![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
olde_fashionedI hadn't planned on making this into more than one entry, but it's gotten so long I think it might be best. So, this is part one of what will probably end up being three posts about the movie costume exhibit at the Fashion Institute of Design and Merchandising in Los Angeles, California, which I was lucky enough to see last week.
On Wednesday, we went on a bit of an excursion, andmade the pilgrimage drove the distance to LA. Since it was entirely free, and scheduled to leave at the end of the month, and I'm a obsessed enthusiastic admirer of costumes in general, the FIDM Motion Picture Costume Design exhibit of 2009 movie costumes was a very big treat. :-D Films ranging from The Dark Knight, The Duchess, Changeling, as well as Valkyrie, Appaloosa, Doubt, and a bunch of others were all on display. This post mostly covers only TDK, but I'll elaborate on the rest of the exhibit when I have more time to write the rest up!
They wouldn't allow photography (*sobsobsob*) but for some reason I've found photos taken by others posted online, so due to a lack of my own images, I'm linking to the lucky souls who were actually allowed to preserve the sights before their eyes with their viewfinders. All the images in this post and others forthcoming are courtesy of here, here, and here.
To avoid confusion, I'm going to go in the order the costumes were displayed in the exhibit, skipping over ones I didn't feel were worth more than a cursory glance and elaborating on the ones I was most impressed with.
Click the cut only if you're interested in lots of pics, tons of text, and some very long rambles about my own observations of some of my favourite costumes, mostly those from The Dark Knight which I spent a ridiculous amount of time staring at. ;-)
As you first walk beneath the black lights (which lit up everything white as neon purple) and round the corner which separates the costume-clad mannequins from the harmful rays of sunlight, the first costumes you are presented with are those from The Spirit and some comedy movie I've never heard of. Not being interested in any way, shape, or form in The Spirit I was a bit surprised to find myself drawn to the overall design of the main character's black outfit with the striking contrast of a red tie.
Pretty straight forward and simple, but pretty neat looking, too, even if the tie wasn't silk. The two ladies' costumes (one from The Spirit, the other what looked to me like a Fantastic Four knock off) badly needed some sort of cover-up in the chest area. >.< I almost feel bad for the actresses for having to wear them!
[not posting pics due to prudish tendencies] ;-P
Next up were Lindy Hemming's costumes from The Dark Knight, one of the primary reasons for my wanting to go in the first place (you should’ve seen my reaction when I spotted the batsuit lurking in one of the wide shots of a local news channel's coverage of the exhibit months ago!) and by far the most impressive costumes in the exhibit, or at least in my very humble (and very unbiased) opinion. ;-)
First, Harvey Dent's Two Face suit.
Harvey's costume was surprisingly detailed. Perhaps I just never noticed or thought about it, because so much of it is shrouded in darkness for the duration of its appearance in the film. With the wearer's left half doused with "gasoline," darkened with scorch marks, red material (lining?) exposed and showing underneath, the blackened portions of the suit's extensive damage are shiny in the way that they almost glitter and catch the light. I wonder what they used? Puffy paint??
It amuses me that my brother has a tie very similar to this. ;-)
And now...the masterpiece! *cues epic music* (If you're not interested in the smaller details of the suit, you can skip the next couple paragraphs, lol, because I definitely wax verbose!) ;-)
The Batsuit. Lemme tell ya, and you can think I'm crazy if you like, but in person, that thing is almost beautiful in its complexities. Light years away from the Batman Begins suit which, though nice, is admittedly little more than a fancy-looking rubber suit. Shades of interesting gray, charcoal, and slate in color, every very line or crevice that looks like it's a separate piece, is a separate piece, making me wonder in amazement just how the heck the thing is assembled and held together. (Strike that, how long did it take Christian Bale to get dressed every time they filmed a Batman scene?? Did he have to have help, maybe even really read that instruction manual they joke about in the movie? LOL!)
The cape is flocked on both sides (which I knew from watching the making-of documentary on the DVD extras) but it was surprisingly stiff, almost like it was a light-weight nylon, rather than the velvet-y looking cloth I had imagined.
I've illustrated most of the "new and exciting" observations I made on the suit here to show just exactly what I mean, because a picture is worth a thousand words, so I GIMP'd a promo pic of the suit to highlight the different parts, so as to reduce confusion by trying to describe to them. (somehow "the stretchy/stripey bands on the bulgy part of his arm" just doesn't sound right.)
One of the best (IMO) things that I was most surprised to notice (after staring anddrooling admiring for a long while) was something that doesn't really show up on film at all, to my knowledge. I couldn't get a good look at the entire suit, obviously, and there are probably some that I missed/couldn't see/didn't notice, but see those colored/edited portions I've highlighted in blue? They're transparent. [insert geeky spaz-out moment here]
It was reallyreallyreally hard to tell in the dim lighting, but I'm convinced that certain plates of the armor are translucent plastic/resin/whatever, tinted a smoky quartz/slate gray color. The almost hexagonal pattern or design that shows up in higher quality close-ups of the suit aren't patterns on the plating itself, it's the mesh-like fabric beneath the plates that is showing through them. Neat, huh? ;-D The mesh is also black, but shiny, which is why it looks gray (it's not) in the images.
You can see the texture of the fabric underneath pretty well in the three "ribcage" strips in the photo below.
(And take a look at those nasty-lookin' knuckle guard thingies! They look like they'd really hurt whoever was unlucky enough to be on the receiving end of his fist, lol.) You can see it better in the next photo, but there is also elastic on each finger of the glove, with leather at the fingertips. The orange portions at the wrist in that promo pic I colored are the Velcro fasteners, which I thought was kind of funny!
