🎦 The Dark Knight full movie HD download (Christopher Nolan) - Crime, Drama, Thriller, Action. 🎬
The Dark Knight
Year:
2008
Country:
USA, UK
Genre:
Crime, Drama, Thriller, Action
IMDB rating:
9.0
Director:
Christopher Nolan
Christian Bale as Batman
Heath Ledger as Jack Napier
Aaron Eckhart as Two-Face
Michael Caine as Alfred Pennyworth
Maggie Gyllenhaal as Rachel Dawes
Gary Oldman as Commissioner James Gordon
Morgan Freeman as Lucius Fox
Monique Gabriela Curnen as Detective Anna Ramirez
Ron Dean as Det. Michael Wuertz
Cillian Murphy as Scarecrow
Chin Han as Lau
Nestor Carbonell as Mayor Anthony Garcia
Eric Roberts as Salvatore Maroni
Ritchie Coster as The Chechen
Storyline: Set within a year after the events of Batman Begins, Batman, Lieutenant James Gordon, and new district attorney Harvey Dent successfully begin to round up the criminals that plague Gotham City until a mysterious and sadistic criminal mastermind known only as the Joker appears in Gotham, creating a new wave of chaos. Batman's struggle against the Joker becomes deeply personal, forcing him to "confront everything he believes" and improve his technology to stop him. A love triangle develops between Bruce Wayne, Dent and Rachel Dawes.
Type Resolution File Size Codec Bitrate Format
1080p 1920x1080 px 11201 Mb h264 10287 Kbps mkv Download
HQ DVD-rip 720x304 px 1494 Mb mpeg4 1155 Kbps avi Download
DVD-rip 628x254 px 801 Mb mpeg4 767 Kbps avi Download
iPhone 480x192 px 563 Mb mpeg4 539 Kbps mp4 Download
Reviews
Let's be realistic.
I settled on a 5/10 for The Dark Knight. I appreciated the story structure and all the notes they hit... I just don't think they played them loudly. I don't like re-casting, and the replacement of Katie Holmes/Rachel and the original Barbara Gordon actress (yes, her too, didya notice?) is awkward and distracting. The lack of ANY blood in the film to complement the multitude of beatings and killings (to sustain a PG-13 rating) nullifies the tension that should be present in some brilliantly conceived scenarios. I didn't believe for a second that the victims of several hostage situations (mass or otherwise) would actually lose their lives, because it's blisteringly apparent from the onset that this film is a PG-13, and would never disturb its audience beyond the minimum necessary plot points.

The Joker is actually underwritten. Ledger was game and his performance solid, but honestly: Throw the makeup and stringy hair on 75% of capable actors out there, and you have the same product. I think Jack Nicholson's output is ultimately more interesting, and I think that Tim Burton's original film, although imperfect, is still the most entertaining in the pantheon.

I realize that to hardcore Batman fans, this is a wet dream having the grittiness of the graphic novels transposed to the big screen (if they say so; I say it came close), but riddle me this: If the same script was fashioned into a non-superhero flick, let's say Heat II, and had the same strong performances and production values, would the lack of Batman fan loyalty still rocket it to its current position on the IMDb Top 250?
2008-07-22
I'm sorry everyone, this is no masterpiece.
** PLOT SPOILERS EVERYWHERE **

Christopher Nolan's "The Dark Knight" is one of the better films in the history of its genre, however, it does not qualify as a masterpiece. In fact, it's quite far from such a distinction. It falls short of unquestionable excellence because of a ridiculously high number of plot holes, most of which regard The Joker and his criminal exploits.

It is a given that Heath Ledger's portrayal of The Joker leaves us with a character who is thoughtful, unpredictable, ruthless, unrelenting, and arguably insane. That is to say, some inconsistencies in the villain should be accepted, if not embraced. But others, to be frank, are unacceptable because of their stupidity. For example: In the film's opening sequence, a clever bank heist spearheaded by The Joker, the crazed clown kills off his partners as the caper progresses. At the time, it made sense. Pretty simple, the more colleagues he kills off, the more money that leaves for him. But later on in the film, The Joker burns his half of the criminal underworld's combined fortune. He makes it overtly clear that he is not motivated by money. Not in the least bit.

