Do you think this movie is better than The Dark Knight?
If so explain why?
shareas a superhero movie, i think it's far better.
the dark knight may be a great movie, but it's a terrible batman film on multiple levels. first of all, batman is supposed to be the "world's greatest detective." when you were a kid and "pretended" to be batman, you solved crimes in the batcave at the bat-computer. hundreds, if not thousands, of chemistry kits were probably sold on this premise alone. rhas al'ghul even gives batman the honorific, "detective," and i believe this is where DC comes from--"detective" comics.
there is none of this in the nolan films. lucius is made into a q-like character. batman didn't figure out how to beat scarecrow's poison; lucius did. in bruce timm's iconic BTAS, ivy sprays him down with a poison that's supposed to turn him into a plant. she expresses shock when it doesn't work. he had found a sample, analyzed it, and came up with a counter on his own. that's batman.
without the detective element (amongst other things), batman is just some dude in a suit who knows kung-fu.
Funny you bring up Batman being a dude in a suit who knows kung-fu. I really enjoyed some aspects of the The Dark Knight trilogy. None of them were perfect, but the fight scenes/choreography were horrible.
That's what surprised me about CA:TWS were the fight scenes.
Batman has been fooled in the comics before.
share[deleted]
[deleted]
as a superhero movie, i think it's far better.
the dark knight may be a great movie, but it's a terrible batman film on multiple levels.
first of all, batman is supposed to be the "world's greatest detective."
when you were a kid and "pretended" to be batman, you solved crimes in the batcave at the bat-computer.
hundreds, if not thousands, of chemistry kits were probably sold on this premise alone.
rhas al'ghul even gives batman the honorific, "detective," and i believe this is where DC comes from--"detective" comics.
there is none of this in the nolan films.
lucius is made into a q-like character.
batman didn't figure out how to beat scarecrow's poison
lucius did.
in bruce timm's iconic BTAS, ivy sprays him down with a poison that's supposed to turn him into a plant. she expresses shock when it doesn't work. he had found a sample, analyzed it, and came up with a counter on his own. that's batman.
without the detective element (amongst other things), batman is just some dude in a suit who knows kung-fu.
I completely agree, 'The Dark Knight' is a terrible Batman film, a terrible superhero film in general. I've said so many times to people that it's just a thriller movie about police chasing criminals and terrorists, except one of the police officers happens to be wearing a silly costume while doing it.
And I love Batman, I'll happily watch a film with him in it, but 'The Dark Knight' is NOT a Batman movie. It's a thriller about chaos and social norms being broken down.
TWS - Had a lot of very relevant points about how much power do we give the government. When does security because we respect the law cross over to we don't break the law because we fear the consequences?
TDK - I just found it to be "Meh" at best. I wasn't happy they had to bring The Joker back and I didn't find Ledger's Joker to be intimidating so much as he was annoying to the point where I can't help but think that somewhere along the line, someone would have put a bullet in his head because he was so annoying. Plus, his plan had so many outrageous variables that had any one of them not gone EXACTLY how he planned, it would have fallen apart.
TWS is the best film in an 11-film stable. The cast are all great, the writing is solid, the villains are menacing, the music is superb, and the action sequences are put together perfectly. It's a Captain America movie that features a ten-minute chase sequence that captain America himself isn't even in, and the tension in that sequence alone blows most of the rest of the (mostly brilliant) MCU out of the water.
TDK is the weakest entry in a 3-film stable. The action sequences are dry and choppy, the pacing is haphazard, and it's very po-faced at times. However, it's a beautifully-shot film with a brilliant cast, excellent music and a perfect villain.
"Finish it... 'cause I'm with you to the end..."
http://malcandbenjy.blogspot.com
beautifully shot?
nolan has one palette: drab. he has no sense of color... at all. there are colors beyond blue, brown, and yellow. every single one of his films looks like they are shot in the same hue. when one visits the entire universe, how about seeing some rich, saturated nebulas, gas giants, asteroid rings? nope, drab. how about seeing some of that color when you visit the fifth dimension? nope, drab.
Okay, I'll concede his colour palette is criminally limited, but beyond that we'll have to agree to disagree. I thought a lot of the high, establishing shots of Gotham and Hong Kong looked fantastic.
The end of Interstellar was pretty drab though, totally with you there.
"Finish it... 'cause I'm with you to the end..."
http://malcandbenjy.blogspot.com
TDK is the weakest entry in a 3-film stable.
I think all super hero films are stupid fundamentally. I might watch them for the spectacle but they're both crap. Or better analogy could be a giant douche and a turd sandwich.
