- The Dark Knight
- Opening Date: 07/18/2008
- STUDIO: Warner Bros.
- TRAILER: Trailer
- ACCOMPLICES: Official Site
The Charge
Why so serious?
Opening Statement
The most anticipated nerd movie in recent history, Christopher Nolan’s follow-up to the relaunched Batman franchise, The Dark Knight has wowed early reviewers, captivated fans with an engaging online guerrilla advertising campaign, and immortalized the young Heath Ledger’s role in infamy. It also currently stands at #4 on the IMDb Top 250 list.
Is this the magnum opus of comic book adaptations? Or is it simply (gasp!) another mediocre sequel?
A little of both, as it turns out.
Facts of the Case
Things are looking good for Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) aka Batman, protector of Gotham City. Due to his constant vigilance, crime in Gotham is slowly decreasing, and citizens are beginning to appreciate his actions, even attracting some unwelcome imitators. Unfortunately for Batman, his heroic vigilantism has attracted some more unsavory elements. The mob presence, which once ruled Gotham under its well-dressed shoes, now finds themselves at a loss. In their place, rapidly rising is a new kind of criminal, an anthesis to the caped crusader, given flesh and form by way of the Joker (Heath Ledger).
Despite the efforts of stoic police officer Lt. Jim Gordon (Gary Oldman) and rising star D.A. Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhart), the three are unable to anticiate this new threat. The Joker is unlike any element Gotham has ever seen before, killing without motive, striking surgically, and rapidly descends Gotham into fear and disorder. Batman struggles with this new challenge, fearful of the person he must become in order to subdue such a wild and elusive threat. He also struggles with his growing conflict and admiration towards Dent. As a symbol of hope for Gotham, Dent can inspire people in a way Batman cannot… but he may lose his longtime love, Rachel (Maggie Gyllenhaal) to his charm.
The Evidence
Never has a film in recent memory inspired so much glee and anticipation in the masses as The Dark Knight. People have been seething for this film, frothing at the bit, anxious for what may be the most satisfactory comic book adaptation ever put to film. If you are one of those people, and you have yet to see The Dark Knight, you may as well stop reading this review now, because you will probably not like what you are about to read.
As sequels go, The Dark Knight hits home, and hits often, upping the emotional ante, adding new villains, pulling out a compelling performance from the late Heath Ledger, one that is sure to be his headstone on a short but brilliant career, and entertaining audiences through its crushingly long running time. It is a good film… but only a good film. Greatness, incredibleness, holy realms of bodaciousnes; despite what you may have heard (or perhaps more accurately, desperately want to believe) these are all elements that have eluded The Dark Knight.
Brooding and melancholic, the emotional tone of the film dives straight into the nether regions and never once comes out, creating one of the more maudlin comic films in recent memory. The Dark Knight is obsessed with the space between good and evil, black and white; a duality best reflected by the film’s second villain, Two-Face, who himself is a walking metaphor for the themes examined. Tossing around meandering philosophical musings on the nature of evil, of justice, of heroism, Batman struggles endlessly (and annoyingly) with the realization that he must betray the very values he swore to uphold in order to get the job done this time, and cannot quite seem to wrap his head around it. Likewise, both Gordon and Dent fight their own consciences in order to bring down a criminal threat that seemingly has no conscience of any kind.
The Joker is the polar opposite of Batman, emerging from the shadows of Gotham as a cruel kind of counter-balance. Had Bruce Wayne never donned a cloak and started leaping from buildings, we ask ourselves, would the Joker have emerged? For every ying, there must be some serious yang, and that is exactly what Heath Ledger brings to the role. Ledger is undeniably creepy and frightening as the cackling, rambling, insane crime boss, throwing the entire city into chaos for the sheer desire of chaos. A fantastic and noteworthy performance, Ledger gives the role his all, and is the star of the film from start to finish. Every sequence he is on screen is magnetic and mesmerizing. Still, it is a problematic performance, one inexorably linked to Ledger’s untimely death. Had the young man not passed away so tragically, it is unlikely the masses would be carrying on in quite the same fashion, calling for awards and whatnot. To be brutally honest, Ledger’s performance is fantastic, but not Oscar winning material by any stretch. His performance is very good, but not godly.