The tang-like protrusions on the gauntlets look verrrrry sharp, but there wasn't any visible clue to how the firing mechanism from the movie works. I'm thinking those were a special prop? Another thing that might be a prop was the belt. It doesn't look as "snazzy" in person as it does onscreen, and the accessories/utilities clip and hook over the belt on the top and bottom. The silver stripes on each segment appear to be entirely decorative, rather than magnets as I had hoped, and the grapple gun was tied down to the holster, presumably for preventative measures against thieves, or over-eager fans.
The above is also a good shot of the mesh bodysuit underneath.
Rachel's dress was conveniently standing right beside the Batsuit, so I didn't have to move more than a few steps to go from one favourite to the other. ;-P
Rachel's evening gown was even more gorgeous in person that it is onscreen, and it was one of the most well-made and constructed garments in the entire exhibit, from what I could tell. It's not blue as it sometimes appears in certain lighting conditions, but is definitely green, kind of a bluish peacock green. It looks like a high-quality silk, soft and shiny, like a satin with a lovely drape, and the sheer fabric flutters in the air currents like a chiffon or very fine crepe.
The dress itself has a very feminine design that looks like it would be somewhat flattering to the figure, but Maggie Gyllenhaal must be awfully tiny, because that dress was so darn small! I do think the dummy was shorter than Maggie, though, because in the exhibit the dress pools on the ground and it doesn't in the film. Exhibit pic vs. screenshot. The skirt of the gown also appears to be on the bias.
There are literally sheer inserts all over the dress; with the neckline having a sheer accent, also with the dagged/picot type edging (see remarks below) which matches the sleeves, a chevron-shaped insert underneath the bust (which I'm pretty sure runs down along the back of the waist), and smaller intersecting inserts across the hips and thighs.
The gown is actually sleeveless, although it's not noticeable in the movie, there is clearly a shrug made from the sheer chiffon/crepe over a sleeveless dress once you see it in person. I also found an image from the CostumesGuide.com which must be a behind-the-scenes shot, because the straps are never visible in the film.
In the last and the next pics you can see the trio of darts at the bust, which I thought was a nice touch, instead of having a single dart. The second pic also gives a pretty good glimpse of the beading along the edge of the shrug. I don't think any part of the dress was beaded.
The sheer fabrics are edged with either a veryvery tiny picot trim, or what is more likely IMO, some sort of finishing method or stitch that gives a very delicate dagged edge. There are what appear to be flat, rectangular sequins width-wise rather than length-wise along the duration of the beaded trim on the shrug, which is actually kind of striped, with an outer row of seed beads, then a row of sequins, another row of beads, a second row of sequins, and lastly more seed beads on the outside edge. The sequins are almost an abalone or hematite sort of color.
Now we proceed from elegance and sophistication to degradation and filth...
The Joker's costume was, like Harvey's, a bit of a surprise in the amount of detail they put into the distressing and grunged portions. I'd heard that there was a conscious decision to make him look more and more disheveled through the duration of the film, especially his makeup, but I hadn't realized his trademark purple outfit is delightfully dirty right from the start.
The rust colored jacket lining is a great touch, IMO, as is the watch and chain, and you can see the dirt and smudges of grime, especially on the wrists, lapels, shoulder pads, and even his pocket flaps.
Another view. You can really see the gunk on his pinstriped pants here!
You gotta love (or love to hate?) his socks!
More costumes from other movies will (hopefully!) follow in a few days. :-)
ETA: Since posting this I've also discovered two new promo pics that show the sideviews of both the Batsuit and Rachel's dress (the latter has been lightened to show detail).
The hi-res Batman pics are courtesy of Christian Bale's fansite and the last pic of Rachel and the Joker is courtesy of Maggie Gyllenhaal's fansite. ;-) A kind commenter pointed out this article on the TDK costumes as well.
On Wednesday, we went on a bit of an excursion, and
They wouldn't allow photography (*sobsobsob*) but for some reason I've found photos taken by others posted online, so due to a lack of my own images, I'm linking to the lucky souls who were actually allowed to preserve the sights before their eyes with their viewfinders. All the images in this post and others forthcoming are courtesy of here, here, and here.
To avoid confusion, I'm going to go in the order the costumes were displayed in the exhibit, skipping over ones I didn't feel were worth more than a cursory glance and elaborating on the ones I was most impressed with.
Click the cut only if you're interested in lots of pics, tons of text, and some very long rambles about my own observations of some of my favourite costumes, mostly those from The Dark Knight which I spent a ridiculous amount of time staring at. ;-)
As you first walk beneath the black lights (which lit up everything white as neon purple) and round the corner which separates the costume-clad mannequins from the harmful rays of sunlight, the first costumes you are presented with are those from The Spirit and some comedy movie I've never heard of. Not being interested in any way, shape, or form in The Spirit I was a bit surprised to find myself drawn to the overall design of the main character's black outfit with the striking contrast of a red tie.
Pretty straight forward and simple, but pretty neat looking, too, even if the tie wasn't silk. The two ladies' costumes (one from The Spirit, the other what looked to me like a Fantastic Four knock off) badly needed some sort of cover-up in the chest area. >.< I almost feel bad for the actresses for having to wear them!
[not posting pics due to prudish tendencies] ;-P
Next up were Lindy Hemming's costumes from The Dark Knight, one of the primary reasons for my wanting to go in the first place (you should’ve seen my reaction when I spotted the batsuit lurking in one of the wide shots of a local news channel's coverage of the exhibit months ago!) and by far the most impressive costumes in the exhibit, or at least in my very humble (and very unbiased) opinion. ;-)
First, Harvey Dent's Two Face suit.
