Carl the Critic: The Dark Knight

Rating: 7/10 (9 November 2010)

Every where I go people always say how great the Dark Knight was, how its was such a great movie, how the film should deserve an Oscar for Best Picture! I say NO IT DOES NOT!
gasp "What!? you don't like the dark knight?" you may be asking me.
"No," I would reply, "as a movie I did not think that it was a good movie at all, and I know no one will say this but I feel that this film was a horrible story, and the photography of the film was not that impressive."
"But," you may reply "Heath Ledger was the best Joker ever!"
"True," I would reply, "Heath Ledger was indeed the best Joker ever, and he did deserve that Oscar for Best Actor, but he was one actor that made the movie enjoyable for me, the rest of the film was not all that impressive. Two Face should have been saved for the sequel instead of this film because it just made the film longer instead of dragging on for ever making my butt hurt in the theater."
However I must confess that the score for the film was still good, even though it was the same thing as the FIRST film, and that it is not really the worse Batman ever made. That title was given to "Batman and Robin," but what I'm saying is that people should not be so conformist when it comes to films such as this, people need to watch the film for more than Heath Ledger, because every time I ask people what made it good 100% of the people say Heath Ledger. He was the best Joker, but this was not the best Batman, in fact I'm thinking the film should be retitled "The Joker," because his role was much more significant than Batman (who still talked as if he had been smoking tobacco out of a bazooka for the past 10 years.)