I just watched Batman: The Dark Knight...

[Kirby]

Originally posted by: Doboji

Originally posted by: nkgreen

Originally posted by: Doboji
What confuses me, is alot of people on ATOT seem to give TDK a "meh" rating, and yet the rest of the known universe seems to recognize it as a eye poppingly good. What is it about ATOT that allows for this rift? Furthermore, what movies ARE good to these folks... I suspect it's more a matter of people on ATOT being negative nancys than it is being aware intelligent movie critics.

I gave it a meh, so here are some of my favorites:

Dr. Zhivago
The Big Lebowski
Taegukgi Hwinallimyo
All Miyazaki and Kurosawa
Shawshank Redemption
One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest
The Silence of the Lambs
Dr. Strangelove
Apocalypse Now
Forrest Gump
Das Boot
Der Untergang
The Great Escape
Amadeus
Coming to America
Blade Runner
Soylent Green
Planet of the Apes
Patton
Young Frankenstein

You thought Coming to America was a great movie? really?

Excluding the Big Lebowski, it is probably one of the best comedies imo. Beats the hell out of any Will Ferrell, Owen Wilson, Ben Stiller, Dane Cook, or Jack Black movie.

 

[irishScott]

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: DomS

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: irishScott
As for corny... how so? The Bank robbery scene was designed to be entertaining obviously. I laughed and cheered my ass off. Same story with the Joker blowing up the hospital (although that was no cheering and more of a WTF laugh). The Batman/Joker/Dent chase was anything but corny, neither was the climactic battle.

The plot was complex as hell, the characters were complex as hell, the acting was excellent on all sides (with Ledger singled out obviously. The guy deserves an Oscar dead or not). This movie was well deserving of the hype it got. I wouldn't call it the "best movie of all time", but it's up there.

Cheering the Bank and Hospital scenes? Why? They weren't that entertaining.

Ledger deserves an Oscar? Why? He should no complexity or depth to his character, acted the same way the whole movie.

Man, some folks haven't seen a well acted/complex movie before or are just sheeple.

EXACTLY. The scenes weren't THAT entertaining, and Ledger's Joker wasn't that great. I honestly thought he was the weakest character. There was nothing...'Jokery' about him. Change his makeup and he could've been playing virtually any other villain. There was nothing about his portrayal that really tapped into the roots of the joker character. It was a typical villain, in the joker's makeup. And as you said, the performance was wooden and didn't change throughout the movie.

It also felt like there was no real buildup throughout the film. It was like a 2.5 hour plateau.

Completely agree. The only character development from the Joker/Ledger was learning how he got the scars around his mouth which he repeated time after time which got tiring.

Well since neither of you will quote my actual response on this issue (and DomS flat out ignores it), guess I'll have to do it.

Oh come on. You have to admit the mob thug with the shotgun at the bank robbery was pretty badass.

Note I said I wasn't cheering during the hospital scene. The Joker messing with the switches and such at the end got a mild WTF laugh out of me.

No complexity or depth because he acted the same way? No shit, he was playing the same character. You need to learn to read between the lines my friend. Start getting into the Joker's psychology. Why does the Joker repeatably talk about his scars? Do they affect his decisions? Notice his demeanor changes whenever he talks about them.

And that's just one example off the top of my head and I haven't seen the movie in 2 months. I could analyze the characters in this movie for hours.

You say his character lacks depth? It's not depth if the movie has to spell it out for you/take you on a guided tour.

Also, here's another one I just thought of. Why a "Joker"? Of all the images he could have chosen. In the context of Ledger's Joker of course. Once again this is just off the top of my head. Once I get my hands on the movie and have the time to do a full analysis (with quotes and such) I'll post it here. I can almost grantee that it'll be pages.

 

[Capt Caveman]

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: DomS

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: irishScott
As for corny... how so? The Bank robbery scene was designed to be entertaining obviously. I laughed and cheered my ass off. Same story with the Joker blowing up the hospital (although that was no cheering and more of a WTF laugh). The Batman/Joker/Dent chase was anything but corny, neither was the climactic battle.

