|
| Welcome to NoE Version 2. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. << Furthermore, adverts like these are removed as you sign up! Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| The Dark Knight; Spoilers | |
|---|---|
| Topic Started: Aug 22 2008, 01:42 PM (287 Views) | |
| Noolsey | Aug 22 2008, 01:42 PM Post #1 |
Sextbook: By Order Of The Admin
|
*Spoilers throughout* - This is a copy and paste. I'm lazy. Despite what I said before, I saw The Dark Knight earlier today. My experiences haven't been negative, but have lead me to believe that the only reason this film is so highly regarded is because of Heath Ledger's death. Batman Begins was a revival for the series, a fresh start. It had excellent build up, the pace was just right. If things have been quiet for a while you're given an action sequence, which was done very well. It was a very good film. I don't think there is anything I could suggest which could have improved it. The Dark Knight is currently number 1 in IMDB's top 250 films. Of course it is, it's a public poll. Idiots who have never even seen Batman Begins and other idiots who haven't actually seen the film can vote, as well as those who have no reasonable film sense. The Dark Knight has a horrible fanboy following. It's like the Nintendo of the movie industry. I've been assuming that the majority of this is from Heath Ledger's death, but this doesn't seem so obviously true anymore. I'm not sure where they come from, or why they're here, but unfortunately they are. The first point I want to make comes from the beggining of the film. There's nothing wrong with a character returning, but there's something wrong with a character appearing for absolutely no reason. The Batman series needs to see the end of a villain for at least one film. I loved The Scarecrow as a character, he was well crafted, his dialogue was great and so was the acting. They seem to have thrown the character in so they can come up with some Batman fanbase crap, and have an early action sequence. Two more things, early on, also annoyed me. The suit protects him from bullets, but the dogs manage to tear a hole in his arm? I'm pretty sure metal is tougher than bone. Later you also see Batman being shot at, when lots of glass behind him is smashed, yet the glass directly behind that isn't even damaged; but I'm drifting away from the point now. The action sequences seemed clunky and horrible to me. I realise they want to emphasise his inability to move properly in the suit, but he had no problem in the first film and it didn't show restrictions in movement as much as it shows sloppy work. The only close quarters "action" that was executed well was the pencil trick by The Joker. It was fast, smooth and funny. It was well done. In the battle sequences The Joker definately "has" the stage. This is probably due to him having some sort of weapon, as most of the time he seems to throw the focus to another character, or to a part of his body so you don't really see the full expression. Anyway, the point I'm making here is that Heath Ledger's performance was far from the God like one people make it out to be. It wasn't special in any way. If anyone should be getting an Oscar it should be one of the three lead roles from In Bruges. He played an easy character, he was masked by make up and a few fancy sentences (like most of the characters), he often throws the focus away while interacting with another person or weapon and each time he plaays the scene exactly the same. I also though that he (Heath, not the character) did a terrible first two scenes. He had no confidence in what he was doing, and was muttering. There is no reason for the characer to be doing that; he's a big boy who kills people, I'm sure he isn't embarrassed. I also found all of the other performances to be below those in Batman Begins. The only two people who perform well are Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman. While we're on the topic, I don't like the fact that Freeman is now Q, from James Bond and the batsuit is now being co-developed by Inspector Gadget. Bale gave one of his worst performances. His character seems to have changed, and he was dull throughout. If he wasn't busy ignoring people he was mumbling at them. Maggie Gyllenhaal wasn't a terrible Rachel, but didn't stand out. At no point did I feel for the characters. It was around 3 hours long, I should have made some sort of attachment in that time. You actually feel for the characters in The Last Of The Mohicans and that's much, much shorter. Gary Oldman was also fine, but nothing special. It doesn't seem as though he will ever beat his performance in Léon. Two-Face, my, my. He looks like something from Mars Attacks. It's trying to be too realistic. The big, peeping eye is neither funny, nor does it help you see the serious side of the caracter. I was spending most of my time staring at the crap CG eye. He has the posibility of being a great character, if his wounds heal so he looks normal, just a little scarred he could still be a great villain. Talking about crap CG brings me to my next point. The final scene was far too Spiderman 3. Construction, hanging, hero etc. I know it isn't really important, but a film as bas as Spiderman 3 brings back bad memories in those "final" scenes; which is another thing I don't understand. The Final scenes aren't with the main villain, but his creation, Two-Face. Like I said, he could be a better character, but at that time he was crap. 76% |
 |
 
|
| Chunks | Aug 22 2008, 03:10 PM Post #2 |
The Internet told me I wasnt good enough so I hung myself D:
|
:approve: I liked the film, though I was expecting better, because of all the hype. I think that this was more overated than SSBB, far too much hype over sothing that's good but there's so much hype over it that they feel they can't give it a bad review |
|
|
|
| Noolsey | Aug 22 2008, 03:18 PM Post #3 |
|
Sextbook: By Order Of The Admin
|
I don't think people are afraid to give it a lower score than others, but they think they're enjoying it more than they actually are, if that makes sense. You can convince yourself that you're actually watching something great, because you don't know how you feel about a sene or two and read what someone else has said about it. It's mainly America where it's the big blockbuster film. Just like American Beauty, for example, it gets a very high score, despite all of the obvious flaws. I'm not saying American Beauty is a bad film, but it isn't close to the style of an American TV drama, it is an american TV drama. It feels like it should have been broken up into segments, like The Dark Knight, which should have been over two films, at least. |
|
|
|
| picollo no. | Aug 22 2008, 05:49 PM Post #4 |
Screw the rules I'm Yuri Lowell
|
I actually really did enjoy this film, I thought Christian Bale was excellent as always (he is my favourite actor at the moment) and I though Heath Ledger also was excellent as the joker, I found he really made the role his own. Though I agree that Two Face was just rushed into the film like Venom was in Spiderman 3, I feel he could of been fleshed out and continue into the next film where he could recieve far more development. |
|
|
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
| « Previous Topic · Films · Next Topic » |