So why was the money a factor in the opening scene? It shouldn't have been. Uneven scripting there.

But that's nitpicking in comparison to the film's greater faults. The ultimate reason why "The Dark Knight" falls short of the masterpiece label is because there is absolutely no way, under any circumstances, at any time, on any planet or in any solar system, that The Joker could execute so many complex plans in such a short period of time.

OK, here is where people start saying: "But it's a movie! It doesn't have to be possible." I know, thanks. I agree, it doesn't have to be possible. But, and this is a huge BUT, a film as ambitious and lengthy as "The Dark Knight" wants to be taken seriously. Not only does it want to be taken seriously, I think director Christopher Nolan wants Oscar consideration for the work he has put in here, and cast members have been saying regularly that they don't want this to be considered as a mere "superhero movie," or "action movie." Well if you want to elevate to the level of serious drama, then you have to explain a few things to me.

(1) How does The Joker continue to find willing participants in his escapades when all of his previous crew members end up dead or in jail? The guys he's finding to work for him have to be true idiots. Totally brainless. And that doesn't work because The Joker's plans are meticulous and require precise timing and execution. If these goons are dumb enough to work for him, they aren't smart enough to be effective as help. It's a perpetual contradiction throughout the film, particularly the second act.

(2) Sure The Joker is swift and tricky, but c'mon, he doesn't exactly look like a normal citizen. If city-wide security has been heightened to a level never before seen, how the hell is this maniac with a painted face and wacky hair not being spotted? Does he have an invisible transportation machine or something? He doesn't have supernatural powers, so he shouldn't have a supernatural aura.

(3) When did he have the time to wire the hospital with bombs? Even if one of his goons did it, how did no one in the hospital notice suspicious activity? What about the assassination attempt on the Mayor? The other cops on the firing line didn't notice the most infamous villain in the city standing right next to them? Why? Because he crouched over a little and tried not to make eye contact with them? Please. I could go on for days, too many plot liberties were taken.

I'd actually like to discuss the performances a bit. I think the separation between the strongest part and the rest of the cast is the largest ever with an ensemble of this size and magnitude. Meaning, Heath Ledger's performance was far and away the best in this film, better to the point where it bothered me that no one else was in his realm. The scenes where Ledger was off screen lacked the magnetism and intrigue of the ones in which he appeared. Although appeared is probably not the best word, more like dominated.

Christian Bale was OK as Batman, but he's almost too stoic for a character with such strong morals and opinions. He's also a little bit stiff when he's in playboy mode as Bruce Wayne. I think his performance in "The Prestige" was more emotional, effective, and polished.

Aaron Eckhart was all right as Harvey Dent/Two-Face, but the problem was that the vast majority of the time I was seeing Eckhart on screen, not Dent. The same Eckhart we saw in "Thank You For Smoking." Also, a man with a finely tuned social philosophy, like Dent, would not totally flip his ideology after the loss of a close loved one. Hopefully the angle is that the toxin causing the disfigurement messed more with his brain than we were led on to believe.

Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman were believable as always, but of course they are underused as Alfred and Lucius Fox. Gary Oldman probably contributed the second strongest performance in the film as Commissioner Gordon, and Maggie Gyllenhaal (as Rachel Dawes) was a step up from Katie Holmes as far as execution and timing -- but that's not saying much.

I really could go on for days about the unacceptable plot liberties, but I'll spare you. All in all, I liked the film because it had some thought-provoking sequences involving moral dilemmas and intriguing societal questions, and in having such "The Dark Knight" succeeded in escaping the "superhero movie" label. But it's not a masterpiece.

