The Dark Knight
- Thread starter thehappyhippyyy
- Start date
christina126
Active Member
- Joined
- May 20, 2005
- Messages
- 7,315
- Reaction score
- 1
I REALLY want to see this movie. Wanted to see it tonight but it was sold out!! Might try again in a few days.
TheGlassAngel
VSFS 2009!
- Joined
- Aug 1, 2005
- Messages
- 15,353
- Reaction score
- 41
thehappyhippyyy
Member
- Joined
- Jul 7, 2008
- Messages
- 965
- Reaction score
- 2
AH im sad i didnt get to get on here earlier, and discuss this!
i knew this film was going to break spidey3 hahah.
amazing film. amazingamazingamazing, if you havent seen it yet, go see it.
if you did, what was your favourite part?!
i knew this film was going to break spidey3 hahah.
amazing film. amazingamazingamazing, if you havent seen it yet, go see it.
if you did, what was your favourite part?!
thelittlemermaid
Member
- Joined
- May 2, 2006
- Messages
- 394
- Reaction score
- 0
I thought it was amazing! Heath was amazing! 
But you know the release of a much awaited film tends to drive fans into a frenzy, so basically this is just the initial reaction.
When POTC 3 first came out it was on the list, by the second week it was already out. Haters and trolls on those boards are already trying to lower the score. It was amazing. The 'morality play' was truly interesting.
simple_elegance
Active Member
- Joined
- Jul 26, 2005
- Messages
- 4,328
- Reaction score
- 6
my mind...it is BLOWN.
just give Heath his damn Oscar right now. don't wait for February, just give it to him NOW. what a wonderful way to go out. (though he really should still be here to continue giving us incredible performances.)
just give Heath his damn Oscar right now. don't wait for February, just give it to him NOW. what a wonderful way to go out. (though he really should still be here to continue giving us incredible performances.)
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2005
- Messages
- 23,482
- Reaction score
- 411
^^Yes LOTR: FOTR was also #1 for a while before being pulled down. It's always fun watching a film overtake all others for even a moment, though.
LOTR: FOTR was also #1 for a while before being pulled down. It's always fun watching a film overtake all others for even a moment, though.ChloeFrancoise
Active Member
- Joined
- Jan 7, 2008
- Messages
- 1,514
- Reaction score
- 1
I wouldn't mind seeing him get the Oscar but I really wish he was around for it. 
I wish I could go again to see it in the Imax theater.
I wish I could go again to see it in the Imax theater.dior_couture1245
Fat Karl
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2006
- Messages
- 9,225
- Reaction score
- 4,764
...I didn't like it very much. I was very disappointed because I thought the first one was incredible.
I really believe that everyone is seeing this film through the haze of excitement and that is why so many people are saying it's amazing, because I personally don't think it is.
It's taken me about a day to finalize my thoughts as to why I didn't like it...and here's why.
1. Too much subplot and not enough solid plot. I mean, I get that the overarching story was the Joker wreaking havoc, but there was so many other useless characters and scenes that I couldn't quite fully grasp what was going on. For example, that Italian mafia guy...who was he? I really feel the plot would have been more solid, more clear, and more impacting had these little loose threads had either been tied neatly at the end or simply cut out all together.
2. WHERE WAS BATMAN?!?!?!?! This was the Heath Ledger show and Batman/ Bruce Wayne just happen to be in the picture. The first film was so great in balancing Bruce Wayne and Batman...there was no Wayne in this movie, which makes no sence at all...and it was really disappointed, to be honest. Bale is so great...why cut him out of the movie?
3. This film was far too sadistic. I'm not a wimp...I can handle an intense film...but I feel as though Nolan and the rest of the crew felt like torturing the audience for the sake of torturing the audience. It was just one thing after another...this person dies, and then another person dies, and then this blows up and then those guys capture this person, it was just too much for me to handle emotionally for two and half hours. The first film was far from light, but it still didn't feel like a burden...you didn't feel disgusting after you watched it. After seeing Dark Knight, I felt as though I had participated in all the crime by allowing it to happen, so to speak.
4. I STRONGLY believe everyone has fallen such a victim to the hype that they already convinced themselves that Heath would be AMAZING. Don't get me wrong, he was good. He was so convincing a creep...you really were disturbed by him. However...I really don't understand what was so incredible about his performance? He's not the first actor to play a convincing creep, nor will he be the last. What is it that I'm missing? He was good...but what was so phenomenally special about it. Plus, after a while, I couldn't watch him anymore. Not that you generally want to root for a villain, but you still should want to see him/her...in Batman Begins, Liam Neeson was a great villain, he was in no way someone you rooted for, but he had charisma...you wanted to watch him. I really didn't want to see the Joker...there was no likability factor to him. Not that I sympathized with Liam, but...Joker was just too repulsive to even care about.
