Movies

[Misanthrope]

I have to say, I really think its cool when people have opinions that are opposite that of the populous, simply to be opposite.

Fuck off you asshole, its nothing like that. The movie is not without merit if you like fast cutting action flicks ( I don't but I can appreciate it when they are well done, and save for the last 15 minutes its a lot better than Begins ). Its just the way the script is written and the lines are said, they are unnatural, they are condescending, they are borderline non-sense at times.

I mean give me a damn break that is called suspension of disbelief: breaking away so the characters can flat out tell you "He is a symbol of heroism, a white knight" that is just infuriating.

Its like watching the movie and then have nolan pause the damn thing and explain "ok they are saying that because the theme we are going for is escalation" and then unpause the movie. That is literally what happens at least 10 times throughout the movie when they stop to explain.

So far none of you have done anything to actually defend the movie other than saying "nuh hu! lots of people like it you're just bitter!". You either need to address the criticism which are VALID and called for or shut the fuck up or I'll have batman come in and post "Ad Hominem is a symbol of denial and fear, you will bring forth an escalation of violence devoid of any intellectual discussion if you keep this up"

 

[rahvin]

I like to purposefully go against the masses, elbow them, then walk away nonchalantly.

 

[plintus]

What's the top reason for 'The Dark Knight's opening weekend success?

40.3% Heath Ledger's performance.
13.3% Director Christopher Nolan's vision.
13.2% Media hype, including reviews.
8.0% The Joker.
6.9% The word-of-mouth from 'Batman Begins.'
4.8% A real movie event amidst a bad economy and high gas prices.
3.8% The Batman brand.
3.2% The marketing campaign.
2.9% The ensemble cast.
2.2% Other
1.2% Timing and scope of the release.
0.2% The stunts and special effects.
2,990 users polled.

48.3% is for the Joker.

Ta-da!

 

[DisplayofCharacter]

Fuck off you asshole, its nothing like that.

I did see the movie.

As it appears to me, most of your criticism (that I read, anyway) hinges on your perception of the audience (both fans and proletarians) and your own prejudices.

Seeing as you've seen Nolan's films before (you mentioned Memento and Batman Begins) you obviously had some level of expectation.

I just have to laugh when I see people so dead-set against something for flimsy reasons. Ultimately its not your cup of tea, that's fine - doesn't bother me in the least. Its just amusing how it spilled out - you obviously value your intelligence and don't like to be condescended to (and who does?), even though what you wrote was mostly condescending.


----My opinions:

The performances were nuanced, especially The Joker but also Harvey Dent - and honestly, for what the movie was (a big-budget blockbuster), the themes were bleak and not all that obvious in my opinion. Ironically but purposefully, the villains clearly stole the show. In my opinion, Gordon and Rachel were the clunkiest characters, and both because they were overtly obvious.

That doesn't mean themes were hard to fathom (they weren't, I agree) but some were more subtle. The audience at my viewing (though a fairly unintuitive demographic - a bunch of hicks live in my home town so its quite obviously skewed) had a hard time grasping conceptually, and likely just enjoyed the explosions (anecdotal evidence follows). For example, several audience members at my viewing laughed at inappropriate times and seemingly only at the Joker's physical appearance. These people were at least in their early twenties - they weren't even kids, but I guess they weren't into it. Suspension of disbelief, right?

To retread a point previously made, (and this popular opinion rightfully deserved, I feel) - the Joker has several soliloquies that were believable and well-written, very intense and the movie benefited from it - but I'm not sure everyone would appreciate it the same way.

The movie was technically sound. The camera became more manic, less focused when the Joker was on-scene. When the Batman was performing his theatrics, we got a more panoramic view with much more real (not CGI) cityscape for the stunts. Fast cuts, as previously mentioned, and a fair use of camera for dialogue. Good action shots - satisfying at least.

I came out feeling like it was the best superhero movie I've seen. That isn't saying all that much, but I definitely had a great time - and to me that is what it should be about.

 

[Salamurhaaja]

I will see it (The Dark Knight) tomorrow at the finnish opening nite and while
I am expecting a lot, I must say I'm a fan of Frank Miller and that better show
in this movie or I'll be pissed.