Plain and simply, it has too many holes.
2008-07-22
the most wonderful move ever
this move is the most wonderful move I have ever seen I strongly advice the lovers of movies to watch it . it's contain the action, adventure , and mystery features , This move considered as the second film of the batman trilogy or the dark knight trilogy ) , i advice the people to watch all the film series ) . the events of the move are interesting , u can't feel of Boredom when u watching it , the actors and the actress of the dark knight film are so smart and talented , u will have the image this move is realistic and not just a move . Christian Bale , Heath Ledger , Morgan Freeman , Maggie Gyllenhaal, Aaron Eckhart , all of them have the talents and strength to be engaged in this move , and I'm the big fan of their movies and Their business films . the story of the film its about the evil is founded every where and the good will have the victory at last .
2015-07-03
A bit of criticism to counter the praise ...
Admittedly, Christopher Nolan has been incredibly successful at what I would consider a doomed endeavor. After all, what sane director would try to fashion a realistic, rational universe from a sophomoric fantasy about a self-indulgent playboy with a costume fetish and a penchant for stylized bedlam? Still, I find the Batman premise more palatable when overshadowed by the fun spectacle of carnival freaks, kitschy art, and psychedelically rendered pulp lore. Without such accoutrements, the story largely relies on the poignant characterization of caricatures—a difficult task, to be sure. At times, Nolan tries to circumvent the problem by turning The Dark Knight into a didactic meditation on terrorism or a vehicle for its catch phrase, "You either die a hero, or live long enough to see yourself become the villain." However, terrorism loses its contemporary salience when exploited for plot and entertainment purposes, and Nolan seems reluctant to subject his protagonist to the implications of a dubious aphorism or to explore adequately the transformation of his less fortunate foil, Harvey Dent. Because each character serves as a mouthpiece for Nolan's ideas rather than a living manifestation of his themes, even a cast of capable actors cannot save some of the more unconvincing scenes. In the film's best moments, the camera lingers over a face or a cityscape and allows the image to transcend the script. Sadly, such moments are few and far between. Nolan reminds us that the Batman legend will always fail as social commentary because it focuses on allegorical, larger-than-life individuals while relegating the masses to cowering factions of homogenized corruption, selfishness, or ineptitude. Such a perspective underestimates humanity, which is lost in the frenetic whirl of action sequences on screen.
2008-12-02
A stupendous effort that needed a little tweaking.
This review is for you, if you have watched it, and are wondering if it was brilliant and flawless. Or was there a tiny little "hard to point your finger at" thing that was wrong with it?

I am an avid Batman fan, who has been devouring the Frank Miller graphic novels that depict the grim and gritty side of the dark Knight. I have followed the tidbits and stories on Dark Knight for over a year. Batman Begins marked the beginning of one of the most amazing "ordinary superhero movie" ever witnessed. Four years later, as I stepped into the hall, and awaited the beginning of this new movie, the excitement was almost palpable.

I was not disappointed. The movie had enough chills and sadistic pleasures to keep me hooked and unable to look away from the screen for the most parts. And yet, when the credits rolled, I had a queer feeling, as though something wasn't entirely right.

A few hours after the sensory overload, when I could finally think,I realized one of its drawbacks was dwelling into too many story plots simultaneously. For instance, we follow the joker through a long, and sometimes cumbersome car chase, which except for that final brilliant (and much publicized) truck sequence, was nothing great. We have been lead to believe that the joker is a man who attacks psychologically, and is not physically strong. This is portrayed eloquently in the interrogation scene.

As a result the car sequence became the sort of cliché they could not avoid despite the possibility of becoming the only boring sequences in an otherwise splendid movie. I remember because, I caught myself yawning.

Also considering how Joker is the arch nemesis of Batman - the yang to the Dark Ying, the absolute bad guy, Two Face pales by comparison. No doubt, the make up and graphics are grotesque and excellently done. But we just are not able to believe that he is capable of the menace that Joker manages to exude.

