It's less serious, sure, but it's also much less ridiculous.
Nah. It was very ridiculous, especially when compared to 2008's "The Dark Knight".
Way better than most superhero movies when it comes to set design, costuming, casting, etc.
Visually, there was some effort at least. But I've seen much better on other superhero/comic book movies.
It's just a classy movie; no wonder it's basically forgotten. Who's with me?
I'm not with you. This movie is just badly made. Part of it's failure would be in that it was toned down from the environment of it's source material. Yes, this movie was set in the 1930's, Depression era or Prohibition era, but what ruined everything for many people, including me, would be the addition of some campy humor laced into what is supposed to be a very dark, tortured avenger of the night. When doing a movie about this character and the era he's all about, those were very dark times full of despair for many, especially in big cities. To try sugarcoating it with such drops of humor here and there, is not only awkward but very unappealing. That, and that you could tell the movie had some dull moments and it was apparent there was no passion for this movie and the character.
This movie is nowhere close to being a classic. It's very cult in it's fandom. I don't like it, a bunch of other people don't like it. But there are still some other people out there that do like it, given the poor box office performance in the summer of 1994. I'm not really surprised it was just basically forgotten by so many more.
I really like the character. I don't like this movie at all, and it sucks a lot. But what's great is that it was able to introduce a lot of mainstream audiences to this character from the original pulp magazines. That's how I first heard about The Shadow, I got some of the toys from the merchandising that came with the movie and I was immediately hooked on the Shadow. I didn't see the movie at the time because I was too young, but when I did see it many years later, the feeling's still the same. I expected much better and was not impressed. I had done some research into the Shadow and gotten some comic books about him, and I realized it was no wonder why this movie just doesn't cut it for me.
To compare it to The Dark Knight movie, is pointless. I'm a huge fan of Batman, and maybe that's why I thought the Shadow character was so amazing. This appreciation would grow a lot as I got older and realized that the Shadow was one of the main inspirations for the creation of Batman. So, if anything, despite my own criticism of Chris NO-lan(yes, I spelled it that way on purpose), his trilogy of Batmovies are not really my cup of tea. They are so pretentious and spoonfeeds the audiences like they're very stupid. But...I think The Dark Knight is the best out of the trilogy. Given the ultra "realism" that NO-lan demanded for his version of Batman, I felt that Dark Knight had balanced carefully somewhat the comic book elements of Batman into it as opposed to the other 2 in the trilogy. Also, Heath Ledger's performance as Joker, it's truly out of this world. He made that movie.
2008's Dark Knight movie is what many fans for hoping for Batman to have on the big screen, especially me. So inspite of my hesitation of NO-lan being a part of Batman's legacy, I'm glad The Dark Knight put Batman back on the map. At least it was very serious and in no way is it more ridiculous than The Shadow. It's not. It was still a well crafted movie. The visuals are awesome, probably because of the aid of the IMAX cameras used to film some scenes.
Due to the success of the trilogy, it has given me hope that perhaps The Shadow can come back to the big screen in all his dark, ominous glory as he's supposed to, and not something that feels like Sam Raimi's Spider-Man trilogy.
reply
share