So far the best Batman I've seen, along with the best Joker, is Batman: Dead
End: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0374526/
I never likes Jack Nicholson as Joker, he wasn't insane enough or whatever, so
maybe the dead dude can do a better job, tho I have a feeling all his praise is
due to the fact that he is the dead dude.

Yes, I tend to be on similar paths with Mis when it comes to movies, as some
of you might have read in this thread. Anyway, I'll report back when I've seen
the movie.

 

[plintus]

IMAX evening and night shows in Philly are sold out till the end of July. I was trying to break in around 12:30 AM last night for 1 AM show listed on Yahoo! (and I was drunk as fuck), but it appeared to be a bit of misinformation.

I guess it's 9 AM for me.

 

[Siren]

I saw the Dark Knight, i liked it a lot, especially Joker, and not because he's a dead dude. Funny moment: while entering the theater there was a guy dressed and made-up as Joker and was saying "Hello beauty" to all the females. So of course the "hello beautiful" line in the film broke some laughs.

 

[Misanthrope]

Just because you decided to declare your argument valid doesn't make it so.

No but unless someone addresses the actual arguments instead of just posting random ad hominem and non-arguments like "but everybody likes it" then why should I change my mind? I respect somebody who would at least give me a reason like you.

I myself haven't seen the movie, so I won't be drawn into the specifics but it seems your only objection is that this mainstream blockbuster action movie makes its themes and characters too obvious by spoon-feeding the viewer.

You have not seen the movie so its a little difficult to reply to your input. But for this point I mentioned it early: Yes I know I judge this movie against a higher standard only because the fanatics and moviegoers are doing the same thing by giving it a 10/10 rating and talking about oscar nominations. A 10/10 rating? If it was pure action, pure entertainment I could just respectfully disagree and leave it at that but this is clearly not just action, it attempts ( and imho fails ) a lot more so measuring against a higher standard its in order.

We did measure Memento against a higher standard after all, why should we suddenly stop taking Nolan seriously and measure him against the likes of Michael Bay? He is still trying to be more than your average mainstream flick but imo could have done way better. See the film to see what I mean.

The fact that you call yourself a misanthrope and have chosen such a pointless and elitist way of attacking a Batman movie suggests that the above poster is really right, you just like to go against the masses and rebel. Nothing wrong with that though

So you are making conclusions on a movie you admittedly haven't seen based on some bullshit fame I have and a nickname. Again see the movie first, get familiar with the director as well, then come talk to me.

 

[Misanthrope]

I did see the movie.

As it appears to me, most of your criticism (that I read, anyway) hinges on your perception of the audience (both fans and proletarians) and your own prejudices.

Seeing as you've seen Nolan's films before (you mentioned Memento and Batman Begins) you obviously had some level of expectation.

I just have to laugh when I see people so dead-set against something for flimsy reasons. Ultimately its not your cup of tea, that's fine - doesn't bother me in the least. Its just amusing how it spilled out - you obviously value your intelligence and don't like to be condescended to (and who does?), even though what you wrote was mostly condescending.

The dialog and the character development being laughable are now "filmsy reasons"? Why is that? Read my previous posts and address them: I measure this movie against strict standards because of people who claim this is revolutionary and award-worthy. It is not that it is NOT my cup of tea since the film its clearly not only just an action film, in fact one of my criticism is precisely that its disjunctive in the way it makes the film stop dead cold to elaborate on the characters and then does such a piss poor job at it I wish they would have just included more explosions and fight scenes then, if you are going to mess up with the pacing make it worth while.

I find it laughable that almost none of you are able to offer an opinion ( sometimes at all ) without taking a personal jab against me first. You think it reflects poorly on me but its the other way around.

The performances were nuanced, especially The Joker but also Harvey Dent - and honestly, for what the movie was (a big-budget blockbuster), the themes were bleak and not all that obvious in my opinion.

Nuance? Whats the nuance about each character explaining his motivations by outright telling you literally "I want CHAOS" "I am not a hero" "You are the white knight, the hero this city needs" "I cannot be with you so I wrote down this letter, however if that is not painfully obvious it will be read OUT LOUD"

And again you keep saying "This is a big-budget blockbuster" as if we were supposed to forget all this or validate the non-existent "nuances" you speak of.

