The Dark Knight

[DARRYLXWF 0]

Just saw the film. Excellent. If you like Batman, you'll enjoy this film. If not, stay clear.

[Twisted Intestine 0]

Good thing you told me that! I hate batman, but was going to go see it anyways. Now I know it's a batman movie.

[Zack Malibu 0]

Got my tix to the Thursday night midnight showing this morning. Can't wait.

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

There's a couple negative reviews on rotten tomatoes now, one of which is from a top critic.

 

The best part is seeing his take on comic book movies. He gave Iron Man a rotten rating...and Hancock a fresh rating. I think his negative review only excites me more.

[DarKnight 0]

There's a couple negative reviews on rotten tomatoes now, one of which is from a top critic.

 

The best part is seeing his take on comic book movies. He gave Iron Man a rotten rating...and Hancock a fresh rating. I think his negative review only excites me more.

 

That critic has got to be an idiot. Hancock was by far the worst movie I've seen this year, just awful. Its pretty much impossible for any movie to get in the high 90's on rotten tomatoes as there are always dumbass critics who hate a movie for no good reason. I think its disturbing that Batman Begins only gets 84% on there. That rating isn't bad at all, but I think people thought it was an excellent movie. If it only gets that much, why does Iron Man get 93%? Does anyone think its that much better than Batman Begins really? I thought Iron Man was a great movie, but I didn't think it was better.

[King Kamala 0]

You know I don't agree with the guy's views on Iron Man (Haven't seen Hancock...or The Dark Knight obviously) but aren't film critics hired to...you know...have an opinion?

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

Depends on what your looking for. I personally prefer Batman Begins...but I can easily see why people (even a majority of them) would prefer Iron Man. Iron Man was just pure fun, and I'm glad it did big business and was a critical success. Batman Begins is more my taste...but for a summer movie especially...Iron Man was perfect fare.

[Kahran Ramsus 0]

It is the ratings format on Rotten Tomatoes that allows that to happen. Most people I know think that Batman Begins is better than Iron Man, but at the same time there are fewer people that actually dislike Iron Man than Batman Begins, so Iron Man would end up having a better rating in that sample because of fewer negative reviews.

 

For starters, those that are big fans of the over-the-top style by Tim Burton are at odds with the more realistic approach of Nolan. Iron Man doesn't have that handicap.

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

You know I don't agree with the guy's views on Iron Man (Haven't seen Hancock...or The Dark Knight obviously) but aren't film critics hired to...you know...have an opinion?

 

 

Fair.

 

But you have to admit there is something extremely strange about this guys views being directly opposed to the overwhelming majority of his peers for 3 movies of the same genre in the same summer.

 

Which was my point.

[King Kamala 0]

Dude's probably just a huge film snob. I don't like them myself but I'd gladly take a snob over a shill.

[DarKnight 0]

[Depends on what your looking for. I personally prefer Batman Begins...but I can easily see why people (even a majority of them) would prefer Iron Man. Iron Man was just pure fun, and I'm glad it did big business and was a critical success. Batman Begins is more my taste...but for a summer movie especially...Iron Man was perfect fare.

 

I agree with you on this. Batman Begins was more of my taste as well. When I think of Batman I think of stuff that is dark and gritty, but also very exciting, and Begins nailed it. When I think of Iron Man, I think of stuff that is more fun and lighthearted. Same thing with Spider-Man.

[bob_barron 0]

I liked Batman a lot more than Iron Man as well.

 

Metacritic is a better indicator of how good a film is I think

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

I more or less have a couple reviewers who generaly agree with my tastes in movies. For the most part reviews don't really matter to me since I'm one of those people who knows what they want to see and then sees it... and if I don't want to see something it takes the word of people who's opinions I trust (actual people...not reviewers) to get me to watch it. I find this way gives me the least amount of headaches. I will see stuff that gets a lot of Oscar buzz eventually though...I just like to see what the Academy is into that year.

[Darthtiki 0]

I saw it last night and I want to see it again

[Starks 0]

I'll keep this review spoiler free. I went in as spoiler free as possible, not having seeked out all the TV spots or having watched the trailers ad-nauseum, and to ruin this film would be a crime.

