Addressing the most frequent complaints about The Dark Knight

Addressing the most frequent complaints about The Dark Knight

It's difficult to read anything about The Dark Knight these days without hearing about all it's flaws. I have decided to comment on some of the more frequent complaints in an effort to set the record straight about these so-called "Plot Holes".

Editorial Opinion
By LoudNoises - Apr 25, 2012 12:04 AM EST
Filed Under: Fan Fic




Greetings fellow CBM fans. I come to you today not with the intention of starting an all out war about whether The Dark Knight is or isn't the greatest CBM of all time because honestly, what's the point? Rather I am here simply to address some of the most frequent complaints about the film. Like many of you I am a regular on this site. We come here to momentarily escape our mundane lives and fish for the most recent rumors and details concerning our favorite CBMs. But more often than not I find myself more interested in the comments than the articles on which they are posted. It's a guilty pleasure which I suspect many of us share. As a result of this addiction I have come to know the complaints regarding TDK all too well. People often refer to these complaints as "Plot Holes". This is where I find my biggest problem. A plot hole is by definition "a gap or inconsistency in a storyline that goes against the flow of logic established by the story's plot, or constitutes a blatant omission of relevant information regarding the plot.". In other words, if it does not directly affect the story's plot, it cannot be considered a plot hole. That being said, I would re-label these complaints as "Minor Inconsistencies". I use the word minor because their overall significance to the story is minimal and the only thing that they may be inconsistent with is the reality driven environment and not the plot.

The term "reality driven" carries with it a lot of baggage. It is largely in my opinion where most of the complaints derive from. How you feel about Nolan's realistic approach to Batman is a non factor or at least it should be. The issue here is when you ground your story in reality you open your film to the utmost scrutiny. It is easier to recognize flaws in this sort of environment, because most of us (and I say this loosely) have a firm grasp on reality. Fantasy/Science Fiction movies have a free pass in this department because they require a suspension of disbelief to begin with allowing the audience to accept flaws with far less opposition. But it’s time we admit that the real problem here is not these minor inconsistencies. People simply place too much emphasis on the word “realism”. They have taken this word as verbatim and milked it for all its worth with the sole intent of unraveling an otherwise tightly knit tapestry. Well I am here to say ENOUGH! This is a MOVIE! And like every other movie of it’s genre it still requires a certain suspension of disbelief even if it is to a lesser degree.

One of the other games people like to play regarding TDK is the over analysis of a scene. To be more specific, let’s use the “Joker Escape Argument” as an example. People love to site this particular sequence as being a plot hole suggesting that after Batman and Rachel fall from the building (which I will address in further detail below) that the Joker and his thugs would have no way of escaping the building. First of all, this can in no way be considered a plot hole. How the Joker made his escape does not affect the overall plot. Secondly, to suggest they would have no way of escaping only demonstrates your lack of imagination. The emphasis on this scene is not how Joker gets in and gets out but why he is there to begin with. To kill Harvey Dent. If Nolan felt that the Joker’s escape was significant to the story he could have wrote another action packed sequence similar to the bank heist where they shoot grappling hooks out a window and zip line onto another building. One could imagine a 100 ways in which they orchestrated a brilliant escape. However, it is not important information and if you dwell on something as trivial as this for any longer than a few seconds then you are really just ruining the movie for yourself by over analyzing the situation and straying to far from the story‘s focal point.

Having established the ground work for my defense of TDK, allow me to summarize the main points. There are plot holes, there are minor inconsistencies and then there is over analysis. The 3 ways in which I will address the following complaints. Distinguishing between the 3 will be my goal in the remainder of this editorial. “And here… we… GO!”.

