Let’s break this down like a logic puzzle.
- Iron Man is a better beginning-to-end movie than The Dark Knight or Hancock.
- The Dark Knight’s best scenes and moments are easily superior to anything in the other two movies.
- The Dark Knight’s epic collapse (pretty much everything after Harvey Dent is burned) reflects that (a) it had much farther to fall; (b) it had outsize ambition, even if it didn’t fulfill all of it; and (c) expectations for it — after Batman Begins, after its bravura early scenes, and with a Joker in conception and performance that remains endlessly fascinating — would be nearly impossible to meet.
- Hancock’s special effects were terrible, Iron Man’s were impressive, and The Dark Knight’s were seamless and organic.
- I did not see The Incredible Hulk.
- I never want to see Hancock or Iron Man again, while The Dark Knight I expect to watch regularly, despite my disappointment with it.
So which did I like best, and find the most affecting?
Hancock, of course.
I’m still trying to figure it out.
I just recently sat through Dark Knight again at the second run theater and decided I now like it better than Batman Begins. I felt on first viewing like the filmmakers try to do to much and rushed through the Harvey Dent storyline. Second time through I felt like the Joker/Two-Face story had to be told this way. The battles are internal struggles over the fate of Gotham which takes away from dramatic action scenes but takes the film into a much more interesting level. I liked the battles between Joker & Bats but mano y mano Batman outclasses the Joker & Two Face in a street brawl it is only in the constant struggle of public influence that the Joker causes chaos with Batman keeping the peace and Two-Face torn between which direction humanity is destined to go toward. It’s a endessly deep and fascinating movie and will be the benchmark for hero/action movies from now on.
Update to display newest comments