Things You Did Not Like About the Dark Knight?

Originally posted by Kovacs86
It's not how serious the films were that I objected to. It was the fact that they raped one of the greatest series' of books ever...

TDK is pretty damn good, yeah, and is definitely better than most summer blockbusters. However, summer blockbusters are not necessarily where you should be looking for great films...

Two words: Star Wars. The greatest series of movies ever is a summer blockbuster series.

I think the Rings book trilogy is sort of dated nowadays; I like the movies better than the books, anyhow.

I love summer blockbusters, but TDK's great success is that it mixes superb summer blockbuster entertainment and thought-provoking, disturbing themes seen in less 'big' movies.

Originally posted by Master Crimzon
Two words: Star Wars. The greatest series of movies ever is a summer blockbuster series.

I think the Rings book trilogy is sort of dated nowadays; I like the movies better than the books, anyhow.

I love summer blockbusters, but TDK's great success is that it mixes superb summer blockbuster entertainment and thought-provoking, disturbing themes seen in less 'big' movies.

Star Wars isn't necessarily a great series of films. I love the original trilogy, they're hugely enjoyable, and I'm not saying they're bad films, but at nostalgia plays a huge part in people's love of Star Wars. Everyone grew up with Star Wars.

The LOTR books are not dated and never will be, IMO. The story's set in an entirely separate Universe/ World (or, alternatively, is an alternative history mainly set in England, but I get confused whenever people explain how that works). They're still brilliant, still unique and still awe-inspiring. LOTR inspired pretty much every work of fantasy literature from the 1960s to the present day, IMO.

I agree with your bottom point.

Originally posted by Kovacs86
Star Wars isn't necessarily a great series of films. I love the original trilogy, they're hugely enjoyable, and I'm not saying they're bad films, but at nostalgia plays a huge part in people's love of Star Wars. Everyone grew up with Star Wars.

The LOTR books are not dated and never will be, IMO. The story's set in an entirely separate Universe/ World (or, alternatively, is an alternative history mainly set in England, but I get confused whenever people explain how that works). They're still brilliant, still unique and still awe-inspiring. LOTR inspired pretty much every work of fantasy literature from the 1960s to the present day, IMO.

I agree with your bottom point.

I wasn't born when the original SW came out. I even like Revenge of the Sith more than any of the OT. I still think it's a great, imaginative series of films- the best series ever, although I can name a few movies (TDK among them) that I like better than any SW movie.

LotR is slightly outdated to me. Not the concept, but the writing style... it's kind of... I don't know how to describe it. But it hardly pulls me in, like some other modern books (Philip Pullman's "His Dark Materials", the Harry Potter book series, etc...)

Originally posted by Master Crimzon
I wasn't born when the original SW came out. I even like Revenge of the Sith more than any of the OT. I still think it's a great, imaginative series of films- the best series ever, although I can name a few movies (TDK among them) that I like better than any SW movie.

LotR is slightly outdated to me. Not the concept, but the writing style... it's kind of... I don't know how to describe it. But it hardly pulls me in, like some other modern books (Philip Pullman's "His Dark Materials", the Harry Potter book series, etc...)

I wasn't born when the original Star Wars trilogy came out but I still grew up with them, and remember them very fondly. Largely because of this, I suppose, I abhor the "prequels" (which in turn is an abhorrent word), including Revenge of the Sith.

On LOTR: I still get drawn in by the books. I absolutely love the series. I guess it may seem a bit dated, however. I grew up with the books, too, though, so that has quite an impact on my view of them.
Then again, I do find the Chronicles of Narnia to be pretty dated. Those books just make me feel like I'm having CS Lewis' faith hurled in my face. While Tolkien had plenty of Christian subtext, at least it was a little subtle...

Originally posted by Kovacs86
I wasn't born when the original Star Wars trilogy came out but I still grew up with them, and remember them very fondly. Largely because of this, I suppose, I abhor the "prequels" (which in turn is an abhorrent word), including Revenge of the Sith.

