I'm surprised this was never commented by people doing reviews of TDK. I remember reading a couple of interviews months before TDK where Nolan said that Dent was the character to watch, that he would be the backbone of the story whereas The Joker was more of a symbolical force of nature rather than a three dimensional character with a story. It seems that this element was completely overlooked by most people who watched TDK. Heath Ledger's performance as The Joker was extraordinary but I always felt that the element that pushed TDK towards masterpiece status was Dent's tragic downfall.

Am I the only one who thinks his arc was truly underrated? A lot of the film is Batman and The Joker's elemental conflict which each other (order vs chaos), granted. But saying TDK is just about Batman and The Joker's clash of views severely undercuts what the film is actually about I think. Dent's fall was almost Shakespearean IMO and I did get a sense that Gotham's fate rested with him. It seems that what the Nolan brothers did with Dent being a tragic figure was severely overlooked by people I think.

Right there w you man, seriously. Everything about Aaron's Dent is underrated as fak

I personally view TDK as Dent's story, and Batman and Joker's conflict revolves around it. Even my dad, who thinks TDK is overrated praises Nolan for Dent's transformation.

TehBatGetsBraked wrote:Right there w you man, seriously. Everything about Aaron's Dent is underrated as fak

Aaron Eckhart did give an underrated performance Funnily enough though my number one most underrated performance in the film (and possibly of the entire trilogy) is Gary Oldman as Gordon. Sad that no one talks about his performance

Bacon wrote:I personally view TDK as Dent's story, and Batman and Joker's conflict revolves around it. Even my dad, who thinks TDK is overrated praises Nolan for Dent's transformation.

Dent does have arguably the biggest character arc in the film, even more so than Batman I think. But I really liked how Nolan brought everything back round to Batman by the end of the TDK. Like The Joker said, Batman's appearance in Gotham had changed things for good. TDK truly is an ensemble piece and I don't think The Joker is as dominant in the movie as a lot of people made it out to be.

gaspernoe wrote:I'm surprised this was never commented by people doing reviews of TDK. I remember reading a couple of interviews months before TDK where Nolan said that Dent was the character to watch, that he would be the backbone of the story whereas The Joker was more of a symbolical force of nature rather than a three dimensional character with a story. It seems that this element was completely overlooked by most people who watched TDK. Heath Ledger's performance as The Joker was extraordinary but I always felt that the element that pushed TDK towards masterpiece status was Dent's tragic downfall.

Am I the only one who thinks his arc was truly underrated? A lot of the film is Batman and The Joker's elemental conflict which each other (order vs chaos), granted. But saying TDK is just about Batman and The Joker's clash of views severely undercuts what the film is actually about I think. Dent's fall was almost Shakespearean IMO and I did get a sense that Gotham's fate rested with him. It seems that what the Nolan brothers did with Dent being a tragic figure was severely overlooked by people I think.

Spot on, bro. IMO, Eckhart's performance as Dent/Two-Face was just as good as Ledger's as Joker. Now some of you will scoff, but hear me out. Eckhart was so good in all of his scenes:
1. When he goes crazy in the hospital bed upon finding the burnt coin letting him know Rachel was blown up. Sent a shiver down my spine.
2. The entire last conformation when he correctly accused Gordon for letting the corruption in the police force ruin everyone's lives. I so felt his pain.
3. The scene where Batman and Gordon race to rescue Rachel and Harvey, and Harvey screams at Batman for trying to save him. Broke my heart.
4. Many more scenes.

Eckhart did a magnificent job spending the first hour and twenty minutes of the film establishing himself as the charming, handsome public hero, and then switching to the tragic killer in the final act. He had to play two characters, one after the other, whereas Ledger played one character: a crazy clown from beginning to end. It is for these reasons why, IMO, Eckhart's Dent was the best thing about TDK. Again, the Ledger diehards are gonna slam me, but I still think that Eckhart was the heart and soul of the movie.

Dent is the fulcrum around which the plot revolves.

But the story is Bruce's.

ArmandFancypants wrote:Dent is the fulcrum around which the plot revolves.

But the story is Bruce's.

Hmmmm elaborate. Not disagreeing but I'm a little torn

Bruce is the active character, he is the one that we begin with, he is the one that makes the choices. Harvey makes very few active choices, he is not the protagonist in the true sense - things just happen to him.

The film works in the classic sense of Bruce pursuing what he wants, and then ending with him doing what he needs, which is a very old-fashioned narrative tool. Although obviously the Joker gets the first scene, we then begin the story proper with Bruce's dilemma (his quest to be a symbol is being misinterpreted, and people are getting hurt trying to emulate him), and then we find out about his plan to resolve this (set Harvey up as the shining example of justice, someone that ordinary people can strive to be, and relinquish the Batman mantle to be with Rachel). The film then unfolds with him trying to accomplish that, but what he realises by the end is that he actually needs to demonise the Batman, he basically needs to tarnish and, in a way, destroy who he truly is in order to accomplish his goal, as Rachel is gone and all he wants is stew in his own misery.

Harvey Dent is the pawn (or, White Knight) in the game. Batman (and to a lesser degree Gordon) and the Joker are the players.

Wow thanks

http://imgur.com/t7Q20q3.jpg