Review The Dark Knight (2008)

Doctor Omega

Administrator
Staff member
VIP
MV5BMTMxNTMwODM0NF5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTcwODAyMTk2Mw@@._V1_SY1000_CR0,0,675,1000_AL_.jpg


Your thoughts on this movie.....

When the menace known as the Joker emerges from his mysterious past, he wreaks havoc and chaos on the people of Gotham. The Dark Knight must accept one of the greatest psychological and physical tests of his ability to fight injustice.



 
Last edited:

TheSowIsMine

What an excellent day for an exorcism
VIP
Im not a fan. This movie has a weird pacing, some things go on too long, other things go too fast.
And I got annoyed by the Jokers lip-smacking and Batmans voice.
 

chainsaw_metal1

Member: Rank 8
Batman Begins is a strong reintroduction of Batman to the big screen. It brought him into real world settings, which grounded him more than the visually stunning but overly fake looking Gotham first realized by Burton and built upon in further films. While toy sales were still a goal by those in charge, it didn't influence the film as much as with Batman & Robin. Instead of implausible rubber suits, Bruce goes with tactical gear, while still looking like the character we have always known and loved. A solid story (even if it was Goyer who wrote it), and characters who contain depth. Even the villains have more to them than the typical "just out to be bad guys" motif. Plus, rebooting Batman and using a B-level villain like Scarecrow is just awesome. It would have been to easy to bring the Joker in right away, but this works better.

The Dark Knight is a fantastic movie. I wasn't originally sold on the idea of Joker just being a guy with scars and make-up, but Ledger sold the role and made this a believable villain. Obviously, they use the "multiple choice" origin idea from The Killing Joke, and his comments about having one bad day that changes someone. And adding in Two-Face the way they did was genius. This still makes my Top 10 superhero movies of all time.

I still enjoy watching The Dark Knight Rises, but it's a weak movie. There are good moments in it, to be sure. And I liked seeing a more realistic version of Bane. True, he wasn't Bane from the comics, but he also wasn't Bane from Batman & Robin, which was a major improvement. Adding in Catwoman and Talia was really good, because the idea that Bruce would wind up going to the grave pining for Rachel was just wrong. Bruce was a player, and while he had a few women he did have a strong connection to, there wasn't just one woman...you know, until Rebirth and now he's just with Catwoman. Comics, amirite? I also liked the addition of Blake, but I'm torn about the ending. He gets to the Batcave, and then we end the series. I like the idea that he takes up the cowl, but I would have liked to have seen it. Still, at least we'll have Batfleck for years to come, right? Right?
 

PF4Eva

Member: Rank 2
It has officially been 10 years since The Dark Knight was released. In some respects, it feels like yesterday. I remember where I was when I heard that Heath Ledger died. It was the same day I went to a Van Halen concert.

I saw the film in January of 1999, just before it left theaters. We didn't have an IMAX yet. (Oklahoma didn't get one until 2012, and even then it was a Digital IMAX. The dollar theater, which ran 35mm, closed in 2013; briefly reopened as a digital theater in 2015 and was evicted ten months later. AMC Quail Springs has had a 70mm projector since 2015, and used it for The Hateful Eight, Batman v Superman, and Dunkirk.) I moved back to Colorado last August, and the one theater I know of here that is film-capable is Alamo Drafthouse.

My mom gave me The Dark Knight on DVD for my birthday in 2009, shortly after I saw it, but it was full screen. (I'm glad those days are over. haha.) For my next birthday, I got my first Blu-ray player and TDK was one of my first discs. (In hindsight, the transfer could have been better. Luckily, the 4K UHD Blu-rays have fixed this.)

In honor of its anniversary, Warner is re-releasing it next month in select IMAX 70mm locations. Pretty important film.
 

PF4Eva

Member: Rank 2
Why is it important? Has it had a profound impact on pulp culture, technology, filmmaking?
Seriously? It was the first (non-documentary) Hollywood movie shot even partially in IMAX.

It helped usher in a large-format renaissance and rebranded IMAX as more than just a bunch of penguins (no pun intended) and astronauts.

It extended what Batman Begins did by urging people to take superhero movies seriously.

It made Heath Ledger's Joker an icon, arguably more iconic than Nicholson (and that's a tall order).

It made Christopher Nolan a household name... and a trusted one. (If his previous efforts didn't already do that.)

It became the second highest grossing film of all time, behind Titanic, until Avatar surpassed it in early 2010.

Its Best Picture snub forced the Oscars to expand the category to up to ten nominees, in order to honor genre films along with the usual Oscar fare. And this year, The Shape of Water (a genre creature romance from Guillermo del Toro) won Best Picture.

