-

Jump to content



Photo
- - - - -

*** Official THE DARK KNIGHT Discussion Thread


This topic has been archived. This means that you cannot reply to this topic.
832 replies to this topic

#1 of 833 OFFLINE   JonZ

JonZ

    Lead Actor

  • 7,793 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 28 1998

Posted July 15 2008 - 03:10 AM

James Bs review. 4 stars.

ReelViews Movie Review

#2 of 833 OFFLINE   Brent M

Brent M

    Producer

  • 4,486 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 15 2001

Posted July 15 2008 - 11:00 AM

I'm not much of a conspiracy theorist, but 3 of the 4 current negative reviews at RT are from Time Out New York, New York Magazine and The New Yorker. I guess all the talk about New Yorkers being pissed that Nolan filmed in Chicago instead of using their city as Gotham was true after all. It's absolutely ludicrous that "critics" let something like that play into their review of a film, but in this case the bias clearly shows. What a bunch of a-holes. Posted Image
"If you're good at something, never do it for free."

#3 of 833 OFFLINE   Chad R

Chad R

    Screenwriter

  • 2,174 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 14 1999
  • Real Name:Chad Rouch

Posted July 15 2008 - 05:28 PM

Just got back. If you can, see it in IMAX. Even if you have to wait for a later show or more convenient time this weekend. It's worth it. Every penny.

The movie itself is very, very good. I would have to see it at least a second time before I say HOW good -- but right now I'm falling down on pretty darn great.

#4 of 833 OFFLINE   oscar_merkx

oscar_merkx

    Lead Actor

  • 7,632 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 15 2002

Posted July 16 2008 - 01:14 AM

Gilliam attacks Batman - Yahoo! News UK
Toastmasters International

Communication is Everything

#5 of 833 OFFLINE   Brandon Conway

Brandon Conway

    Lead Actor

  • 7,202 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 2002
  • Real Name:Brandon Conway
  • LocationNorth Hollywood, CA

Posted July 16 2008 - 03:00 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by oscar_merkx
I'm sorry, but it's the media making a big deal about it, not Warner or anyone involved with the film. And even then most reviews have been quite respectful, even pointing out that his performance is great by itself without any bias because of his passing. Warner has made no ads that play up Ledger's death. This is, IMO, a baseless accusation.

"And now the reprimand, from an American critic. He reproaches me for using film as a sacred & lasting medium, like a painting or a book. He does not believe that filmmaking is an inferior art, but he believes, and quite rightly, that a reel goes quickly, that the public are looking above all for relaxation, that film is fragile and that it is pretentious to express the power of one's soul by such ephemeral and delicate means, that Charlie Chaplin's or Buster Keaton's first films can only be seen on very rare and badly spoiled prints. I add that the cinema is making daily progress and that eventually films that we consider marvelous today will soon be forgotten because of new dimensions & colour. This is true. But for 4 weeks this film [The Blood of a Poet] has been shown to audiences that have been so attentive, so eager & so warm, that I wonder after all there is not an anonymous public who are looking for more than relaxation in the cinema." - Jean Cocteau, 1932


#6 of 833 OFFLINE   TerryRL

TerryRL

    Producer

  • 3,977 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 12 2001

Posted July 16 2008 - 03:04 AM

Roger Ebert's 4 star review...

The Dark Knight :: rogerebert.com :: Reviews
"Quite an experience to live in fear isn't it? That's what it is to be a slave."

#7 of 833 OFFLINE   DavidPla

DavidPla

    Screenwriter

  • 2,357 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 15 2004

Posted July 16 2008 - 03:53 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by Brandon Conway
I'm sorry, but it's the media making a big deal about it, not Warner or anyone involved with the film. And even then most reviews have ben quite respectful, even pointing out that his performance is great by itself without any bias because of his passing. Warner has made no ads that play up Ledger's death. This is, IMO, a baseless accusation.

Totally agreed. It's like he thinks they shouldn't feature him in ANY of the ads at all or something. Terry Gilliam always has to have a negative word in it seems for everything.

#8 of 833 OFFLINE   DavidPla

DavidPla

    Screenwriter

  • 2,357 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 15 2004

Posted July 16 2008 - 04:02 AM

So... is Rex Reed an idiot?

Quote:
Writer-director Nolan’s Batman Begins, with its surreal and mystical mumbo jumbo about playboy Bruce Wayne’s beginnings, remains the worst Batman movie I’ve ever seen, although the comic-book addicts disagree.

The Dark Knight takes up where it left off, but if it’s a follow-up that introduces a comprehensive sociopath called the Joker, then how do you explain the fact that the Joker made his debut years ago as Jack Nicholson? It’s just one of the things that makes no sense, but hey-ho, since when did Batman and logic morph?

