The First Negative Review of The Dark Knight

Please Note: This is NOT a negative review of The Dark Knight. This is a rant about the negative review which was printed by New York Magazine.

The Dark Knight is currently getting 100% on Rotten Tomatoes. Everyone I’ve talked to who has seen the film thinks its nothing short of brilliant. I’ve even called the film a masterpiece, my favorite film of the year thus far. But it was bound to happen eventually… the first negative review of The Dark Knight has hit the web.

New York Magazine’s David Edelstein calls The Dark Knight “a morbid affair”, claiming that “It could only be darker if Batman died. (He does die a little, on the inside.)” And he is right, The Dark Knight is not Adam West’s Batman, it’s not Tim Burton’s Batman, it’s not even Frank Miller’s Batman. Edelstein comments that when Burton’s Batman came out critics complained that the film was too violent for kids. “Wait’ll they get a load of this,” he says. And again, he’s right. This is the Empire Strikes Back of comic book movies. Harvey Dent will lose half his face, and it doesn’t look pretty.

The Dark Knight is the grittiest superhero film I’ve ever seen. It’s so wonderfully bleak that you will forget that you are even watching a comic book movie adaptation. And this might scare a few people off, but to me, it is what I’ve always hoped for. I was never one for the flashy comic book-like colors, and unrealistic super villains with ridiculous plots to take over the world. Heck, the world is a huge place. The Dark Knight centers on one madman’s plot to bring one city into chaos, and the vigilante who dresses up like a bat to try to stop him.

I walked out of my Los Angeles junket screening commenting to friends that this might be the first comic book screenplay to be worthy for award consideration, but Edelstein writes “On paper, the morality play is intriguing, but a lot of the dialogue should have stayed on paper”. At the core of the story is the tragic transformation of Harvey Dent, from Gotham hero to Two Face. Edelstein says that it plays “as if they’d been penned by Oxford philosophy majors trying to tone up a piece of American pop”. As if the illogical transformation of Tommy Lee Jones’s Two-Face in Schunacher’s Batman Forever might somehow be more entertaining?

David found Heath Ledger’s performance “painful to watch”, calling it “rave and rage and purge acting”.

“Scarier than what the Joker does to anyone onscreen is what Ledger must have been doing to himself”.

Oh C’mon… Yes, Heath Ledger’s death was tragic, but if you are thinking about his tragic personal life while watching this performance - Trust me, you aren’t watching the movie right.

Related Posts with Thumbnails

  • mysterymovieopinionner
    the movie sucked!!!!!!
    JOKER YOU WERE AWSOME!!!!
    but the rest..................SUCKED!


    love
    mystery movie opinionner
  • Mike Wu
    This review isn't harsh enough! This movie was terrible from minute one. I didn't care about any of the characters (and there's too many of them). I didn't care about the plot (was there one? Who cares! Blow sh*t up!) The usual ridiculous Hollywood action scenes were drawn out and totally boring. And that totally stupid cellphone bullsh*t? Please. And let's not forget the annoying Batman voice which totally made me laugh! Also the movie was waaaaayyyyy too f*cking long! How many times did it seem to be ending when, wait, there's more!!? My friend and I just looked at each other incredulously after the third "ending". And was anyone over the age of 12 surprised by how it ends? Is anyone ever surprised at how comic book movies end? My problem isn't with the films "darkness", just it's mediocrity and it's inability to suspend my disbelief. Everything about it felt forced, like the writers wanted all these different elements in the movie and didn't care if it was needed or made any sense. The fact that The Dark Knight is on so many Best Of lists is disheartening - the fact that it won't win the Academy Award for Best Movie isn't.
  • Aderes
    There is always someone who wants to be the outsider....
  • Pix
    speaking of negative reviews.... how about lying about the film?
    The Independent Newspaper uk:

    The knife is shoved inside the victim's mouth and pulled from one side of the face to the other, the blade ripping a smile across the cheeks. The victim is petrified, frozen in terror, paralysed into powerlessness, and then the blood flows. This is a scene from The Dark Knight....

    http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentato...