On LOTR: I still get drawn in by the books. I absolutely love the series. I guess it may seem a bit dated, however. I grew up with the books, too, though, so that has quite an impact on my view of them.
Then again, I do find the Chronicles of Narnia to be pretty dated. Those books just make me feel like I'm having CS Lewis' faith hurled in my face. While Tolkien had plenty of Christian subtext, at least it was a little subtle...

At least you admit your hatred for the prequels is because of nostalgia. Most of the prequel bashers refuse to admit it.

Chronicles of Narnia is dated, yeah. The religious tones are incredibly annoying, but still, it's a pretty well-written series. LotR IS slightly dated, too, but I can enjoy the movies. RotK is an amazing movie, Fellowship comes at least close to 'amazing', and only Two Towers is relatively mediciore (except for the final fight, of course.)

The most hatred I ever have for a book adaption is Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. Not because it's the worst book adaption- there are far, far worse- but because it takes one of the books of one of the greatest book series of all time and completely rapes it, removing all the meat and rushing it ridiculously. It should have been a 3 hour movie, at the very least. Ugh, it simply pisses me off epically.

Originally posted by Master Crimzon
At least you admit your hatred for the prequels is because of nostalgia. Most of the prequel bashers refuse to admit it.

Chronicles of Narnia is dated, yeah. The religious tones are incredibly annoying, but still, it's a pretty well-written series. LotR IS slightly dated, too, but I can enjoy the movies. RotK is an amazing movie, Fellowship comes at least close to 'amazing', and only Two Towers is relatively mediciore (except for the final fight, of course.)

The most hatred I ever have for a book adaption is Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix. Not because it's the worst book adaption- there are far, far worse- but because it takes one of the books of one of the greatest book series of all time and completely rapes it, removing all the meat and rushing it ridiculously. It should have been a 3 hour movie, at the very least. Ugh, it simply pisses me off epically.

I'm not saying my hatred for the prequels is purely because of nostalgia. I do think that the Phantom Menace, at least, is just an awful film.
I think the Two Towers is both the weakest film and book. It's got the problem of being the halfway point, where it's really got to set up the final chapter in the story. I don't believe RotK is an amazing film, it's alright, and I thought the Battle of Helm's Deep was awful in the film. It was boring, to be honest.
Harry Potter's not one of the greatest series of all time. They're enjoyable books, but they were hardly on the same level as LotR, from which Rowling took a lot of inspiration, I'm sure. The Order of the Phoenix wasn't half as bad as Goblet of Fire, which was the only film which I couldn't stand at all. The other four films have been OK, quite enjoyable, but nothing special at all.

Originally posted by Kovacs86
I'm not saying my hatred for the prequels is purely because of nostalgia. I do think that the Phantom Menace, at least, is just an awful film.
I think the Two Towers is both the weakest film and book. It's got the problem of being the halfway point, where it's really got to set up the final chapter in the story. I don't believe RotK is an amazing film, it's alright, and I thought the Battle of Helm's Deep was awful in the film. It was boring, to be honest.
Harry Potter's not one of the greatest series of all time. They're enjoyable books, but they were hardly on the same level as LotR, from which Rowling took a lot of inspiration, I'm sure. The Order of the Phoenix wasn't half as bad as Goblet of Fire, which was the only film which I couldn't stand at all. The other four films have been OK, quite enjoyable, but nothing special at all.

Eh? Disagreed here. HP is more readable and filled with a more imaginative world and likeable characters than LotR. It's well beyond it, IMO.

Look, a whole bunch of 'cliffhanger' movies are actually the best in the series. Take Empire. It has a massive cliffhanger, and is actually easily the best film in the Original Trilogy; far, far better than its relatively boring successor.

The Battle of Helm's deep rocked, in my opinion. Awe-some fight.

I did get kinda bored readin LOTR, I was pretty young though, maybe I should give it another go. Harry Potter...meh...it's an alright children's book I guess. Didn't really like any of the characters too much...and it certainly hasn't the linguistic intensity LOTR has. I'm not very much into Fantasy though.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I did get kinda bored readin LOTR, I was pretty young though, maybe I should give it another go. Harry Potter...meh...it's an alright children's book I guess. Didn't really like any of the characters too much...and it certainly hasn't the linguistic intensity LOTR has. I'm not very much into Fantasy though.

