The Dark Knight
On the Marvel-DC comics divide, I fall squarely in the Marvel camp. I know the rudimentary aspects of the DC universe. I know the major characters, their origins and even some of their story lines. I know some of the tangibles of the DC universe, but honestly, I really don't care too much with any of the DC heroes. They were too "SuperFriend-ly" for me and seem to have that wholesomeness still grafted onto them. For what they are they can not be too dark.
Enter the new revisionist take on DC. Starting with Infinity Crisis, DC begins to remake themselves into a more grittier universe. Batman always being so dark takes on the mantle of chief dark character in the DC universe. Frank Miller writes the ultimate Batman tale of urban grit and grime in the immortal, The Dark Knight Returns, and ever since then it's been a brooding, sinister, hard boiled Gotham for the Batman to prowl.
Tim Burton makes a splash with Batman and adds some color to Bruce Wayne's Gotham. It was a joyous romp taking inspiration from Miller's The Dark Knight, but adding some sense of whimsy and playfulness to Gotham. Burton knew that he's doing a comic book movie. His main character is a man in a tight fitting suit. While embracing Miller's Darkness, Burton weaved into the Batman movie a feel of enjoyment in the comic book.
Almost twenty years on and the DC universe goes through another revision to make it more darker. Superman has a kid. And Batman, well, he's dark and all.
The first Batman movie of this century, Batman Begins, takes place in the more modern Gotham. It's like a version of New York in an alternate time. Yet, it still had some fun as a comic book movie: Ra's Al Ghul, the Scarecrow.
The Dark Knight lacks any sense of comic book-ness and instead goes for reality. You know it when the Joker's sense of playfulness arises from being completely psychotic. The film is not a summer comic book movie to enjoy, but one to sit in the dark and meditate on what darkness lies in men's souls. Is the Batman dark? Is the Joker dark? Their souls are joyless in this movie and the seriousness hurts it as a fun time.
And it was forty minutes too long with several endings. I thought the Joker was the main baddy. He's joined by TwoFace. And then the Penguin, Mr. Freeze and Poison Ivy would show up next. Yet, if they did, it would ruin the seriousness of the movie, because we must be shown that in all of us there is a darkness and a happiness battling it out all the time. Except for the Joker who is a loon.
So The Dark Knight bored me. Every turn in the plot made me cringe. "What more is there," I thought exasperated! And can't they capture one guy shooting at the mayor while surrounded by the entire police force? I mean this was at a police funeral with everyone on high alert. I mean everyone. Right down to the mayor's wife! Everyone should've been ready and when the shots occurred not twenty feet from the mayor and twenty feet from several hundred officers the best the police could do was duck and cover?! How convenient. Let's just add another forty minutes to the movie. It'll just suck all fun from what should've been a comic book romp of ass kicking goodness.
And that's my problem with The Dark Knight. Its soul as a comic book movie probably died with Heath Ledger. They wanted to make it more serious in tribute to the fallen actor so that the audience can remember him as a serious actor not as a man dressed up as a clown. Yet, the clown show is what we wanted to see. His jokes were not funny, just ask the guy the guy about the pencil.
Most likely, my reaction to the film comes from my Marvel fandom. Not one to associate myself to much with the DC universe, I could care less about their major characters. They bore me. So too with this film.
2 of 5 stars.
On the Marvel-DC comics divide, I fall squarely in the Marvel camp. I know the rudimentary aspects of the DC universe. I know the major characters, their origins and even some of their story lines. I know some of the tangibles of the DC universe, but honestly, I really don't care too much with any of the DC heroes. They were too "SuperFriend-ly" for me and seem to have that wholesomeness still grafted onto them. For what they are they can not be too dark.
Enter the new revisionist take on DC. Starting with Infinity Crisis, DC begins to remake themselves into a more grittier universe. Batman always being so dark takes on the mantle of chief dark character in the DC universe. Frank Miller writes the ultimate Batman tale of urban grit and grime in the immortal, The Dark Knight Returns, and ever since then it's been a brooding, sinister, hard boiled Gotham for the Batman to prowl.
