The Dark Knight...Bores.

I haven't really written up my thoughts on TDKR so far because everyone and their poodle already has, plus there seems to be a fandom embargo on saying anything remotely negative about Nolan's "Masterpiece". Even Rotten Tomatoes had to take down commenting on reviews for the film because negative ones were catching such nasty flack that some of those reviewers probably had to hire bodyguards. Enter David Cronenberg.

Truth be told, I respect the movie and can admit that technically and visually it is flawless. But it's also boring as hell. I could not care either way about those characters, aside maybe from Joseph Gordon Levitt who could be charismatic even if he played a McDonalds burger flipper with a booger up his nose. Nolan felt he had a story to finish and tried to make it just as good as the previous if not better. I LOVE The Dark Knight, I DO think that one is an amazing achievement, but now I understand the value of quitting while you're ahead.

So where does my man Cronenberg fit in? Dave's never been one to care very highly what people think of him. He got into a nasty divorce and his ex drained him dry, so he made a nasty horror movie called The Brood based on how he felt about her. A guy who can lay his personal life out like that certainly won't shy away from a negative opinion about something he's a master of (movies). And his opinion about the latest Bat sighting is less than favorable. Why did he experess it? God knows, but its high time somebody did.

 Says he, "I think it's still Batman running around in a stupid cape. I just don't think it's elevated. Christopher Nolan's best movie is Memento, and that is an interesting movie. I don't think his Batman movies are half as interesting, though they're 20 million times the expense… they're mostly boring. A superhero movie, by definition, you know, it's comic book. It's for kids. It's adolescent in its core. That has always been its appeal, and I think people who are saying, you know, 'Dark Knight Rises is, you know, supreme cinema art,' I don't think they know what the fuck they're talking about."

I know, ironic coming from the guy who hired Edward Cullen for his latest movie, but still, not entirely wrong, is he?! Either way someone has to address the elephant in the room: we don't ALWAYS need three movies, especially when you KNOW the third one just can't be as good as the previous. I know, not exactly what Crone just said, but I do; I say stop making trilogies, there are plenty of other ways for Hollywood to rob me of my money. Like re-issuing DVDs and Blurays over and over again or making 3D movies just for the sake of charging more. Not that anyone's already thought of that....