Movies

I feel like to a lot of the comic book readers of the time, it felt more like a cartoon than a comic book. Certainly more like the 60s Adam West Batman than what the comics were producing, which looked a lot more like this:

711-12.jpg


Within a year or so of the movie's release, the comics would be launching a storyline in which a major earthquake causes Gotham to be uninhabitable and is cut off from the US as "No Man's Land," a story later mined by Nolan for TDKR (alongside the concept of Bane, which had actually originated in the comics during the Batman Forever film era). Audiences wanted to treat Batman like a serious character, and Schumacher made him a joke. I mean, say what you will about all of the Gothic eccentricities of Tim Burton, at least that Batman wasn't a punchline.
When an extremely popular, critically acclaimed children's cartoon called Batman: The Animated Series outclasses your multimillion dollar film in terms of writing, maturity, emotional depth, and complex characterization, you might have misjudged what your audiences are looking for. Arnold Schwarzenegger "kicking ice:" not it. Compare to:


I'm not going to argue either of these points because they're both valid criticisms to have. All I said was I didn't think the movie was bad for what it is. The movie is entertaining (maybe not always how it was intended to be) and I have a good time watching it because I don't take it that seriously. ĀÆ\_(惄)_/ĀÆ
 
I will also say that I hate what Christopher Nolan did to superhero movies.
Itā€™s notā€™s Nolanā€™s fault. His Batman is a fine big budget action film. The fact that Warner Bros. decided to ape the success of those movies (along with Zach Snyderā€™s 300) to diminishing returns over the next 15 years is more to blame.
 
Itā€™s notā€™s Nolanā€™s fault. His Batman is a fine big budget action film. The fact that Warner Bros. decided to ape the success of those movies (along with Zach Snyderā€™s 300) to diminishing returns over the next 15 years is more to blame.
The Dark Knight is a decent movie, anchored almost entirely by Heath Ledger. The other two in his trilogy were overly long bores that tried to make gritty realism work for the grown man dressed like a bat but forgot to do much else. His Batman films have no style to them outside of their lack of style; the fact that they are ashamed to be comic book movies is the beginning and end of their identity.

In my opinion.
 
The Dark Knight is probably overhyped but it probably still is the best superhero movie of the 2000s and one of the top 5 best ever. Idk if it's afraid to be a superhero film (like something like Joker is), because the cinematic thrills you'd expect from one are all still there, plus a tangible thematic weight that hasn't been seen in a superhero film since. It's been emulated plenty of times and it's never been as good (not even with Nolan's other 2 Batman movies). A perfect storm that thing.

I wish more filmmakers would realize that they don't have to sacrifice thematic and emotional substance for empty spectacle or vice versa. The only movie that's come close to striking a perfect balance in the last decade is Into the Spiderverse.
 
I will defend The Dark Knight, but I do not care for the two movies it's sandwiched between and I feel like people praise the trilogy as a whole when what they mean is they love TDK.
 
I will defend The Dark Knight, but I do not care for the two movies it's sandwiched between and I feel like people praise the trilogy as a whole when what they mean is they love TDK.
I enjoyed all 3. Well, I should say I enjoyed parts of all 3. Ledger and Hardy are both utterly brilliant villains and there are fantastic action pieces in all 3. That being said each could probably lose about 30 to 45 minutes of sub plot and been even more effective. Even The Dark knight that is often held up as the pinnacle has, In My opinion; about 45 minutes of Unneeded Harvey Dent B-Plot tacked on to the ending. I think all 3 could have been nearly great with some extra editing.
 
I know this is probably a bit of a hot take but itā€™s one that I have always agreed with and probably explained better than I would be able toā€¦
 
Back
Top