digg

Join DiggAbout

Discover and share the best of the web!
Learn more about Digg by taking the tour.

See the original image at firstshowing.net

The Dark Knight: An Extraordinary Cinematic Revolution

firstshowing.net — This is not a review of "The Dark Knight." However, considering the film isn't even in theaters yet, it might come as a surprise to hear so much profound praise, but I can't help from sharing my feelings on this absolute masterpiece. In fact, I've decided to move beyond calling it a masterpiece to calling it potentially a cinematic revolution

Bury
show profanity settings
expand all
  • ganus, on 07/03/2008, -7/+30Reading this further confirmed that I am as giddy as a school girl in anticipation for July 18th.
    • 801NvizioN, on 07/04/2008, -2/+10Or giddy for the schoolgirls at the movie.
    • biggerapple3am, on 07/04/2008, -2/+4I wonder if there are schoolgirls out there that aren't giddy. That'd be weird.
      • BobMysterioso, on 07/04/2008, -0/+4I think there are. The goth ones, they never seem giddy about anything.
    • joel8x, on 07/04/2008, -0/+3It made me think that the author is feeding the hype and attracting easy traffic to his website.
    • Vigilo, on 07/05/2008, -2/+1Its just an action movie, a summer blockbuster action movie that's all. I love this year how the economy is tanking so people aren't spending as much. All of a sudden every big video game release is getting 10's and every big movie release is the best film eva.

      Trust me it will be a good movie but that is it. It won't change the world or movies. Movies in general will continue to be crappy all year until the summer and then we start all over with another so called "revolutionary" film. We are being sold on a film that's all folks.
      • skeeterou, on 07/05/2008, -0/+1I've seen the film and you're wrong. While it is just a film, this movie has broken the mold. People will be talking about the moral dilemmas offered up by this film.

        Truth be told, I'm not one to buy into hype, but this movie more than lives up to it, it exceeded my very lofty expectations. Nolan will become one of the elite directors with this film, and Ledger will get an Oscar nod, if not a win. This is not your kids Batman movie. This film is dark, and thank jeebus for that.
    • warplayer, on 07/05/2008, -0/+2This made me think of Dieter and smile :)

      NOW IS THE TIME ON SPROCKETS WHEN WE DANCE!
  • davincih, on 07/04/2008, -13/+3Wow, another stellar review. Great stuff.

    Ok so here's the question... if this movie really is this good, what effect will it have on the future of the superhero genre? I think it's only going to make it better, but here's a piece on how The Dark Knight could actually make things worse:
    http://digg.com/movies/Could_The_Dark_Knight_Kill_ ...
    • Modulo, on 07/04/2008, -1/+3***** off. or to put it less succinctly, take your "hay guyz wuts goin on, oh neat, hey check out this story that is tangentially related to what this popular story is talking about that I submitted", fold it until it is all corners, and stuff it up your ass.
  • amanilaenvelope, on 07/04/2008, -5/+25Goddamn it. All this trailers and posters is killing me with excitement with the waiting for the release of TDK. Its making me act like a japanese school girl who just saw the newest kitty hugging robot.

    yes, that excited.
  • overt, on 07/04/2008, -13/+7I want to have Christian Bale's babies.
  • alexmarchuk13, on 07/04/2008, -18/+12This movie will rape my ass apart. Come faster 7/18/08!
  • nnagflar, on 07/04/2008, -3/+46I'm excited for this movie too. But seriously, clean your pants.
  • kitkatsavvy, on 07/04/2008, -13/+6would this movie be as "superhot" if mr. druggo heath ledger didn't die after accidently mixing his prescribed meds? who knows..

    all i know is that i hate the media making someone a hero and a "saint" in death, even tho heath was a druggo..so much for good role models these days..what happened to all the smart people? oh well
    • darienphoenix, on 07/04/2008, -2/+6"what happened to all the smart people? "

