Dark Knight

[lilylothlorien (deleted)]

I just got back from the midnight premire.... that movie is AMAZING.
I'm not going to ruin it for anybody, but go see that movie. Enough said.

[gilravadry]

Indeed, I would definitely say 'The Dark Knight' was Bat-tastic!! One of my only complaints about the movie (Spoiler-safe) was that the character of Rachel Dawson was played by Katie Holmes in 'Batman Begins', but was replaced by Maggie Gyllenhaal this time around. While I don't think she did a bad job in the role, it really ruins the continuity for me when a character is portrayed by two different people in the same time-frame. Other than that, it was an all-around good movie, and Heath Ledger's final performance was his best, as far as I'm concerned.

-Ryan

-Stay safe, carry ALWAYS, and when the need is greatest, a 1911 is faster than 911.

[lilylothlorien (deleted)]

most assuredly agreed

[cynical]

`Why so serious?

[wilhelm8474 (deleted)]

`Personally, I can't wait to see who they get to be the villain in the next one. I'm hoping they bring back the Penguin, or maybe the Riddler. It'll be hard if they try to bring back the Joker though, because I don't think anyone can outdo Heath Ledger's performance.

[alcazar_PREV (deleted)]

`Sharpen your pitchforks if you want, but I didn't like The Dark Knight.

Not that it was a bad movie but I like my superhero movies a bit more tongue-in-the-cheek, like Hellboy etc. I mean, come on people, the whole concept of people running around in their underoos to punch people in the name of justice is a bit silly, and trying to be as solemn as your average Lord of the Rings movie or Obama-ad is rather disheartening.

The thing I disliked the most about The Dark Knight is that on the one hand the director went for a dark-and-gritty, ''realistic'' feel, but on the other hand we are suposed to believe things like a powerless psycho like The Joker could actually rig all the hospitals in Manhattan er...Gotham to explode in a day or so. Sorry but the logistics alone involved in demolition are mind-boggling.
And don't get me started on all the surveillance nonsense, e.g. no way they would have left The Joker UNCUFFED, in an interogation cell, with just one unarmed guard.

[gilravadry]

Upon reflection, there were two more things I didn't care for...

First, I didn't think very much of Two-Face as a villian. In the series and the earlier movies (Revolting as they were...), Two-Face is the head of a gang, and has power to back up his crimes. In this newest installment however, he's more of a disfigured and disgruntled civil-servant who doesn't even make it to the end of the movie before getting killed. The character was neutered from his former hey-day, and while it's certanly a different direction to take the character, I think it was the wrong one.

Secondly, how many more innocents will have to die when the Joker escapes and plans his next big capper (And you know he will...), because Batman refuses to finish him off when he gets the chance?! I get it - It's a movie, and they needed a re-occuring villian - but seriously, why can't he just suck it up and deal with him? He's always whining about his damaged psyche, so I wonder how he's going to deal with all the innocent blood of Gotham citizens that will stain his hands?

-Ryan

-Stay safe, carry ALWAYS, and when the need is greatest, a 1911 is faster than 911.