It arguably made movies like Watchmen, Captain America: Winter Soldier and Logan possible.
 

McQualude

Member: Rank 3
Seriously? It was the first (non-documentary) Hollywood movie shot even partially in IMAX.

It helped usher in a large-format renaissance and rebranded IMAX as more than just a bunch of penguins (no pun intended) and astronauts.

It extended what Batman Begins did by urging people to take superhero movies seriously.

It made Heath Ledger's Joker an icon, arguably more iconic than Nicholson (and that's a tall order).

It made Christopher Nolan a household name... and a trusted one. (If his previous efforts didn't already do that.)

It became the second highest grossing film of all time, behind Titanic, until Avatar surpassed it in early 2010.

Its Best Picture snub forced the Oscars to expand the category to up to ten nominees, in order to honor genre films along with the usual Oscar fare. And this year, The Shape of Water (a genre creature romance from Guillermo del Toro) won Best Picture.

It arguably made movies like Watchmen, Captain America: Winter Soldier and Logan possible.
Yes, I'm very serious.
1) Transformers RF which came out a year later was also shot in imax. Does that also make Transformers important? No.
2) You're really reaching and even if that is true, so what? IMAX is still a niche.
3) Now you're joking. Raimi's Spiderman led to superhero movies being taken seriously. Without, it's doubtful BB would ever have been made. And Donner's Superman made a significant contribution as well. BB deserves more credit than Dark Knight.
4) Meh, the Joker only has cultural significance among Batman nerds.
5) I bet 99 people out of a hundred on the street couldn't tell you who made DK or what year it came out. I bet if you asked a hundred more to name a C.Nolan movie, less than 80% would get one.
6) That is success, not cultural importance.
7) You'll have to back that up. If true, I'll give you that one since a lot of people believe the Oscars are important.
8) Marvel's success was due to Spiderman and Iron Man, Nolan had no part in that.

I asked how it changed pop culture, technology, or filmmaking. Box office /= importance.
 

PF4Eva

Member: Rank 2
Yes, I'm very serious.
1) Transformers RF which came out a year later was also shot in imax. Does that also make Transformers important? No.
I'll give you this one. Transformers 2 is no more important than Transformers 67. But The Dark Knight was the first to do it. The first to do anything is important. The Dark Knight was groundbreaking and innovative for that alone.

2) You're really reaching and even if that is true, so what? IMAX is still a niche.
In 2008, digital hadn't kicked into overdrive the way it has since Avatar. A lot of movies were still being shot on film: Iron Man, Hancock, Frost/Nixon, even the Rob Zombie Halloween movies (2007, 2009). The last 70mm feature up to that time was Branagh's Hamlet (1996). Niche or not, there's an audience for large format, 70mm, and IMAX, and for celluloid, period. Enough to keep Kodak in the black. Without The Dark Knight, Michael Bay probably wouldn't have bothered with IMAX. Nor JJ Abrams. PTA probably wouldn't have been allowed to make The Master in 70mm. Who's to say whether Quentin Tarantino's The Hateful Eight would still have been shot in Ultra Panavision, a format last used in 1966?

3) Now you're joking. Raimi's Spiderman led to superhero movies being taken seriously. Without, it's doubtful BB would ever have been made. And Donner's Superman made a significant contribution as well. BB deserves more credit than Dark Knight.
You had Donner, Burton, and Raimi, but how many of those were prestigious, cerebral films with major awards buzz? How many of them transcended their genre? The Dark Knight is as much a crime drama (such as Heat) as it is a superhero movie. No less than Ebert said he'd be surprised if TDK didn't get nominated for Best Picture.

4) Meh, the Joker only has cultural significance among Batman nerds.
Now, you're just trolling. The Joker, especially in The Dark Knight, is all about chaos, disorder, and anarchy. There's something punk rock about him.

5) I bet 99 people out of a hundred on the street couldn't tell you who made DK or what year it came out. I bet if you asked a hundred more to name a C.Nolan movie, less than 80% would get one.
Trolling. Why don't you try it yourself.

6) That is success, not cultural importance.
The two are not mutually exclusive.

7) You'll have to back that up. If true, I'll give you that one since a lot of people believe the Oscars are important.
https://variety.com/2009/film/awards/oscar-expands-best-pic-noms-to-10-1118005322/

8) Marvel's success was due to Spiderman and Iron Man, Nolan had no part in that.
What I mean is that these films, too, are taken more seriously than, for example, The Avengers, Deadpool, Suicide Squad, or Guardians of the Galaxy. The Dark Knight proved that a superhero movie can transcend the genre and become something more. Like I said, The Dark Knight is a crime drama. Captain America: Winter Soldier is a political thriller. Logan is a gritty drama that deals with mortality. Watchmen, while not necessarily transcending the genre, takes itself seriously and has deep, psychologically complex characters, especially if you've read the graphic novel.

