comment #1

filmfestivalgeek says ...

The more over-all acclaim a film receives, the more interesting the darts that do appear. Thompson is entitled but the consensus is there...and this is coming from someone who is disappointed in the (overall) direction Christopher Nolan has gone into. (FORGOTTEN and MOMENTO seem like they are from a long time ago, no?)

comment #2

Griff says ...

This film might be the "The Searchers" for this generation. If you recall, pretty much everything the John Wayne character does he screws up.

(THEMATIC SPOILERS! THEMATIC SPOILERS!!)

And, given the futility of almost everything Batman/Bruce Wayne tries to do, and the various losses throughout the film...well, it could be a parable of America in our times.

comment #3

BurmaShave says ...

I'm sorry but that's really idiotic. That review's thesis was going to find whatever it needed to, regardless of the content of the film.

comment #4

CitizenKanedforChewingGum says ...

Nice Searchers comparison there, Griff...bit of a stretch, maybe, but I like it. Can't think of the last summer blockbuster (let alone American film) where the so-called "hero" drops the ball as constantly and clumsily as Batman does here. But he endures, lives to fight another day. Found all of it quite refreshing and surprisingly touching.

comment #5

Rod32303 says ...

He's fucking high.

He went INTO it hating it...he pretty much says so in that little bitty about only seeing it because of Ledger's death. He is obviously not a lover or liker of movies...it's no wonder no one has ever heard of this bitch before. And PLEASE wank yourself off more in your self love of your command of the bullshit you espouse as critical thought.

Jackass.

comment #6

bmcintire says ...

He would have been happier with a bloodier version? More swearing? Who is this douchebag? His disdain for the genre (with an apparent lack of any context) makes him an ass - in need of an editor. Maybe he should go to a near-empty theater and masturbate to THE LAST MISTRESS, rather than jerking off on his keyboard and hitting SEND.

comment #7

JosephB says ...

Jeez... I'm getting pretty sick of film reviewers using any and every advantage to call out a film and then compare it (politically, metaphorical, aesthetic) to the Bush government. I'm a Democrat, and at least you Wells have the gumption to dedicate this site to your predilections with a pretty clear difference- you do film reviews and then you promote your political outlook. That's fine and dandy. But I can pick 1 review each week (whether its from NP Thompson, or hell especially Dave Kehr who should just move to Canada if he hates us Americans so much) from various sources who choose to combine both in a very ugly way. Let's make sure we all include a post 9-11 reference in the next "Mamma Mia" review ok, fellas! Get over it.

comment #8

Ozwitch says ...

What a load of tripe. Surely he's not suggesting that we should have WATCHED THE MAN BURN in the name of moral equivalency? It was PG-13 for chrissakes.

Never heard such a stupid reason for disliking a film. What does he want, a memorial service for all the characters killed or hurt in the film? Perhaps a disclaimer at the end:

"No people or animals were hurt or injured in the making of this film, but there was imaginary violence and pain and we are sorry that it happened to these imaginary characters. We feel their pain and extend our sympathies to their imaginary families. Of course that doesn't excuse us from being bad people, but we FEEL BAD about it, so that's okay."

comment #9

DavidF says ...

I know it's hard to believe the entire world population made it to Saturday night without seeing the movie but....

....maybe when I visit your website I don't want to read an article describing the culmination of a subplot in Batman???

Why do you have so many problems with the concept of spoilers, Jeff????

comment #10

D.Z. says ...

"The Dark Knight, with its sanitized, hollowed-out approach to the most outre violence, would seem to be the movie that Bush’s Abu Ghraib America deserves."

Personally, I'd love to see an R-rated cut, but that's not going to happen with Batman. I bet just getting away with Two-Face required a lot more MPAA bribes than usual.

comment #11

K. Bowen says ...

That's really scraping the barrel. I mean, to begin with, he seems aware there's a guy on top of the money. That certainly wasn't lost on me. Why would we need the stupid reaction shot he's describing.

