Film The Dark Knight released 15 years ago today, how do you feel it holds up today?

[WestEgg]

I remember when this movie came out, and it felt like such an event. Batman Begins had been surprisingly good, but The Dark Knight promised to be the realization of what its predecessor set up, Batman in his prime, against his most iconic villain, in a massive, high budget movie. It felt more ambitious than other Super Hero films of its time, both in terms of its action set pieces, and its character storylines. It took risks, the characters felt well realized rather than emobodied tropes, and things felt like they had consequence.

I know all Hollywood films are constructed experiences designed to turn a profit. Maybe it's just decades worth of exhaustion with Super Hero films following the explosive success of the MCU, but I still feel this movie has a unique feeling to it that hasn't quite been replicated since, even in its own sequel. I'm not sure if it's my favorite super hero movie ever made, but it's really hard for me to say it's not the best super hero movie ever made. Maybe it's because, despite being the middle chapter of a trilogy, it works as a stand along film quite well. Maybe it's that it feels less formulaic when it comes to its storytelling. Maybe there's the mystique of it being Heath Ledger's final role. But something about this movie just feels special to me.

What do you think, Famiboards? Did you watch this film when it released, or sometime later, and what did you think of it? How well does it hold up in the post MCU world?

 

[Deleted member 2258]

I think it was a very good movie. Heath Ledger was great. Two Face was goofy. It's been a long time since I've watched the trilogy, but I'd imagine this one holds up the best.

 

[Jimmy Joe]

My response to Nolan's movies in these later days has less to do with the changing landscape of superhero movies and more to do with Nolan being a reactionary

Dark Knight Rises did more to damage Dark Knight's shape in my mind than anything that Marvel Studios put out

Anyway boooooo, boo Nolan, boo Nolan's Batman movies

 

[oomoepoo]

I remember watching this for the first time on the big screen when a theater nearby had a triple-feature of all the Nolan Batman movies when the third released. It's a great movie, possibly even timeless classics, though I personally enjoyed Batman Begins more as a comicbook movie for reasons I can't quite pin down, maybe Liam Neeson? Also still slightly prefer the Burton movies over all because they're not afraid to be campy at times.

Also unfortunately it ruined DC movies in general and also Batman in particular for the years to follow. Yes, Nolan's approach worked for the character and because he's a very talented film maker. It doesn't much work for every other hero, especially if it's also executed poorly by lesser film makers like Goyer or Snyder.

 

[hologram]

My thoughts on this film are complicated. I loved it at the time, but I've soured on it in recent years for a few reasons:

• Batman, and particularly Nolan's version of Batman, have kind of right-wing / fascist undertones that make me pretty uncomfortable
• Some of Nolan's, uh, Nolanisms have become worse with recent films (nonsensical plotting, inaudible dialogue), but they started pretty definitively with this film IMO

I guess most of the rest of my criticisms - e.g. the Two-Face stuff is rushed and unearned - can be mostly categorized in one of the above two points.

 

[Dizzle]

It's a great movie from a great director that carriers more baggage than it can handle: Batman as an icon, Heath Ledger's tragic death, the Patriot Act politics (pro? anti? who knows), movie bro culture, etc etc etc.

I think it "holds up" if it doesn't have to be everything people expect it to be. The more time passes, the more it's reputation will settle down and it will just be a movie. Unless we've got a Shining on our hands in which case God help us. I'll see you at the documentary about film bros who have turned The Dark Knight into a pseudo-religion.

 

[Josh5890]

It has been a minute since I've watched it, but I'm 99% sure that it will remain my favorite Nolan film as well as a top 3 comic book film. It really can't be overstated how big of an event that film was when it released. I remember seeing it opening day with my brother. Everybody saw it at one point or another. It is a shame that Heath Ledger couldn't live on to receive his well-deserved accolades.

To me, it will always be a classic.

 

[Pierceyonder]

I think it holds up pretty well but is definitely being carried a lot by Ledger's performance.

 

[Catsylvania]

The Dark Knight holds up well. Heath Ledger’s performance is timeless and the standard every Joker actor will likely be compared against as unfair as that may be. Sorry, Jared.

My main issue with it is how quickly the Two Face storyline is largely resolved with some fallout in the sequel. There probably should have been a movie between The Dark Knight and The Dark Knight Rises to address the pacing of Two Faces’ plot and how overstuffed TDKR was.

 

[BotenAnna]

I'd be lying if I said it didn't have things to it I like, but the more I've seen and thought about it more recently the more icky it really is. Nolan's body of work from this point onward is mostly just fairly mid movies being dragged into insufferable garbage by his own stylings and themes. I don't think this one really stands on its own well at all and the only enjoyable moments are carried by the one particular performance, but it has aged even more poorly thanks to where it stands in relation to his work and other goings on of Hollywood trends.

 

[JazzPotatoes]

A film that doesn't quite know what it's about, but certain knows how it's about it.

If you look past the messy theming and the questionable politics, it's a superhero film that absolutely swings for the fences, and I think it's legacy is secured just on that alone. And the set pieces put modern superhero films to shame.