    Anyone say biased reactionary nanny state B/S.....
  • Ryan
    My overall beef with this review is that it doesn't have any substance. It has a lot of words but not a lot of meaning. David Edelstein starts off his review like the movie, with the bank scene. He starts off by saying its now set in modern day times and that is not like Tim Burton's Batman, which everyone who saw the first Nolan film would know already. And then he says its like Quentin Tarantino's Reservoir's Dogs. I'm not sure why, I suppose because there is violence and a bank... at the same time. Unlike one of Tarantino's Resevoir Dogs there wasn't much witty, "real" seeming conversation and then a torture scene. However, like a Resevoir Dog there was a bank and some guns... and clowns? He then brings up that even the skyline shots didn't make the movie a hit. That's like saying even all the sea anemones in Little Nemo couldn't keep the movie from sinking. Come to think of it Little Nemo was like Resevoir Dogs too when all of Little Nemo's brothers and sisters died at the beginning the Barracude didn't leave a tip making Mr. Pink proud.

    Harvey Dent. This guy didn't like how Harvey Dent was written into this story. I have my complaints too (which would involve too many spoilers to go through). But this reviewer brings up the philosophy angle? In my opinion his character was used as the perfect analogy of what could happen to any one of us in that situation. It is the classic "When in Rome situation". When you are faced by overwhelming odds, going against the norm, having to stand up for what you believe in, its rough. Sometimes it is just easier and more satisfying to give into the mob mentality and become one of the bad guys. This in fact mirrors what Batman goes through and hints at any moment what Batman can become. It shows the evil that lurks within anyone if the situation is right. It shows what happens when your morals are stuck between a Joker and a hard place. If there is no hope of being right then you might as well be wrong.

    As for the spatial challenges. I didn't find it hard to follow at all. I have divided my comments into the challenges Dave laid out for us.

    Challenge 1: Early scene with the Scarecrow. Its a parking garage... there isn't too much to this scene. There's the ramp, and there's the parking spaces and some cars. Its like this reviewer is scared by fast movement because its confusing and too hard to follow in between naps at the old age home.

    Challenge 2 (Level 2): This one is a little bit harder as you are like... hold the phone... is Batman shopping? This is no time for the mall Batman. But then once it gets to the end of the chase you are left there assuming that the Dark Knight that prowls through the city at night knows the streets fairly well. Its not that far of a leap anyway as there are no large twists and turns in the chase.

    Challenge 3 (Ultimate): Firstly, when were there more faux Batmen in the climax? What movie did you see? And how does faux batmen make spatial sense harder to comprehend... they were in a building that they gave you tons of views of... Batman moved up a couple of floors, that's it. Just pay attention to the movie instead of writing in your journal about how tragic Heath Ledger's death is. That should never even come up in this review as it has nothing to do with the movie.

    Which brings up your next point about Heath Ledger's acting. You have a huge paragraph on it and say absolutely nothing about it other than the Joker didn't play many pranks. Which is a valid point because maybe you were let down by this portrayal of the Joker. He wasn't the Joker you wanted to see. He didn't have a buzzer hidden in his hand and a flower that spit acid. And when he was punched in the face his hidden false teeth didn't go chattering away. Its definately not the same Joker as Jack Nicholson or the same Joker that was in The Animated Series or the one from the Adam West's era (no mustache). For my opinion, he was the best Joker I have ever seen. He made Batman think, and made the audience think too. He made you realize that the joke's on us. He doesn't have to make the jokes because society itself is the joke. He was a sociopath and I think he played it well.

    All in all this reviewer seems to be working so very hard to fill the void, writing a lot of words that do not add anything to his point--trying to find the center of a review without a critque.
  • ozziek
    @jkj27 totally agree. It was too long and with over extended scenes (the chase of Harvey Dent) that could have been shorter and had the same outcome to the plot.

    I Loved the first film and wanted to love this but felt toward the end it was becoming a bit ridiculous with the mobile phone based sonar system. I'm sure they could have just explained that with another military gadget from the Wayne labs.

