Wonder Woman vs the Dark Knight

[The Joker]

The Dark Knight is arguably not even the greatest BATMAN movie.

Now that's funny coming from someone who rates Val Kilmer's Batman as the best

Wow a survey, really?

From 'people that work in hollywood'? What should that even mean?

It means it's from directors, producers, writers, cinematographers etc, as stated in the article if you read it.

Now where are your stats and facts to discredit all this, aside from your "fanboy opinion"?

 

[Skrilla31]

Now where are your stats and facts to discredit all this, aside from your "fanboy opinion"?

All due respect your team has yet to provide a substantial argument in favor of the film's quality.

Without mentioning box office, without mentioning how popular the Joker was, without mentioning other people's opinions... explain to me how The Dark Knight is:

A) One of the best movies ever made.

B) Far beyond the rest of the superhero genre.

Preferably a few paragraphs, not a novel. Let's keep this simple.

 

[psylockolussus]

Wonder Woman is just fun, light, emotional and a crowd pleaser. TDK is overrated and way too serious.

 

[BH/HHH]

Wonder Woman is just fun, light, emotional and a crowd pleaser. TDK is overrated and way too serious.

I don't TDK is as good a film as Batman Begins personally. I also think as the years go on I really start to notice Nolan's editing is quite sloppy.

 

[Boom]

All due respect your team has yet to provide a substantial argument in favor of the film's quality.

Without mentioning box office, without mentioning how popular the Joker was, without mentioning other people's opinions... explain to me how The Dark Knight is:

A) One of the best movies ever made.

B) Far beyond the rest of the superhero genre.

Preferably a few paragraphs, not a novel. Let's keep this simple.

And you have yet to offer a substantial argument as to why the film is overrated and doesn't belong in the conversation.

Besides, how does the combination of box office totals, reviews, awards, and polls/surveys not provide a substantial argument in favor of the film's overall quality? That makes no sense. What else is there to measure a film's quality on, if not those factors? It's certainly more substantial than whatever argument you're trying to make. All I've seen you do is dismiss things without even bothering to provide a counterpoint.

But honestly, we can argue in circles all day about this. Probably best to simply agree to disagree and move on.

 

[The Shape]

I'm excited for the upcoming "Spider-man: Homecoming vs. The Dark Knight" thread.

 

[Skrilla31]

And you have yet to offer a substantial argument as to why the film is overrated and doesn't belong in the conversation.

Why doesn't TDK belong in the same conversation as The Godfather?

You mean aside from the fact that one is a drama and the other is an action movie?

Let's see:

- It's not as sophisticated.
- It's not as well written.
- It's not as well directed.
- It's not as dramatic.
- It had one memorable character.

 

[Boom]

Your argument is your personal opinion. So basically you have nothing to back up your claim.

Good talk.

 

[Skrilla31]

So your argument is your personal opinion. So basically you have nothing to back up your claim.

Good talk.

Are you aware of how a 'debate' works?

If you weren't allowed to offer your own personal opinion may I ask what else you would be doing on this forum?

 

[Boom]

Are you aware of how a 'debate' works?

If you weren't allowed to offer your own personal opinion may I ask what else you would be doing on this forum?

Usually debates have facts, figures, and statistics to back them up. You know, like people providing box office numbers, reviews, polls/surveys, awards, and so forth to prove The Dark Knight's overall quality and its reputation as the best superhero film ever made. Those are cold, hard facts to support that particular argument.

You seem perfectly content to dismiss all of those as being insignificant. Yet when you are asked to prove that TDK is overrated and undeserving of being considered an all-timer, your argument basically boils down to "because I said so." How exactly am I supposed to debate that?

 

[Skrilla31]

Usually debates have facts, figures, and statistics to back them up. You know, like people providing box office numbers, reviews, polls/surveys, awards, and so forth to prove The Dark Knight's overall quality and its reputation as the best superhero film ever made. Those are cold, hard facts to support that particular argument.

You seem perfectly content to dismiss all of those as being insignificant. Yet when you are asked to prove that TDK is overrated and undeserving of being considered an all-timer, your argument basically boils down to "because I said so." How exactly am I supposed to debate that?

There are no 'facts' and 'figures' in a subjective discussion.