First up in is the infamous “Batman and Rachel Fall”. This particular argument addresses the scene in which the Joker drops Rachel out of a window and Batman leaps after her. They fall somewhere in the range of 40 to 60 floors (who knows?) and somehow manage to land on top of a car unscathed. This is the most frequent complaint I hear about on this site. Now even if you aren’t sold on the idea that Batman’s cape appeared to slow them down enough to prevent serious damage, most of us know this is obviously what they were trying to convey in the scene. Picture a person who is parachuting and the wind suddenly disrupts their chute and they begin falling at a fast rate. It is plausible that someone in this situation will survive the fall. The chute may slow them down just enough to endure the landing with minimal injuries. Add the fact that they are also wearing body amour and it becomes even more plausible. In a movie, all you need is plausible. Is it unlikely? Yes, absolutely. But since we know this is a Batman movie and that Batman uses his cape specifically for jumping off rooftops it would not be a completely wild idea that the cape prevented them from smashing the ground at 100 mph. For the sake of argument though, lets say this is a perfectly valid complaint. That it was simply poor execution on Nolan’s behalf. This would still not qualify as a plot hole. The fall has no relevance to the story’s plot. If anything you could call this a minor inconsistency with the reality driven environment. But again, this is just a movie.

Next up is another favorite. The “The Thumb Print on the Bullet Scenario”. Most people argue that this sequence doesn’t make any sense or that they don’t understand it. So allow me first to describe what is going on in this sequence for clarity. (Deep breath…) Batman cuts out a chunk of concrete from a wall containing fragments of a shattered bullet. He shoots a scanner into the hole where the bullet entered the concrete to get a full scan of the shattered fragments. He then sets up an automatic gun to fire rounds into separate small pieces of concrete. Each round fires a different bullet. He then looks over the freshly shot concrete blocks to figure out which bullet hole matches the original. After locating the match he now knows what the original bullet shell looks like so he can scan the it and enter the information into a specialty software. The software takes the shattered bullet scan and recreates it to look exactly like matching bullet shell. The recreated bullet shows up on screen with a heat signature revealing the thumb print left on the shell when the shooter pushed the round into the clip (…and exhale). Hopefully this clears things up a bit... or not? Moving along! It’s pretty well known at this point that Nolan incorporates some technology in his Batman films that is perhaps beyond our current technological reach. Bat-gadgets, doomsday devices, etc. This is where we must utilize a suspension of our disbelief. Although the technology may not exist, it does provide a plausibility factor by incorporating a degree of science that is within the realm of our current understanding. If Nolan decided to throw a time machine or a teleportation device into his movie then I would agree that he crossed the line in terms of believability. When it comes to technology the trick is knowing exactly where that line of believability is and then pushing it rather than jumping right over it. Again, even if this explanation does not sit well with you, this is still not a plot hole. The whole scene is only relevant to locating the shooter and can only be considered at most a minor inconsistency.

The next complaint is a perfect example of over analysis, “The Bomb Dilemma”. How did the Joker manage to get all those explosives into the hospital and how could he have possibly had enough time to do so? The answer to this question is quite simple actually… WHO CARES! How he got the bombs into the hospital is not relevant information to the story. What is relevant is why he put them there is the first place. The Joker is attempting to show just how ugly society really is by setting up elaborate human experiments that puts our morality to the test. Don’t put yourself in the position where you have to question every single event unless you are deliberately trying to ruin the experience for yourself. People who do this with real events are conspiracy nuts. People who do this with movies are douches.

The last complaint I will cover is one that I can actually agree with to an extent. This is the “Joker Cuts Gambol” scene. I’m actually surprised that this is the complaint I hear about the least seeing as it is one of the most obvious in my opinion. Joker is holding a knife against the corner of Gambol’s mouth as he is telling him the story about how he got his scars. Long story short the Joker cuts Gambol’s face and Gambol falls to the floor dead. Now it is easy to recognize that Gambol would not have died from a cut to the face. He would more than likely be holding his face screaming in pain. But what you have to consider is we are dealing with a movie that is rated PG-13. And while there is some material in this movie that may push the envelope in terms of ratings, a man screaming in pain and bleeding everywhere would definitely fall in R rated territory. So lets try and understand this scene from a PG-13 standpoint. This is undeniably a great scene which showcases just how frightening and twisted the Joker is. The question is, do you ditch the entire scene because of the unrealistic nature of dying from a cut to the face? NO. Because the beautifully written dialog and amazing performance takes precedence over a minor inconsistency. And like I mentioned before, not many people even notice it. A tribute to a performance so captivating that you completely ignore such an obvious hick-up in the scene.