Winter Soldier seems to embrace the whole cartoonish angle better, so Dark Knight does appear more pretentious to me. But there are good and bad scenes in both.
Agreed. The only superhero movies I like are the original ones, like Superman '78, Batman '89, and Spider-Man '02, because they fully embrace the camp and stylish comic book roots, before all these "gritty" reboots. The MCU goes too far in the other direction, where the material isn't taken seriously enough.
~ I'm a 21st century man and I don't wanna be here.
Batman '89, .... before all these "gritty" reboots.
I suggest you look up the definition of "gritty."
shareI suggest you re-watch Batman & Batman Returns. Those two movies set the standard for comic book movies.
shareIt's true, they might have been dark, but they were still heavily stylized and gothic, as Batman is usually pictured.
shareThose two movies set the standard for comic book movies.
Superman 1 & 2 pre-dated Batman 1989, but Batman 1989 set a standard for how to set a "dark" tone without being boring.
I don't consider The Crow a comic book movie because, even though I read comic books in the 1970's and 1980's, I didn't know it was a comic book. And, if I didn't know it, then 99% of the rest of people didn't know it. It was simply an action movie.
Without Batman 1989, most of the rest of the movies which aren't "happy" superhero comic book movies don't get made.
I don't consider The Crow a comic book movie because, even though I read comic books in the 1970's and 1980's, I didn't know it was a comic book. And, if I didn't know it, then 99% of the rest of people didn't know it. It was simply an action movie.
Both are pretty stupid and childish but I'll go with TWS
shareYes.
TDK had some great high points (my favourite being the Joker dressed as a nurse and blowing up a hospital) but otherwise it was okay, but not as awesome as it gets hyped up to be. It's not that rewatchable either I've found.
TWS is endlessly rewatchable, has some great action set pieces that are still weirdly thrilling to watch and the Cap vs Bucky stuff gave it major emotional pathos. It also had a female character with some actual character development and shades of grey going on, not just there to be a love interest, for which I will always be grateful.
Yes. Easily. Because TDK was a bloated mess. I mean seriously, why introduce Two Face only to kill him off within minutes of his introduction? It has the same problem as Spider-Man 3. In trying to ramp things up they included too much and the movie just collapses under its own weight.
The new home of Welcome to Planet Bob: http://kingofbob.blogspot.ca/
I mean seriously, why introduce Two Face only to kill him off within minutes of his introduction?
I said TWO FACE, not Dent. Clearly I was referring to the fact that once he becomes Two Face, he has a few minutes on screen and then is dead.
The new home of Welcome to Planet Bob: http://kingofbob.blogspot.ca/
See that's the problem with people who love Marvel movies (not saying you love all of them but clearly you love TWS), they just want to see the heroes/villains in their known suit/appearance without caring any bit about going deeper into what the characters are actually about.
Two Face regardless of whether he is portrayed before or after the accident is a KEY part of TDK. His character is the main underlying theme of the whole movie, which is either you die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain. Showing to Batman/Bruce Wayne that great intentions or ambition have their price and can eventually lead to corruption. This also plays into the point the Joker wants to make throughout the movie, that everyboy is by nature corruptable. Hence Two-Faced. And there is more stuff like this to discuss about in TDK.
In TWS there is pretty much nothing going on "under the hood". "Goverment is corrupt and spying on us woah how relevant with NSA and all" that's it. All that it is is "cool" looking comic book characters being in CGI-heavy fight action scenes, making snarky remarks. It might be enjoyable to a lot of people but by no way is it better than TDK because 'Two Face is only in it for a short time and gets killed'.
I mean seriously, why introduce Two Face only to kill him off within minutes of his introduction?
He was big in this movie; worked with Batman throughout! Too bad he was knocked off so he can't come back as he does again and again in the animated series! ;-/
- - http://scifiblogs3.blogspot.com/ - - Sci-fi, Batman, & E:FC
- - http://www.childrenofrassilon.com/ - - Homage to DW & B7
I mean seriously, why introduce Two Face only to kill him off within minutes of his introduction? It has the same problem as Spider-Man 3.
Omg I am so happy to read these intelligent replies on this thread. I was expecting many people to bash OP for even suggesting the comparison, but I am glad that there is some kind of consensus that all superhero movies are fundamentally stupid; TWS embraces this while TDK remains pretentious, with plenty of plot loop-holes (or if not loop-holes then ridiculous number of variables, as another person said), typical Nolan-esque colour correction to make it feel real and serious, and a host of other problems. TDK is just cool because of the villain and the music and the real feel. However if you think about it the movie is quite mediocre. And, the action is uninteresting and the crime/plot development seriously lacks suspense and detective work, which is what Batman is all about.
share