Ledger’s stellar performance is both a blessing and a hindrance for The Dark Knight as a whole. When the Joker is on-screen, all is well, but it is unsettling to realize that Batman repeatedly gets outperformed in his own movie at every turn. Bale delivers his dialogue as if he just finished smoking seventeen cigars in rapid fashion, syncopating his dialogue in an emphysemic and ridiculous snarl. As Wayne, he is melancholic and moody, and as Batman he is just plain angry. In comparison, Ledger is vibrant, dynamic and completely committed to his performance, literally stealing the entire film away. Any scene with Aaron Eckhart also eclipses Bale, belting out a hammy but passionate turn as the saving grace of Gotham, and gets a surprising amount of screen time devoted to his tale. To avoid any spoilers, nothing more of his fate will be discussed here, but suffice it to say, the film is as much his as it is the Joker’s.
As sequels go, The Dark Knight is satisfying overall, coming back to the plate with more of everything the first film had; more fighting, more explosions, more dark and somber brooding and more over-the-top villains. It also came back with a running time of over two and a half hours. The Dark Knight is punishingly long, cramming in enough erstwhile plot points, zig-zags and twists in to fill out two or three films. The ambition is impressive, and occasionally achieves moments of inspired brilliance, but they are disappointingly brief. The vast majority of the film is solidly average, and really needed to be a good thirty minutes shorter. Too many times, the narrative simply felt lost in a sea of calculated fight scenes, bank heists, explosions, car chases, running from point A to B to C without any narrative oversight. The film peaks early, and never really climaxes into anything substantial or dramatic—it simply bumps up and down like the constant beeping of an EKG machine.
Shot primarily in Chicago, The Dark Knight has cinematic style aplenty and audiences gorge on iconic shot after shot. Some of the compositions are nothing short of phenomenal, and for all its murky, angry cynicism, The Dark Knight is a beautiful-looking film. If you get the chance to see it in IMAX, go ahead and treat your senses.
Closing Statement
A solid sequel, but The Dark Knight buys a little too much into its own hype. The film is overly long, moody, sullen and ill-tempered, with a muddled plot that meanders in philosophical conundrums about the nature of good and evil instead of taking audiences into a narrative story worth remembering. We are left with mere fragments and sequences, like a jigsaw puzzle tossed on a table—all the pieces are here, but the film never bothers to assemble them. Ledger’s performance is impressive and memorable, but not the gold-plated euphoric grand slam required to rest the entire film upon his shoulders.
There are moments of solid execution and iconic imagery, but the majority of The Dark Knight is disappointingly average. It hurts to admit it, but here we are.
The Verdict
Good… but not great. Fans hoping for the moon will be disappointed, so tether your expectations accordingly, and you will enjoy The Dark Knight a lot more.
7/10
33 comments ↓
Just got back from seeing the film and could not agree more with Adam’s assessment. This is far from the end-all, be-all film of the summer. There’s plenty to find fault with, not the least of which is how it manages to wear down its audience. Sure, there’s exceptional character development and some truly memorable moments (“Want to see me make this pencil disappear?”), but THE DARK KNIGHT is a ride most people will only take once.
To quote Clay Davis:
SHIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIITTTTTT
Hey Adam—your comments practically echoed the ones coming out of my brother-in-law’s mouth as we exited the theater last night. I can understand how it could have been exhausting for some viewers (i.e. the running time, the zig-zagging, lots of characters). However, I loved every minute of it and not only as a comic book movie but a crime story. It’s the acting that truly makes this a pleasure to watch, and not so much the truck somersaults and all that. I’m going to see it at IMAX tomorrow night and get a second helping just to catch some things I missed, and I’ll see if it’s even better on a second viewing. Even though Batman Returns may be Michael’s franchise fav, this very well may be mine. Chris
While not a perfect film by any means, I do think that it manages to achieve greatness, if only sporadically. There are certainly stunning moments–the entire theater shrieked when the Joker made that pencil disappear–that was when it became obvious that Ledger was leaving Jack Nicholson’s Joker in the dust.