Bat to the Future | The New York Observer

#9 of 833 OFFLINE   TonyD

TonyD

    Executive Producer

  • 16,146 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 01 1999
  • Real Name:Tony D.
  • LocationDisney World and Universal Florida

Posted July 16 2008 - 04:10 AM

apparently
facebook.com/whotony

#10 of 833 OFFLINE   Brandon Conway

Brandon Conway

    Lead Actor

  • 7,202 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 2002
  • Real Name:Brandon Conway
  • LocationNorth Hollywood, CA

Posted July 16 2008 - 04:16 AM

Sad that a paid critic can be that dense to the idea of a re-launch and alternate adaptation. Does he think each film version of Hamlet has been a spin-off of those previous?

"And now the reprimand, from an American critic. He reproaches me for using film as a sacred & lasting medium, like a painting or a book. He does not believe that filmmaking is an inferior art, but he believes, and quite rightly, that a reel goes quickly, that the public are looking above all for relaxation, that film is fragile and that it is pretentious to express the power of one's soul by such ephemeral and delicate means, that Charlie Chaplin's or Buster Keaton's first films can only be seen on very rare and badly spoiled prints. I add that the cinema is making daily progress and that eventually films that we consider marvelous today will soon be forgotten because of new dimensions & colour. This is true. But for 4 weeks this film [The Blood of a Poet] has been shown to audiences that have been so attentive, so eager & so warm, that I wonder after all there is not an anonymous public who are looking for more than relaxation in the cinema." - Jean Cocteau, 1932


#11 of 833 OFFLINE   Chuck Mayer

Chuck Mayer

    Lead Actor

  • 7,980 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 06 2001
  • Real Name:Chuck Mayer
  • LocationNorthern Virginia

Posted July 16 2008 - 04:22 AM

Quote:
Originally Posted by TerryRL
Roger Ebert's 4 star review...
Yeah, but Ebert loves Chicago Posted Image

Seriously, Rex Reed considers BB the worst Batman film? Seriously?

I don't think I can even wrap my head around that. Seriously?!?!?
Hey buddy...did you just see a real bright light?

#12 of 833 OFFLINE   Nicholas Martin

Nicholas Martin

    Screenwriter

  • 2,683 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 18 2003

Posted July 16 2008 - 04:26 AM

The review comments were quick to jump on Reed's misunderstanding of the franchise and the fact that 'Begins' and 'Dark Knight' are not sequels to the Burton/Schumacher movies.

Now this is one critic everyone can agree on...being a complete moron.

Anyone who thinks Batman & Robin is better than Begins will always be a complete moron, which Reed made clear by stating that Begins was the worst Batman movie he's seen. There's no disagreeing with that assessment of him, because to do that would be well, stupid!

#13 of 833 OFFLINE   Brent M

Brent M

    Producer

  • 4,486 posts
  • Join Date: Oct 15 2001

Posted July 16 2008 - 04:26 AM

Oh my goodness, what a complete tool. I didn't know Rex Reed was even still alive let alone reviewing movies, but after reading that I'm glad I haven't heard much about him in the last few years. Clearly he's not all there.

In a somewhat related category(since Reed also writes for a NY publication), now 4 of the 5 negative reviews on RT are from New York critics. It's absolutely pathetic how the reviewers in that city are holding a grudge against this movie because Nolan filmed it in Chicago instead of NYC. It's about the most unprofessional bias against a film I've ever seen and I hope nobody takes the reviews from any of those publications seriously.
"If you're good at something, never do it for free."

#14 of 833 OFFLINE   Brandon Conway

Brandon Conway

    Lead Actor

  • 7,202 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 2002
  • Real Name:Brandon Conway
  • LocationNorth Hollywood, CA

Posted July 16 2008 - 05:08 AM

The critics who thought it was being "too serious" for its comic book roots is one thing, but this idea that Nolan's Batman films are worse than Schumacher's is simply sour grapes, incompetence in understanding the language of cinema, or both.

I like how rottentomatoes.com is listing Eric Snider's review as negative. They quote the following:

"This is easily the worst Batman film so far, and I include "Batman & Robin" in that statement."

And then neglect the next line:

"Just kidding. It's fantastic. I just wanted to see if a negative quote on Rotten Tomatoes would get me the same kind of psychopathic comments that other negative reviews have gotten. If it does, I guess that means those idiots really are just going by the one-sentence quotes, and not actually clicking over to read the whole review."