The plot was complex as hell, the characters were complex as hell, the acting was excellent on all sides (with Ledger singled out obviously. The guy deserves an Oscar dead or not). This movie was well deserving of the hype it got. I wouldn't call it the "best movie of all time", but it's up there.

Cheering the Bank and Hospital scenes? Why? They weren't that entertaining.

Ledger deserves an Oscar? Why? He should no complexity or depth to his character, acted the same way the whole movie.

Man, some folks haven't seen a well acted/complex movie before or are just sheeple.

EXACTLY. The scenes weren't THAT entertaining, and Ledger's Joker wasn't that great. I honestly thought he was the weakest character. There was nothing...'Jokery' about him. Change his makeup and he could've been playing virtually any other villain. There was nothing about his portrayal that really tapped into the roots of the joker character. It was a typical villain, in the joker's makeup. And as you said, the performance was wooden and didn't change throughout the movie.

It also felt like there was no real buildup throughout the film. It was like a 2.5 hour plateau.

Completely agree. The only character development from the Joker/Ledger was learning how he got the scars around his mouth which he repeated time after time which got tiring.

Well since neither of you will quote my actual response on this issue (and DomS flat out ignores it), guess I'll have to do it.

Oh come on. You have to admit the mob thug with the shotgun at the bank robbery was pretty badass.

Note I said I wasn't cheering during the hospital scene. The Joker messing with the switches and such at the end got a mild WTF laugh out of me.

No complexity or depth because he acted the same way? No shit, he was playing the same character. You need to learn to read between the lines my friend. Start getting into the Joker's psychology. Why does the Joker repeatably talk about his scars? Do they affect his decisions? Notice his demeanor changes whenever he talks about them.

And that's just one example off the top of my head and I haven't seen the movie in 2 months. I could analyze the characters in this movie for hours.

You say his character lacks depth? It's not depth if the movie has to spell it out for you/take you on a guided tour.

Also, here's another one I just thought of. Why a "Joker"? Of all the images he could have chosen. In the context of Ledger's Joker of course. Once again this is just off the top of my head. Once I get my hands on the movie and have the time to do a full analysis (with quotes and such) I'll post it here. I can almost grantee that it'll be pages.

Need to learn to read between the lines? You can say that about that every character in every movie. How about talking about your scars once or twice then go into other bits of his pass? How about Batman/the Police/etc provide more depth to give his character some complexity?

The read between the lines comment is beyond lame. That would make Rambo, Freddie Kruger, the Terminator, etc deep and complex characters.

 

[irishScott]

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: irishScott

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: DomS

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: irishScott
As for corny... how so? The Bank robbery scene was designed to be entertaining obviously. I laughed and cheered my ass off. Same story with the Joker blowing up the hospital (although that was no cheering and more of a WTF laugh). The Batman/Joker/Dent chase was anything but corny, neither was the climactic battle.

The plot was complex as hell, the characters were complex as hell, the acting was excellent on all sides (with Ledger singled out obviously. The guy deserves an Oscar dead or not). This movie was well deserving of the hype it got. I wouldn't call it the "best movie of all time", but it's up there.

Cheering the Bank and Hospital scenes? Why? They weren't that entertaining.

Ledger deserves an Oscar? Why? He should no complexity or depth to his character, acted the same way the whole movie.

Man, some folks haven't seen a well acted/complex movie before or are just sheeple.

EXACTLY. The scenes weren't THAT entertaining, and Ledger's Joker wasn't that great. I honestly thought he was the weakest character. There was nothing...'Jokery' about him. Change his makeup and he could've been playing virtually any other villain. There was nothing about his portrayal that really tapped into the roots of the joker character. It was a typical villain, in the joker's makeup. And as you said, the performance was wooden and didn't change throughout the movie.

It also felt like there was no real buildup throughout the film. It was like a 2.5 hour plateau.

Completely agree. The only character development from the Joker/Ledger was learning how he got the scars around his mouth which he repeated time after time which got tiring.

Well since neither of you will quote my actual response on this issue (and DomS flat out ignores it), guess I'll have to do it.

Oh come on. You have to admit the mob thug with the shotgun at the bank robbery was pretty badass.