Even after a few days’ reflection, I still think the entire hospital sequence is masterful, from set design to acting, to costuming. The Joker really doesn’t care if Dent kills him–if he does, then he wins (like John Doe); if not, there will be so many other opportunities.
Joker swinging upside down, talking to Batman–Holy Shit. Entire decades of confrontation distilled into a few moments.
As for the weaknesses–One of my major complaints about the Burton movies was that Batman was pretty cavalier about human life, so it’s good that we see a line clearly drawn in the sand (for the record–my biggest problem with the Shumacher movies is their existence). But development was a little clumsy. I would have liked to have seen a scene between Bruce and Rachel, arguing whether the Joker should just be put down like a rabid dog. That would have allowed them to reference the death of Joe Chill, and provided more continuity between the films.
Which leads me to my biggest problem–the ending. Not only was the end of Two-Face ridiculously abrupt, there remains the fact that–wait for it–Batman killed him. Oops. What happened to that line he wouldn’t cross? Bats should have been able to use the memory of Rachel to talk him down, and then have an accidental death. That wouldn’t prevent the final resolution, as Dent had already done quite enough by that time (I gotta say, though, I liked the way he took out Maroni).
I’m afraid I’m going to have to join in the hype on this one (though perhaps for different reasons than some). For me, “The Dark Knight” is far and away the film of the summer. Sure, it’s terrific as a popcorn movie/superhero film… but this is a movie that deals with morality and consequences in an honest and thought-provoking way that makes many films in the same genre (such as “The Incredible Hulk”) seem childish. I’ve waited so long for a Batman film to address some of the issues that this one does. I found it a fascinating, absorbing film from start to finish.
Just got back, and I came right to Adam’s review to see if his problems with the movie meshed with mine. I may have liked it more than him, but I still left the theater with a sour taste in my mouth. I really dug the first one-and-a-half to two hours, but that’s about the time my thoughts of “when can I see this again?” became “when will this end?” The film lost me right around the ferry sequence—somewhere between the handing out of ballots and Bruce’s magic Joker-finding cell phone invention. Look: I really, really loved most of the movie. Up until hour two it was more crime film than
comic book movie. The last thirty minutes reversed that—and as we all know, a subpar ending can spoil even the most promising films. Too bad. (By the way, if I wanted to be a jerk, I’d say that Batman sounded like a chain-smoking Ed Begley Jr. …Anyone?)
I don’t disagree the film is peppered with tremendous moments that uncover nuances to these characters heretofore unexplored, but the journey itself is not wholly satisfying. By the Nolan brothers attempting to accomplish too much, it felt more like a great safari than an expertly crafted roller coaster ride. As a result, not everything put into motion got the resolve it deserved, with Harvey’s story line being the most obvious. Ledger’s performance is one that can be rewatched time and again for the multitude of physical, psychological, and emotional detail it contains. Oldman had another great turn as Gordon. And yet Bale, whose performance was crucial to the success of BATMAN BEGINS, was a surprising non-issue, with the voice becoming a major distraction by the end. DARK KNIGHT is definitely worth seeing, but I respectfully disagree with those who feel this is the finest comic book adaptation or Batman film to date. Once the hype dies down and people get a chance to explore the film in more detail on DVD, the flaws will become more apparent and the overly exuberant responses will be tempered.
I can’t wait to explore the flaws of this film on DVD — I may get a head start by rewatching it in IMAX. Until then, I still think it is a masterpiece.