Finally we’ve reached the end! Now I’m sure I haven’t addressed all the complaints regarding TDK. People will forever nit-pick at this film which is fine because the important thing is we are still talking about it. Even with The Dark Knight Rises right around the corner we just can’t let this film go. That's how you know a movie will stand the test of time. Whether people praise it or despise it, they just never shut up about it. Thank you for hanging in there with me if you have made it this far. I look forward to your responses and I’m open to criticism. As they say, you got to take negative with the positive. “Unbiased. Unprejudiced. Fair.”.

Hope everyone enjoys the greatest CBM summer of our lifetime!
DC & Marvel Team Up In Awesome Fan-Created Infinite Crisis Video
Related:

DC & Marvel Team Up In Awesome Fan-Created "Infinite Crisis" Video

Bill Cosby Says He Wants To Be In A Superhero Film
Recommended For You:

Bill Cosby Says He Wants To Be In A Superhero Film

DISCLAIMER: As a user generated site and platform, ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and "Safe Harbor" provisions.

This post was submitted by a user who has agreed to our Terms of Service and Community Guidelines. ComicBookMovie.com will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please CONTACT US for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. CLICK HERE to learn more about our copyright and trademark policies.

Note that ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

1 2
Swarley
Swarley - 4/25/2012, 12:30 AM
Great read!
buttercup
buttercup - 4/25/2012, 3:00 AM
I have a much bigger problem with the pretensions to political relevancy TDK aspires to than minor plot holes. The movie works as long as you don't actually think about anything deeper than JOKER TOTALLY PWNS, because at a level of character motivation and meaning, it doesn't hold up.

Plus, the action is poorly directed, which is hugely annoying in a tentpole blockbuster.
wedontdie
wedontdie - 4/25/2012, 6:23 AM
I'm guessing you never heard that Nolan stole some of his ideas from some Jackie Chan films. Watch a film I believe is called Police story with Jackie Chan and you will see what I mean. Its on netflix. This isn't a complaint but more like an FYI thing. maybe a fact that nobody really knows.

The issue I had with this movie is that it started to seem less like a Batman film and more like a Film Noir Crime-drama. The only thing about it was that it didn't have a Femme Fatale but now Catwoman might take that spot. I still think that the acting is superb. Just wish the story didn't have to bore me every 10 minutes.
SmellofDuty
SmellofDuty - 4/25/2012, 6:48 AM
@Teabag - You better not be a picky penis today. I'll find you.

THE FIRE RISES
LoudNoises
LoudNoises - 4/25/2012, 7:06 AM
@Swarley- thanks, I appreciate it!

@buttercup- Not sure where your going with the pretensions to political relevancy argument. I suppose one could make political connections with terrorism or corruption, but those are pretty broad subjects that many films make reference of. I don't understand how that is a bad thing? To me, the real topic of interest this movies explores so well is our ethical and moral boundaries.

@Tea- Can't help you with the Joker hair problem but I would be honored if you spice up my comment section with some boob action! Lol

@wedontdie- Nope, never heard that. But to be honest, I wouldn't care if he stole his ideas from The Little Mermaid. Whatever he did, he made it work. And you refer to TDK as a "crime drama" like it's a bad thing.
LoudNoises
LoudNoises - 4/25/2012, 7:34 AM
@yossarian- yeah, I wouldn't know the actual logistics of a thumbprint being found on a bullet shell. But thanks for reading. I just hope I don't come across as a Nolan worshipping douchebag, lol. I just like this movie.
Irons
Irons - 4/25/2012, 7:59 AM
Well written. I agree, some people don't seem to understand the meaning of realism. There's a reason this stuff doesn't happen in real life.
Gerrit
Gerrit - 4/25/2012, 8:01 AM
Someone says that Ledger's death increased the hype for TDK, someone makes an article to say it didn't. Someone points out possible flaws in TDK, someone makes an article to "set the record straight". For God's sake, TDK is NOT the perfect movie, let people criticize it in peace.
The worst problem about TDK, for me, is not the movie itself but the Nolanites who say it is more "cerebral" or "intellectual". How can these people be part of this site if they don't even respect the "superhero genre" (personally I don't think CBMs are all the same and belong to just one genre) up to the point of saying "its not just a good CBM, it's a good movie" as if CBMs are a lower class of film?
BlueMex
BlueMex - 4/25/2012, 8:03 AM
I agree with all your points. when it comes down to it ..for those who are nipicking...Who cares!?! its a MOVIE! Movies are made to take you away from reality and into a fantasy of movie making, especially when it comes CBM. If you start over analyising everything in a movie , dam that movie will start being a bad movie. Great article !
wedontdie
wedontdie - 4/25/2012, 8:03 AM
@LoudNoises I guess it doesn't sound like a bad thing if it is a film noir crime drama but the bad thing about it was that it seemed less like a batman film. If it looked more like batman begins then it might have been more interesting.

