I expected someone with limited comprehension skills to say something like this.. Everytime I come out and say that the dark knight was overrated some one always jumps out and screams bloody murder. Just because a movie is overrated doesn't mean it isn't good. Lebron James is overrated, but he is the best player in the league. I'll say it again, it was a great movie, but isn't one of the best movies of all time as many would like to believe. Also, I never stated that action was better, on the contrary its the other way around. That is why nolan is one of my favorite directors of all time and I can't stand a michael bay film. It doesn't take a great deal of effort to put together a bunch of action scenes but when it comes to a superhero movie they are subject to be judged with more scrutiny. + I hate the way batman talks, he doesn't have to sound like a crow
I don't think there are too many people outside of fanboys that would seriously rate The Dark Knight as one of the greatest movies of all time for any genre. What you hear, more often, is that people says its the best superhero movie of all time. And I think that's fair.
Thats actually how he's supposed to sound, its described in the comics like that. I for one don't have a problem with his voice or Bane's for that matter as I understood everything the first time but then again I am in the minority. And I have to agree with what durvasa said, its more about people regarding TDK as the best comic book/superhero movie of all time and not the best movie ever.
the last time i looked at the imdb top 250, the dark knight was #10 all time with something like 500,000 votes. i'd say the consensus is that it was one of the best movies ever. personally, it's my favorite movie ever and i'm certainly not a batman fanboy (never read a comic) and wasn't anything approaching a nolan fanboy until the dark knight and inception (i seemed to be far less impressed than most by his pre-batman begins stuff like memento and the prestige).
i rank it just below Die Hard among action movies as my favorite. compare it to comic book movies, and there's not really a close second. like you, i'm hardly a nolan fanboy. i just think he nailed the tone to present a gritty and more realistic take on this character and his storyline. that's much more intriguing to me than CGI and cool fight sequences.
Nolan ****s on you fools. Especially Cowboy_Bebop and True Beaner. YOU WILL BE EXILED FOR YOUR INSOLENCE
I would say it's top 100 - and it's better than The Titanic etc. And it's better than the LOTR movies. http://www.infoplease.com/ipea/A0760906.html
You nailed it. Nolan did a masterful job with the tone and grit. But Die Hard is Flawless. Great characters, action, story and no fat. The Dark Knight has a ****ing 20 min sequence that has no purpose other than trying to score points & cash with mainland China/Hong Kong audiences. Those f-cking 20 min grind the movie to a halt and ruin a near perfect masterpiece. There was no need for it. It was ****ing useless. ....That and the casting of sad cartoon turtle. In synthesis, it's a flawed masterpiece. And as much as I hate to agree with Cowboy y Beaner, the hand to hand action is very clunky indeed.
I guess by "fat", you mean depth. I liked that the Joker fights like a cheating weasel. And I don't know how Batman is supposed to talk, but it makes sense that he would disguise his voice. What bugged me the most is the Joker's long hair. It only looked Jokerish to me when he was sitting in the jail.
It isn't top 1000... And I freaking love Batman... If you have it in your top 500, you haven't seen enough good film. Kubrick & Dreyer made 20 superior films alone.
I am comparing it to movies in the American Film Institute's list of the top 100 greatest movies of all time.
i mean uselessness. That episode served no purpose. It didn't enhance any understanding or depth of the principle characters. It served no purpose to the main plot points. It was there a a detour. A pointless detour. The only thing the audience got from it was the Batman has no borders. Something the Joker made everyone aware of in 2 sec worth of dialog.
I remember that part. I thought it was to introduce the cell phone sonar technology that Batman later used in the end. Am I mixing movies here? This was all in part 2 right?
You are correct. This way it wouldn't need to be explained in the end and take away from the ending scenes.
Beat me to it. Wayne later reassigns the R&D department with a new government contract to embed the sonar technology in cell phones and hides that from Fox, knowing he would be displeased.
So, then um...this opinion is wrong then. Hey, I didn't love the action sequences either, but at least this part made sense to me, as to why it was included.
Maybe the point was to remove the audience from Gotham for awhile, given that the film was effectively suffocating, maybe too much so (like being in Tokyo for too long; man!, had to get on the train and leave the concrete jungle) with the Joker's every machination heightening the tension. I'd go into why I disagree with some of your other rantings, but everyone's entitled to their opinion/perception. However, suffice it to say, 3.5 years after the movie was released, you do seem a bit worked up still.