I just could not believe that Two-Face was that bad. The directors have somehow failed to bring the transition between his characters. If i remember the comic books, the disaster drove Two Face insane, making him dependent on the coin even for small decisions.

The real trouble if you ask me, was bringing in a new villain in the last half hour of the movie. One that made the joker's final confrontation with Batman seem a little unsatisfying. I kept expecting them to show Joker one last time. He didn't die, did he? Yes, I do understand how Joker is the arch nemesis, and its Batman's great burden that he can never kill Joker, and they are back at it time and again...but Ledger is dead. We know he won't return. So we, as audience wanted an ultimatum. Not a dangling loose end and definitely not a dangling loose joker from a building top.

Enough with the criticism. I am Batman fan. A son of batman, if you wanna call me (ref: Frank Miller). I loved the style. I loved the bat pod, the first robbery sequence, Joker's pencil disappearing trick, the flick of his tongue, the little line about Joker completing Batman, the other line about joker being the dog that chases the car and not knowing what to do if it catches the car...

Dark Knight was about Heath Ledger. Sadly, we wanted more of him. It JUST WASN'T ENOUGH! Batman as always was his sporting best, the flight sequences were brilliant, Caine and Freeman had the best lines apart from Ledger. Aaron Eckhart did a great job as Harvey Dent, though I did feel that Two-Face lacked character. I expected the sort of chill Javier Bardem inspired in No country for old men, when he tosses the coin. Instead, Two-Face's tosses were merely just passably interesting. Oh, I must really commend the Nolan brothers for doing away with the only female lead, and in such a sudden and scary way. I almost couldn't believe it.

Enough has been spoken about Ledger. I do not want to be repetitive. Clearly, his lines were the best. But more important was his body language and sequences, which were to say the least, eccentric. Kudos to Nolan for a good script, something that could give Ledger an opportunity for such a mind blowing performance. He sparkles in every scene, and we only wish there was much more of him.

A word on Bale. As Batman, he is the best ever. As Bruce Wayne, he does excel in a few scenes. But were those scenes requiring Bruce Wayne driving around in his Lamborghini necessary at all? In the quest to make The Joker the most remarkable villain ever, some of the dilemmas that made Batman the Dark Knight are never questioned. Batman Begins did such a good job of bringing in the character. Why leave him like hanging like a prop actor in this one?

Some of these sequences could no doubt be shortened. Batman could have been given some character and Two Face could've been the surprise element, AFTER a somewhat more definite end to JOKER, and the movie would have been a tad more awesome. I would have given it a 10. Instead I give it a 9. I dare not give it less than that...

Background score was brilliant. The scenes involving Joker, just before he mutilates someone, or pops a psychological question, are well, horrifying. I was almost squirming in my seat.