The post-Goblet books are as much adult books as they are children's books.

Originally posted by Master Crimzon
Eh? Disagreed here. HP is more readable and filled with a more imaginative world and likeable characters than LotR. It's well beyond it, IMO.

Look, a whole bunch of 'cliffhanger' movies are actually the best in the series. Take Empire. It has a massive cliffhanger, and is actually easily the best film in the Original Trilogy; far, far better than its relatively boring successor.

The Battle of Helm's deep rocked, in my opinion. Awe-some fight.

Helm's Deep was ghastly! It took up about a chapter of the book and about an hour of the film! It was ridiculous. If he took out crap like that, perhaps Jackson could have produced a better reflection of the real story and taken out fewer key scenes and characters.

I agree that ESB was the best of the Star Wars films. However, often it's hard to pull off the penultimate episode of a series, as it requires a lot of setting-up for the final part. I concede TDK also wasn't like that, but that's because Nolan treated it as a film in its own right as well as part of a series.

Originally posted by Master Crimzon
The post-Goblet books are as much adult books as they are children's books.

Originally posted by Kovacs86
Helm's Deep was ghastly! It took up about a chapter of the book and about an hour of the film! It was ridiculous. If he took out crap like that, perhaps Jackson could have produced a better reflection of the real story and taken out fewer key scenes and characters.

I agree that ESB was the best of the Star Wars films. However, often it's hard to pull off the penultimate episode of a series, as it requires a lot of setting-up for the final part. I concede TDK also wasn't like that, but that's because Nolan treated it as a film in its own right as well as part of a series.

It wasn't too long to me, anyways.

Bardock, I don't think the HP books are boring, but if you do... well, I guess I can't convince you otherwise. I literally read ever HP book about 5 times, though. That's pretty impressive, dontcha think? Lolz.

Originally posted by Master Crimzon
Bardock, I don't think the HP books are boring, but if you do... well, I guess I can't convince you otherwise. I literally read ever HP book about 5 times, though. That's pretty impressive, dontcha think? Lolz.

I guess. Glad that you like them.

Originally posted by Bardock42
I guess. Glad that you like them.

Yup, I love 'em.

Originally posted by Master Crimzon
It wasn't too long to me, anyways.

Bardock, I don't think the HP books are boring, but if you do... well, I guess I can't convince you otherwise. I literally read ever HP book about 5 times, though. That's pretty impressive, dontcha think? Lolz.

Actually, I'd think reading each 5 times to be a little obsessive, and that you should read a wider range of books. But, hey, it's your choice...

Originally posted by Kovacs86
Helm's Deep was ghastly! It took up about a chapter of the book and about an hour of the film! It was ridiculous. If he took out crap like that, perhaps Jackson could have produced a better reflection of the real story and taken out fewer key scenes and characters.

I can see why he did it though. A lot of people about the movie because they say it was too much walking and talking and not enough action for a 3 and a half hour movie. He had to have some central conflict in each movie aside from the main quest that woudl keep people's attention long enough. If the Hems Deep battle had been, say, thirty minutes, people would have been bored out of their minds for the other 2 hours...

Originally posted by NonSensi-Klown
I can see why he did it though. A lot of people about the movie because they say it was too much walking and talking and not enough action for a 3 and a half hour movie. He had to have some central conflict in each movie aside from the main quest that woudl keep people's attention long enough. If the Hems Deep battle had been, say, thirty minutes, people would have been bored out of their minds for the other 2 hours...

Well... people are wrong. I appreciate that the films had to be targeted at a wider audience (than just those who loved the books), but I'm no great fan. They could've been considerably worse, though.

Originally posted by Kovacs86
Well... people are wrong

😂

I personally hate Harry Potter and find the children quite unlikable. Especially those Weasleys

Really, is there no one other than myself who loves Harry Potter...?