6 years on.....The Dark Knight.

Adamantium

Listen I love a wide range of movies (so don't mistake this the raving of some fanboy, i'm not, Lost In Translation is one of my favourite movies of the last decade) , but very few left me with that electric, blue feeling that this film left me with. I had read nothing about it, and had only watched Begins a few months earlier on TV.

Honestly not a false note, and no superhero films have dared challenge Nolan's Batman films in terms of weight and stakes/loss. (No the Winter Soldier is not that)


The Dark Knight will never be topped, and there's already more than enough ADD explosion-fest **** in theaters in past years to prove that.

I remember walking out of the cinema into the blaring sun
"Wow, that was a serious piece of cinema that I didn't think they could do."

Yeah its on the nose about stuff like "The War on Terror", but it's themes are there and genuinely menacing, disturbinh, thought provoking

It was almost the only film of it's kind where the sheer intrinsic ridiculousness of the scenario was not a barrier to feeling "this is could be happening for real".

I love the fact that is an ensemble as well.

And it didn't need a sequel much like Terminator 2. This story may have been better left a two parter.

Heroism is good (but is ultimately a lie really) and in the end it will cost you everything, your friends and family, your life. And for what in the end?
No film of this ilk, is brave enough say that and leave it at that. Losing and keep on losing as part of that way of life

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0G1TgseTPH0

What do ye think?

e_e

It's an excellent summer movie that significantly stumbles in its final act. It'd probably be in the lower part of my top 100 of the decade, great but not among the very best imho. I think Nolan's made at least 3 superior films too.

e_e

I also have to reject the idea that it "will never be topped" either, it's far from a perfect film and studios/filmmakers should look to it with "Hey that really worked! How can we do better?" instead of a "Now let's not even try anymore." defeatism. It's a film that's done with a hell of a lot more thought than most other blockbusters and that certainly should be commended, but I don't think it's the be all and end all especially considering how muddled and ham-fisted the film gets at points. I actually think that Inception is a better example of what a blockbuster can be and is up there with the likes of Die Hard/Aliens as high watermarks.

sabat

The last two Batman films were just a series of random setpieces designed to make teenage fanboys go "the bit where x happened was really cool" and mangled together into a feature with little consideration for logic, motivation or continuity. "Serious piece of cinema?" "Thought provoking?" I think not.

.jacksparrow.

sabat wrote: »

The last two Batman films were just a series of random setpieces designed to make teenage fanboys go "the bit where x happened was really cool" and mangled together into a feature with little consideration for logic, motivation or continuity. "Serious piece of cinema?" "Thought provoking?" I think not.

What made it mangled together?

DrWu

Didnt like any of the trilogy. No vision - all too realistic. Batman should be full of lunacy and over the top villains. "The Cult" graphic novel had that perfect mix of grit and lunacy. Lots of vivid colours and meaty storylines.

Rackstar

Saw this in a cinema in Vegas when it came out.

It sticks in my memory more than the rest of the Vegas carry on and thats something!!

e_e

Yeah seeing it in the Savoy on opening day was an amazing experience (screen 1 packed, everyone engaged with the film and a good applause at the end), but I'm not gonna lie it's been diminishing returns with the film ever since for me.

MJ23

Superb film. Went to it in the cinema 4 times.
The Joker was brilliant.




"Why don't we cut you into little pieces and feed you to your pooches, hmmm, and then we'll see how hungry a loyal dog really is"

Bipolar Joe

People tend to overlook the things in Nolan's Batman films that they would hate in every other. It drives me nuts. I think most superhero movies are far over rated, these ones especially.

