The Dark Knight only CBM in BBC's 21st Century's Greatest Film

I would argue Transformers isn't entertaining at all.

I don't understand how "entertaining" is not "good."

We're not saying "great."

We're not saying "a masterpiece."

I just want you to say "The Avengers is... good."

@nickzambuto: Its okay.

74. Spring Breakers (Harmony Korine, 2012)

??? (lol)

No Ex-Machina???? or Up?

Also 3 movies directed by Nolan made this list that's saying something, some could argue Interstellar could make this list.

Because I may like Mcdonalds but i'm not gonna call it good food. I can objectively know the truth of something while still liking it subjectively.

@buttersdaman000: So The Avengers is a bad and poorly made movie?

Mediocre/Average, but the subjective qualities, like the humor, references I liked, and so on boost it to a good movie.

Nice list. My list in order:

1. Mad Max: Fury Road
2. Sicario
3. The Martian
4. Creed
5. Ex Machina

Well I'm not a film student or anything so I can't really look into it as deeply as you. If I liked the movie than it was good, that's as far as it goes for me. But thank you for explaining your reasoning.

@nickzambuto: Opinions are subjective. From a technical standpoint, however, its pretty mediocre considering the plot holes and lacklustre plot.

I liked it, but its still barely decent and hasn't aged well over the years.

Avengers is a well made movie. A good film can consist of more than a lacklustre plot, especially a character driven film. And plot holes. I expect you to understand, considering the most recent DCEU movie consisted of plot holes and a generic plot and you, at the time of your review, considered it a great movie.

@cruelwinter: the dceu movies did not consist of plot-holes. Everything is explained if u actually pay attention nd wats generic about them?

@cruelwinter: Difference between Suicide Squad and The Avengers is Suicide Squad had ONE film to flesh out its characters whereas The Avengers has a roster of prior films that built up to it. So The Avengers doesn't seem quite as character driven as Suicide Squad since the characters have already been established. What we're left with is an ensemble in a lacklustre plot.

P.S Suicide Squad doesn't have nearly the amount of plot holes The Avengers had, in my opinion.

How did this become DCEU vs MCU again?

I said Suicide Squad. Which is yet another generic save the world plot.

To be fair, nearly every superhero film has the hero saving the world or at least a city. The Dark Knight is probably the only one where the protagonist failed.

Good CBM - Avengers, The Dark Knight Rises

Very Good CBM - Batman Begins, Spiderman 1 and 2, GOTG, X-men First Class, X-Men 1 and 2, Ironman 1

Great CBM - Winter Soldier, DOFP, Civil War

Masterpiece - The Dark Knight

I will just say I am not surprised other CBM's fall short on lists like these, since at the end of the day, they are still CBM's, they may be great CBM's... but Dark Knight is more than just a CBM.

It's kinda the same reasons I imagine that 99% of comicbooks aren't included in anyone's great litterature lists.

I still don't see this "greatness" in the dark knight everyone talks about. Everytime I watch it, all I can think of is how much Ledger's Joker is carrying the film. The plot wasn't outstanding or innovative by any means, the acting wasn't outstanding (except for Ledger's of course), the action scenes were pretty boring to be honest, Bale's voice still sucks, and despite what some people say there were still plotholes.

It's not a perfect movie, and I still do this day cannot understand how people consider it some groundbreaking masterpiece in film making. As far as I'm concerned, the Joker carries that movies, plus obviously the fact it's a Batman film and Batman is undoubtedly in modern day the most popular comic book character. Look at pretty much any list and you'll get Batman>Superman>=Spiderman, or something like that. I don't like to call things overrated, because at the end of the day it's all entirely subjective, but I think there are honestly better CBM's out there than The Dark Knight, but due to the popularity of Batman and Ledger's Joker performance people don't want to look past this movie.

That's like saying Man of Steel's story is comparable in quality to Batman Begins because they're both a journey for the heroes: nope, one of them is executed better than the other. Way better.

