-
Ever wanted an RSS feed of all your favorite gaming news sites? Go check out our new Gaming Headlines feed! Read more about it here.
-
We have made minor adjustments to how the search bar works on ResetEra. You can read about the changes here.
What faults does 2008's 'The Dark Knight' have?
- Thread starter Deleted member 61196
- Start date
I could make a huge and exhaustive list to address this question, but I don't have time, and I've done so multiple times in the past.
I enjoyed this movie very much, it's great, but that is mostly due to Ledger's performance. This movie is so messy, but he is so magnetic that we don't notice or care (in the moment).
I also don't know if this discussion would happen as often as it does if people weren't hyping it as "Godfather tier"--which it just isn't, sorry.
Anyway, to try and be brief (failing so far), I'll just point out that the movie is not as smart or as deep as it purports itself to be. Any theme or message it tries to convey is endlessly over-explained in hamfisted and unnatural sounding expository dialogue, mostly because the movie would absolutely fail to convey these themes or messages otherwise (which, in itself, is a failure).
It's like the movie features its own CliffsNotes, but they don't quite match what is shown on screen.
The most egregious example is the ending speech, in which Gordon literally explains the title of the movie and we're supposed to be in awe--except the explanation doesn't make sense, the scenario doesn't make sense, the tone is weird...and wait, did they really just explain the title of this supposedly super serious and deep Godfather-tier film?
I am tempted to go on and on. Must resist.
Also, I enjoy the movie, for the record.
He wouldn't be able to pronounce words with half lips and an open cheek that leaks air out.
Holy shit, you're right.
I enjoyed this movie very much, it's great, but that is mostly due to Ledger's performance. This movie is so messy, but he is so magnetic that we don't notice or care (in the moment).
I also don't know if this discussion would happen as often as it does if people weren't hyping it as "Godfather tier"--which it just isn't, sorry.
Anyway, to try and be brief (failing so far), I'll just point out that the movie is not as smart or as deep as it purports itself to be. Any theme or message it tries to convey is endlessly over-explained in hamfisted and unnatural sounding expository dialogue, mostly because the movie would absolutely fail to convey these themes or messages otherwise (which, in itself, is a failure).
It's like the movie features its own CliffsNotes, but they don't quite match what is shown on screen.
The most egregious example is the ending speech, in which Gordon literally explains the title of the movie and we're supposed to be in awe--except the explanation doesn't make sense, the scenario doesn't make sense, the tone is weird...and wait, did they really just explain the title of this supposedly super serious and deep Godfather-tier film?
I am tempted to go on and on. Must resist.
Also, I enjoy the movie, for the record.
He wouldn't be able to pronounce words with half lips and an open cheek that leaks air out.
Holy shit, you're right.
Last edited:
Joker's performance being played directly next to Gambol and Chechen always makes me laugh, for being completely different league of a performance. And then post-hospital, not being able to raise the stakes post-Rachel for Bruce. Like the hospital sequence for Joker being relentless, but needed something else for the last act. Handing the movie over to two boats and randos was eh. And Joker/Batman's confrontation happens in a dark abandoned building. And really... my biggest cringe is Two Face's scene at the end "You wouldn't dare try to justify yourself if you knew what I lost" was tough.
In a nutshell felt like it needed a more complete arc for Batman's character to go, could have used a better Two-face, and better climax. Joker provides the series highest highs i think, but Begins is a more rewatchable, better film for my tastes. That said still love TDK
In a nutshell felt like it needed a more complete arc for Batman's character to go, could have used a better Two-face, and better climax. Joker provides the series highest highs i think, but Begins is a more rewatchable, better film for my tastes. That said still love TDK
Every time I watch the movie and the boat scene comes up I'm like " Oooh right, this boat scene" It's a good scene but would have been better as part in the first act and a bit shorter. Also felt like I've seen that scene before in other media.
At 2:53 the guy gets picked up by what appears to be Spiderman. The bat cycle randomly rolls into the scene from the right, Batman appears from the left. He then punched the guy in his helmet visor, it breaks and sounds like glass breaking. When he punches him, the guy looks at him for like a second and has a late reaction to his punch before going down. Also, how did he knock him out if he just punched his helmet visor? Maybe this is a stupid nitpick but it's just something I noticed only a decade later after watching it recently again.
Last edited:
I feel like TDK ended up being a reflection of the type of movie that American audiences hoped to see in the post-9/11 climate: a dramatic premise, a pretense scenic realism, and a thematic maturity with regard to themes such as morality and anarchy. The only problem is that they delivered it into the hands of the wrong guy IMO
Undeniably, the script has its virtues, from the dramaturgy of the character arcs (Wayne's heroic conflict over his role as vigilante) and in the thematic exploration of the conflict of order versus anarchy, of the chaos that arises through fear. It's all set up, but these are ideas that remain in the pages of the script and never go beyond that. Most of the conflicts are verbalized, materialized in speeches inflated with a grandiose pomp in the belief that they carry a load of spectacle and impact that still has little impact without Hans Zimmer's blasting soundtrack. Nothing is really explored in a cinematic way, devolving into a mere line of rehearsed dialogues or uplifting monologues about the nature of the hero that are edited without any interest from its filmmaker
And that is the word that could simply define Nolan's Batman: interest. Or most of all, *dis*interest
Any image in the Nolan's ouevre is nothing more than something easily disposable. His montage never seeks to reinforce what is in his text, to intensify it through the sensorial impact of his mise-en-scène. It's all very shallow, lifeless, soulless. There is no stimulation from the director, only the complete formal apathy of his style
How can a film that seeks in several instances the emotional component of its narrative be so poor in how it treats such artifice within its images? A death, a feeling of danger, affliction, and even tension are restricted to one specific language element (the aforementioned soundtrack headed by Zimmer). Otherwise, they are hollow, empty images, a series of zoom-outs with no weight or desire to register what is laid out in the shot
And this apathy expands to all the arcs, all the conflicts and challenges, making any element described in the text the most superficial and generic on the scene. The physical action is ridiculously ill-conceived, composed entirely of dead, locked choreography, with no desire to be minimally exciting, to carry a dramatic essence, but only to be mere stop-motion action-figures
It's honestly sad to see a film that never wants to do the best it can with the wealth of materials it has at hand.
Also I highly recommend an essay by The Baffler's Jonathan Sturgeon on Dunkirk which expands on Nolan's problem as a filmmaker much better than I can
Note: the interrogation sequence stands out in parts and I don't even need to comment that Ledger is the best thing in the movie, right?
P.S. - I'm surprised that a movie so willing to show the chaos of the Joker in Gotham is so clean, so measured, so methodical in everything. Even with isolated parts that suggest this, the work never makes the anarchy of the clown something that can be sensorially felt, it is always meticulous, in a precision that seems unwilling to expose the mayhem that a single insane and maniacal man could cause in a city
Undeniably, the script has its virtues, from the dramaturgy of the character arcs (Wayne's heroic conflict over his role as vigilante) and in the thematic exploration of the conflict of order versus anarchy, of the chaos that arises through fear. It's all set up, but these are ideas that remain in the pages of the script and never go beyond that. Most of the conflicts are verbalized, materialized in speeches inflated with a grandiose pomp in the belief that they carry a load of spectacle and impact that still has little impact without Hans Zimmer's blasting soundtrack. Nothing is really explored in a cinematic way, devolving into a mere line of rehearsed dialogues or uplifting monologues about the nature of the hero that are edited without any interest from its filmmaker
And that is the word that could simply define Nolan's Batman: interest. Or most of all, *dis*interest
Any image in the Nolan's ouevre is nothing more than something easily disposable. His montage never seeks to reinforce what is in his text, to intensify it through the sensorial impact of his mise-en-scène. It's all very shallow, lifeless, soulless. There is no stimulation from the director, only the complete formal apathy of his style
How can a film that seeks in several instances the emotional component of its narrative be so poor in how it treats such artifice within its images? A death, a feeling of danger, affliction, and even tension are restricted to one specific language element (the aforementioned soundtrack headed by Zimmer). Otherwise, they are hollow, empty images, a series of zoom-outs with no weight or desire to register what is laid out in the shot
And this apathy expands to all the arcs, all the conflicts and challenges, making any element described in the text the most superficial and generic on the scene. The physical action is ridiculously ill-conceived, composed entirely of dead, locked choreography, with no desire to be minimally exciting, to carry a dramatic essence, but only to be mere stop-motion action-figures
It's honestly sad to see a film that never wants to do the best it can with the wealth of materials it has at hand.
Also I highly recommend an essay by The Baffler's Jonathan Sturgeon on Dunkirk which expands on Nolan's problem as a filmmaker much better than I can
Note: the interrogation sequence stands out in parts and I don't even need to comment that Ledger is the best thing in the movie, right?
P.S. - I'm surprised that a movie so willing to show the chaos of the Joker in Gotham is so clean, so measured, so methodical in everything. Even with isolated parts that suggest this, the work never makes the anarchy of the clown something that can be sensorially felt, it is always meticulous, in a precision that seems unwilling to expose the mayhem that a single insane and maniacal man could cause in a city
Unfortunately The Batman also had a middling third act. All the best stuff in the movie happens and then they bring you another plate of food when you're already full.
Bale is a better Bruce than Batman in TDK to me. I remember being in the theater and not understanding some of the lines thanks to the voice. That was also the main complaint shared from the friends I saw it with during the time.
The only thing I don't like about the third act is the Dent/Two Face stuff and how it's so rushed. It felt like a waste. If I hadn't seen some of Nolen's other works, I would have some negative comments about the editing, but it's really the same style with all of his movies. I think it works for some of his movies, and mixed results for others.
The only thing I don't like about the third act is the Dent/Two Face stuff and how it's so rushed. It felt like a waste. If I hadn't seen some of Nolen's other works, I would have some negative comments about the editing, but it's really the same style with all of his movies. I think it works for some of his movies, and mixed results for others.
LMAO Nolan really is awful at scripting and directing action sequences. Maybe he should have hired Zack Snyder or any of his second unit directors.At 2:53 the guy gets picked up by what appears to be Spiderman. The bat cycle randomly rolls into the scene from the right, Batman appears from the left. He then punched the guy in his helmet visor, it breaks and sounds like glass breaking. When he punches him, the guy looks at him for like a second and has a mate reaction to his pinch before going down. Also, how did he knock him out if he just punched his helmet visor? Maybe this is a stupid nitpick but it's just something I noticed only a decade later after watching it recently again.
Batman is just a spectator so you as the viewer don't really get very engaged, since you know it doesn't matter what happens; Joker's got a backup plan.
The entirety of the movie's plot can be summarized with "Joker does thing, Batman stops thing, but turns out Joker has a backup plan that Batman has to stop now" repeated about five times. The only time in the movie we get any conflict between Batman and Joker, is at the very end when Joker's plans to destroy the boats goes wrong.
Say what you want about TDKR, but it had at least more back and forth between Bane and Batman, being more interesting and less static in its plot events.
The entirety of the movie's plot can be summarized with "Joker does thing, Batman stops thing, but turns out Joker has a backup plan that Batman has to stop now" repeated about five times. The only time in the movie we get any conflict between Batman and Joker, is at the very end when Joker's plans to destroy the boats goes wrong.
Say what you want about TDKR, but it had at least more back and forth between Bane and Batman, being more interesting and less static in its plot events.
Ledger props up an otherwise messy, bloated movie.
-The stupid Lou subplot.
-Gordon faking his death so he can get a round of shallow theater applause later on.
-Some terrible editing, particularly during the chase scene.
-Terrible fight chorography.
-A corny, nonsensical third act.
-Harvey Dent's character arc is incredibly rushed.
-The only woman character only serves to be the subject of a love triangle, and then murdered.
-Bale gives a wooden performance, and yeah, the voice is terrible and kills the scenes that are supposed to have an ounce of drama.
-Some shitty right wing 'for the greater good' politics.
-The stupid Lou subplot.
-Gordon faking his death so he can get a round of shallow theater applause later on.