5. Where was the CHARM!?!?!?! The first movie...you just felt fantastic afterwards! You had experienced a intense yet extremely rewarding ride. With the Dark Knight...I felt exhausted, dirty, cheated and upset afterwards. I understand that this was all about "the dark before the light," however...there was no perceived sense of hope at the end of the movie. I certainly don't want to see it again...and I saw Batman Begins 5 times in theaters.
I wanted to like it SO much, I really did. I thought Batman Begins was phenomenal, but I feel like the filmmakers were trying really hard to top the first one and just went too overboard.
I really believe that everyone is seeing this film through the haze of excitement and that is why so many people are saying it's amazing, because I personally don't think it is.
It's taken me about a day to finalize my thoughts as to why I didn't like it...and here's why.
1. Too much subplot and not enough solid plot. I mean, I get that the overarching story was the Joker wreaking havoc, but there was so many other useless characters and scenes that I couldn't quite fully grasp what was going on. For example, that Italian mafia guy...who was he? I really feel the plot would have been more solid, more clear, and more impacting had these little loose threads had either been tied neatly at the end or simply cut out all together.
2. WHERE WAS BATMAN?!?!?!?! This was the Heath Ledger show and Batman/ Bruce Wayne just happen to be in the picture. The first film was so great in balancing Bruce Wayne and Batman...there was no Wayne in this movie, which makes no sence at all...and it was really disappointed, to be honest. Bale is so great...why cut him out of the movie?
3. This film was far too sadistic. I'm not a wimp...I can handle an intense film...but I feel as though Nolan and the rest of the crew felt like torturing the audience for the sake of torturing the audience. It was just one thing after another...this person dies, and then another person dies, and then this blows up and then those guys capture this person, it was just too much for me to handle emotionally for two and half hours. The first film was far from light, but it still didn't feel like a burden...you didn't feel disgusting after you watched it. After seeing Dark Knight, I felt as though I had participated in all the crime by allowing it to happen, so to speak.
4. I STRONGLY believe everyone has fallen such a victim to the hype that they already convinced themselves that Heath would be AMAZING. Don't get me wrong, he was good. He was so convincing a creep...you really were disturbed by him. However...I really don't understand what was so incredible about his performance? He's not the first actor to play a convincing creep, nor will he be the last. What is it that I'm missing? He was good...but what was so phenomenally special about it. Plus, after a while, I couldn't watch him anymore. Not that you generally want to root for a villain, but you still should want to see him/her...in Batman Begins, Liam Neeson was a great villain, he was in no way someone you rooted for, but he had charisma...you wanted to watch him. I really didn't want to see the Joker...there was no likability factor to him. Not that I sympathized with Liam, but...Joker was just too repulsive to even care about.
5. Where was the CHARM!?!?!?! The first movie...you just felt fantastic afterwards! You had experienced a intense yet extremely rewarding ride. With the Dark Knight...I felt exhausted, dirty, cheated and upset afterwards. I understand that this was all about "the dark before the light," however...there was no perceived sense of hope at the end of the movie. I certainly don't want to see it again...and I saw Batman Begins 5 times in theaters.
I wanted to like it SO much, I really did. I thought Batman Begins was phenomenal, but I feel like the filmmakers were trying really hard to top the first one and just went too overboard.
Last edited by a moderator:
D
Deleted member 98391
Guest
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2005
- Messages
- 23,482
- Reaction score
- 411
I do believe that this was the point of the film, actually - to bring realism to a genre by serving as the antithesis of superhero films. I think in recent times we've seen title characters' flaws/struggles portrayed more and more extremely, and I actually think this resonates with a great amount of audiences...and TDK just brought everything to a level that one just can't help but be affected by. In the end, it actually inspires more thought than a hopeful ending -- how would society function under chaos? Under the wing of a vigilante? Under such desperate times? The film does not provide clear answers, yet it prepares us for the worst.
As someone I know said to me yesterday, "If you wanted to feel innocent and joyous this weekend, I guess you should've seen Mama Mia instead!"
And I think this excerpt of Roger Ebert's review may help appease some of your concerns best:
Last edited by a moderator:
Luxx
oh me, oh my
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2005
- Messages
- 7,284
- Reaction score
- 37
I felt dirty and cheap, even though I'd spent a good $24...
But you ARE dirty and cheap.
And I say that with love. You're juggling Bruce Wayne, Nick Naylor, Harvey Dent, Laurie and Don Draper. You're kinda busy...
Faith, that Ebert review reads like poetry.
Last edited by a moderator:
D
Deleted member 98391
Guest
But you ARE dirty and cheap.
And I say that with love. You're juggling Bruce Wayne, Nick Naylor, Harvey Dent, Laurie and Don Draper. You're kinda busy...
But, but... some of them are being juggled together! It's not all about me...