nyarlothothep

It articulates a fundamentally conservative vision with respect to the noble lie, covering up Harvey Dent's crimes because the public are not ready for it, so they must be excluded from any democratic inquiry of their elite masters, it reinforces the status quo. Ditto for Batman 3, which I admit to liking, despite it's dodgy politics. I strongly disliked The Dark Knight for the conservatism of its politics, it was almost an apologia for the Iraq War, that torture under extreme circumstances is somehow warranted and useful! But Batman 3 was almost worse, it was like Atlas Shrugged applied to film, I completely disagreed with its implicit political message and it advocated pure nihilism as a legitimation of an ends justifying the means mentality, ie the world is going to sh1t with Bane, a pinko commie nihilist just wanting to watch the world burn, which invites a semi fascist/police state response. But even more grating is the aesthetic composition of these films, essentially an overwhelming desire to be taken so seriously, to induce that po faced reverence among the audience for their seriousity, they cross over into silly territory on the number line that divides seriousness from the comically absurd! Its a comic book movie about a guy in a rubber suit in a fictional gothic city, called of all things Gotham! It is ridiculous on some level! Trying to turn it into Shakespearean tragedy set in the realm of high politics is phony and falls flat for me. But it's not just that, any film that is so overly serious, hitting the audience across the head with all the subtlety of a sledgehammer, trying to impress so desperately upon them its "importance" would be just as absurd.

Furthermore, the overuse of music and the labouring of the central theme, a flaw common to any Nolan film I've seen, but not to the same extent, thankfully as The Dark Knight Rises. My reaction to watching TDK at the time was wtf is this?! Am I watching a fcking trailer inside a movie?! Why are all these characters espousing unnatural dialogue about the central conceit of the film, in a choppily edited, trailer version of the film with epic music? How am I meant to take this film seriously which so desperately wants me to take it seriously?! TDK has some good points, Heath Ledgers' performance is unreal, the Joker is an awesome character, ditto for TDKR with respect to Bane, Tom Hardy is an unreal actor, but Nolan's style and the political ideologies in these films rubs me the wrong way. Batman is an asshole and Bruce Wayne is Patrick Bateman, a rich, pompous asshole, honestly Bale's performance as Wayne has many of the same characteristics as Bateman. It's like worship your ubermensch elite betters, kind of like Iron Man and I couldn't disagre more with that vision of society. I will always prefer the lightness of touch of Burton's Batman. More than Nolan, Burton reinvented Batman, he actually made it 'dark' or gothic on the silver screen, Nolan took that and went down a 'realistic'/gritty route, but basically Burton transformed it. Also I preferred Keaton's Batman, here was a hero I could sympathise with and therefore identify with. He wasn't some uber loaded, thrill seeking, self righteous vigilante asshole who makes arrogant, self important remarks about buying hotels. No, he was an eccentric loner who happened to be rich, it wasn't about some philosophy employed to justify his behaviour in the abstract, his turn towards vigilantism was directly associated with his traumatic childhood. Here we had a real character, not Bruce Bateman. And Keaton was cool because he wasn't your stereotypical uber macho, weight lifting crime fighter, but he had this intensity and more importantly, humanity, which Bale's performance lacks. It also had an awesome funktastic soundtrack by Prince which automatically blows Zimmerman's score, good as it is, out of the water. Combined with Danny Elfman's music, well that's it. One of the best soundtracks in a film ever. Before 1989 Batman you had camp Batman, no one was expecting a modern, hard hitting update, but at the time that was it.

TLDR, I don't like Nolan films, I like Burton's Batman.

LuckyLloyd

It's magnificent visual filmmaking with one of the most memorable villains in cinema history. Was in West Virginia on release day, went to see it. Next evening we had driven up the road a couple of hundred miles and happened upon a sign for an Imax screening of it. Took the opportunity and was able to really drink Nolan's work in properly.

MagicMarker

I find all the Nolan Batman movies really rather ordinary. If any are on TV I'd probably start watching but would unlikely make it to the end.

Skittlemon

TDKR was a bit of a letdown compared to the previous two. Ledger's performance in TDK when I first saw it actually shook me up, by the end of the film I was genuinely perturbed as to what this maniac would do and I think that what nearly every decent graphic novel tried to do with the Joker character, make the reader nervous and Nolan/Ledger succeeded in doin that imo
Bale's portrayal of Bruce Wayne was half ' Machinist' and half Patrick Bateman but he came fairly close to nailing the anger and ferocity of the Batman psyche. Keaton's Bruce Wayne was a better film character and empathy was an emotion that was stroked to capture the audience but his Batman psyche was a little too tame. Still better than Kilmer or Clooney though by many many light years.

