The Dark Knight

c.g._eads said:
Okay, this is not going to be a popular opinion, but I was pretty bored during this movie. Now, for those who'll say, "This is a summer movie, you're being too harsh." Well, this movie wanted to be taken seriously (why so serious?), so I'm going to judge it seriously. (that's why)

But first of all, I'm going to review the previews!

The Spirit - What... the... hell???? What was this??? Is this movie a joke? Man did this look awful. I still don't know what it is. Hopefully I never will.

The Day The Earth Stood Still - I might check this out. But looks pretty lame.

Terminator - I'm sorry, but I'm there. A lot of people hate McG. I think this is going to be cool.

The Watchmen - I have heard so much about this movie and wow was I underwhelmed. This looked really cheesy and, quite honestly, dumb. I will not be checking this out.

Okay, to the Dark Night...

First, the good...

1) Heath Ledger. I think people want Ledger to be nominated because it will sort of vindicate the fanboys that comic book movies be taken seriously. He was good - but this stuff about an Oscar nomination... ehhhh, not so sure. I think that's a premature reaction to his death. I really do.

2) The emergence of the batbike was supercool. I was not expecting that.

3) The directing. This is a well made, well-produced movie. Everything from the look to the casting. Some of his action directing could've been better. But overall, very well made.

THE BAD (major spoilers)

Okay, almost all my complaints have to do with the script. And ultimately, this is why I didn't like this movie. But I'll start with the small stuff that bothered me.

1) Batman's costume - Am I the only one who feels that Batman's mask looks really weird on him? It's shaped like a bird. He just looks funny in it.

2) Bale's Batman voice - Remember when you were a kid and you would have to make a phone call to someone pretending you were older than you were? So you husked up your voice to sound more "adult". But the person on the other end always knew you were a kid? That's what Bale's voice sounds like to me. It's almost comical. I guess it is a "comic" book movie though. so maybe it works.

3) Way too much going on - There were honestly like 150 characters in this movie. And about 20 subplots. After awhile of dealing with things like random characters trying to blackmail morgan freeman so that he could tell a funny joke I was like, "come on already. who cares??"

4) The theme - The theme was basically that cities are filled with crime, and there's nothing we can do about it. I'm sorry, but this might have been cutting edge stuff, say, in the 30s. But crime? Today? As something that I worry about? There are far bigger issues in the world that concern me. So right from the start it all felt ho-hum.

5) The Joker Character - a bad guy who has no motivation. I'm sorry but that's stupid. We call it amateurish when any other movie villian is written without a motivation. Clearly, this is overlooked because of Ledger's performance. But at the end I was like, "huh? he does this cause he's got nothing better to do?" lame.

5) GIVE ME A BREAK - The thing that turns Harvey into Two-Face. We're to believe, not only, that Batman is so into fighting crime that he leaves the love of his life to die to save Harvey Dent? But also, that batman couldn't take 1 second to turn back and TELL THE POLICE WHICH PERSON HE WAS GOING TO SAVE so they could go save the other one!?? Give me a break.

6) GIVE ME A BREAK 2 - Who honestly bought into that b.s. that the police would actually want to *arrest* batman??? How did this make any sense?? It is only there to create artificial conflict but there is absolutely no point to it! The guy is helping you! And he's doing your job better than you are! So what's your solution? Put him behind bars! Yeah, makes sense to me.

7) Cell phone thing - this was just dumb and pointless.

8) The ending - The big ending to a 180 million dollar movie is someone holding a kid hostage? Wow, I think I saw this on a rerun of C.S.I. last week. I was hoping after 2 hours and THIRTY MINUTES! (yes, cause this movie needed to be that long) that I'd least get some bang for my buck. Instead I got some introspective voice over and batman falling 1 story. Enough said.

It's very clear I'm in the minority here, but those are my reasons for not liking the movie.
Click to expand...


Usually in these huge movie threads, I can scan thru and find a hilarious post with some great snarky observations. This is that post.

While I enjoyed myself at the theatre this weekend, I agree with most of the negative comments (AKA "the Bad") above, even though many of them were subsequently disputed.

I agree with points 2, 3, 5, 5, 6, 7, and 8. And no, dammit, I'm not gonna "pay attention" or at least that much attention when there is (as was pointed out) 150 characters running around shooting each other, sticking pencils in people's eyes, blackmailing each other and God knows what else.

I think if a solid 1/2 hour was cut from this movie it would have rocked. Taking out the whole "Korea" sequence was a brilliant suggestion.

I like a nice 2 hour action movie. I have two dogs at home that don't like to be left alone. Going to the movies shouldn't be a four hour endeavor. :Drogar-Evil(DBG):
 
I just watched the Burton "Batman" again. And I have to say... it didn't hold up *at all*. Nolan's TDK is superior on every level. But the biggest disappointment was the Joker, because I remembered it as being so much better; and now, in comparison, the Ledger Joker was far more believable.
Click to expand...


I think this is the thing. Once Schumacher came in and Batman became a joke, everyone looked so fondly back at the Burton Batman movies as so much better than they really were. There were only that much better compared to what came after.