Tim Burton makes a splash with Batman and adds some color to Bruce Wayne's Gotham. It was a joyous romp taking inspiration from Miller's The Dark Knight, but adding some sense of whimsy and playfulness to Gotham. Burton knew that he's doing a comic book movie. His main character is a man in a tight fitting suit. While embracing Miller's Darkness, Burton weaved into the Batman movie a feel of enjoyment in the comic book.
Almost twenty years on and the DC universe goes through another revision to make it more darker. Superman has a kid. And Batman, well, he's dark and all.
The first Batman movie of this century, Batman Begins, takes place in the more modern Gotham. It's like a version of New York in an alternate time. Yet, it still had some fun as a comic book movie: Ra's Al Ghul, the Scarecrow.
The Dark Knight lacks any sense of comic book-ness and instead goes for reality. You know it when the Joker's sense of playfulness arises from being completely psychotic. The film is not a summer comic book movie to enjoy, but one to sit in the dark and meditate on what darkness lies in men's souls. Is the Batman dark? Is the Joker dark? Their souls are joyless in this movie and the seriousness hurts it as a fun time.
And it was forty minutes too long with several endings. I thought the Joker was the main baddy. He's joined by TwoFace. And then the Penguin, Mr. Freeze and Poison Ivy would show up next. Yet, if they did, it would ruin the seriousness of the movie, because we must be shown that in all of us there is a darkness and a happiness battling it out all the time. Except for the Joker who is a loon.
So The Dark Knight bored me. Every turn in the plot made me cringe. "What more is there," I thought exasperated! And can't they capture one guy shooting at the mayor while surrounded by the entire police force? I mean this was at a police funeral with everyone on high alert. I mean everyone. Right down to the mayor's wife! Everyone should've been ready and when the shots occurred not twenty feet from the mayor and twenty feet from several hundred officers the best the police could do was duck and cover?! How convenient. Let's just add another forty minutes to the movie. It'll just suck all fun from what should've been a comic book romp of ass kicking goodness.
And that's my problem with The Dark Knight. Its soul as a comic book movie probably died with Heath Ledger. They wanted to make it more serious in tribute to the fallen actor so that the audience can remember him as a serious actor not as a man dressed up as a clown. Yet, the clown show is what we wanted to see. His jokes were not funny, just ask the guy the guy about the pencil.
Most likely, my reaction to the film comes from my Marvel fandom. Not one to associate myself to much with the DC universe, I could care less about their major characters. They bore me. So too with this film.
2 of 5 stars.
He's a billionaire in a bat suite.
I don't know the comic book universe too much but I am stoked that he had the balls to try something else then the usual whimsy of a "comic" book translation. After all there's plenty of that comic book feel all around which I have enjoyed. Films like Wanted, Hancock, Xmen series, Spiderman series, Iron Man and the new Hulk series all have that fun and whimsey. So it's refreshing to see a universe being built around the hero in which a society is affected beyond a smack down. It makes it more exciting and brings back that thought some of had as a kid... "can you imagine a man in a suite like that running around the city?" Now I can again.
I do agree on your superman statement though.
But to each his own.
I'm not one to say that reviews matter or that "if your the only one thinking this than maybe you should realize you may not be right" kinda thinking. I'm just saying I don't think Nolan is purposely trying to make the Dark Knight "real" but there's a grit he's going for not found in these movies. I love the tension that you yourself did not get into. In campy films there's barely if any tension. Spiderman 2 has a good blend of campy/tension. But that's another filmmaker's world.
I welcome these two different universes and ideas. It's nice and refreshing for a movie goer. That's just a personal preference to me.
Ah, what?
A wordy ass review that basically boils down to. It's too serious but at the same time is too cartoony.
I guess Nolan brought this upon himself trying to raise the bar on Comic films. Now he's getting ostracized for it.