 

Finished watching the film ~ 5hrs ago so I'm still processing what I've seen. This isn't a superhero film. It's a crime drama (that can stand aside films such as Heat or LA Confidential) of the superhero subtype. It's a tragedy. It's about dealing with the unforeseen consequences of actions undertaken with the best of intentions, it's about making difficult choices when presented equally terrible options. And it's very very good. Perhaps even great. I really need to see the film a few more times to appreciate it's subtleties, as it's an enjoyably layered story.

 

Compared to Batman Begins this film is on a whole nother level. The action scenes flow much better with the camera pulled back and the editing far less rapid, the stand out being a chase scene in the middle of the film. The FX work is top notch, much like Iron Man nothing screams "This is CGI". The script is where the real magic happens however. Simple conversations between characters steal this movie, the actors obviously relishing with working with such quality material. All the shitty one liners from Begins have been jettisoned, although the movie is humorous in places.

 

Heath Ledger's depiction of the Joker is every bit as good as the press is reporting. He is walking contradiction ("Let me tell you how I get these scars..."), a mad man, an enigma, an anarchist, an unstoppable force who can't be reasoned or negotiated with, and in the blink of an eye switches from a darkly humorous weirdo to manic violent sociopath. And while he initially presents as a man who indulges in his every whim, he is also an absolute mastermind in the paradox he presents to Gotham City and it's inhabitants. The scope and genius of his plan cannot be fully appreciated until the final moments of the film.

 

Sometimes an interpretation of a character will resonate with an audience to such an extent that it will influence all future interpretations of the character. Just as Frank Miller's run on Batman in the 80's redefined the characters, or the Blade movie introduced Whistler to the characters mythos, Ledger's interpretation is so definitive that it will influence the character in comics and animated form for decades. Just wait until you see The Joker's "Magic Trick" (20 seconds of character shorthand that tells you everything you need to know).

 

And because Ledger is so damn good people are going to miss the other brilliant performance in this movie. Aaron Eckhart is superb, deserving all the accolades that Ledger's performance has received. His story arc is the centre of the movie and is what drives it. He gives the best performance in the film IMO.

 

Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman provide solid support. Maggie Gyllenhaal replaces Katie Holmes without missing beat. Gary Oldman's Lt. James Gordon gains the most of the characters returning from the first film however.

 

Dependant on other films to be released this year, I'd expect TDK award nominations for Heath Ledger (Best Supporting Actor), Wally Pfister (Cinematography), Christopher & Jonathan Nolan (Best Screenplay), along with a swag of nominations in various technical and production categories (Best FX, Sound Mixing, Design etc etc). If their is any justice (which there isn't when it comes to acting nominations, too often nominations are given for an actors body of work rather than their single performance) Aaron Eckhart would be a lock for Best Supporting Actor Along with Ledger. Addition nominations for Best Film and Best Director may be a stretch, but not out of reach.

 

Highly Recommended. 4.5/5 Stars.

[DarKnight 0]

And because Ledger is so damn good people are going to miss the other brilliant performance in this movie. Aaron Eckhart is superb, deserving all the accolades that Ledger's performance has received. His story arc is the centre of the movie and is what drives it. He gives the best performance in the film IMO.

 

Oh man, this movie sounds like its going to be awesome. I can't wait to see this!

[bobobrazil1984 0]

Minor quibble in above review, i think the screenplay would be in "Best Adapted Screenplay" if it got nominated. OTOH you probalby can't point to ONE specific story as being adapted. like 'Begins' was sort of a cross between Denny O'Neal's "The Man Who Falls" (1st half of the movie) and Miller's "Year One" (second half).

[The Man in Blak 0]

He flat out calls the movie possibly the greatest since ROTK. That's some high praise.

 

There's so many things wrong with this that I don't even know where to begin.

 

Here's the actual quote, just to clarify:

 

perhaps the most impressive mainstream entertainment experience since 2003's The Return of the King.

 

By framing it as a "mainstream entertainment experience", he separates it from the various dramas, art-house films, etc.