It's interesting that one of the most tense sequences in the whole film revolves around two boats not exploding. That's something we don't see in these sorts of films anymore.

 

[Deleted member 2258]

Interesting to think about this movie vs modern superhero movies because I thought The Batman was a much better movie in many ways. If I had to rewatch one right now, I'd definitely pick The Batman over The Dark Knight. I was lucky to mostly avoid the grimdark DC years in between those two.

 

[Rooster]

The way in which people qualify giving a perfect score, being that the product is masterful but that doesn't actually make it perfect or free from flaws is the way I'd describe the movie. It's a spectacular movie, but not a flawless one. Of course there are nitpicks and a few things that are a bit of a stretch; I don't think any movie is flawless.

I think the worship this film garners can be a little off-putting, but that's not really the film's fault - it's a tremendous movie.

Though I do agree, and this may undermine the idea of the film's holistic quality, but without Ledger's performance, I wonder if it would just be seen as "great" rather than, well, any of the superlatives it usually gets. Because that is the best part of an already very strong film.

One of the weaknesses, which isn't really the film's fault, nor Bale's fault, as I think he does a perfectly fine job as Batman, but is just Batman as a character. People say Batman is less interesting than his villains, and I think that's true. I think this film makes the disparity all the more obvious. Not just with Joker but even with Two-Face (though I understand complaints about that arc). I think Batman/Bruce Wayne is a little flat as a character, and that ultimately stems from being created in the era before Marvel realized you could actually give comic characters depth.

In retrospect all the memeing has also made Bale's Batman voice become more funny than it's meant to be. I would also say newer superhero movies have made the few fight scenes a little underwhelming just in terms of how they were shot, edited, and choreographed. Still way better than Batman Begins in that regard, though. Other than that, I think most of it holds up.

And again this isn't a flaw of the movie but more its effect, but this (and the other two) were seminal films in spurring the "gritty reboot" era, and that works for some properties better than others. But, and this is now a tangent, these films did kick off the holding pattern which still exists to this day of DC trying to chase trends with their superhero stuff - first towards Nolan, then Gunn.

In any case, I still consider it the best superhero movie. I do think it tends to overshadow how good some of Nolan's other non-Batman movies are though.

 

[SammyJ9]

I mostly liked it at the time but haven’t seen it in many years. But Batman Begins has always been my favorite of the trilogy - Dark Knight is a great movie with some incredible performances, but I found it kind of… off-putting to actually watch? It’s really intense, almost grueling and anxiety-inducing at times. Which I know is part of the point, but I didn’t click with it nearly as much as I did Begins.

 

[chocolate_supra]

I would consider it technically the best superhero movie if Raimi's Spiderman 2 didn't exist.

What I like about the Nolan Batman films is they don't even feel like superhero or comicbook movies to me. I don't quite know to to explain it, something about the tone and action being so grounded (not grimdark like Snyder gave DC the reputation for), the weight and simplicity of the score, the performances, the cinematography, they feel more like Nolan films that just happen to have Batman in them.

I did a rewatch a couple years ago and found that all three really hold up. I do agree with @Catsylvania that it felt like there shoulda been another movie between Dark Knight and Rises, as it seems weird to go from "Batman meets the nemesis that would define him" straight to "hey Batman disappeared for like years right after that wtf." It's a weird comparison but I got to thinking about if there were other tetralogies that have worked well, and that led me to Rebuild of Evangelion. I think they might've maybe been able to go from Rebuild 2 to 4 in terms of movement of the overall plot, but you'd lose a lot of the character arcs doing that. And that's kinda what it feels like to me going from Dark Knight to Rises. It feels like there shoulda been a big, brooding, character-focused entry in there (like Rebuild 3) that starts with Gotham coming after Batman and ends with Wayne going into hiding. With a bunch more good villain shit on there as well. But trilogies seem to be the way to do it here in the States so

Anyway TDK on its own is obviously great, but I just have a hard time seeing it outside of the trilogy. I know culturally it was a big deal because of the hate-then-love reaction to Ledger and such, but I see it as part of a bigger whole. A trilogy so iconic and so much its own thing that when it came time to reboot (re-bat?) they didn't even try to ape it. Nolan achieved something at the time that nowadays seems impossible: a strong, cinematic, standalone comic book adaptation without connections to or a need to serve an expanded universe of multiple IPs. Kind of amazing in retrospect.

 

[Mekanos]

It's the first movie I ever saw three times in theaters. It left a huge impact on me and it's probably the movie I've seen the most times (either that or Office Space). As the years go on I've definitely soured on Nolan's sociopolitical viewpoint and how much it appears in basically every movie he makes, but this is still the best Batman movie for my money and just incredibly entertaining. Flaws and all, I still consider it an all-time great.

It's a great movie from a great director that carriers more baggage than it can handle: Batman as an icon, Heath Ledger's tragic death, the Patriot Act politics (pro? anti? who knows), movie bro culture, etc etc etc.

