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

[T-CLIPSE]

... For all we know, he may have only just arrived at the moment he started speaking.

Okay that's fine if that's the answer, but really I already know the answer to the question that I'm asking I just wanted to ask just to see if anybody would just come flat out and say it. The answer of course is that it's just a poorly staged scene, it's impossible, it can't happen, and that scene was just Nolan's poor attempt to create an internal surprise moment for the Joker and also an external surprise moment for the audience that pushes the realm of believability and I think that anybody who sees that poorly executed scene and tries to defend it is in denial.

That movie also has some severe editing problems, some severe gaps in logic and some real heavy handed writing and what I saw another poster here refer to as "spoon feeding" to the audience. I think people see those issues but they're just so ready to embrace this thing as though it's the pennacle of motion picture achievement they're ready to ignore those problems and give Nolan a "free pass" on some areas that I (and others) consider to be really shoddy looking filmaking for a director of his caliber.

Which brings me to the OP's original question, "where does most of TDK's critisism come from"?....of all those options he provided for us to vote from he forgot the one single BIGGEST option for people to vote from....

"People who don't believe the hype"

Hype,... hype around a movie that has people using words like "masterpiece,"... hype that has people saying things like "it's a modern day tale of tragedy" and comparing that movie to Shakespearian works,... hype that has people talking about that movie in the same sentence that they talk about 'The Godfather' and 'Silence Of The Lambs',.. hype that has people talking about how that movie got "snubbed" at the Oscars and should have gotten the Oscar nom (and win) for Best Picture and Best Director.

No I'm not saying that TDK is a bad movie and surely it's better than a lot of other so called comicbook movie fare, but I believe that a lot of the critisism comes from people (like me) who may have enjoyed it but we (me) just don't believe that it was some kind of magnificient, marvelous, magical movie going experience that has reshaped motion pictures forever the way some people are making it out to be.

That's where most of the TDK critisism comes from...it's coming from people who don't believe the hype.

 

[The Joker]

Every movie that's gotten extreme hype falls prey to that kind of criticism. There's always going to be some people who didn't think it lived up to it.

 

[Godzilla2014]

Every movie that's gotten extreme hype falls prey to that kind of criticism. There's always going to be some people who didn't think it lived up to it.

Exactly.

 

[wampa1]

That's where most of the TDK critisism comes from...it's coming from people who don't believe the hype.

I'm not sure it does as that implies that people had already made their mind up before viewing the movie which does not allow for objective criticism.

I think the genuine crticism arises from those caught up in the hype only to be let down by the final product as opposed to not believing in it from the outset.

 

[GothamAlleys]

Sure, Batman appearing in the middle of a room in a spot thats not even covered by people is a comic book moment, but it IS a comic book movie in the end, no matter how well its disguised.

Im a person who ignores the hype. I judge movies on my own, I just dont like when people get worked up over me disagreeing that something's a masterpiece, which is probably the group of people youre referring to. And that can actually really, really impact person's enjoyment of the movie, but we should just ignore the overzealous fans and judge it with our own unbiased mind.

At first I didnt think TDK was anything remotedly similar to being special, but I liked it and enjoyed it. But I couldnt really focus on the movie itself when you had an internet flooded and trolled by the so called "fans" wishing death to Nicholson and calling other guys who played Batman fakes and calling them unimaginably hateful names. It was crazy, the amount of juvenile haters that supported the movie and got associated with it for a rather long time, staining many people's opinion on it and making others scrutinize it much more than they usually would.

Now, 3 years later, I dont realy see many of those whackos around, which is surprising cause those were the ONLY people who were heavy TDK supporters that I encountered at the time (encountered I say, not only one in existence), and the last time I saw TDK after a very long time I was surprised at how MUCH I enjoyed that movie and that it was my best TDK viewing experience I had so far and was never so immersed and focused on the story

So I think a lot of people are impacted by those Nolan Nazis' throat shoving attitude, which turned the heat on TDK and on normal and adult Nolan/TDK fans out there

 

[T-CLIPSE]

I think the genuine crticism arises from those caught up in the hype only to be let down by the final product as opposed to not believing in it from the outset.

