The sick day rolls on, and I'm feeling (slightly) better. The Other Half came home, and we ordered a pizza, something that is off of my regular diet. And, I watched--as part of a superhero double feature with The Incredible Hulk--The Dark Knight, the second of the rebooted Batman franchise.
The blurb on the box (actually Blu-Ray, not DVD) says "prepare to be wowed." And I was prepared. Everybody has raved about this picture. It's up for Oscars, and is widely regarded as the best superhero movie of all time. And me? I'm a comic book fan from years (decades) past, I'm easy to please. So, why was I underwhelmed by The Dark Knight?
The first thirty to forty minutes were a snooze-fest for me. Things picked up a couple of times. There were some nifty effects with the Bat-Cycle, I thought Heath Ledger did a good job, and I really like Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman. Harvey Dent's Two-Face makeup was great. But otherwise? Not impressed. I can't see myself reaching into the old movie library to watch this again in a month, a year, even five. On the other hand, I've seen Superman Returns, Spider-Man 1 & 2, X-Men 1 & 2, Iron Man and both Fantastic 4 flicks at least a couple of times each.
There is something overwrought and bombastic about Batman movies (the original four, and the two new ones). They tend to be too long. There is generally too much going on, with an inordinately convoluted plot weighing everything down. The newest films have done better with the villains, though. Two-Face and Joker did not feel like they were shoe-horned into the same movie. The 80s/90s Batman movies shoved way too many villains and heroes onto the screen at once, much like Spider-Man 3 did.
I guess my problem is in the character of Batman himself. You never really buy that a non-superpowered human would do the things Batman does, or that it is even possible for him to do so. It was nice that he asked for a mask that would allow him to turn his head, because that always bugged me. Why does he have a big rubber cowl anyway? Wouldn't fabric work better?And Christian Bale has a very recognizeable lower face (as does Aaron Eckhart), so how hard would it really be to figure out Batman's secret identity?
As a comic book fan, you might wonder why I'm picking it all apart like this. I don't know. I wanted to like the movie. . .and I sorta did. But it's like all the hype about Forrest Gump when it came out. When I finally saw it ("You've just gotta see this film!!!"), I spent most of my time mentally picking it apart. I think part of my subconscious takes it as a challenge to prove the rest of the world wrong sometimes. As it was with The Dark Knight.
Despite all I've written, it really isn't bad. In fact, if it were tightened up a bit, I would have liked it just fine. If you're sick at home like I've been today, you could do a heck of a lot worse (see The Happening, or better yet, don't). It's just that it isn't the best superhero film ever as everyone says (that honor belongs to Iron Man, in my opinion), and I wasn't wowed. Sorry.
The blurb on the box (actually Blu-Ray, not DVD) says "prepare to be wowed." And I was prepared. Everybody has raved about this picture. It's up for Oscars, and is widely regarded as the best superhero movie of all time. And me? I'm a comic book fan from years (decades) past, I'm easy to please. So, why was I underwhelmed by The Dark Knight?
The first thirty to forty minutes were a snooze-fest for me. Things picked up a couple of times. There were some nifty effects with the Bat-Cycle, I thought Heath Ledger did a good job, and I really like Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman. Harvey Dent's Two-Face makeup was great. But otherwise? Not impressed. I can't see myself reaching into the old movie library to watch this again in a month, a year, even five. On the other hand, I've seen Superman Returns, Spider-Man 1 & 2, X-Men 1 & 2, Iron Man and both Fantastic 4 flicks at least a couple of times each.
There is something overwrought and bombastic about Batman movies (the original four, and the two new ones). They tend to be too long. There is generally too much going on, with an inordinately convoluted plot weighing everything down. The newest films have done better with the villains, though. Two-Face and Joker did not feel like they were shoe-horned into the same movie. The 80s/90s Batman movies shoved way too many villains and heroes onto the screen at once, much like Spider-Man 3 did.
I guess my problem is in the character of Batman himself. You never really buy that a non-superpowered human would do the things Batman does, or that it is even possible for him to do so. It was nice that he asked for a mask that would allow him to turn his head, because that always bugged me. Why does he have a big rubber cowl anyway? Wouldn't fabric work better?And Christian Bale has a very recognizeable lower face (as does Aaron Eckhart), so how hard would it really be to figure out Batman's secret identity?
As a comic book fan, you might wonder why I'm picking it all apart like this. I don't know. I wanted to like the movie. . .and I sorta did. But it's like all the hype about Forrest Gump when it came out. When I finally saw it ("You've just gotta see this film!!!"), I spent most of my time mentally picking it apart. I think part of my subconscious takes it as a challenge to prove the rest of the world wrong sometimes. As it was with The Dark Knight.
Despite all I've written, it really isn't bad. In fact, if it were tightened up a bit, I would have liked it just fine. If you're sick at home like I've been today, you could do a heck of a lot worse (see The Happening, or better yet, don't). It's just that it isn't the best superhero film ever as everyone says (that honor belongs to Iron Man, in my opinion), and I wasn't wowed. Sorry.
My review: Everyone else loved it a lot, so I recommend it. I just advise lowering your expectations a little. You'll like it better that way.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Have something to say to us? Post it here!