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

[Motown Marvel]

Why does it not present you with a universe where that can happen? You acknowledge we're in a universe with a guy dressed as a giant bat, driving around in a big black tank. Not to mention outlandish technology has been present since Begins. Why is it suddenly taboo to be used in TDK as well?

why doesnt it? because it's not the reality nolan crafted. he didnt craft a reality where impossible science is acceptable.

Two things:

1. Gordon's "death" provided some great moments. The little Cop family on the roof of Police HQ trying to contact Batman. Barbara Gordon's breakdown, and blaming Batman for bringing the craziness of the Joker on Gotham. The sense of urgency that literally nobody and nowhere is safe in Gotham.

Dent: "Rachel, you're not safe there"
Rachel: "This is Gordon's unit. He vouched for these men"
Dent: "And he's gone"

2. Aside from Gordon saying why he did it, and the scenes where he's reunited with his wife and son, what more did you want from it? Apart from anything else, I also loved how it showed how dedicated and smart Gordon was, taking matters into his own hands. Protecting his family, and helping smoke out the Joker. Plus I don't care what anyone says, that moment where he is revealed to be alive by pulling a gun on Joker and saving Batman at the same time, "We got you, you son of a *****", was sheer awesome sauce.

none of those "great moments" matter when it does nothing to advance the plot. there was nothing smart about it. it did not depict him taking matters into his own hands, because it did nothing to smoke out the joker.

what WOULD have worked (and would also result in the elimination of the Reese character, who was completely pointless), is: Like many of the other public officials, Joker calls out Gordon as one of his next targets. Gordon's death is faked giving him the opportunity to do something that actually aids in Joker's apprehension. All the jail scene crap happens, never start with the head, Joker escapes. Pissed about Gordon playing a "joke on him" and making him look a fool, Joker tells gotham that if Gordon isnt dead by whenever then he will blow up one of the hospitals in gotham. Then the rest plays out how you know it. Then you'd still get to have all your cute family moments and Gordon looking like a bad ass.....except, this time it'd actually matter.

As an added bonus, Two-Face disappears after his talk with joker saving the rest of his story for the third film.

 

[kedrell]

Another possibility would have been Gordon's death(which he faked) be the thing that sends Dent over the edge instead of Rachel's death. Then Gordon ends up having some guilt over it as it contributed to Dent's downfall(though that was not Gordon's reason for faking his death, he was just trying to protect his family just as it really happened in the film). Of course this would have required a major rewrite and impressing upon us that Gordon is the only guy Dent can trust(one good cop in a bad town) as well as them becoming close friends. Also giving Dent a pre-existing psychological condition that he's always kept secret would have been useful here(kinda like BTAS). But oh well, it's just a thought.

 

[kedrell]

Dont buy that. The tumbler is just a fancy version of a vehicle. You see cars and other vehicles every day dont you. You don't have to be a mechanic to know the batmobile or tumbler or whatever ya wanna call it is ott.

Yes but then that's totally not taking into account that THEY ACTUALLY BUILT THE TUMBLER AND IT REALLY WORKS. No suspension of disbelief even required on that one. The only thing that might require it is the rocket jet on the back being able to somehow cause the batmobile to fly up in a jump instead of just move forward faster. But then that arguably didn't even really happen in BB. In TDK however he used it to jump over a vehicle from level ground. I always scratched my head on that one.

 

[kedrell]

But Nolan's movies don't set up any rules. That's my whole entire point. Where is it specified anywhere in either movie that outrageous tech is a no no? Most of the tech used in both movies is unrealistic. The schemes of the villains are unrealistic. Batman's whole set up is unrealistic. Ninjas living in the Himalayas is unrealistic. Harvey Dent's facial scarring is unrealistic. The movies are filled with the fantastical.

I'm still utterly confused where these rules are supposedly set in the actual movies.

Just about every movie(I think) sets up rules of the reality it is supposed to be in. They don't have to be listed in text before the film for them to be there. In fact almost NO movies just spell out their rules like that(maybe some pure fantasy films do but that's about it).

It's all in how the movie is set up in the script, often in expostion between characters(Star WarsIV: Ben talking to Luke about the Force for example) but just as often(especially when it is in a film with a reality or hyper-reality based very closely on our own modern world like it is in this movie) it just expects us to be familiar with said rules due to the film being of a reality very reminiscent of our own. This most often occurs in Urban Fantasy/Fiction which is what almost all superhero films are. They set up the caveats early(if their smart) that will allow the marginal fantastical elements to exist side by side with what otherwise would be a very common seeming world.