Harvey's costume was surprisingly detailed. Perhaps I just never noticed or thought about it, because so much of it is shrouded in darkness for the duration of its appearance in the film. With the wearer's left half doused with "gasoline," darkened with scorch marks, red material (lining?) exposed and showing underneath, the blackened portions of the suit's extensive damage are shiny in the way that they almost glitter and catch the light. I wonder what they used? Puffy paint??
It amuses me that my brother has a tie very similar to this. ;-)
And now...the masterpiece! *cues epic music* (If you're not interested in the smaller details of the suit, you can skip the next couple paragraphs, lol, because I definitely wax verbose!) ;-)
The Batsuit. Lemme tell ya, and you can think I'm crazy if you like, but in person, that thing is almost beautiful in its complexities. Light years away from the Batman Begins suit which, though nice, is admittedly little more than a fancy-looking rubber suit. Shades of interesting gray, charcoal, and slate in color, every very line or crevice that looks like it's a separate piece, is a separate piece, making me wonder in amazement just how the heck the thing is assembled and held together. (Strike that, how long did it take Christian Bale to get dressed every time they filmed a Batman scene?? Did he have to have help, maybe even really read that instruction manual they joke about in the movie? LOL!)
The cape is flocked on both sides (which I knew from watching the making-of documentary on the DVD extras) but it was surprisingly stiff, almost like it was a light-weight nylon, rather than the velvet-y looking cloth I had imagined.
I've illustrated most of the "new and exciting" observations I made on the suit here to show just exactly what I mean, because a picture is worth a thousand words, so I GIMP'd a promo pic of the suit to highlight the different parts, so as to reduce confusion by trying to describe to them. (somehow "the stretchy/stripey bands on the bulgy part of his arm" just doesn't sound right.)
One of the best (IMO) things that I was most surprised to notice (after staring and
It was reallyreallyreally hard to tell in the dim lighting, but I'm convinced that certain plates of the armor are translucent plastic/resin/whatever, tinted a smoky quartz/slate gray color. The almost hexagonal pattern or design that shows up in higher quality close-ups of the suit aren't patterns on the plating itself, it's the mesh-like fabric beneath the plates that is showing through them. Neat, huh? ;-D The mesh is also black, but shiny, which is why it looks gray (it's not) in the images.
You can see the texture of the fabric underneath pretty well in the three "ribcage" strips in the photo below.
(And take a look at those nasty-lookin' knuckle guard thingies! They look like they'd really hurt whoever was unlucky enough to be on the receiving end of his fist, lol.) You can see it better in the next photo, but there is also elastic on each finger of the glove, with leather at the fingertips. The orange portions at the wrist in that promo pic I colored are the Velcro fasteners, which I thought was kind of funny!
The tang-like protrusions on the gauntlets look verrrrry sharp, but there wasn't any visible clue to how the firing mechanism from the movie works. I'm thinking those were a special prop? Another thing that might be a prop was the belt. It doesn't look as "snazzy" in person as it does onscreen, and the accessories/utilities clip and hook over the belt on the top and bottom. The silver stripes on each segment appear to be entirely decorative, rather than magnets as I had hoped, and the grapple gun was tied down to the holster, presumably for preventative measures against thieves, or over-eager fans.
The above is also a good shot of the mesh bodysuit underneath.
Rachel's dress was conveniently standing right beside the Batsuit, so I didn't have to move more than a few steps to go from one favourite to the other. ;-P
Rachel's evening gown was even more gorgeous in person that it is onscreen, and it was one of the most well-made and constructed garments in the entire exhibit, from what I could tell. It's not blue as it sometimes appears in certain lighting conditions, but is definitely green, kind of a bluish peacock green. It looks like a high-quality silk, soft and shiny, like a satin with a lovely drape, and the sheer fabric flutters in the air currents like a chiffon or very fine crepe.
The dress itself has a very feminine design that looks like it would be somewhat flattering to the figure, but Maggie Gyllenhaal must be awfully tiny, because that dress was so darn small! I do think the dummy was shorter than Maggie, though, because in the exhibit the dress pools on the ground and it doesn't in the film. Exhibit pic vs. screenshot. The skirt of the gown also appears to be on the bias.
There are literally sheer inserts all over the dress; with the neckline having a sheer accent, also with the dagged/picot type edging (see remarks below) which matches the sleeves, a chevron-shaped insert underneath the bust (which I'm pretty sure runs down along the back of the waist), and smaller intersecting inserts across the hips and thighs.
The gown is actually sleeveless, although it's not noticeable in the movie, there is clearly a shrug made from the sheer chiffon/crepe over a sleeveless dress once you see it in person. I also found an image from the CostumesGuide.com which must be a behind-the-scenes shot, because the straps are never visible in the film.
In the last and the next pics you can see the trio of darts at the bust, which I thought was a nice touch, instead of having a single dart. The second pic also gives a pretty good glimpse of the beading along the edge of the shrug. I don't think any part of the dress was beaded.
The sheer fabrics are edged with either a veryvery tiny picot trim, or what is more likely IMO, some sort of finishing method or stitch that gives a very delicate dagged edge. There are what appear to be flat, rectangular sequins width-wise rather than length-wise along the duration of the beaded trim on the shrug, which is actually kind of striped, with an outer row of seed beads, then a row of sequins, another row of beads, a second row of sequins, and lastly more seed beads on the outside edge. The sequins are almost an abalone or hematite sort of color.
Now we proceed from elegance and sophistication to degradation and filth...
The Joker's costume was, like Harvey's, a bit of a surprise in the amount of detail they put into the distressing and grunged portions. I'd heard that there was a conscious decision to make him look more and more disheveled through the duration of the film, especially his makeup, but I hadn't realized his trademark purple outfit is delightfully dirty right from the start.