SPOILER: Honestly, you want a scene to complain about? Try the fund-raiser scene. Wayne comes to grab Dent and take him to safety. But he leaves Rachel, his lifelong friend and love upstairs for The Joker. What's with that? And then the scene ends and moves on with The Joker still upstairs, threatening the guests, presumably knocking around and looking for Dent, completely unresolved.

And you know what? It barely makes a dent in the totality of the film.

comment #12

D.Z. says ...

Bowen: There's a perfectly good reason why Wayne cares more about Dent than Rachel.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batman#Homosexual_interpretations
http://superdickery.com/index.php?view=article&catid=32%3Aseduction-index&id=35%3Abatmans-not-gay-hes-not-dammit&option=com_content&Itemid=24
http://superdickery.com/index.php?view=article&catid=32%3Aseduction-index&id=303%3Abatmans-boner&option=com_content&Itemid=24

comment #13

Kristopher Tapley says ...

This guy is an idiot. I'm sorry, I don't generally just disregard someone's opinion because it differs from mine, but there's no combating the ignorance that is rooting out something to make a political point.

And he's a bad writer. Never helps.

comment #14

Gaydos says ...

"B'man's" complete abstraction of villainy into thematics and theatrics is essential to the coporate blockbuster as safety-assured amusement park ride experience which I believe will soon join the gas-guzzling Hummer as an artifact of the Good Ole Days.

Here's the view from Montreal where the Just for Laughs comedy fest is wrapping up the weekend as Paul McCartney arrives to play free for a celebration of 400 years of Quebec and the Francophones are angrier than the Joker without his Maybelline. Just saw "P.E.", the latest example of Apatovian deconstruction of contemporary comedic tropes.

"Pineapple Express" is the movie "Batman" should have been. Incredible but humanly vulnerable superheroes battling evil and the psycho-eroticization of the American action film has finally reached (sorry) climax.

It's got James Franco's greatest performance.

And it's okay to laugh.

A lot.

comment #15

StoneFan1 says ...

Pointing out one of the many mistakes in "The Dark
Knight" is fine, but making some half-ass political
statement is just stupid. This guy needs a good
night of sleep and a full, healthy meal.

comment #16

K. Bowen says ...

SPOILER:

DZ: I figured that would be one theory. But even if you accept homoeroticism, Rachel is still Wayne's best friend, and it made no sense to leave her there. (And later on, he does the opposite, choosing to try to save Rachel rather than Dent). It's an awkward setup for what happens later.

comment #17

johnc says ...

Wow, there's some "Dark Knight" Kool-Aid being drunk out there. God forbid anyone should criticize this movie. I mean, it's, like, really dark, man, and it's got such a profound message about vigilantism being not a great thing and all, so let's not spoil it by ragging on bogus issues like narrative incoherence and deficient technique. Plus, there's a consensus, so someone who doesn't jump on the bandwagon must be an idiot or a douchebag, right?

comment #18

Howlingman says ...

"Dave Kehr who should just move to Canada if he hates us Americans so much"

We don't want him -- we already have an overabundance of douchebags north of the 49th parallel, thank you very much

comment #19

swordandpen says ...

"And, given the futility of almost everything Batman/Bruce Wayne tries to do, and the various losses throughout the film...well, it could be a parable of America in our times."

Thank you, Griff. That was one of the few insightful comments I've seen on The Dark Knight.

comment #20

Josh Massey says ...

If you insist on seeing a political angle in The Dark Knight, it comes off pretty damn pro-Bush. Especially the ending. (Of course, I'm sure that's not what Nolan was going for, so that should argue against any political angle being present).

"And then the scene ends and moves on with The Joker still upstairs, threatening the guests, presumably knocking around and looking for Dent, completely unresolved."

Thank you. I was in the theater wondering, "So, uh, did the Joker just walk out?"

comment #21

Glenn Kenny says ...

