• Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!

Rottenwatch: THE DARK KNIGHT

Status
Not open for further replies.
Fisticuffs said:
wtf does this even mean?
It means that it's a fairly silly character to begin with, who through considerable effort and talent got translated into something less silly.
But why bother?
Why just don't start with a less silly?
 
Chichikov said:
Just saw it (already LTTP?)
I do agree that this is probably the best serious treatment to a superhero on film.
But by setting it sights high it also hit the glass ceiling of the source material smack in its face -
For a movie that revolves around crime, it takes a beyond simplistic and reactionary approach to its subject matter.
Now I wasn't expecting any serious social discussion from my summer blockbusters, but the movie just throw it straight at my face, and it does a pretty poor job at it.

It could have been a brilliant action movie, but it's dragged down by misplaced aspiration for a morality tale that just doesn't work, and quite honestly, plays like something out of creative writing 101.

And it's a shame, because there's considerable talent on display there (not a huge fan of Nolan, but outside some stupid rotating cameras dialog scenes he stay out of the way, and he got pretty damn good at directing big action scenes) and one cannot help but wonder if that talent was not better served channeled to a more mature source material (or alternatively, have fun with its silliness).

So yeah, being able to make a half burned former DA who kills peopled based on chance into a quasi-realistic character is a pretty impressive feat, but why bother?

Yeah, I have simply no idea what you're talking about.
 
Chichikov said:
It means that it's a fairly silly character to begin with, who through considerable effort and talent got translated into something less silly.
But why bother?
Why just don't start with a less silly?

I still don't understand. I GET ANGRY WHEN I DON'T UNDERSTAND WAAAAAAAAAAAAAGH
 
Chichikov said:
It means that it's a fairly silly character to begin with, who through considerable effort and talent got translated into something less silly.
But why bother?
Why just don't start with a less silly?


You typed plain english which I understood perfectly the first time.
 
OuterWorldVoice said:
I thought it was too long.

I thought the plotting and twists were excellent.

I FUCKING HATE BATMAN VOICE.

I thought Harvey was better than the reviews have claimed.

I almost choked on my coke when the Joker said to Gyllenhal, "You are beautiful," and almost blurted out, "no she's not."

I thought it looked too much like Chicago to the detriment of an imagined Gotham.
Yes she is.
 
OuterWorldVoice said:
Honestly, she looks really, really weird up there. Like a sad faced, slightly spent soccer mom who has been crying because she realizes she'll never be young again and her marriage is a farce. Also, the makeup on her first scene was atrocious. She looked puffy and tired and frankly, kind of melted.

And she has pointy knees!

She's not the hottest woman, but the amount of people complaining about her is ridiculous
 
Chichikov said:
So yeah, being able to make a half burned former DA who kills peopled based on chance into a quasi-realistic character is a pretty impressive feat, but why bother?

Well, because it's based on a franchise that would make them a considerable amount of money.

I do agree though, all throughout the movie I kept getting the feeling that these performances were wasted on the universe and the shit it must oblige itself to.
 
Linkzg said:
Average. That means not beautiful, no?
Maggie Gyllenhaal is way above average.

Average is the asian lady who works at 7-11 with missing teeth and a cock eye.
Average is that chunky bitch that sat behind you in high school.
Average is the nerdy white girl with a nose that sticks out six inches and has 6 thousand bumps.

That's what average is.

You don't want to know what ugly is.
 
pizzaguysrevenge said:
Do I need to show you what the average woman looks like?

So that's a yes.

2enyw7k.jpg
 
Can we get off this fucking MG shit already? Jesus Christ? She is above average looking and is a good actor, so she was chosen for the role.

Do we really need any more fucking picture wars shitting up these threads?
 
pizzaguysrevenge said:
Maggie Gyllenhaal is way above average.

Average is the asian lady who works at 7-11 with missing teeth and a cock eye.
Average is that chunky bitch that sat behind you in high school.
Average is the nerdy white girl with a nose that sticks out six inches and has 6 thousand bumps.

That's what average is.

You don't want to know what ugly is.

Plus on a big screen... any flaws are magnified by x100.

I would love to see some pictures of the people here on GAF who think she is ugly.
 
Honestly, what kind of pussy are you guys getting that makes you think Maggie Gyllenhaal and Kirsten Dunst ugly?

Just because they're not the prettiest women in Hollywood doesn't mean they're not goreous.

How many bars/clubs can you go to where the average woman is hotter than those two?
 
Maggy G is cute. Fuck that.

The movie was awesome. I think I'm alone when I say I felt the conflict of Batman's personas stronger than any other conflict in cinema I've watched, mainly the ending. The Joker was excellent, I couldn't ask for anything more, he was perfect in my book.

"Let me show you a magic trick, I can make this pencil disappear." :lol
 
Okay, first of all, I think GAF's getting a little too particular about TDK. Myself included in an earlier post.

