You might think I'm exaggerating or that I've got a screw loose upstairs, but you'd be wrong. It's time that we talked about how The Dark Knight was overhyped and bloated and that if not for Heath Ledger's performance and untimely death, The Dark Knight would have been heralded less of a masterpiece and seen for what it really is.
Unfortunately there are parts of this new Batman that are reminiscent of The Dark Knight's plot but that is because both were inspired by the plot of The Long Halloween and now I'm inclined to like The Dark Knight even less because it is taking away somewhat from this one.
The thing about The Dark Knight was that it always carried a slight bit of cognitive dissonance for me. The Joker's plotting was always too contrived and convenient, requiring more strain to suspend disbelief that all of these elements could come together as the Joker intended. Instead it just seems like the Jokers plot relied on blind luck that a car would turn down this alley or that, or that a criminal would get locked up in this cell and not that one, when there were always plenty of options. Instead it feels more like the work of the writer pushing characters along into the scheme not because it is inherent in their characters, but because that's what the writer needs them to do so that he can check off some boxes.
(And can I just say for the record, you cannot jam a pencil into a table to get it to stand straight up in order to slam a man's head down on it.)
Conversely, in The Batman, the Riddler's plot is much more plausible. Leaving clues following to the next and the next so that Batman admits they have no choice but to go along with it. Soon it becomes personal and in Batman's search for the truth regarding his past, the Riddler very plausibly can predict and prepare for the events that come next.
Then there's the whole arc of the character. In The Dark Knight there is no arc. Batman doesn't change nor does he have an epiphany. That all occurred in Batman Begins. Instead for the first hour and a half Christian Bale is just mostly mum, at times yelling not because his character is feeling something, but because Christopher Nolan told him to and it's not until the end that the writer tries to retcon the whole thing into the "hero Gotham deserves" crap, yet because it barely relates to the unwieldy plot its just feels too lofty.
Whereas in The Batman, the character clearly is changed by the events. He is motivated by vengeance only to find his loved ones were just as corrupted as the people he seeks to bring to Justice. His shortcomings are revealed in the end when the Riddler henchmen says he too is vengeance, causing Batman to realign his purpose. It's much more supported by the plotting of events than in the Dark Knight.
And then there are telltale signs of bad writing in the Dark Knight. The dialogue is too on the nose at times expressing what the theme is supposed to be yet not actually demonstrating it with the characters actions. There are times where an idiosyncratic line is used by more than one character (not heard by the other) to suggest a lack of development between the two i.e. "playing it close to the chest" is uttered by Bruce Wayne to Lucius and by Harvey Dent to Rachel but really this is Christopher Nolan talking though the characters. The Batman does not suffer from this problem.
And finally, we can talk about the tone and the visual elements. The Batman is clearly the winner on both with a much more darker and unsettling edge than it's predecessor. It's beautifully shot and much more visceral in its use of color and shadows. The music is more in tune with the characters and the plot bringing us more into the sordid world of Gotham and making us feel the heaviness and hopelessness of its destruction.
I don't feel anything when I watch The Dark Knight, other than annoyed at a missed opportunity.
Unfortunately there are parts of this new Batman that are reminiscent of The Dark Knight's plot but that is because both were inspired by the plot of The Long Halloween and now I'm inclined to like The Dark Knight even less because it is taking away somewhat from this one.
The thing about The Dark Knight was that it always carried a slight bit of cognitive dissonance for me. The Joker's plotting was always too contrived and convenient, requiring more strain to suspend disbelief that all of these elements could come together as the Joker intended. Instead it just seems like the Jokers plot relied on blind luck that a car would turn down this alley or that, or that a criminal would get locked up in this cell and not that one, when there were always plenty of options. Instead it feels more like the work of the writer pushing characters along into the scheme not because it is inherent in their characters, but because that's what the writer needs them to do so that he can check off some boxes.
(And can I just say for the record, you cannot jam a pencil into a table to get it to stand straight up in order to slam a man's head down on it.)
Conversely, in The Batman, the Riddler's plot is much more plausible. Leaving clues following to the next and the next so that Batman admits they have no choice but to go along with it. Soon it becomes personal and in Batman's search for the truth regarding his past, the Riddler very plausibly can predict and prepare for the events that come next.
Then there's the whole arc of the character. In The Dark Knight there is no arc. Batman doesn't change nor does he have an epiphany. That all occurred in Batman Begins. Instead for the first hour and a half Christian Bale is just mostly mum, at times yelling not because his character is feeling something, but because Christopher Nolan told him to and it's not until the end that the writer tries to retcon the whole thing into the "hero Gotham deserves" crap, yet because it barely relates to the unwieldy plot its just feels too lofty.
Whereas in The Batman, the character clearly is changed by the events. He is motivated by vengeance only to find his loved ones were just as corrupted as the people he seeks to bring to Justice. His shortcomings are revealed in the end when the Riddler henchmen says he too is vengeance, causing Batman to realign his purpose. It's much more supported by the plotting of events than in the Dark Knight.
And then there are telltale signs of bad writing in the Dark Knight. The dialogue is too on the nose at times expressing what the theme is supposed to be yet not actually demonstrating it with the characters actions. There are times where an idiosyncratic line is used by more than one character (not heard by the other) to suggest a lack of development between the two i.e. "playing it close to the chest" is uttered by Bruce Wayne to Lucius and by Harvey Dent to Rachel but really this is Christopher Nolan talking though the characters. The Batman does not suffer from this problem.
And finally, we can talk about the tone and the visual elements. The Batman is clearly the winner on both with a much more darker and unsettling edge than it's predecessor. It's beautifully shot and much more visceral in its use of color and shadows. The music is more in tune with the characters and the plot bringing us more into the sordid world of Gotham and making us feel the heaviness and hopelessness of its destruction.
I don't feel anything when I watch The Dark Knight, other than annoyed at a missed opportunity.