That doesn't mean themes were hard to fathom (they weren't, I agree) but some were more subtle. The audience at my viewing (though a fairly unintuitive demographic - a bunch of hicks live in my home town so its quite obviously skewed) had a hard time grasping conceptually, and likely just enjoyed the explosions (anecdotal evidence follows).

So they don't have the ability to understand english? At this point even I could grasp everything by just putting attention to the painful analogies offered by wayne, alfred and gordon. This is subtle on your part but I don't think you can get away with belittling the audience to elevate the film: it doesn't works that way since a massive audience includes people without ADD who will understand it.

 

[DisplayofCharacter]

diatribe

Upping your post count must be fun.

 

[Matse]

Hey hey hey girls, chill, take a break and smoke with me. As long as the grass is green and the sky is pink, we should not fight. Let us hug each other and make love. Women with men. The elder with the young. The healthy with the sick. The blacks with the whites and let us lay aside all differences in the world. Peace.







While writing this post I was not under the influence of any drug. Amazing, is it not?

 

[Salamurhaaja]

Fuck, if I wasn't so drunk I would offer an opinioj onn the movie,
but I thinkI'll leave if fro tomorrow and mabe I make more sensse.
In nay casse, I liked the movie, unlike a lot of other "superhero"
movies I've seen lately, Iwill post myopinion on those later as
well. I'm on the cas, rest assurd people of Gotham.

 

[La Rocque]

I was going to fly somewhere east of the Mississippi River to see 'the Dark Knight' in 3D IMAX
but just found out its only playing in IMAX 2D
when the Batman mania slows down I'll drive to the Pittsburgh area to check it out in the 2D IMAX
ain't life a bitch -

 

[Misanthrope]

Hey hey hey girls, chill, take a break and smoke with me. As long as the grass is green and the sky is pink, we should not fight. Let us hug each other and make love. Women with men. The elder with the young. The healthy with the sick. The blacks with the whites and let us lay aside all differences in the world. Peace.

What fucking fight? All I see is idiots who can't accept any criticism to the object of their devotion and think ad-hominem or patting each other in the back constitutes a counter-argument.

If anything you are 10 times more annoying, you and motherfuckers like Rahvin trying to break down fights pretending to be civilized and always positive and constructive. At least the Italian Stallion has an official excuse as a moderator but you are just rotten shit to me.

 

[Salamurhaaja]

Ok, so now that I'm sober and bored again, I will bring you my (re)view on the new Batman and or
other random thoughts on comic books and comic book movies.
Now watch me blabber on for miles, try to keep up.


The Dark Knight
So, it was good, but it could just as well have been a movie without Batman, of course then it would
most likely suck as it would be compared to great crime movies, which some people do anyway, names
like Heat and L.A. Confidential have been used and while I can understand this, I don't see the movie
this way, cos it's just too hard to imagine a world with someone as "comic book like crazy" as The
Joker and have them actually be successful in their crimes (or tying their shoelaces for that matter).

So, no, can't compare it to crime movies, it's a comic book action movie and should be reviewed as
such and compared to the others of the franchise/genre, cos let's face it, there isn't much organized
about the crimes of The Joker for it even to count as a crime movie of the Heat style, it would be
more in the style of a catastrophe movie if anything.

Let me begin by saying that this movie could do without Batman, as his character seems very
secondary and reactive thru the whole movie, not to say he's not needed, but he could just as easily
be replaced by Gordon or Dent as the main "good guy" and for the large part he is, but in the movie I
guess it makes sense.

Batman is not very interesting as a character and thru the movie he's totally at the mercy of The
Joker when it comes to actually achieving something, The Joker tries to blow up something and
Batman tries to stop him, it seems always that the villains make Batman movies interesting, not
Batman, maybe they should've named this movie The Joker instead.

And yes, The Joker is good here, he's just as nuts as you could imagine, yet he's also the sharpest
knife (see what I did there?) in the drawer and a master manipulator of the human (or bat) mind.
He has no real ulterior motive other than seeing Gotham in ruins and later messing with Batmans head,
trying to get him to kill someone, mostly himself and thus fall, of course failing this he goes after
Dent, this is as it should be.