Over all a brilliant movie. A landmark Batman film, that ends on the right note, ready to jump headlong into the next phase of Batman's life. I only hope it doesn't take four more years! Long Live the Batman franchise. Long live Nolan fraternity. RIP ledger.
2008-07-19
Is it really one of the top 10?
There seems to be a lot of hype about this film. As I write it's sitting at #6 with an average rating of 9.0. Honestly, I don't think it's that good. Heath Ledger is fun as the psychopathic side of the joker, but I'm not sure he's any more enjoyable than Jack Nicholson - where, for instance, are the actual jokes? Michael Caine just is NOT Alfred - butlers should speak much more correctly than that, and the cockney boy just doesn't work for me. Christian Bale doesn't seem solid enough as a Bruce Wayne. It's a bit more jolly than the Tim Burton efforts - there is at least daylight this time - and the plot twists and effects are decent, but I don't think they're particularly ground-breaking. All in all I'd say it's watchable, but I don't expect it to hang around in the top 10 for too long.
2009-04-05
Eh, it was good, but very overrated
Now don't get me wrong, I did like this movie. but really? Why does everyone think this is the most amazing superhero movie of all time? the movie dragged on for far too long and really wasn't as entertaining as movies like Spider-Man 2, Iron Man, or even the Tim Burton Batman films. In my mind, this movie doesn't hold a candle to those movies. the general plot was boring and way too serious, Bale's acting was horrible (He was much better in Batman Begins), and there was way too much dialogue. On the other hand, Ledger was amazing as the Joker, and the overall acting from the rest of the cast was good (With the exception of Bale and Aaron Eckhart. they were pretty bad in this one.) The action was great, although, at some points in the movie, I felt like I've seen it all before. over all, the movie was good, and I would've even considered it a classic at one point. but the overall hype of this movie seems to extinguish that notion from my mind. as I said before, it's a good movie, but not as amazing as people put it out to be.
2009-09-27
Surpasses "Begins" in every aspect!!!
Christopher Nolan's second bundle of joy "The Dark Knight" EXCEEDED all of my expectations!!! With the success of 2005's reboot of the Batman franchise, they took what was already established and expanded it, amped it up, and gave a deeper, darker and brooding story that is more gripping and the suspense is likely to catch you of guard several times throughout. Christian Bale delves more deeper into Batman, sworn to fight evil and injustice, though also quite reluctant and uncertain if his crusade can ever end and cleanse his inner turmoil from his fractured soul due to the murder of his beloved parents. But with the help of his trusted butler/ally Alfred (played superbly by Michael Cane) grounds him, gives him moral support, and keeps him in check. But the real star of the show is Heath Ledger as Batman's most deadly enemy, The Joker. I can HONESTLY tell you that: as good as Jack Nicholson was in Batman'89 he is CHILD'S PLAY compared to this Joker. He is sadistic, psychotic, and downright SCARIER and PSYCHOLOGICALLY disturbing than the previous incarnation of The Clown Prince of Crime and Ledger gives it his all to do him justice. Along with the original cast comes some fresh faces such as Aaron Eckhart, Maggie Gyllenhaal and more. I must say though I liked Katie Holmes, Gyllenhaal gives a much better performance and is a far cry from the "damsel-in-distress" stereotype (though there's a little of it, THANKFULLY) that's common in films. Bale and Gyllenhall have MUCH better chemistry this time around more so than Holmes. Even better, the fight sequences are vastly improved and feature more brutal and bone crushing combat than "Begins" in addition to new technology at Batman's disposal. Also worth mentioning is screenwriter Jonathan Nolan, who gives the film an added frosting to an already delicious cake. Simply put, The Dark Knight is totally more bad ass than "Begins." The action is great, and the plot is more deeper and engrossing. I applaud Christopher Nolan, Christian Bale, and especially Heath Ledger (who sadly passed away earlier this year) and all those aboard for believing in Mr. Nolan's talents for this second installment. Although some may feel a bit of melancholy over Ledger's death, but as a final note I will say this sincerely from my heart: Remember Heath Ledger and honor him in your minds and hearts not only for his performances, but as a human being and father to his daughter Matilda Ledger. May we issue him best wishes for his family and friends and his daughter for years to come. Remember . . . Honor him not only for this role and past roles, but as an incredible individual and talented actor. Rest in peace. Heath Ledger: 4/4/1979-1/22/2008.
2008-07-07
Best film ever? You must be batty!
Obviously Christopher Nolan was trying to touch on one of the prominent issues of recent times. That of the environment. He did this by recycling tired old jokes and set pieces from many action films before, and the rest of the plot was salvaged from toilets and rubbish bins. He also comes up with the perfect formula to make a profound sentence, by taking two words that mean complete opposites and shoving them together.

Joking aside, after almost nodding off for the first hour and a half the second half of the movie actually was pretty good, albeit drawn out until the ending which was very frustrating. They literally left the joker hanging while dealing with the completely pointless and irrational side-story of two-face. I'd have thought that a man of dent's resolve would have been made stronger by the events that took place, to get back at the joker and stop such events from happening to other people, instead of deteriorating into the monster of similar calibre to the joker.

