You say “the Dark Knight is a very cool movie. It’s just not as good as people are saying.”

Did you ever stop to consider that others simply think differently than you do? Sure, YOU don’t think it is worth all the hype. Makes sense as not everyone has the same taste. But to go as far and say that it is not as good as people are saying is completely untrue. Why? Because it is THEIR opinion. Opinion cannot be proven true or false. Just like you say it isn’t the greatest (which I don’t think it is the greatest, but it is great) others will think differently. I can see your stance on this film, but to call others out for saying it is the greatest is truly a waste of breath. That is like trying to tell Twilight lovers those movies suck. Are they good to most movie connoisseurs? Of course not. Do the Twilight fans think they are the greatest? Yes! And that is their God given opinion to think so. You can’t say that it is not as good as people say, because what people say is up to them…NOT you.

As for you saying that Ledger’s role could have been played by DDL, that is also your opinion. We have hard evidence that Ledger destroyed his role, and that is more than enough. Oscars aren’t picked based on the fact that other people could play the role, they are picked on the role played. I am sure other actors could have played Gump, Maximus, or Rocky had they been challenged to the role. But again… it’s a matter of opinion.

As for the Joker saying he wasn’t a schemer, he was not saying that because he believed it. He was saying it to manipulate Dent. How could you miss this? Really? We see him scheming the WHOLE movie. We as the audience know he schemes. So why is this piece even relevant to any argument? Ever notice how the Joker has a different story for each time he discusses how he got his scars?? He lies, he manipulates, he deceives. That’s in his character.

I think Nancy hit the argument on the head. The Joker exposes fear in the people after the city starts to take a turn towards the good in the first film. He uses that fear to destabilize the city, and even more so push the boundaries of what Batman said he’d do. All of this is brought about from the discourse in the movie through Alfred and Bruce, and the Joker and Batman (you’ll have to break your one rule).

No Batcave or Wayne Manor? Are you serious? The first movie clearly showed the mansion burning down right? REMEMBER? The first movie ends with a reference to the Joker, meaning they couldn’t elapse time years, the problem of the Joker was already presented. Should the second movie just jump ahead with a magically created mansion and cave to make you happy? That is called realism, and good storytelling. His house was burnt down, this is how he dealt with it.

And Dent being unrealistic? That claim is not backed up, so I don’t even know where to go with this one.

Finally…. @ Craig. He didn’t know he was going to get arrested to plant the bomb. It’s called, a Plan B. By having a back up plan for his scheme to capture Dent, this allowed him to escape after failing. Of course he didn’t know he was going to get caught… but in the event that he did he placed a bomb in the guys stomach. Is that really so difficult to believe the Joker would take a worthless pawn and put a bomb in him to save his ass in case he gets arrested? I think not. That is not that fictitious… even most sane people have a Plan B, I would have to think a notorious villain would have one.

Moral of the story… spit your opinion and call it that. Don’t call people out for having their own. It is simply ludicrous for you to sit and say others are wrong. You can say this is why you don’t agree… but WE are not wrong, and neither are you. OPINION.

It was a great film, but it wasnt the best…

justrobby’s last blog post..FIRST TRAILER – “Where the Wild things Are”