His background or "birth" is not touched or explained any more than what he tells his victims and since
it changes every time it could be anything and this is excellent, this is how he's supposed to be, a
total mystery. Ledger is good in the role and while I can see him replaced, it will be a shame, tho I
still don't see why he should get an oscar for this, it wasn't anything that can't be repeated by other
people, most acting is that way.

Funniest moment in the movie with Joker happens in the beginning, it's called "magic trick" and I won't
ruin it for those who haven't seen the movie, but I laughed out loud... well, I laughed out loud at a
lot of things the Joker did, which is good, since he is The Joker and the jokes were a one of the best
parts of the character, while they all were very dark and twisted, they all also worked really well,
which is something that is lacking even in most comedies these days, how fucking weird is that?
I mean just watch The Love Guru or Get Smart and compare, amazing.

As for the mandatory comparison to Jack Nicholsons version, Ledger was better, but only cos his
version is closer to the "true" Joker, Nicholsons version is more of the animated series or old TV show
version and as such more kid friendly version, which is one of the reasons I never liked the old movies,
too kid friendly, Batman is not supposed to be kid friendly, Batman is a fucking psychobat (see what I
did again?) and almost as insane as the criminals he brings down, he's only tolerated more cos he goes
after criminals.
On hind sight, Nicholson did an ok job within the limits of the movie.

The character that brings both The Joker and Batman to shame is Harvey Dent, while I don't like Aaron
Eckhart as an actor that much, he does a very good job here, tho his falling is kept rather simple for
some reason and rather different from the comics, which is a shame, as the comic book version
would've made it better I think, now it really lacks impact and I for one don't see his "going nuts" very
believable.

The make up for Two-Face is bloody brutal and blows Tommy Lee Jones version out off the water any
day of the week, it truly looks horrible, if a little unbelievable due to his eye having no damage at all,
but I can forgive that. Two-Face is a good character if he will develop before the next movie, as this
version is cut off a bit short and is missing a lot of the stuff that makes him a proper villain.

As for other character Scarecrow makes an all too brief appearance, but is a tie in to the first movie
which is always good to see, Batman has other villains to deal with as well, not just the big one of the
movie and also you see that he doesn't kill the criminals, this is an important part of the character as
well as an important part of The Jokers motivations.

For the side characters, they are all good in their roles, just as they were in the first movie and I'm
very happy to see a new Rachel Dawes as Katie Holmes just stunk up that role and pretty much the
whole movie with her lack of charisma and acting skills.


So, to the complaints, as it's truly what I'm good at.
I have a lot of complaints, most of which are not just this movie, but all Batman movies to some
extent, but for the ones of this movie first.

The Batman voice, fucking horrible, I don't know why they decided to use this crap voice for him when
he's masked, I'm just happy he doesn't say much, it is so bad I want him to shut up every time he
starts speaking, but then again, I would want him to keep silent mostly anyway, he's supposed to be
The Dark Knight, not mr. talks-a-lot, except when he's fighting The Joker cos that just The Jokers
super power, making people talk.
This is my biggest beef with this movie.

The techno toys, this is my second biggest beef with the movie, while I can see the car and bike and
so forth as useful and maybe even needed to make some scenes work, I do hate them on general
principle, at least they don't have the fucking Batman logo on them, one thing I like and even the dark
logo on the suit is very good for the same reason, it's not obvious.
I just generally dislike the techno suit, the comic doesn't have this shit and neither should the movie,
this is a problem with a lot of comic movies, just look at the X-men suits, they look fucking stupid.

I want the tights and I know a lot of people have a problem with that, but they can be made look
good, trust me. They did have the right idea in this movie cutting down the suits armor, but they just
didn't go far enough for me.

Another grief I have is the stupid "glue on love triangle" between Rachel, Bruce and Dent.
Batman doesn't love (well, he does, but it's a very specific woman, not some random slut thrown his
way), he can't afford to, I can forgive this on the belief that this is early in his career and he hasn't
developed that part of his code yet.
Still, it does drag the movie down a bit and seems a bit too emo for me, not every movie and hero
needs a love interest to make them good, in fact this movie would've been much better without
Rachel and maybe it would've made Dents change better as well, cos the way they did it now kinda
sucks.