There is enough story in THE DARK KNIGHT for one and a half movies but I loved every moment of it. The Nolan bros. have great storytelling instincts. Instead of doing a simple villain-of-the-week story, the plot developments kept coming out of the central conflict with the Joker. And that’s what makes this incarnation of the Joker so formidable: just when you think he’s beat, another ace from up his sleeve. The amount of screen (and story) time given to Gordon and Dent is so satisfying. That is an element that has always been missing from the other Batman movies. Making this movie about the trio of crime fighters makes the world of Gotham City so much more substantial. Unlike Metropolis and the New York of Marvel Comics, where their pet superheroes always arrive to save every stuck kitten or cut the ribbon at a mall opening, Gotham has a personality and Batman is just one aspect of it. DARK KNIGHT is the Gotham City crime epic that I never thought would be so effectively translated to the screen.
The other nice touch about the digest-sized story in this movie is that now a number of essential Batman mythos elements have been dealt with. The basic building blocks of the character’s history are now set and the makers of the next one essentially have a blank slate. Whatever comes next, I think it is going to be extremely tough to top this one.
I loved it. Heath Ledger one-ups Johnny Depp’s caricature of Kieth Richards as Pirate and channels Richard M Nixon as clown psychopath
I would suggest that who ever plays the next villain channel Charles Manson crossed with George W Bush (both corn fed soul mates who should be joined at the hip ) . The Nolan’s then should hire Vincent Bugliosi (who I think would agree with me ) as Gotham’s next DA.
Thanks for all the comments and feedback, guys!
It’s funny; the more I think about the film and let it percolate through my various synapses, the more I’m curious about seeing The Dark Knight a second time. William’s right on–I also can’t wait to explore the film’s flaws on DVD.
Whether you thought it was transcendental or not, there was definitely a lot of film there to take in, and a lot of the motifs and themes FEEL underdeveloped at the time, but kind of resonate later. Kind of surprised me, actually.
I’m still far and away from calling it a masterpiece, but there is something about it that is constantly alluring and keeps working after the credits roll.
Jim, wanted to address one of your points…
“Which leads me to my biggest problem–the ending. Not only was the end of Two-Face ridiculously abrupt, there remains the fact that–wait for it–Batman killed him. Oops. What happened to that line he wouldn’t cross? ”
After careful re-viewing, I’m not entirely convinced (in fact, I’m mostly unconvinced) that Two-Face is actually dead. It wasn’t a very long fall (recall the scene when the mobster said that he couldn’t be killed from a similar height), it wasn’t entirely obvious that Two-Face was dead, nobody declared Two-Face to be dead, and Batman survived the fall. I could be wrong, but I have a feeling that Batman hasn’t killed anyone, and that Two-Face will turn up again in the third (if there is a third) film.
Funny that Adam is considering rewatching the film. A day later, I find myself remembering the fun stuff and letting some of the annoying aspects of the film slip away. I thought once was enough for me, but I might be up for round two in a week or so. Looks like the joke’s on me.
I can’t help but say it: re-watching the film in IMAX was even better. I drove 2.5 hours, picked up my niece, her boyfriend, and their roommate; we saw it down in Virginia Beach, and it was actually worth it. The only downfall was that the sound got screwed up during the scene where the Joker “made the pencil disappear.” It completely ruined the moment, but the whole tunnel chase/truck somersaulting sequence was more than dazzling. Even the roommate (who gave up after 1989′s BATMAN) was more than impressed and happy that Nolan and Co. finally got it right. Still, I’m going to hold off on calling it a masterpiece until I get the DVD. Aside from that, how was the double-header w/Mamma Mia! at the drive-thru Erich? Chris
So, I waited for the crazy crowds to die down and I just saw it today. Quick thoughts. Great movie. Not as good as Batman Begins.Too long. Maggie was much better than Kate. Great performance by Heath, yes, but he was in the majority. Batman’s voice was annoying, but the Joker sounded like Stuart Smalley. Being a Chicago girl, it was so cool to see the city like that.
While I won’t call it the best movie ever, mainly because singling out any one film is an impossible task; it’s certainly one of my favorites.
