Dark Knight is pretty damn good.

This movie is great. I scoffed w/all the BS about Ironman being the best comic book movie ever. This one may well be, at least amongst the best. Ledger is awesome, it's not just posthumous hype and Bale and Eckhart are pretty good. Replacement Rachel was not so great but she doesn't really have that important a role anyway. The movie is also perhaps a touch too long.

I strongly suggest you see it. I didn't think too much about it afterwards or anything but it was one of the more enjoyable 2 1/2 hours in quite some time. Virtually all of it was really nailed.

One thing I really appreciated is the fact that the plot did not revolve around any huge pseudo-apocalyptic scenario, as even the first one did. It really put the focus on the characters, as it should be.

It's not just posthumous hype, but there is definitely posthumous hype. I thought the Joker was extremely well written. I think Ledger did a fantastic job bringing him to life. But people's opinions are being unconsciously affected by his death - I have no doubt about that (partially because that's what I study).

And Maggie Gyllenhaal is far far better than Katie Holmes.

-MMM

She is better, but Holmes was pretty meh too.

Just got back from seeing it in IMAX. Awesome! The movie felt like it was all Frank Miller.

And I agree with Gary in that there was none of that "comic-book" crap like the train scene in the first one.

Maggie was ok, but then anything is better then old "wall-eye".

Again, I must say, if you can see it in IMAX, do it. Awesome!!!

Tim Burton's Batman films will never be topped.

Pretty Damn good or great?
Make up your mind.

The Wife and I both loved this one.

Neither of us are big Batman fans, and actually hadnt seen Batman Begins, so we kinda had to figure out a few things, but nothing major (like who the heck Rachel is to Bruce).

Sure lots of hype, but really I think it's justified. The movie's great, and certainly my favorite in the franchise. Ledger's Joker is better to me than even Nicholson's - and after talking about it, I think it's because Ledger's is more or a stretch for him. He's a pretty boy Aussie - and comes across as terrifying.

Other notes include:
-look, characters are great and all, but I LOVED the chase scene - awesome
-this was a STRONG PG-13, I don't have kids, but I wouldnt let MY kid see that.
-really liked the Bale Batman, he was very believalbe both as the super hero and as Bruce.
-I thought the overall themes/messages of the movie were solid and incorporated very well thoughout. and I didnt feel preached at.
-I thought the movie was ending about 1 1/2 hours in, and was so tense and invested that as every scene ended, I was hoping for just one more. The time flew by.

jdevowe wrote:

Tim Burton's Batman films will never be topped.

They were already topped with Batman Begins.

THE DARK KNIGHT is a masterpiece. To compare it to popcorn Corporate marketing movies and CGI demo reels like SPIDER-MAN or IRON MAN really does the quality of writing, acting, production, and raw filmmaking in THE DARK KNIGHT a great disservice- the film deserves to be discussed in the company of great crime films like HEAT, DIRTY HARRY, and THE FRENCH CONNECTION more than even the best of the recent comic films. It's a _great crime film_, and it is the Batman movie I've wanted ever since I read books like THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS back in the 80s and realized that comics could be gritty, dark, relevant, and complex.

In context of the comic book film, it completely upends everything audiences expect from Batman as well as "superhero" fiction- this is not the wish fulfillment fantasy that most superhero fiction targets. You've got to remember that a large percentage of the audience seeing this film knows very little about Batman other than the Burton films (bad), the Joel Schumacher films (worse) and the Adam West show (worst). Most audiences are still under the assumption that comic book titles are gee whiz funtimes for kiddies. I actually saw one reviewer fault the movie for not being "fun"...guess he never read Miller.

BATMAN BEGINS was great. But it was a Bruce Wayne movie more than a Batman movie. THE DARK KNIGHT is about Batman and what he represents.

There's really too much to even discuss in terms of what made it great- it's a lot of greats together so I may just babble a bit here. Sure, there's some nitpicks I have but really, they're so minor and irrelevant in the face of 2.5 hours of masterful filmmaking that I don't care to discuss them. If we went back and picked nits over every great film ever made, we'd have no great films and just a bunch of internet bitching and grousing in their place.

The Joker. Needless to say, it's an amazing performance and it's not just the posthumous hype. I think Ledger was literally as good in the role as any other performance I've ever seen in any film. The writing of The Joker helped a lot- he was _so_ well written it was ridiculous- so nuanced, complex, and rich. In particular, I thought it was _masterful_ that he gives two explanations for the scarring- one provokes the "oh, he was a childhood victim of cruelty" explanation, but the other completely turns that over. And we never know what the truth is. I also thought it was amazing that they managed to capture everything that makes The Joker who is and grounding it in reality. The scene where he walks out of the hospital in the nurse costume and _people run in terror_ may be the single best Joker moment in the picture.

Something I'm kind of surprised that no one has mentioned is that The Joker has a lot in common with Scorpio from the first Dirty Harry film- very similar in a lot of ways.

I thought it was really interesting that it was a gritty, ruthless, dark, and brutal film...but there's no gore, no bad language, and very little violence. The Joker's worst happens off screen...but the impression of it is so strong, it feels like we've seen it. Seriously, the next time you watch it, note how we never really see graphic violence...but the specter of graphic violence is there. It's almost kind of old fashioned, in a way.