I cannot prove that TDK is overrated, it is my opinion.

That's what these boards are for, to share our opinions.

 

[SnakeEyes]

Wonder Woman is a fun, action/adventure movie. Different from TDK. WW is more like Captain America:TFA.

 

[The Joker]

All due respect your team has yet to provide a substantial argument in favor of the film's quality.

What is your definition of a substantial argument? Because you've rejected hardcore statistics and praises from reputable sources, and according to you anything we say is just fanboy opinion.

Would me showing you a quote from a Hollywood giant like Steven Spielberg calling TDK a beautiful art film sway you? Because he did actually say that.

Without mentioning box office, without mentioning how popular the Joker was, without mentioning other people's opinions... explain to me how The Dark Knight is:

A) One of the best movies ever made.

B) Far beyond the rest of the superhero genre.

Preferably a few paragraphs, not a novel. Let's keep this simple.

Ok lets keep it simple for you. Start with the depth the movie has;

This movie is about exploring the consequences of Batman's presence on Gotham. That is why it was not meant to explore the Joker’s backstory because it’s really not that important to the film. Simply put, the Joker represents anarchy and chaos, a constant and near-unstoppable force whose origins are inexplicable (something which is made clear rather explicitly when the Joker delivers two creepily different monologues as to his scars’ origins). Many people compare Joker to other film and comic book villains but the one that I think he can be most closely associated with is Anton Chigurh from No Country for Old Men, who is a force of nature. His origins are unclear but his actions are strongly felt by those around him (to put it mildly).

The Joker is unpredictable and can’t be reasoned with, nor does he have any broader goals except to create chaos and destruction. The Joker upends the genre conventions of a villain in that he has no inhibitions and refuses to hew even to the ultra-basic moral code of criminals (see: the opening scene). When a character has no values that you as a viewer can relate to and hold on to, the results are extremely disorienting.

All of this comes to a head in the hospital scene, when Joker gives Harvey Dent the “It’s all part of the plan” monologue, a speech that’s chilling not just for its content and delivery, but also because of its incisive commentary for Americans.

The final monologue that Commissioner Gordon brings the themes from Batman Begins to their logical conclusion: Namely, that as a man, Bruce Wayne’s powers to evil crime are rather limited. As a man, he can be corrupted, he can be killed, and ultimately, he can be defeated. As a symbol he can become far more, and at the end of The Dark Knight, he becomes, to society, an uncontainable force in very much the same way the Joker was. He becomes hunted, making people believe that he cannot be controlled, that he has lost all respect for societal norms and the rule of law. As Gordon realizes he needs to blame the murders on Batman, he acknowledges not only the need for society to push their fears onto something, but their hopes as well (which he allows them to do by preserving Dent’s good name).

In order to keep from tearing itself to shreds, society needs to believe in the incorruptibility of good and the relative remoteness of evil. The Dark Knight points us to ways in which we cope with this need.

Simultaneously, it’s also made clear that, in fact, Batman never succumbs to his own dark, inner urges. In the movie, Bruce Wayne says the line, “I’ve seen what I have to become to fight men like him,” and he rejects the path he has to take to stop Joker, a man who has no rules whatsoever. In one of the more memorable scenes from the film, the two have a showdown in Gotham’s city streets, the Joker manically screaming “Hit me!” as Batman is propelled towards him in the bat pod. As much as Batman wants to annihilate the Joker, he knows he can’t violate his own moral code, and almost sacrifices himself to prevent this from happening (albeit as part of a broader ruse to capture him). Still, Batman doesn’t seek to kill evildoers, but to bring them to justice. The dichotomy that the film sets up between Joker and Batman is one of chaos vs. order. The dichotomy between Joker and Dent is one of good vs. evil.

At its best, The Dark Knight holds a mirror up to us as viewers and asks us to look closely, to examine ourselves as humans and as citizens. It doesn’t always do this gracefully, but it tries far more than any comic book movie in recent memory has ever done. The fact that it succeeds most of the time is a testament to Nolan’s script and artistry.

That's just the depth of the movie's story and themes. I haven't touched on the masterful acting from Ledger, Bale, Oldman, and Eckhart. Or the beautiful cinematography. Or the deep emotional weight of the movie.