One of the first feelings I got from the movie was a weird vibe. "Hunh. This bank robbery looks like Micheal Mann. And the dude is just popping people left and right. Oh, it's the joker!" Geez. You make it feel real then you put the joker in. What are we supposed to feel from the scene? Amazement that this is a new superb outlook on comics. I felt reality set in and the appalling lack of empathy with the dead.
The quote you quoted stands for the fact that we praise The Dark Knight because it is supposedly awesome, but it doesn't satisfy because it lacks in many ways.
Here's a better quote that will make the wordy less wordy.
"The Dark Knight, Nolan’s practically salivated-over follow-up solves many of the problems in Begins by eradicating almost any traces of ridiculousness and instituting a relentless, unmitigated assault of self-doubt, anger, gruesomeness, nihilism and fear, all buttressed by a relatively sober realism."
That's what I meant by making it too gritty and real. And what I meant by a lack of whimsy or comic bookishness. It was brutal and thuggish right from the start.
thats what i like about Nolan too. i stay awake thinking.
*and to add: i obviously didnt read what you guys wrote. i just read that the link was from RottenTomatoes and they gave it a 90%*
All I know is what I got from it and to sit there and tell me that the movie I saw wasn't the movie I wanted is pure silliness.
That's why I took the quote from his review."The quote you quoted stands for the fact that we praise The Dark Knight because it is supposedly awesome, but it doesn't satisfy because it lacks in many ways"... Uh... to some of us it did satisfy and delivered exactly what we wanted, an entirely different approach to a super hero. Some of us still had some fun. I love the scene when he jumps off the rooftop and Nolan gives it that feel as if we are right there with him. Because of that level of realism it becomes that much more exhilarating when he leaps into the air and opens his wings. All you hear is the sound of his cape. Fucking wonderful and thrilling. That's the essence of the world he created. It's that level of realism that add to the effect of scope and wonder. That's what I feel some of these reviews are missing. Like "THEY" just don't get it. Like there trying too hard to pull something away from it, but it's as simple as Batman leaping or Joker's madness unleashed in a holding cell with "regular" cops watching. Yes you can point out flaws like Joker not getting caught in the attempt to kill the Mayor, but to me that's just one thing in what I felt was better than average. It's still a comic book movie at heart in the sense it's still that "what if" this and this. I feel some critics are missing that and maybe like I said "they" just didn't get it. I know I get it, cause I enjoyed every fucking bit. No Joker shoved a pencil through my head.
"That's what I meant by making it too gritty and real. And what I meant by a lack of whimsy or comic bookishness. It was brutal and thuggish right from the start."
That's exactly what I enjoyed about the film. So I don't know what to say. It worked for it's context. Spectacle, realism, gadgets, brooding, character, dynamic... I don't know what to say, I personally got that from the movie. It can't be argued. People can point out all the flaws... but some of us just don't feel that way. It's still a comic book movie to me. Two Face was cruising around with half his face missing... I bought into that. It's still a fantasy world set in a way that feels can coexist in some alternate reality. Just like I bought into the Dinosaurs in Jurassic Park, The alien in Alien, the chair sliding in Exorcist, the Orks in LOTR, and Roy Batty.
As for "going against the grain", why is that an issue? The only reason I put up that link to tomatoes was because you linked to that one verbose sour puss. =) It's about ones personal taste over another. Like I said I can discuss some of it's flaws, but overall I really dug this universe Nolan is going for. It's a road that is intriguing and difficult. Which is why I'm excited to see where it can go from here.
This is why I HATE reviewing film. It can be a silly conversation sometimes. I understand conversation is good and there is a level of solid and legitimate criticism to films. Batman doesn't transcend that or anything... But there's something to be said when a director takes a material that's a franchise and trying to keep intact the symbol of said character, but making it his own. I'm geeking out over it. There's nothing these negative reviews can negate the world I enjoyed. =) They basically give a grocery list of all the reasons I liked and "they" just didn't find the fun in it. That's all.
I have to admit. This is a fun conversation though. We should do this for Mama Mia.
JK