    Please let's not have Tommy guns with red lights on them in the next film!
  • ozziek
    Someone has a different opinon to you and so you attack them?
  • @ToTheChase It always leaves me scratching my head when I hear people say they didn't like The Dark Knight. You can't please everyone.

    Also Funny, how you like Speed Racer. Which majority of the people hated and it died a ugly death at the box office.
  • ToTheChase
    I don't understand the repeat business for such a sit-and-talk movie. People sitting at desks talking, people sitting at tables talking, people sitting in cars talking, all to make it a more "serious" movie. If I were still a teenager, I'd have fallen asleep. I saw "The Empire Strikes Back" 5 times and always got bored waiting for the Dagobah scenes to end.

    But I thought the same about "Speed Racer." I liked that movie OK, and it wasn't the supposed crazy seizure-inducing action that was a negative; it was the overdose of long, talking scenes to make it a more "serious" family movie.
  • jkj27
    Let me say first that I loved Batman Begins. However there is a long list of points that made The Dark Knight a tough movie to watch so here I go. Too long. There were multiple endings. Multiple story lines some of which were not related. Even if they were related it was forced. The primary story line was spoon to the viewer through Joker and Batman dialogue within a span of 2 minutes near the end. The movie should have been cut into two parts. Part I released this year and part II released next year with elaboration on the Two Face story line.
  • hatedit!
    The amount of money "The Dark Knight" made is not an indicator of how good it was. I completely agree with his negative review. It was horrible! The ending was sooo lame! People get angry with me for speaking my mind but I only attribute that anger to the fact that people follow, like cattle being prodded to the slaughterhouse! Can anyone have an opinion that is not based on how much $ a movie makes or how hyped up it is. It was horrible! And, no one can tell me otherwise. I want my $10 back, please!
  • Mr. Wayne
    2 hours and 20 minutes worth of great scenes tho' the scene where batman drops maroni, the batpod scenes, the joker crashing the party , the joker on the news ( batman 89' kinda), ( I'm a man of my word scene), the joker killing judge, etc , Batman jumpin on scarecrow's van, Why so serious scene, Joker's siren theme,Commisioner gordon promotion scene, Bank heist at the begining etc......extraordinary, went in expecting a comic book movie left seeing bits of every movie lol
  • Mr. Wayne
    Corny scenes..:
    The scene where the mob guy tries to shoot harvey in court and his gone was empty
    All scenes with two-face except the scene where he kills maroni.
    Scene where joker joker escapes via a phone in the man's belly. Joker bazooka scenes.
    that's all I loved every minute of it besides those
  • Alfred
    the dark knight wasn't perfect don't get me wrong but it was to about 30 million ppl so his nit picking critcism doesn't matter
  • James Ebbinger
    the saga of the batman has gone crooked in this movie there are many bad things and i think that the rating should be bumped to R many things in the movie are twisted the joker changes stories about his smile i can now see why he died during filming the psycotic joker is very agressive and adds a negitive point to the movie batman is changing and is now more of a bad guy than a good guy two face harvey dent going from good guy locking up 500 plus criminals to bad guy killing on chance the only good thing in this movie is the nonstop action batmans car/motorcycle and the criminal throwing the detonator out the window as for all of the people who think that the movie is the new generation of batman i think that this movie is a showing of what action in movies should look like but the psycological things should change apparently batman has changed!!!!

    I give the movie 5 stars for action 2 stars for plot no stars for being so twisted and sick.
  • Cassie
    And one more thing : )

    The only reason that 'Wormy' goes on the news to reveal Batman is because it is only after his first blackmail attempt that Joker threatens Gotham unless Batman 'takes of his little mask'. This is why he attempts it a second time; this time, the only benefit is a possible cessation of chaos.
  • Cassie
    To the above--

    I will agree on certain points, however;

    A) If you remember correctly, the Joker did not overcome the officer at MCU with a knife. He weilds a broken piece of glass that he nicked from the mirror Batman smashed him into.

    B) Had Gordon remained alive, it would have given the Joker even more leverage over the police force; I think there was enough when Ramirez and Wertz came into the picture.

