The Dark Knight Where does most of TDK's critisism come from?

[truth]

Maybe the criticism comes from actual problems people had with the film.

Here's my breakdown, and feel absolutely free to pulverize each and every part you may disagree with:

What I liked:

1)Heath Ledger
2)SOME of the action sequences
3)The Score
4)Rachel Dawes' Death

What I didn't like:

1)The editing and camera-It felt like they cut a 3+ hour movie down to just under 2 hours and 40 minutes and on top of that some of the action sequences and shots could have been better edited and shot.
2)The third act plateaus
3)The ending is terrible and doesn't make sense
4)Rachel Dawes-I hated this character, she was poorly written in begins and it carries on here.
5)Two Face/Harvey Dent is under developed and makes a 180 too quickly.
6)Things don't make sense such as Batman and his girlfriend survive a fall on a car, Rachel says the best place to hide is the SAME penthouse where she was attacked, a cop stands INSIDE the interrogation room with an uncuffed joker...I can go on...
7)Batman...his voice, performance and writing...
8)The writing in general is pretentious, and is handing me the script with the characters analyzing/talking about everything...
9)The cell phone device was an awful and aggravating plot device
10)The boat scene is ALSO just plain awful and aggravating.
11)Watching Chicago rather than Gotham, seriously, where was the atmosphere from Begins?
12)No Bat Cave

THIS.

I like to have SOME stuff open to interpretation, rather than being told EVERYTHING about the film's morals, ideas and meanings.

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

Is there some assumption it should be invulnerable to criticism. There are a lot of worthwhile criticisms to make, like, for example, Lao being illegally extradited from his own country. While the scene is fun and shows Batman using resources in a unique way it's a definite plot hole. Or, why do the cops just casually drive into Jokers' trap when the other side of the street was clearly not blocked off. Seems they purposefully chose the obviously boobytrapped route. Also Nolan tends to vocalize a lot of his themes and motifs often and in a very ham fisted manner, which is traditionally considered poor writing. So I guess my personal answer is the criticism comes from the fact that the movie has flaws.

 

[The Morningstar]

The poll is laughable and amazingly obnoxious.

Edit: And looking through some of the replies in the thread, so are the fans. Some of you people are embarassing, I would take pity on you, but you don't deserve it.

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

The poll is laughable and amazingly obnoxious.

My biggest problem with Nolan: he's a great director with a lot of really unique and clever ideas, but sometimes he's too clever, especially in situations when simplicity would suffice.

For example, I really never thought Gordon's "death" was all that important. Interesting twist yes, but ultimately had no bearing on the rest of the movie. Sometimes when I'm rewatching The Dark Knight I almost forget he's "dead" until he reappears, then I'm like "Oh, yeah, that did happen". The novelty of that whole series of events wore off pretty quickly.

Or Batman's trip to China seemed more like an excuse to send him to China than something imperative to the movie. At the end of the day it actually HURT the plot because in the "realistic" world of Nolan after Dent and Gordon found Lao on their doorstep the most they could do is apologize and send him home.

 

[Motown Marvel]

weak story telling.

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

weak story telling.

I even felt this about Batman Begins in that the origin was almost overtold. They kept searching for these reasons for him to be Batman as if watching his parents die at the hands of a crook wasn't motivation enough. I didn't think the parents' death in Batman Begins had quite the storytelling impact it could've. The plot got so wrapped up in giving Rachel Dawes a role in his origin it forgot why he became Batman in the first place.

 

[The Morningstar]

My biggest problem with Nolan: he's a great director with a lot of really unique and clever ideas, but sometimes he's too clever, especially in situations when simplicity would suffice.

For example, I really never thought Gordon's "death" was all that important. Interesting twist yes, but ultimately had no bearing on the rest of the movie. Sometimes when I'm rewatching The Dark Knight I almost forget he's "dead" until he reappears, then I'm like "Oh, yeah, that did happen". The novelty of that whole series of events wore off pretty quickly.

Or Batman's trip to China seemed more like an excuse to send him to China than something imperative to the movie. At the end of the day it actually HURT the plot because in the "realistic" world of Nolan after Dent and Gordon found Lao on their doorstep the most they could do is apologize and send him home.

I kind of agree. I feel Nolan can overcomplicate things for no other reason than I don't know, to seem smarter?

He obviously is a clever guy, not doubting that. But sometimes it seems he is trying to prove it so much it becomes a negative.

There is a lot of things i could criticize about this movie but i'll use an example here to back my point up.