DrumSteve

For a long time I couldn't remember which film it was that when I watched it, I would always fall asleep about half way through...

...this is it.

nyarlothothep

Skittlemon wrote: »

TDKR was a bit of a letdown compared to the previous two. Ledger's performance in TDK when I first saw it actually shook me up, by the end of the film I was genuinely perturbed as to what this maniac would do and I think that what nearly every decent graphic novel tried to do with the Joker character, make the reader nervous and Nolan/Ledger succeeded in doin that imo
Bale's portrayal of Bruce Wayne was half ' Machinist' and half Patrick Bateman but he came fairly close to nailing the anger and ferocity of the Batman psyche. Keaton's Bruce Wayne was a better film character and empathy was an emotion that was stroked to capture the audience but his Batman psyche was a little too tame. Still better than Kilmer or Clooney though by many many light years.

Actually that's a good point, Bale did bring a certain ferocity to the character, it was pretty relentless. Kilmer I don't remember. Clooney was funny in a farcical kind of way. I actually think Batman and Robin isn't so bad if it's contextualised as a happy 90s film, it's funny and unforgettably sh1t in its defense. I watched it there recently where he's bidding against Robin, great cheese.

Liam O

I do want to hate it and have made some dissenting remarks to friends who naturally all jizz over it, but despite it's flaws one thing it is very watchable. I didn't see it in the cinema so that clouded any original view I had of it. I liked Begins when I seen it in the cinema before the hype train but didn't expect it to take off like it did, nothing like taking advantage of a well timed death to market your movie I guess...I also thought originally that Rises was the best but after subsequent re watches it really falters.

Ultimately the batman portrayed in this doesn't make sense. Wayne became Batman to eliminate street level crime like what killed his parents, in this trilogy he did that for about 2 days, fought the Scarecrow and Ra's Al Ghul for a couple of days, the Joker for a month or 2 and then gives up for 8 years? Doesn't really make sense for his character to do that at all in any shape or form.

Shiraz 4.99

Got very messy in the 3rd act.
The sonar nonsense & Harvey's decent were handled poorly I thought.
Film is reprieved by Batman's final monologue.

Mickeroo

Liam O wrote: »

I do want to hate it and have made some dissenting remarks to friends who naturally all jizz over it, but despite it's flaws one thing it is very watchable. I didn't see it in the cinema so that clouded any original view I had of it. I liked Begins when I seen it in the cinema before the hype train but didn't expect it to take off like it did, nothing like taking advantage of a well timed death to market your movie I guess...I also thought originally that Rises was the best but after subsequent re watches it really falters.

Ultimately the batman portrayed in this doesn't make sense. Wayne became Batman to eliminate street level crime like what killed his parents, in this trilogy he did that for about 2 days, fought the Scarecrow and Ra's Al Ghul for a couple of days, the Joker for a month or 2 and then gives up for 8 years? Doesn't really make sense for his character to do that at all in any shape or form.

Yeah, I loved all three films but I'm not sure the whole Dark Knight Returns angle really worked in the third. Would have loved if they made the sequel that TDK hinted at instead with Batman being blamed for Harvey's death and on the run from the law.

Adamantium

Mickeroo wrote: »

Yeah, I loved all three films but I'm not sure the whole Dark Knight Returns angle really worked in the third. Would have loved if they made the sequel that TDK hinted at instead with Batman being blamed for Harvey's death and on the run from the law.

I remember hearing rumours at the time that the IMAX 5 MIN prolouge picked up one second after where the TDK ended, Batman being chased by the police and the like on the same night of Dent's death.

That for me was the film I wanted to see too. Him with no resources and pushed to the limit after having lost everything, which was something I thought TDK captured quite well

I hate the fact that these trilogies need to go full circle as wll, so they had to for BB Leauge of Shadows arc again.

It feels very detached and forced, and not natural

Duffy the Vampire Slayer

Wasn't Nolan's original idea to have the third film set a short period after TDK with the Joker on trial?

krudler

Mickeroo wrote: »

Yeah, I loved all three films but I'm not sure the whole Dark Knight Returns angle really worked in the third. Would have loved if they made the sequel that TDK hinted at instead with Batman being blamed for Harvey's death and on the run from the law.