    However it is true that the editing was a little awkward at points. Continuity errors abound, especially in the beginning, with characters facing different directions and with faces in different positions, such as Bruce Wayne's facial position as he converses with Alfred in the first 'Bat-Cave' scene.

    I disagree with your response to Ledger's performance. I really believe that he brought this role to a new level. It is dark, it is terrifying. Nicholson's joker was more of a boss character; he is the kind of person that you allow to fall off the building in the end. However, he seems untouchable.

    Ledger's Joker is creepy and morbid. He is not trying to attain money; he proves that by burning both Lau and his share of the loot. He is truly after chaos. He doesn't care whether he lives or dies, while Nicholson's character was totally about self-preservation. The new Joker is screwed up in the head. He is a morbid curiosity. You feel like you shouldn't enjoy it, but you can't look away. I felt awkward laughing at the beginning, when the Joker shoots the bus driver without even a backwards glance, but I did.
    I laughed because of the sheer absurdity. The lack of deference, of pity, of guilt.
    I laughed out loud but i didn't mean to, and I think everyone had the same reaction.
    His performance was unexpected and outrageous, and I think he did a great job.
  • Cassie
    I saw this on July 1st. I thought it was amazing. Edelstein succeeded in giving a deft review of the movie.
    It is too dark for young children. It is too violent. Six people are killed in the first five minutes.
    He did not give a negative review; he gave a truthful one.
    Even if he didn't like the movie--obviously--he's just creating media fodder so people like you can have something to do on the internet.
    I suppose you've been viewing leaked Joker pictures since last october.
    Someone up there made my point; he said the movie wasn't as great as what you EXPECTED it to be.

    In my opinion, this is untrue. I was skeptical of Heath Ledger as Joker, but I was blown away. This movie is a must-see.
  • ToTheChase
    And the more I think about it, the worse this movie was. Does everyone love Heath so much, they saw the film they wanted to?

    All the characters have to be stupid in order for the Joker to do what the screenwriters want to see. When the characters are dummer than the audience, you've got a bad script...

    "Powerful" gangsters don't even try to frisk him when he appears.

    He promises the gangsters he'll kill Batman, but when he doesn't and switches to wanting to unmask Batman, they do nothing in reprisal even though Joker's outfit is small at that point. Batman threatens the gangsters for Joker's whereabouts, but the gangsters would have killed him themselves.

    Police truck driver doesn't try to evade Joker's 18-wheeler and allows him to drive parallel to fire rockets at him.

    Officer gives in to obvious anger ploy in jail cell to allow Joker out (although how he got out and got a knife is a mystery due to incompetant editing).

    Comm. Gordon is stupidly going to shoot hostages at the end of the movie, after he shoul dhave well-known by then it's a ploy.

    Everyone has amnesia that Harvey Dent is in a hosp., so they leave him for the Joker.

    Dent lost his brains as well as half his face, I guess, because he suddenly trusts Joker? Come on. The audience was treated like they're in a trance, and most reviewers of this film were.

    What exactly did faking Gordon's death accomplish, other than put in a forced twist?

    Who says, "That's not good. That's not good" when a helicopter is crashing? That's Joey from "Friends" dialogue.

    Who was piloting the huge C-130 that picked up Batman in Hong Kong? Alfred? Morgan Freeman? Whomever it was had to see Batman enter the back hatch and exit later.

    Wormy guy is gonna blackmail Bruce Wayne on Batman's ID, but Morgan freeman supposedly puts that down to good effect. Then wormy guy shows up again making that scene irrelevent.

    Clunky, clunky.
  • ToTheChase
    It's not brilliant, just over-complicated to seem smart like the other two Nolan bros.-written movies, and it is very sloppy & clunky in parts. Ledger is good but no better than Nicholson, and dressing in a drag as a nurse was more goofy than anything any other Joker has done, even on the TV show.

    Here are some duh, non-brilliant moments that seemed OK in the script and were never corrected and are now preserved forever in the IMAX format:

    Bank manager in the opening can spit out and throw away the grenade in his mouth at any time.

    Dawes gives Alfred that note as though she knows she's going to die. She had no prob talking to Bruce directly before.