      They just buried your post.
    • BulletsforRingo, on 07/04/2008, -2/+3Does it hurt being that ignorant?
    • norman619, on 07/04/2008, -0/+4It's not just the media. People in general seem to turn almost anyone who dies to saints regardless of how ***** they really were in real life. But your point here is out of place here. The praise and hype surrounding the new Batman film has nothing to do with Ledger's death. The last Batman film was fantastic and this new one is promising to be as good and possibly even better than the lat one.
    • thestranger, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1Kikatsavvy: What happened to all the smart people? You mean entertainers like; Monroe, Hendrix, Phoenix, Hedberg, and...oh wait...
  • tomsentest, on 07/04/2008, -31/+38Give me a break - it's just another comic-book-to-movie project.
    • norman619, on 07/04/2008, -6/+3Exactly. It's hardly a revolutionary film or series. I know it feels like it is when compared to the previous Batman films which ranged in quality from silly to horrible.
    • wacomwacoff, on 07/04/2008, -0/+17Have you seen the movie? Then you can't really say, can you?

      This guy's seen it. I'd take his opinion over someone who hasn't, thanks.
  • frenchkick, on 07/04/2008, -5/+7okay...time to buy my tickets...
    • spidoman, on 07/04/2008, -0/+2With his (and other's) praise for Imax that means that I get to drive 90 miles and not get home until around 5 am friday morning, then work at 7:30. I hate my love for movies sometimes.
    • Vigilo, on 07/05/2008, -0/+1Your lame. People will buy tickets for anything Wall-e cleaned up just recently and so will this and after this comes out the next weekend we will be duped into seeing another movie meanwhile gas skyrockets and people lose their jobs.
  • Mr.Gone, on 07/04/2008, -12/+7Viral marketing hmmmm?
  • Oddish, on 07/04/2008, -20/+12Overhype much?
  • Oddish, on 07/04/2008, -17/+12Overhype much?
    • cavar, on 07/04/2008, -3/+5Agreed. Good as it may be, I think the director should be doing more serious, original stuff like "Memento".
      • norman619, on 07/04/2008, -1/+1Memento is a great film but why are you such a film snob?
      • Niightwitch, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1I preferred his last movie about an olive who had lost his memory - "Pimento".
  • easypie, on 07/04/2008, -17/+9Overhype much?
  • easypie, on 07/04/2008, -18/+10Overhype much?
  • easypie, on 07/04/2008, -18/+10Overhype much?
  • easypie, on 07/04/2008, -24/+37Overhype much?
  • biggerapple3am, on 07/04/2008, -6/+6"I entered the theater a young man. I left the theater having lived in the remote village of Tnungizzah for the last several decades of the 14th century."
  • cogitocogito, on 07/04/2008, -2/+62Note to reviewer: Please don't call a movie "flawless". It's sloppy, amateurish, and just shows you haven't looked that closely. It seems like it's a great movie, but come on.
    • indigit4l, on 07/04/2008, -3/+4It's like anyone who played gta4 a week before it's release... it's bragging on the most elementary level. The reason it's flawless is b/c you got to see it before others. But I can not wait. I had a dream I watched the movie the other night and it gave me chills.
    • norman619, on 07/04/2008, -1/+7The author's fanboy is showing.
  • jimblackler, on 07/04/2008, -2/+22It's good because it's filmed in IMAX and has viral marketing? Welcome to .
  • aftern9ne, on 07/04/2008, -1/+40Oh gag me. It may be a great movie, but it won't be a damn revolution.
    • marx2k, on 07/04/2008, -2/+4"Oh gag me"?
      • amanilaenvelope, on 07/04/2008, -0/+2with a spoon.
      • Acglaphotis, on 07/04/2008, -0/+2I suppose he was tired of saying "***** me".
      • norman619, on 07/04/2008, -1/+1If you insist...

        (whipping it out......)
    • skeeterou, on 07/05/2008, -0/+1Actually, this movie will have a huge effect on future productions. It's pretty damn groundbreaking.
  • Zuhsz, on 07/04/2008, -4/+9Why is everyone acting like this is the first uber-hyped movie ever? In case you're wondering, it's not.
  • Gisterogue, on 07/04/2008, -0/+9One of the great things about working in a cinema is getting to see films early - before everyone else. Our cinema is the first fully digital multiplex in Europe, so we also get the advantage of each movie being in HD with top quality visuals and sound. Because of these things, our manager was invited to a meeting to watch this film, and a few other of the summer's unreleased movies, a week or two ago.