Now if you want to purely put on your fanboy spectacles, and see why it's the best Batman movie, I'll keep it simple and ask you to read this. Don't worry it's in nice numbered paragraphs, and sums up my thoughts well;

http://www.cbr.com/the-dark-knight-15-reasons-its-the-best-batman-movie-ever/

 

[Boom]

There are no 'facts' and 'figures' in a subjective discussion.

Box office results prove that the film was a phenomenon with moviegoers. It was the first superhero film to crack $1 billion dollars, and it did so without 3D ticket prices or the shared universe concept.

Winning 45 of 67 film critic awards proves that it is the most critically acclaimed superhero film of all time.

Being nominated by the WGA, DGA, and PGA proves it was highly regarded among the Hollywood guilds. To my knowledge, the only other superhero film to hit the trifecta of WGA/DGA/PGA was Deadpool last year.

Being nominated for 10 Academy Awards proves it was highly regarded by the Academy, and that it is the most acclaimed superhero film in the history of the Academy Awards.

So when I say to you that The Dark Knight is one of the most financially successful superhero films of all time and is the most acclaimed superhero movie of all time, I have facts to back that argument up. There is quite literally no way to dispute what I just said.

Skrilla, I absolutely respect your opinion that TDK is overrated and that it doesn't belong in the conversation of being an all-timer. You are entitled to that opinion. All I have tried to do here is provide evidence as to why people might feel differently than you do. So even though you may personally disagree, you can at least see why the argument can be made for those people.

I think The Avengers is overrated. However, I cannot dispute the fact that it is the most financially successful superhero film of all time, is one of the most critically-acclaimed superhero movies of all time, and was both a cultural phenomenon and an industry game-changer. The numbers, the reviews, and the entire Hollywood landscape don't lie.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

I don't think TDK is overrated a movie within the superhero genre, just overrated as being a top film of all time.

I don't think TDK is in the same ballpark as The Godfather, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Empire Strikes Back,
Jaws, and The Shawshank Redemption, to name a few.

But it is arguably the most intense movie made in the superhero genre, and a thematic goldmine compared to the average superhero movie.

 

[BH/HHH]

I don't think TDK is overrated a movie within the superhero genre, just overrated as being a top film of all time.

I don't think TDK is in the same ballpark as The Godfather, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Empire Strikes Back,
Jaws, and The Shawshank Redemption, to name a few.

But it is arguably the most intense movie made in the superhero genre, and a thematic goldmine compared to the average superhero movie.

It's subjective anyway, if people think it is then that is there right same as people who think it isn't, etc.

Personally for me, I've over watched it and I notice it's flaws more than ever. But it's still a ****ing great film, IMO not the best in the genre but I won't argue with people who say it is. Same as I won't argue with people who rate the Exorcist as the best horror film, even though I'm not a fan etc.

However, I don't get why people need to use things like Empires best movie list to justify what at the end of the day is there own opinion. Let's say you ask a 100 people, 90 love it, 10 don't. That doesn't mean to those 10 that don't like it are wrong for thinking that.

 

[The Shape]

However, I don't get why people need to use things like Empires best movie list to justify what at the end of the day is there own opinion. Let's say you ask a 100 people, 90 love it, 10 don't. That doesn't mean to those 10 that don't like it are wrong for thinking that.

Very true, but the "majority opinion" seems to be a really important qualifier among fanboys and the Internet in general. Sort of a "mob/herd mentality", if you will.

 

[BH/HHH]

Very true, but the "majority opinion" seems to be a really important qualifier among fanboys and the Internet in general. Sort of a "mob/herd mentality", if you will.

It seems that way, I don't think there's a problem debating aspects of films etc but we're constantly seeing people arguing opinions. You can't argue whether or not someone should like or dislike a film. It's then when we start to see that mob herd mentality crop up.

 

[The Batman]

All due respect your team has yet to provide a substantial argument in favor of the film's quality.

All due respect, the irony in this statement is hilarious.

You dodge simple questions or statements, try to dismiss others using a consensus of professionals to prove a point...then turn around and do the same thing.

You really can't criticize the quality of anyone else's argument when yours has been so poor.

 

[The Joker]

However, I don't get why people need to use things like Empires best movie list to justify what at the end of the day is there own opinion.