The rust colored jacket lining is a great touch, IMO, as is the watch and chain, and you can see the dirt and smudges of grime, especially on the wrists, lapels, shoulder pads, and even his pocket flaps.
Another view. You can really see the gunk on his pinstriped pants here!
You gotta love (or love to hate?) his socks!
More costumes from other movies will (hopefully!) follow in a few days. :-)
ETA: Since posting this I've also discovered two new promo pics that show the sideviews of both the Batsuit and Rachel's dress (the latter has been lightened to show detail).
The hi-res Batman pics are courtesy of Christian Bale's fansite and the last pic of Rachel and the Joker is courtesy of Maggie Gyllenhaal's fansite. ;-) A kind commenter pointed out this article on the TDK costumes as well.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
no subject
Date: 2009-03-29 04:12 pm (UTC)I knew I wasn't going to make it up in time for it, but will probably stop by there sometime in the next part of the year to see what else they have. I did that last Aug during Costume College, and saw some really nice costumes then too.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-29 09:06 pm (UTC)I actually didn't know they did this sort of thing every year, so now I'm going to have to make a regular trip, if at all possible. I wish I'd gone to see some of the costumes from a few years back! Which ones were there when you went to see?
no subject
Date: 2009-03-30 02:03 am (UTC)The last time I went after Costume College they were from TV programs. The only one I remember was from the quirky show, Pushing Daisies, about the pie maker that brings people back from the dead for a minute to solve their murder. It peaked my interest so I went back and saw the whole series on dvd, and I loved it!
no subject
Date: 2009-03-30 03:57 am (UTC)I've seen some of Anna Friel's dresses in pictures, and they look very retro, especially the red one that reminds me of Dior's New Look. She usually has great wardrobes in the movies I've seen her in. ;-) I adore her gowns in Our Mutual Friend.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-29 05:08 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-29 09:10 pm (UTC)Nice to see you drop by, Kari! :-D
no subject
Date: 2009-03-29 09:26 pm (UTC)Yeah, I think so. The caps in all the scenes she wears the dress in have been predominantly blue, and I actually thought the dress was more of a blue than it really is. (I need to change my icon!!) Plus the lighting seems to be quite dark: Screencap one (http://screenmusings.org/TheDarkKnight/pages/tdk_0939.htm), screencap two (http://screenmusings.org/TheDarkKnight/pages/tdk_0911.htm), promo one (http://s68.photobucket.com/albums/i31/costumersguide/Batman%20-%20The%20Dark%20Knight/rachel/?action=view¤t=joker_rachel_1024.jpg), promo two (http://s68.photobucket.com/albums/i31/costumersguide/Batman%20-%20The%20Dark%20Knight/rachel/?action=view¤t=1280x1280.jpg), and promo three (http://s68.photobucket.com/albums/i31/costumersguide/Batman%20-%20The%20Dark%20Knight/rachel/?action=view¤t=DK-FC-00131b.png).
no subject
Date: 2009-03-29 09:55 pm (UTC)I remember listening to a recording of Maggie Gyllenhaal speaking to a round table of reporters, and one of them asked if she had kept the gown. Maggie said no, and that she doubted it would still fit her since she was still nursing while she was filming, so if the dress is as small as you say, I can only imagine just how thin she is when she's at her normal weight!
no subject
Date: 2009-03-29 10:40 pm (UTC)Rachel's gown I've loved ever since that promo of Rachel and Bruce on the balcony surfaced. ;-P I just hadn't realized how detailed it was! The Joker's costume is great, but that's really all you ever see the fans talking about, it seems. It was nice to be able to
drool overappreciate the Batsuit, as well. ;-PWait...Maggie had a baby?! I didn't know that!
no subject
Date: 2009-03-29 11:53 pm (UTC)I agree, there was a lot of thoughtful design that went into the gown when the costume designer could have easily grabbed a gown off a rack. It's not a dress that's simply meant to be pretty, you know? It's got the beautiful, flowing fabric, but there's a hint of conflict thanks to the X over the skirt, which fits well with the image of Gotham City that's presented in the film.
Indeed. She said that her weight was fluctuating so much that the costumers were constantly tailoring her outfits.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-30 04:44 am (UTC)Yup, yup! That's exactly what I think, too. It looks like Lindy Hemming actually spent some time and effort on Rachel's wardrobe, which (thankfully!) doesn't look like someone ran out and charged a bunch of things at some department store.
That's very interesting, what you said about the X and Gotham. *ponders* I hadn't thought about it like that, but you're right!
Hmm. I remember thinking that she didn't look overly skinny in the film (which I found refreshing) so that could be why, I suppose? I loved her red dress at the restaurant, too, too bad that wasn't on display. ;-)
no subject
Date: 2009-03-30 07:15 am (UTC)I like how there were intentional nods to Annie Hall in regards to Rachel's outfits, because I totally got that vibe with the ensemble she wore during the interrogation scene.
To be honest, the notion about the X occurred to me while I was in the middle of writing that last comment. I was struck by how unusual (at least to me) it was; the gown could have easily had one full panel after the bust, but it doesn't. It made me think that perhaps Lindy deliberately put in that cross-section to throw the viewer off-course, to go against what is expected, which is essentially what the entire film does as well.
Yes, the red dress was lovely as well. Very classy and tasteful, and the antithesis of the getup worn by the curiously well-endowed ballerina whom Bruce came in tow with, hah.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-30 09:15 pm (UTC)Hmm, really? I didn't catch that, but then I haven't seen AH, either. I mostly appreciated how all of her garments were decidedly feminine, even the pantsuit in the interrogation of Lao. It was nice to see business suits and the like for a professional woman (who as an ADA can't get away with over-the-top frills and furbilows) who still dressed like a woman, not just a woman in a man's suit with pearls added.
