Urban75 Home About Offline BrixtonBuzz Contact

The Dark Knight review: Gutted

good point about the pace.
i didn't think it dragged.
and the only disappointment was that it had to end!

and the story line was clear as fuck.
what's with the confusion?
it had 3 main story lines and a couple of twists.

where's the confusion?
 
I thought the only let down was that the Joker was left alive at the end. There didn't seem to be any resolution for his character, I mean, are we supposed to believe he got sent down for 15 years or something? For such a great performance I thought they could've seen him off in style. I suppose they were leaving the door open for a return at that stage?
 
So he did definitely die after the film was wrapped up then? I couldn't remember if he was partially digitally put in after his death
 
Why don't people use the spoiler code?

Anyway. I enjoyed. Much better than walle, I know what I'd take my kid to see :D
 
It has the plot of three movies squeezed into one film, and for a large part of it I was confused as to what exactly was going on, and where the story was going (not in a 'Oooh, what a nice surprise!' way, but in a 'What a jumbled mess!' way.

I thought it only had one plot ( although it was nicely complex ) and I understood everything . I know your a clever bloke wookey but if I didn't I'd have thought you were some kind of gibering idiot not to be able to follow the plot :p
 
Why don't people use the spoiler code?
I'm a big advocate of the spoiler code, but I figured that given this was the 'review' thread it would generally be populated by people who have seen it and should generally be assumed that there will be spoilers in the discussions contained hereon within, here.
 
Meh - it was better than shite like the last Spiderman movie but it isn't anything like as good as say The Crow. Don't see what was so great about Ledger's performance either. Drab love-interest n'all.
 
apart from this being factually inacurate the whole of that "review" is utter crap :rolleyes:




this bit cracked me up



The Batman is a man of steel, unlike Bruce Wayne, who is merely super-hunky and dashing. He has no limits, and can survive flesh wounds, stabbing, crashes, and falls from a great height, without putting a dent in his schedule. He moves with a fluidity and speed that must make him the envy of the Parkour kids, appearing out of nowhere, and disappearing noiselessly. His ferocious masculine growl is an exaggerated imitation of Dirty Harry. He is the ruthless, overbearing superego of Gotham city, animated not by compassion or solidarity but by an obsessive conscience. "The most urgent task of the man of steel," Klaus Theweleit argued, "is to pursue, to dam in, and to subdue any force that threatens to transform him back into the horribly disorganized jumble of flesh, hair, skin, bones, intestines and feelings that calls itself human." People turn to men of steel in order to restore the imperilled fantasy of immortality, by ensuring that it is others who die. But the men of steel, whatever their protests to the contrary, do not desire an end to the chaos and destruction. They adore it, and are lost without it. If Bruce Wayne no longer had his epic fight against mega-crime, he might have to deal with picket lines at his company gates, people trying to 'redistribute' his wealth, immigrant workers becoming politically assertive, public prosecutors bashing on his doors to investigate his environmental or labour code violations, all of that petty stuff that real-life CEOs have to deal with. His romantic interests might realise that he was unworthy of love too, and anyone unfortunate enough to marry him would discover a controlling personality given to violent rages, a megalomaniac who spies on her every move through his system of cameras and hidden mics. And what's with all the secret chambers and torture equipment? He might even prove to be rather dim, bigoted and narcissistic, a more handsome version of Donald Trump. As for Harvey Dent, his 'idealism' would prove to be as tyrannical as it is selective. He would be rounding up petty drug offenders and shoplifters, 'cleaning the streets' of prostitutes and undesirables, jailing the homeless, going after the damned radicals and peaceniks.

:cool:
 
Seen it. Really liked it. It played things straight enough for me to be drawn in. Better than the first one. The highest compliment i could give it is that I wasn't bored once in two and a half hours. The plot was complex in blockbuster terms I guess, but I can't see why an adult would find that a bad thing. It certainly wasn't 'all over the place' In fact, it was great to see things not coming to an easy resolution. As for the OPs comments about the direction, a director directs the performances of the actors, not the car chases. And he did a v good job. I've always though Nolan was overrated but with this and The prestige he's really coming into his own.
 
Oh dear oh dear oh dear :(
#


would batman say this?

Voilà! In view, a humble vaudevillian veteran, cast vicariously as both victim and villain by the vicissitudes of Fate. This visage, no mere veneer of vanity, is it vestige of the vox populi, now vacant, vanished, as the once vital voice of the verisimilitude now venerates what they once vilified. However, this valorous visitation of a bygone vexation stands vivified, and has vowed to vanquish these venal and virulent vermin vanguarding vice and vouchsafing the violently vicious and voracious violation of volition. The only verdict is vengeance; a vendetta held as a votive, not in vain, for the value and veracity of such shall one day vindicate the vigilant and the virtuous. Verily, this vichyssoise of verbiage veers most verbose vis-à-vis an introduction, and so it is my very good honor to meet you and you may call me V."


there ya go then
 
Back
Top Bottom