It’s interesting to read that, with some exceptions, the people who were more critical of the film; now find themselves reevaluating it. It just shows that the Nolan’s have created something far deeper than a mere “comic book” movie.
I’m really struggling to find flaws with the film, I’m sure they’re there, but the good outweighs the bad so much, that I can’t recall much that annoyed me (except for the voice of the computer in the Bat-mobile).
I loved how Two-Face was handled, he was given a purpose that completely justified his inclusion in the film. There was also a very clever, though far from subtle, hint at the monster that existed in Harvey Dent, early on.
I fail to understand the problem some people have with Bale’s voice, when in the Batsuit. It makes perfect sense, to me at least, that Bruce Wayne would alter his voice, as much as his appearance, when he puts on the suit.
Heath Ledger gave himself over to the role of the Joker, and became the character, to such an extent, it was impossible to distinguish the man behind the makeup. Oscar worthy? Who cares. Awards mean nothing, his performance is beyond a mere statue and fans of Batman will forever remember his stunning performance. He made the Joker the catalyst for chaos. His continually changing “origin story” was in-perfect keeping with the character, and his final dialogue with Batman was note perfect.
I particularly enjoyed the films resolution. The fate of Two-Face is still unclear, while Batman’s public persona has taken an interesting direction. I’d love to see a third film with a Zodiac style Riddler. Though, unless the Nolan’s have a story to tell, that can at least complement the work they have already done (not necessarily exceed it), I’d be more than satisfied with two Batman movies we have.
For my money, The Dark Knight stands supreme as the film of the year (so far).
First, Nolan tried to do a crime movie, and in the effect, he forgot he had a superhero/comic book movie he had to deal with. The film has flaws, big flaws.
The cinematography is not good (except for the IMAX scenes), the editing is sometimes choppy. The Joker is introduced in Begins with a card, and we are left to wonder about him, about his lies, about his past, about his scars. Not for me. The same for Harvey, one courtroom scene and he is the white knight? Bale’s Batman’s voice is HORRENDOUS. Oh, and Batman has both a Superman moment, and a HUGE Matrix moment.
So, you laughed when Hulk (in Hulk) battled pumped dogs, but yet here, since it’s Ledger’s Joker is OK? I’m still waiting for a Joker/Batman showdown. Also, I lost the superhero/comic book movie scent in the Batman/Joker interrogation scene…he just lost me there.
I for once, didn’t think the film was too long. Yet, why have a subplot that doesn’t really advance anything else, such as the money subplot? Can’t you understand that the Joker is a mentally (and physically) damaged human being who is looking for affection? To be hones, when they are both fighting, then when Bat is on top of J, I almost shout out “I wish I knew how to quit you”, no joke.
Again, less screen time for Bat and more for the villains, just like in the Burton films, that many of you dislike…odd.
And, the marketing made $300 in 10 days possible, specially for those who were laughing at ALL the jokes the Joker made, and who just a few days ago knew what Dark Knight was, unlike most of us, who had been waiting for this movie long before Ledger was announced as the new Joker…oh, he is an actor, and actors act…
Chalk me up with the “good but not great” gaggle. This film was out-of-control long. And its penchant for punctuating every thematic element with a chase, explosion, gunfight-ok-corral approach got old. The film played like a music box that you kept cranking and cranking, and then, Turette’s-style, a machine gun would gun down everybody on the merry-go-round. The best part of the movie was indeed the sociopathic-to-the-max bend towards the Joker character. It’s difficult to prevent or manage an element of evil that has literally no concern, motive, or justification for why he’s doing what he’s doing, to whom or whatever–and that’s the brilliance of the pathology. Ledger’s performance just oozes, you can actually smell the grease, oil, and b.o from the other side of the screen he’s that alive in each of his scenes. But the never ending punctuation, to the point of objectionabilty, of having these uber-action sequences followed by “let’s slow things down and talk with the characters” lull after lull after lull really grated. Good but not great says it all.