I wonder how many other such details there are to be noticed? ;-) You're going to send me on a treasure hunt, lol! Another thing about the X in that dress, could be how the sheer inserts are intersecting, almost like a crossroads. Rachel is at a crossroad of her life; she has to choose between one path (Bruce) and another (Harvey). The crossroad theme could be applied to both of her love interests, as well, especially in the very different ways they each choose to handle their [SPOILER!] grief after her demise.
I need to see how much of an analysis I can piece together from the few angles we get of that red dress (do we ever get to see the skirt??) I must say, though, you had me in veritable stitches with your remark about Natasha. I said something similar last time I watched it, although I put it a little less tastefully than you did. ;-P (I get such a kick out of that scene where Bruce turns to Harvey after Rachel mentioned his taking her to the ballet, and without missing a beat asks him if he's into ballet! ROTFLOL!!)
(And I hope you'll forgive me for running out of Maggie icons, lol. Have you seen Batman Begins?)
no subject
Date: 2009-03-31 04:26 am (UTC)That's a great interpretation of the X; crossroads are definitely a prevalent theme throughout the movie, for pretty much every character, not just Rachel and her men.
I think this might be the best look we'll get at the red dress: http://pics.livejournal.com/riseoverrun/pic/0010ty1w Hopefully you will have found better images, though.
Yeah, I've run out of icons myself, which is surprising since I'm such a Maggie fangirl. I shall have to resort to one of her brother and husband instead :D I did see BB, but I don't really remember all that much of it. The things that do stick out for me, however, were that I didn't care for the third act, that Katie Holmes was really boring to watch, and that Cillian Murphy was delightfully creepy as Dr. Crane/Scarecrow.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-31 07:31 am (UTC)I thought of another, too, though it's rather morbid compared to yours. Rachel is marked (X marks the spot) for death. :-/
*drools* I literally exclaimed "OOOOH!" aloud when I saw your pic...thank you loads and loads for sharing that! Just when I thought I'd seen all the TDK images out there. :-D I never noticed her clutch, either!
LOL, I'm running out because I don't want to delete any of my other ones. ;-P
I had to look up who Maggie's significant other was. Are they married? IMDb has them as engaged with a daughter. *shrug* (am I the only person who thinks it's interesting that Rachel/Maggie, Bruce/Christian, and Joker/Heath all have young daughters who are absolutely adorable?)
TDK can definitely stand alone, but it makes for a better viewing experience IMO to watch it when you're familiar with BB. I'm even less a fan of Katie, but I'm just a teeny bit more forgiving of how Rachel treats Bruce in BB, because she honestly didn't know he wasn't just a shallow rich jerk. In TDK she knows, and she still treats him like crap.
Cillian Murphy is great as Scarecrow! His scenes together with Tom Wilkinson are some of the best, but then there's Liam Neeson, too, and his character has a very poignant line about the loss of his wife, which became incredibly sad after Natasha Richardson died. :-(
Third act?
no subject
Date: 2009-04-01 05:47 pm (UTC)Well, I do somewhat understand why Rachel is cold to Bruce in TDK. She's passionate about doing things the honorable and legal way, which is why she became a lawyer. Bruce, on the other hand, takes matters into his own hands through vigilantism, which is like him saying that he's above the law or that he doesn't have faith in the legal system, the very same system that Rachel fights to uphold. His brand of crime-fighting is almost like a slap in the face to Rachel because it belittles her work. Harvey, on the other hand, is what she wishes Bruce could be without the mask, strong and caring and above all things, honorable. They truly are two sides of the same coin.
You know how most stories are divided into three acts: the introduction, the build-up, and then the conclusion? So when I said that I didn't like the third act, I meant that I didn't care for the denouement, what with the train and Ducard trying to bring down Gotham by messing with its water supply. It was a bit too farfetched for me.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-01 09:14 pm (UTC)You summed that up very eloquently! I can totally understand how Rachel feels about Bruce's nightly escapades, but my biggest issue is how she is essentially leaving both men hanging in the balance. She knew that in the penthouse, when Bruce asked her "Did you mean it?" that he was asking her (again) if she would wait for him. What does she say? Not, "Yes, I meant it then, but things have changed," etc., or something along those lines, she gives him a yes and lets him believe there is still hope for their romance. That's a bit cowardly on Rachel's part (I'm sure she didn't want to crush him) and a bit fickle, too, because I'm not even sure at this point she knows which man she wants. And then there's Harvey. Why is Rachel dating her boss if she still has feelings for Bruce? Tsk tsk tsk. Make up your mind, girl!
Bruce, on the other hand, takes matters into his own hands through vigilantism, which is like him saying that he's above the law or that he doesn't have faith in the legal system, the very same system that Rachel fights to uphold.
Again, I really enjoyed reading your remarks on Rachel (I am trying to understand her better, as it really is quite difficult to comprehend why she would dump the Best Man in Gotham) but I wanted to address something you mentioned. (Please note that I'm not condoning vigilante behaviours in real life, I'm just arguing from within the boundaries of the fandom, okay? lol) Yes, he's taking the law into his own hands, but he started this back a year ago (during the first movie) when there was no Harvey, when Gordon was still a streetcop, and the system wasn't being effective.
By TDK, things have changed for the better, and this is why we see Bruce looking to hang up his cape. I do think the discussion about Rome and "suspending democracy" at the restaurant is a bit like what Bruce is doing. He's not trying to become the law (he won't kill, etc.) but carry it out by catching the bad guys and turning them over to the police. He's just the vehicle for apprehending them, and sometimes preventing their crimes. I think I disagree that his work belittles Rachel's, because her job is to prosecute those criminals that he gives to the cops. He's not trying to become judge and jury. I hope all of that makes sense without making me sound like a freak, lol!
