Re: Theatrical Review of The Dark Knight

Quote:
hat's true, I can think of some "dark" movies that were pretty lame! "Blade Runner" for example . . .

lmao...your crazy.

Let me put it this way: I saw "TDK" today and enjoyed it, certainly. But given the choice of which I look forward to seeing again on disc, it's "Iron Man." The fact is, "TDK" does take itself pretty seriously, as it should. But it's way too long and too grim, and those damned swirling camera movements of Nolan's started giving me a headache.

John

what "iron man" and "the hulk" got right is their focus on character psychology, even if they approached psychology differently. "iron man" showed us how a shallow man was able to find his conscience, even if he still likes to have fun from time to time. "the hulk" was uber-serious and showed realistic deliberations and conundrums.

"batman begins" was very mechanical. it laid down all the tracks on the rail line as if it were a dutiful laborer. therefore, "the dark knight" was a big step beyond "batman begins", but clearly, chris nolan now thinks that he's the greatest director of all time (just like manoj shyamalan). the action became very repetitive, which dulled the genuinely tense moments (such as when the passengers on the two ferries have to make a horrible decision).

i still think that the best moments in nolan's "batman" movies involve bruce wayne just chit-chatting with michael caine and morgan freeman. can you imagine a two-hour movie with batman and joker just sitting down for dinner? "my dinner with joker"--that would be something.

With Iron Man, Favreau wants us to believe Stark (mid-40's) was naive(?) in this day and age about his warmongering business and weapons in the wrong hands is ultimately a big no-no. I would have more easily bought Stark just didn't give a shit than he just kinda didn't really know the negatives. Stane victimized Stark too. I didn't buy it.

Eddie: but clearly, chris nolan now thinks that he's the greatest director of all time (just like manoj shyamalan).

What leads you to that clear conclusion?

---

[Post edited by JSWELL on Jul 22, 2008 - CDT 6:45 AM]

Quote:
chris nolan now thinks that he's the greatest director of all time

Eddie, I'm also curious as to what leads you to that conclusion. I stayed far away from interviews and stories on TDK prior to seeing it, but I expect Nolan claiming or thinking he's the best director of all time would have been a somewhat major headline. And I missed it. )

Jason, quizzical

No. No. NO! Ironman, was contribed and lacked mystery. I do not like Downey but believe he did a great job with what he had. Does anybody remember half of the useless characters introduced and spit two or three lines out then disaapear? I guess that, how they wanted it to be... It may have followed a comic book storyline, but failed at creating a series. Don't get me wrong, a sequel will probably be added, but where will it go? The TDK is merely a peice of the legendary Batman storyline. There is so much to explore yet. We've only seen a partial side of the Batman.

Remember, coomparing Iron Man and Batman Begins, Iron Man blows BB in a heartbeat...so imagine, if Dark Knight was better than BB, how much better Iron Man 2 is going to be??

And agreed, Superman II is THE best...

Well I saw Dark Knight yesterday on IMAX and overall it was a positive experience. Let me say right off the bat the movie was VERY good and the pace is non-stop. Well written, well acted, exellently executed. The Joker was almost mesmerizing, he stole the show for me. Not to sound over-the-top or anything but whenever the Joker was on the screen I was totally glued to that screen. You just didn't know what he would do or say next. As good as Harvery Dent was (I'm glad his character was given such a good part n this film) the Joker owned this movie for me. Anyway I could go on and on but just read Jasons review which is linked to the first page of this thread and it sums it up quite nicely. I also have to say I love what happened with the two boats and what the convict did. His line of "I will do what you should have done 20 minutes ago" and what he did afterwards was such a positive human thing. It was nice to see.

About the IMAX experience, if you can see it on IMAX, definitely do it. It's worth the extra couple of dollars. Right from the opening scene where the camera pans over the city towards the building where the bank robber is about to shoot the rope to the other building, you get the "IMAX" experience. I know it's been said there were only 4 scenes filmed in IMAX but I swear it was more. I remember watching James Bond in IMAX once and it was a horrible experience. The sound was echoing and the film was so small on the screen that it just looked dumb. Not in the case of D.K. The IMAX scenes were really good and the regular (non-IMAX) scenes almost filled up the whole screen also. The two guys I watched the movie with didn't even notice when it changed back to the regular version, that's how good it was. Mind you, this is where I'm going to warn you guys, we were sitting a little too close to the screen. We were seated a few rows below the middle (about two-thirds of the way down) because all the good seats were already taken. One thing I have to say about the IMAX experience, if you are going to watch it this way sit as close to the top of the theatre as possible. I know for me it would have been much more enjoyable and would have seen the movie a lot better. It didn't help the guy sitting beside me had a horrible case of dragon breath which was distracting in itself. So ya, if you see it in IMAX sit in the top half of the theatre. You'll be glad you did and it will be totally worth it.

---

[Post edited by Falcon01 on Jul 22, 2008 - CDT 12:40 PM]

Eddie, something we can agree with about Hulk!!

Quote:
best comic-book superhero adaptations:
1) "iron man"
2) "the hulk" (ang lee/eric bana, not leterrier/norton)
3) "the dark knight"

You are missing Fantastic Four ( )...I want to call this your 2000's list, since Superman and Batman Returns aren't there...and you didn't like Spiderman 2 or X-men 2??

yeah, i didn't like any of the "superman" movies (like tim, i can't stand the red underwear).

i don't like tim burton's movies (see here: http://hddvdreviews.blogspot.com/2008/04/sweeney-todd-two-disc-collectors.html).

i didn't like the "x-men" movies because all of the actors were so bland except for patrick stewart, ian mckellan, and hugh jackman.

the first spidey was pretty good, but as the series continued, maguire's whiney acting and dunst's spaciness irritated me. james franco can act the other twos' butts off, but he's stuck with playing the idiotic harry osborne.

a director doesn't have to state that he thinks that he's the best director of all time. just look at the way he makes movie. when he lets his movies run for much longer than they need to be, then he thinks that whatever he's shot is too precious to be left on the cutting-room floor. that's when a director has jumped the shark (see spielberg and "indiana jones 4" or manoj and anything after "the sixth sense" ).

---

[Post edited by posters5 on Jul 22, 2008 - CDT 1:52 PM]