    The reason I am telling you all this is because he was more excited about seeing WALL-E than The Dark Knight. I sure hope it lives up to the hype, because that will be fantastic, but with all this hype I can't see it doing badly at the box office if it turns out to be a tad mediocre anyway. Similar things happened with Cloverfield and more recently Hancock. Very mediocre films, but extremely popular.

    If The Dark Knight lives up to the hype it will have achieved both, and this Digg post with it ;)
    • norman619, on 07/04/2008, -6/+2Wow. WALL-E was a disappointment to say the least. Nearly 2 hours of dragging it's ass. Most films out are better than WALL-E. To give you an idea of how bad it was I took my 5 year old nephew to see it and he fell asleep half way into it. Sounds like your manager has questionable taste in films.
      • wacomwacoff, on 07/04/2008, -2/+1You're entirely wrong. WALL-E is getting some of the best reviews of the year, is a box office hit, and nearly universal love from viewers. The theater I saw it in was going crazy over it at the end -- a standing ovation. It's easily my favorite Pixar movie. If you don't like movies about love and happiness, well, okay, but that doesn't mean that everyone does.
      • norman619, on 07/04/2008, -3/+3wacomwacoff:

        LOL!!! So if the critics say it's good it must be good. Is that what you are telling me? The fact that my nephew who loves robots and spaceships found to so boring he fell asleep means nothing. Yeah... riiiiiight.....
      • Maver1c, on 07/04/2008, -0/+2norman, you're argument stinks. you don't think any critics opinion is worth anything, or the fact that its making tons of money, or the fact that almost everyone who goes to see it loves it is worth anything. BUT, one 5 year old kid who can't stay awake during a freakin' Pixar film must mean the movie is bad? just...wow.
      • wacomwacoff, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1Norman: who should I believe: the opinions of myself, my friends, and professional movie reviewers all across America who all loved this film... or a single sleepy 5 year old?
      • BowieX, on 07/04/2008, -0/+2Norman: wacom listed two additional reasons (beyond its critical reception) for why Wall·E is objectively a good film -
        "WALL-E is getting some of the best reviews of the year, is a box office hit, and nearly universal love from viewers." So, the general public as a whole has responded very positively, and thus, objectively speaking, you're wrong in your assertion that most films out are better than Wall·E.

        I would suggest, however much you are entitled to be disappointed by the movie, that you not judge a film by the reactions of a 5-year-old. Futhermore, the fact that you took him to see a movie that is arguably much more adult-oriented than most feature-length animations likewise suggests that you personally have a very tepid appreciation for nuance, something -- mind the pun -- littered throughout Wall·E.
  • AgmLauncher, on 07/04/2008, -4/+26Comparing it to the Return of the King doesn't do a very good job of conveying the concept of "cinematic revolution" very well to me....

    RotK was epic and fairly high quality, but in no way was it earth shattering or moving...
  • elperegrino, on 07/04/2008, -0/+19i think he came.
  • pangelovski, on 07/04/2008, -8/+0I don't understand why you have to take one of the best Batman movies ( Batman from 1989) and remake it again. I think its just to 1. make more money and 2. just so that some egocentric director/producer can put his own artistic touch on it.
    I say bring back Tim Burton and create a masterpiece like Batman or Batman Returns!
    • Calinthalus, on 07/04/2008, -0/+2I really hope that was sarcasm.
    • norman619, on 07/04/2008, -0/+3Remake? You serious? These new Batman films are not remakes. They totally ignore the previous films as if they did not exist much like what I like to do. The previous films were pretty bad and/or silly. They all had very weak stories and felt like they were for kids. I do hope you are being sarcastic because if not then you just gave us a great display of ignorance.
  • pangelovski, on 07/04/2008, -2/+1I forgot to ask what you guys think will be so great about this movie and for those who has seen it, what was so good about it?
  • MizuhoChan, on 07/04/2008, -11/+4I've been hearing all this ***** about how "The Dark Knight" is going to be awesome. So I finally break down and google it. And what do I find?