This flick's no Gone With the Wind...I think we knew that before...but everybody built it up in their minds that this flick's gonna be flawless, it's gonna be a total mind-blow, etc., etc.

There's no doubt this movie changed things. It's dark as hell for a comic book character/superhero/action movie. In fact, it's more of an action/crime saga than anything. If you're coming from the perspective of "this is gonna be Iron Man times a million" then you're selling yourself short. Iron Man was a completely different movie, completely different hero, completely different group of filmmakers.

The Dark Knight is one of the best films of the year, in my opinion. I think it has more than we can even fathom hiding under the surface. Sure it was Heath Ledger's last full film appearance, sure it was built up by the critics (for good reasons) in the past few weeks, and sure, it was technically innovative and is more than likely the biggest box office draw.

But it's simply a great movie, despite its flaws, despite its marketing campaign, and certainly despite the untimely death of its main villain. Would there be Oscar talk surrounding Ledger's performance if he were alive and well today?

Probably not and that's a damn shame. That's the media's fault for building it up so much.

But I think if he were alive, he would more than assuredly deserve an Oscar nod. This film shows the duality of order and chaos, darkness and insanity, and their relation to each other. It shows that through Batman and Joker's relationship; neither can live without the other because the world's not perfect.

I feel most of us are focusing on the fine little details (you know, stupid crap like "Rachel was ugly" or "The editing was sub-par") because we're ignoring the true purpose of this film: its messages were all over the place. But some of us were too focused on ridiculous little details to fully appreciate that, were we not?

If anything was "a social experiment" it would be GAF's perspective on this film. Is it perfect? No; show me something that is and I'll laugh in your face. Look deeper. Look beyond the flaws, because in those flaws, might lie your answers.

The Joker's line was right about how
"...they'll eat themselves alive"...
our society in a nutshell. And where else to dig up the scum within society than the internet? How appropriate. We're all little trolls when it comes down to it. And we don't care.

A year down the road, you'll see what I mean. And I only saw the flick once. Maybe some of us were too busy texting our pals or attempting to record the whole thing on our iPhone. Seriously, you pay for your damn ticket to see a movie...see the movie.

Bottom line, and this is the last I'll say about it...
The Dark Knight is the best movie of the year.
 
Royale with Cheese said:
The Joker's line was right about how
"...they'll eat themselves alive"...
our society in a nutshell.

But he wasn't right. This movie proved that humanity is a caring lot that wouldn't blow themselves up in a bid to stay alive. It PROVED that.
 
Son of Godzilla said:
But he wasn't right. This movie proved that humanity is a caring lot that wouldn't blow themselves up in a bid to stay alive. It PROVED that.

I think it goes half and half. Cause Dent certainly proved his point... but the boat thing didn't.
 
But he wasn't right. This movie proved that humanity is a caring lot that wouldn't blow themselves up in a bid to stay alive. It PROVED that.

It demonstrated it in the context of this story. And it was a very good depiction. My point in "...eat each other alive" was to show what idiots we are when we're online.

Let's either have a civil, critical conversation or none at all, that's all I'm saying.
 
Karma Kramer said:
I think it goes half and half. Cause Dent certainly proved his point... but the boat thing didn't.

Very enlightening point...it's the choices of individuals, not the masses, that make the most impact. In most cases.

See, that's the awesome thing about TDK that you really take with you the first time around. Sure, the stunts are great, The Joker's just insane all-around, the ensemble cast was excellent...but the film had more to say than many of us give it credit for, myself included.

I was floored when I left the theater. I had a pretty good walk back in the dark to think things through also. Very awesome flick!
 
pizzaguysrevenge said:
Maggie Gyllenhaal is way above average.

Average is the asian lady who works at 7-11 with missing teeth and a cock eye.
Average is that chunky bitch that sat behind you in high school.
Average is the nerdy white girl with a nose that sticks out six inches and has 6 thousand bumps.

That's what average is.

You don't want to know what ugly is.

So now she is not ugly? I thought that was already established.

I think she is average, or slightly above average look broad. Not beautiful, but well above the quo.

I still think the line the line Joker says to her sticks out because of it.
 
Royale with Cheese said:
This film shows the duality of order and chaos, darkness and insanity, and their relation to each other.
But you see, it really doesn't, at least not in an adult way.
It pits a madman that kill for no reason against an altruistic billionaire who would sacrifice everything for the greater good.
Both archetypes has nothing to do with reality.
You want to explore chaos vs. order?
Do fascism vs. anarchism or liberty vs. government control.
 
Linkzg said:
So now she is not ugly? I thought that was already established.

I think she is average, or slightly above average look broad. Not beautiful, but well above the quo.

I still think the line the line Joker says to her sticks out because of it.

I think if that line stuck out to you, you have serious mental problems.
 
Royale with Cheese said:
Very enlightening point...it's the choices of individuals, not the masses, that make the most impact. In most cases.