-Some terrible editing, particularly during the chase scene.
-Terrible fight chorography.
-A corny, nonsensical third act.
-Harvey Dent's character arc is incredibly rushed.
-The only woman character only serves to be the subject of a love triangle, and then murdered.
-Bale gives a wooden performance, and yeah, the voice is terrible and kills the scenes that are supposed to have an ounce of drama.
-Some shitty right wing 'for the greater good' politics.
I rewatched TDK after The Batman actually and enjoyed it thoroughly, more than I imagined I would since I felt like I had really cooled down on it over the years. It's thrilling, exciting and engrossing in a way that The Batman never was for me. It's a really propulsive movie. The usual occasionally corny Nolan dialogue is probably the low point for me although not that big a deal. Movies are more than the sum of their parts, or they should be anyway.
And I'm sorry but Gary Oldman will always be best Gordon just like Michael Caine will always be best Alfred.
I also rewatched Begins for that matter and frankly I can barely stomach all the shitty jokes David Goyer constantly inserts into the movie anymore. In general TDK comes across as such a much more confident film from Nolan, he's more sure of himself and what he wants to accomplish. Begins sometimes feels like it has this undercurrent of desperately wanting to appeal to a younger and wider demographic, at least now in 2022. Back in 2005 it didn't feel like that as much, but shit has changed. The at-times constant quipping (mostly in the second half) is Marvel-like almost. TDK is a really different film and experience when you watch these two close together.
And I'm sorry but Gary Oldman will always be best Gordon just like Michael Caine will always be best Alfred.
I also rewatched Begins for that matter and frankly I can barely stomach all the shitty jokes David Goyer constantly inserts into the movie anymore. In general TDK comes across as such a much more confident film from Nolan, he's more sure of himself and what he wants to accomplish. Begins sometimes feels like it has this undercurrent of desperately wanting to appeal to a younger and wider demographic, at least now in 2022. Back in 2005 it didn't feel like that as much, but shit has changed. The at-times constant quipping (mostly in the second half) is Marvel-like almost. TDK is a really different film and experience when you watch these two close together.
Last edited:
I actually don't like Bale's Batman that much. I think he's the Batman I like the least of the live actions one. It's just too silly and not in the good way
Do you have examples of this? Been a while since I've seen begins but I don't remember it being that quippy
i thought of one fault: batman never fully closes his mouth. i guess the cowl is pinching his nose shut.
Does it come in black
You should see my other one
A guy that dresses up like a bat clearly has issues
I'm buying this hotel and setting new rules about the pool area
Damn good television
You're out at night, looking for kicks, someone passes around a weaponized hallucinogen…
I couldn't find any mob bosses
I gotta get me one of those
Nice coat
etc
Yeah this is funny to think about. But its so minor I dont have a problem with it.
Boat stuff is a bit clunky and the Gordon plotline was convoluted. And Batman landing on the van being driven by the Scarecrow looks bad. That's about it.
Honestly I can't think of any. Batman dropping on the van is a bit silly and yeah the movie a bit long but I don't mind, its a good rollercoaster ride thanks to Ledger and Eckhart.
Nah man. Dent's face melted off. He's on heavy painkiller shit. I can forgive him being out of it for a few seconds.
The Joker's disguise is hilarious though.
The Joker's disguise is hilarious though.
Rewatched it the other night. It's really crazy what a back-step Bale's physicality takes from Begins. Like, the costume doesn't help. But so much of the way he's even staged in scenes just removes that primal physicality he had in the previous film. Like how many scenes does he just awkwardly strut into frame instead of that cool hunched perch of him watching from above. Or even when he fights Ra's on the train - he swings through the window and holds himself like he's ready to pounce in that showdown. You don't see it anymore.
Like plenty is said about the awkward and bad fight choreography, but yeah, his presence doesn't carry any of the gravity is used to. Bale described the "panther-like" shape of the original mask/cowl and how that informed his choices. It feels just gone here.
Like plenty is said about the awkward and bad fight choreography, but yeah, his presence doesn't carry any of the gravity is used to. Bale described the "panther-like" shape of the original mask/cowl and how that informed his choices. It feels just gone here.