Posted Image Posted Image Posted Image

"And now the reprimand, from an American critic. He reproaches me for using film as a sacred & lasting medium, like a painting or a book. He does not believe that filmmaking is an inferior art, but he believes, and quite rightly, that a reel goes quickly, that the public are looking above all for relaxation, that film is fragile and that it is pretentious to express the power of one's soul by such ephemeral and delicate means, that Charlie Chaplin's or Buster Keaton's first films can only be seen on very rare and badly spoiled prints. I add that the cinema is making daily progress and that eventually films that we consider marvelous today will soon be forgotten because of new dimensions & colour. This is true. But for 4 weeks this film [The Blood of a Poet] has been shown to audiences that have been so attentive, so eager & so warm, that I wonder after all there is not an anonymous public who are looking for more than relaxation in the cinema." - Jean Cocteau, 1932


#15 of 833 OFFLINE   Chuck Mayer

Chuck Mayer

    Lead Actor

  • 7,980 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 06 2001
  • Real Name:Chuck Mayer
  • LocationNorthern Virginia

Posted July 16 2008 - 05:14 AM

Good job, RT (thumbs up).

Seriously, I won't critique any of the reviews of a film I haven't seen, or even one I have. Opinions are like (yadda yadda), and all that.

But I agree with Brandon re: Rex Reed. It's OK to not like a film, but a professional movie watcher should at least understand the skill in making it and presenting material. The objective portion of the job.

Still, all in good fun. Who cares?
Hey buddy...did you just see a real bright light?

#16 of 833 OFFLINE   Brandon Conway

Brandon Conway

    Lead Actor

  • 7,202 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 30 2002
  • Real Name:Brandon Conway
  • LocationNorth Hollywood, CA

Posted July 16 2008 - 05:15 AM

Andrew Sarris of the New York Observer has a positive review to put a small dent in Brent's NY spite theory.

"And now the reprimand, from an American critic. He reproaches me for using film as a sacred & lasting medium, like a painting or a book. He does not believe that filmmaking is an inferior art, but he believes, and quite rightly, that a reel goes quickly, that the public are looking above all for relaxation, that film is fragile and that it is pretentious to express the power of one's soul by such ephemeral and delicate means, that Charlie Chaplin's or Buster Keaton's first films can only be seen on very rare and badly spoiled prints. I add that the cinema is making daily progress and that eventually films that we consider marvelous today will soon be forgotten because of new dimensions & colour. This is true. But for 4 weeks this film [The Blood of a Poet] has been shown to audiences that have been so attentive, so eager & so warm, that I wonder after all there is not an anonymous public who are looking for more than relaxation in the cinema." - Jean Cocteau, 1932


#17 of 833 OFFLINE   TravisR

TravisR

    Studio Mogul

  • 21,999 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 15 2004
  • LocationThe basement of the FBI building

Posted July 16 2008 - 05:30 AM

I would think that the negative reviews could be more of a result of some critics deciding that they were going to go against the grain and not like the movie since the movie is going to be very popular (critically and box office-wise) rather than anyone being mad about where they choose to shot.

EDIT: If I lived in New York City, I'd be alot more mad at the movie if they had shot it there since they don't need anything else to screw up traffic in that city. Posted Image

#18 of 833 OFFLINE   todd s

todd s

    Lead Actor

  • 6,895 posts
  • Join Date: Jul 08 1999

Posted July 16 2008 - 05:43 AM

I wasn't going to respond to this whole critic debate. But, reading what Rex Reed wrote....What an idiot. I cannot believe he doesn't know that its a reboot. What gets me the worst. He not only gets to see the movie before me...He gets paid to do it. Posted Image
Bring back John Doe! Or at least resolve the cliff-hanger with a 2hr movie or as an extra on a dvd release.

#19 of 833 OFFLINE   Sam Davatchi

Sam Davatchi

    Producer

  • 3,151 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 15 1999

Posted July 16 2008 - 11:09 AM

I read that for the BD release they are going to make it change aspect ratios. I hope this is not true. It would be a terrible idea and would distract from the viewing in our homes. It's designed to work for IMAX screens. I hope they fix it to 2.35:1.

#20 of 833 OFFLINE   Yumbo

Yumbo

    Screenwriter

  • 2,243 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 13 1999

Posted July 16 2008 - 01:58 PM

Just finished watching first screening here in Fiji.

Left speaker was off as usual.
Focus was off.
Reel changes were distracting.
The print had dirt and scratches galore.

And the opening did not have the brightness, clarity nor the punch of the IMAX prologue on Blu-ray.

The movie was less wooden than Batman Begins.

Looking forward to the ratio-changing Blu-ray.

LOOKED AND SOUNDED perfect on my home rig.


Back to Movies (Theatrical)



Forum Nav Content I Follow