If anyone has watched the first Burton Batman again, recently, it is just barely less campy than the 60s Batman. The museum scene: really?

And to the notion of Burton doing better with this script than Nolan: hogwash. Burton had his "dark" script and he camped it up.

I'm not necessarily a Greengrass fan, but I'd love to see him get his hands on the franchise and really dirty it up.

I'm not a comic reader, but I understand there is a Batman book that has him more of a normal person fashioning homemade stuff as opposed to James Bond level gadgets. I'd love to see Greengrass have a go at THAT Batman: more of a REAL man using detective work to find more serial killer like criminals than cartoon character criminals.
 
I watched the first in the theater, couldnt bother to waste my time with the others, but bought the DVDs for the special features. I'm a BTS freak.

I have never bothered to watch them though.

Those movies are a waste of life.
 
Following Barry's, post, just revisited 1. Its a different movie. The acting was not up there, specialy on the supporting cast. However, both Jack and Keaton were top notch. We have to remember that this was a "transitional" Batman- a bridge from the Old 60'ies to the end of 80'ies Batman. This movie was extremely influencial and lead the way for the Darker Batman comics seen in the 90'ies till today.

While some of the acting is indeed campy, and the sets look very studio, it has "soul". I really like Keaton's take on the character. Compared to the Dark Knight, it is obviously more campy and "unrealistic". It doesn't take itself so seriously.

I would really like to see a post "Sweeney Todd" Burton take on Batman. Now that the franchise has done away with the restrictions of the PG rating, I insist in the opinion of that being simply amazing- Burton's Gothic Mise-en-Scene with Miller's writting. Johny Depp as the " next" Joker, or as the Riddler...

Will revisit Batman Returns tomorrow...
 
Last edited:
SPZ said:
Following Barry's, post, just revisited 1. Its a different movie. The acting was not up there, specialy on the supporting cast. However, both Jack and Keaton were top notch. We have to remember that this was a "transitional" Batman- a bridge from the Old 60'ies to the end of 80'ies Batman. This movie was extremely influencial and lead the way for the Darker Batman comics seen in the 90'ies till today.

While some of the acting is indeed campy, and the sets look very studio, it has "soul". I really like Keaton's take on the character. Compared to the Dark Knight, it is obviously more campy and "unrealistic". It doesn't take itself so seriously.

I would really like to see a post "Sweeney Todd" Burton take on Batman. Now that the franchise has done away with the restrictions of the PG rating, I insist in the opinion of that being simply amazing- Burton's Gothic Mise-en-Scene with Miller's writting. Johny Depp as the " next" Joker, or as the Riddler...

Will revisit Batman Returns tomorrow...
Click to expand...

I don't know. I think Burton's lost something over the years. Maybe his movie's have just gotten too slick. There was something charming about the lack of sophistication of his early work that I miss now.
 
While I would love a sequal, nothing can do justice to this. The Joker isn't dead but nobody can replicate Ledger's incredible, and UNIQUE take on the joker.

Its because of this that there shouldn't be another. The Joker is dead, and like the story so plainly spells out, he is the greatest villian Batman ever has, or ever will face. They are in many ways Polar Opposites. The Penguin, Two Face (SPOILER: I'm pretty certain hes dead, although they didn' spell it out), Posion Ivy, The Riddler, Mr. Freeze, and all these others (if hes more then a comic book villian) pale in comparison to the Joker. Now that there can't be another Joker, there is nothing that compare to this film. No villian is more sinister or more interesting, not by a long shot.

I'm sure this has been said throughout the thread, but with this many posts I couldn't look.

By the way, is Mr. Freeze just some villian made up for the Batman cartoons or was he in the DC comics. I never read them.
 
He may have been better, but not as important as a charactor.

"Batman's "most implacable foe" is the Joker, a clown like criminal who as a "personification of the irrational" represents "everything Batman [opposes]."
Searched Batman on Wikipedia to find that.


Its cool to know that about Mr. Freeze though. I just can't think of any better Villian then the Joker.
 
Back a few years ago, the WB had a short lived series called Birds Of Prey. Unfortunately, the backstory was better than the story. Batman and Catwoman hook up, the result is a girl who will grow up to be a heroine called Huntress. Joker takes his revenge on Batman by shooting Batgirl and several others that were close to him. Batgirl survives, but is paralyzed, becoming the wheelchair bound Oracle, while Batman disappears. That is a story I want to see, not another rehash of how he became Joker.
 
That would be very cool. However, my major concern is the fact that Ledgers performance, aside from being brilliant, is very unique and un-nerving. I would love to see the Joker in a future Batman, but it would be very difficult while still retaining the persona of Ledgers Joker, something they would probably have to do, because it is a series.

Does Batman disappear through that entire episode, or is he still a major player? I'm a little confused. Sounds very interesting.
 
While that would be really cool, it would be hard to have a Batman movie without Batman. It could be approached as a seperate project but it seems odd serving as a third part of this series.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top