- Joined
- Sep 15, 2005
- Messages
- 23,482
- Reaction score
- 411
Also wanted to mention this after rereading the critique 
Personally, I thought that was done purposefully -- the sole reason people sympathize with the Joker now is because of Heath's passing, but imho that wasn't supposed to happen throughout the film. He had no clear past (No record whatsoever, lies about how he got his scars), no limits to his evildoings, absolutely no room for our sympathy in the direction the film went in. Harvey/Two-face was supposed to be the only villain worth caring about, and because of his "fallen" status we can manage that easily. But now, the game has changed...we're watching a final performance for a young actor, and there's no stopping what kind of emotions that causes within ourselves. The magic of Heath's performance was supposed to be that you end up not caring about the Joker whatsoever...despite the fact that Heath himself has portrayed many roles that were audience-favorites. But due to unforseen circumstances, the result is now somewhat different than what everyone originally expected. You end up feeling sad for Joker, but not because of the Joker's past -- because of the young man behind the makeup.
So overall, I think the feelings you had felt about the Joker were actually the right ones Nolan meant for everyone to experience His performance was absolutely thrilling, but I can't help but wonder if the true intentions of his performance was somewhat redirected...
Personally, I thought that was done purposefully -- the sole reason people sympathize with the Joker now is because of Heath's passing, but imho that wasn't supposed to happen throughout the film. He had no clear past (No record whatsoever, lies about how he got his scars), no limits to his evildoings, absolutely no room for our sympathy in the direction the film went in. Harvey/Two-face was supposed to be the only villain worth caring about, and because of his "fallen" status we can manage that easily. But now, the game has changed...we're watching a final performance for a young actor, and there's no stopping what kind of emotions that causes within ourselves. The magic of Heath's performance was supposed to be that you end up not caring about the Joker whatsoever...despite the fact that Heath himself has portrayed many roles that were audience-favorites. But due to unforseen circumstances, the result is now somewhat different than what everyone originally expected. You end up feeling sad for Joker, but not because of the Joker's past -- because of the young man behind the makeup.
So overall, I think the feelings you had felt about the Joker were actually the right ones Nolan meant for everyone to experience
His performance was absolutely thrilling, but I can't help but wonder if the true intentions of his performance was somewhat redirected...
Last edited by a moderator:
Luxx
oh me, oh my
- Joined
- Aug 7, 2005
- Messages
- 7,284
- Reaction score
- 37
Deerlike, you should learn how to be a one man kinda woman.
HOOTCHIE.
I also feel as though the characterization of the Joker was done very much on purpose. The lack of backstory sets him up as a sort of ultimate evil - when you sympathize with the villain it lends them a humanity. The Joker is almost sub-human in that he just doesn't care for or about anything. It was an incredibly nihilist depiction of a character that can be don in many ways. Lets face it we've seen the sort of very comical version of the Joker several times. This was a new creation - something much darker and more sinister and I appreciated that because its very realistic. No one is pure evil in real life of course but there are people who for whatever reason are just unhinged enough to want complete anarchy and destruction. That for me at least is much more frightening than the stock comic book villains.
I did feel though that Heath brought likeability to his role - there is a alot of comedy but its all very dark. Things like the pencil trick and so on so forth that are actually quite humorous as long as you're not squeamish. I know I laughed but I've been told my humor runs towards being rather macabre.
HOOTCHIE.
I also feel as though the characterization of the Joker was done very much on purpose. The lack of backstory sets him up as a sort of ultimate evil - when you sympathize with the villain it lends them a humanity. The Joker is almost sub-human in that he just doesn't care for or about anything. It was an incredibly nihilist depiction of a character that can be don in many ways. Lets face it we've seen the sort of very comical version of the Joker several times. This was a new creation - something much darker and more sinister and I appreciated that because its very realistic. No one is pure evil in real life of course but there are people who for whatever reason are just unhinged enough to want complete anarchy and destruction. That for me at least is much more frightening than the stock comic book villains.
I did feel though that Heath brought likeability to his role - there is a alot of comedy but its all very dark. Things like the pencil trick and so on so forth that are actually quite humorous as long as you're not squeamish. I know I laughed but I've been told my humor runs towards being rather macabre.
Last edited by a moderator:
dior_couture1245
Fat Karl
- Joined
- Jan 30, 2006
- Messages
- 9,225
- Reaction score
- 4,764
I agree...it was a thought provoking movie...in fact, the parts I liked were ones involving Harvey Dent (Ekhart deserves the hype, not Ledger...Ekhart was incredible...but then again, Ekhart is always fantastic) and his dealing with trying to do what is right and his eventual downfall.
The exploration of chaos had potential...but for me, there was too much going on (I know that sounds horribly ironic, but chaos could have been successfully portrayed without the audience's experience being so chaotic.)
I'm surprised, myself, I didn't like it. I'm usually more of a fan of serious, thought provoking, not-'easy' films...this one just rubbed me the wrong way...maybe it was the hype.
Similar Threads
- Locked