Both Marvel's The Avengers and Suicide Squad are broadly generic, but Avengers is executed MUCH better. It is generic, but on the whole well put together and completely told: it works.

Because for all of Marvel's The Avengers's shortcomings, I wasn't asking myself

Why a psychopath with a baseball bat was on the team

Or why an Aussie-boomerang throwing criminal was on a team that was pitched to stop the next Superman from ripping off the roof of the white house

I'm not questioning why someone like Harley Quinn would fall in love with a psychopath to such an extent as to give him a machine gun

Some of the most unconvincing romance I've seen in June Moore and Rick Flagg: I nearly face palmed in every scene where they presumed that the audience should be emotionally invested in their romance

An abrupt opening

An inconsequential character in The Joker

Shallow characters in Boomerang and Killer Croc and Katana, who are utterly wasted

An utterly unforgettable villain, Loki is significantly better. She is an ancient being that says "you haven't got the balls."

Setting up Deadshot's motivation to be his daughter only to show later on that he dreams of killing Batman

Rick Flagg holding Deadshot's daughter's letters for absolutely no reason

Captain Boomerang departing after the bar scene and coming back for no reason (ha! get it... because he's a boomerang, so he came back! Still doesn't justify it from a character perspective).

So much for a character driven movie.

Avengers at least has: consistency, character and structure. The story, at worst, worked at the time of the movie's release. Suicide Squad couldn't.

In The Avengers, every character beat has a purpose. The characters are consistent.

I remember the protagonist succeeding in Civil War.

Blue is the Warmest Colour is a CBM and it's on the list (deservedly so).

Thank you!

You mean the antagonist? Cap and Tony fought because Tony was pissed. Zemo didn't break the Avengers up.

I forgot to add /s.

The protagonist did not succeed in Civil War. I think you must re evaluate your statement that The Dark Knight is the one movie where the hero didn't succeed.

Cap and Tony fought because Tony was pissed. Zemo didn't break the Avengers up.

Reminds me of Harvey Dent going mad because he was pissed, and not because The Joker had a helping hand in that. That and because of his laughable and impossible to predict plan that would fit better in a BBC's Sherlock episode.

Heh heh, you're welcome. :)

Where is 2006 "The Wicker Man"?

No, I stand by my statement that The Dark Knight is probably the only CBM where the protagonist failed.

Reminds me of Harvey Dent going mad because he was pissed, and not because The Joker had a helping hand in that.

At least it wasn't resolved in a bathroom brawl. Harvey was supposed to be incorruptible, but was corrupted. Had the opportunity to kill Joker, but didn't. He sought revenge on others who were also manipulated by Joker. What became of the aftermath? 7 years later, the city is still in mourning, and Bruce went off the rails because all Harvey built was destroyed when he became the villain.

You're being unfair. The protagonist did not succeed. And I will be adamant in believing that until you dispel my following claims (which you've chosen to ignore).

• The avengers are now split into the Avengers and Secret Avengers

• The accords still went ahead, so the secret avengers are fugitives and will be hunted by the government, while the normal avengers are forced to act under government orders

• Rhodey is paralysed; Tony is pissed at Vision

• Vision and Wanda are on opposite sides but clearly have strong feelings for eachother, which could lead to one of them leaving their respective side

• Bucky is in stasis

• Black Widow changed sides and told Tony to f himself

• Panther changed sides

• Bucky and presumably the rest of the SA are in Wakanda, which could very likely lead to an invasion by the US. There could be a full scale war between the US and Wakanda.

• Tony will now forever be known as Tony Stank

Now, uh, how did the protagonist succeed?

Harvey being corrupted would mean something if the build up was logical. Instead, we get The Joker's laughable, unpredictable plan. You're adamant in criticising Civil War, but then again you let something as monumental as The Joker's laughable plan in The Dark Knight fly over your head.

I don't get it.

@cruelwinter:

Now, uh, how did the protagonist succeed?