    IT'S ***** BATMAN.

    Batman can go kiss my ass, either that or jump in a vat of toxic waste or something. SUPERHEROES NEED SUPER POWERS.

    I don't want to sit for 3 hours watching a guy in spandex jumping round like I could. ***** Batman.
    • pangelovski, on 07/04/2008, -0/+0And finally it happened.... TDK claimed its first victim.
    • norman619, on 07/04/2008, -0/+4I hate that they changed so much from the actual story. Frank Miller's "The Dark Knight" is a great graphic novel. I'm looking forward to The Dark Knight Returns. If the stuff we say in I Am Legend is really a teaser it means this film is planned. Can't wait to see a senior citizen Batman kick the crap out of Superman. :-) In any case I learned a long time ago not to go to see movies like this expecting too much because they rarely live up to the hype.
      • zer0nix, on 07/04/2008, -1/+1wait... i thought 'the dark knight' was the good one and 'the dark knight returns' is supposedly the one that sucks ass...

        also, i don't think this movie actually has anything to do with the graphic novel 'the dark knight' except for the name.
      • norman619, on 07/04/2008, -0/+2Zeronix:

        Yes. I know this movie has nothing to do with the Frank Miller books. They took the name and changed most everything else. The I Am Legend teasers seem to point to a The Dark Knight Returns film since the had the Batman and Superman logos superimposed. Since they are going with "The Dark Knight" is stands to reason this is in the works.
      • zer0nix, on 07/05/2008, -0/+1ah. whoops, i actually forgot about that... thanks for clarifying.
  • Jarasmen, on 07/04/2008, -0/+5Dark Knight hits theatres on 8th August in Poland. Global release dates my ass, not awesome. I just hope they'll have a copy in IMAX.
    • pangelovski, on 07/04/2008, -0/+2Ever heard of the BitTorrent protocol :P
      • norman619, on 07/04/2008, -2/+5Ever heard of ***** camcorder pirate copies?
      • Jarasmen, on 07/04/2008, -1/+2Watching some movies at home is a crime... and I'm not talking about pirating stuff.
    • slightlyoffbeat, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1If you want to download "The Love Guru" and watch it at home, then be my guest...but this film deserves to be watched on the Imax screen.

      IMO anyways
  • lopla, on 07/04/2008, -1/+8funny, they opted not to use much cgi at all and it's a revolution. It just goes to show how bland big cgi effect ridden movies are. There's nothing like the real thing. It's amazing to see many going back to old school. I know folks getting out of digital photography and going back to film in droves, they got sick of their dslr's and images looking identical to everyone else's.
    • zer0nix, on 07/04/2008, -0/+4 as expensive as it is, cgi is still cheaper than building and shooting on real-life sets.

      go ahead and digg me down.
      • noots, on 07/04/2008, -0/+3CGI is now being treated as a tool for filming (like it should be), rather than a replacement.
  • hermmermferm, on 07/04/2008, -4/+5Cinematic revolution? I think you mean the trend to turn all films into comic books and video games.
    • ZenMojo, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1Better than the previous trend to turn all films into music videos. Ironically, when MTV went to crap by no longer making music videos, the quality of films got better.
  • amercer, on 07/04/2008, -0/+7Wait... did anyone else detect sarcasm while reading this? Was it really only me? I think the writer is just trying to take a very subtle jab at all the people raving about the movie. The first paragraph in the outline even sounded a little sarcastic, and just look at the words in bold throughout the article. I thought it was pretty obvious he was just playing on other reviews.
    • zer0nix, on 07/04/2008, -2/+1the first and second paragraphs both seem a bit self-aware, and excessively positive by choice of praise. the writer's 'mistake' is in waiting till later to reveal that he's actually writing from just having seen the film.

      regardless, his 'non-review review' has sold me on seeing the film in imax -even though i thought batman begins was completely and totally overrated (even after two viewings).

      i'm going to state my intentions clearly: i'm going for the special effects. i'm actually not expecting much for the story -i found batman begins totally underwhelming in this regard and i have VERY low expectations for american cinema- but if it turns out to be even half as good as this guy is describing (or at least as decent as the last movie), it should prove to be quite enjoyable.