Because it's not Empire's best movie list made up by their staff, it's a public voted list that Empire put out there to see what the public rate as the best. That is the movie going public talking. Not Empire.

Let's say you ask a 100 people, 90 love it, 10 don't. That doesn't mean to those 10 that don't like it are wrong for thinking that. You can't argue whether or not someone should like or dislike a film. It's then when we start to see that mob herd mentality crop up.

This seems to be a constant hang up with you, and one that is not even valid at that. If you can show one single post in this thread that has anyone saying it is wrong for someone to like any movie, then your argument is credible. Go ahead, please show us all where these posts are that are.

The only attempt made to discredit anyone's opinions was made here; http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=35336621&postcount=113

When thousands of opinions were deemed somehow inferior because they are "fanboy" opinions. So, being the great sports we are here, we offered up another source, one that could not be accused of being fanboy opinions;

http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=35336651&postcount=114

Box office results prove that the film was a phenomenon with moviegoers. It was the first superhero film to crack $1 billion dollars, and it did so without 3D ticket prices or the shared universe concept.

Winning 45 of 67 film critic awards proves that it is the most critically acclaimed superhero film of all time.

Being nominated by the WGA, DGA, and PGA proves it was highly regarded among the Hollywood guilds. To my knowledge, the only other superhero film to hit the trifecta of WGA/DGA/PGA was Deadpool last year.

Being nominated for 10 Academy Awards proves it was highly regarded by the Academy, and that it is the most highly-regarded superhero film in the history of the Academy Awards.

So when I say to you that The Dark Knight is one of the most financially successful superhero films of all time and is the most acclaimed superhero movie of all time, I have facts to back that argument up. There is quite literally no way to dispute what I just said.

Skrilla, I absolutely respect your opinion that TDK is overrated and that it doesn't belong in the conversation of being an all-timer. You are entitled to that opinion. All I have tried to do here is provide evidence as to why people might feel differently than you do. So even though you may personally disagree, you can at least see why the argument can be made for those people.

I think The Avengers is overrated. However, I cannot dispute the fact that it is the most financially successful superhero film of all time, is one of the most critically-acclaimed superhero movies of all time, and was both a cultural phenomenon and an industry game-changer. The numbers, the reviews, and the entire Hollywood landscape don't lie.

 

[BH/HHH]

Because it's not Empire's best movie list made up by their staff, it's a public voted list that Empire put out there to see what the public rate as the best. That is the movie going public talking. Not Empire.

It's still people's opinions at the end of the day. If you need it to validate your opinion then five but it doesn't change the fact that for sone people it isn't one of the greatest films if all time (for which I am not one of those). A list like this does not make it so, it all comes Disney to opinion.

This seems to be a constant hang up with you, and one that is not even valid at that. If you can show one single post in this thread that has anyone saying it is wrong for someone to like any movie, then your argument is credible. Go ahead, please show us all where these posts are that are.

The only attempt made to discredit anyone's opinions was made here; http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=35336621&postcount=113

When thousands of opinions were deemed somehow inferior because they are "fanboy" opinions. So, being the great sports we are here, we offered up another source, one that could not be accused of being fanboy opinions;

http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=35336651&postcount=114

Hang up? that is damn ironic coming from you . Don't like what I say then put me in ignore.

But people are arguing opinions, if one poster doesn't think it's one of the greatest there's clearly people attempting to prove other's wrong by showing things like that Empire article. You yourself in a post question so doves taste because they love Val Kilmer's Batman. So what if they do, that doesn't make your tastes anymore valid.

To be quite frank I think it's rather pathetic.

 

[The Joker]

It's still people's opinions at the end of the day. If you need it to validate your opinion then five but it doesn't change the fact that for sone people it isn't one of the greatest films if all time (for which I am not one of those). A list like this does not make it so, it all comes Disney to opinion.

There's a massive difference between the opinions of a few people on Empire's staff, and thousands of movie going people in the public. A list like that shows that this is not some fanboy made list.

If you are going to claim something is unworthy or undeserving of praise, then just saying it doesn't make for a convincing argument. They can believe it all they want, but if they're going to waltz in here and dismiss the opinions of so many people as simply being fanboys, then you present your lists like this to counter act such nonsense claims.