The bullet scanning thing. Put in there to seem really "high concept" and clever. But it fell flat. Simply because of a fundamental flaw that was overlooked; you don't get thumb prints on the bullet itself. You could possibly get them on the bullet casings, but you do not touch the bullet itself when loading them into a clip. I feel that basic bit of logic was overlooked simply to provide a high concept idea in the film. It also prevented Batman, the Sherlock Holmes of superheroes, to do some real detective work.

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

My fanboyish criticism of Nolan's The Dark Knight was when Bruce talked about a time when "the city would no longer need Batman". Batman doesn't believe Batman will never be needed. Neil Gaiman summed up Batman perfectly for me: "Even if there never was a Batman, I am Batman. Even if all the evil I fought was a lie, it doesn't matter, I keep fighting". Batman is practically Don Quixote.

 

[The Joker]

My fanboyish criticism of Nolan's The Dark Knight was when Bruce talked about a time when "the city would no longer need Batman". Batman doesn't believe Batman will never be needed. Neil Gaiman summed up Batman perfectly for me: "Even if there never was a Batman, I am Batman. Even if all the evil I fought was a lie, it doesn't matter, I keep fighting".

That was established in Begins, when Bruce saw his mission as being finite.

Alfred: 'Are you coming back to Gotham for long sir?'
Bruce: 'As long as it takes. I'm going to show the people of Gotham that their city doesn't belong to the criminals and the corrupt. People need dramatic examples to shake them out of apathy'

Bruce thought he could come along, take down the mob, and then Gotham would pick itself up, and he could hang up the cape and be done. It's where Rachel's whole promise of when he's done being Batman and then they can be together came from.

TDK established that he would always be Batman, and his idea of being able to give it up was fool hardy. Especially with villains like the Joker surfacing.

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

That was established in Begins, when Bruce saw his mission as being finite.

Alfred: 'Are you coming back to Gotham for long sir?'
Bruce: 'As long as it takes. I'm going to show the people of Gotham that their city doesn't belong to the criminals and the corrupt. People need dramatic examples to shake them out of apathy'

Bruce thought he could come along, take down the mob, and then Gotham would pick itself up, and he could hang up the cape and be done. It's where Rachel's whole promise of when he's done being Batman and then they can be together came from.

TDK established that he would always be Batman, and his idea of being able to give it up was fool hardy. Especially with villains like the Joker surfacing.

Right, yeah, I know this, and I feel it's a misrepresentation of his character. DareDevil kind of started out as a one mission hero, then decided there was some perminence to what he was doing. Batman is just f***ing single minded and borderline fascist, he doesn't believe there is an end to his mission from day one because that vision of his parents dying will be etched forever into his brain. IMO Batman is perpetually 10 in some respects, because he's acting out a rather childish fantasy, and that's all it is, "a fantasy". Crime would exist with or without him, but he feels the world won't be rid of it unless he eradicates it personally. That's a delusional mentality, not an attainable goal, but that is, after all, what makes him so dangerous.

 

[The Cocreator]

In a case like this we should be able to choose multiple options.

 

[The Morningstar]

Are you serious? Better then TDK? There are only a few on that list that are just as GOOD as TDK.



Better? Wow, I can see I've wasted my time here.



You win!

Well, that's the problem, I'm not biased in anyway. There are many films that are just as good as TDK, but better? Really? I'm sorry, but some of the ones on your list don't even deserve to share the same shelf space as TDK.

Originality, is a given, but I'll have to disagree about the rest. And acting? really? Did we see the same film?

That's the problem with people like you... you assume everything.

I'm NOT TDK-fanboy, I DON'T think the film is PERFECT and I didn't think your idiot... but after this post I'm really starting to wonder.



Some of the movies you listed I wouldn't even waste time waching again. The only thing we agree apon is Maggie.



You know, when I first heard Bale do the voice in Batman Begins, I was like "What the hell?" Then after realized the reason he was doing the voice that way it didin't bother me anymore. Why does everyone blame Bale? Shouldn't you blame Nolan if you don't like it? Besides, isn't time to get OVER the that issue?

Is this guy for real? Looking through this thread is actually quite depressing.

 

[The Joker]

Batman is just f***ing single minded and borderline fascist, he doesn't believe there is an end to his mission from day one because that vision of his parents dying will be etched forever into his brain. IMO Batman is perpetually 10 in some respects, because he's acting out a rather childish fantasy, and that's all it is, "a fantasy". Crime would exist with or without him, but he feels the world won't be rid of it unless he eradicates it personally. That's a delusional mentality, not an attainable goal, but that is, after all, what makes him so dangerous.

We must be reading two different Batmans. Batman never ever believed he could eradicate all crime. He knows it's a constant battle. Even BTAS addressed this, in the episode, I am the Night.