Ohhhh, okay! I get it now - I'm sorry. I didn't know that was what you meant, I thought you were talking about something else. Nevermind. ;-P And yes, I know what you mean about it being a tad bit...farfetched, but I happen to really like the Wayne Train fight scene, ha ha ha, so I enjoy it. ;-P (I'm just grateful they "fixed" Ras al Ghul from what he was in the cartoons/comics!!!!)
no subject
Date: 2009-04-02 05:16 am (UTC)I understand your arguments, but the thing is that I don't see Bruce as the Best Man in Gotham. He dons the suit and mask not just for altruistic reasons, but for self-serving ones as well. He's still traumatized by the death of his parents, and being Batman is the way in which he can unleash all of his pent-up anger and frustrations. Rachel understands this, which is why she said in her letter something to the effect of, "I'm not sure the day will come when you won't need Batman." He keeps telling her that he wants out of the suit so that they can be together, but she knows better. Also, I suspect that Bruce was more in love with what Rachel represented (and by that I mean a better life) than with her as a person, and that she sensed it, too. I thought that one piece of dialogue, the part where she says, "Don't make me your one hope for a normal life," was very astute; when he looks at Rachel, he sees a symbol, the key to all of his problems, and not actually her.
He's not trying to become the law... He's just the vehicle for apprehending them, and sometimes preventing their crimes.
The problem I see with this is that despite his good intentions, Bruce unwittingly makes the crime worse in Gotham. Batman's appearance brings about escalation, just as Gordon suggested it would at the end of BB. He soon digs himself in too deep, and so instead of being able to prevent crime, he has to devote his time to cleaning up the messes that he in part helped to create. Nor can he bring himself to back away, which could help to restore things back to their natural order, because he's too dependent on Batman, on the way it gives him the sense of control that he so craves, control that he lacked when his parents were murdered.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-02 09:21 am (UTC)I understand your arguments, but the thing is that I don't see Bruce as the Best Man in Gotham.
LOL, okay, well maybe I'm biased here, but who do you think is the best man in Gotham, then? Surely not Harvey!
He dons the suit and mask not just for altruistic reasons, but for self-serving ones as well. He's still traumatized by the death of his parents, and being Batman is the way in which he can unleash all of his pent-up anger and frustrations.
Hmm. I'm not sure that I agree with you. Do you not think that he's trying to prevent other people from suffering the same fate that he suffered as a child, by having crime destroy lives?
"Don't make me your one hope for a normal life," was very astute; when he looks at Rachel, he sees a symbol, the key to all of his problems, and not actually her.
I think you are very astute, because you're bringing up all these things I hardly ever thought about!
I think one main reason Bruce is so attached to Rachel (I do think he's also deeply in love with her) is because they grew up together in a sense. He knows her, and she knows him, better than anyone minus Alfred. She was a part of his life before the death of his parents, so perhaps she is the last connection to his "normal life". But she is also the only woman in on his secret; he can hardly go off and marry one of his models! ;-P
Bruce unwittingly makes the crime worse in Gotham. Batman's appearance brings about escalation, just as Gordon suggested it would at the end of BB. He soon digs himself in too deep, and so instead of being able to prevent crime, he has to devote his time to cleaning up the messes that he in part helped to create.
You're entirely right there. Another reason he can't back off, even if he wanted to, would be because people like the Joker would create situations where "if Batman doesn't come out of retirement I'll blow up a hospital" etc. He's created this machine, and someone has to fly it, or else it'll crash and burn.
it gives him the sense of control that he so craves, control that he lacked when his parents were murdered.
Would someone as rich as Bruce Wayne really feel a lack of control?
no subject
Date: 2009-04-02 05:23 pm (UTC)Oh, Harvey is definitely not the best man in Gotham, and the fact that he could be easily swayed by the Joker's somewhat weak argument in the hospital proves that. The title has to go to Gordon. He's the one uncorrupt officer who puts his neck out on the line even when the odds are against him because he has a strong moral compass and he wants a safer Gotham for both his family and everyone else.
I do agree with you in that I think Bruce truly does want to stop/prevent crime as a service to Gotham, the city his family had worked so hard to improve, as well as its people. However, I also think his reasons for Batman are paradoxical, in that he's being selfless and selfish at the same time. He's got a savior complex, for one, that stems from the way he was unable to save his parents. He even blames himself for their deaths because if he hadn't been scared at the opera, they wouldn't have been caught in that alleyway with Joe Chill, so taking on Gotham's underworld is his way of seeking absolution from his sins. He also gets off on fighting criminals, just as he had when he had himself locked up in that Chinese(?) prison before he met Ducard. It affords him a high that he can't get any other way. I mean, he could have become a cop and befriended the other officers to the point where they'd feel confidant enough that they wouldn't have to take bribes from the mob, but he didn't because that would mean that he would have to work within the means of the law and follow its code of conduct, something he doesn't have to do under the guise of Batman. Finally, Batman is such an ingrained part of Bruce's identity that it's hard to see him part with it even when the time comes when Batman is no longer needed. Like Rachel said at the end of BB, his normal face, the one that both she and the public see, is the mask he puts on, while being Batman comes naturally to him. It all comes down to the fact that, as Alan Moore's Watchmen notably points out, a person has to be incredibly messed up enough to want to fight crime while wearing a mask and suit, and deluded enough to think that he or she can be a hero and rid a place/city of its problems, and Bruce Wayne fits the bill on both of these counts.