Note I said I wasn't cheering during the hospital scene. The Joker messing with the switches and such at the end got a mild WTF laugh out of me.

No complexity or depth because he acted the same way? No shit, he was playing the same character. You need to learn to read between the lines my friend. Start getting into the Joker's psychology. Why does the Joker repeatably talk about his scars? Do they affect his decisions? Notice his demeanor changes whenever he talks about them.

And that's just one example off the top of my head and I haven't seen the movie in 2 months. I could analyze the characters in this movie for hours.

You say his character lacks depth? It's not depth if the movie has to spell it out for you/take you on a guided tour.

Also, here's another one I just thought of. Why a "Joker"? Of all the images he could have chosen. In the context of Ledger's Joker of course. Once again this is just off the top of my head. Once I get my hands on the movie and have the time to do a full analysis (with quotes and such) I'll post it here. I can almost grantee that it'll be pages.

Need to learn to read between the lines? You can say that about that every character in every movie. How about talking about your scars once or twice then go into other bits of his pass? How about Batman/the Police/etc provide more depth to give his character some complexity?

The read between the lines comment is beyond lame. That would make Rambo, Freddie Kruger, the Terminator, etc deep and complex characters.

Ummmmmmm... no it wouldn't. There's simply less material to work with in those cases. I also don't get how you're comparing Ledger's Joker to the above, but whatever.

 

[JackBurton]

The movie was ok, but the visuals were AMAZING at times. The shot at night of Hong Kong was absolutely breath taking. Now this is for the Blu-ray version, so if you were on the fence about Blu-ray, this would be one of the movies to get. I'd rate Baraka the TOP Blu-ray for visuals, but not nearly as entertaining as The Dark Knight.

 

[foghorn67]

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: DomS

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: irishScott
As for corny... how so? The Bank robbery scene was designed to be entertaining obviously. I laughed and cheered my ass off. Same story with the Joker blowing up the hospital (although that was no cheering and more of a WTF laugh). The Batman/Joker/Dent chase was anything but corny, neither was the climactic battle.

The plot was complex as hell, the characters were complex as hell, the acting was excellent on all sides (with Ledger singled out obviously. The guy deserves an Oscar dead or not). This movie was well deserving of the hype it got. I wouldn't call it the "best movie of all time", but it's up there.

Cheering the Bank and Hospital scenes? Why? They weren't that entertaining.

Ledger deserves an Oscar? Why? He should no complexity or depth to his character, acted the same way the whole movie.

Man, some folks haven't seen a well acted/complex movie before or are just sheeple.

EXACTLY. The scenes weren't THAT entertaining, and Ledger's Joker wasn't that great. I honestly thought he was the weakest character. There was nothing...'Jokery' about him. Change his makeup and he could've been playing virtually any other villain. There was nothing about his portrayal that really tapped into the roots of the joker character. It was a typical villain, in the joker's makeup. And as you said, the performance was wooden and didn't change throughout the movie.

It also felt like there was no real buildup throughout the film. It was like a 2.5 hour plateau.

Completely agree. The only character development from the Joker/Ledger was learning how he got the scars around his mouth which he repeated time after time which got tiring.

He didn't repeat them. Listen carefully.

 

[Doboji]

Originally posted by: foghorn67

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: DomS

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: irishScott
As for corny... how so? The Bank robbery scene was designed to be entertaining obviously. I laughed and cheered my ass off. Same story with the Joker blowing up the hospital (although that was no cheering and more of a WTF laugh). The Batman/Joker/Dent chase was anything but corny, neither was the climactic battle.

The plot was complex as hell, the characters were complex as hell, the acting was excellent on all sides (with Ledger singled out obviously. The guy deserves an Oscar dead or not). This movie was well deserving of the hype it got. I wouldn't call it the "best movie of all time", but it's up there.

Cheering the Bank and Hospital scenes? Why? They weren't that entertaining.

Ledger deserves an Oscar? Why? He should no complexity or depth to his character, acted the same way the whole movie.

Man, some folks haven't seen a well acted/complex movie before or are just sheeple.

