Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'DC Comics Films' started by Solid, Oct 29, 2021.
Still the best CBM and most likely will remain so for many years to follow.
Personal preference is one thing, but judging something by your own standards of what a comic book movie is or should be is another. There are tons of different iterations of the character and the vast majority of his popular stories have little or nothing to do with superpowers, magic and aliens. It's like saying that the likes of Year One, The Killing Joke or the Long Halloween, possibly the most iconic Batman stories ever written, were originally created for people who don't like comic books, because they happen to be more grounded than what you specifically identify with. I can never understand people who argue that a medium, or an adaptation for that matter, should only be done one way.
The Dark Knight is at the superhero pedestal exactly because it resonates both with people who love comic books and with people who don't. It takes all the basic elements that make the character so great by also making him accessible to those who wouldn't give a damn.
I believe I have been quite clear that while TDK does what it does quite well it's not for me. There are certain parts of the film that I like quite a bit, including the tunnel sequence and the interrogation room. Other aspects, such as the fridging of what's her face and the barge based Prisoner's Dilemma - Why wouldn't you assume the detonator would blow up your own transport? - not so much.
I'm glad that there is variation in CBMs and do enjoy more grounded takes, such as Begins and the Daredevil Netflix Series. And I have enjoyed Miller, Moore and Loeb's take on the Darknight Detective. But I also believe there are much better films in the genre than TDK.
No it wasn't clear at all when you said stuff that clearly showed a specific predetermined opinion of what comics are in general. The idea that The Dark Knight only appealed to people who have no connection to comic books makes no sense. I mean this is a forum about superheroes, everyone here likes the genre one way or the other, and the movie still crushes every single poll created to pitch something against it. That was mostly the argument I was referring to.
But I'm glad you made it clear now. I totally respect your second post and in any case, everything is subjective after all.
I doubt TDK can lure people who don't like superheroes.
I even know one example of someone who started watching it not knowing anything and at first enjoyed the heist sequence in the beginning and then bam, there's a guy with a cape and rubber ears. And her turned the film off.
I know plenty of people in real life who are not attracted to superheroes and they loved the film because of that. And you don't make a billion dollars in 2008 after the 350 million that Begins ended up with by only appealing to a specific crowd. It's a fact that it transcended the genre and won over all types of crowds back then.
Christopher Nolan announced early on that his plans were to make Batman more grounded in reality for his movies, so he chose not to use the Lazarus Pit for Ra's AlGhul.
Even with that in mind, his movies took comic book moments and characterization to heart with some altercations that don't shy away from the source material and are recognizable to comic readers.
I do find it odd that Nolan was committed to grounding his bat themed billionaire vigilante, but not his adventurers in time, space or the mind. Or old timey magicians.
The other stuff are pretty hard to ground, unless they do the magician stuff like in 2009's Iron.. Sherlock Holmes with the evil warlock of that story.
EDIT: I was thinking of Batman villains if adapted to film, not the general filmography of Christopher Nolan. Sorry about that mistake.
I don't know, I think even his sci-fi stuff are pretty grounded and practical and half of them are based on actual scientific theories. Even Inception could have been very chaotic and surreal, considering it's dealing with dreams. If anything, people have been complaining on his stripped-down approach to science fiction for years. I find his Batman films very much in line with the rest of his work.
I believe TDK is the best superhero movie to present to people who don't like superheroes. That says a lot in itself.
^^ Yup, and it still manages to maintain respect for the source material and the characters 80+ year history in comics. Finding that perfect balance isn't always easy, and yet Nolan managed to do it as close to perfectly as possible.
I overall like it, think it's overall a good movie, but dislike a lot of it and think it's far from great, let alone how great it's generally considered to be.
The movies by their own standards said 2 would, and did, escalate, I didn't think 2 did, I didn't think Joker's actions and effects were particularly worse, more intense, more impactful than Ra's+Scarecrow's in 1.
It's a flawed film and there are things I think it could have done better or should have left out entirely but it's got a lot of positives to it, some great performances including a truly memorable Joker performance from the late and great Heath Ledger and it's a film that was a good superhero film that also managed to say something interesting about the character
I do wish that it's legacy had been "Let's actually give a **** about doing something interesting and cool when we adapt a superhero story instead of acting like we don't have to care because it's just guys in tights hitting each other" instead of what its actual legacy was which was that for a time everyone seemed to think that to make a superhero story they had to make it "Dark" and "Gritty" and "Realistic"
I really like it -- anchored by Heath Ledger's performance -- but it's not a Batman film I watch frequently. That honor goes to BB, which is a more Batman-y film. TDK is too nihilistic and gritty for me to revisit often and TDKR is far too long.
Love it. It's a great film. I think it's a masterpiece of the genre.
I remember being indifferent to Nolan's Batman films as a kid. However, I recently re-watched both BB and TDK and was blown away by how good they were. They're both fantastic movies that tried to address what the real-world ramifications of being a superhero would actually look like. The concept of how heroes create their villains is of course nothing new, but I do appreciate Nolan's attempt to do something different with the genre.
In fact, if you compare DC's CBM output with Marvel's over the past couple decades, I would argue that DC has provided a far more interesting string of films. By avoiding a 'house style' and allowing creators to use their own distinct voices, DC/WB have created a much more unique body of work.
Not necessarily better than the Marvel films, but definitely more distinctive...
It's a fantastic film, the only film I've seen more than twice in a theater. I think it's become a bit of a punching bag for contrarians but what can you do? I grew up on Blade Runner so the shift in audience attitude isn't really surprising.
This tends to happen when something is SO GOOD that a certain group of people get almost jealous in a way. It's a testament to it's legacy.
Still the best superhero film ever made after Superman I and II, in my view, and a fantastic crime film. One of the best blockbusters ever made.