Film

Movie theaters, reviews and showtimes in New York, plus articles, trailers and more

The Dark Knight (2008)

Director: Christopher Nolan

Critics' rating

Average user rating

170 reviews

Movie review

From Time Out New York

Smart directors tend to adopt a one-for-them, one-for-me ideology in their relationship with the studios; the dichotomy, however, usually doesn’t play out in a single film. Christopher Nolan’s sequel to 2005’s Batman Begins internalizes that schism between serious aims and summer-movie duties. The problem isn’t the admittedly jaw-dropping sturm und drang—this is Batman, not Bergman—but how the pummeling action rarely informs the psychological angst. The personality split between the operatic Dark Knight of the soul and the OMG set pieces is almost as pronounced as the maladies of our freak trio.

That would be the Caped Crusader (Bale), still wrestling with a DSM-IV’s worth of disorders; Harvey Dent (Eckhart), Gotham City’s do-gooder district attorney with a transformational face-lift coming his way; and the Joker (Ledger). Thankfully, an origin story isn’t offered for the grinning archnemesis; he simply appears like the Ebola virus, armed with an insatiable appetite for destruction and John Wayne Gacy’s makeup manual. Next to Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard’s propulsive drone of a score, Ledger’s performance is the most dynamic element of the movie. What the late actor accomplishes with little more than a nurse uniform and a Groucho Marx waddle makes the various explosions, as well as Bale’s raspy, remote characterization, pale in comparison. If Nolan’s only goal were to add to another revisionist wrinkle to an iconic villain, Ledger’s brutal, batshit malevolence would qualify The Dark Knight as a success.

The stakes, however, are higher. To paraphrase a colleague, the director is going for the Man Who Shot Liberty Valance of men-in-tights films, and he comes remarkably close. Nolan is pondering big themes: post-9/11 concepts of justice, the fragility of social bonds, when it’s better to simply print the legend. All of which makes superfluous side trips like an IMAX-ed Mission: Impossible–style sequence that much more disappointing. Yes, it’s visually impressive, but any hack can do a halfway decent job with trailer-ready tangents. Not everyone can push the genre forward, and the fact that Nolan’s padded popcorn flick isn’t the streamlined masterpiece it could have been is a real buzzkill.

Author: David Fear 2008-07-15 15:57:55

Time Out New York Issue 668: July 17–23, 2008

Bookmark

User reviews of this film

Craig said...

Posted on Jul 18 2008 05:40 Ah - another one of the dirty-dozen critics who just didn't get this flick. Why is it when a foreign or independent low-budget film tackles weighty issues of morality they get all googley-eyed and weepy, but whenever a big-budget film does it they call it heavy-handed and pretentious? This movie was wonderfully complex and presented some truly morally ambiguous situations for all of its main characters with a variety of outcomes....Interesting how the only negative reviews I see online are from bastions of left-wing liberal places like Austin Texas (surprisingly full of hippies - they're scared to live anywhere else in Texas :)) Boston and New York. The critic compains that Nolan does not present his themes well - But I beg to differ, sir. Apparently 98%of your fellow critics felt otherwise - which means - you JUST DIDN'T GET IT. It happens - and we accept your apology and are sorry you were having a bad day and let it influence your review. :)

Report as inappropriate
paul b said...

Posted on Jul 18 2008 04:22 Just got out of the Imax screening in NY for the midnight showing. Place was packed, crowd was amped. at least 30 people painted up as joker, face scars included, and one full on batman.
the movie was astounding
and this is after all the hype.
i mean, it's easy to be impressed by a movie you don't expect anything from.
but my group i went with all expected this to be the best thing since sliced bread.
and it was better.
the reviewer has some points, but its nitpicking to the slightest detail, asking a movie that was in essence perfect, to be actually perfect.
and as a fan of batman, and a fan of superhero/comic movies, it really was perfect, and by far the best of its genre ever done
don't compare it to the there will be bloods, because its not that type of movie, but it was just as brilliant if not more so in its own way.

Report as inappropriate
Rob said...

Posted on Jul 18 2008 03:51 Seriously? Did you see the same movie I just saw?
Don't ANYONE listen to this art-house punk. The Dark Knight is one of the most entertaining movies I've seen in... I couldn't even tell you. If you liked Batman Begins, you will LOVE TDK. And I'm no fanboy, just a movie fan (and a FILM fan, so, please, you phony, film-school dropout know-nothings, shut the hell up).
Note to the editor: Send this idiot packing. He wouldn't know a good movie if it sat on his face and wiggled.