    All hospitals are evacuated, except for the number-one DA patient in the city, Harvey Dent, who everyone knows but is left alone, so Joker can talk to him. Then Joker waltzes slowly out of the hospital, which is watched by the TV news while it blows up, and no one sees him. Plus, he somehow kidnaps their top correspondent. Moviemakers in a vaccum.

    How did Joker load two huge, popular ferries with all those gas drums? Movie "magic."

    Dent shoots gangster's driver while at full speed, car crashes, Dent not shown exiting the car, so is he dead too? Nah. But the gangster, it being his car, could have escaped just as easily.

    The elevated train that figured so prominently in "BB" doesn't exist now evidently.

    I think David S. Goyer's thematic cohension was missed.
  • JJ
    @ maybeididnt

    I lol'd at "sonar for retarded monkeys."
    Yes, I love NPR, but sometimes (and most of those times it's with the mainstream "low-culture" topics) they just miss the point.

    That said, I agreed with some of the things he said in his review. The action sequences were disjointed (I really was a little baffled during that first one), and there were overlong stretches in the middle too much psychobabble and too little productive plot advancement.

    I did, however, enjoy the movie overall. It was expertly cast and visually exciting. Heath Ledger? I agree with the poster above who said it looked like he was having a blast with the scenery-chewing - he owned every moment he was onscreen.

    So... good movie? Yes. Great movie? Maybe. Earth-shattering masterpiece undeserving of and/or impervious to criticism? Hardly.
  • oman
    It's rather surprising the fawning attitudte most people have for this movie, but this is just part of the Ledger induced hype.

    Average special effects, a story with holes that destroy the rather simpleminded themes.

    Overrated pretty much down the line. Other than Ledger's nice performance of a rather simplistic character, and the opening scenes kick, the movie actually dabbles with tiresomeness pretty frequently. A good solid blockbuster but not warraning the rather universal praise.

    They aren't bashers. They just are ruining your circle jerk.
  • JDC
    Ever since I listened to David Edelstein try to say that the movie "Superbad" was about two boys dealing with strange homo-sexual urges and grown men railing against having anything to rebel against, I stopped taking him seriously.

    He's an elitest who likes to hear himself talk and is seroiusly out of touch with society. He also likes to attribute non-existent (possibly personal?) themes to movies which don't actually exist in the movie; such as with Superbad.
  • Pablo
    this asshole doesn't know shit.

    case in point:

    (snippets for some comments)

    "Although this review caught me by surprise, I was less shocked to see that you gave The Zohan a glaringly positive review, what a magnificent piece of American cinema."

    "Hmm... I just noticed this, but you also gave Wanted a positive review. I guess good taste in movies isn't a requirement for movie reviewers anymore?"

    i rest my case.
  • chris
    let's see, the new yorker hated it, Salon hated it and Fresh Air hated it. first negative review? hardly. haven't seen the times review yet. these movies are about comic heroes and are meant for children. oh yeah!
  • tanabe
    ugh! pretentious, humorless and way too overrated movie. i found it boring. intelliegent? hahaha! ya gotta be kiddin me!
  • Whitephosphorous
    Sometimes a person doesn't need to see a movie to know it will be good. For instance, Coen brother films, Nolan films. Just as you don't have to jump off a cliff to know the landing will probably not be very comfortable.
  • Whitephosphorous
    Thankfully, David Edelstein is a critic and not a film maker. I couldn't image the crap he'd produce.
  • Chip
    Ditto, Tony Stark. These fanboys are really getting on my nerves jumping on every single piece of criticism this movie is getting, when they haven't even seen the film. That said, I do expect The Dark Knight to be brilliant. I'm extremely excited for it, and I do think that it will be the best superhero movie around, masterpiece or not.
  • Tony Stark
    Oh please shut up fanboys!