Because the antagonist failed.

The avengers are now split into the Avengers and Secret Avengers

Due to the accords.

Harvey being corrupted would mean something if the build up was logical. Instead, we get The Joker's laughable, unpredictable plan. You're adamant in criticising Civil War, but then again you let something as monumental as The Joker's laughable plan in The Dark Knight fly over your head.

I don't understand this.

Personally feel v for vendetta should have made this list.

@monsterstomp:

Because the antagonist failed.

Setting out on a journey to cripple The Avengers from the inside and succeeding isn't a loss by any metric.

[The Avengers are split] Due to the accords.

Except they're only fugitives because Rogers recruited them into fighting Zemo. Just because someone doesn't agree with the law, doesn't make them a fugitive. Without Zemo, there is no reason to fight. Instead, the bombing of the UN is what led into Bucky, Captain America and Sam into getting arrested. Clint, Wanda and Scott aid fugitives, which all leads into them becoming on the run.

TL;DR without Zemo, no one becomes fugitives. Therefore, he won.

See what I mean?

I don't understand this.

The double standard. The Joker's masterplan is laughable and belongs in a BBC's Sherlock Episode = The Dark Knight is a masterpiece. I could see you adamantly critiquing Civil War if they did this, saying Zemo's plan is illogical. But nope: nothing about The Joker's plan being illogical.

Fury Road > The Social Network, Inception, TDK, 12 Years A Slave, Inglourious Basterds, etc? ? ? ? ?

hahah GTFO

Thank goodness it's the only one that we can all agree upon. Well done on Mad Max: Fury Road.

@deathstroke52: Clearly the film struck a chord with a lot of people. It's not like those films were left off the list anyway.

@farkam said:

So harshly blunt.

@mfundroid: The point is that I don't see how you can say Fury Road is objectively better than those. Maybe Basterds. I liked MM as much as the next guy but the big thing it has is action while the others have the whole package.

Exactly.

Not only that but they have SPRING BREAKERS on the list!!!!!

@cruelwinter:

Setting out on a journey to cripple The Avengers from the inside and succeeding isn't a loss by any metric.

He set out to cripple the Avengers, but only managed to spark a feud between Steve and Tony, which isn't going to last. The accords did more to cripple the Avengers.

Except they're only fugitives because Rogers recruited them into fighting Zemo. Just because someone doesn't agree with the law, doesn't make them a fugitive. Without Zemo, there is no reason to fight. Instead, the bombing of the UN is what led into Bucky, Captain America and Sam into getting arrested. Clint, Wanda and Scott aid fugitives, which all leads into them becoming on the run.

TL;DR without Zemo, no one becomes fugitives. Therefore, he won.

See what I mean?

That's aside the point. The original comment was:

[The Avengers are split] Due to the accords.

Cap wanted to do what he wanted, regardless if the antagonist was Zemo or not. Without the accords, Tony wouldn't have been so adamant in stopping Cap, hell, Tony even set aside their difference of opinion and intended to help Cap. Which strengthens my point.

The double standard. The Joker's masterplan is laughable and belongs in a BBC's Sherlock Episode = The Dark Knight is a masterpiece. I could see you adamantly critiquing Civil War if they did this, saying Zemo's plan is illogical. But nope: nothing about The Joker's plan being illogical.

I never said anyone's plan was illogical. I just think Joker succeeded in pretty much everything he set out to do, except get those ferries to blow each other up.

@from_beyond: accurate in so many ways

@soldierofel: I don't think it's because The dark knight is far away from being a CBM, its because its the strongest written CBM we have seen in. The characters are consistently strong, the plot holes are few and far between, the performances are amazing, the direction is beautiful. It's an amazing movie, that enhances the material it came from, being like a comic book does not guarantee the movie will be good, two vastly different mediums

@monsterstomp:

@monsterstomp:

That's where you're wrong. The belief that all Zemo did was igniting a few between Tony and Steve at the end of the film is such a common misconception. Without Zemo, there is no conflict. Never at one point in the film do they state that those that don't sign the accords are fugitives, or that they will be hunted down. Zemo's plan to cripple the Avengers was set in motion once be blew up the UN. Which caused Steve and his group of super friends to aid a fugitive, which split the Avengers into two, 1/2 of which are fugitives. If that isn't toppling an Empire, I don't know what is.