Okay I'll accept that too, however you want to word it whether it be "don't believe" the hype or "caught up" in the hype or whatever, the point I'm making is that when the hype machine starts churning it makes some people want to (for lack of a better word ) "attack" it because the viewing individual really can't see what all the fuss is all about so that person starts to criticize it.

Im a person who ignores the hype. I judge movies on my own,

Well so do I, and that not only applies to hype it goes the same for criticism, when everybody said Green Lantern sucked I ignored that and I went anyway, when everybody said TDK was the greatest thing they had ever seen I ignored that and I went anyway.

 

[Reality]

It's simple for me.

I've seen it three times now and it's just a well made film with an amazing performance.

The structure of the film and the nursery school lesson in morality writing is what really irked me. I think it had to do with no really powerful central protagonist and too many characters that just weren't handled well.

 

[Spider-Nerd]

I really enjoyed the dark knight. I thought it was fantastic entertainment and a great movie but I've got a couple of gripes.

Harvey's descent into madness was a tad fast for my liking, but I suppose in a 2+ hour movie they did the best they could and I'm forgiving for that.

My biggest gripe with the movie is that it's not a batman movie so much as it is a crime drama. Don't get me wrong, the characters are there. We've got Bruce, Gordon, Alfred, Joker, etc but it did not feel like a take on the character that rang true to the universe I know. That's not a bad thing necessarily, different mediums will bring different results.

I still say that Mask of the Phantasm is the best batman movie ever

 

[Reality]

Question:

Why didn't Harvey shoot Joker the first chance he had? Why flip for it? Last I checked, Joker was responsible for killing Rachel and he even admits it.
So how did Two Face just accept his BS story? That bothered me. Why didn't they just keep the brilliant comic origin and have the mob solely responsible for his scarring????

 

[El Payaso]

Question:

Why didn't Harvey shoot Joker the first chance he had? Why flip for it? Last I checked, Joker was responsible for killing Rachel and he even admits it.
So how did Two Face just accept his BS story? That bothered me. Why didn't they just keep the brilliant comic origin and have the mob solely responsible for his scarring????

You get the answer the minute you get the character. Two-Face doesn't just kill for revenge. That was not and has never been the point of the character. He kills for blind justice. He believes his own judgement is not as impartial as the coin's. And thus...

He never believed Joker's side of the story. In fact, when Two-Face flipped the coin, there was a certain chance that he would have shot Joker. Obviously the coin didn't go with his personal desire.

 

[The Joker]

Question:

Why didn't Harvey shoot Joker the first chance he had? Why flip for it? Last I checked, Joker was responsible for killing Rachel and he even admits it.

Payaso adequately covered this. But your point about Joker admitting to it is also false.

Joker: "When you and Rachel were being abducted, I was sitting in Gordon's cage. I didn't rig those charges".

Btw there's something familiar about you, Reality. Have you had a user name on here before?

 

[Reality]

Still, the leap from Dent to Two Face is huge.
Joker says "it was nothing personal"
is he not directly or indirectly admitting responsibility?

Also, the whole fake Gordon death thing. I don't want to sound picky but for such a plot point that took up a hefty section of the film...did Gordon plan to get shot? What if Joker shot him in the head? Who knew about it? Was Batman in on it?

And last but not least...how did Wayne figure telling the whole world he was Batman stop joker from killing people? So if joker does end up killing him, will he just stop killing?

 

[Robin91939]

Also, the whole fake Gordon death thing. I don't want to sound picky but for such a plot point that took up a hefty section of the film...did Gordon plan to get shot? What if Joker shot him in the head? Who knew about it? Was Batman in on it?