Batman is jaded by being Batman. He thinks the constant battling against crime he's doing is not doing any long term good. It just goes on and on. Then he's late to a drug bust, Jim Gordon gets shot, and he blames himself for not being there, and he quits being Batman.

He'd dedicated to his mission, but he's under no illusions that he can one day get rid of crime forever. That's a realization he comes to in TDK, which you must remember is still set in Batman's early days. He's been Batman for less than a year. He's still on a learning curve.

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

We must be reading two different Batmans. Batman never ever believed he could eradicate all crime. He knows it's a constant battle. Even BTAS addressed this, in the episode, I am the Night.

I'd read more comics then. Everyone clings on to I am the Night when I bring up fanatic-Batman. It really wasn't a good representation of his character then and it's not now. He's frequently depicted as trying to eradicate all crime. Hell, you quoted the BTAS universe - in that very universe he said he wanted to create a world where no child would ever lose their parents [to crime]. Batman is crazy, and I always found moments in Nolan's movies where he really tried to whitewash this fact. Rachel Dawes is one such instance, and in case you missed it, while Nolan's films are pretty well liked, even diehard Nolan fans seem to have it in for her character...and I think that's the reason why.

This actually goes back to what I said. One of my criticisms of Nolan is he never really gives Bruce's parents enough of an impact. As you note, it was Dawe's death that drives Bruce over the edge in The Dark Knight. That movie barely acknowledges his parents' murder, which after all, is his primary motivation. For Batman it's all about his parents, there is no one else who needs to motivate him to do what he does.

That's what makes Gaiman's "Butler's tale" so perfect. It shows that even in a world where Batman wouldn't be possible he still exists because that's who Bruce is, that's what he does, even if it's stupid to everyone else.

 

[Comics N' Toons]

There was probably 20 to 30 minutes of this film that I would erase

 

[The Joker]

I'd read more comics then.

I've probably read more than you've had hot dinners

Everyone clings on to I am the Night when I bring up fanatic-Batman.

Probably because it's one of the best and accurate representations of Batman.

It really wasn't a good representation of his character then and it's not now.

I beg to differ. It personifies Batman to a tee. He is a human being, flawed, and it shows that even he gets weighed down by the enormity of the mission he's under taken.

Nobody wants a Batman on auto pilot who never faces a personal crisis of faith in his mission.

He's frequently depicted as trying to eradicate all crime.

Care to throw out some examples?

Hell, you quoted the BTAS universe - in that very universe he said he wanted to create a world where no child would ever lose their parents [to crime].

What episode was that said in?

Batman is crazy, and I always found moments in Nolan's movies where he really tried to whitewash this fact. Rachel Dawes is one such instance, and in case you missed it, while Nolan's films are pretty well liked, even diehard Nolan fans seem to have it in for her character...and I think that's the reason why.

Not at all. She was just annoying character. The concept of the character was fine, it was the execution of her that was bad.

This actually goes back to what I said. One of my criticisms of Nolan is he never really gives Bruce's parents enough of an impact.

Batman Begins spends the whole movie of him talking about his parents, and how their deaths affected him. More so than any previous Batman movie.

As you note, it was Dawe's death that drives Bruce over the edge in The Dark Knight.

I said no such thing. Where did I say that?

That movie barely acknowledges his parents' murder, which after all, is his primary motivation. For Batman it's all about his parents, there is no one else who needs to motivate him to do what he does.

Rachel was not his motivation. There is a bazillion Batman stories that do not address his parents murder. It's not needed in every story.

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

I kind of agree. I feel Nolan can overcomplicate things for no other reason than I don't know, to seem smarter?

He obviously is a clever guy, not doubting that. But sometimes it seems he is trying to prove it so much it becomes a negative.

Yeah, I agree. South Park's spoof of Inception (which I actually didn't like too much) was basically trying to point this out. Inception was Nolan's best work because it allowed him to be as 'high concept' as he wanted without it really affecting the story IMO. Because the entire thing was based in the human mind he could be as cerebral and plot-twist heavy as he wanted.

I feel like Nolan's cleverness works against him when he's dealing with more practical characters like Gordon and Dent. Instead of having them approach things like you'd expect to very by the book lawmen to approach them, he has them concoct an overly convoluted mess of a scheme to combat the Joker. One that, understandibly, blows up in their face (no pun intended).

There is a lot of things i could criticize about this movie but i'll use an example here to back my point up.

