MovieChat Forums > The Dark Knight (2008) Discussion > Not as good as I thought.

Not as good as I thought.

posted 2 years ago by TroyB (164)
26 replies | jump to latest

It's still a good movie, dont get me wrong, but not great, other than the Joker, exceptionally done by the late Heath Ledger.

After another closer view, I realized that the movie is over plotted with a lot of unnecessary characters. Then the Two Face subplot toward the end should've unfolded during the middle of the film, not after the capture of the Joker with only about 15 minutes left before going off. The way in how Two Face was handled felt rushed. I feel that hurt the movie.

I was also disappointed with the new Rachel Dawes. She just looked out of place in my opinion. And so many of the action sequences jumped around so that also didn't help.

[–] acidraindrop (3055) 2 years ago

Without the two face subplot at the end, the film's primary narrative and thematic arc would be woefully incomplete without Wayne's direct foil.

[–] Ace_Spade (9411) 2 years ago

Agreed. There's a whole "duality" theme that Two-Face serves. It starts when is the "White Knight" as Harvey Dent - contrasted to Bruce's "Dark Knight" persona - and then continues when he becomes duality personified. This is also mirrored in the fight between order/chaos with Batman and the Joker.

I also think there's a weird motif of "games" in TDK with Joker (cards) and Two-Face (coins) that set each other off nicely.

[–] TandyMan (10439) 2 years ago

Joker's big prison showdown falls flat. I love the idea of it. But it didn't quite work. Joker ultimately feels a little wasted in this movie.

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7449) 2 years ago

I like this movie but dislike that Harvey Dent as Two Face was only in the movie for about 20 minutes and then is killed off. I wish he'd been a main villain for the next movie instead of Bane who I admit I do not care for that much.

[–] TroyB (164) 2 years ago

I agree with you there. As stated from the start of my post, Two Face felt like it was shoehorned when it wasn't. Two Face was a fascinating take behind the Joker and should've had a bit more than just 15 minutes of fame. We gotten short changed as viewers in my opinion.

[–] [deleted] a year ago

Its especially dumb if you consider the movie is way too long. Just cut him out. Let him wake up and run off or something.

[–] fawltybasil (249) a year ago

One of the most overrated films of all time. There's so many things that happen in this film that leave me scratching my head.

When Batman's speeding towards The Joker and then changes his mind about killing him, why is he knocked out from a very minor fall from the Batpod?

What happens to The Joker after Batman and Rachel land on the car. Did the Joker just say goodbye to everyone and walk out of the penthouse or did he kill those people?

How does The Joker survive an explosion that killed everyone else just by bending down behind some filing cabinets?

Why does Two-Face who has a vendetta to pursue risk his own life by shooting the driver of the car causing it to crash?

If Batman has a no kill rule and saves The Joker at the end, why does he drop the mobster from the building? He doesn't know he's going to be lucky and land on his feet and only break his legs.

When you try and make a serious crime thriller out of a comic book, the fantastical moments are just jarring. Same goes for the attempts at humour like "Let's not do that again", and "That's not good. Oh, that's not good!".

I liked it when I first saw it but even then I was always disappointed that Gotham didn't look like it did in Batman Begins, thought Batman's voice was way too gruff, felt that it started to go downhill and never really recovered once The Joker escaped from prison, and found Gordon's speech at the end a bit cringeworthy.

6/10

[–] spurtle467 (1509) a year ago

The worst one is how the senator can't see the dead Batman guy until the moment he hits the glass, when he's looking out of his window in that same direction for a few seconds before that.

I do agree the film is overrated. I like the film but I never understood how it drew such acclaim to be considered one of the best movies apparently ever.

[–] mitzibishi (1624) a year ago

or the Eric Roberts mob boss getting in the car with two face sat right there in the back seat (who silently dispatched of one of his henchman as he was getting in the car), and he doesn't realise until minutes into the journey.

Or the Michael Jai White mob boss dying silently and lying down for sleepy time after the joker has a knife in his mouth.

This movie is full of contrivances and things that don't make sense.

I had it at a 9/10, now I think it's only around a 7.5/10

Nolan nailed the themes but the little details just kept bugging me as I was constantly pointing things out that didn't make sense and contrivances

[–] Joogle83 (4148) a year ago

what still better Than The Batman

[–] Luffy (837) a year ago

I did not like Nolan's direction or the script he ended with. For about a decade the film was considered better than Pulp Fiction and Fellowship of the Ring. It was worshipped till the last second of IMDB boards' dying breath. IMHO, Fellowship too has aged badly.

I was dismayed because I always prided on my taste being aligned with the zeitgeist of the decade. I felt that I was losing my judgement. Seeing this thread is still unreal, given what was being said about The Dark Knight on IMDB back then.
TDK was the biggest reason why I stopped watching Hollywood blockbusters bar Avengers and Endgame (most other superhero movies I could not completely watch). This thread is not a threat to TDK's reputation, but I'm glad that my opinion is not that much an outlier. I often think what does art mean and why some movies that I like might have something special about them.

