The Dark Knight What makes TDK so special?

Its just my imagination, but I can't help but feel that he unintentionally slighted Reeve and Keaton with that quote, or at least the movies they were in, lol
 
The movie is actually emblematic of its time; it captured the atmosphere of an era. The ambiguity, the ascendency of organized crime...even minor themes like surveillance, the role of oil, the uneasy relationship between China and the West...you can tell a lot about our rancid time by watching that movie, and it will stand as a good slice of life from this era for generatons to come.
 
Its just my imagination, but I can't help but feel that he unintentionally slighted Reeve and Keaton with that quote, or at least the movies they were in, lol

I'd say it was more the movies rather than the actors. But I think it's not so much a put down but more a comparison to how CBM's have come a long way since them.
 
Maggie Gyllenhaal , no doubt !

Seriously , i dont think TDK is special. Its a ****ing well made movie. Like really well made. Amazingly precise.The way it builds tension , how t interweaves situations and ideas explored...magnificent. But , and people kill me for it , at the end of the day i tend to prefer Begins and especially Rises.
 
Last edited:
So how is it not special? The way you describe it, it sounds like a special movie lol.
 
So how is it not special? The way you describe it, it sounds like a special movie lol.

Because in the history of movies there are a lot of ****ing well made movies. Special within the genre ? Maybe.
 
Last edited:
If it's a well-made movie like you described, and then you add in what the film did within the genre when it comes to breaking certain tropes, the oscar winning performance, and the influence it has on action movies outside the comic-genre..

Then yeah, sounds like a special movie.
 
I'd say it was more the movies rather than the actors. But I think it's not so much a put down but more a comparison to how CBM's have come a long way since them.

That makes much more sense, lol
 
TDK was just a perfect storm, that's what makes it special. You can't recreate the set of circumstances that makes something such a pop culture explosion.

That, and it being the first Hollywood movie to shoot on IMAX. All of it just elevated it to being this larger than life experience. Such an insane amount of hype and it actually managed to exceed expectations.
 
Watched it last week. Joker looks so sick!! He looks like a maniac.
 
Possibly one of the best posts I've ever read on the Bat-boards. It's not just what he said (similar sentiments have been expressed all over the place), but how clearly he articulated it.

Tacit Ronin, get in here and take a bow.
Thank you.
 
The reason this movie is special is because Nolan did something extraordinary with the franchise which no other filmmaker had done previously.:yay:

He made Batman realistic, a superhero of today's times who has his grey shades. Also as stated already the movie is much more believable since it is set in today's times.

But the biggest reason why this movie is special to me is because of Joker. Heath Ledger has immortalized Joker on the silver screen for ever.
 
On the bonus disc in the ultimate edition of the dark knight trilogy blu ray the dark knight imax scenes are recorded in dts-hd ma not dolby true hd like the stand alone edition of the dark knight bluray. Has anybody noticed this?
 
Since Interstellar is out there's been a lot of retrospectives about Nolans earlier work.

Two contributors to Variety had some great words
2. “THE DARK KNIGHT”

BARKER: Justin, when we first started this list — five or six years years ago, it feels like — I referred to “The Dark Knight” as the greatest comicbook movie ever made, and I suppose I should elaborate on that a bit. I don’t believe I’m alone in that opinion, and champions of the film have alternately praised it for elevating the comicbook narrative to the level of serious art, or for being the rare comicbook film to take comics seriously. Both schools of thought seem a little wrongheaded to me. Comicbooks are one of the defining American artforms of the past century, and thus always worth taking seriously. And what’s more, plenty of prior filmmakers have attempted to imbue superhero movies with a degree of seriousness and moral inquiry. What Nolan did better than anyone before or since, however, was to find the perfect cinematic correlative for classic comics’ particular brand of pop mythology, embracing the source material’s pulpiness and its profundity in equal measure.

“The Dark Knight” was also a resonant product of its time and place, and a fitting elegy for the George W. Bush era, when half a decade of war, terrorism, domestic surveillance and an overall air of moral relativism had made the ethical certainties of so many earlier superhero pics look hopelessly naive. (The secret of “The Dark Knight” is that its protagonist isn’t really Batman, it’s Harvey Dent, the once noble justice-seeker turned avenging monster.) It’s hard to imagine a film this pitilessly dark grossing more than a billion dollars in any previous decade, and for better or for worse, this is the film that has shaped the timbre of blockbuster action filmmaking ever since. Sometimes this feels like a strike against it, as even the once squeaky-clean Superman and Spider-Man films are now expected to dwell on the jagged edges, murky motivations, dark moods. One could blame Nolan for that, but to do so would be no fairer than blaming the Pixies for every loudQUIETloud indie band that flourished in the 1990s, or blaming Quentin Tarantino for the generation of grindhouse crate-diggers that followed in “Pulp Fiction’s” wake. If you nail something as perfectly as Nolan did with “The Dark Knight,” imitators are to be expected.