The bullet scanning thing. Put in there to seem really "high concept" and clever. But it fell flat. Simply because of a fundamental flaw that was overlooked; you don't get thumb prints on the bullet itself. You could possibly get them on the bullet casings, but you do not touch the bullet itself when loading them into a clip. I feel that basic bit of logic was overlooked simply to provide a high concept idea in the film. It also prevented Batman, the Sherlock Holmes of superheroes, to do some real detective work.

I also feel like the end was more of his 'cleverness' getting in the way. It's like he felt if he put the words "right", "sacrifice", "dark", "night" and "fear" into Gordon's closing monologue it would cover up for the fact that Batman taking the heat makes no sense when you have a crazy person in clown make-up to pin it on.

 

[Ancracks]

I also feel like the end was more of his 'cleverness' getting in the way. It's like he felt if he put the words "right", "sacrifice", "dark", "night" and "fear" into Gordon's closing monologue it would cover up for the fact that Batman taking the heat makes no sense when you have a crazy person in clown make-up to pin it on.

Exactly!! They could have blamed the Joker for it.

 

[DarKJediKnight]

So there are still some who don't get why Batman doesn't want to pin the crimes on Joker? I thought it was explained numerous times.

 

[The Morningstar]

It was? Why didn't Batman pin the blame on Joker then?

 

[Motown Marvel]

its not even a matter of pinning the crimes on the joker....rather its completely subversive and hypocritical of the rest of the movies themes to pin it on batman. but i've had that conversation here a hundred times before and ain't getting into it again.

 

[DarKJediKnight]

Why do Gordon and Batman choose to pin Two-Face's crimes on Batman?

A number of reasons:

1) When Dent had Gordon's family at the place where Rachel died, the police had a border already set up. By this time, Joker was in custody. Had they blamed Joker, everyone would have known they were lying. That would prompt an investigation into the other deaths. Batman and Gordon wanted to preserve Dent's image as the "White Knight," giving the citizens of Gotham hope.

2) Batman wouldn't want to falsely pin crimes on even someone like the Joker.

3) After the events of The Dark Knight, Batman can no longer allow himself to be affiliated with Gotham Police without risking more deaths. By "rebranding" himself, he not only severs all ties to authority, he is also "becoming the villain." As Dent is allowed to die a hero, Batman must accept the opposite responsibility. (i.e.- Dent's phrase, "You either die a hero or live long enough to see yourself become the villain.")

4) Harvey Dent is a leading prosecutor. If word was to get out that he's a crazy killer, all the crime bosses in prison would have sufficient grounds for appeal. All the convictions of all the cases Dent has ever tried could be overturned, and all the crime bosses would be back on the street. The movie mentions this a few times. In their first meeting, the mayor cautioned Dent that he had better watch himself, because all they need is a little dirt on him and all the cases would crumble. During the scene where Dent threatens the fake honor guard who was actually a paranoid schizophrenic, Batman warns Dent that killing him would put all the cases in jeopardy. Batman reiterates this to Gordon at the end.

5) During their final confrontation, the Joker explains that Batman's weakness is his adherence to rules. Why abide by a code when your enemies obviously don't? Pinning Two-Face's crimes on Batman is sending a message to the public, and it's not a terribly positive one. This also plays into his psychological dilemma evidenced by the line "I've seen what I have to become to stop men like him." (Another possible interpretation in this vein is referenced earlier in the film. The point is made that the criminals are not scared of Batman because they know he won't kill, making him less effective. By pinning Two-Faces crimes on Batman, it changes that perception, striking even more fear into the criminal mind.)

6) Giving Batman a villainous public image should prevent any further copycat batmen harming themselves and others

7) Since he began his fight on crime, Batman has, inadvertently, become the glue that holds Gotham together. Alfred tells Bruce after the Joker shows up that he can't quit, and that he would have Bruce endure because he can make the choices no one else can make. The decision to take the fall for Harvey was the only way to keep the crime bosses/criminals from being released from jail and to keep the city inspired. The personification of Batman is the only image/symbol strong enough for Gordon to use, which could convince the people of Gotham to believe the story that Batman, not Harvey, was responsible for those deaths. It would not have been very convincing or ethical to blame those crimes on another person/criminal. This was Bruce/Batman's way to be whatever Gotham needed him to be.

 

[Motown Marvel]

uh huh.

hope you had fun typing that.

 

[DarKJediKnight]

No I didn't type it.

 

[The Morningstar]

Still doesn't explain why the crimes can't be pinned on Joker or at least his plotting. Joker wasn't there when the Major or the Judge died. But they still pinned the crimes on Joker.

Why wouldn't Batman want to lie about the crimes being committed by Joker? Because he doesn't want to lie to the people of Gotham? Well he already lied to them when he pinned the crimes on himself.