See, that's the awesome thing about TDK that you really take with you the first time around. Sure, the stunts are great, The Joker's just insane all-around, the ensemble cast was excellent...but the film had more to say than many of us give it credit for, myself included.

I was floored when I left the theater. I had a pretty good walk back in the dark to think things through also. Very awesome flick!

Yeah... good points.

Movie was classic. One of the best in a long time.
 
So yeah, being able to make a half burned former DA who kills peopled based on chance into a quasi-realistic character is a pretty impressive feat, but why bother?

The fuck does that even mean? Stop trying to sound like a professional reviewer douche. You only have half of that down.
 
omg rite said:
The fuck does that even mean? Stop trying to sound like a professional reviewer douche. You only have half of that down.
Do you really don't understand or are you blinded by rage due to the fact that someone does not share your opinion on a movie?
If it's the former I can try to explain again, if it's the latter, grow up.
 
TheHeretic said:
I think if that line stuck out to you, you have serious mental problems.

So now having different taste is considered a mental problem. :lol

Whatever helps you sleep at night, kid.

Chichikov said:
Do you really don't understand or are you blinded by rage due to the fact that someone does not share your opinion on a movie?
If it's the former I can try to explain again, if it's the latter, grow up.

It makes sense, so I don't think that is the problem. I think the answer to "why bother?" is because it was included in the script. All there is to it.
 
Chichikov said:
Do you really don't understand or are you blinded by rage due to the fact that someone does not share your opinion on a movie?
If it's the former I can try to explain again, if it's the latter, grow up.

No, you sound retarded.
 
Royale with Cheese said:
It demonstrated it in the context of this story.

It really didn't demonstrate shit, humanity passed Joker's challenge because Batman yelled really loudly or something. The ferry scene was entirely disconnected from the rest of the movie.
 
Linkzg said:
So now having different taste is considered a mental problem. :lol

Whatever helps you sleep at night, kid.

If in that scene all you could think was "omg MG is teh ugly" and that stuck out as a negative, let me tell you, taste has nothing to do with it. You simply have no idea how to go about watching a movie.
 
Linkzg said:
It makes sense, so I don't think that is the problem. I think the answer to "why bother?" is because it was included in the script. All there is to it.
I obviously challenge the story, not the fact that the director followed the script.
Anyway, it's not even a major issue I have with this movie, it's just an observation.
Not sure why so many people got hung up on this particular line.
 
reilo said:
Only once, but, if time allows, I'm contemplating multiple views. Maybe even get ahold of IMAX tickets.

Watch it in IMAX at least once if you haven't. It is worth it.

TheHeretic said:
If in that scene all you could think was "omg MG is teh ugly" and that stuck out as a negative, let me tell you, taste has nothing to do with it. You simply have no idea how to go about watching a movie.

People are different. Shocking, I know, but it's true.

btw, you should really stop assuming things based on things people didn't say.
 
Chichikov said:
I obviously challenge the story, not the fact that the director followed the script.
Anyway, it's not even a major issue I have with this movie, it's just an observation.
Not sure why so many people got hung up on this particular line.

You need to write in a more direct fashion. And when I said I have no idea what you said, I meant it. I couldn't understand what you're writing at all.

it takes a beyond simplistic and reactionary approach to its subject matter.
Beyond simplistic? Reactionary? Huh?

It could have been a brilliant action movie, but it's dragged down by misplaced aspiration for a morality tale that just doesn't work, and quite honestly, plays like something out of creative writing 101.
Elaborate?

So yeah, being able to make a half burned former DA who kills peopled based on chance into a quasi-realistic character is a pretty impressive feat, but why bother?
Why bother? Why bother with what? Writing a script and putting an established character from the batman universe in? The director did help to write the screenplay with his brother.


There can be a ton of interpretations on what you wrote, because you simply wrote nothing conclusive at all. Can't blame others to intrepret it the way they see it. Have fun with silliness? Why can't we have a film that is more serious for once?
 
Chichikov said:
Not sure why so many people got hung up on this particular line.
if you can't understand then you're not as bright as you make yourself sound. :P you had a fairly pretentious, critical post and ended it on a rhetorical question. attention is thus drawn to that last question, though i think some other comments deserve ridicule. creative writing 101? fuck, get over yourself, dude. it was an amazing film and no one admires you for attempting to vaguely tear its foundation down.
 
reilo said:
Only once, but, if time allows, I'm contemplating multiple views. Maybe even get ahold of IMAX tickets.

I meant how many times did you blow your load while watching the movie :lol but yes watch it in IMAX, way better experience.
 
:lol :lol :lol

I can't believe you people are taking his criticisms seriously, it honestly reminds me of the latest xkcd:

impostor.png


If you can't write clearly, you're not a good writer. If you're not a good writer then you shouldn't hold yourself as an authority on criticising the writings of others.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom