Batman strikes again

[rockfotze]

I just saw the new Batman movie (The Dark Knight) and am sorry to say I was kind of disappointed. Much like how I was with Batman Begins. The casting is superb, the acting brilliant, the action scene awesome...but the dude who wrote (as well as the guy who edited them) them needs a kick in the balls. Seriously, it didn't need to be two-and-a-half hours long, not did the first one. To me, they both dragged on at the end and I really started to lose interest. The plot just wasn't good enough either. I felt it jumped around all over the place and was very disorganised, which is what disappointed me about Batman begins.

Heath Ledger was awesome. I think the Joker is such a great character. So evil without purpose. Heath did it so well that I didn't know how to react to him. Impressed by how good he was? Or repulsed at how evil the Joker proved himself to be? It's just a shame he had such little screen-time. I also kind of wished he had greener hair too, but that's just me being pedantic.

I'm not a huge fan of Christian Bale, he's always so creepy and intense. He does play a good Batman though (a decent Bruce Wayne too, though not a great one). I just HATE his voice as Batman. He sounds like he had a blocked nose and was out of breath half the time. In fact it was almost comical, which is certainly not what it should have been. He did have some cool gadgets/vehicles though, I'll give him that.

I didn't much like Aaron Eckhardt, he played an alright Harvey Dent but I wasn't thrilled with his Two-Face. I also disliked how they threw in his transformation in at the end, which is why the film went for so long, I guess. They did the same thing with the Scarecrow in the last film, which frustrated me back then too. As tacky as he was, I liked Tommy Lee Jones' Tow-Face better in Batman Forever (but hey, I love that stupid film).

The action scenes were good but short and not action-y enough. Sure there were explosions and violence but for an action blockbuster you really do expect a bit more bang for your buck. I don't know if they were trying to make it more "realistic", if they were then they're idiots because HELLO this is batman we're talking about and I would have expected some thrilling, climatic action scenes as opposed to what they offered. Which goes directly against his last Bat-gadget which was kind of far-fetched when they seemed to make this big effort to tone the film down.

I appreciate the fact these films are a LOT closer to the comics and that the first lot of films were kind of silly, in that respect they did well. It's the film making itself that didn't work for me. Seriously, if the writer didn't try and be so fancy and the editor didn't take on all these extra scenes the film would have been amazing.

So all in all it was alright and I do intend on seeing it again as I often do with these sorts of movies (I saw Iron Man three times, plus The Incredible Hulk and Hancock twice each) which will help me to decide if I do like it or not. I'm leaning toward liking, but certainly not loving it.

Comments

[melonoma.livejournal.com]

I went and saw it last night, but absolutely adored it.
I can see what you mean about the storyline being a bit jolted and disorganised, but at the same time I think it sort of added a great deal of tension and confusion that complimented it;
Lots of social psych stuff in it too which i thought was interesting.
Heath Ledger scared me as the Joker, there was only one point where I thought 'thats heath ledger' otherwise, i was completely oblivious to his celebrity status.