Hang up? that is damn ironic coming from you.

Are you going to elaborate on that, or just leave it as vague and unconvincing?

Don't like what I say then put me in ignore.

Now why would I do that? I'm not so weak willed that I have to ignore what you say, especially when I can call you out on it and show that you haven't got a lick of proof to substantiate these claims.

But people are arguing opinions

I know. You'd swear this was a discussion forum or something. Crazy.

if one poster doesn't think it's one of the greatest there's clearly people attempting to prove other's wrong by showing things like that Empire article.

No, that's people doing what the other side is not; adding credibility to their argument by posting proof of the praise and success the truly all time great movies get. That's what you do when you want to support an argument.

You yourself in a post question so doves taste because they love Val Kilmer's Batman. So what if they do, that doesn't make your tastes anymore valid.

No, when someone comes along and dismisses other people's opinions as simply being "fanboy", citing their love for Kilmer's Batman is using their own logic against them because not only is what they are saying here a "fanboys" opinion, but they also have one of the most unpopular opinions in the fan community.

It's called using someone's own logic against them.

To be quite frank I think it's rather pathetic.

Interesting judgement coming from someone who heavily took part in a thread designed on another forum to slag off the admin staff and members of this forum.

 

[Batmannerism]

Okay, so to get back to the original topic......from the poll TDK is the clear favorite.

Of course, that begs the question "why?"

What is it about TDK that makes it better than WW ?

Bale vs Gadot ? Gotta go with Bale, as he's performing a multifaceted role and personally I don't think he got enough credit for it.

Gadot, well there's a little bit of the old Christopher Reeve Superman about her - but whereas Reeve was a very good actor, she's merely a decent one, albeit she does a lot with that role. What I mean is that she's probably going to embody WW for an entire generation (well, who didn't grow up with Lynda Carter) and she's extremely likeable as the character.

The one moment where I feel like she falls flat is when she goes back to the village that's been gassed - she almost pulls off WW's reaction, but not quite .

Because I found the supporting cast and villains really weak in WW, Gal shines even brighter - good on her !


Action: Well in terms of fight choreography WW is definitely better, but in terms of overall action scenes gotta go with TDK (because to me an action scene needs more than just punches, kicks, shooting and sword swinging, there needs to be tension and drama too). Because Nolan did so much of TDK using practical effects the action scenes feel like they've got some stakes - unlike pure CGI battles (which was what ruined the Hobbit movies for me, and I was in one of them)


TDK has a pretty amazing car chase and the Pruitt building rescue is spectacular - and also very authentic Batman, if you think about it, because he uses a combination of brains, fists and gadgets to neutralize all the threats without killing anyone, I would argue that this is MUCH closer to the spirit of the character - even Miller's Dark Knight wasn't a killer ! Sure there are no fancy kicks or pretty choreography, but that was part of Nolan's approach.

Having said that the way GG moves and fights is pretty much how I always imagined she'd move and fight - she's a whirlwind of destruction. The bit where she liberates the town is pretty damn impressive.


Supporting cast: To be honest I feel that Gal pretty much carried the WW movie by herself. Chris Pine was okay, but most of his dialogue was very poorly written and terribly timed. The moment where he tells her he loves her - as he rushes off to certain death - just doesn't hit the right note.
The bit where he tries to sweet talk Dr. Poison was just painful. ugh.

Gotta give TDK a huge edge here, and we're not even talking about Ledger yet. Freeman, Oldman and Caine absolutely bring it.


Music: I think the WW guitar riff is going to become iconic with time - However, got to give Zimmer the edge for TDK, I felt this was his best work on the trilogy ( I found the TDKR theme a bit overblown).

The Joker's theme really seals this one.


Storytelling: TDK does drag in a few parts, and I feel like it could have been 5-10 minutes shorter without losing anything important. However, there are sensible peaks and troughs in the drama to keep the audience engaged.

WW has a very strong opening and second act, but I wasn't glued to my seat. Good storytelling, but not great.

I think both films have a few equally prepostorous moments, but hey they're cbms.


Villains: okay not even close. Ledger's Joker is one of the great screen villains of all time. In WW I didn't find any of the villains anything more than cardboard cut-outs, even Ares wasn't particularly memorable. Danny Huston's character was well acted, but such a one-note bad guy, ugh.




