Dark Knight discussion

I saw the Dark Knight at the midnight premier at the Cinerama. I have thoughts, and I would like to hear yours. We got there 2 hours early and the line was already all the way down the block. Its the longest line I have ever waited in for a movie. I cant decide if it was good that people were walking along giving away free Monster energy drinks. They tasted like melted then super-cooled sweet tarts.

Impressions

JASON: I think it was good, not great. Not as good as Iron Man; didnt live up to the hype. Definitely worth seeing and I will buy it.

--Matts 08:49, 21 July 2008 (MST)I thought it was excellent; the best movie I've seen in a long time. I think it takes a pretty ballsy vision to turn a summer blockbuster into a thorough discussion of terror and terrorism, but I think that's what Christopher Nolan did here. Just in terms of sheer hollywood drama, I haven't seen a spectacle with this much depth since at least LOTR and honestly probably before that.

--Dieter the Bold 12:19, 21 July 2008 (MST) Loved the movie. Thought it was quite bold in some of the things it did. Found Heath Ledger's Joker to be terrifying.

--Edmiao 14:50, 28 July 2008 (MST) saw it last weekend. awesome. brilliant. easily as good as Iron man or any other super hero movie.

Spoilers

JASON: I love Christian Bale in this role. Or, I did in Batman Begins. He felt flat in this movie. It seemed more of a Joker movie than a Batman one. This movie had so many excellent parts but that didnt add up to an excellent whole. There was nothing glaring wrong with it, but it didnt jump out and scream 'awesome'. It was excruciatingly long. The plot and twists, though believable, were not particularly interesting or good. It looked excellent and the action was very good.

--Matts 08:54, 21 July 2008 (MST)I think it takes serious cojones to make a movie that ends three times, more cojones to blow up the love interest, and the most cojones I can imagine in one place to characterize a summer action movie hero in such shades of gray. That's what I love about this movie - cause and effect with respect to insane terrorists is discussed, and the infinite psychic price of fear is laid bare. Not to mention the Joker knocked my socks off except I wasn't wearing any.

I agree that Bale saw a reduced role as Bruce Wayne, and didn't really get to do much in this movie except yell in a hoarse low voice out of a bat-mask, but I can see how that fit into the overall arc of the story - Wayne fell more and more into the Batman persona, even though he tried to escape.

And what the hell, Alfred? Pushing dude further into his nutty psychosis, and saying "that's the price we pay"? That's some gangster shit right there.

--Dieter the Bold 12:21, 21 July 2008 (MST) A friend ruined it for me with his comment that the movie was a giant apollogia to Bush's reign. Turning Gotham into a surveillance state, trusting in the outside-the-law authority to lay it all down when their job is done fighting terrorism? I think he's on to something here, as much as I hate to admit it.

--Matts 13:03, 21 July 2008 (MST)I don't think it's an apologia; it's a questioning of our nature to respond to threats by giving one person the responsibility to deal with it. It's got the guts to connect Bush to Batman, but it also asks: what's the cost of exceptionalism, and its answer is in part, exceptional troubles. Certainly a tougher line on superheroes than Iron Man or other recent fare, though no slight against them.

--Edmiao 14:50, 28 July 2008 (MST) what i really appreciated was how it developed, or continued to develop from the last movie, the batman as a symbol of hope for the people. I liked the concept that batman was what the city needed at whatever time. in the first movie it needed a knight in shining armor, in the second at the end of the movie it needed a dark knight to preserve the image of Dent as an inspiring figure. loved the symbology and thought it was not overplayed at all.

JASON: This movie was pretty so-so. Why were the police mad at Batman? That was completely non-sensical. I didnt believe Harvey Dent as squeaky clean at all, the performance was average at best. Maggie Gyllenhal was flat as well, and there was no chemistry between her and either Bale or Eckhardt. When she died it was no big deal. What purpose was there for the Scarecrow to be in the movie for 5 minutes? It devalues the character even more than being destroyed by a tazer in the first movie, and in a way cheapens everything Begins fought hard to establish. The only excellent performance was Ledger, with Oldman giving a good one. Why were the criminals so weak? They were all super-pussies except the Joker. What is the source of the interdepartmental rivalry in the police force? Why was this movie 2 1/2 hours long? Lots of great bits of action and some super-cool Joker scenes. Besides that nothing. Even the jokers plans werent hard to predict. Sure, some of his actions were stunning, but what he does and how he does it could have been any criminal in any movie. This movie is a classic date with a blond bimbo. Not in my top 5 super hero movies. I cant decide if its better than Wall-E for 2nd this year.

--Edmiao 17:46, 28 July 2008 (MST) why can't you enjoy a great movie?