The Dark Knight review thread

[WildHoneyAlways]

Originally Posted by No spoken words

You know, I'm sure that a bunch of fawning over a film can become annoying (and, yup, I'm fawning over this film), but, jesus Lance, maybe see the fucking movie before you start your whining about it?

Some people like to bitch just to bitch. I hate hype more than the average person. (ie I refuse to see Superbad b/c some many people said it was, and I quote, "the funniest thing ever." ) I understand hating the hype.

But seriously lance, your whining is much more credible when you have specific things to whine about. The "reports" you've heard don't cut it. That's like me saying, "From reports I've heard, the White Sox are one bat away from being a great team."

Ridiculous, no?

[Lancemc]

I need to cite specific sources now? If you really want me to I'll look back through all the things I read with the highlights of my concern. Although I'm sure all anyone will do is either try to discredit the reviews/reviews I mention, or beat up on me for "whining/bitching" even more thoroughly.

Because we all know all I ever do here is whine and bitch about movies. I hate everything, remember.

[No spoken words]

Originally Posted by Lancemc

When did I ever post my own "impressions" anywhere on this board yet? I think you misinterpret. I can certainly be disappointed by other people's own impressions who have seen the movie and posted their own reviews and reactions, which is what I'm talking about. Obviously I don't know for a fact what I'll think about the action in the film or the script myself, but I've read detailed impressions and descriptions from others on those matters, and currently I'm preparing for a film of lesser excellence than I was originally anticipating.

Isn't this why we read reviews in the first place?

Fair enough. I always read the reviews afterwards, just to avoid spoilers/having the thoughts of others coloring my own judgement, but I see your point.

Fuck you.

[No spoken words]

Originally Posted by Lancemc

I need to cite specific sources now? If you really want me to I'll look back through all the things I read with the highlights of my concern. Although I'm sure all anyone will do is either try to discredit the reviews/reviews I mention, or beat up on me for "whining/bitching" even more thoroughly.

Because we all know all I ever do here is whine and bitch about movies. I hate everything, remember.

To be clear:

I don't care if you see it and dislike it; I'd never try to discredit any negative review of this film, let alone your own review.

GAF just called it a shit movie and I just shrug my shoulders, sorry that he disliked it after he was so amped up, that's a bummer.

If we all wandered in here and thought the same things, it would be boring and pointless. I have zero problem with you disliking Nolan's direction of action scenes, I just want to hear how YOU feel about it, after you see it.

[Lancemc]

And I'll certainly share my thoughts when I do.

Fuck you.

[anitram]

I passed by the Regal theatre in Union Square today and there were still line ups and it was sold out all day. Insanity.

I never watch anything in the movie theatre twice and I rarely see anything a second time on DVD either, and same goes with this movie. Although I do wish I'd seen it in IMAX when I had the chance.

[deep]

It is quite a bit better than Indy 4.

And I took some crap for going against the hype on Indy 4.


I have not given my impressions, yet.

I did get caught up in the excitement and go the first day.

I did wait in line about 25 minutes.


I did like the movie, quite a bit.


I am asking myself if I can be objective and just judge it as a 'comic book' movie. There have been a lot of these lately.

That is the standard it should be compared against. imo.


As for Heath? Top notch work.
No doubt this will be his most successful film. (box office - money wise)

I do not think is is his best work.
The character is very one or perhaps two dimensional.

Yes, he nails it. But where is the arc. The nuance?


His work in "Brokeback" is far superior to this.


As for this film. With all the high points. One can overlook the deficiencies, and there are some.

The last film with Bale and Nolan was more impressive than this one.

[deep]

Originally Posted by anitram

I passed by the Regal theatre in Union Square today and there were still line ups and it was sold out all day. Insanity.

It is like James Cameron and The Titanic.

What a huge monster hit that was.

[No spoken words]

Titanic is certainly a film I'll only see the one time.

I never quite understand why people refuse to see a film twice, or re-read a book, but they, I suppose, cannot understand why I'd re-watch films or re-read books. I just do not think that pieces of art are meant to be viewed, seen, listened to, etc, just the one time.

I think that I'm feeling maudlin all over again about his passing since having seen DK. What a fucking shame. 28 years old.

[deep]

Originally Posted by anitram

I never watch anything in the movie theatre twice and I rarely see anything a second time on DVD either, and same goes with this movie. Although I do wish I'd seen it in IMAX when I had the chance.

I feel the same way.

I saw TDK Friday

and two foreign language films last night.

I read on this board that someone watched a torrent version of "No Country" on their computer screen. I'd have to be in lock-up to do that.