Now in terms of where I stand on TDK, the following is my opinion:

TDK is the Godfather......the Godfather of cbms. The movie is great, slow but great. The book, well it's one of those that you start reading and can't put down.

 

[BH/HHH]

There's a massive difference between the opinions of a few people on Empire's staff, and thousands of movie going people in the public. A list like that shows that this is not some fanboy made list.

If you are going to claim something is unworthy or undeserving of praise, then just saying it doesn't make for a convincing argument. They can believe it all they want, but if they're going to waltz in here and dismiss the opinions of so many people as simply being fanboys, then you present your lists like this to counter act such nonsense claims.

Where did I claim that? I'm merely pointing out that if 1 person doesn't like a film then that is there right. To them it's not a good film. Therefore if 9 other people say it's great that doesn't mean that 1 person has to backdown and say they're wrong for disliking something. And vice versa!

Are you going to elaborate on that, or just leave it as vague and unconvincing?

You quite cleverly mock people in posts all the time like the Kilmer dig at skrilla. It held no relevance to the conversation and came off as a petty jab.

Now why would I do that? I'm not so weak willed that I have to ignore what you say, especially when I can call you out on it and show that you haven't got a lick of proof to substantiate these claims.

Uh huh, you just enjoy telling people to post on other forums because you don't like what they say.

I know. You'd swear this was a discussion forum or something. Crazy.

There's a way to do it though. People aren't wrong for liking or disliking something.

No, that's people doing what the other side is not; adding credibility to their argument by posting proof of the praise and success the truly all time great movies get. That's what you do when you want to support an argument.

But just because other people say something is good if someone doesn't like it then it isn't for them. What don't you get? So if I like something you don't I just need a bunch of others to agree with me and you're wrong for disliking it?

No, when someone comes along and dismisses other people's opinions as simply being "fanboy", citing their love for Kilmer's Batman is using their own logic against them because not only is what they are saying here a "fanboys" opinion, but they also have one of the most unpopular opinions in the fan community.]

It's called using someone's own logic against them.

But that's there opinion why does it have to be popular to make there opinions on other films valid? That is really petty.

]Interesting judgement coming from someone who heavily took part in a thread designed on another forum to slag off the admin staff and members of this forum.

The forum you're constantly telling people to go to cause you don't like them liking something you don't. End of the day that thread was for people to air there grievances with this site and the way it's going. They're allowed to! In any case it's clear you're visiting there quite often isn't it?

 

[The Joker]

Where did I claim that? I'm merely pointing out that if 1 person doesn't like a film then that is there right. To them it's not a good film. Therefore if 9 other people say it's great that doesn't mean that 1 person has to backdown and say they're wrong for disliking something. And vice versa!

And who said they didn't have the right to say that? Seriously, this is what is so perplexing about your posts on this. You are talking about things that have not happened. If someone wants to think it's the worst movie ever made, they can. Nobody said they don't have the right to their opinion.

You quite cleverly mock people in posts all the time like the Kilmer dig at skrilla. It held no relevance to the conversation and came off as a petty jab.

I wouldn't have lasted 14 years on this forum if I was constantly mocking people. What I said is not mocking, that's pointing out irony. And it was totally relevant when someone dismisses 'fanboy opinion' about TDK being the best Batman movie, but can claim Kilmer is the best Batman.

Uh huh, you just enjoy telling people to post on other forums because you don't like what they say.

Can you please show me where I tell people to go post on other forums

I am assuming this is based solely on the recent post to The Manhunter, who said he feels he has to keep posting here to counteract all the negativity, and I said if he felt that way, maybe he should look elsewhere, because nobody should feel they have to post because they find a forum so negative.

There's a way to do it though. People aren't wrong for liking or disliking something.

And again, please show us all where anyone said they were. Seriously because I want to see your basis for this.

But just because other people say something is good if someone doesn't like it then it isn't for them. What don't you get? So if I like something you don't I just need a bunch of others to agree with me and you're wrong for disliking it?

BH/HHH, nobody said a movie has to be for them. Nobody said they were wrong if they don't like it. Nobody is saying any of the things you seem to have issue with. That's why your interjection of protest into this discussion is so out of place and perplexing. It's like you're reading a different convo to the rest of us.