 

[The Morningstar]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/2008/jun/03/fingerprints.bullets

And...? That isn't what happened in The Dark Knight.

Why didn't he just pick up a bullet casing from the floor? Instead of doing some psuedo high concept bullet scanning thing that made absolutely no sense what so ever, even with movie logic.

It makes me laugh, people say "Well the thing with The Dark Knight is, it's more than your average comic book movie, it takes the genre seriously"

Then someone points out a ridiculous gap in logic, like the bullet scanning thing or the sonar, and they say "Well it's just a comic book movie! You're nit picking!"

You can't have it both ways. If those ridiculous gaps in logic were in some crime thriller film with no comic book characters, they're gaps in logic, they're plot devices. But because this film features comic book characters, it gets a free ride huh?

But the police in this film does. Maybe they still underestimate the Joker. Maybe they are confident that the guy they left with the Joker won't be harmed by this mass murderer. Maybe this fictional police force is really that incompetent. What I'm trying to say here is in the overall story, this particular point doesn't matter. You're just nitpicking.

To the overall story this particular point doesn't matter?! OF COURSE IT DOES. That particular point allows Joker to escape. It's a plot contrivance.

But I guess it's just a comic book movie so it's plotting and logic shouldn't be compared to serious films...

Why? Because there's no computer In REAL LIFE with that capability?

No, because the whole thing is logically unsound, even for a movie. Especially for a movie that has the pretense of being more than your average comic book movie.

Let me be perfectly clear, I don't think The Dark Knight is a terrible film. It's good, but is in no way shape or form brilliant, in my opinion.

And I find the attitude that it's more than just a comic book superhero movie laughable. Especially when plot contrivances and gaps in logic are pointed out that would get a non superhero film completely lambasted, then those flaws are brushed off as "Well it's a superhero film, what do you expect".

 

[weezerspider]

People criticize it because its popular. Its like those people who claim The Beatles suck. They want to be "nonconformists" or whatever. The film is flawed, every film is, but if you study film, there is no way its not the best film in the superhero genre.

 

[The Morningstar]

People criticize it because its popular. Its like those people who claim The Beatles suck. They want to be "nonconformists" or whatever. The film is flawed, every film is, but if you study film, there is no way its not the best film in the superhero genre.

This comment is as absurd and obnoxious as the poll in this thread.

SOME people might criticize because it's popular. But saying everyone that does is a gross generalisation.

I don't think it's the best film in the superhero genre. I'd say X-2, Spider-Man 2 and the first Blade movie are better than TDK.

 

[Travesty]

People criticize it because its popular. Its like those people who claim The Beatles suck. They want to be "nonconformists" or whatever. The film is flawed, every film is, but if you study film, there is no way its not the best film in the superhero genre.

Ha! So you're basically saying that if you're not an expert in film, that your opinion doesn't matter, because you don't know what makes something good. Oh, and that The Bealtes are so good, that if you don't like 'em, it's because you're a nonconformist.

Trust me, guys, if you say you don't like Justin Bieber, it's because he's popular, and you're a nonconformist. If you studied music, you would know there is no way he's not the most talented musician right now.

 

[kedrell]

Popularity does not make an artist or work invulnerable to criticism.

 

[The Joker]

why doesnt it? because it's not the reality nolan crafted. he didnt craft a reality where impossible science is acceptable.

Yes, he does. LOL! He has been using outrageous tech since Begins. There is nothing in his Batman world that says it cannot exist when it clearly can since he uses it in both movies frequently.

That's not an opinion, that's a fact.

none of those "great moments" matter when it does nothing to advance the plot.

Of course it matters. If it was a huge plot point, I'd agree with you. But it last all of 15 minutes, if even that. It was used in the middle of the movie, when the Joker was forcing the good guys into impossible situations. Batman was contemplating quitting. Dent abducted a suspect in an ambulance and terrorized him with a gun. And Gordon faked his death to protect his family.

there was nothing smart about it. it did not depict him taking matters into his own hands

Oh really? So he informed everyone what he was going to do, did he? No. Of course he took matters into his own hands, and yes it was smart as it did keep his family safe from Joker.

what WOULD have worked (and would also result in the elimination of the Reese character, who was completely pointless), is: Like many of the other public officials, Joker calls out Gordon as one of his next targets. Gordon's death is faked giving him the opportunity to do something that actually aids in Joker's apprehension.