Same, it was a perfect setup for Batman being hunted by the people he was trying to save, with Gordon having to play the Commissioner role while knowing everything. Rises had some good moments but it was so convoluted and overblown it lost all the impact TDK had, Joker's psychological games had far more impact for me than Bane's city hijacking and nuclear bombs going off. There's no scene in Rises that compare's to Batman and the Joker in the interrogation room, I thought that was the highlight of the entire series.

Duggy747

Didn't like Begins, Nolan was trying to create a realistic-ish universe in a ridiculous and impractical city with a crazy train running through it and a slum worthy of Rio. The humour was also pretty naff and felt way out of place when it cropped up.

I liked TDK much more, felt like they had a better idea of what to do with Batman in this universe that was a bit more grounded. This Gotham was entirely different to the one that appeared in Begins. It had a lot of memorable scenes and action sequences but pacing and dodgy editing does let it down a bit, certainly not one of the greatest films people proclaim it to be but it was fun when it came out.

TDKR was just completely hollow for me with an extremely silly plot and too many plot holes I couldn't ignore.

Some of the acting was dreadful with a shockingly bad death worthy of a B-movie and a corny kiss to boot in that scene:

Alfred Borden

Best superhero film for me. Remember coming out of TDKR and thinking it was better but i had to wait a few months to let the hype die down. TDK is perfect in every way, Heaths performance alone makes it a top 5 film for me but Everything was so dark and grim, the telling of the story of Harvey Dent was also excellent.

Jonny7

I remember hating the film with a passion for being so utterly unrealistic or gritty.. something I value highly in films.. which leads to a tendency not to like superhero films..

For some reason, awhile back, I saw the opening again, the ticking clock, the bank job..

It's a comic book film, so if I watch it with that frame of mind, it's a very different film... in fact I now see the first two-thirds of that film as great - the pace, the characters, the set pieces

I went from hating it, to liking it, pretty rare for me, seen it about 4 times now.. also I find it very re-watchable

Rubber_Soul

Duffy the Vampire Slayer wrote: »

Wasn't Nolan's original idea to have the third film set a short period after TDK with the Joker on trial?

He's said a few times in interviews that he had nothing in mind for a third film even before Ledger's death.

I thought DKR was thematically perfect but it felt like they just decided to film a very early draft, the whole thing needed a few more rewrites. It honestly felt like Nolan operating on contractually obliged autopilot with one eye already on his next projects.

Sad Professor

Duffy the Vampire Slayer wrote: »

Wasn't Nolan's original idea to have the third film set a short period after TDK with the Joker on trial?

I think that was part of Goyer’s pre-TDK plan for the third film, which would have featured Harvey’s transformation into Two Face. But Nolan wasn’t sure he wanted to do a third film so ended up mining all of that material for TDK, playing out the Harvey arc and the Batman/Joker dynamic in a single film rather than over the course of two.

Mickeroo

Sad Professor wrote: »

I think that was part of Goyer’s pre-TDK plan for the third film, which would have featured Harvey’s transformation into Two Face. But Nolan wasn’t sure he wanted to do a third film so ended up mining all of that material for TDK, playing out the Harvey arc and the Batman/Joker dynamic in a single film rather than over the course of two.

I'm convinced Joker would have still played a major role in a third film but for Ledger's passing.

Sad Professor

He definitely would have played some role. Nolan would have had no choice but to use him again. But I’m not sure he would have been used effectively. The Batman/Joker dynamic as it exists in the comics is pretty much played out in its entirety in TDK. Bringing him back for another round as the main villain would have been repetitious. I suppose the same could be same said for bringing the LoS back in TDKR, but the Joker is more than just a man in Nolan’s world, he’s a force of nature, a symbol of the evil Batman is fighting but will never truly defeat. It seems fitting that he’s still alive, locked up somewhere at the end of TDKR, justifying the need for a new dark knight.

