Dark Knight, The (DVD)

Yeeeah that bugs the hell out of me. I'm not quite ready to give in to BluRay yet, financially and otherwise, but I'm not about to pay for a 2-disk edition that doesn't make any attempt to offer a solid amount of extras. I know the high def releases will have more, but putting 2 parts of a 12 part doc. is a waste of a fan's time. That's my opinion at least, not sure how the rest of you dvd users feel.

I'm sick to death of extras. They're all the same movie after movie. I like to find the versions that are simply the movie and nothing else. The only way I get into the special versions are if they are director's cuts or extended film editions.

I find it's even worse on the hi-def end of things. Extras on Blu-ray are mostly shot in standard format for regular SDTV and hardly any of them are presented in hi-def. So, IMO, this makes watching the extras even more painful on Blu.

The advantage to weaning yourself of supplemental extras is it cuts down the need to worry about double-dipping. If you're happy with just the film the first time you purchase, then there's no need to fuss over buying a collector's edition at a later time. I understand for some people weaning from extras can be like giving up carbs, but seriously ask yourself, do you really need to see a "making of" featurette with film makers and actors kissing each others butts, even when a movie totally sucks? Do you really need to see another doc. of computer nerds with the personality of a roof shingle telling us how they did the CGI? I mean really, if you don't know how CGI works by now, there are plenty of places on the web to research it.

i agree with tim. i don't watch any extras anymore. they repeatitive and boring especially the commentary. good lord who wants to hear 6 morons talk about a freaking movie. i might as well read something better. btw this movie sucks. i agree with John's review although i will rate it bit lower. 6/10.

It sucks but you give it a recommendation (6/10)? You must be a sadist. I like that.

There are plenty of great extras out there, but most of them are garbage. I certainly never need to see another "making of" the special effects featurette.

I certainly agree that most extras are puff pieces, I suppose I made it a bit personal and should have just said that those interested in them should get their money's worth even if they are still using DVD. I have deffinately cut back on the number of two-disk editions I purchase, and the quantity and quality of the supplementals obviously play a large part in the decision. As for the film itself I look forward to seeing it again but I have some of the same problems with it that the reviewers here do: It's a shame that Maggie Gyllenhaal was given even less to do than Katie Holmes the first time around, and the Harvey Dent character is wrapped up after a great introduction, completely distracting me from the end of the film since I was looking forward to seeing him in future installments (I assume that doesn't need a spoiler warning since it is mentioned in the review, apologies otherwise).

ranjan, how about my review of "the dark knight" at my blog?

The best way to spread Christmas cheer is signing loud for all to hear.

6/10? Why such a low score? What score would you give Batman Begins?

I give it a 9/10 simply because the Joker was so fantastic and the pace is pretty amazing in this movie.

He gave it 7/10, not 6. I would agree with John's view of this movie, as I feel the same as he does, and I'd also give it a 7/10. While I did enjoy Ledger's performance like everyone else, the rest of the movie borders on mediocre. And yes, Batman Begins was much better, IMO.

Tim, rpruthee gave it a 6/10, that what I was referring to.

Personally, I think Dark Knight was a nice sequel to Batman Begins. The Joker, or I should say Heath Ledger, was just fantastic.