and I guess that is why James Cameron got a lot of complaints of making a rip off of Pocohantes? People would still complain that he got the story off of the little mermaid. I'm not saying what I said before to complain but I just wanted to inform the people that liked the dark knight, that the writer of the dark knight got some of his ideas from certain Jackie Chan movies because some of the scenes in the dark knight seemed a lot similar to ones In a few Jackie Chan films that I saw. Call it a fun fact if you will, or an opinion if it isn't a fact?
Gerrit
Gerrit - 4/25/2012, 9:09 AM
@teabag, exactly. The problem with these articles is that they serve as backup for trolls. How many times I saw comments like "Avengers is too much CGI, in Nolan's Batman everything is real" or "TDK is more realistic, therefore it is better". This kind of article does more damage than good. It backs up nolanites and contribute to turn TDK into some sort of deity among CBMs, and if someone criticizes it than that person is either a troll or nitpicking. If everytime someone criticizes a CBM we are entitled to make an entire article to counter the criticism than things will get messy here.
LoudNoises
LoudNoises - 4/25/2012, 9:29 AM
@Gerrit- I don't see how any of what you just said does any damage. People write their opinions on a comic book movie website and the sun still rises, world continues spinning, we all are still breathing.

We are here because we enjoy writing, reading and commenting about our favorite CBMs. Why are you here? To keep the peace? Are you captain of the CBM Internet SWAT team?
RidiculousFanBoyDemands
RidiculousFanBoyDemands - 4/25/2012, 10:34 AM
The joker poisoned Gambel and that paralyzed him before he cut him. Plus you can easily die from that kind of trauma to the mouth. Especially if he pushed in and cut across.
RidiculousFanBoyDemands
RidiculousFanBoyDemands - 4/25/2012, 10:35 AM
I still don't understand why people are become so upset by the same 5-10 people who complain about The Dark Knight on this site. Seriously guys, venture outside comicbookmovie.com and you will find nothing but praise for that movie. Don't let people get to you.
RidiculousFanBoyDemands
RidiculousFanBoyDemands - 4/25/2012, 10:36 AM
The joker got the bombs in all those places because he has the entire mobs resources available to him. Remember from Batman Begins, the mob owns the city, thus the joker would be able to go where he wants when he wants. You don't think the mob had guys on the inside at the hospital?
LoudNoises
LoudNoises - 4/25/2012, 10:46 AM
@RidiculousFanBoyDemands

Yeah, I get what your saying. My point was that you don't really need come up with a reason. It's safe to assume since the bombs were there that he found a way to get them in there and there's no point in over analyzing how he accomplished it. Like you said, he has connections, that's how. End of story. Lol.
headlopper
headlopper - 4/25/2012, 11:40 AM
Good editorial. Well argued.

At the end of the day, it's just a movie. So don't EVER expect perfection.


...unless it's Star Wars: A New Hope.
CorndogBurglar
CorndogBurglar - 4/25/2012, 11:54 AM
I don't know about Nolan getting his ideas from a Jackie Chan movie. He pulled about 90% of the story elements straight from Long Halloween and The Killing Joke. Read those stories and you'll see what I mean.
CorndogBurglar
CorndogBurglar - 4/25/2012, 12:11 PM
@ teabag

