Anyway, I finally got round to seeing The Dark Knight and, given the overwhelming and fanatical praise the movie has engendered, a rather negative critical evaluation which pours cold water on the mass hysteria seems a bit pointless. Because what do I know? But here goes anyway!
So let's confine ourselves to a couple of observations that might give the adoring fans some food for thought.
The plot, whilst completely linear, and in fact, rather banal, was confusingly laid out, and not because Nolan was trying for anything enigmatic or even thought provoking; simply it was a tale not very well told. Muddying up a plot, especially one so basic, is not the mark of a clever movie, simply a poor one.
The fight scenes were likewise confused and consequently rather uninvolving. And somebody must have been on a bonus to see how many shots of the back end of the "Batcycle" could be included in the final cut.
POSSIBLE SPOILER ELEMENT
POSSIBLE SPOILER ELEMENT
But the real surprise for me was the misuse - and I think it is misuse, however deliberately it was conceived - of the central character of Batman.
Batman was essentially a bystander in his own movie. He didn't really seem to do anything, other than swan off to Hong Kong, a sub plot that seemed to be taken from a another movie altogether.
Harvey Dent was the protagonist of this film and The Joker the antagonist.
Batman was seemingly cast adrift, totally peripheral and rather ineffective. It seemed to me that everyone's destiny was settled without much help from Batman, and even the Joker achieved pretty much what he wanted to do.
I'd almost go as far to say that if the movie had done away with Batman and had been rewritten as a straight crime procedural, it would have been a better movie.
Now Nolan and his buddies obviously know what they wanted to achieve, which is fair enough. I am just surprised with the impression I was left with.
Still as I said at the beginning, I am really the wrong person to critique this film. I was cajoled into going and I thought, well it will probably be OK.
And, being kind, that is just about what it was.
So let's confine ourselves to a couple of observations that might give the adoring fans some food for thought.
The plot, whilst completely linear, and in fact, rather banal, was confusingly laid out, and not because Nolan was trying for anything enigmatic or even thought provoking; simply it was a tale not very well told. Muddying up a plot, especially one so basic, is not the mark of a clever movie, simply a poor one.
The fight scenes were likewise confused and consequently rather uninvolving. And somebody must have been on a bonus to see how many shots of the back end of the "Batcycle" could be included in the final cut.
POSSIBLE SPOILER ELEMENT
POSSIBLE SPOILER ELEMENT
But the real surprise for me was the misuse - and I think it is misuse, however deliberately it was conceived - of the central character of Batman.
Batman was essentially a bystander in his own movie. He didn't really seem to do anything, other than swan off to Hong Kong, a sub plot that seemed to be taken from a another movie altogether.
Harvey Dent was the protagonist of this film and The Joker the antagonist.
Batman was seemingly cast adrift, totally peripheral and rather ineffective. It seemed to me that everyone's destiny was settled without much help from Batman, and even the Joker achieved pretty much what he wanted to do.
I'd almost go as far to say that if the movie had done away with Batman and had been rewritten as a straight crime procedural, it would have been a better movie.
Now Nolan and his buddies obviously know what they wanted to achieve, which is fair enough. I am just surprised with the impression I was left with.
Still as I said at the beginning, I am really the wrong person to critique this film. I was cajoled into going and I thought, well it will probably be OK.
And, being kind, that is just about what it was.