Dave Kehr doesn't hate Americans, or America .Anyone who likes PRC Westerns as much as he does can't possible hate America, for one thing...

As per N.P. Thompson, I am reminded of the joke between Robert Christgau and Greil Marcus, about their being the East and West Coast Deans of American Rock Critics. I'm trying to come up with a similar shared title to bestow on New York's Armond White and Seattle's Thompson....

comment #22

storymark says ...

I don't really get the confusion over the fund-raising scene. Joker and his guys had all just gotten pretty well smacked around by Batman. Joker grabbed Rachel as a way to stop him, then threw her out the window, thus giving himself time to escape while Batman saved her. He didn't stay and look for Dent, because as he says later, at that moment, he thought Dent was Batman, so why stay.

Sure, it would have been helpfull to add a shot of them running out the door or something, but I simply don't see this huge hole in logic that some seem to think is there.

comment #23

K. Bowen says ...

Storymark, you might be right about that part of it. Of course, The Joker still is sitting there with all of Gotham's prominent citizens.That seems like opportunity knocking.

comment #24

mtgilchrist says ...

Thanks for introducing some of us to this guy, Jeff - he's a crackpot, but an articulate crackpot. The reason I can't take any of his criticisms seriously is not because he disagrees, but because he so clearly seems to hate every aspect of his job, and arguably, modern moviemaking as a whole. Having scanned several of his other reviews online subsequently (including a bombastic denouncement of P.T. Anderson's There Will Be Blood), he seems to write every review from the point of view of "all movies suck, so this movie sucks, and anyone who thinks this sucky movie is good also sucks." There's a real joylessness to his pursuit of movies - as if he's obligated to see them and offer a contrarian opinion - which I don't think serves any reader's interests, because it doesn't really present a sincere viewpoint; in his way hes exactly like the folks who only cover things from a certain perspective or appreciate films as a genre enthusiast, except his genre is "bad movies" and he's the supreme authority.

comment #25

ScottMendelson says ...

I don't know if the film was any particular political stripe. Yes, Batman spies on civilians, but the film looks down on it, or at least treats it as a terrible cost rather than a must-have toy for government to have. I was more bothered by the extraordinary rendition that occurs about 35 minutes into the movie, both with the moral implications, and the unrealistic lack of any consequences (in the real world, their would have been an international outcry and everyone from the mayor to Gordon likely would have had to resign).

As for as the headline of this thread 'Abu Ghraib Attitude', it should be noted that had Batman spent less time beating the crap out of The Joker, it's likely that Joker would have told him the locations of the kidnappees sooner and its possible that Batman and Gordon could have saved them both (at the least, it would have been less of a close call for Dent and thus saved his face).

The biggest annoyance I have with the movie, regardless of my politics, is the very end, which seems to endorse the kind of propaganda attitude that brought us false hero myths like Jessica Lynch and Pat Tillman. Aside from the obvious question of why Gordan and Batman simply blamed the handful of mob murders on anyone else (like, oh, I dunno... The Joker??), the film's alleged philosophy seemed to endorse the use of mass deception to make people feel more warm and fuzzy.

Besides, I'm not sure how much better the citizens of Gotham would feel about believing that their champion was kidnapped, horribly deformed, then brutally murdered for standing up for what's right (it's not like everyone felt great after Bobby Kennedy and MLK Jr were murdered in 1968).

As for inspiring Gotham, I'm pretty sure the actions of the people on the ferries would serve as an effective (and truthful) example of good people not giving into the darkness that destroyed Dent.

comment #26

Josh says ...

Wells just cnanot stand that this flick is all about conservatism. From battling terrorists to not giving to them and appeasing. To Batman becoming a bad guy because that is what it takes to combat evil. They made the most conservative movie they could.

comment #27

janee says ...

Si vous etes interesses par le dossier, ou desirez en savoir plus, contactez-moi par mail, et je vous mettrai en contact.
Best regards,Jane, CEO of high availability software