Report as inappropriate
sarah said...

Posted on Jul 18 2008 03:23 why do I feel like the reviewer didn't ever see the movie (which I just saw)? there are a few ways to criticize the dark knight, but this is just meaningless and pathetic. GET A DECENT REVIEWER!

Report as inappropriate
bvllets said...

Posted on Jul 17 2008 17:43 Wait, how can you have a DSM IV worth of disorders, isn't that all the disorders? I don't see how thats humanly possible.

Report as inappropriate
NLM said...

Posted on Jul 17 2008 17:40 Batman, Schmatman. You touchy, touchy bozos criticizing the critic. The Batman franchise doesn't need your defense, just your $$$. What do you care whether the reviewer gave it 3 stars or 6? It's his opinion, which is likely better informed than many of yours. Why do you think David Fear is getting paid (presumably) to do this? How many of you know-nothings have even seen a Bergman flick?
Besides, these kinds of pictures are review-proof. So you're going to see it anyway. And it's going to rake in lotsa cash this weekend. Chill OUT fanboys. Your indignance is misplaced.
By the way, Fear's review wasn't entirely negative. He just said it wasn't as good as he anticipated. Sort of like most things in life...

Report as inappropriate
bvllets said...

Posted on Jul 17 2008 17:37 I love DARK KNIGHT 's comment

Report as inappropriate
JK said...

Posted on Jul 17 2008 17:18 I can't wait to see The DK and Heath Ledger's performance. I think this review was given by a person with low self worth. Why else would some one undeniably criticize a movie that will go down in history as being one of the greatest Superhero movies ever. This critic is obviously trying to show off his 'expertise' by rambling on with nonsensical information. It appears as though he is intentionally giving the movie a poor review to seem like he has an original thought. Playing the Devil's advocate will not get you a role in superhero's movie, no matter how hard you try Mr. Critic. In this critics quest to have an original thought about this movie, he only accomplished sounding arrogant and I am confident I will never read another review ever written by this critic.

Report as inappropriate
Dean said...

Posted on Jul 17 2008 16:29 This is the most idiotic, self-important narcissistic review I've ever read. I think the author will sell tickets on the mere basis of moviegoers wanting to prove him to be wrong!

Report as inappropriate
JR said...

Posted on Jul 17 2008 15:46 Saw a screening last night and it was fantastic, visually impressive, edge-of-your-seat film the entire time. Impeccable performances, especially by Heath Ledger.

Report as inappropriate
InsideHoops.com said...

Posted on Jul 17 2008 11:59 Seeing the movie Friday afternoon and can't wait. It's weird that of only a few bad reviews of this movie in the entire country half of them come from NY writers. I'm a NYer who looks forward to raving about it, assuming it's as great as most everyone says

Report as inappropriate
Chino said...

Posted on Jul 17 2008 11:01 like 100 of out the 115 comments here completely bash you.
get fired already.

Report as inappropriate
3goldens said...

Posted on Jul 17 2008 09:31 There is not much more that I can add to the those who support the film and have made comments about the review by a critic that has not given a fllm a positive review ever! It figures he's from New York, as the other bad review came from New York magazine another steller publication that no one reads anymore. This is the only way they can get any attention.
It is almost as though they were jeaolous, but come on, calling Chris Nolan a hack! WHo the hell are you man!

Report as inappropriate
jose said...

Posted on Jul 17 2008 02:54 I've seen the movie, in IMAX no less and it was mindblowing. The performances by all of the actors was phenomenal, the fact that Ledger somehow managed to steal the show despite this shouldn't take away from the great job done by everyone else.
I don't want to go into spoilers but if Mr. Fear couldn't make the connection between the "pummeling action" and the "psychological angst", then he wasn't watching the movie as it was fairly well spelled out.
Mr. Fear, please go back to reviewing your little art house films and make all the little movie references that will warm your jaded heart. Until you're ready to review a movie with an open mind, and leave your pretensions and snobbery at home, leave the reviewing to real critics. Its unfortunate that little critics like you try to make their names by just being contrary and elitist snobs. Aside from, "There Will Be Blood" have you liked anything done this millennium? I mean seriously this movie was incredible, and its sad that you're standing in your own way and not enjoying it.

Report as inappropriate
Jack said...

Posted on Jul 17 2008 00:59 Your an idiot. This is a fantastic film. Dont listen to this moron go and see the dark knight.

Report as inappropriate