I'm glad 2 see I'm not alone in my distaste 4 Bale as Bruce Wayne/Batman. See my comment above...

(2) Two-Face has always been my favorite male villain...Harley Quinn is my favorite female willain and I really hope she's in the next installment.

Sorry I have to correct this. You mean Harlequin (a comic character in pantomime).

bluefish said:

You were supposed to see The Dark Knight, not Mamma Mia.

Mars23 said:

Did you even read my review? It was a good movie, just not a good Batman movie; it was a little TOO grounded in realism for my tastes.

The whole mob storyline with Marconi and Lau was completely uninteresting and made me doze off more than a few times. The explosions just got repetitive and boring: Explosions for explosions' sake. And the overly-obvious philisophical dialogue had me constantly. I also agree with those who say that Bale's peformance as Batman regressed from Begins, although he was a better Bruce Wayne in this one.

My one major beef with TDK is it just didn't feel like a superhero movie AT ALL. I would have appreciated it much more if the characters weren't part of a comic book universe, because in this film they took themselves much too seriously. It's akin to having the Scooby Doo characters appear in a period romance; it just doesn't click 'cause its straying too far from the genre.

Burton's Batman did it right: There was campiness and flair, some over-the-top cartoony elements, but it was perfectly balanced with the gritty, dark reality of a slum. Not too realistic, yet not too "fantasyland" either. A perfect middleground.

Next thing you know, they'll have the Transformers joining Congress or something. THESE TYPES OF CHARACTERS DO NOT BELONG IN THE REAL WORLD! [/rant]

bluefish said:

even though the whole "gritty realism" thing didn't bother me as much with TDK as it did with the last one, i totally agree! if you don't want a whimsical element in a movie, don't adapt a comic book!

SUPRMAN said:

No, I mean Harley Quinn...the Joker's Hench Wench from the animated series.




http://en.wikipedia.org/w...rley_Quinn


http://comics.ign.com/art...650p1.html


She's simple and more a sidekick, but she's my fave Batman lady.

Isn’t a man in a bat suit being chased by a clown whimsical enough?
If something is live action, it should be grounded in reality, that’s why this Batman movie opened as solid as it did, that’s why it's getting the reviews that it is getting,
That’s why “Spiderman 2” worked so well.
An arty movie with limited appeal like Sin City is as close to a comic book as you are going to get, I liked it but that aspect of it also kept me from getting really drawn in. The comic “book” art, while beautiful, was also a distraction which you don’t feel while reading.
The Dark Knight was too good to be a comic book movie in my opinion; it left a lasting impression on me as strong as last years "Atonement"
This is the measure of all comic book movies from now on.

Giovanni777 said:

You're not alone but you're wrong.

calldapplwondery83 said:

I have mixed feelings about Bale. Though his heart is in the right place, his performances usually come across as overwraught and overdone IMO. He's kind of like the person in art class who you admire their work, but at they same time they think to highly of themselves, that you end up hating them,..

violetblues said:

then explain "underdog" and "alvin and the chipmunks" to me.

Anxiety said:

....., in a "comedy" anything works!
[Edited 7/21/08 19:45pm]

Tom said:

He was good in Newsies!

violetblues said:

Anxiety said:

Dont worry, you'll get it one day Charlie Brown.

bluefish said:

even though the whole "gritty realism" thing didn't bother me as much with TDK as it did with the last one, i totally agree! if you don't want a whimsical element in a movie, don't adapt a comic book!

Anxiety said:

OR adapt a whimsical comic rather than a gritty one.

Bluefish, I did read your review and was refraining from commenting on it. The moment Joel Schumaker was mentioned as a desirable element, I tuned out. To even mention the two steaming piles of crap he produced other than in the context of how he nearly harmed the franchise beyond repair is offensive to me.

We simply want different things from Batman. I got lots of what I wanted and you didn't. It's cool, but I don't think a movie should be reviewed by how you would make it, but rather did the director make his film well.

violetblues said:

maybe they'll make a gritty and realistic version of "peanuts" starring anthony hopkins as charlie brown and ellen page as peppermint patty.

Anxiety said:

Can't quite figure out the diffrence between "comedy" and "action drama" thing huh?
keep working on it you'll get it

violetblues said:

i'm still trying to figure out where you're getting all these rules about comic book adaptation movies. are you stan lee?

Bluefish, I did read your review and was refraining from commenting on it. The moment Joel Schumaker was mentioned as a desirable element, I tuned out. To even mention the two steaming piles of crap he produced other than in the context of how he nearly harmed the franchise beyond repair is offensive to me.

went to six flags amusement park and was all hyped to find out there is a new dk ride. it was the worse mess in the park- don't stand in line for it you'll want to protest.

Evvy said:

Is it called the "Christian Bale Acting Inspiration Ride" and you just sit on a plank of wood?

Mars23 said:

Mars23, I think the two Schumacher films are HORRIBLE and without a doubt RUINED the whole flow of the '90s Batman series in that they strayed so far from the brilliance of Burton's vision.

But my whole reason for bringing up Schumacher in the first place is this: As horrible as Forever and B&R were, they felt at least somewhat like superhero movies! They weren't trying to be all pretentious and make us believe that those characters could exist in our world. They weren't using comic book characters to disguise pedantic dialogue that, if delivered by more realistic characters, would bore audiences to tears.

All I was trying to say is, I surprised and shocked the hell out of myself by wishing that a touch of the absurd Schumacher silliness would have been in TDK. It is a sad, sad thing that my mind had to go there for even a milisecond. But it did. Why? Because what I consider offensive is putting iconic comic heroes into a plot where they weren't needed at all. THIS COULD HAVE BEEN MADE AS A REGULAR CRIME THRILLER MOVIE. A vigilante detective who keeps justice and order? Fine. A psycopath bent on destroying the world? Cool by me. But use true-to-life characters. Taking a realistic crime thriller like this and plugging these characters into it is just insulting.

The whole point of trying to make comic characters true-to-life is just DUMB. Let comics be comics and reality be reality; either TOTALLY realistic or TOTALLY fantasy. End all the "blurring the line" B.S., it's stupid. Who wants to hear about the Joker's alcoholic father, or learn every little detail about Wayne Enterprises' business partnership with the chinese??? It's freakin' BATMAN for cryin' out loud! Who cares?

[/rant]
[Edited 7/21/08 21:54pm]

Actually, comic books stories aren't what they once were at least for some of them. Take a look at "The Killing Joke", for one. A story like that would never have been released back in the 70s or earlier. Take a look at how John Stewart, Hal Jordan, and Tony Stark have done since that time period. They're more fragile than the 70's would have had you believe, and that makes them that much more believable because they're human like the rest of us.