EXACTLY. The scenes weren't THAT entertaining, and Ledger's Joker wasn't that great. I honestly thought he was the weakest character. There was nothing...'Jokery' about him. Change his makeup and he could've been playing virtually any other villain. There was nothing about his portrayal that really tapped into the roots of the joker character. It was a typical villain, in the joker's makeup. And as you said, the performance was wooden and didn't change throughout the movie.

It also felt like there was no real buildup throughout the film. It was like a 2.5 hour plateau.

Completely agree. The only character development from the Joker/Ledger was learning how he got the scars around his mouth which he repeated time after time which got tiring.

He didn't repeat them. Listen carefully.

Rereading this thread... I think the problem was our boy DomS really didnt get it...

 

[BoomerD]

I just got done watching it. I gotta rate it a Meh...

MIGHT it have been better on the big screen? Sure, possibly, but I don't see how it could have earned all the rave reviews it has.

It wasn't BAD...but I was somewhat let down after all the hype.

Ledger's part? Nothing spectacular IMO. He did a good job, but not anything outstanding...certainly not anything worth killing himself over.

Like many others here, I liked Batman Begins much better...but even that one wasn't GREAT. I was hoping for a great movie. I actually liked Batman Begins, and was hoping this one would be a decent sequel. I'd give it no more than a 7-7.5 TOPS.



BUT, IMO, it was the best of the Batman movies so far...definitely better than Keaton and Nicholas, who I believe, were aiming for Batman "Adam West" style...

 

[pcslookout]

DomS I am in full agreement with you. Batman Begins I preferred by far.

 

[Fritzo]

Originally posted by: Doboji

Originally posted by: foghorn67

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: DomS

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: irishScott
As for corny... how so? The Bank robbery scene was designed to be entertaining obviously. I laughed and cheered my ass off. Same story with the Joker blowing up the hospital (although that was no cheering and more of a WTF laugh). The Batman/Joker/Dent chase was anything but corny, neither was the climactic battle.

The plot was complex as hell, the characters were complex as hell, the acting was excellent on all sides (with Ledger singled out obviously. The guy deserves an Oscar dead or not). This movie was well deserving of the hype it got. I wouldn't call it the "best movie of all time", but it's up there.

Cheering the Bank and Hospital scenes? Why? They weren't that entertaining.

Ledger deserves an Oscar? Why? He should no complexity or depth to his character, acted the same way the whole movie.

Man, some folks haven't seen a well acted/complex movie before or are just sheeple.

EXACTLY. The scenes weren't THAT entertaining, and Ledger's Joker wasn't that great. I honestly thought he was the weakest character. There was nothing...'Jokery' about him. Change his makeup and he could've been playing virtually any other villain. There was nothing about his portrayal that really tapped into the roots of the joker character. It was a typical villain, in the joker's makeup. And as you said, the performance was wooden and didn't change throughout the movie.

It also felt like there was no real buildup throughout the film. It was like a 2.5 hour plateau.

Completely agree. The only character development from the Joker/Ledger was learning how he got the scars around his mouth which he repeated time after time which got tiring.

He didn't repeat them. Listen carefully.

Rereading this thread... I think the problem was our boy DomS really didnt get it...

I got the impression in the movie the Joker was making up stories about his scars...none of which were true. Am I off here?

 

[Aikouka]

Originally posted by: Fritzo
I got the impression in the movie the Joker was making up stories about his scars...none of which were true. Am I off here?

There have been quite a few instances of the Joker over the years (in different versions of the comics) and those two stories he mentioned are two of the back stories for him in these comics (or they at least follow the idea of what happened) as in one he owed a loan shark money and the loan shark took it out on his wife and the other one he had a broken home~.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: BoomerD
I just got done watching it. I gotta rate it a Meh...

MIGHT it have been better on the big screen? Sure, possibly, but I don't see how it could have earned all the rave reviews it has.

It wasn't BAD...but I was somewhat let down after all the hype.

Ledger's part? Nothing spectacular IMO. He did a good job, but not anything outstanding...certainly not anything worth killing himself over.

Like many others here, I liked Batman Begins much better...but even that one wasn't GREAT. I was hoping for a great movie. I actually liked Batman Begins, and was hoping this one would be a decent sequel. I'd give it no more than a 7-7.5 TOPS.



BUT, IMO, it was the best of the Batman movies so far...definitely better than Keaton and Nicholas, who I believe, were aiming for Batman "Adam West" style...

Oh hell no! Burton's Batman was the first Frank Miller version, just as these current Nolan films are.

If you want the Adam West version of Batman then turn to the abominations that were Joel Shumacker's doing.

I agree 1 million percent with everything else you said, though ...though I think Nicholson and Ledger were equal. They played very different characters to perfection. Nicholson's Joker had an origin, a legit identity. Ledger's did not. That in itself lends a stark difference to the type of character.

TDK is an incredible action movie, and next to SM 2, probably the best comic book adaptation out there. The thing is, comic book readers have suddenly proclaimed themselves experts in film criticism and interpretation and dub this "a masterpiece of cinema," when outside of the action genre, it is merely normal, and incredibly simple.

It's an incredibly fun flick, great score, terrible BD transfer , but it's not nearly the best flick to be released this year, let alone the last decade as some fools have proclaimed.

Hell, Wall-E did more for defining the nature of humanity in 90 minutes than this overwrought explosion fest did in 150. And that robot didn't even talk

 

[roid450]

Movie was meh, still over rated. After the second time the Joker said "do u wanna know how i got these stars," it became old and annoying every other time he said it throughout.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: irishScott
As for corny... how so? The Bank robbery scene was designed to be entertaining obviously. I laughed and cheered my ass off. Same story with the Joker blowing up the hospital (although that was no cheering and more of a WTF laugh). The Batman/Joker/Dent chase was anything but corny, neither was the climactic battle.

The plot was complex as hell, the characters were complex as hell, the acting was excellent on all sides (with Ledger singled out obviously. The guy deserves an Oscar dead or not). This movie was well deserving of the hype it got. I wouldn't call it the "best movie of all time", but it's up there.

Cheering the Bank and Hospital scenes? Why? They weren't that entertaining.

Ledger deserves an Oscar? Why? He should no complexity or depth to his character, acted the same way the whole movie.

Man, some folks haven't seen a well acted/complex movie before or are just sheeple.

lulz, no shit.

defining TDK as complex and deep belies a film-watching history of Vin Diesel drivel with a smattering of Ashton Kucher comedies. seriously....

against that, sure, TDK is fucking brilliant!

Put it up against TWBB, Raging Bull, Departed, Godfatehr 1&2 (as we must always do), blah blah blah, and TDK is a dried-out ganglion in an abnormal, lobotomized brain.

People talk about Ledger as if he were on the same level as DDL's Plainview. Fucking ridiculous. He was an awesome actor, getting better and better it seemed. Still, his Joker wasn't as good as he was in Brokeback, mumbly semi-accent and everything.

 

[zinfamous]

Originally posted by: roid450
Movie was meh, still over rated. After the second time the Joker said "do u wanna know how i got these stars," it became old and annoying every other time he said it throughout.

he only said it 3 times, iirc; and only explained it the first 2.

 

[destrekor]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: Capt Caveman

Originally posted by: irishScott
As for corny... how so? The Bank robbery scene was designed to be entertaining obviously. I laughed and cheered my ass off. Same story with the Joker blowing up the hospital (although that was no cheering and more of a WTF laugh). The Batman/Joker/Dent chase was anything but corny, neither was the climactic battle.

The plot was complex as hell, the characters were complex as hell, the acting was excellent on all sides (with Ledger singled out obviously. The guy deserves an Oscar dead or not). This movie was well deserving of the hype it got. I wouldn't call it the "best movie of all time", but it's up there.

Cheering the Bank and Hospital scenes? Why? They weren't that entertaining.

Ledger deserves an Oscar? Why? He should no complexity or depth to his character, acted the same way the whole movie.

Man, some folks haven't seen a well acted/complex movie before or are just sheeple.

lulz, no shit.

defining TDK as complex and deep belies a film-watching history of Vin Diesel drivel with a smattering of Ashton Kucher comedies. seriously....

against that, sure, TDK is fucking brilliant!

Put it up against TWBB, Raging Bull, Departed, Godfatehr 1&2 (as we must always do), blah blah blah, and TDK is a dried-out ganglion in an abnormal, lobotomized brain.

People talk about Ledger as if he were on the same level as DDL's Plainview. Fucking ridiculous. He was an awesome actor, getting better and better it seemed. Still, his Joker wasn't as good as he was in Brokeback, mumbly semi-accent and everything.

Woah woah... I don't think anyone is comparing it to Departed, the Godfather movies, or any other acclaimed movies that are truly amazing films.

I think some people look into people saying "that is the best movie ever" as being way too literal. Watch those people carefully - they will say that about numerous movies. It's simply an expression, much akin to "OMG" but with a few more words.

But seriously, saying The Dark Knight was a simplistic movie is more asinine than saying its the best ever. Sure, it is no Godfather, but where's the justice in saying that? Must every movie be compared to the top movies of all time? Bring it down a level, and compare it to more similar movies.
I, for one, thought there was plenty of depth to the characters in The Dark Knight, but I don't proclaim it was award-winning depth in the story.

I do, however, think Ledger's Joker was brilliant. No, not the best ever brilliant, and I haven't seen There Will Be Blood. However, any award-winning talks are more for supporting actor, whereas DDL was lead, correct? I think Hedger should win something, but not for a lead character, as I didn't see him as such.

You can go into TDK with a mindset where you completely don't see the depth to characters, that's relatively easy. But personally, in the acting, I see a lot more subtleties that hint to more depth. Such as the numerous yet different repeats of the "how i got these scars"... the way he delivered those, just hinted at a very unstable and insane individual. His mannerisms, his speech, his playful delivery of very twisted actions. Yes, it's in the story, but some actors would deliver it with a flat performance that would make it feel like they are just performing the lines and aren't giving it any effort, and aren't using their own ability to suggest anything deeper than simply lines. Hedger delivered a character that both performed the lines, and did so in a way that suggested so much more.

And... the bank and hospital had me entertained thoroughly.

And this just proves my reasoning for why I hate critics and critic-wannabes. Everything has to be about being the best. Why can't movies just be movies, and entertaining and awarded for doing it right? No... every little this has to be critiqued, like the writers and directors had the goal to make the best damn movie humanity has ever seen. The critics and wannabes alike are so high on themselves, that it just seems like they don't WANT to be entertained, and it's disgusting to a degree. Those types annoy the hell out of me.

Those types have made their presence known in this very thread too. Sigh.

I really don't care if people disagree with any views of mine in regard to specific movies. All I care is whether I am entertained sufficiently for what the subject matter was. And when I go into certain movies, I really go into them with a mindset based upon what I expect from the team behind the movie - like what they have done in the past, such as the director, writer(s), and actors. Often times it leaves me feeling fulfilled - I was entertained and got what I expected. Other times, I'm ecstatic - it went above and beyond what I expected and was very thrilling to have watched.

 

[pcslookout]

I didn't even like There Will Be Blood. I thought it was ok but not great. Boring in some parts. No I do not like just action films and knew what kind of movie I was able to watch. I just didn't enjoy it. Now that is not saying I thought The Dark Knight was the best movie ever made or any better. There both totally different movies. The Dark Knight was good but not nearly as good as Batman Begins for me. Batman Begins is a masterpiece compared to The Dark Knight. I still don't understand what is so good about There Will Be Blood. I watched the whole thing but it was a chore to do.

 

[roid450]

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: roid450
Movie was meh, still over rated. After the second time the Joker said "do u wanna know how i got these stars," it became old and annoying every other time he said it throughout.

he only said it 3 times, iirc; and only explained it the first 2.

Well it was annoying after the first one

Seemed like he said it more than 3 tho.

 

[thraashman]

Originally posted by: roid450

Originally posted by: zinfamous

Originally posted by: roid450
Movie was meh, still over rated. After the second time the Joker said "do u wanna know how i got these stars," it became old and annoying every other time he said it throughout.

he only said it 3 times, iirc; and only explained it the first 2.

