The Dark Knight Fan Review Thread

Here's my in-depth analysis/review:

http://cinemaanalysis.blogspot.com/2008/09/dark-knight-perfection-justified.html

 

ha ha aha ha.

yeah, talk about a disappointing sequel.

seriously juha you need to see the movie again. and again. its greatness will reveal itself to you slowly but suddenly.

or not.

 

Very cool analysis, RedAppleSmoker.

 

Yeah maybe you're right. I mean I didn't like X2 and Hellboy the first time I saw them but now I love them both. Only time will tell...but based on the first viewing, TDK was just an empty shell compared to Begins IMO. Begins is much more humane and identifiable. Thematically it's more personal and gripping and it's also better executed when it comes to pacing and overall structure. Just my 2 cents.

And I like Ghostbusters 2! I think it's a worthy sequel and I like my avvy. Red and black are my favourite colors and the ghost itself is kinda groovy

 

Nice. I enjoyed that read.

 

I had a hard time pinning down TDK after one viewing as well. I needed two to really understand that they were going for, and the second time, I thought the film was perfect.

But no doggin' ya if it wasn't your taste. It happens.

 

I'd have to disagree about being better executed. The first two acts are slightly slower, but very interesting, and filled with lots of character development and intense personal moments. The third act is rushed, the microwave emitter was just thrown in like a second hand thought, and it was very "unrealisitic" if you're one of the die hard realisim fans. Not only that, it felt fairly silly and contrived (compared with the overall tone of the movie).

I mean, a global terrosit agency is trying to destroy a city, and the best plan they can come up with is to steal a microwave machine that vaporizes water,(and it can somehow vaporize the water in pipes under feet of concrete but doesn't vaporize the water in people) so it can release a fear gas into the air? Why not just buy some planes and spray the gas over the city, or better yet, screw the gas and just start bombing major buildings like the banks, hospitals, jails, and courthouses?

The third act came off like a cliched comic book villain attack. Now, I don't think it was horrible or even bad, I love BB, but compared to the rest of the movie, the third act didn't feel like it had the same well thought out attention that the first two did.

 

This is sorta of a fan review from amazon.com Pretty insightful.

http://www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member..._pr_auth_rev?ie=UTF8&sort_by=MostRecentReview

First of all, this is a GREAT film, not just a great Batman film.

Others have compared Christopher Nolan's two Batman films to the Tim Burton Batman films, so I won't repeat their observations. Let me simply say that everything about this movie, from the script to the casting to the CGI to the acting and ultimately the directing is superb.

Now to Plato. The meta-message of The Dark Knight is a meditation on the nature of good and evil, the veneer of civilization, the virtues of principle and the necessity and the danger of bending principle in emergencies, the differences between evil for gain or power and evil for mere destruction and chaos, and the tension between public duty and private loyalty. Finally there is the question of the place for facts and the place for "sacred" myth.

(Caution: this review refers to specific scenes and characters.)

The mafia in Gotham is evil for gain and power. They want money and they want influence. They also want order. When the manager of the bank objects to the robbery he complains that the usual rules and courtesies among criminals are being violated. The corrupt police officers are evil for gain as well. They too need general acceptance of rules and procedures.

The Joker is evil for evil's sake. He sows chaos and disorder and wants to expose the thin veneer of civilization. He seeks only to unmask what he sees as contradiction and hypocrisy in human nature and to demonstrate that so-called good citizens are really evil underneath.

Scarecrow, who was featured in Batman Begins and has a minor role in the drug bust scene in The Dark Knight, is a deranged psychiatrist whose evil comes from desire for power over others as he uncovers the weaknesses in the minds of others.

The Mayor is out for power but does not resort to evil. Police Lieutenant James Gordon represents incorruptible good. This is ultimately stressed when Gordon must make a choice between public duty and personal relationship. Batman faces that same dilemma when he must decide whether to rescue Harvey Dent or Rachel Dawes. Likewise, the passengers in the ferries must choose between what they are told will be personal survival and the deaths of others, in another of The Joker's nefarious experiments. When the Wayne Industries accountant is about to reveal the identity of Batman, The Joker announces that the accountant must die, and citizens try to assassinate him. Personal safety trumps adherence to the good sometimes, but not all times.