      -and even if it turns out to be a real suckfest, my nearest imax is right next door to a science museum i haven't visited in ages, so it's a win-win for me :p

      PS: regarding my negative verbiage: usually, if i expect a movie to suck (on completely justifiable grounds) it turns out better than expected and i end up having a better time than i would otherwise (however, that tactic has utterly failed me with 2001's hulk, spiderman 2 and 3, xmen 3 and many other films my brain is trying very hard to forget). so forgive me if you find my language un-hype-sustaining. also, once again, i found the first movie to be totally mediocre.
  • vishzilla, on 07/04/2008, -0/+4With all this hype on the internet going around The Dark Knight, it shouldn't raise our hopes too much. If anything goes wrong down the line, we will be disappointed
    • Modulo, on 07/04/2008, -0/+2Not disappointment!! AhhHH!!!!!! NOBODY WARNED ME ABOUT THE POTENTIAL FOR DISAPPOINTMENT!! YOU MONSTERS!!!!!
      Live a little for chrissake.
  • ChayD, on 07/04/2008, -0/+2Wow, that's what I call "gushing praise". Admittedly every Chris Nolan directed / Wally Pfister cinematographed movie I've seen has always been top notch, but seriously, let the audience decide without the "OMFG!" factor.
  • korashime2001, on 07/04/2008, -0/+3Welcome to hyperbole.com
  • LAngeDuFoyeur, on 07/04/2008, -0/+3The Dark Knight is revolutionary in it's ability to reveal poorly informed contributors to film websites. These people are acting like they've never seen a solid film before.
  • DeFex, on 07/04/2008, -0/+4Holy cow! get over yourself.
  • adougy, on 07/04/2008, -2/+13Watch 2001: A Space Odyssey. THAT was a cinematic revolution.

    This is just a really good film.
  • flangepiece, on 07/04/2008, -0/+5"Most comic book fans look for great action in superhero movies and that's it" - is he talking out of his arse or what?
  • ntas, on 07/04/2008, -0/+3I must admit it looks good in the trailers i have seen so far...but a cinematic revolution? I doubt that...I have yet to see a ground breaking movie since I first saw the Matrix..well just have to wait till July 18 then
  • Stketcher, on 07/04/2008, -0/+3Yeah..Started reading and stop when he said that its just "awesome"because of the Imax experience...There's no Imax in the country I live.
    • solid12345, on 07/04/2008, -1/+2I guess America needs to bring freedom and Imax to your nation then!
  • xBarnabyJonesx, on 07/04/2008, -1/+3Cinematic revolution?
    It looks like an awesome late 80s/early 90s movie. I'm sure it will be incredible, but cinematic revolution is a bit much.
  • solid12345, on 07/04/2008, -0/+5Until a hologram rachel dawes comes off the screen and gives me a handjob in my chair it isn't that revolutionary.
  • petaganayr, on 07/04/2008, -0/+4What if...just what if... the movie comes out on the 18th and it suck. What if the movie industry is just hyping this movie up because of a tragic death of a depress actor. What if the movie comes out and it suck but people still thinks it is awesome because thinking otherwise would disrupt the herd. Kinda of like how most people say they listen to Nirvana because they think Curt was a genius, but really he was just depress and was loaded on drugs and booze. Don't get me wrong, I loved Batman Return, and the Batman Franchise, but has anybody thought about this? I agree about the comment on The Matrix. The Matrix was ground breaking. I just don't think another Batman movie will be a cinematic revolution. Just think about it guys. Really, another Batman movie, a cinematic revolution? Gullible.
    • thestranger, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1Oh man your probably right.........I am going to be forced to like this movie, because I am so afraid to upset the herd. Goddamnit, why can't I just have my own likes and interests, but here I sit only aloud to like the safe things that everyone else likes........