haha. He never poisoned him. I have no idea where RFD got that from.
CorndogBurglar
CorndogBurglar - 4/25/2012, 12:12 PM
Just like I have no idea where and when it became acceptable to leave out details of a movie and let the viewers try to come up with crazy speculations to justify what actually happened or was not shown.
rockerdude22
rockerdude22 - 4/25/2012, 1:18 PM
Nice article! Really well thought-out! However, I'll say this. When I first saw TDK in the theater back in '08, I thought it was one of the best movies I ever saw. I recently watched it again to see it it still held up, and please don't flame me for this, but I don't think it holds up. While it's still a good movie, the only truly great things I found in it were The Joker (of course!) and Two-Face (even thought he wasn't in it that long). If you take those two out, it's pretty much a generic crime drama with Batman in it (still a good movie, though). Honestly, I think The Joker is pretty much the only thing the film will be remembered for (among general audiences, that is). Nothing really else stands out that much. Remember, this is just my opinion. I know many of you are going to disagree with me on this, and that's perfectly fine. It's good to have differing opinions. So, I'm hoping TDKR will have something to it that makes it hold up better in later years.
Gerrit
Gerrit - 4/25/2012, 2:04 PM
@LoudNoises. Good point. I just wouldn't like to see someone posting articles when I or anyone criticizes something, all it takes is a response in the comments, at least for me. And I certainly don't want to say "please don't flame me for this" when I'm about to say something that goes aginst the majotiry of oipinions, like @rockerdude22 just did. We shouldn't have to do this.
LoudNoises
LoudNoises - 4/25/2012, 2:32 PM
@Gerrit- Agreed. I don't care at all if someone hates TDK. I decided to get these thoughts out in the form of an editorial instead of the comment sections because I really wanted to flesh them out and make my arguments clear and concise. The comment sections are fun, but I feel like an editorial makes for a larger platform to reach a broader audience. I guess this makes me an attention whore, lol.

@rockerdude22- lol, your good dude. I realize there are people on this site that would have you burned at the stake for speaking such blasphemy, but I am not among the pitchfork weilding mob. But just so you know, everytime someone says they don't like TDK, a Nolan fan dies a little bit on the inside. ;)
Gerrit
Gerrit - 4/25/2012, 2:37 PM
attention whore, LMAO. Just post pics of boobs or Gusto and you'll get attention.
Supes17
Supes17 - 4/25/2012, 2:47 PM
HOW THE [frick] DID THE JOKER POISON GAMBLE?!

He just sliced his ass lol. He cut all across his cheeck, lip, and probably his neck in one slice.



But anywho, ya'll take this shit to seriously.
Just relax lol. People hating on this movie isn't going to lower it's ratings or make the critics renounce their good reviews. It isn't going to make the film lose the $1 billion it earned at the box office, so don't sweat it. We're all entitled to our own opinions.

[frick]ing nerds:P
RidiculousFanBoyDemands
RidiculousFanBoyDemands - 4/25/2012, 3:12 PM
That is the explanation I came up with. If he didn't then Gambol would have broken free easily. I just assumed he had something on his left hand that he stuck him on the back of the neck with.
LoudNoises
LoudNoises - 4/25/2012, 3:13 PM
@tea- One day I would like to visit this boob factory of yours, lol.
RidiculousFanBoyDemands
RidiculousFanBoyDemands - 4/25/2012, 3:15 PM
Plus he had the look of somebody who couldn't move his body. Gambol was written as a tough mother f*cker, and he wouldn't have just sat by and listen to the joker tell that story.

Either that or he knew that he had guns on him, and the jokers goons would have shot him if he broke free. Still I like to think that he poisoned him. I could care less if people don't agree, but for me it is the only plausible explanation.
manymade1
manymade1 - 4/25/2012, 3:18 PM
Gambol didn't die.
AZSuperman
AZSuperman - 4/25/2012, 3:20 PM
Good Article! I agree whole heartedly. Having been a Marine the actual shell doesn't go with the bullet, it is discharged, but if he loaded them from the front (no one does that) it's possible.

Anywho, I always wondered about the fall too, but never considered it a "plot hole."

ok so I do have one question is why would the banker (nice cameo btw) fire 6 shots and not hit a thing? Do you know how hard that his with a 12 guage? SERIOUSLY!

Things that I thought of after reading this article:

Taking the whole ballet on a 50 ft scooner? I know BW has some cash, but seriously? none of them have husbands or wives (being PC)?

