The Dark Knight

[AntiAntagonist]

It hasn't come out on video yet, how the hell did you watch it at home?

uuummm.... bootleg? I know plenty of people that have done it though I don't watch them because they have shitty quality. (I watched Star Wars Episode 3 bootleg and some movie that really sucked that I totally can't remember but the quality was so horrid that I went to watch it at the movies anyway.)

Might explain why the complaint of the film being too dark to make anything out as well.

Unless it's a DVD quality RIP many cam recordings will come out too dark.

To the review: I'll give you the comment on speed (I was concentrating more on the number of items and obstacles in play). I also agree on Bale; and genuinely laugh when people refer to his Batman lines as gargling gravel (other reviews). I disagree on some of the descriptions of other characters, the Joker/Batman symbiosis, the cinematography, all the pacing and surprised at no mention of Freeman.

I haven't much time right now. However I will say that the pacing was such that I was further drawn in as the film progressed. There were a few times that I asked myself how they could a melodrama without tying up some of the more powerful loose ends.

I also laughed when Batman ran/limped awkwardly away into the shadows. It immediately made me think of Adam West since the entire rest of the film Bats only has dynamic action or dialogue.

 

[MrBrightside919]

I was fortunate enough to see this movie in the theater on opening weekend (at like 10 PM on sunday)...

I've got to disagree with what you said about the movie being simplistic. I didn't find one thing, other than the joker, to be simplistic about it, just like most of Nolan's films. There is more to be found underneath the initial plot.

I agree with what some people are saying. You can't really compare the two jokers because they are very different from one another. Ledger's joker is just a catalyst to the story who's only real purpose in the movie is to fuck things up for Wayne and Dent. He was never meant to be some deep character the people were to ponder. Like Alfred says in the movie "Some men just wanna watch the world burn." The Joker's motives are all explained with that one line. He was just there to shake things up. The Burton Joker was really the star of the movie who laughed and giggled his way into the heart of the Gotham crime scene. He was pissed at batman for ruining him and knocking him into those chemicals.

You also can't really compare the old batman movies to the dark knight because, once again, they are very different movies. Dark Knight is a more realistic take on batman where as the Burton movies were not so much realistic. The Burton movies were a more Gothic take on Batman.

Comparing Keaton to Bale wasn't a good idea either because, as i've said twice already, the two movies are very different from one another. Keaton's Wayne was witty and somewhat funny while Bale is an unlikable arrogant ass. Since the Dark Knight is trying to be more realistic, obviously Wayne is going to be an ass because millionaires are assholes.

I think the point i'm trying to make here is that the Burton batman movies and the Nolan batman movies are totally different flicks and they really shouldn't be compared. It's like comparing the old Nightmare On Elm Street movies and the Friday the 13th movie to something like Freddy VS Jason. You just were never meant to make those comparisons, even though people were already going to do it anyway.

 

[Smiles]

YES! YES! I completely agree with you! I mean the OP...

 

[LesIsMore]

Sir: I take issue with your claim and believe you are a knob.

 

[Cheesebob]

Sir: I take issue with your claim and believe you are a knob.

of butter

Also Hearth Ledger's Joker was WAAAAY more mental than Tim Burton's joker, just like he should be...

Having your face burnt with acid by your nemesis is going to make you at least a little bit quirky

 

[MrBrightside919]

Sir: I take issue with your claim and believe you are a knob.

of butter

Also Hearth Ledger's Joker was WAAAAY more mental than Tim Burton's joker, just like he should be...

Having your face burnt with acid by your nemesis is going to make you at least a little bit quirky

That's kinda the whole point I was trying to make about the two jokers. Burton's joker is out for revenge against batman for messing him up while Nolan's joker is just in it for the kicks...which is WAY freakier than anything else

 

[qbert4ever]

Anyway, good review. Have yet to see the film in question, so I shall reserve my personal opinion until I get the dvd.