I think it "holds up" if it doesn't have to be everything people expect it to be. The more time passes, the more it's reputation will settle down and it will just be a movie. Unless we've got a Shining on our hands in which case God help us. I'll see you at the documentary about film bros who have turned The Dark Knight into a pseudo-religion.

I think it's safe to say after 15 years its reputation has held strong and probably won't change. It got entered into the National Film Registry in 2020.

 

[GamerJM]

Good movie, though I like Batman Begins a bit more. I used to be more of a hater, but some time in 2012 I had a viewing where it finally clicked for me outside of just being a vehicle for one of the best performances of all-time.

 

[Dizzle]

I think it's safe to say after 15 years its reputation has held strong and probably won't change. It got entered into the National Film Registry in 2020.

The National Film Registry is filled with movies whose reputations have changed. Who is going back and watching the original silent Ben Hur (a tale of christ)? It's considered culturally significant, but that's it. I could easily see The Dark Knight 30 years from now being considered just as good but less "important" or vice versa.

 

[Phosphorescent Skeleton]

Its a stinker, much like all of Nolan's films. Heavy, dull, unimaginative dreck, with the added bonus of dog shit political/social commentary. The psychic damage The Joker in this inflicted on a generations is incalculable.

 

[EvilChameleon]

Probably one of the best superhero films of all time. It was my favorite Batman film until The Batman came along.

 

[Sadist]

Despite how I feel about recent Nolan films, it’s a fantastic movie. Its more of a Joker movie than a Batman movie.

As much as I like Bale’s take on Bruce Wayne, I feel that Batman kind of takes a backseat in this. There are some great scenes, no doubt about it. Especially in tandem with Caine’s Alfred it works quite well. Still, I think this movie, as a Batman flick is certainly leagues above the schlock we got in the years before it. But it’s about the villains.

Heath Ledger’s Joker is absolutely fantastic. As someone who casually enjoys comicbooks and reading up on classic Batman stories, the version of the Joker in the Nolanverse is very close to the character in the comicbook. No identity, no past, no empathy, just… let’s fuck shit up and well, because it’s just fun! Looking back on the Dark Knight, it really is Ledger who carried the movie.

Which might not be entirely fair, as Oldman, Freeman and others gave a great performance.

 

[Barahir_MJH]

Not perfect, but still a very good movie. Yes the politics are kind of reactionary (though to some extent most of the superhero movie genre is), but nowhere near Rises in that regard. I might like Batman Begins a little more though.

The funny thing about Dark Knight Rises is Nolan obviously really wanted to make a modern Tale of Two Cities, which is negative toward both the French Revolution's excesses and a brutal and corrupt old regime that made the revolution inevitable. But his horizons are so limited he ended up making a super reactionary movie anyway, and while I'll give movies a pass on questionable politics to a certain extent it's deep-seated enough to really hurt the film. Even making Bane actually come from the streets of Gotham to give the revolution some level of legitimacy instead of an agitator from a Kazakh prison would have helped.

 

[Mekanos]

Not perfect, but still a very good movie. Yes the politics are kind of reactionary (though to some extent most of the superhero movie genre is), but nowhere near Rises in that regard. I might like Begins a little more though.

The funny thing about Rises is Nolan obviously really wanted to make Tale of Two Cities, with is negative toward both the French Revolution's excesses and a brutal and corrupt old regime that made the revolution inevitable. But his horizons are so limited he ended up making a super reactionary movie anyway.

Nolan has Tory Brain for sure

Even with Oppenheimer getting great reviews, I am very hesitant to go whole hog on a Nolan movie about arguably the biggest war crime in history

 

[Beanstar40]

I feel ancient! I was obsessed with this movie, I was 15 when it came out. I watched it so many times. Having watched it again recently, I still think it’s the best batman film, with lego and THE batman tying for second

 

[neil]

I liked this one after finding Batman Begins boring. Only saw it at the cinema, I’d have to watch it again to know how I think it stands up. The hype around Heath Ledger was a bit much at the time.

 

[chocolate_supra]

I feel ancient! I was obsessed with this movie, I was 15 when it came out. I watched it so many times. Having watched it again recently, I still think it’s the best batman film, with lego and THE batman tying for second

You feel ancient? When it came out I went to see it with my wife.

 

[Prophet64]

Christopher Nolan like several directors working that I wish they would have a dedicated screenwriter to co-write with seriously. Not that they are terrible writers as I judge that from a film to film basis, but they are too close to the script material as written it seems that they seem less inclined to admit and change anything if it seems clear it's not working at all. Just ends up feeling rigid and less appealing overtime.

I voted for "it's fine" because Heath Ledger's performance is an all-time classic. The character of the Joker stands out even more because of the otherwise pedestrian script and plotting, Joker moves through this film like a pervasive foreign entity that dominates everything else in this film. The film is practically in awe of this entity despite itself. There is just a whole different vibe when the character is on screen than without. Like the difference of being submerged underwater to being above and out of water. While that resulting palpable difference can be appealing, it is uneven in away that seems unintended by the writer/director. There's what everyone else was doing, and then there's what Ledger brought. I blame the writer/director for that uneveness.