Daveysil15

I thought it was excellent overall but there was one thing I didn't like about it: The Joker was supposed to be a man without a plan. "I just do things" Yet he robbed a bank, blew up a few buildings and used Harvey as his "ace in the hole," all of which required serious planning.

Mickeroo

Daveysil15 wrote: »

I thought it was excellent overall but there was one thing I didn't like about it: The Joker was supposed to be a man without a plan. "I just do things" Yet he robbed a bank, blew up a few buildings and used Harvey as his "ace in the hole," all of which required serious planning.

I think his plan was to give the impression that he was making it up as he went but everything he did in the film was very calculated and precise.

Daveysil15

Mickeroo wrote: »

I think his plan was to give the impression that he was making it up as he went but everything he did in the film was very calculated and precise.

Possibly so, although it almost seemed like he had a death wish at times. like the scene in the hospital where Harvey had the gun to his head. Or when he was on the street and he wanted Batman to hit him. It's kind of like he didn't give a damn, yet he was still as you say, calculated and precise. Although who knows what was going on in his head.

e_e

I didn't like how the last 10 minutes descended into characters standing around shouting the morality of the film at each other. :pac:

Mickeroo

e_e wrote: »

I didn't like how the last 10 minutes descended into characters standing around shouting the morality of the film at each other. :pac:

BUT YOU WERE THE BEST OF US!!

Daveysil15

e_e wrote: »

I didn't like how the last 10 minutes descended into characters standing around shouting the morality of the film at each other. :pac:

This is the post we deserve, but not the one we need right now.

Adamantium

Daveysil15 wrote: »

This is the post we deserve, but not the one we need right now.

So we'll hunt him...

Zubeneschamali

Mickeroo wrote: »

I think his plan was to give the impression that he was making it up as he went but everything he did in the film was very calculated and precise.

In the comics, the Joker could get away with this sh!t because he knew Batman wouldn't kill him because it's a comic book for kids. In the movie, I'm not sure how the Joker knew the Batman wouldn't just kill him from cover.

kryogen

Couldnt understand any of the seemingly new found coolness of hating The Dark Knight, feeling a little let down by TDKR I can totally understand, but TDK was an unbelievably good film, some excellent performances in there, notably Ledger, who totally made The Joker his own, Oldman is always terrific also, I like Bale as Batman, more so in Begins then TDK but wouldnt put me off

Considering how it turned out, and I didnt by any means hate TDKR, it may have been better to leave the story as it was at the end of TDK, leave it a two parter with un ending possibilities

e_e

kryogen wrote: »

Couldnt understand any of the seemingly new found coolness of hating The Dark Knight,

I don't understand the online trend of misconstruing differing opinions as "coolness".

e_e

I can't say I get the piling on TDKR either given that The Dark Knight has so many similar flaws, I'd rank 'em close together. Batman Begins is more consistent than both imo, with the first hour being the finest on-screen origin story to date.

Brian?

It's not a bad film, none of the 3 were.

But I can honestly say it's not a very memorable film, in fact I am really struggling to remember details of the plot.

I've never rewatched it and probably won't unless it's on TV and I am bored.

thedarksh1te

I think I'm more qualified than most to speak on the subject......

Zubeneschamali

kryogen wrote: »

Couldnt understand any of the seemingly new found coolness of hating The Dark Knight

I disliked it enough that I didn't see the third one at the cinema.

Call Me Jimmy

Jesus looking at that clip I'm glad I didn't bother with the last one. The first two were pretty meh for me when they came out but now they all make me cringe.

Soft Falling Rain

Liam O wrote: »

I do want to hate it and have made some dissenting remarks to friends who naturally all jizz over it, but despite it's flaws one thing it is very watchable. I didn't see it in the cinema so that clouded any original view I had of it. I liked Begins when I seen it in the cinema before the hype train but didn't expect it to take off like it did, nothing like taking advantage of a well timed death to market your movie I guess...I also thought originally that Rises was the best but after subsequent re watches it really falters.

Ultimately the batman portrayed in this doesn't make sense. Wayne became Batman to eliminate street level crime like what killed his parents, in this trilogy he did that for about 2 days, fought the Scarecrow and Ra's Al Ghul for a couple of days, the Joker for a month or 2 and then gives up for 8 years? Doesn't really make sense for his character to do that at all in any shape or form.