Batman seems weaker than The Joker because he adheres to rules. The Biblical injunction, "Justice, justice shall you pursue," has been understood as demanding that justice be pursued justly. Evil, especially evil for its own sake, makes no such demand. We see this every time terrorists deliberately target innocents and hide themselves behind children knowing that those in pursuit will not purposely aim at innocent bystanders. This gives evil a huge temporary advantage.

Yet sometimes the good must bend and even break the rules. Abraham Lincoln suspended the right of habeas corpus during a critical interval during the Civil War. Batman asks Lucius Fox to preside over such a broken rule to locate and catch The Joker. When and how can we know when good can break rules to catch evil? Batman answers by creating a mechanism to restore the rules as soon as the crisis is over.

Alfred Pennyworth indirectly poses the question, "Knowing that evil, if attacked, will double its efforts and create even more destruction, is it really wise to go after evil?" The bad guys cause huge destruction after Batman and Gordon squeeze the mafia, creating enormous conflict and guilt in Batman. But without disturbing the hornet's nest, evil would prevail anyway. So the battle must be joined in any event.

Harvey Dent is extremely complex. He berates Gordon for compromising his police unit by accepting some corrupt officers to his staff. Gordon answers by claiming that sometimes those who know corruption can be the most effective in fighting it. Dent is identified as the "White Knight" whose public persona will rally the public against evil. But Dent himself participates in an untruthful diversion to help trap The Joker. Even he compromises good for the sake of fighting evil.

 

This is sorta of a fan review from amazon.com.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/cdp/member..._pr_auth_rev?ie=UTF8&sort_by=MostRecentReview

First of all, this is a GREAT film, not just a great Batman film.

Others have compared Christopher Nolan's two Batman films to the Tim Burton Batman films, so I won't repeat their observations. Let me simply say that everything about this movie, from the script to the casting to the CGI to the acting and ultimately the directing is superb.

Now to Plato. The meta-message of The Dark Knight is a meditation on the nature of good and evil, the veneer of civilization, the virtues of principle and the necessity and the danger of bending principle in emergencies, the differences between evil for gain or power and evil for mere destruction and chaos, and the tension between public duty and private loyalty. Finally there is the question of the place for facts and the place for "sacred" myth.

(Caution: this review refers to specific scenes and characters.)

The mafia in Gotham is evil for gain and power. They want money and they want influence. They also want order. When the manager of the bank objects to the robbery he complains that the usual rules and courtesies among criminals are being violated. The corrupt police officers are evil for gain as well. They too need general acceptance of rules and procedures.

The Joker is evil for evil's sake. He sows chaos and disorder and wants to expose the thin veneer of civilization. He seeks only to unmask what he sees as contradiction and hypocrisy in human nature and to demonstrate that so-called good citizens are really evil underneath.

Scarecrow, who was featured in Batman Begins and has a minor role in the drug bust scene in The Dark Knight, is a deranged psychiatrist whose evil comes from desire for power over others as he uncovers the weaknesses in the minds of others.

The Mayor is out for power but does not resort to evil. Police Lieutenant James Gordon represents incorruptible good. This is ultimately stressed when Gordon must make a choice between public duty and personal relationship. Batman faces that same dilemma when he must decide whether to rescue Harvey Dent or Rachel Dawes. Likewise, the passengers in the ferries must choose between what they are told will be personal survival and the deaths of others, in another of The Joker's nefarious experiments. When the Wayne Industries accountant is about to reveal the identity of Batman, The Joker announces that the accountant must die, and citizens try to assassinate him. Personal safety trumps adherence to the good sometimes, but not all times.

Batman seems weaker than The Joker because he adheres to rules. The Biblical injunction, "Justice, justice shall you pursue," has been understood as demanding that justice be pursued justly. Evil, especially evil for its own sake, makes no such demand. We see this every time terrorists deliberately target innocents and hide themselves behind children knowing that those in pursuit will not purposely aim at innocent bystanders. This gives evil a huge temporary advantage.