Well it was annoying after the first one

Seemed like he said it more than 3 tho.

Told the story twice. Told it differently both times. Started to tell it to Batman, who interrupted him by attacking him.

And as far as TDK's version of the Joker. It might have been the script, but the mannerisms and voice and everything that Ledger put into it brought this character alive to me. It may be because I'm a comic fan and I know a ton of comic fans. Knowing the source material and seeing the character come alive is amazing. Heath Ledger took a character that is truly psychotic, evil, maniacal, deadly, terrifying, brilliant, kooky, wierd, and complex and brought him to life better than I ever could have imagined.

The Batman Animated Series had a decent version of Joker, that was close but not quite perfect. They had to tone him down a bit for the younger audience. The Nicholson version was this odd blend of dark and really campy that in the end you realize is the same damn thing Nicholson always does and his acting as the Joker was very similar to his parts in As Good As It Gets and The Shining, but unfortunately nowhere near as good or as appropriate for the character. Ledger's Joker was the best acted job of any character in any comic book movie, ever. And I think that Tobey Maguire as Peter Parker and Robert Downey Jr as Iron Man are perfect choices.

Now everyone likes to bitch about the raspy Batman voice. And yes, it's kinda offputting. But remember, Bale is trying to do two different voices in an American accent when his is what, Australian or Welsh or something? I give him leeway as it's really not that annoying.

And never, ever bring up Wanted in context of comic book movies. While the source material was a comic book .... it's not even close. It's about as similar as if Jurassic Park had been based off the Turok: The Dinosaur Hunter comics.

 

[BuckFuddy]

The first time I saw this movie I thought it was ok because so many things were happening at once and I got confused. The second time though, I got the chance to put everything together and that's when I saw how great the movie was.

I still have a few unanswered questions:

-When Bruce Wayne stopped the truck with his Lamborghini, did Gordon know Bruce was really Batman and was just playing it off like it was coincidence or did he really think Bruce was trying to beat the traffic light?

-When Gordon said that Dent killed 5 people, 2 of which were cops...who were the other 3? Was it Maroni, his driver, and the bartender?

 

[zerocool84]

My main problem is that many people say that this movie is one of the best movies ever made when it clearly wasn't. It was a good movie but not worth winning a oscar or anything like that. It was a good action movie plain and simple. Does not need to go into a hall of fame or anything.

 

[Sentrosi2121]

I enjoyed the movie. I loved Heath's take on The Joker.
Everyone else's opinions matters not to me. Why? Because I'm a grownup and cannot be swayed by someone's opinion.

 

[toslat]

From a comic reader's view point, TDK (and all other predecessors) were disappointing. They never seem to get the characters right. Ledger was too sober to be the Joker, who is suppose to be a maniac with a permanent grin.The only Joker moment was the bank scene. For a general movie evaluation, I guess it was ok (definitely feel it is overrated).

People's taste and expectations from movies varies, and a lot of people only watch movies that are heavily publicized or win Oscars. I have seen a lot of movies, and TDK is just one of the many I will soon forget.

 

[Skyclad1uhm1]

I thought it was an ok movie, but not more than 7.5/10.

Annoying voice thingie, the Joker didn't impress me that much, 'Rachel' never managed to impress at all, meaning her death was just boring, and the whole 'Joker chasing Dent claiming to be Batman' scene was just annoying. 'Oooh, let's wait for several minutes before firing this rocket at the car, because the real Batman isn't in place yet!'...

That said, several of the other characters were quite good, and it did manage to keep me interested most of the movie. Only fast forwarded a small part of it. So overall it's pretty decent, but not so impressive that I'll be watching it again any time soon.

I've seen lots of movies this year, but almost all on DVD, and a lot of older movies too, so I do not know which ones are from 2008.

But Batman: TDK wasn't the movie that impressed me most, that is certain.

 

[zoiks]

I really didn't enjoy the movie as I thought I would. I thought it was overdone with the Batman's raspy voice and seemingly extended storyline. Heath Ledger was definitely good. I rented the movie on blu-ray on Netflix just to see the pencil trick again.