But that's there opinion why does it have to be popular to make there opinions on other films valid? That is really petty.

It doesn't. That's the whole point. Said person was dismissing other people's opinions simply because they were "fanboy". Where is your outrage at this, since you are all about equal rights for opinions?

The forum you're constantly telling people to go to cause you don't like them liking something you don't.

Where am I CONSTANTLY telling people to go there? If you're going to make accusations like this, then post proof.

End of the day that thread was for people to air there grievances with this site and the way it's going. They're allowed to!

Oh yeah, they're allowed to slag off members, call them names, insult the admin staff etc. Very classy. Posting public voted lists about movies to show their popularity and status with the public, that's pathetic, but a thread made to spew bile about other members and admin staff, that's class all the way.

In any case it's clear you're visiting there quite often isn't it?

Because I saw that one thread (which one of your fellow members there who posts here PM'ed me about to show me) that means I visit regularly? Can you explain the "logic" in that?

Okay, so to get back to the original topic......from the poll TDK is the clear favorite.

Of course, that begs the question "why?"

What is it about TDK that makes it better than WW ?

Bale vs Gadot ? Gotta go with Bale, as he's performing a multifaceted role and personally I don't think he got enough credit for it.

Gadot, well there's a little bit of the old Christopher Reeve Superman about her - but whereas Reeve was a very good actor, she's merely a decent one, albeit she does a lot with that role. What I mean is that she's probably going to embody WW for an entire generation (well, who didn't grow up with Lynda Carter) and she's extremely likeable as the character.

The one moment where I feel like she falls flat is when she goes back to the village that's been gassed - she almost pulls off WW's reaction, but not quite .

Because I found the supporting cast and villains really weak in WW, Gal shines even brighter - good on her !


Action: Well in terms of fight choreography WW is definitely better, but in terms of overall action scenes gotta go with TDK (because to me an action scene needs more than just punches, kicks, shooting and sword swinging, there needs to be tension and drama too). Because Nolan did so much of TDK using practical effects the action scenes feel like they've got some stakes - unlike pure CGI battles (which was what ruined the Hobbit movies for me, and I was in one of them)


TDK has a pretty amazing car chase and the Pruitt building rescue is spectacular - and also very authentic Batman, if you think about it, because he uses a combination of brains, fists and gadgets to neutralize all the threats without killing anyone, I would argue that this is MUCH closer to the spirit of the character - even Miller's Dark Knight wasn't a killer ! Sure there are no fancy kicks or pretty choreography, but that was part of Nolan's approach.

Having said that the way GG moves and fights is pretty much how I always imagined she'd move and fight - she's a whirlwind of destruction. The bit where she liberates the town is pretty damn impressive.


Supporting cast: To be honest I feel that Gal pretty much carried the WW movie by herself. Chris Pine was okay, but most of his dialogue was very poorly written and terribly timed. The moment where he tells her he loves her - as he rushes off to certain death - just doesn't hit the right note.
The bit where he tries to sweet talk Dr. Poison was just painful. ugh.

Gotta give TDK a huge edge here, and we're not even talking about Ledger yet. Freeman, Oldman and Caine absolutely bring it.


Music: I think the WW guitar riff is going to become iconic with time - However, got to give Zimmer the edge for TDK, I felt this was his best work on the trilogy ( I found the TDKR theme a bit overblown).

The Joker's theme really seals this one.


Storytelling: TDK does drag in a few parts, and I feel like it could have been 5-10 minutes shorter without losing anything important. However, there are sensible peaks and troughs in the drama to keep the audience engaged.

WW has a very strong opening and second act, but I wasn't glued to my seat. Good storytelling, but not great.

I think both films have a few equally prepostorous moments, but hey they're cbms.


Villains: okay not even close. Ledger's Joker is one of the great screen villains of all time. In WW I didn't find any of the villains anything more than cardboard cut-outs, even Ares wasn't particularly memorable. Danny Huston's character was well acted, but such a one-note bad guy, ugh.




Now in terms of where I stand on TDK, the following is my opinion:

TDK is the Godfather......the Godfather of cbms. The movie is great, slow but great. The book, well it's one of those that you start reading and can't put down.