Certainly, the fact that Bruce and Rachel grew up together deepens his attachment to her. But that only strengthens my theory of how she more of a symbol to him than a person. He no doubt thinks that had tragedy not struck all of those years ago, he and Rachel would be married by now and would be leading the perfect, normal life. But just how well does he know her as adult? A lot can change in seven years, and so the Rachel he has in his mind, the one that he clings to, is the one he knew while growing up, not the person she is in the present.
Would someone as rich as Bruce Wayne really feel a lack of control?
Absolutely. Money does not automatically equate control. His family's riches weren't enough to prevent his parents' murders, nor is Bruce's fortune enough to rid Gotham of the mob. Bruce cannot control the copycats who in their misguided way strive to continue Batman's work, he cannot control the fact that the woman he loves loves another, nor can he control his public image and show it in a positive light without possibly blowing his cover as Batman. The only thing he has control over is the way he lands his punches against his enemies, and even that walks a fine line and threatens to spiral out of control, as shown during his confrontation with the Joker in the interrogation room.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-02 10:08 pm (UTC)Do you think Gordon's pragmatic approach to his cops allows him to deserve the title of "Best Man in Gotham"? He willingly turns a blind eye to corruption and bribery (even after Harvey made a big stink about it on the MCU rooftop) because he's short on manpower. Isn't that a bit naive, or foolish? Don't get me wrong, I really like Gordon and think he's great, but I'm just playing the devil's advocate here. ;-)
I like your wording of Bruce's crusade being both selfless and selfish. I'm used to thinking of it as entirely selfless, but you're raising some good points. Would you agree it's fair to say that the selfish portions are subconscious?
The savior complex, gee, I thought that was a given, lol! And as for feeling guilty about his parents' deaths, I've wondered if a part of that could be survivor's guilt.
he could have become a cop and befriended the other officers to the point where they'd feel confidant enough that they wouldn't have to take bribes from the mob, but he didn't because that would mean that he would have to work within the means of the law and follow its code of conduct, something he doesn't have to do under the guise of Batman.
I disagree that those are his reasons for donning the mask. What good would one more cop on the streets do? Even if he was the richest man in Gotham, he's still just another man, as Bruce explains to Alfred on the plane after his return from Ducard's monastery. Part of his reasons for trying to create an entire persona is because of the added impact and influence it gives him in the minds of the criminals. I think a lot of them still aren't sure he's even human, which surely goes light years farther than a badge would.
I also disagree that he's dismissed working within the means of the law and following a code of conduct. He's routinely working alongside with Gordon and the DA's office, (Rachel, and later once he meets Harvey), giving them information and gift-wrapped packages of criminals they want to prosecute.
It all comes down to the fact that, as Alan Moore's Watchmen notably points out, a person has to be incredibly messed up enough to want to fight crime while wearing a mask and suit, and deluded enough to think that he or she can be a hero and rid a place/city of its problems, and Bruce Wayne fits the bill on both of these counts.
Do you think he's addicted to fighting crime?
I only know what I've read about, but reviews of Watchmen leads me to think that those people are a bit more screwed up than Bruce Wayne, lol. In real life, someone like Bruce would be in serious need of therapy, but in the fictional world of Gotham, desperate times call for desperate measures. Not that I don't think Bruce needs a few sessions on the couch, lol!
Which reminds me, are you a psychology student or something? Or do you just enjoy this stuff? :-)
But that only strengthens my theory of how she more of a symbol to him than a person.
What exactly makes you think he views Rachel as an object and not a person?
(continued in next comment)
no subject
Date: 2009-04-02 10:09 pm (UTC)But just how well does he know her as adult? A lot can change in seven years, and so the Rachel he has in his mind, the one that he clings to, is the one he knew while growing up, not the person she is in the present.
I don't think there's any evidence in either movie that the Rachel that slaps Bruce in the car is any different from the Rachel that he bumps into at the hotel after swimming, or the Rachel that ends up dating Harvey in TDK. One reason I think Bruce loves her so much is because she's one of the few people who knows him well and will be brutally honest with him. In BB, at least, since she's less honest in TDK, but that's more about her personal feelings which are more difficult to sort out. I think he's the one that changed, and that's partially why she's not sure she wants to end up with him; I think he frightens her to some degree. (Can't blame her there, big hulking guy in black suit and mask with a penchant for beating people up and scowling?? Yup, it'd scare me, too!)
The only thing he has control over is the way he lands his punches against his enemies, and even that walks a fine line and threatens to spiral out of control, as shown during his confrontation with the Joker in the interrogation room.
Ah, you're right again. ;-) The lack of control in the interrogation room scene is one reason I find it so powerful. There's literally nothing he can do to save them except run the Joker's rat race and play his game.
I just want to say, that I'm enjoying this discussion. It's been quite fun (as well as illuminating) to explore the deeper workings of one of my favourite movies with an intelligent conversationalist. ;-)
no subject
Date: 2009-03-29 11:57 pm (UTC)I never noticed all the detail put into the TDK!Batsuit,either xD Thank you so much for sharing!
no subject
Date: 2009-03-30 05:05 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-30 02:18 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-30 05:06 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-30 04:12 am (UTC)You know it looks so excellent and great in the film but it looks almost intimidating in real life like in these pictures . Your description gave me a very good idea of what went into it! Its a really well planned piece of costume !
And I must agree that Rachel`s dress looks much prettier here! I didn`t find Maggie very appealing in the film and this delicate dress didn`t work for her IMO . but wow its stunning! Plus we don`t get to see the dress very well in the movie because yes most of the scenes are dark .
no subject
Date: 2009-03-30 04:16 am (UTC)Now about the 'dirty' joker costume ---- Its so cool!!!!!! ;D ;D ;D You know I never saw those socks !!!!!! Very interesting! Never noticed the dirty look either! Thanks so much for sharing all this interesting stuff olde ! Loved this post ALOT ;D
no subject
Date: 2009-03-30 05:45 am (UTC)The socks are only shown briefly, when he's sitting in the holding cell and the camera pans upwards. Pic (http://s68.photobucket.com/albums/i31/costumersguide/Batman%20-%20The%20Dark%20Knight/joker/?action=view¤t=02k.jpg).