Wait, you didn't see it in theaters?

People like you are the reason Titanic is still #1 at the box office. You, my friend, are going to that special Hell normally reserved for baby-rapists and people who write checks for anything when a credit or debit card would do just fine. Repent now, sinner. And you may just avoid the most searing flames.

 

[broadband]

``The Joker has a plan for chaos´´ i liked that line.

And everyone who says that the Joker just did the things according to the situation and all that, the fat guy with the bomb and the fiber wires to crash the police helicopters, or the bombs on the ferrys arent stuff that can be made in 2 hours or so.

The Joker just wanted to fuck up the city, but he had plans for that.

 

[hypothetical fact]

I watched the dark knight four times so my bias will be overwhelming, however; I feel that you are attacking this movie for the point of attacking in that all of your evidence is subjective to your own opinion of the acting and writing. While there is no problem with this if you are going to take this method you should attempt to relate to the story as anyone can call the acting in Citizen Kane over te top and poorly paced.

Rather than tear you apart for it I will help you with attacking the actual plot which is what everyone else was watching while you were looking down on the movie as a whole causing you to miss the entire point of Harvey Dent. "Not worth mentioning", the fall of Harvey Dent was only the entire point of the movie.

(WARNING SPOILERS) Legitimate failings of the Dark Knight: (WARNING SPOILERS)
1) The indestructibility of the Joker; he manages to sit inside the driver's seat of a truck when it flips and get out unscathed. He also causes a bomb in the police department to go off killing everyone around him but leaving him once again untouched.

2) The Joker's plan to escape from the police department. If we are to believe Gordon in that The Joker planned on getting caught we would have to believe that he somehow planned on upsetting Batman enough to throw him into the glass, with enough force to break off a shard large enough to use as a weapon to take the cop hostage when he demands a phone call. If Batman had simply punched the crap out of the Joker he never would have escaped.

3) There is a massive military presence searching for bombs all over the bridge out of the city yet no one took the time to check the two ferries before they left the port.

4) How did the Joker escape from Bruce Wayne's party after he throws Rachel out of the window; surely Batman could just get off the crushed car he landed on and wait at the entrance before the Joker's elevator reached the ground floor.

5) The Joker's entire plan came down to Harvey Dent not shooting him when he gave Harvey the gun and for the coin toss to land on heads when Harvey flipped the coin. I know the Joker was meant to be chaotic but that was just stupid.

 

[scnj]

You, my friend, are going to that special Hell normally reserved for baby-rapists and people who write checks for anything when a credit or debit card would do just fine.

"And people who talk at the theatre."

 

[Danglybits]

As a review not bad but at little slow to get to what you're trying to say and I don't agree in the least. Burton tried to make Batman realistic (sort of) and compelling but in the end its only slightly less campy than the Adam West version. Don't get me wrong I love the '89 version of Batman and Jack Nicholson's Joker, who freaked the hell out of me when I was a kid.

But Nolan and Ledger did a good job of presenting Gotham city as a world gone mad. And with the bar set so high by the '89 Batman both Ledger and Nolan went to great lengths to give things their own spin. Another thing I really liked about the film was that it picked a freaking era.

I'd like to think that the eclectic era paraphernalia from the previous Batman films (more neon than a redlight district and cars from the 40's) is trying to show us that Gotham is timeless and all that but I'm not so sure. Lastly I'm all for any Batman movie where he doesn't drive a cock.

 

[Random Argument Man]

I was not really a superhero moive fan from the beginning. The Dark Knight had some interesting moments, but it wasn't special like everyone 's been bragging.

-The Joker
-Morgan Freeman who gived a huge buuuuuuuuuuuurrnnn.
..That's it

 

[tonsoffun111111]

It just kicks ass

 

[rossatdi]

I'd be interested to hear of what you films you actually like.

I read all your points I can't really agree with any of your criticism. You say the duality of Batman/Joker is clearer in the Burton Batman film, I can't see how you can possible just say that and move on.