The middle third of the picture was where it went from "great" to "Oh my fucking god this is a masterpiece". The complex, elaborate plotting leading up to catching the Joker was some of the most gripping, intense filmmaking I've seen in a while. The chase scene was stupendously great and the resolution exhilirating, cathartic, and frustrating all at the same time.

I actually didn't know Two-Face's whole story arc was in the film...and it was extremely well done. Aaron Eckhart was terrific, I think this role will get him some very nice work in the next few years.

Best scene? Batman and the Joker in the interrogation cell, almost hands down was the best scene for me. When he pulled that chair up to the door...oh man.

Just a great, great film. So far, it's the best film of 2008 and frankly I don't see anything immediate that might top it. It's got a shot at being one of my Top 20 favorites. It may already be there.

Glad you jogged my memory, Barnes. That bit about the Joker's two explinations was one of my favorite details tossed in.

As for my favorite Joker gag?

Watch as I make this pencil disappear!

That coming after only the brief introduction of who this Joker was going to be, I think, set everything up nicely. Our audience audibly cringed and laughed. That's *my* Joker - he makes me wince but ya gotta acknowledge the wit he puts into his schemes.

So many great scenes...

The interesting thing about The Joker's "origin", other than the fact that we're not subjected to a 45-60 minute over-explained buildup to tell the audience why he is what he is (all other comic book films, I'm looking at you), is that it really inverts one of the core comic book ideas- the sympathetic freak as villain. Batman has always faced villains that have a certain degree of pathos, they're almost justified in their behavior in a way. Look at Mr. Freeze and Ra's Al Ghul- bad guys who act out of love (as well as megalomania) and kind of just got dealt a bad hand. The new Joker is like an inevitable symptom of societal breakdown, an absurd and ultimately nihilistic sign that represents a complete disassociation of evil and lawlessness from any sense of meaning or degree of control. "Some men just want to watch the world burn", says Alfred...and when we set him set all that money on fire, it's clear that this character is far beyond the cackling, bank-robbing "Clown Prince of Crime" we've seen before.

One thing that was done extremely well too was to extend the presence of The Joker throughout the entire film...it feels like he can show up anywhere at any time and cause massive harm. The scene with the pencil, coming right after we see him wipe out the accomplices in the bank heist, really kind of sets the rules for his character- there aren't any. He'll do anything and almost completely without pretext or warning. And what's worse, without meaning or even motives. That makes him a very, very dangerous figure.

It would have been so easy to go WAY over the top with the character...and I'm really completely astounded at how much subtlety and restraint they treat him with. Little things like the fact that he's recruiting schizophrenics or that he has his clothes made hint at a larger character that we never really know- nor need to know.

It really kind of ruins The Joker for me in all other Batman incarnations, save for perhaps THE KILLING JOKE and THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS (probably the closest analogue to the film's interpretation). Even the classic Mark Hamil Joker in the animated series now looks...quaint. And don't get me started on Jack Nicholson...that has got to be one of the hammiest, self-serving, and completely narcissitic performances I've ever seen. I hated him.

Why do the newspaper film critics all feel obliged to name check Frank Miller? Everyone seems to have forgotten that THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS was not just grim and gritty but satirical and funny and wild.

And why do they always have to make the Batsuit completely black? Does anyone else wish for even a hint of the old blue/gray color combo? Batman is as visually dreary these days as a Eurogame box cover. It's like everybody thinks that Batman's depiction in the movies needs to be drab and subdued so that it will be taken seriously by the adults and the normals.

Screw that, I say! The next Batman movie had better be about the Rainbow Batman, and if there's no giant mechanical dinosaur in the Batcave, I'll be asking for my money back.

Don't you want to see the giant penny too?

That's a good point about DNR...it is really funny...the satire in it is one of the things that make it so great. You know...with Batman running off at the end of this one, there's no reason they couldn't skip ahead a few years...have Batman retire, get older and crochety while Gotham gets worse...the Sons of Batman were sort of in a roundabout way hinted at in THE DARK KNIGHT...and THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS would be a great title for the third film...

If you really get down to it, the Nolan films are a lot more like the Jeph Loeb/Tim Sale or even Brian Azarello books than the Frank Miller ones, save for maybe YEAR ONE. They're more crime story oriented, DNR is still very much a superhero book.

I'll have my review up tomorrow, wanted to let Tom's great article have some time in the sun. My review should be a doozy.


SPOILER: I really, really, really like the movie.

I think that BATMAN BEGINS was explicitly intended to be a YEAR ONE kind of deal, and the new movie follows from that. The Batman depicted in THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS, though, *could* have been the same Batman that wore the Rainbow Batsuits and collected kitsch for his trophy room, just older and disillusioned.

Oh, and I want Bat-Mite, too. Hear me, Chris Nolan: the next movie needs Bat-Mite. And Brane, the Batman of the 31st Century.

I think I've posted this link on F:At before, but this BATMAN: YEAR ONE screenplay by Frank Miller is a must-read.