I'm not certain I want to watch the movie The Dark Knight, so I've decided to write this post, and make the points I want to make, before I get roped into seeing it. I've heard the rave reviews, so I'm wondering if I'll be retracting my words. I guess we'll see. On with my rant.
I can't understand why the Nolan brothers decided to start remaking Batman movies that have already been done, and done well (with the exception of the glitch that saw the seriously misguided casting of Val Kilmer in one of them).
Batman Begins was such a good attempt by the Nolan brothers to put their stamp on this franchise, and it was a really original take on the Batman story. Why would they spoil what they've begun by settling for a remake when they could make a second movie just as original. There are plenty of villains in the Batman comic books, and I'm sure the writers could come up with others.
Much as I enjoyed Christian Bale in Batman Begins, he will never replace Michael Keaton as the best of the Batmen. And I cannot even imagine how Heath Ledger will attempt to take over from Jack Nicholson as the iconic Joker. And therein the main issue. So much hype has gone into this movie due to the death of Heath Ledger, that I am worried it has swayed viewers' opinions. They're talking about a possible Oscar-winning performance... for a comic-book movie! That's just as insane as the hopelessly bad make-up job.
Having said that, I must admit that a recent couple of rumours have me slightly excited about upcoming Batman remakes: that Johnny Depp may be cast as The Riddler, and Angelina Jolie as Catwoman. Wow. Now that I can actually imagine working. Michelle Pfeiffer was awesome, but I have to admit that Angelina was born for that role. But what's wrong with developing an entirely new storyline involving Catwoman?
The most worrying development, however, is the deviance of this latest Batman movie from the essence of the genre. Like everything else we're being spoon-fed these days, it looks like The Dark Knight is jumping onto the reality- based story-telling bandwagon, and straying too far from the comic-book-style urban fantasy genre.
From what I've heard - and the words "terrorism" and "torture" were in there somewhere - it reminds me too much of the massive disappointment that was the Daniel Craig Bond movie Casino Royale. As far as I'm concerned, Casino Royale was not a Bond movie, no matter what the main character was called. Bond has always before been the invincible spy - he hardly ever gets caught, and, if he does, he escapes without sustaining much more than a few body punches and dishing out far more than he gets. Casino Royale was too close to the bone, and I hated it. I fear the same for The Dark Knight.
Comments (5)
David Mascellani -
Hi, I haven't gone to see The Dark Knight as yet. But friends (whose opinions I tend I agree) had mixed reactions to the movie-but most agreed that Heath was pretty phenomenal as the Joker. I'll probably wait until it comes out on DVD.
Regards,
David Mascellani
Posted 19 August 2008
Selma -
I haven't seen it yet either, which is a surprise as I am madly in love with Christian Bale. I have heard it is very dark. Maybe I'll catch it tomorrow. Batman is my fave superhero.
Posted 24 August 2008
Elle -
Let us know what you think of it, Selma. We'll probably rent it on DVD - hubby picks up our Friday night DVD on his way home, and he's said he wants to see it, so he will bring it home at some stage, I'm sure.
Posted 25 August 2008
SusanVillasLewis -
Interesting thought there on Casino Royale. Because that movie was so much closer to the original story in the book than any of the other movies, torture scene and all. Bond as created by Fleming isn't quite as smooth and perfect as he is in the movies. First time I've heard a complaint about stuff that took the movie closer to the book. 🙂
(BTW, I hate the Bond books. Just horrid writing, IMO. Love the movies. Was OK with this new take on Bond. Not OK with dropping the iconic line in the next one, though. One must have standards.)
Posted 21 October 2008
Elle -
Actually I can think of a few movies that have been an improvement on their books. One series in particular springs immediately to mind, but I've already caused a ruckus once because of my unpopular opinion of a certain author, and I'm not keen to do that again.
I'd forgotten about the books' version of Bond, though, now that you mention it. I only read a few Bond books as a teenager, and I couldn't get hold of Casino Royale. I was referring more to the branding of the Bond (movie) franchise as an easy-to-watch adventure. They broke their brand in the latest movie because they're trying to attach themselves to the latest proverbial musical go-kart instead. Bad move.
Posted 22 October 2008