      Oh wait no...I going to like it cause; I love Batman, I love the comics (especially Frank Millers), Joker is my favorite villain, I love Nolan's other movies, and I think Bale and Ledger are awesome (yes even before he died). That could just be the herd speaking though...oh well.
  • RidgeWalker76, on 07/04/2008, -1/+2I hope this movie can live up to the hype. Wall-E didn't get this much hype and is an extraordinary movie. It's getting to the point where this movie has been so hyped it is going to disappoint unless it is an absolute masterpiece. Could this really be a new Lawrence of Arabia? A bit doubtful.
  • Bra1nStew, on 07/04/2008, -1/+0... Since when was Return of the King a good film? It was easily the worst of the three LOTR movies. ***** ghosts...

    Dark Knight looks like it will be one of the best sequels of all time though and probably the best film of the year. T2 good. I haven't been this hyped for a movie since Two Towers.
  • RaulMuadDib, on 07/04/2008, -2/+1Spoiler: Heath Ledger dies at the end
  • sonar1, on 07/04/2008, -1/+1anyone have a link to the first 5 minutes?
  • sonar1, on 07/04/2008, -0/+1http://ie.youtube.com/watch?v=FPtvTCui2P0
  • sark666, on 07/04/2008, -0/+3Everybody gushes about IMAX, when I suspect the majority of you have never seen anything filmed in imax. And no, matrix or attack of the clones do not count. They were never shot in imax, they were upsampled to imax resolutions. As a matter of fact, to have a film called an imax film it, crazily enough, had to be shot in imax. Well now they have relaxed the standards and a film that's not even shot in imax can say it has 'the imax experience'.

    See, the big thing about imax isn't the screen, it's the film it's shot on. The exposure is huge compared to regular film and you get much more detail. Now in defence of this film quoting wiki here:"The director used an IMAX camera to film six major action sequences, including the Joker's first appearance in the film.' I believe this is a first, finally people going to see traditional cinematic film converted to imax will actually see a portion of it in imax.

    So probably about 15-20 minutes of these is truly imax, which is impressive in the sense that nothing they have tooted as 'imax' has actually been imax.

    A couple of things against imax though for traditional films is film has a aspect ratio of 16:9 or wider whereas imax res is closer to 4:3. The result? You'll see a massive cropping of the film just like the days before getting movies in letterbox. Also, imax can only be 2 hours max, last I checked they hadn't got around this. For ex, attack of the clones in imax literally had twenty minutes cut from it.

    Ok, enough rambling, it just bugs me when people gush about 'the imax experience' when the majority truly haven't experienced it. If you ever get the chance to see something truly shot in imax, go see it, the detail is astonishing.


    And i just read wiki a little more, it seems the max running time of imax is now 2hrs 20 min, so less films will get the chop. And here's a last little quote on the transistion to upsampling of traditional films.

    "Reviewers have generally praised the results of the DMR blowup process, which have superior visual and auditory impact to the same films projected in 35 mm. Many large format film industry professionals point out, however, that DMR blowups are not comparable to films created directly in the 70 mm 15 perf IMAX format. They note that the decline of Cinerama coincided roughly with the supersession of the original process with a simplified, reduced cost, technically inferior version, and view DMR with alarm. IMAX originally reserved the phrase "the IMAX experience" for true 70 mm productions, but now allows its use on DMR productions as well. However, IMAX DMR versions of commercial Hollywood films are generally popular with audiences, with many people choosing to pay more than standard admission to see the IMAX version."
  • AlexanderZero, on 07/04/2008, -1/+1Revolution blah blah blah IMAX blah blah viral marketing blah dark blah blah mood blah visual blah blah "rattle the cages."
  • Fetching more discussions...
    Show 51 - 58 of 58 discussions
  •  

    Login or register to add a comment

    Create a new account or login to join in the conversation on Digg. You'll also be able to Digg stories to help promote things you like.


© Digg Inc. 2008 — Content posted by Digg users is dedicated to the public domain.
DIGG, DIGG IT, DUGG, DIGG THIS, Digg graphics, logos, designs, page headers, button icons, scripts, and other service names are the trademarks of Digg Inc.