The last overpraised movie that I watched is Parasite. I gave it 8/10, but I don't think it is the masterpiece that everyone had been shouting from the rooftops collectively. We'll see what time does to its perceived reputation.

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7449) a year ago

I like TDK a lot tbut I'd give it an 8/10. It is overrated and certainly isn't as good as Terminator 2, The Star Wars OT, Forrest Gump, Shawshank Redemption, One Flew over the Cuckoo's Nest, or Goodfellas. It is dumb people felt the need to rate some of these other films a 1/10 just to boost the rating of the Dark Knight.

[–] Luffy (837) a year ago

Yes, it is regrettable when people approach movie fandom with the worst kind of tribalism best left to sports.

[–] BlackMass (700) 7 months ago

'Gump' lol.

[–] GreenGoblinsOck8 (7449) 7 months ago

I know it's popular on message boards like this to hate on Forrest Gump but most people think it's pretty good. Also I've gotten more respect for the film since reading the book back in 2014. If the movie had been like the book, it wouldn't have won any Oscars except maybe best special effects. Nobody could take seriously the stuff that happens in the second half of the book.

[–] BlackMass (700) 7 months ago

It's popular to "hate" on 'Gump'? Knew nothing about that, nor am I influenced by it. I simply find the film to be a twee, ball-less piece of Hollywood fluff. Gump's mic "cutting out" as he states his politics summarises the film well ("Don't offend anybody!"). It also dances around the AIDS issue in a way that the previous year's 'Philadelphia' – a far superior Hanks effort – was willing to tackle.

The rest of the films you mentioned are classics, with both grittiness and a heart.

[–] maul (1534) a year ago

"Fellowship too has aged badly"

Absolute blasphemy. Shame on you, sir.

[–] Luffy (837) a year ago

I have a feeling your vocab will quickly... urbanise, if I engage, so yeah, I won't.

[–] maul (1534) a year ago

There's probably some kind of correlation between your weird misreading of my character and your perspective on Fellowship. Some kind of inherent inability to properly judge things. Thanks for confirming that, at least.

[–] Luffy (837) a year ago

Now I'm not judging or trying to read you, but since registering on this site, I've had the weird feeling that everyone is either 15 or 50, depending on the references and level of maturity people exercise in. I'm not bothered by your post. Just wanna wish you good luck, however wrongly I misread your character :)

[–] Ace_Spade (9411) 7 months ago

I rewatched all of the Lord of the Rings films a couple years back, and I respectfully disagree with your position. A couple of visual effects seemed a little dated (not Gollum, though; that still looks great), but other than that, I thought they held up marvelously. Chalk it up to Tolkien, if you like; his writing provides such a solid foundation that the films are elevated by that alone. However, there is much more to it than that.

The casting in the films are, my opinion, about as perfect as you could hope for. They also deliver on some brilliant performances. While I try to operate on a "to each their own" basis, I must confess that, if somebody didn't like Ian McKellen's performance as Gandalf (at least), I'd become a little suspicious of the validity of their personal taste.

I don't want to rant about all aspects of the film, but suffice to say, my belief is that they hold up. From production design, to music, to a remarkably faithful adaptation (if imperfect) we got some amazing LOTR films. As a big fan of LOTR and Tolkien, I continue to be very, very pleased with these milestone movies.

Overrated can be different than bad, though. I probably would agree that TDK is overrated, and probably Parasite, too, but I think both are great movies.

[–] Luffy (837) 7 months ago

You sound alright, and, though this is a forum and arguing is more than encouraged, I don't get any sort of validation from doing so in this context. I'm not a regular poster here anyway.

[–] Ace_Spade (9411) 7 months ago

I get my kicks on these forums discussing movies. I like to hear other people's theories. I like to dissect the symbolism and meaning behind things like imagery and shot composition, or the use of leitmotif.

When it comes to disagreements, I like to present my side and hear out what the other guy has to say. I might learn something. Even if I don't wind up agreeing, I can at least understand where other people are coming from when it comes to why they love a fillm I loathe, or vice-versa.

In this case, I was just offering up some points about why I think LOTR still stacks up, and if you want to share why you've become a little disaffected (or always were) by these films, go right ahead. I won't start castigating you or anything like that.

[–] [deleted] a year ago

Its a mediocre movie, it was hyped with ledger's death and now people are too afraid to admit the movie actually sucks cause they lied to themselves

[–] Luffy (837) a year ago

Ledger's death had something to do with the movie's aura, though not everything. Fans kept saying that if Ledger's death was so crucial to the box office success of TDK, then why did The Imaginarium of Doctor Parnassus do so poorly?

These people forget that whatever the scenario, people go to someone's funeral and pay tribute and mourn only once. That is the reason why TDK benefited from Ledger's death and not his other posthumous movie.

[–] jk90us (5541) 7 months ago

Nolan’s trilogy is just boring fluff with no action or suspense and the clumsiest fight scenes. Ledger is the only bright spot in the three.