It wasn't planned. Gordon took a bullet for the mayor spontaneously. At that point, the Joker believed that Gordon was dead...So Gordon capitalized and allowed everyone to believe that he was dead, going so far informing his wife and family that he was dead. I would believe that Stephens was in on it, as he was the one to check Gordon's vitals after he was shot.

The reason: Gordon wanted the Joker to believe that he was dead so that he wouldn't go after Gordon's family. It's also heavily influenced by Harvey Dent's faked death in The Long Halloween.

And last but not least...how did Wayne figure telling the whole world he was Batman stop joker from killing people? So if joker does end up killing him, will he just stop killing?

He didn't think it would stop him, clearly. that's why he never revealed himself or turned himself in.

[Scene in Bruce's Penthouse]
RACHEL: You honestly think that's going to keep the Joker from killing people?

WAYNE: Maybe not. But I have enough blood on my hands.

^ He wasn't sure that revealing himself would stop the Joker...but he knew that if he did reveal himself that any future killings would not be his fault and that new blood wouldn't be on his hands.


I swear to god, it's like a lot of people who have criticisms didn't watch the film...the answers are all right there.

-R

 

[Reality]

Erm, but didn't Bruce Wayne say that "no more people are going to have to die..."
and "people are dying, what would you have me do?"
So him revealing himself, surely was with the intention of it stopping Joker's rampage.

It just makes no sense. So once he reveals himself and EVERYONE knows who he is, then the whole idea of Bruce Wayne hiding behind his mask of Batman is gone forever....

I just thought Batman was the kind of dude who takes any challenge head-on. Yeah, there will be casualties, but whoever the perpetrator is, he will find him and sort him out...isn't that the POINT of Batman?

 

[The Joker]

Erm, but didn't Bruce Wayne say that "no more people are going to have to die..."
and "people are dying, what would you have me do?"
So him revealing himself, surely was with the intention of it stopping Joker's rampage.

No, he was turning himself in because he didn't want any more blood on his hands.

Rachel: "Harvey said Batman is going to turn himself in"
Bruce: "I have no choice"
Rachel: "You honestly think that's going to keep the Joker from killing people?"
Bruce: "Maybe not. But I have enough blood on my hands"

Robin91939 is right, it's right there in the movie for you. There's no reason for you to have missed this.

So once he reveals himself and EVERYONE knows who he is, then the whole idea of Bruce Wayne hiding behind his mask of Batman is gone forever....

I just thought Batman was the kind of dude who takes any challenge head-on. Yeah, there will be casualties, but whoever the perpetrator is, he will find him and sort him out...isn't that the POINT of Batman?

That's one of the lessons Bruce learns in the movie. He saw his mission as finite in Begins. That he would shake Gotham out of it's apathy by being a dramatic example and then he'd leave them to it to clean their city up. He didn't count on criminals like the Joker or the escalation that came with his effect on Gotham.

By the end of TDK he knows he's always going to need to be Batman.

Btw Reality, there is something very familiar about you. I think you used to have another account on here before.

 

[Robin91939]

That's one of the lessons Bruce learns in the movie. He saw his mission as finite in Begins. That he would shake Gotham out of it's apathy by being a dramatic example and then he'd leave them to it to clean their city up. He didn't count on criminals like the Joker or the escalation that came with his effect on Gotham.

By the end of TDK he knows he's always going to need to be Batman.

Btw Reality, there is something very familiar about you. I think you used to have another account on here before.

^This.

That's the beauty of the film. This is why it's a great "young" Batman story. It's the story that shows Bruce that he HAS to be Batman. This film could have been aptly titled "Batman Forever" and it would have been more apropos than the 1995 film. One of Bruce's weaknesses at the start of the film is his naivety. He thought that there was a chance for Gotham without him. That there was a chance for he and rachel down the line. He thought that he could pass his work down to someone like a Harvey Dent.

The Dark Knight taught him that HE is the only one who can carry the burden of being Gotham's true protector.