But, I am considering going to the IMAX, it is 20 miles from my house, just to pay my last respects to Heath, whatever that means.

[No spoken words]

I don't watch anything on my computer screen unless it's something simply unavailable to me via traditional means (Old BBC TV series, for example, like Survivors).

[Lancemc]

Titanic is really only worth seeing one time, unless one feels compelled to study and effects/camera/sound work on repeat viewings... which I have. Otherwise it's vastly inferior to anything he's done before...aside from Piranha 2 of course.

[GirlsAloudFan]

Originally Posted by No spoken words

Titanic is certainly a film I'll only see the one time.

I never quite understand why people refuse to see a film twice, or re-read a book, but they, I suppose, cannot understand why I'd re-watch films or re-read books. I just do not think that pieces of art are meant to be viewed, seen, listened to, etc, just the one time.

Deep, I thought Ledger was fantastic in DK, but, I will agree and say he was even better in Brokeback.

I think that I'm feeling maudlin all over again about his passing since having seen DK. What a fucking shame. 28 years old.

I've seen Titanic in it's entirety, I think, around 4 times.

And certain scenes I have seen close to 10 times because when it comes on TNT I make sure to catch them (particularly Leo's first dinner with the hot shot passengers of the ship)

And, yeah, me too about Heath. Since the movie came out I've been crushed all over again by his passing. I loved his work in Brokeback but I think this is the more memorable performance for me.

A beautiful actor, and a damn shame.

[deep]

Originally Posted by No spoken words

I never quite understand why people refuse to see a film twice, or re-read a book, but they, I suppose, cannot understand why I'd re-watch films or re-read books. I just do not think that pieces of art are meant to be viewed, seen, listened to, etc, just the one time.

I get what you are saying.

But, for me it is all a question of time.

There are so many "other" books and films that will go unread and unseen by me.

I did watch both "No Country" and "There Will Be Blood" in the theaters a 2nd time this last year and got more from each film.

I may re-read Lolita, sometime in the future.

I did take my 30% coupon to "Border Books" yesterday and buy the "Watchmen" graphic novel. I am trying to absorb the images along with just reading the captions, so I get the full story. I do not have a lot history with reading comics. So this is a new process for me.

[anitram]

Originally Posted by deep

I get what you are saying.

But, for me it is all a question of time.

Same here.

I'm just not a big enough movie buff to care to see something twice. And I'm a more physical person and don't really enjoy sitting for 2-3 hrs at a time. So with my limited free time, I'd rather do other things than go see something I've already seen.

[No spoken words]

Originally Posted by deep

I get what you are saying.

But, for me it is all a question of time.

There are so many "other" books and films that will go unread and unseen by me.

I did watch both "No Country" and "There Will Be Blood" in the theaters a 2nd time this last year and got more from each film.

I may re-read Lolita, sometime in the future.

I did take my 30% coupon to "Border Books" yesterday and buy the "Watchmen" graphic novel. I am trying to absorb the images along with just reading the captions, so I get the full story. I do not have a lot history with reading comics. So this is a new process for me.

I understand the "time" issue, but I'm not encumbered by it, luckily. I stay up late, and so even when I find myself busy with work and softball and actually being social, there's plenty of time for me to watch/read the things that I want to. I have been a night owl since I was a little kid. I also read quickly, so that helps.

Watchmen is a great place to start, or perhaps re-start in your case. I hope you enjoy it. I read it due to Laz recommending it less than a year ago, so, I came to that party late, too, but I'm glad that I did.

[No spoken words]

Originally Posted by anitram

Same here.

I'm just not a big enough movie buff to care to see something twice. And I'm a more physical person and don't really enjoy sitting for 2-3 hrs at a time. So with my limited free time, I'd rather do other things than go see something I've already seen.

I manage to do other things, too, thankfully.....for such a boring and lame person, I have broad interests that also include physical activities (No, Laz, this is not where you utilize innuendo).

But, we had this conversation ages ago, no, when I got on your case for not making time to read novels because you were reading like 1,000 pages a day for school.

[deep]

Originally Posted by Lancemc

I think it's retarded that the film is #1 on IMDB? That's all I've "whined" about regarded this film so far.

I am pissed
WALL-E is only number twenty fucking three ?


If WALL-E does not get a best actor nomination - the whole process is corrupt!!!!!!

[Lancemc]

I do believe your sarcasm is lost on me.

I know it's there though somewhere.

[deep]

Did not mean to single you out.

Yes, there is a bit of irony or sarcasm.


to think out that of the Hundreds of Thousands of films ever made
there are 22 that are better than WALL-E, can that be possible ?


and the articles calling for an Oscar for Heath
are a bit much.