Where 'The Dark Knight' Falls Apart

Rises is an abomination compared to the first two films IMO. Begins is my favorite because it's the Batman movie I always wanted to see. I think from a purely film making standpoint The Dark Knight is the best in the trilogy, a well oiled machine that is pedal to the medal for nearly 3 hours.
 
A Psych Major said:
I hate to go off topic TS but does anyone else think that

The Tahlia Al Ghul twist would've been much better if they included her character in the previous films? Have as a background character in the second film and imply she has feelings for Bruce, especially in the latter part of the film after Rachel dies. That way, it doesn't feel as forced in the third film and its more of a twist.
Click to expand...

yea agreed. its all hindsight though.
 
csroster said:
Two-Face:

Two-Face should have had no role in the movie. Harvey being deformed and then having his morals put in question by the Joker was all good, but then he should have just had no further major role in the movie. Harvey suddenly going totally nuts and trying to kill Gordon's family felt extremely forced, and should have played out longer. If they wanted to wrap Harvey's story up in this single movie entirely, he should have turned into a villain earlier in the movie, and had time to convincingly develop into a psychopath.
Click to expand...

Most of that was supposed to happen in the third movie as part of Joker's trial. They are lucky they chose to go the way they did, otherwise they'd have had to find a replacement for Ledger.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dark_Knight_(film)#Development

csroster said:
What Happens to the Joker?

So what the fuck even happens to the Joker? This dude is criminal mastermind with more knives in his pockets than an obsessive compulsive mohel, and Batman just leaves him hanging from a wire? Did he get away? Did he get arrested? He got arrested before and it was all part of his greater plan, so why trust that this time would be any different.
Click to expand...

They show him being taken into custody. Maybe it was cut in the TNT version.
 
A Psych Major said:
I hate to go off topic TS but does anyone else think that

The Tahlia Al Ghul twist would've been much better if they included her character in the previous films? Have as a background character in the second film and imply she has feelings for Bruce, especially in the latter part of the film after Rachel dies. That way, it doesn't feel as forced in the third film and its more of a twist.
Click to expand...

Well he is supposed to have a relationship with her when he's training with Ra's which is part of the reason why he wanted Bruce to be his right hand man but obviously they omitted that in Begins. I liked that they brought Talia in but the execution was poor, as it was in the entire movie IMO.
 
DarkKnight81 said:
Rises is an abomination compared to the first two films IMO. Begins is my favorite because it's the Batman movie I always wanted to see. I think from a purely film making standpoint The Dark Knight is the best in the trilogy, a well oiled machine that is pedal to the medal for nearly 3 hours.
Click to expand...

lol i remember your not liking TDKR man. Batman Begins is a shit ton of fun and doesnt take itself SO somberly seriously as the other two but I still feel the latter two are more ambitious and stronger pieces of entertainment.

dont get me wrong though I really have nothing but positive things to say about Batman Begins. Begins has the best role for Alfred of any Batman movie ever as well, in my opinion. That's where Caine and Bale really tear shit up. The early stages of Batman stuff is great.
 
ufcfan4 said:
lol i remember your not liking TDKR man. Batman Begins is a shit ton of fun and doesnt take itself SO somberly seriously as the other two but I still feel the latter two are more ambitious and stronger pieces of entertainment.

dont get me wrong though I really have nothing but positive things to say about Batman Begins. Begins has the best role for Alfred of any Batman movie ever as well, in my opinion. That's where Caine and Bale really tear shit up. The early stages of Batman stuff is great.
Click to expand...

Yeah I don't think it's Nolan's strongest film from him as a filmmaker, in fact it's probably in the lower 50% of his work but I always wanted a true Batman origin movie, I always wanted Ras and the Scarecrow, it was perfectly casted (aside from the Rachel character). I couldn't have asked him to make a movie more to my liking.
 
greenseeker said:
Most of that was supposed to happen in the third movie as part of Joker's trial. They are lucky they chose to go the way they did, otherwise they'd have had to find a replacement for Ledger.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dark_Knight_(film)#Development



They show him being taken into custody. Maybe it was cut in the TNT version.
Click to expand...

Ah that was probably it then. I've only seen TDK like 3 or 4 times, and for the people talking about TDKR, I've only seen that movie once.

IMO, TDKR wasn't even as good as Batman Begins, but as I said I only saw Dark Knight Rises once.

Ha, see these threads aren't just about making complaints. If you bring up things you don't understand, sometimes people will actually help you fill in the gaps.

Of course with that 'Da Speeit' guy, all of his posts seem to be some variation of saying 'I'm better than you.'
 
I think the most unrealistic part of The Dark Knight is a handsome billionaire playboy being in love with Maggie Gyllenhaal.

maggie-gyllenhaal-1.jpg
 
lts5025 said:
I think the most unrealistic part of The Dark Knight is a handsome billionaire playboy being in love with Maggie Gyllenhaal.

maggie-gyllenhaal-1.jpg
Click to expand...

Yeah, but I figured Bruce Wayne has access to the most beautiful women on the planet anytime he wants.

When you can have any supermodel at the drop of hat, it might start coming down to personality and childhood memories shared more than a pretty face.

That said, I can't say that I find her particularly attractive.
 
lts5025 said:
I think the most unrealistic part of The Dark Knight is a handsome billionaire playboy being in love with Maggie Gyllenhaal.

maggie-gyllenhaal-1.jpg
Click to expand...

This is the Rachel that he fell in love with.

Katie_Holmes.jpg


Obviously there was some kind of accident between the two movies that required facial reconstructive surgery.
 
Honestly, Batman taking the fall at the end never bothered me. You can't have Joker taking it, because too many people know That it was only Gordan, his family, Dent, and Batman were there.