    You haven't even see the movie yet! this guys already did!
  • No hate speech allowed
    His had presumably had an advanced perspective. Edelstein loved the Batman, he just hated seeing him turned into a blind religious practice over the years. When you get a blind bat out of his cave, you might as well cut his wings off. I pray he is right, for darkness' sake. Another ingenious idea destroyed by commercialization. It was the moles that forced the bat out of his cave, not the other bats.
  • maybeididnt
    I looove NPR for the intelligent news and social commentary thats unlike all the dumb mook-rock stations here in vegas. However, I ABSOLUTELY CRINGE everytime I hear this clueless, self-absorbed prick bless us with a movie review. Not only is he just....off, but his effffing voice is the WORST. It has a lispy, sing-song, hyper-effeminate quality that makes every stupid comment come out like a stupid(er) question.....like, i dont know,...sonar for retarded monkeys. Makes me want to pull over in my work truck and cry.
  • Dennis Spain
    The continuing infantilization of the American populace.....just great.
  • devils advocate
    holy crap anyone here listen to the movie blog uncut from themovieblog.com? john campea seemed pissed about this article from peter!
  • onemansword
    Congratulations, David Edelstein you have become the "Joel Schumacher" of critics. So start preparing for your new job using these words, "Do you want fries with that?"
  • David gave Tim Beurton's BATMAN a 4 star review (4 out of 4 stars) when he wrote for the NY Post back in 1989. I remember it well as I lived in NY at the time and I couldn't wait for the print reviews the morning it was released. Hey he has a right to his opinion. Last time I looked this was America!
  • evan
    I guess New York has no love for Gotham. David Denby of The New Yorker has given TDK a 50/100 (according to Metacritic).

    http://www.metacritic.com/film/titles/darkknight
  • Captain Awesome
    Yeah I agree, this really spun out of control. Everyone I do know who "has" seen it has been gushing about it.

    So I have no doubt I'll be there masturbating to it as well.
  • Fab D
    I like what Justin said, because in defending the writer of this article or defending his right to have an opinion, he makes a point I very much stand by, which is that people are entitled to have their "own" tastes which can sometimes differ from what might be called a certain "norm". Among today's film enthusiasts, there are a lot of people who will crucify you or won't be your friend if you say you hate modern hollywood and everything that goes with it, and there are also a lot of people who will take what's being given to them with a "it's great" label without second thoughts or wanting to make an opinion for themselves.
    That said, I very much accept the fact that people can go and see TDK and end up LIKING it, but I'd really appreciate it if it was okay to have the right to NOT like a mainstream film... being force fed something, or having opinions pushed onto you is nothing short of a fascist attitude. There will be people who will like the film for good reasons, and people who will like it for wrong reasons, just because it's a trend, it's fashionable to say you liked it, and your friends said they liked it. Once and for all, people who will go and see TDK and think it isn't all the crap it's hyped up to be can also be cool people who have great tastes and they're also into dark films, and they're interesting people.
    What's interesting about talking about movies is when opinions differ, not when everyone bows down to the same gods and always say amen to the same trends.
  • TempusFugit
    Perhaps. I never saw Zohan because it didn't seem interesting to me. I have no opinion on it whatsoever. But still, who cares if he liked one movie that was considered poor by the general populace? If this was like the case of that reviewer for Maxim who liked every damn movie in the world because it would earn him a blurb on a poster or a TV ad, then I would take issue. This guy's review seemed balanced; not overly praising the movie but not condemning it, either. It's just the rabid fanaticism taking place here that is ridiculous. "If you don't think it's the best movie EVAR, ur an idiot lololololol" "Have you seen it yet?" "Well no... but u suck hahahah"

    This whole post was pointless (I'm guessing it's a slow news day) but at least I know the OP has actually seen the movie.
  • Captain Awesome
    TempusFugit,

    To be fair, while many people haven't seen it. You can easily base this guys review record on the fact that he "loved" Zohan. That right there is grounds for prison rape.
  • TempusFugit
    Ugh. What is this fanboy bs? I cannot say anything about the movie because I haven't seen it yet (although I'm anticipating that I'll at the very least like it) but are you really complaining because a few critics don't like it? They're entitled to their opinion and as long as their negative reviews don't stem from some obvious ignorance, who cares? So he doesn't like how dark it is; if someone doesn't have the predisposition to like that sort of thing, of course they aren't going to enjoy the movie! It wasn't even a completely negative review, there were just some aspects he felt did not work and some that he felt did. OH NOES, AN OPINION THAT MIGHT BE UNBIASED AND FAIR. BURN THE INFIDEL! HOW DARE HE BE HONEST AND NOT WORSHIP OUR IDOL THAT IS THIS UNRELEASED FILM!