Batman outrunning the Dogs?

ya know what, there's a bunch of other things that just make me go "hmmmmm" but I'm being lazy and don't really want to comment on them because I feel like I'm doing disjustice to the movie

It was to date the GREATEST CBM...
l0rdleg0las
l0rdleg0las - 4/25/2012, 9:00 PM
if you watch the Gambol scene it cuts away during the moment he would actually be cutting his face. so really who is to say that he didn't just move the knife 2 inches lower and cut his throat.

that is how i always thought about it. makes it simpler to think that way than to really focus on and wonder how a big bad mofo got killed by a cut to the face.
TheMyth
TheMyth - 4/25/2012, 9:03 PM
Glad to see this wasn't a flaming article of nerd-rage, I was wincing when I hit the link lol. Nice write up with fine points. I'd never considered the dispute of Jokers escape from the party, and it is as you say, not integral to the plot. Hell, I'd say forcing Batman to save a civilian in a desperate situation WAS the escape plan. The Bat is busing, move along.

The fall is what took me out of that event, and as such I disagree with your observation. I'm likely one of the people you've seen arguing this scene. I once went in depth explaining terminal velocity and the rate at which mass gains speed in a free fall, but in doing so realized not everyone has an intimate knowledge of physics and I was over-analyzing. I can accept Batman walking away without broken bones, it's Rachael that ruins that scene for me, poor girl would've been [frick]ed up to say the least. Yes people have survived failed chutes on 15,000ft skydives, but they never just walk away. Even a perfectly functioning parachute in the use of an experienced operator can result in hard landings that snap ankles and legs. In short, while I can accept that Bats could walk away from it with his armor(which incidentally also adds mass, increasing the rate at which they fall), Ms. Dawes would have sustained serious injury and there is no getting around it. In the end you're right though, neither event is actually a plot hole, but an inconsistency. During my experience, the fall broke the illusion.

The "bullet print" thing is actually a good contrast in explaining my reasoning for the "incredible Ms. Dawes" scene. I have no knowledge of ballistics of fire arms beyond what I've seen my guns do to trees lol. So the scenes dealing with it really made me wonder, "Can that be done?" It had me to the point that I was willing to believe it could. I do know that the lead is the only thing that comes out, casings are ejected upon a new round entering the chamber. Furthermore, when loading a handgun clip, you certainly do handle the bullet enough to leave prints all over it, lead and casing. I still don't know the plausibility of it, but it is essential to the plot as without that print he can't progress the investigation. The scenes depicting the methods elaborate that, and it is clear that what he is doing is necessary, otherwise why would he be left to such dramatic and complex means. For me personally it doesn't bother, but it is centric to the plot. The real holes are in the argument against it though as through it I've seen a lack of knowledge regarding guns in general. As an American raised in the south, I'm quite familiar with the mechanics and intimate with the use, just not an expert in the sciences. This of course causes me to laugh when I hear people talking about how you don't touch the lead when loading. A shotgun slug is the only solid shot from commonly used guns that you could easily avoid touching the lead. I'd be more concerned with how the print survived the friction and how the surface of the lead wasn't scoured by the brick.

Bombs in the hospital? Didn't know that was an issue. I think those disputing this demonstrate a lack of imagination. By excluding scenes depicting it I'd think it was conveyed that he used many undercover thugs, which he obviously has, and their planting of the bombs was without incident.

Cutting Gambol is a bit more than a minor inconsistency. It's easily the worst scene in the movie. The dialogue is good but does not redeem the poor execution of the entire thing. What makes it bad is that... Nolan is like the son that gets straight A's while the other kids vary between C's and B's but are good for the most part too. When one of them slips up and brings home a D, it's not as shocking as when Nolan brings home a D, and I'm gonna be harsher on Nolan for it. It was like he said "[frick] it." the day that scene was filmed. In thinking about it in this moment, it's probably the worst scene of any movie Nolan's done.

I'm odd on what constitutes "realism" especially so in the more fantastic genres of superheroes and fantasy. Grounding things in real world science is what sells it to me. I want the fantastic to seem possible, even when I know it's not. Within this film, the "bullet print" scene did that, made me question my grasp of science and made a fantastic idea seem plausible. Adversely, the "fall with Rachael" scene did not and therefor broke the illusion for me.