Yet sometimes the good must bend and even break the rules. Abraham Lincoln suspended the right of habeas corpus during a critical interval during the Civil War. Batman asks Lucius Fox to preside over such a broken rule to locate and catch The Joker. When and how can we know when good can break rules to catch evil? Batman answers by creating a mechanism to restore the rules as soon as the crisis is over.

Alfred Pennyworth indirectly poses the question, "Knowing that evil, if attacked, will double its efforts and create even more destruction, is it really wise to go after evil?" The bad guys cause huge destruction after Batman and Gordon squeeze the mafia, creating enormous conflict and guilt in Batman. But without disturbing the hornet's nest, evil would prevail anyway. So the battle must be joined in any event.

Harvey Dent is extremely complex. He berates Gordon for compromising his police unit by accepting some corrupt officers to his staff. Gordon answers by claiming that sometimes those who know corruption can be the most effective in fighting it. Dent is identified as the "White Knight" whose public persona will rally the public against evil. But Dent himself participates in an untruthful diversion to help trap The Joker. Even he compromises good for the sake of fighting evil.

 

Continued...

When Rachel and Dent are being held in danger Batman and Gordon each race to save them. Batman declares he is going to save Rachel but is tricked into going to Dent's location. Rachel dies and Dent is severely injured. In a brilliant make-up creation the right side of Dent's face remains normal and the left side is severely and dramatically changed. He has physically transformed from a White Knight into his derisive nickname, "Two Face." Reminiscent of Jekyll and Hyde, Dent's nature is now permanently divided.

The death of Rachel has destroyed Dent's belief in good and has dissolved his commitment to the public's welfare. Now he only thinks of his own personal pain and loss. But he is not a creature of pure evil. His hurt and grudge turn him into a near nihilist. The lucky coin with two heads has been transformed. One side is now ruined and becomes for him the oracle of ethics. Life and death depend solely on chance; solely on the flip of a coin.

Furious at Gordon for the actions of the corrupt police officers in Gordon's unit who betrayed Rachel, Dent finds Gordon's wife and children. Recognizing that Gordon's young son is dearest to him, Dent demands that Gordon reassure the son as Dent flips his coin to decide the boy's fate.

Batman, for whom good and evil, life and death, are not decided by chance, intervenes. In their fight Dent and Batman both plunge to the ground from a height. Batman survives and tells Gordon that the myth of Dent's goodness must become the rallying point for the city. Dent remains the White Knight, while Batman allows himself to become The Dark Knight, spurned by the public, identified wrongly but necessarily as the source of evil, who can then secretly work for the good. Only Gordon and his son know the true story behind this myth. Gotham thus gets the hero it deserves.

The Joker is captured but his fate is left hanging, literally and figuratively. We do not even know for certain whether Dent died, or unconscious, has survived his fall. All we know for sure is that the complexity of fighting evil and the compromises permitted for good are unsolved. Civilization continues but only barely. The Joker has destroyed Rachel, transformed Dent, and caused everlasting turmoil and doubt within Batman.

The need to resort to myth over facts after arguing previously for the absolute value of Truth, ends Plato's Republic, with the famous story of the myth of the cave. We too are left in the dark, in the company of The Dark Knight, at the end of this superb film.

We can only wonder what the sequel might have been, with The Joker and Two Face challenging Batman, had Heath Ledger survived.

Speaking of Heath Ledger I want to mention a few things about his performance as The Joker. There is a small pantheon of presentations of psychiatrically deranged individuals in film. Among the best are Olivia Thailand in Snake Pit, Gregory Peck in Spellbound, Jack Nickelson in One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest, and Heath Ledger in The Dark Knight. Ledger's perhaps surpasses them all.

For those with a psychiatric or medical background like myself, the use of his slight head tics and the seemingly random movement of his tongue suggest that The Joker has been in a psychiatric institution and medicated with drugs that left him with a case of tardive dyskinesia, a rare but serious and irreversible movement disorder that can be a side effect of certain psychotropic medications. This touch, which I believe was meticulously and masterfully added to the portrayal by Ledger, makes The Joker both more convincing and more dangerous.