Adam Arseneau thinks that “The Dark Knight” is only 1/10th better than “Run Fatboy Run”. His reviews for both films show his love for the word “mediocre” but do not nearly demonstrate the analytical mettle necessary to distinguish these two films properly. Adam failed to anticipate “The Dark Knight” becoming a huge success, a monumental cultural event and a record breaker of the highest degree. It is Warner Brothers’ highest grossing movie ever. The other film — the one Adam Arseneau thinks is only1/10th worse — was DOA at the box office. Adam throws down the gauntlet, saying that “the majority of The Dark Knight is disappointingly average… [i]t hurts to admit it, but here we are.” There’s no room for rationalization here — Adam Arseneau is a BAD film critic. Whatever opinions one has about “The Dark Knight”, it is not average. I cannot believe that Cinema Verdict allows this to be their verdict on the film that has garnered such an overwhelming response with enormous repeat business — a film which has clearly proven itself the world over. How unlucky was Cinema Verdict to hand over the reviewing chores to Adam Arseneau?
Jon (#19), I totally agree with your comments. TDK is the best movie I have seen in years. Will try to catch it on the IMAX screen this coming weekend which would make it my 3rd viewing of this masterpiece.
Michael, I don’t know what you or this reviewer are talking about… I have seen the film 7 times and many people I know have seen it again and again. It gets better each time… What you need to ask yourself is how big a BATFAN are YOU? This film was made mainly for US… it cannot be called MEDIOCRE. It is Epic, amazing and very thoughtful… it is EXACTLY what I hoped for. I usually agree with most of this site, but this is nonsense. Your review seems to be jumping on this ridiculous “backlash bandwagon.” See, this movie is the king, the best, the biggest – so of course people have to try and knock it down – but it can take it – Batman can take it. If JOel Shitmaker didn’t hurt Batman, do you really think this review matters? I’m just disappointed that you didn’t see it more than once before you wrote this. To say the MAJORITY of this film is average is like saying the effects in the Star Wars movies are subpar. It’s a foolish notion and one I am surprised came from this site.
Thanks, Todd. I appreciate your enthusiasm in defending the film, but your ire may be misplaced. If you look closely, Adam only uses the word “mediocre” as a tease for the body of his review. At no point does he use it to describe any element of the film. Personally, I’ve seen the film twice and my main issue with DARK KNIGHT is that Chris tried to cram too much story into it and thus critical elements, like Harvey’s transformation, feel shortchanged. For example, the ferry boat sequence — an entire plotline unto itself — could have been set aside for a sequel. But on the whole, I think the film accomplishes some amazing feats. While I can’t speak for Adam, my Bat cred extends back 30 years encompassing the books, the series, and the films. And as for the review trying to hurt the film or keep people from attending, that’s not the intent of Cinema Verdict or film criticism in general. A large number of moviegoers want to know what to expect going into a film, and forewarned is forearmed.
Granted, I am not the extreme batfan you might claim to be, but I am a batfan nevertheless; I had been waiting for TDK long before Ledger was cast, long before many of you began noticing this movie weeks ago.
After the two and a half hours of this movie, I felt disappointed. Nolan failed at combining a crime movie and a superhero movie and making a great combination of both. But why do you support this movie in being less of a superhero movie and more into a supposedly crime movie??
I still haven’t been blinded by all the hype, and I don’t think I ever will. I haven’t overlooked TDK’s faults just because I followed whysoserious or IbeliveinHarveyDent, or by Ledger’s death…I mean, you might’ve seen the movie ten times, but those ten times you overlooked its faults, its many faults. Plots that go nowhere, underexposed characters, a horrendous Batman’s voice, cinematography, editing…enough.
I think it might make around $525 million domestically, but like Titanic’s $600+, it doesn’t deserve it.