Seriously: where did Zemo lose?

Well your talking as if the antagonist of a movie, it's it own separate thing when it's not. This Joker is the perfect villain for this movie and for this protagonist. That's why the movie works because it has the right force to drive the plot (the Joker in this case). Look at this video, this dude goes in detail why The Joker makes the movie special:

It doesn't make sense to separeae each aspect of a film, is like taking a dish prepared by a chef and eating each of his ingridients, you aren't going to get the taste that the Chef wanted you to get.

@cruelwinter:

Without Zemo, there is no conflict.

That's where we disagree.

"What if this panel sends us somewhere we don't think we should go? What if there's somewhere we need to go, and they don't let us?" - Captain America

He pretty much admitted that he would prefer the right to choose. No, the accords don't make anyone who doesn't sign it a fugitive. But it was pretty inevitable that Cap would continue to save people regardless if it was against the law. Be it Zemo or any other antagonist. Zemo merely sparked a personal feud between Steve and Tony, he didn't split the Avengers, the accords did that.

Yes, but Zemo absolved any possibility of The Avengers coming to terms with The Accords.

He also caused a personal feud between Iron Man, Captain America and Bucky, which has yet to be resolved. Steve isn't 12, he's not friends with Tony anymore, but will lend him a helping hand if the world is at threat. And that's just Steve: the rest of the team still despise Tony. That & Steve Rogers is no longer Captain America, as confirmed by The Russo Brothers. That and Natasha in on the run and Rhodey is in need of rehabilitation.

Whether or not another antagonist would've done it is irrelevent. The point is that Zemo did it. And sans committing suicide, he succeeded. I guess The Joker's accomplishment means nothing because someone would've done it eventually ^_^ You cannot say Zemo failed because he accomplished his mission.

You arguing that Zemo's accomplishment deficient because of Steve's letter to Tony (as evident in your "which isn't going to last" argument), or the fact that some of the team is still salvageable is similair to arguing that The Joker failed because in his quest to prove that one good man can go insane, he proved that there are people in this city ready to believe in good. Hell, didn't he undo his "point" when a ferry full of low lives were reluctant to blow up the fellow ferry? That's rather inspiring on the Joker's end. These are criminals and they refused to blow up the ferry. I guess The Joker lost?

I never said anyone's plan was illogical. I just think Joker succeeded in pretty much everything he set out to do, except get those ferries to blow each other up.

My point is the double standard. In the instance of Civil War, you've been analytical and critical. But The Dark Knight is a masterpiece because of the point Nolan is trying to make, not how he made it. You've ignored the pretentious dialogue like The Joker's motivation being spelt out by Alfred then needlessly reiterated in the burning of money scene. Let's not talk about the characters acting stupidly to advance the plot: the cop who goes to "beat up" The Joker, which is such a blatantly lazy way of advancing the story I'm surprised people haven't torn it apart. The one prison who somehow managed to get a bomb into a police station. And The Joker's laughable 15 step plan which, again, belongs in an addition of BBC's Sherlock. Ignore the phone bomb killing everyone that isn't The Joker. Or the fact that Harvey goes from playing Russian roulette with a dude, to willing to murder a child. That and the coin flip thing is ludicrous and doesn't belong in a masterpiece of a film.

But... The Joker proved his point, right? The finer details don't matter. Not when it comes to TDK, at least.

I'm disappointed The Babadook didn't make it in.

But on the other hand... why do I even care what BBC Culture thinks? >.>

History of Violence and Old Boy are both comic book movies.

Also people not from the UK need to stop thinking of the BBC as the word of god.