I've ranted enough, nice article.
incrediblesuperbatspider
incrediblesuperbatspider - 4/26/2012, 12:55 AM
Thumbs up!...@ teabag, please tell me who that brunette at the top is
TheNameIsBetty
TheNameIsBetty - 4/26/2012, 3:55 AM
For people with complaints, I have two words for you:

He's Batman.
Rhino4508
Rhino4508 - 4/26/2012, 5:04 AM
I really enjoyed this article. Very well argued. However, speaking on the "Joker cuts Gambol" scene, I have always assumed he just slit his throat. We never really get a good look at where he actually cut him in the film, even though the blade had been in his mouth in one shot. But with the Joker using his hands to talk so much it is possible he moved the blade slightly to Gambol's neck and ending his life.

Another possibility is that Gambol fainted as a result of being completely terrified of the Joker mixed with the fact that his grin was being...expanded. Which would give the Joker a laugh because at that moment someone in Gotham really was "like him".
Caedus137
Caedus137 - 4/26/2012, 7:32 AM
I'm with Legolas & Rhino on the Gambol scene - Joker cuts his throat. Thats what I thought the first time I saw it and the 20th time I saw it. Yes, the blade was in his mouth at one point, but thats irrelevant. We don't actually SEE him do it because that would have messed up the pg rating - the same as omitting Jango Fett's head-butting of Obi-Wan in 'Clones, as the censors thought it was too violent. How else do you explain him falling to the floor as if dead? Erm - because he is! We dont see him again after that, but we DO see the Kosovon bloke, Maroni etc... I also find it incredible that people pick out things like "How did he get the bombs there?" and "He wouldnt have been unscathed after that fall" but are perfectly happy to accept thunder gods, blokes in flying suits of armour, and a super soldier who can throw a shield like boomerangs. Double standards people, double standards....
TheMyth
TheMyth - 4/26/2012, 12:17 PM
Cutting Gambol's throat would not result in instantaneous death, even if Joker completely cut his jugular in half, Gambol would not have been dead before hitting the ground.

Caedus137, the argument that realism can't exist alongside Norse Gods hurling lightning and magic hammers is a terrible one that too many people go to. It can and I expect it to. Batman is a normal fella with a genius intellect and some sweet ass gear, but is still a normal guy. If Thor drops 50 stories to flatten a car, it's acceptable because he's supposed to be a superpowered god. Even if you put that falling scene in a Batman/Superman teamup movie with Supes flying around slapping villains through buildings, it would STILL be a poorly handled scene as Bats is just a man, and as such could not simply walk away from such a fall with no injury at all, and Rachael certainly wouldn't have walked away. I love that you went to Marvel comparisons as if this is a DC vs Marvel issue, it isn't, it's an issue of a poorly handled scene. But hey if you think you can jump from a skyscraper bearing twice the recommended load for a parachute that was deployed late and walk away from it, be my guest. The scene breaks the illusion created by the film, or at least it does for people like me who study physics. Lemme use an incident in the X-Men flics to better illuminate my meaning. In a nutshell, the physics behind Cyclops optic blasts is relatively simple. They are force beams that create no heat or friction, then in Wolverine, suddenly the beams are generating friction and heat and igniting things it impacts. this breaks the illusion and ideals of who Cyclops is and the extend of his powers. The falling scene does the same thing for Batman.
Rhino4508
Rhino4508 - 4/26/2012, 3:26 PM
@Caedus137

Yet, his beheading in Clones, and Dooku's in Revenge are non-violent? lol
acidbath
acidbath - 4/26/2012, 3:31 PM
Well the bullet shell would have a finger print and that would've been on the floor or in the gun still...but none of that bothers me what bothers me is Batman fighting like a high school kid and not a Damn martial arts experts Batman should look like the emil blonsky hulk fight all the time but with ninja stuff added in...that's my problem with nolans Batman
EdgyOutsider
EdgyOutsider - 4/26/2012, 3:43 PM
My only complaint about The Dark Knight is how over rated it is. Don't get me wrong, It is a damn good film but people hype it up to be more than it is.
1 2
View Recorder