I am told that Ledger immersed himself in The Joker's state of mind before and during the filming. It is not unknown for an actor to have difficulty extricating himself from such a wrenching and demanding role. Joaquin Phoenix and Faye Dunaway have each spoken about this as they worked to emerge from Johnny Cash and Joan Crawford. If this was so for Ledger then The Joker got an undeserved bitter laugh while we have only tears.

Addendum July 23, 2008: One of The Joker's henchmen must have gotten into my spell checker to change Olivia De Havilland into Olivia Thailand. Sorry for that.

I want to expand on one point distinguishing Batman from Dent. When The Joker reveals the locations of Rachel and Dent, Gordon asks Batman which location he is going to. Batman says Rachel's but I believe he is aware of The Joker's double crosses and switches, and knowingly goes to Dent's location. That Batman expresses no surprise at finding Dent rather than Rachel confirms this view. Bruce Wayne would have rescued Rachel but Batman, a true hero, puts his public duty above his private preferences.

After Rachel is killed Dent loses his sense of public duty and loses faith in goodness. Batman, equally in love with Rachel and equally convinced she will marry him, retains his public duty and goodness, though he is burdened with grief and guilt. Perhaps a White Knight cannot endure crushing disappointment. Perhaps only a Dark Knight, who has already experienced the crushing loss of viewing the murders of his father and mother, and holding himself responsible for that tragedy, can make his way through darkness without losing his way.

A final note, in response to a commenter who took issue with my portrayal of Gordon as incorruptibly good, I agree that Gordon made pragmatic choices, and refer to them in the essay. But as a person he is beyond bribery and never loses sight of his duty to the citizenry. So how about personally incorruptible but one who made some seemingly necessary but ultimately unwise alliances.

 

I find it very interesting about Jokers little tics and weird movements, maybe he has been in a institute and drugged up?

 

Interesting...so may be he did know the Joker's sick game? or not?

I've always thought that Bruce was making a choice the save his life-long friend, putting himself above the needs of the city.

 

Na i deffinatly see a reaction in him as he opened that door and see Dent lying there. He sorta pauses for a split second.

 

Yeah, poignant moment cos Batman think he's walking in to see Rachel lying there....

 

No, the script makes it clear that Batman was tricked, because he realizes that the Joker lied.

 

agreed. overall that is a great anlysis but he is wrong on this point. joker clearly lied to batman about the locations.

 

Ghostbusters 2 was not that bad ... it was actually pretty entertaining. It's hard to top something as GREAT as Ghostbusters.

A disappointing sequel that doesn't stand up to it's predecessor you could've went a number of directions before Ghostbusters 2. How about Batman Returns? Ninja Turtles II: Secret Of The Ooze? Hellboy 2? Robocop 2? Superman 2? Blade 2?

 

I thought Hellboy 2 was pretty sweet at least on par with original. I really like Luke Goss as a villain.

 

Jonathan Nolan did an interview with Creative Screenwriting magazine (podcast is on Itunes if you want to hear it), and he says that Joker lied and told him the wrong location. Just clearing that up.

 

I was just wondering, who the hell voted 1 on the poll? LOL They must of been pissing around.

Oh and I think its pretty obvious Batman expected Rachel to be there, you can clearly see a reaction on his face as he busts open that door and finds Dent laying there.

 

i liked Batman Returns, and Superman the Movie was too slow for me to choose over Superman 2.

 

they guy who posted about TDK being kind of a let down has Ghostbusters 2 as his avvy...it was my attempt to lessen one opinion in favor of another by pointing that out... and for the sake of a laugh cuz i was bored.

 

Thanks Anita and JokersWild!

It took me forever to finish, so I'm glad to see it wasn't lost in the wash this late in the game

 

Yes, and not only that, had Batman switched, Gordon would have arrived just in time to see him dragging Dent out of the building before it explodes, because Bats never told Gordon that he was switching targets.

However, this did not happen, which clearly shows that Batman did not expect to rescue Dent.