This Batman is not the same as the one in the comics nor should he have to be. In this trilogy he became Batman for the simple reason of protecting Gotham and its people from falling victim to the same tragedies he did.

The Dent Act pretty much eradicated gang crime in Gotham and made the streets safe for its inhabitants. Both Blake and Gordon alluded to this when talking about what counts for police work in the aftermath of the Dent Act i.e. tracking down well to do types who had "gone missing" after a couple of hours of not returning home.

That's why Bruce "retired" for 8 years; he simply wasn't needed anymore. That, and the fact that he suffered major mental trauma after the death of the love of his life. Again, this isn't the comics, where Bruce has suffered constant mental trauma only to keeping going. In reality these things are going to take their toll on someone and significantly reshape their life.

Oafley Jones

Soft Falling Rain wrote: »

This Batman is not the same as the one in the comics nor should he have to be. In this trilogy he became Batman for the simple reason of protecting Gotham and its people from falling victim to the same tragedies he did.

The Dent Act pretty much eradicated gang crime in Gotham and made the streets safe for its inhabitants. Both Blake and Gordon alluded to this when talking about what counts for police work in the aftermath of the Dent Act i.e. tracking down well to do types who had "gone missing" after a couple of hours of not returning home.

That's why Bruce "retired" for 8 years; he simply wasn't needed anymore. That, and the fact that he suffered major mental trauma after the death of the love of his life. Again, this isn't the comics, where Bruce has suffered constant mental trauma only to keeping going. In reality these things are going to take their toll on someone and significantly reshape their life.

It's the convenience of character and plot that I find so offensive about TDKR. Love the first two, despite each having major problems and not really existing in a cohesive universe. But this idea that a man who's been so traumatised by an event as to create an alter ego can just walk away from it is inconceivable to me.

So the dent act cleaned up gang crime. Are we to believe that this is eradicated crime completely? There's no thugs robbing people outside of the Opera anymore? Or is Bruce cool with this level of crime now.

kryogen

e_e wrote: »

I don't understand the online trend of misconstruing differing opinions as "coolness".

Me neither, I also dont like reading too much into things though

kryogen

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

I disliked it enough that I didn't see the third one at the cinema.

Now that kind of hate I can get on board with

kryogen

Oafley Jones wrote: »

It's the convenience of character and plot that I find so offensive about TDKR. Love the first two, despite each having major problems and not really existing in a cohesive universe. But this idea that a man who's been so traumatised by an event as to create an alter ego can just walk away from it is inconceivable to me.

So the dent act cleaned up gang crime. Are we to believe that this is eradicated crime completely? There's no thugs robbing people outside of the Opera anymore? Or is Bruce cool with this level of crime now.

I would assume it made it just like any other major city, and not the massively corrupt cesspit that it was

e_e

kryogen wrote: »

Me neither, I also dont like reading too much into things though

What do you mean by "reading too much into things"? I was kinda fawning over the film the first time I saw it but I can definitely see a lot of the criticisms, especially over the last act.

Soft Falling Rain

Oafley Jones wrote: »

It's the convenience of character and plot that I find so offensive about TDKR. Love the first two, despite each having major problems and not really existing in a cohesive universe. But this idea that a man who's been so traumatised by an event as to create an alter ego can just walk away from it is inconceivable to me.

So the dent act cleaned up gang crime. Are we to believe that this is eradicated crime completely? There's no thugs robbing people outside of the Opera anymore? Or is Bruce cool with this level of crime now.

Bale's Bruce was very naive though in a lot of ways. He was never in it for the long haul and stated in TDK repeatedly that he saw Dent as the man to properly lead the city, and allow him to quit and be with Rachel.

Then he lost Rachel, and the Dent Act eradicated serious crime to at least the point where the police were capable of handling small level street crime on their own. He lost all of his motivation in one fell swoop so gave up in a lot of ways. Bare in mind it wasn't a simple case of giving up Batman, he gave up on life itself and became a hermit. This is a man who had been deeply mentally effected.