Gordon seemingly dies just when Joker announces him as the next target? Oh yeah, that's so much more clever and less obvious than taking a bullet when trying to protect the Mayor.

Just about every movie(I think) sets up rules of the reality it is supposed to be in. They don't have to be listed in text before the film for them to be there. In fact almost NO movies just spell out their rules like that(maybe some pure fantasy films do but that's about it).

Right.

So basically you have nothing to offer me that proves outrageous tech cannot exist in Nolan's Batman world. You simply have decided it cannot, even though he's been using it from the get-go.

Again this is why I cannot take these arguments seriously. They are baseless.

And...? That isn't what happened in The Dark Knight.

You're missing the point. The fact is fingerprints can be retrieved from bullet casings. Nolan just substituted some chemical method the mentioned in that link with a more technical way of doing it.

Why didn't he just pick up a bullet casing from the floor? Instead of doing some psuedo high concept bullet scanning thing that made absolutely no sense what so ever, even with movie logic.

It was a shattered bullet.

1. Batman takes a piece of concrete containing all the pieces of the shattered bullet since that is what he will need at the end.

2. The gunshots were to test different bullet types in hopes of finding what type of bullet was used by (a) matching the hole size made in the concrete and (b) matching the wave patterns between the two blocks of concrete through sonar.

3. Once the bullet type was determined, Fox's new type of sonar imaging was used in visualizing the bullet fragments and allowing them to be recombined to match the known bullet type. (a) Why the image could be gathered at the new Batcave but only be pieced together at Wayne Enterprises is unclear. (b) It is a plot point which allows the sonar device to resonate an image of a fingerprint since the oil found on someone's skin would not be picked up that easily (or clearly) by a soundwave.

4. The fingerprint is matched to all possible suspects who have their fingerprints on file.

5. Of the four, the one they chose (Melvin White) had a known address which was on the procession route for the funeral march.

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

It doesn't? So we shouldn't have minor plot points that provide awesome moments then?

But. it. doesn't. make. any. sense.

I gathered the purpose of him faking his death was so the cops could protect him and his family, yet in the end he wilfully puts himself in danger by driving the truck carrying Dent. We're led to believe most of the law enforcement types in the film are in on all this too. Also, Joker never once goes after his family, doesn't even hint at it when Gordon finally comes back. So it really doesn't factor into the plot at all. In fact next time you watch the movie, "pretend" Gordon was never shot. Outside of the scene with his wife it doesn't change a damn thing in the movie, not even the "we got ya" line. Did you notice how back at the station everyone conveniently forgets he was dead?

As to this: "So we shouldn't have minor plot points that provide awesome moments then". Yes and no. Yes, minor plot points are fine as long as they advance the story. This particular one is just jarring and ridiculous. And "No" because just because something is awesome doesn't mean it belongs in the story you're trying to tell. There is a reason writers remove unnecessary sentences from essays. In writing you always strive to say more with less.

 

[The Joker]

But. it. doesn't. make. any. sense.

It makes perfect sense, as I'll proceed to explain...

I gathered the purpose of him faking his death was so the cops could protect him and his family, yet in the end he wilfully puts himself in danger by driving the truck carrying Dent. We're led to believe most of the law enforcement types in the film are in on all this too. Also, Joker never once goes after his family, doesn't even hint at it when Gordon finally comes back. So it really doesn't factor into the plot at all.

No, Gordon faked his death because Joker was targeting all the good guys who were making a stand against the mob in order to force Batman to unmask himself and turn himself in. Judge Surillo, Commissioner Loeb, Harvey Dent, Rachel, the Mayor etc. Gordon would inevitably be on the list eventually. If he was dead, then the Joker would have no reason to target him or anyone he cares about.

By the time Gordon comes back, Joker is not killing people in order to force batman to unmask himself because he doesn't want Batman to unmask himself anymore.

As to this: "So we shouldn't have minor plot points that provide awesome moments then". Yes and no. Yes, minor plot points are fine as long as they advance the story. This particular one is just jarring and ridiculous. And "No" because just because something is awesome doesn't mean it belongs in the story you're trying to tell. There is a reason writers remove unnecessary sentences from essays. In writing you always strive to say more with less.

There was no need for it to advance the story. It was an element of the plot that showed the extremes Batman, Dent, and Gordon had to go to in dealing with the Joker.

And yes, it produced several great scenes as a result.

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

If we're just appraising things on what makes a movie good, rather than what makes a superhero movie good I'd say X2: X-Men United is probably the best. It's got a great script, great characters, good pacing and the cast does a bang-up job.

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

No, Gordon faked his death because Joker was targeting all the good guys who were making a stand against the mob in order to force Batman to unmask himself and turn himself in. Judge Surillo, Commissioner Loeb, Harvey Dent, Rachel, the Mayor etc. Gordon would inevitably be on the list eventually. If he was dead, then the Joker would have no reason to target him or anyone he cares about.

BUT HE NEVER DOES. That's the whole problem with it. It would be one thing if his faked death had an effect ON THE REST OF THE MOVIE. But. It. Doesn't. After he returns Dent and Rachel are killed, then Joker manipulates Dent into killing several other cops and criminals. Joker barely even mentions Gordon for the entire film, and everyone in the ENTIRE CAST seems to forget he faked his death. Yes he saved the Mayor, but who gives a crap, he could've done that anyways. Moreover the convoluted logic you have to go through to figure out how he A) knew he would get shot B) knew to lay there and act dead long enough for the crowd to buy it. He had to of come up with his death faking entirely on the fly. To top it off, it's an incredible dick move too. Hey, I got an idea, for funsies lets tell my entire family I'm dead so they have to go through an incredible trauma which accomplishes nothing but a few cool scenes for Bat-fans to oogle.

By the time Gordon comes back, Joker is not killing people in order to force batman to unmask himself because he doesn't want Batman to unmask himself anymore.

What are you talking about? Did you even watch the movie? He turns around and does that exact thing to Mr. Reese like ten minutes later. It literally stopped nothing.

"If Mr. Reese isn't dead...I'm gonna blow up a Hospital". Still killing good guys -- I suppose not to get Batman to unmask himself -- but still, same scenario, different hat.

There was no need for it to advance the story. It was an element of the plot that showed the extremes Batman, Dent, and Gordon had to go to in dealing with the Joker.

And yes, it produced several great scenes as a result.

Then that's why we're complaining about it. What's so hard to understand?

 

[TheBatman072]

BUT HE NEVER DOES. That's the whole problem with it. It would be one thing if his faked death had an effect ON THE REST OF THE MOVIE. But. It. Doesn't. After he returns Dent and Rachel are killed, then Joker manipulates Dent into killing several other cops and criminals. Joker barely even mentions Gordon for the entire film, and everyone in the ENTIRE CAST seems to forget he faked his death. Yes he saved the Mayor, but who gives a crap, he could've done that anyways. Moreover the convoluted logic you have to go through to figure out how he A) knew he would get shot B) knew to lay there and act dead long enough for the crowd to buy it. He had to of come up with his death faking entirely on the fly. To top it off, it's an incredible dick move to. Hey, I got an idea, for funsies lets tell my entire family I'm dead so they have to go through an incredible trauma which accomplishes nothing but a few cool scenes for Bat-fans to oogle.

What are you talking about? Did you even watch the movie? He turns around and does that exact thing to Mr. Reese like ten minutes later. It literally stopped nothing.

"If Mr. Reese isn't dead...I'm gonna blow up a Hospital". Still killing good guys -- I suppose not to get Batman to unmask himself -- but still, same scenario, different hat.

Then that's why we're complaining about it. What's so hard to understand?

It's just a movie dude. The people aren't real.

 

[The Joker]

BUT HE NEVER DOES. That's the whole problem with it. It would be one thing if his faked death had an effect ON THE REST OF THE MOVIE. But. It. Doesn't. After he returns Dent and Rachel are killed, then Joker manipulates Dent into killing several other cops and criminals. Joker barely even mentions Gordon for the entire film, and everyone in the ENTIRE CAST seems to forget he faked his death.

YOU

DON'T

GET

IT!

He didn't do it to save anyone else except his FAMILY! He says this himself.

Gordon: "I couldn't risk my family's safety"

You keep waffling on about the other characters seemingly forgetting that he faked his death to protect his family afterward. What did you want them to do, keep saying every five minutes, "Hey, remember when Gordon faked his death to protect his family?".

LOL!

Yes he saved the Mayor, but who gives a crap, he could've done that anyways.

Oh yeah, just like he managed to protect Judge Surillo and Commissioner Loeb. There was no guarantee he could save him.

Moreover the convoluted logic you have to go through to figure out how he A) knew he would get shot B) knew to lay there and act dead long enough for the crowd to buy it. He had to of come up with his death faking entirely on the fly.

Three things:

1. Nowhere is it stated that he came up with the idea on the spot at the funeral
2. He obviously went into the situation knowing he could possibly have the chance to it there and then.
3. If not here, then he could have faked his death some other way

To top it off, it's an incredible dick move to. Hey, I got an idea, for funsies lets tell my entire family I'm dead so they have to go through an incredible trauma which accomplishes nothing but a few cool scenes for Bat-fans to oogle.

He didn't do it for funsies or to appease your thirst for a huge plot advancement. He did it to protect his family. He didn't make light of it. He apologized to his wife, and got a nice slap to the face off her in the process. He knows what he did was cruel to his family, but a necessary evil.

What are you talking about? Did you even watch the movie? He turns around and does that exact thing to Mr. Reese like ten minutes later. It literally stopped nothing.

This getting beyond the joke here now, Optimus. Are you taking the piss with me here?

1. For the bazillionth time, Gordon didn't fake his death to protect anyone else other than his family
2. How could he have forseen Joker escaping custody after they caught him?
3. Joker only targeted Mr Reese because he threatened to expose Batman's identity to Gotham

Then that's why we're complaining about it. What's so hard to understand?

Because none of your complaints make a lick of sense. No offense.

 

[TheBatman072]

Can't be said any better than what Joker has said.

 

[Fudgie]

Yes but then that's totally not taking into account that THEY ACTUALLY BUILT THE TUMBLER AND IT REALLY WORKS. No suspension of disbelief even required on that one. The only thing that might require it is the rocket jet on the back being able to somehow cause the batmobile to fly up in a jump instead of just move forward faster. But then that arguably didn't even really happen in BB. In TDK however he used it to jump over a vehicle from level ground. I always scratched my head on that one.

You keep flip floppin on your stance. First you say you can accept it cos its the kinda stuff you are not familiar with. Now your saying you accept the tumbler cos they actually built one.

Now youre wondering about it having a rocket booster. Youre nit picking.

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

YOU

DON'T

GET

IT!

He didn't do it to save anyone else except his FAMILY! He says this himself.

Gordon: "I couldn't risk my family's safety"

Right yeah I got this, perhaps you don't read my posts, I said THIS WAS NEVER ADDRESSED AGAIN FOR THE ENTIRE FILM. He doesn't even bother trying to protect his family again for the rest of the film either, so much so, Dent just waltzes in and kidnaps them. As I said before, it'd be one thing if he came back in the third act (towards the end) because then it would've made sense, but he doesn't. He comes back fifteen minutes later because the movie conveniently needs him for the plot to advance, making the entire charade irrelevant.

Oh yeah, just like he managed to protect Judge Surillo and Commissioner Loeb. There was no guarantee he could save him.

Why does faking his death guarantee the Mayor's safety. That makes no sense? The Mayor could've died ten seconds later. There could've been a second shooter ready for him. It was the Joker after all.

Three things:

1. Nowhere is it stated that he came up with the idea on the spot at the funeral

No, but he had to of if you try thinking about it.

2. He obviously went into the situation knowing he could possibly have the chance to it there and then.

Even if he planned to tackle the Mayor the amount of skill it would take to choreograph getting shot in the back is mind boggling. Bullets travel fast. He wasn't the target, and they didn't know where the shooter was coming from (in fact they were wrong about that). It's a very convoluted plan.

3. If not here, then he could have faked his death some other way

Maybe he would've pulled a John Denver?!?!?!

He didn't do it for funsies or to appease your thirst for a huge plot advancement.

No, you're right, it wasn't to tell a story at all.

He did it to protect his family. He didn't make light of it. He apologized to his wife, and got a nice slap to the face off her in the process. He knows what he did was cruel to his family, but a necessary evil.

No it wasn't. It was an unnecessary plot point that didn't advance the story in the slightest, and was forgotten as soon as it ended.

This getting beyond the joke here now, Optimus. Are you taking the piss with me here?

1. For the bazillionth time, Gordon didn't fake his death to protect anyone else other than his family

Again, for the "bazillionth time" this desire to protect his family isn't addressed again for the whole film. Why doesn't Gordon simply send his family elsewhere? They aren't like Dent or Rachel, they don't have important roles in the city. The entire scene could've been "I've ordered my wife to leave Gotham for their own protection.

2. How could he have forseen Joker escaping custody after they caught him?

And he no longer wishes to protect his family after this? He doesn't even try to protect his family again for the rest of the film. Him escaping actually makes the entire "faked death" make less sense.

3. Joker only targeted Mr Reese because he threatened to expose Batman's identity to Gotham

Meaning...faking his death didn't stop sh**.

Because none of your complaints make a lick of sense. No offense.

Really the only one who can't seem to admit clear plot holes is you. Everyone else and their mother in this thread understood my point exactly.

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

It's just a movie dude. The people aren't real.

Yeah, that doesn't really let someone off the hook for bad writing, sorry. Have you heard of things like 'MacGuffin Plot Devices' and 'Plot Contrivance'. They are shortcuts writers use, bad ones.

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

Just about every movie(I think) sets up rules of the reality it is supposed to be in. They don't have to be listed in text before the film for them to be there. In fact almost NO movies just spell out their rules like that(maybe some pure fantasy films do but that's about it).

It's all in how the movie is set up in the script, often in expostion between characters(Star WarsIV: Ben talking to Luke about the Force for example) but just as often(especially when it is in a film with a reality or hyper-reality based very closely on our own modern world like it is in this movie) it just expects us to be familiar with said rules due to the film being of a reality very reminiscent of our own. This most often occurs in Urban Fantasy/Fiction which is what almost all superhero films are. They set up the caveats early(if their smart) that will allow the marginal fantastical elements to exist side by side with what otherwise would be a very common seeming world.

Star Wars is an interesting example. Consider the fact that the biggest complaint about the prequels (and Jedi) are the script, because Lucas wrote them himself and doesn't seem to understand how people talk. The Dark Knights plot holes are a similar animal. They don't seem to understand how people would/usually act and require an immense amount of convoluted logic to explain how all the players involved would pull those things off. The Joker playfully skirts this issue by being an 'Agent of Chaos', so within the reality set up by the film Joker can plan super-human capers without it violating the movies internal logic - because we're told he can do the impossible and cause chaos wherever he walks. Gordon and Dent follow different sets of rules (as does anyone else in the film). For example, in the beginning Gordon is forced to offer an explanation why he has lightly irradiated bills, whereas Batman, because we're told he's mister super-tech from the get go can create all sorts of nonsense without it seeming off.

 

[Travesty]

One thing I hated about Gordon faking his death, was how amazingly obvious it was that he wasn't really dead, so the "twist" was just stupid. The only way I can see someone falling for it, is if they knew absolutely nothing about Batman. A main character within the Bat-mythos just dying in the middle of the movie, and nobody thought he would come back? Or nobody watched any of the trailers where Gordon interrogates Joker in the jail-cell or smashed the Batsymbol? Come on!

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

One thing I hated about Gordon faking his death, was how amazingly obvious it was that he wasn't really dead, so the "twist" was just stupid. The only way I can see someone falling for it, is if they knew absolutely nothing about Batman. A main character within the Bat-mythos just dying in the middle of the movie, and nobody thought he would come back? Or nobody watched any of the trailers where Gordon interrogates Joker in the jail-cell or smashed the Batsymbol? Come on!

Yeah, it's funny, the movie didn't even attempt to sell the plot twist. They, as everyone points out, only left him "dead" for fifteen minutes. Actually he was only dead for about 7 or 8 minutes once you know who is driving the car. It's a completely forgettable aspect of the film.

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

Actually, when you think about it, the whole TDK plot is very contrived, and sets up a lot of fairly convenient circumstances for it's characters. For the record, I like the movie, I just think it's strengths lay outside it's plot. It also helps that watching Heath Ledger play Joker never gets old.

 

[Nave 'Torment']

Holy Long Lists of Finger-Pointing Batman! I don't think I can participate in this poll!

TDK is a great movie, can we please not do this? It doesn't mean that the movie is free from flaw, of course it has its shares, but it's still one of the best films of that year, still the greatest superhero film to date, and still a definitive Batman movie that deserves every bit of its positive recognition. I think most of us did connect with it on an emotional level, so it's achieved that, stop ruining it!