I really don't think the film got the best out of the actors involved, probably due to the script. Christian Bale is a fantastic actor, but he is completely wasted as batman where he spends most of his time jumping about in a bat-suit using a silly voice, instead of displaying his incredible character acting skills in movies such as American Psycho and the Machinist. Heath Ledger's performance was the only real solid one in the entire cast, however at plenty of times he guilty of completely over-acting. His introduction to the members of the mob was farcical and the laughter in the cinemas was due to the awkwardness and stupidity of the situation.

The main reason I think the film totally fails is Christopher Nolans approach of trying to make the film really realistic with an explanation for everything. A man running around in a bat costume and a man dressed up in clown make-up is just to surreal to try and be addressed in this manner. This is why I think the original Batman is a lot better because it didn't try to be ultra-realistic and took the comics and had a fairly serious tone with a very comedic undercurrent. Christopher Nolan undoubtedly has talent as a director, memento, the prestige and even insomnia are all great films but I feel his attempts at the batman franchise are far outshone by Tim Burton.

Obviously the film is already a hit and there is nothing anyone can write to stop it from being so, however I must implore you to actually watch the film critically and realise its shortcomings, than get swept away in the hype.
2008-08-01
Too many fans seem to be blown away
Many commenters said they were "blown away," so it probably has succeeded in blowing away the box office. I waited until the second week, and had high expectations from the 9 and 10 ratings it was receiving. But, fellow movie/film viewers (and especially great film lovers) ... really!? There's no doubt about the action and action and action in this one, and thus, the special effects. That's the main reason I enjoy such fantasy flicks -- the comic book genre. So, this one does more of it and perhaps better than the last Batman and the last Spiderman and the last super heroes (but I would not rank it up with Iron Man). So, special effects and makeup may earn it awards.

Maybe I'm beginning to burn out on all the action and special effects of movies, though. Or perhaps I need more from a movie. With 45 minutes to go, I was ready for it to end. It was way too long. Some reviewers thought the acting was superb. What acting -- do they mean the one- or two-minute interludes between the fast and furious segments of action and destruction? I'm not down on any of the actors for their roles or parts -- but where were there any parts of substance in acting? True, Heath Ledger does a very good Joker. But, then, who hasn't (Nicholson, et al) who have ever played those roles in Batman, Superman, etc? As for plot -- well, anyone who knows the genre and a story that combines Batman with the Joker, knows to expect the unexpected with the Joker. So, the plot goes from one unexpected to another -- as though the variety and mixture and change in "unexpecteds" is trying to outdo the action mayhem.

When I saw that this stands as #1 in the top 250 right now, I clicked on the list. But how this movie for acting and plot (and yes, even action in many cases) could rank up there with the likes of the Lord of the Rings, the Star Wars films, and many great classics with real suspense (I have to mention Casablanca, Vertigo, North by Northwest), is beyond me. I'm not that far off with the overall trends in the IMDb reviews, but can't agree with so many who rate this film at the top.

It's good and entertaining -- but too long. It's not great, by any means. I love the youth of today (I have a few grandchildren), and I don't mean to disparage them by this observation -- but I think this high acclaim by many for this film may reflect a very large, very young audience, most members of whom don't have a great deal of quality and varied films in their viewing history. To all of those young people, I urge a look at the top 250 list or other major review ratings -- and then that you rent, borrow or otherwise watch some of the other great films. I promise you won't be disappointed or bored --and you may get an understanding (maybe appreciation for) of some past customs, life styles, dress, behaviors, etc. To be sure, you will have great entertainment.
2008-07-31
📹 The Dark Knight full movie HD download 2008 - Christian Bale, Heath Ledger, Aaron Eckhart, Michael Caine, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Gary Oldman, Morgan Freeman, Monique Gabriela Curnen, Ron Dean, Cillian Murphy, Chin Han, Nestor Carbonell, Eric Roberts, Ritchie Coster, Anthony Michael Hall - USA, UK. 📀
×