The Dark Knight is now...

How much bigger of a budget does it really need?

150M is not chump change by any means and, while not at the top of the list of big budgets, it's certainly not below average.

Bah. I wish they would've just got rid of the Rachel Dawes character if they weren't going to go with Katie. I hate when they switch actors. It ruins movie continuity for me.

That $150mil will probably grow over time.

Pretty much only the last couple of Spiderman installments, the last X-Men movie, and Superman Returns had budgets larger than 150M. So that puts Dark Knight up among the elite. And, while compared with Batman Returns, Dark Knight has almost twice the budget to begin with.

Looking at gross receipts, only the Spiderman sequels really deserved their very large budgets, as X-Men and Superman Returns were not nearly so profitable.

The amount of CGI used also seems to be somewhat proportional to the size of the budget, which makes me wonder if Batman movies don't need as much money to support gratuitous CGI effects. One of the great things about Batman is that the character is so much more interesting than the effects.

That said, I'm looking forward to the movie as well, and hope that the story is done well regardless of the budget and effects.

The reason Batman is the greatest superhero is because of just that watch, the lack of need for gratuitous CGI effects. Why does that make him the greatest superhero you ask? Because it means he is a real guy, with no special powers (other than ridiculous investing knowledge), fighting crime in the real world. Batman is the best because any one of us could actually be him if we had the money. He is real, and that is why they don't need the CGI for his character. That doesn't mean a Tumbler isn't really expensive, but hey, it's still possible. Every other superhero has a power. Batman is just BAD-ASS!

Batman Begins did not cost this much. They were promised more money if the film made money and it did. The film did so well on DVD that the followup is guaranteed a larger audience in theaters. It should go past 200 million in the U.S.

If it's good.

I want Katie Holmes as Rachel Dawes!!!!!!!!!

I just hope the edit the fights better. The last one was hard to follow with all the close ups. They really wasted the choreography the Ong Bak fight choreographers did. You couldn't see anything.

didn't know the OB guys did the choreography.actually the fight moves themselves in OB weren't very good,very simple and repetitive,it was just Jaa's incredible athleticism that made OB watchable.

Maggie Gyllenhaal is much prettier than Holmes. Then again, the Batman movies don't need a Rachel Dawes.

It would have been cool to see Batman do the same moves. Besides, a fight should be simple and quick. I don't think Batman is the type of guy who is into long drawn out fights. I'm really tired of the stuff you see in HK flicks with all the wire-fu.

I cannot wait for this after how great Batman Begins was....

It seriously was such an amazing movie with just a great HT soundtrack!!

I think both are attractive but I like Holmes better in the looks department. I'd replace both of them with Michelle Monaghan from MI3 if I had my druthers.

what ???????? this Maggie looks old, as she was 50
lol there are actress being 50 who look much better.
i hope this is typo. bring back Holmes if there's nothing else.
or what about KATE BECKINSALE ? NOW THAT's A REAL WOMAN. or BRIDGET MOYONAN !!!!

yuck. 3 thumbs down.

I wish you wouldn't have said that. She's absolutely gorgeous, and now I'm going to wish that the entire movie. But I think on principle, I'd rather just get rid of Rachel Dawes for this movie; Batman is supposed to be somewhere between James Bond and the Terminator when it comes to romance. Heath Ledger is a freaking JOKE, though, pun intended. Jack Nicholson is irreplaceable.

Katie Holmes looks like DROOPY THE DOG....seriously her face is soooo droopy. That being said she is still better than the new girl.....(and if katie holmes wanted some action I wouldn't say no... )

The new girl Maggie Gyllenhaal looks like she is always sucking her cheeks in and really is not hot at all. I wouldn't even look at this girl twice in a bar. Yes I'm serious!


Now Digital 2004 had it right....Bridget Moynahan Now there is a 11 out of 10 if there ever was one....

Tom Brady should be thanking GOD if she is having his kid....lol

agree about her non-hotness,Jake is better looking-and no,I'm not gay.

Heath Ledger as the Joker is no worse than Topher Grace playing Venom! Give me a freakin' break. Ledger at least has a history of pretty decent badassedness from "The Patriot" where he tore a little bit up at least. Topher Grace fake-dated an Amazon redhead (who I find strangley attractive though).

Are you on drugs? What in the world are you talking about?

Anyone who doubts Maggie Gyllenhaal's hotness just needs to watch the movie Secretary.

Maggie defines unhotness.

U
G
L
Y

She Ain't Got No Alibi...she Ugly....ya Ya...she Ugly!

Yuck. She is ugly.

Just so happens that she has 10times more bad ones than good ones

katie holmes was just fine..i don't understand the backlash.

I hate re-casting..get rid of the character completely if you're not satisfied with her performance in the first one.

Whatever..

Maggie looks absolutely matronly!!!!!

I heard holmes wasn't in it because Tom cruise won't let her. Its because she makes out with christian bale in the movie.

They both should move to UrANUS