As far as the trilogy goes, TDK was the strongest while I had both Batman Begins and TDKR at 8.5/10

TDKR I initially rated higher but it dropped down a bit during repeated viewings. The dialogue is just super bad at some parts and I thought they could have built up JGL's character a bit more. Still, the scope of the movie was amazing, the cinematography was beautiful, the score was awesome, ect. The production values were some of the best I've seen in a movie. The ending was excellent too. Perfect way to end the trilogy.
 
Ok, I'm going to write a bit of a response based more on what was in the movie than the little I know about the comics. I also adore the movie and will defend it to the death, so I'm not going to pretend to be unbiased about it.

First - Harvey Dent. Two-Face was a gimmick, his shitty coin flips and overly romantic sensibility didn't give him the depth to continue on as a villain. The entire significance of the character was his corruption; his fate was sealed after that happened and his future was more or less irrelephant.

The Joker absolutely cannot die, because of what will be the last film in the next trilogy. Yes it's going to happen, even if I have to direct it myself. He also may have another defining moment before that, but after Ledger I imagine that moment will be passed on to another villain. Assume he's locked up in Arkham Asylum which, if there is a God and he likes Batman, will be the setting of another movie in the next trilogy (which I will continue to pretend will be a thing, inevitably). The only reason to keep Two-Face alive would be to recreate his hilarious scene in the Asylum where they ween him off the coin and onto a 10-sided die and he can't decide if he should go to the bathroom or not.

Something to remember about Batman in general, and especially Nolan's, is that realism is not the highest priority. Nolan might have pushed it in that regard, and that's where the final movie started to fall apart, but the significance of things in TKR is much more concerned with pushing controversial comic-hero motifs than developing a perfectly coherent storyline. The legit white knight is corrupted, the hero's principles are pushed to the limit and the near impossibility of his task realized, the hilarity of his attempt is revealed and a new evil questions his commitment. Developing these ideas was much more important than explaining where the Joker goes at the end. Those little details don't even matter.
 
Last edited:
They should have used the Two Face story line in the Third movie the Dark Knight Rises. Afterall, it was the director who killed him off, so he can actually take some artistic license and find a way to revive him, unlike another character, which probably would have been better.
 
Also -- why does he take the fall in the end?

Defeating the Joker isn't enough to redeem the damage his character took throughout the movie. The significance of the Joker is that such evils -- inexplicable and random -- are at the heart of human nature and will continue to surface and push Batman to his limits until he breaks. His redemption, Harvey Dent, is dead and defiled. His love is gone. His mission is all but over, and the only way out of complete blackness was to preserve the ideal of Dent and pretend that everything could still be alright.

In short -- he won the battle, but found out the war was a joke. That's what makes Ledger's character so fucking perfect. It's like the Comedian in Watchmen at his peak against the naivete of Superman with gadgets instead of superhuman abilities.
 
shotintheface2 said:
Honestly, Batman taking the fall at the end never bothered me. You can't have Joker taking it, because too many people know That it was only Gordan, his family, Dent, and Batman were there.

As far as the trilogy goes, TDK was the strongest while I had both Batman Begins and TDKR at 8.5/10

TDKR I initially rated higher but it dropped down a bit during repeated viewings. The dialogue is just super bad at some parts and I thought they could have built up JGL's character a bit more. Still, the scope of the movie was amazing, the cinematography was beautiful, the score was awesome, ect. The production values were some of the best I've seen in a movie. The ending was excellent too. Perfect way to end the trilogy.
Click to expand...

Can you explain your reasoning behind Joker not taking the fall a little bit more? There were cops outlining the perimeter, and cops apparently taking Joker in from the other crime scene, is that what you're referring to?

I'm curious because that's probably my biggest problem with the movie, and if you have a reasonable explanation, I'd be very interesting in some elaboration.

So far, the people in this thread have gone above and beyond breaking down nuances in this film. If you can unravel this last mystery of why Joker or some random thug couldn't have taken the fall instead of Batman, that'd be pretty epic. If not, no big deal, I'm still interested in hearing your detailed take on the ending.
 
csroster said:
Can you explain your reasoning behind Joker not taking the fall a little bit more? There were cops outlining the perimeter, and cops apparently taking Joker in from the other crime scene, is that what you're referring to?

I'm curious because that's probably my biggest problem with the movie, and if you have a reasonable explanation, I'd be very interesting in some elaboration.

So far, the people in this thread have gone above and beyond breaking down nuances in this film. If you can unravel this last mystery of why Joker or some random thug couldn't have taken the fall instead of Batman, that'd be pretty epic. If not, no big deal, I'm still interested in hearing your detailed take on the ending.
Click to expand...

You've missed a kind of underlying theme of the movie. It shows you Dent and how he's the White Knight, incorruptible, the person Bruce Wayne can't be. Slowly but surely the city was turning on Batman and his methods - especially when manipulated by the Joker. Dent even tried to get people to see this but they're too stupid to bother doing anything else other than screaming for Batman's blood as if this will stop the Joker.

They didn't lay the blame on him because they couldn't find some other stooge to pin in on. They laid the blame on him so people would continue to believe in the White Knight - the amazing, give 'em hell Dent as OPPOSED to his mirror image, Batman. They wanted people to support Harvey Dent's way of doing things (lawfully, before he started kidnapping people) instead of the vigilante way. Bruce, too, wanted this; he alluded to it when he was talking to Rachel about retiring. If not for the Joker, he might have gotten it.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
1,282,681
Messages
58,454,017
Members
176,041
Latest member
jaybuff

Share this page

Back
Top