CHANG: Why mince words at this point? “The Dark Knight” is the greatest comicbook movie ever made, one of the finest sequels Hollywood ever produced, and the rare picture that meaningfully evokes the terror and trauma of 9/11 without tilting into exploitation (I’m lookin’ at you, “Man of Steel”). And for all the film’s self-evident moral complexity and seriousness of purpose, what’s stayed with me most is the sheer energy and momentum that Nolan achieves over the course of two-and-a-half hours; he directs this thing like a man possessed, fully in control even when he seems to be running off the rails, flicking at our nerves a little harder with every scene. Coming on the heels of “Batman Begins,” “The Dark Knight” wasn’t just a continuation but a furious acceleration of the narrative, plunging us from the relative calm of Bruce Wayne’s origin story into what felt like a Gotham City of perpetual night — a realm where, to quote the talking fox in “Antichrist,” chaos reigns.

Andrew, you nailed this earlier when you mentioned the film’s “ungovernable, irrational nihilism,” which pretty much sums up the ethos of the Joker, played by the late, great Heath Ledger in a performance that has rightly entered the kingdom of movie myth. The malevolent genius of “The Dark Knight” is that it seems to embody that ethos even when Ledger is offscreen, which is a surprising majority of the time (a reminder that even the best effects should be judiciously used). With its jackknife twists that seem to assault you from behind, its startling eruptions of violence and horror, the movie feels like something sculpted in the Joker’s demonic image — it’s as if Nolan had succeeded in bottling the very essence of criminal anarchy in narrative form. It’s understandable why he felt compelled to usher Batman out of the shadows with “The Dark Knight Rises,” and to bring back some of the lightness and levity we typically associate with comicbooks. But there’s a reason this picture remains the trilogy’s high point, and I think it’s because, on some level, Nolan dared himself to look evil in the face and make it not just scary, but exhilarating. He likes the darkness, and so do we.
http://variety.com/2014/film/news/r...nolan-from-following-to-inception-1201345787/
 
Aaron Eckhart's performance as harvey dent in my opinion made tdk a special film .

He was great, just wish we'd have really gotten to see him get into the Two Face role. I think when he dispeared at the end he shouldn't have come back at the end. They should have gone abit of the Dark Victory road and built up his comeback in the third film.

It's one of the great movies of our generation, Batman Begins is my favourite still but TDK was an event.
 
The Joker and every scene he was involved with.

I really wish Heath hadn't have died, I'd have loved to have seen interviews with him on playing the character. It's such a shame.
 
I'd have liked to see him in Rises. Would have elevated the film no doubt.
 
I'd have liked to see him in Rises. Would have elevated the film no doubt.

Definitely, you have to wonder had he not died would he have ended up in it? Rises may have even been a different plot entirely as we know they didn't have the story idea right away.
 
He was great, just wish we'd have really gotten to see him get into the Two Face role. I think when he dispeared at the end he shouldn't have come back at the end. They should have gone abit of the Dark Victory road and built up his comeback in the third film.

It's one of the great movies of our generation, Batman Begins is my favourite still but TDK was an event.

Two-Face is my favorite batman foe so i agree with you he was underused by nolan .
 
Two-Face is my favorite batman foe so i agree with you he was underused by nolan .

It's a shame no version has lived up to the Batman the Animated series or the Dark Victory versions. Imagine a Batman film based on Dark Victorys version of Two Face. Would be amazing.
 
I think regarding TDKR; certain plot points would have stayed the same with the Joker included, such as - Dent's murderous rampage coming to light, Bruce's self-imposed exile, Gotham in peace time. I think Nolan would have borrowed more from TDKReturns when it comes to Batman and Joker's story beats, such as when Bruce returns as Batman the Joker is reawakened from his catatonic state.

I think Bane would have still been in the film because Nolan seemed pretty adamant on a physical threat for Batman. Bane would have still released all the prisoners from Blackgate and that's when the Joker would come into the mix again. I don't think Catwoman would have made the film, unfortunately, because Jonah probably wouldn't have had a reason to fill a Joker-less void and suggest her to Chris.

If Bane is still a LOS member Talia would have still been involved I'd like to think, especially to tie her to Ra's and ultimately full circle to BB. She most likely would have received more screen time as Talia I'd hope. But only way for that to work is to eliminate the John Blake character and successor angle completely. Then again, without Selina in the mix you could still have Blake in there perhaps?

A film with Bale's Batman; all worn out and weary, having to deal with Heath's Joker and Hardy's Bane would have been off the charts. I also think the 8 year gap would have been explained in greater detail and more pleasing to us Bat-fans, because with the Joker's involvement Nolan would have been more open to having Batman's career span longer during the gap between TDK and TDKR, even if it we don't necessarily see it play out on film.

Anyways I'm going off on a tangent. Gonna stop now.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"