BUT. He had to go through the gauntlet run by the Joker in this film to come to that realization. He needed to see that criminals aren't simple. That even the best allies can be corrupted...used against him.

That's one of the great aspects about the movie, Batman's character arc...not just Bruce Wayne's, but Batman's.

It's a shame that it seems some have missed what might be one of the best qualities of the film....a story point that sets up a third film perfectly. And something that was pretty, I thought, explicit.

-R

 

[The Joker]

I just figured out why he 'missed' it. Reality is a recently banned user named truth who was always hating on the movie here. He's got a string of posts in this thread. I knew he was familiar.

 

[Reality]

Sorry, but I humbly disagree.

Him viewing being Batman as finite is doing his parent's death an injustice and the character itself an injustice. How does ONE man or ONE DA COMPLETELY cure an ENTIRE city notorious for being one the most corrupt? Makes no sense.

But I thought the whole point and oddity of the character is that from the death of his parents, he changes, and him becoming Batman is directly linked to how he changed when such an unprecedented thing happen to him?

I think it cheapens the character him thinking his role is finite. So he quits and him and Rachel live happily ever after? And he tosses away that his silly batman costume?

 

[Reality]

I just figured out why he 'missed' it. Reality is a recently banned user named truth who was always hating on the movie here. He's got a string of posts in this thread. I knew he was familiar.

erm.....no.

 

[The Joker]

erm.....no.

Erm yes, I just had an administrator, Hunter Rider, check your IP. Like I said, I knew your complaining was so familiar.

 

[Reality]

When I saw "erm...no" I am not "truth" in person, he's a friend in the real world and I've been borrowing his computer as he's away on holiday.

And he was not happy at all with being banned, but I warned him about his short temper with these things...

 

[The Joker]

When I saw "erm...no" I am not "truth" in person, he's a friend in the real world and I've been borrowing his computer as he's away on holiday.

And he was not happy at all with being banned, but I warned him about his short temper with these things...

You're a 'friend' of his. Yeah, and I'm the King of England.

 

[Robin91939]

You're a 'friend' of his. Yeah, and I'm the King of England.

The Hype! needs a "like" button....

-R

 

[Mister Meddle]

You're a 'friend' of his. Yeah, and I'm the King of England.

 

[Godzilla2014]

I really enjoyed the dark knight. I thought it was fantastic entertainment and a great movie but I've got a couple of gripes.

Harvey's descent into madness was a tad fast for my liking, but I suppose in a 2+ hour movie they did the best they could and I'm forgiving for that.

My biggest gripe with the movie is that it's not a batman movie so much as it is a crime drama. Don't get me wrong, the characters are there. We've got Bruce, Gordon, Alfred, Joker, etc but it did not feel like a take on the character that rang true to the universe I know. That's not a bad thing necessarily, different mediums will bring different results.

I still say that Mask of the Phantasm is the best batman movie ever

Personally, I don't see being a "Batman film" and a "crime drama" as being mutually exclusive. I think that if The Dark Knight is as much of a "Batman movie" as Batman: Year One is a "Batman comic".

No, he was turning himself in because he didn't want any more blood on his hands.

Rachel: "Harvey said Batman is going to turn himself in"
Bruce: "I have no choice"
Rachel: "You honestly think that's going to keep the Joker from killing people?"
Bruce: "Maybe not. But I have enough blood on my hands"

Robin91939 is right, it's right there in the movie for you. There's no reason for you to have missed this.



That's one of the lessons Bruce learns in the movie. He saw his mission as finite in Begins. That he would shake Gotham out of it's apathy by being a dramatic example and then he'd leave them to it to clean their city up. He didn't count on criminals like the Joker or the escalation that came with his effect on Gotham.

By the end of TDK he knows he's always going to need to be Batman.

Btw Reality, there is something very familiar about you. I think you used to have another account on here before.

Agreed.