    I'm laughing at how so many people on this comment board are assuming that he wrote a negative review just for the sake of going against the grain when most of the people on here probably haven't even seen the damn movie yet. I'm all for hoping Dark Knight is going to be a great film, but some of you people need to get off your knees and stop acting like total whores. Wait until the movie comes out and then say whatever you wish.
  • Pill
    This man has actually seen the film, as opposed to, what, the 98% of you who haven't? I think he's more likely to know what he's talking about then you are, but aww heck, I guess thats just a little to logical for some.

    Wishing death and slinging school yard insults at a critic (a person whose JOB is to create discussion about a film) because he didn't happen to enjoy a film about a man who runs around dressed like a bat, makes you look about as childish and retarded as "Batman & Robin".
  • Mr. Normal
    Ummm, a whole article about one negative Dark Knight review? Really?

    Haven't seen this flick yet, but I honestly could agree with some of this guys gripes with the first one. Batman Begins was not, in my opinion, a very interesting interpretation of the character. Between Bale's "little-kid-trying-to-sound-tough" voice, Holme's dead-eyed delivery and the unresolved plot-structure, I thought it was pretty much just a lifeless mess with ninjas.

    My point is, Batman Begins was ok at best. Really guys, it was just ok. This one looks better, but it also doesn't look impervious to criticism. Some of those lines just seem hokey. "Wanna go for a ride?" Seriously? You're serious, Joker, that's your line? Oh boy. Michael keaton screaming "You wanna get nuts? Let's get nuts!" disturbs me waaaaaaay more than that shit.
  • Superman
    Oh noes, teh movie willz bombs cuz of dis.
  • Evermore
    fung0 - you have no idea what you're talking about - Batman Begins was derived from three major Batman comics: The Long Halloween, The Man Who Falls and an original Batman comic. You couldn't get a closer Batman adaptation if it slapped you in the face. It is closer than any of the other Batman films, and portrays the characters closer than any, though the original Batman was great. Bale has been a noted actor for a lot of his work, just go see the machinist, and Caine for Alfred and Freeman for Fox were great casting calls. Who cares about Katie Holmes, Bruce and Dawes don't end up together anyway. I say bring on the darkness, and if you don't like it, then stay out of the cave.
  • nrthcar10
    ok, not only is this guy dead wrong, but he should do us all a fvor and kill himself...and anyone who defended him cuz i know there are some, join david...this IS a masterpiece and theres already talk about ledger getting awards for his performance...but yea...he was terrible..and thats what mkes this movie great, is tht its not like other pop teen super hero movies...Peter Sciretta, your the man....David fuckhead edelstein...get a gun..and well...you know...d-bag
  • Evermore
    I have only one question to ask David Edelstein: WHY SO SERIOUS?
  • Mikey
    Hate to break it to everyone, but there are 2 more negative reviews for The Dark Knight. TDK has an 86% on Rotten Tomatoes, 19 Fresh, 3 Rotten.

    For me, it doesn't take way from the fact that Thursday night is Christmas morning.
  • danny bell
    hahahahahahahaa

    clearly this man wud rather see bat-nipples and a neon-lit batmobile.

    this guy shud play the joker, he's so funny!

    dude: batman must be dark. any batman film must be darker than any other superhero movie ever. it shud at least be on a par with the likes of the godfather in terms of violence and presence. because batman is not a superhero: he is a vigilante. and being a superhero would not agree with him.

    (and fung0: are you genuinely being serious? Bale is hailed by, well, just about everyone as the best of the Batmen. and you caaaaa-not have ever seen val kilmer and george clooney do this gig. and as a side note, batman, in EVERY version of the comics uses gadgetry and pyroteknics......)

    ;-D
blog comments powered by Disqus