 

[AuntyEthel]

Though The Dark Knight is on the list of movies I'll never watch (along with the new Indy), we should all agree on something:

It can't possibly be as bad as the one with George Clooney and Mr Freeze.

 

[rossatdi]

Though The Dark Knight is on the list of movies I'll never watch (along with the new Indy), we should all agree on something:

It can't possibly be as bad as the one with George Clooney and Mr Freeze.

Please explain how The Dark Knight and Indy IV are in the same category. And soon, because that's like going "Ice cream! Yeah, if I was having a bowl of dog poo!".

 

[AuntyEthel]

Though The Dark Knight is on the list of movies I'll never watch (along with the new Indy), we should all agree on something:

It can't possibly be as bad as the one with George Clooney and Mr Freeze.

Please explain how The Dark Knight and Indy IV are in the same category. And soon, because that's like going "Ice cream! Yeah, if I was having a bowl of dog poo!".

I didn't mean that. I just avoid remakes, sequels, prequels, comic adaptations etc.

 

[rossatdi]

Though The Dark Knight is on the list of movies I'll never watch (along with the new Indy), we should all agree on something:

It can't possibly be as bad as the one with George Clooney and Mr Freeze.

Please explain how The Dark Knight and Indy IV are in the same category. And soon, because that's like going "Ice cream! Yeah, if I was having a bowl of dog poo!".

I didn't mean that. I just avoid remakes, sequels, prequels, comic adaptations etc.

So you didn't like Godfather 2? Or the remake of Cape Fear? It's not an adaptation from any comic book, merely takes the characters and adapts them to real life. And it was certainly the best blockbuster of the year, by miles. What a baffling prejudice to hold.

 

[AuntyEthel]

So you didn't like Godfather 2? Or the remake of Cape Fear? It's not an adaptation from any comic book, merely takes the characters and adapts them to real life. And it was certainly the best blockbuster of the year, by miles. What a baffling prejudice to hold.

I think you're missing my point. The current trend of movies (Hollywood mainstream movies) is to completely disregard any shred of originality and just go for high-octane explosions, something which I find incredibly tedious. Gf2 and Cape Fear were made years ago, when mainstream movies were still be credible. I thought Batman Begins was awful (I actually found Val Kilmer to be a better Batman, despite being a Bale fan) and might as well have been directed by Michael Bay for all the subtlety and storytelling it displayed. Also, attaching something like "The best blockbuster of the year" immediately makes me switch off.

 

[rossatdi]

I think you're missing my point. The current trend of movies (Hollywood mainstream movies) is to completely disregard any shred of originality and just go for high-octane explosions, something which I find incredibly tedious. Gf2 and Cape Fear were made years ago, when mainstream movies were still be credible. I thought Batman Begins was awful (I actually found Val Kilmer to be a better Batman, despite being a Bale fan) and might as well have been directed by Michael Bay for all the subtlety and storytelling it displayed. Also, attaching something like "The best blockbuster of the year" immediately makes me switch off.

None of that. I don't think I can actually argue with someone like you. Apologies if that comes of as harsh but, well, no, actually, superhero films aren't supposed to be subtle they're supposed to deal with superlatives. The most heroic, the most evil, the strongest, the weakest. And Batman Begins and The Dark Knight do that so well.

If you genuinely meant the bold text then you obviously aren't judging it properly.

Don't full the personal opinion bull as well, Michael Bay < Christopher Nolan. Just from technical points of view as a director. Plus if you even have a vague interest/understanding in the audio/visual techniques in film then The Dark Knight is worth seeing just for that.

So what, you don't like blockbusters? Jaws not deep enough for you? Jurassic Park just for kids? Die Hard just about explosions? You people are ruining films as much as the Epic Movie lot because you'll reject quality films purely on the basis that they're crowd pleasers.

Out of interest, what was the last film you really enjoyed?