Length, this movie is too long, I see a lot of stuff that could've been cut, there is also a lot of
talking and I think Mis mentioned how stupidly simplistic some of it makes the movie.
Not everything needs to be explained to dead, even tho I do like dialogue in my movies, a comic book
movie that tries to be an action movie shouldn't do it.

If this movie had been more like the "detective" version of Batman it would've worked a bit better, but
for now it just seems too much like they tried to Lengthen the movie artificially and let's face it, some
of the dialog does really need work.
Of course The Joker talks a lot in the comics too, so for his part it would be fine and nothing he says
can really be out of place, cos he's just one fucked up motherfucker.

Action, for an action movie the action kinda sucked, I mean it was fluent enough, but some scenes
were just too long for their own good, like the bloody driving scene everyone and their mother seems
to love, too long, cut it the fuck down.

Also a lot of the close combat seems a bit silly, I mean, I know Batman is a master martial artist and
in the comics takes down a lot of people, but since there was a lot of other parts where the movie
tried to be very realistic maybe they should've cut that down a bit, like taking down SWAT teams
alone without them getting off nearly any shots, what are they, chop liver now?

For the most part the action was ok tho and they did get rid of that stupid tank-car of his, which can
only do good things to the series, tho the bike wasn't much of an improvement, but at least it made
him a bit more careful with the driving and he was less bullet proof, which is always good if you want
people to wonder if he gets hurt. Of course now some of you go "Well, how will he get around if he
doesn't have a bat-car/bike/jet/rollerskates etc." He's fucking Batman and not everything needs to be
explained, he's a detective (and one of the best) and he can determine where he needs to be and when.

At least this time the boss villain fight wasn't a 20min uphill fight for the hero, that is one of the
most cliche things in comic book movies, you get rid of the henchmen in 5min and then you deal with
the boss for 20, in this case they really did it correct as The Joker is just a human and his henchmen
are his only real combat ability, at least when it comes to fighting someone as proficient as Batman.


The ending, I don't quite see why the ending was as it was, it could've easily be cut and the
Two-Face just disappear to plot his vengeance and maybe he would go after the right target this time
too, cos who he chose made hardly any sense.
His appearance was too sudden to make very good sense, except maybe to build up for the sequel,
but in that case they should've made him disappear.
Oh well, at least The Joker survives this time, not like in the stupid Burton version, The Joker isn't
supposed to ever die you moron (Burton) he's there to haunt Batman as his twisted mirror image and
to show him what he could become. So, we will see him again.


Overall I would say it's a good movie, just don't expect it to be Batman of the comics, I think they
should've renamed it to "some dude in a bat outfit" to make sure no comic book fan makes the mistake
of this being a movie about Batman and his villains, some of which are closer to the originals than
Batman to his.

So, I would give it an 8 out of 10 and I did on IMDb.
Which means it's an entertaining movie for all it's duration and I wasn't bored once during the 2 and
a half hours. It is however not a 9 or a 10 or even the stupid fucking 9.5 it has on IMDb, being the
#1 movie on the top 250 movies, this seriously is a fucking travesty and I hope once the non-retard
people start voting will be corrected, I mean, I don't like The Godfather myself, but this Batman isn't
even in the same ball park with it, hell it's not even in the same fucking country as far as I'm concerned.
It's just a fun action movie. Period.

I will post shortly how this could be made into a REAL Batman movie and maybe a bit on the other
Batman movies as well and why they suck.

 

[Kovenant84]

...it's a comic book action movie and should be reviewed as such and compared to the others of the franchise/genre...

And this is why I like your review. And I'll agree with your summation. It's by far the best comic book / superhero movie I've seen yet. Best movie ever? No. Never expected it to be. I think part of the problem is that there's been such a dearth of good movies in any genre recently, that you get one like this that does very well in its own category, and people think that it's great across the board.

~kov.

 

[JesterShadow]

Ok, so now that I'm sober and bored again, I will bring you my (re)view on the new Batman and or
other random thoughts on comic books and comic book movies.
Now watch me blabber on for miles, try to keep up.