For me, THE DARK KNIGHT is certainly not a mediocre film by a long shot. I think it’s an excellent film . . . but one with a great deal of flaws. One example is the appearance of the Scarecrow/Dr. Crane. I think that Nolan had wasted Cillian Murphy’s time with this one shot appearance of the villain from BATMAN BEGINS. I thought the bank robbery at the beginning of the movie was pointless to the story and provided William Frichter with probably his most embarrassing moment on film. But the movie’s fatal flaw was the last hour that featured the ferryboat sequence and Batman’s decision to assume blame for Harvey’s crimes. For me, both story points were completely unecessary and rather contrived. I wish that Nolan had Batman captured the Joker, following the latter’s visit to Harvey in the hospital.
But . . . it was basically an excellent film, although not the best one this summer.
Rosie, it’s a very interesting post…in the end, you still overlook big flaws for something I’m still missing…
Jose M. from just reading your post(s). I’m finding you seem to over think things especially with this film. It clearly shows in your statments. Some of your complaints could really be considered nit picking at the film just of pure spit if not over anaylzing the whole film.
Your complaints such as…
“plots that go nowhere”
(you must be smoking something! because dude, the plot was perfectly clear & if you didn’t understand it then it’s just over your head. A plot consists of three dimensions which are character, conflict, & conclusion. This story had the structure well set.),
“underexposed characters”
(Did you watch the film? let alone did you see “Batman Begins”? All the characters were well-developed. Just to mention The Joker wasn’t suppose to have a backstory. That’s what made his character so damn interesting.),
cinematography
(there is no error here other then one’s taste in style),
editing (again…it’s in taste of one’s perspective.)
I mean who’s to say “The Dark Knight” & “Titanic” don’t deserve what they make?
Titanic is no considered a true classic in cinema. The Dark Knight is arguebly the best superhero film to date with a performance by Heath Ledger that is hetched in stone & made one of the best villians in cinema history making Jack Nicholson’s Joker completely fogettable & down right child’s play but hey, Jack doesn’t need that Joker role (It’s clearly Heath’s now & won’t be matched) he’s has other performances that define him (Cuckoo’s Nest, Chinatown…etc).
As far as Bale’s voice with Batman, in all honesty it really didn’t bug me like it did others but so be it.
P.S. It cracks me up when people say a film has flaws. Just to mention every film in cinema history has flaws but they can be over-looked 9/10 times. So, get over it!
correction: “Titanic is (no) considered a true classic in cinema”
(no) I mean “now”
Could not disagree more. Adam’s an obvious Marvel fan boy. TDK is far and away the best movie of the year so far and the best of its genre. Period. Iron Man on the other hand is the typical Marvel flick which did not raise the bar on any level. TDK transcended the genre, and is more than just a superhero movie.
Hello, my name is Scott Spencer. And i was wondering if i could use your photo’s on the Dark Knight. I would be using them for a school web page. Please send me a emial regarding your reply. Thanks.
Thanks for your time.
Scott Spencer.
This film does achieve a level of greatness, and yes, Ledger deserves an Oscar. Far too many past Oscar winners have won for much less effort and results in the past – Kim Basinger for LA Confidential (yawn), etc. Ledger deserves a Best Supporting Actor Oscar, and it’s not because he’s dead now. He was great in The Dark Knight.
It’s odd that in an era now of dark, Oscar-winning movies – The Departed, Crash, even American Beauty from 1999 – people are criticizing The Dark Knight for its dark world and characters.
“Which leads me to my biggest problem–the ending. Not only was the end of Two-Face ridiculously abrupt, there remains the fact that–wait for it–Batman killed him. Oops. What happened to that line he wouldn’t cross? ”
It could be that Batman was trying to hold onto Two-Face like he was trying to hold onto Gordon’s son but he slipped out of his grasp.
I completely agree with Clark Douglas because this movie is brilliant. Especially Heath Ledger who, in my opinion, captivated audiences. I’m 11 years old, and for a movie of 3 hrs long to not bore me to death, that itself is already a success. But to make it one of my favourite movies, is an accomplishment. The Dark Knight is incredibly fascinating and, yes, maybe some people might find it tedious. However some people will see the brilliant intensity that this movie offers.
it very good and i love batman xx
i love batman willy
Leave a Comment