shrader

They'll have a 3rd with Two-Face, but I really can't tell if they planned to use the Joker again or not. They never intended to do any kind of back story for the Joker though. He really doesn't have one anyway. I loved how he told multiple versions of how his face was scarred. That right there is the Joker. Giving a backstory gives a reason why he is as crazy as he is and he doesn't need it. In the comics there is no accepted origin story for him and that just adds to his insanity. The only real backstory he needed was taken care of in the movie. He's basically some minor criminal in Gotham that escaped from Arkham in Batman Begins. Batman's presence made him take that next step, it gave him meaning.

With or without Ledger, I don't want to see any more of the Joker beyond this movie. I don't know how you top what he did in this one. It should stand alone.

He falls right into the same trap that a lot of female comics do. The act is aimed at a specific audience. I'm sure that audience enjoys it, but at least half of the people out there have no f'n clue what the hell he's talking about.

That was a great movie, but I'm at a loss for words right now. Really, I'm still trying to soak in everything that I saw. I'm sure they could've trimmed it down a bit, but there were quite a few vital pieces to the story in that last 30 minutes. Suggesting that the Joker became tiresome is way off base though. Every bit of praise Ledger has been getting was well deserved.

That was one of the things I loved about Begins. They actually explain stuff like that.

The list of bands who are involved with some kind of tribute is pretty impressive too.

I don't know where you sit on comic book movies, but its really not like any of the others. Begins was far more story driven than most. The whole thing was put together so well, its worth seeing.

Yeah, without reading the link I'd say its pretty obvious that he didn't have any bad intentions because clearly Andy Dick is gay.

They were hyping up his performance well before he died. Granted it was people who worked on the movie, but you don't generally hear that kind of stuff so far in advance. Posthumous nominations are so rare. He would've gotten the consideration regardless of his death, especially since he has already been nominated in the past.

Has anyone ever done any type of analysis to figure out just how long of a holdout starts to hurt the development of a player in his first season? The results are probably very obvious for guys on either extreme, the one or two day guys or players like JeMarcus Russell, but is there a certain time where it really starts to hurt players?

Tonight at midnight! Finally I can stop mentioning this in every single movie thread on this board. I've been waiting far too long. Anyway, is anyone else going tonight? The theater I'm going to has it on 7 screens and as of yesterday 5 were sold out. It's going to be one hell of an atmosphere outside that theater.

It seems like most agree that this kind of condition would never be allowed, but I wonder if they could set it up a different way. Say they get that 3rd round pick mentioned earlier. I wonder if they can set the deal up so that if the team that picks up Favre turns around and trades him somewhere else, that 3rd round pick becomes a 1st round pick instead.

I don't know if its my best ever, but I'm a big fan of the St. Francis shirt with the sleeves cut off that I wear during every single hockey game I play. I think it dates back to around 95 or 96, but its only been a part of my hockey gear for about 5 years now. There are so many blood stains on that thing, especially from when I had a gash over my left eye and I used it instead of the jersey for pressure.

Ahhhh, I haven't seen the original movies in a very long time. I should find some time for that.

But where do we draw the line? Can we start shooting people who are fighting in the street? Can we shoot drunk drivers? Can we shoot the random guy going 20 miles over the speed limit? How many people are there that were convicted of burglary, have since served their time and are now making an honest living? Were they vile filth too?

I may have completely lost my mind, but I thought he fires his gun and then the movie ends.

So I'm confused. If the "burglary doesn't justify death" argument doesn't hold water, why don't convicted burglars face the death penalty?

I'll go ahead and mention that this could be a spoiler in case people never saw that movie, but I was under the impression that he killed him at the end. Yeah, I guess it would hurt the story going forward, but I think killing him makes for a better ending.

You're post seemed to imply the exact opposite, that the decision was made, so it must be right. I've heard these tapes several times now and it almost sounds like there's an excitement in his voice, a "yes, I get to go do something" tone. Whether or not the actions were justified, in my opinion, hearing that tone takes things to a whole new level. Maybe it wasn't anything illegal, but its wasn't the right thing to do.

The guy that Bond and M are interrogating, is that the guy Bond goes after at the end of Casino Royale?

And a jury has never been wrong before.

Yeah, that one is way out there. Good for a few laughs, nothing more.

There are no top defensemen in this year's crop of free agents. This is the same kind of market that had Carlos Silva as one of the top starting pitchers available in MLB this past offseason. Also, as for Campbell, I see him more as a complementary piece on the blue line. He's an asset to a team, but he's not the guy you build your blueline around. That kind of money should be going to that kind of player, not Campbell.

And then there's the "your dead" that he said before firing the gun.

Yeah, the tapes pretty much make it sound like cold blooded murder. He put on just enough of a "oh, I was scared" act afterwards and I'm sure that is what kept him out of jail.