Wow I read that whole thing. Great review. I agree with some and disagree with some but overall the movie is simply better than an 8. I cant remember the last time I enjoyed a great movie like this in a theater.... and I dont even like most superhero movies. As far as imdb #1.... yeah ok I dont think it will be for long, but I do think that it will stay in the top 15 for a while.

 

[Misanthrope]

So, no, can't compare it to crime movies, it's a comic book action movie and should be reviewed as
such and compared to the others of the franchise/genre

I agree with your review and thats what makes the statement you made relevant and somehow justified. But still think you give a tad more credit than what's called for here and here's why: Sin City.

Thats also a comic book movie and avoids many of the flaws you mention. Why isn't the movie compared to Sin City? More over why is nobody else but you pointing ANY flaws at all? Why all the perfect ratings? Why the stupid comparisons with crime dramas ( not crime movies )? If more people could make a coherent argument and review I wouldn't even bother mentioning the dark knight at all, but its like some stupid 14 year old was following you everywhere you go telling you "Listen to Slipknot man its the best metal band ever, come on! You're just a hater cause its popular, its great, come on! Who's with me?!" and this would go on every goddamn second of your day no matter where you are.

Wouldn't you get at least a little bit annoyed and reply "You don't know shit about music" at one point?

 

[Salamurhaaja]

I agree with your review and thats what makes the statement you made relevant and somehow justified. But still think you give a tad more credit than what's called for here and here's why: Sin City.

Thats also a comic book movie and avoids many of the flaws you mention. Why isn't the movie compared to Sin City?

Hmm, true, I wasn't really thinking of Sin City when I wrote the review and it's mainly cos I
don't really see Sin City as a comic book movie, even tho it surely is one and one of my
favorites, both the comic and the movie.

The reason I don't think of it as a comic book movie is simply cos it doesn't really have capes
and cowls, it COULD be compared to Heat and it's ilk and it would do pretty well on those
standards, even if some of the stuff in it is a bit "superhumanish" (Marv being a good example).

So yes, now that I think about Sin City I do give TDK a bit more credit than it might deserve,
but then you have to think about TDK not having Frank Miller and Robert Rodriguez writing and
directing either... I believe that Frank Millers script for TDK would've been much better and
more true to the "detective" Batman, especially after he's been writing Sin City for so long.

More over why is nobody else but you pointing ANY flaws at all? Why all the perfect ratings? Why the stupid comparisons with crime dramas ( not crime movies )?

That is a good question, I don't normally write anything as long as I did on Batman, but I
wanted to make sure people understood where I'm coming from with it and I hope it showed,
tho I will write later how it could've been made better as I promised, cos this could've been,
if not equal, but at least a close second to Sin City and head and shoulders above Iron Man
and The Incredible Hulk.

If more people could make a coherent argument and review I wouldn't even bother mentioning the dark knight at all, but its like some stupid 14 year old was following you everywhere you go telling you "Listen to Slipknot man its the best metal band ever, come on! You're just a hater cause its popular, its great, come on! Who's with me?!" and this would go on every goddamn second of your day no matter where you are.

Wouldn't you get at least a little bit annoyed and reply "You don't know shit about music" at one point?

I do feel your pain, I don't quite get the hype either and I don't see where it's all coming from,
I mean, it's a good movie, but #1 movie of all time... maybe the people just have such short
attention spans that they have to make it #1 now or they might forget later or something.

I'm dredding to see how they slaughter my beloved Watchmen...

 

[Siren]

Why isn't the movie compared to Sin City? More over why is nobody else but you pointing ANY flaws at all?

I also thought about Sin City, but i can't really rate either of the two, cause i'm not very familiar with the comic books. Aesthetically i preferred Sin City, i thought and still think that it was something unique. I also mentioned this to a huge comic book fan and he seemed to prefer The Dark Knight (i don't remember why, iirc he said something about Sin City's plot).

As for The Dark Knight, i'm not mentioning any flaws cause i'm too jaded. I didn't really care to find any flaws, i went to see it and enjoyed it, and that's all. It did rule compared to the other Batman movies, so in that regard it exceeded my expectations. It's a blockbuster, so imo it should be judged as one, and in that case it was good and appeared to have a little more depth and darkness than the usual ones. But of course it's not the greatest movie of all time, if someone wants depth they should look elsewhere.