[Starks 0]

Minor quibble in above review, i think the screenplay would be in "Best Adapted Screenplay" if it got nominated. OTOH you probalby can't point to ONE specific story as being adapted. like 'Begins' was sort of a cross between Denny O'Neal's "The Man Who Falls" (1st half of the movie) and Miller's "Year One" (second half).

 

I considered that, but I believe it would come under "Best Screenplay" due to the movie credits. If a story is taken from another source (eg. No Country for Old Men) it will be credited as "Based on the novel No Country for Old Men by Cormac McCarthy", "Adapted screenplay by Joel and Ethan Coen". The Dark Knight is credited as "Story by David S. Goyer and Christopher Nolan", "Screenplay by Christopher and Jonathan Nolan".

[bob_barron 0]

Bob Crane gets credit for creating the characters I believe

[DarKnight 0]

Minor quibble in above review, i think the screenplay would be in "Best Adapted Screenplay" if it got nominated. OTOH you probalby can't point to ONE specific story as being adapted. like 'Begins' was sort of a cross between Denny O'Neal's "The Man Who Falls" (1st half of the movie) and Miller's "Year One" (second half).

 

Yeah, Begins was sort of a mix between Batman graphic novels as well as adapting Ra's Al Ghul and Scarecrow, so the movie can have some of Batman's rogue gallery. There is also some of The Long Halloween thrown in there too, by including Carmine Falcone in the movie, and having the theme of him being above the law.

[ZGangsta 0]

Bob Crane gets credit for creating the characters I believe

It's Bob Kane actually. And it was actually him and Bill Finger if I'm not mistaken (nor wikipedia), though Finger never gets credit in moves/adaptations. I wonder why that it?

[Exslade ZX 0]

Bob Crane gets credit for creating the characters I believe

It's Bob Kane actually. And it was actually him and Bill Finger if I'm not mistaken (nor wikipedia), though Finger never gets credit in moves/adaptations. I wonder why that it?

Because he doesn't get credited in comics either.

 

I read comics on the regular, and until seeing this post, I had never heard of him. :/

[The Niggardly King 0]

Holy fuck, with all the advance reports and tracking... they're making it seem like this film can make all it's money back and GAIN a decent profit by Tuesday/Wednesday.

 

SHIT.

[Cowboy Battlenuts 0]

I expect the gross to be around 300-400 trillion dollars, and half the earth's populations first born children.

 

I just hope I get a chance to see it over the weekend at some point without a theatre full of tools. I might have a better chance just driving off LI to see it.

[Anakin Flair 0]

Bob Crane gets credit for creating the characters I believe

It's Bob Kane actually. And it was actually him and Bill Finger if I'm not mistaken (nor wikipedia), though Finger never gets credit in moves/adaptations. I wonder why that it?

 

Because Kane was smart enough to secure the rights to his characters out of the gate, as opposed to Siegle and Shuster, who spent years trying to get royalties becuase they sold Superman away for about a hundred bucks. I'm betting Finger didn't even think about it.

 

There's actually a pretty cool documentary about Kane on the Gotham Knights 2 disc dvd that goes in depth on his life.

[Adam 0]

Going to see it tonight for the late screening. So very, very excited.

[TheBigSwigg 0]

Bob Crane gets credit for creating the characters I believe

It's Bob Kane actually. And it was actually him and Bill Finger if I'm not mistaken (nor wikipedia), though Finger never gets credit in moves/adaptations. I wonder why that it?

 

Finger never gets credit the same way Jack Kirby never got credit. Back in the day, the publishers saw the artists as replaceable, and that the true talent (and thus the credit of creating the character) was the writing.

[DarKnight 0]

Holy fuck, with all the advance reports and tracking... they're making it seem like this film can make all it's money back and GAIN a decent profit by Tuesday/Wednesday.

 

SHIT.

 

I think I heard somewhere that the expected gross for the weekend is $118M. Now, don't panic since there is more stuff out right now than Spider-Man 3 had to compete with, and I think making $118M when stuff is actually out is a bigger accomplishment than making a lot of money when nothing is out. It still will make tons of money the next few weeks, and I think it will end up being the biggest hit of the year.

[Bruiser Chong 0]

I've got my tickets for the 12:01 A.M. showing tomorrow night. I've stopped watching any clips or reading anything related to the movie. I'm hyped enough.