My issue is that Nolan hates superhero films and his disdain for them is palpable in every scene. Theres a reason he treats Batman like a side character.
Also his cinematography is sterile and boring in almost all his films.
He peaked with Memento.
In the end its a mediocre film boalsted by a great joker performance in addtion to many rave reviews from film critics who also hate superheroe films which without Ledgers death would only be mentioned today in passing to say "Hey Ledger was pretty great in that".
Also his cinematography is sterile and boring in almost all his films.
He peaked with Memento.
In the end its a mediocre film boalsted by a great joker performance in addtion to many rave reviews from film critics who also hate superheroe films which without Ledgers death would only be mentioned today in passing to say "Hey Ledger was pretty great in that".
It's not a Batman movie. It's a crime thriller in which one of the characters dresses in tactical gear somewhat resembling a bat at times, but the character Christian Bale is playing is so far removed from any other version of Batman that it's hard to consider it anything other than a tremendously loose adaptation of the source material. In the case of the Joker, this resulted in an iconic re-imagining of the character. In the case of Bruce Wayne/Batman, it resulted in a bland businessman with an obsessive streak doing a really embarrassing "scary voice."
Yeah I used to love it when I saw it in theaters but multiple watched makes it less interesting and boring. As other said the only things that still fantastic is Joker, while the story and other characters (especially Batman) is just mediocre. On the other side Begins still pretty great even for now and I still consider it as the best Batman movie.
I find the dialogue to be unnatural (across all Nolan Batmans). The tone and pace of it are too similar across different characters, sort of like a Wes Anderson movie but less extreme. Too many profound one liners trying to point toward the overarching themes of Gotham, chaos, and goodness. Everyone is a damn poet. It's cool sounding and all, but just not grounded or believable.
The more Batman threads that come up lately, the more I like The Batman. Things are just a little more organic and subtle. Ledger still elevates the shit out of Dark Knight though, and the cinematography and pacing are still really good.
The more Batman threads that come up lately, the more I like The Batman. Things are just a little more organic and subtle. Ledger still elevates the shit out of Dark Knight though, and the cinematography and pacing are still really good.
I don't really care about any technical flaws in the directorial department or so, but boy oh boy does that movie have issues in the writing department.
Not only TDK, but the whole trilogy must be a conservative's wet dream. In that way, I feel Nolan actually captured Bats pretty well.
Not only TDK, but the whole trilogy must be a conservative's wet dream. In that way, I feel Nolan actually captured Bats pretty well.
Visually one of the most boring movies I've ever seen. I'd say it was like if someone tried to make Batman look as interesting as Friends but Friends takes place in a city that looks like a more interesting Gotham. The whole movie takes place in plain blank white rooms with zero aesthetic.
Also this Batman's mask looks too go hard like they tried to make him look like a blander Dorian from the Mask (Dorian looks cooler though). Also why can I see his neck? A popped collar isn't going to protect you, a real Batman knows you gotta protect ya neck.
You say that but that might be the only fun idea anyone had that worked on this. Let them have thier brief respite, it might have been the only thing that kept them sane! Batman being fun should be a way higher priority than Batman being boring.
Also this Batman's mask looks too go hard like they tried to make him look like a blander Dorian from the Mask (Dorian looks cooler though). Also why can I see his neck? A popped collar isn't going to protect you, a real Batman knows you gotta protect ya neck.
You say that but that might be the only fun idea anyone had that worked on this. Let them have thier brief respite, it might have been the only thing that kept them sane! Batman being fun should be a way higher priority than Batman being boring.
Yeah. The movie was too long and needed to have another round at the chopping board.
I don't see how people keep getting this interpretation. The entire movie is about Batman being faced with uncomfortable morally ambiguous decisions and it doesn't necessarily present them as all being good just because they ended up working out in the end. Saving one (Rachel) over many. Killing Harvey Dent/Two Face. His whole phone surveillance network. We literally have Lucius Fox saying how the surveillance isn't right and that he's quitting after if it isn't destroyed. I don't think it's supporting all that necessarily