As for the dirty look, the "you outta know, you bought it" scene you can really see the grunge, if you watch closely! I went and watched that, too. ;-P
no subject
Date: 2009-03-30 05:20 am (UTC)I just can't forgive Rachel's character for how she treats Bruce, but I didn't dislike Maggie. I do think she's somewhat pretty and "real" looking, not Hollywood-ized if you know what I mean. And you're right, the scenes are really dark, and the blue-ish lighting (especially on the balcony) obscures the color.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-31 05:04 am (UTC)As for the dirty look, the "you outta know, you bought it" scene you can really see the grunge, if you watch closely! I went and watched that, too. ;-P
Thanks I will look out for that! ;D *so happy to get another excuse to watch TDK*
Did you see the keywords I used on it, LOL?
I don`t get it ? Are you referring to the key words in the illustrations?
Passed out?! And missed a few precious minutes of being able to stare at the batsuit!?! Nevah!! Passing out can be done in the car,
ooooh you were one determined fangirl !!!!!! ;D ;D ;D
I just can't forgive Rachel's character for how she treats Bruce, but I didn't dislike Maggie.
I don`t like Maggie in general but to be honest she was a much better Rachel Dawes IMO. She was better than Katie. She and CB atleast had some chemistry but yes I CAN NEVER forgive Rachel either. Her death didn`t really bother me lol.
no subject
Date: 2009-03-31 07:37 am (UTC)*so happy to get another excuse to watch TDK*
ROTFLOL!!! What do you think I did when I got back home from LA? ;-P
I don`t get it ? Are you referring to the key words in the illustrations?
I'm sorry, my bad. When I uploaded the icon, in LJ's "keywords" space, I filed this icon under "TDK -- batsuit love". ;-)
I don`t like Maggie in general but to be honest she was a much better Rachel Dawes IMO. She was better than Katie.
Agreed! Except I've never seen Maggie in anything else so I can't tell if it's her or Rachel who is being annoying. I really do think it's just Rachel, though. ;-)
She and CB atleast had some chemistry but yes I CAN NEVER forgive Rachel either. Her death didn`t really bother me lol.
Ha ha, it didn't bother me either, except in the sense that I felt sorry for the characters who were grieved by her death. I had a feeling they were going to kill her, though, I blogged about it before the movie was even released.
no subject
Date: 2009-04-01 05:03 am (UTC)*thinks hard* ;D ;D
I filed this icon under "TDK -- batsuit love". ;-)
Oh I see I see.... *giggles*
I really do think it's just Rachel, though. ;-)
Very true! The character was overall annoying . No but I NEVER thought that they would kill her! It was pretty shocking for me ! I mean they never really kill off the female lead like that so I wasn`t expecting it but then again it wasn`t a big deal .
no subject
Date: 2009-04-01 09:19 pm (UTC)*iz pathetic*
I did think they would kill her, because that would be the perfect way to torture Bruce with angsty guilt, and that sort of thing makes for a good story. ;-P
no subject
Date: 2009-03-30 06:33 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2009-03-30 06:43 am (UTC)Wow, thank you! I don't think one of my entries has ever been mem'd before!
no subject
Date: 2009-04-23 02:09 am (UTC)I do like the way Harvey's jacket mimics the crispy appearance of his face. Aw, poor Harvey. Yeah, I didn't know what was up with the red pieces on the burn side until I saw here. The movie was so dark, I missed a lot of the detailing.
Agree with you on the Batsuit. It's got some really nice subtle detailing amongst all the black. The chest plate is one of my favorite parts of it.
I have to say that the dress Maggie wore looks so much better here. I never noticed how pretty it really is while seeing the film. It just looked, for lack of a better way to put it, dull in all ways to me. That's important for the costuming department to determine when choosing clothing. This dress didn't show up on film the way it does, more or less, in person. The stitching is beautiful and the sheer parts all over add a new element to the scene where Joker tells her a scar story.
I love that damn suit that Joker wears. And here with so much of the filth becoming evident, I can see how he squicks everyone in the film when he gets close to them. I love the character to bits, but wow, he resembles a well dressed vagrant. He's even more grungy than I thought. I love those socks. Did you actually see a watch or just the chain for one? If you did, what did it look like? I'd assume like a regular pocket watch, but you know. I'm curious.
Very good post here. Thank you so much for sharing. :)
no subject
Date: 2009-04-23 02:56 am (UTC)I never noticed Harvey's red thingies, either, and they really don't show up on camera. After we got home from the exhibit, I watched the last scene with Harvey and Gordon's family, or rather I watched his suit! You can actually see a lot more once you know what you're looking for.
The chest plate is one of my favorite parts of it.
Oh, yes, absolutely!!! ;-) I could've stared at it for hours, and I'm not joking, lol.
I liked Maggie's dress before, but the only really good shots we get from the shoulders down are when she walks outside to talk to Bruce, and it's way to dark to properly appreciate all the detail in that scene, although if you take a screencap and lighten it you can barely make out the sheer insert that wraps around the back of her waist. Seeing the dress in person made me love it even more.
You know...in the movie, the Joker is so disgusting and evil that he's utterly repulsive, but his outfit in person is quite interesting. I found myself looking a lot closer at it than I'd expected. As for his watch, I'm sorry to report that there was no way for me to know what was on the other end, save my actually removing it. All you can see is a chain dangling from his pockets.
My very great pleasure! Thank you for the nice comment. :-D