Batman: Dark Night review

Hahaha, I love how you say "no complaints" and then proceed to complain.

I find myself to be one of the few defenders of Maggie in this film. I haven't seen it yet, but most of my friends are complaining about the change in actresses. I personally feel that Maggie's a great choice to replace Katie -- I agree that Katie is better looking, but Maggie has that same look in her eyes and a similar complexion. Not a spitting image, but close enough that I feel like I'll be able to accept the change. If it were a more major character they were changing, I'd probably feel more strongly about this.

As for Batman's voice -- I think it's PERFECT. Yes, it sounds gruff and over-the-top -- but "Batman Begins" establishes that Wayne has a thing for theatrics and takes the advice from Ra's a little too seriously. He's overacting, and yeah, it's very inhuman and unnatural, but it works for what he's trying to do. It's fantastic.

He says something along the lines of "Its none of my business who Rachel spends her times with" I noticed that was the line right off as he says it quickly and the spends and her kind of blend.

JMN

The thing is, Maggie is a better actress than Katie Holmes and less attractive than Katie Holmes.

But both actresses are lightweights (Mrs Cruise moreso than Miss Gyllenhaal) compared to actors like Morgan Freeman and Gary Oldman, and, well, the entire cast of each movie.

Worst off though is the awful coincidence that the only main character in the movies that are not from the source material is an awful horrible terrible annoying character that is redundant to the character arc and preachy at the very best. At the very worst Rachel Dawes can be referred to as, ah, b***hy.

Interestingly better writers had the idea that Bruce Wayne's best friend from childhood to adulthood grew up to be in the District Attorney's office and was not a love interest... and his name was Harvey Dent.

I'm alright with Bruce Wayne having a love interest. I even loved the notion of using one of the original Golden Age love interests. I have maintained the criticism that Katie Holmes is merely cute and not the knockout I would have expect as the love interest of the Batman.

But seriously any character that tells Batman that Batman is defined by being heroic just irritates me for as long as the character preaches. WE KNOW THAT BATMAN WILL BE HEROIC. THIS IS BATMAN, NOT AMBIVALENT MAN.

I still do not like using the Tumbler tank-thing in favor of an actual Batmobile. I like a real Batmobile.

So recasting a z-list character that has no real impact on the character, and a great impact on me the viewer, does not hurt the picture.

What does hurt the picture, possibly the only thing that does, is that both of these movies fail to establish why Batman loves her so far above any other woman... and it hurts this movie much worse that we do not see why this "lady" is the point of a love triangle. Why do both of these guys want her so much, especially to the point that Batman carries a torch?

The thing is, Maggie is a better actress than Katie Holmes and less attractive than Katie Holmes.

But both actresses are lightweights (Mrs Cruise moreso than Miss Gyllenhaal) compared to actors like Morgan Freeman and Gary Oldman, and, well, the entire cast of each movie.

Worst off though is the awful coincidence that the only main character in the movies that are not from the source material is an awful horrible terrible annoying character that is redundant to the character arc and preachy at the very best. At the very worst Rachel Dawes can be referred to as, ah, b***hy.

Interestingly better writers had the idea that Bruce Wayne's best friend from childhood to adulthood grew up to be in the District Attorney's office and was not a love interest... and his name was Harvey Dent.

I'm alright with Bruce Wayne having a love interest. I even loved the notion of using one of the original Golden Age love interests. I have maintained the criticism that Katie Holmes is merely cute and not the knockout I would have expect as the love interest of the Batman.

But seriously any character that tells Batman that Batman is defined by being heroic just irritates me for as long as the character preaches. WE KNOW THAT BATMAN WILL BE HEROIC. THIS IS BATMAN, NOT AMBIVALENT MAN.

I still do not like using the Tumbler tank-thing in favor of an actual Batmobile. I like a real Batmobile.

So recasting a z-list character that has no real impact on the character, and a great impact on me the viewer, does not hurt the picture.

What does hurt the picture, possibly the only thing that does, is that both of these movies fail to establish why Batman loves her so far above any other woman... and it hurts this movie much worse that we do not see why this "lady" is the point of a love triangle. Why do both of these guys want her so much, especially to the point that Batman carries a torch?