I asked how it changed pop culture, technology, or filmmaking.
Have you not read anything I wrote? I explained everything quite clearly the first time.
 

McQualude

Member: Rank 3
I'll give you this one. Transformers 2 is no more important than Transformers 67. But The Dark Knight was the first to do it. The first to do anything is important. The Dark Knight was groundbreaking and innovative for that alone.



In 2008, digital hadn't kicked into overdrive the way it has since Avatar. A lot of movies were still being shot on film: Iron Man, Hancock, Frost/Nixon, even the Rob Zombie Halloween movies (2007, 2009). The last 70mm feature up to that time was Branagh's Hamlet (1996). Niche or not, there's an audience for large format, 70mm, and IMAX, and for celluloid, period. Enough to keep Kodak in the black. Without The Dark Knight, Michael Bay probably wouldn't have bothered with IMAX. Nor JJ Abrams. PTA probably wouldn't have been allowed to make The Master in 70mm. Who's to say whether Quentin Tarantino's The Hateful Eight would still have been shot in Ultra Panavision, a format last used in 1966?



You had Donner, Burton, and Raimi, but how many of those were prestigious, cerebral films with major awards buzz? How many of them transcended their genre? The Dark Knight is as much a crime drama (such as Heat) as it is a superhero movie. No less than Ebert said he'd be surprised if TDK didn't get nominated for Best Picture.



Now, you're just trolling. The Joker, especially in The Dark Knight, is all about chaos, disorder, and anarchy. There's something punk rock about him.



Trolling. Why don't you try it yourself.



The two are not mutually exclusive.



https://variety.com/2009/film/awards/oscar-expands-best-pic-noms-to-10-1118005322/



What I mean is that these films, too, are taken more seriously than, for example, The Avengers, Deadpool, Suicide Squad, or Guardians of the Galaxy. The Dark Knight proved that a superhero movie can transcend the genre and become something more. Like I said, The Dark Knight is a crime drama. Captain America: Winter Soldier is a political thriller. Logan is a gritty drama that deals with mortality. Watchmen, while not necessarily transcending the genre, takes itself seriously and has deep, psychologically complex characters, especially if you've read the graphic novel.



Have you not read anything I wrote? I explained everything quite clearly the first time.
Read what I wrote, I refuted all of your points except 2, neither of which you supported in your reply. You have confused what you like with what is important. Half your reply was "trolling." It boils down to this .. TDK didn't make a different to technology, culture, or anything else. If it hadn't been made, nothing would be different.
 

Doctor Omega

Administrator
Staff member
VIP
Dear McQualdude....

When you first started posting here you seemed a sterling member, offering rational, intelligent discussion and lively good-natured debate. In short, you were one of the gang. And respected.

But lately, you just seem to be curmudgeonly and looking to start - and perpetuate for God knows how long - debates that are really not worth fighting.

Half of PF4eva's reply was "trolling", because that, sadly, is the distinct impression given of what you are in fact up to.

As for the article that you DID NOT FULLY READ, it (sadly) negated your right to an opinion on it, for as Harlan Ellison said... "You are NOT entitled to an opinion; you are entitled to an INFORMED opinion".

Not reading the entire article left you uninformed. Therefore you threw away/forfeited your right to an opinion on it in a sadly disappointing way.

But clearly you are going to drag this on, so.....

Alright, on behalf of everyone here (and despite it not really being the case) : YOU WIN! THE DARK KNIGHT DID NOT MAKE A DIFFERENCE TO TECHNOLOGY, CULTURE OR ANYTHING ELSE!

There...

Happy now?

Please let us know in advance what other threads you want to start a mean-spirited and pointless debate on.


Because I just KNOW that you are not going to desist from trying to get some pointed last word.

Please don't bother: You've won. If winning was that important.


There is another option: Just learn to agree to differ - and, additionally, maybe try to look at it all with a sense of humour, as lately - and I hate to say it - yours gives all the impression of having been surgically removed!

Whatever happened to lively discussion and good natured debate?

Also, if you carry on like this I am going to end up so traumatised by this thread that I will never want to see another BATMAN movie in my life, whether or not they have "made a difference to technology, culture or anything else"! :emoji_nerd:
 
Last edited:
Top