For me it breaks the movie, try to read the article that I have linked to, among others, I think it points out valid flaws with this.
As for the original post, it wasn't really inflamatory I just said my view about it, besides it is true that a good movie you can rewatch and still have fun with. This is completely opposite with Dark Knight, I can see right through the movie and its flaws and yes, I saw the Gordon escape scene mentioned, all that stuff with faking death and then that kidnapping of rachel and all that, so many convenient story holes. If the movie wasn't presented as something realistic this could be forgiven, but Nolan just used totally unrealistic stuff to not create fun but further inconsistencies instead. And the Joker is best as psychopathic killer maniac, who you cannot tell that he is such at first, however as good as Ledger's performance is in this movie (after all he did what he was asked to and did that very well), the character is just very two dimensional, just to make chaos and batman is incompetent to stop it. The character of joker reeks of the very much cliched public view depiction of anarchist lunatics (which hardly happens in real life). I don't think this is as deep as real thrillers either, i mean really.
The problem why the flaws matter here is how the movie is presented, as some kind of thriller instead of action movie. I could forgive flaws in previous batman movies because they weren't so over the top (plus batman begins was even more believable and there weren't lame attempts at humor either). But The Dark Knight really loses a lot of that artistic feel, hell even Gotham in Batman Begins was built up a new, not so in dark knight, it's just damn Michago or whatever.
Are you even speaking English? God. I don't want to harp on grammar, as mine will suck (drinking and posting is probably a bad idea), but goodness.
I'll address a few of the points from your links, but you posted so much crap, I can't be bothered to address it all. Let's address a few ridiculous plot hole errors.
For instance: why is it so unbelievable that Rachael and Harvey were kidnapped? So many other people were attacked in the film in many different ways--how is their kidnapping obviously the fault of the cops? If you know the answer, you can always say it's obvious, but in the moment, it simply seems like the Joker ambushed them at their houses (and since he can even ambush Bruce Wayne, this isn't particularly surprising).
What happened to the Joker at Bruce Wayne's house? That is ridiculously simple. Batman defeated the goons (which we saw), which left the Joker vulnerable. He knows he is about to be beat. He chucks Rachael out of the window. While batman saves her, he beats his retreat. No, the movie didn't show Batman going back upstairs, looking around, asking if anyone has seen the Joker, going back into the his secret cave, coming back out as Bruce Wayne asking if it's all over yet because Nolan figured that most audience members are smart enough to figure that out. Instead of pointing out that the movie didn't show something, figure it out yourself.
Why did the Joker go through such an elaborate ordeal to get caught? He didn't. He didn't need to be in the station, only the person with the bomb in his stomach. He WAS caught, however, and the bomb stomach helped him get out (as well as kill Lao). He could have set off the bomb then gone in to kill Lao, but it worked to get out as well. The bomb was already in place, either way, it just opens the door either way.
Aha! Batman killed Two Face! What a hypocrit! Oh god, kill me now. In a move to save an innocent, Batman's actions led to Two Face's death. It was not only justified, it was unavoidable. This is not a failure of Batman's moral code, it is a tragedy of events.
As to the distaste of the Joker: It isn't a comic book, so get over it. I agree, the Joker from TDK is not the Joker from
The Killing Joke, nor is he something Bob Kane ever drew. He isn't a jovial maniac, he is rather a sardonic lunatic. Instead of whimsy v seriousness, they went with control v chaos. They positioned him as a foil to Batman, and the Batman they have been painting in these films is less a person devoted to seriousness (which needs a whimsicle counterpoint), but of order.
Batman is a disturbing character, because even though he adheres to a strict moral code, he is the embodiment of fascism. He is about control, about rigid adherence to laws and codes, he is about going above and beyond to punish those deemed punishable.
The Dark Knight Returns, which goes out of its way to try and prove how NOT a fascist Batman is, is a loveletter to fascism (and proves that anyone who was surprised when Miller went completely nutso had never really payed attention to anything he'd said before). In the movie, he is shown (and by extension--fascist government rule) is shown to be ineffective at preventing chaos. He is able only to fight other organized crimes, which operate with largely the same set of rules as him, with the same thought processes. His only victory is when he simply trusts in humanity to do the right thing, as a whole, and is vindicated (and yes, the authority figures are implicated in this as lacking moral vigor--this isn't surprising). Further, his power to fight this threat is almost worthless without exceeding his limits. It is simultaneously a justification of things like The Patriot Act and a condemnation of it--because he is able to see, mostly through Fox, that this power is absolutely, damningly too much for any person or entity to possess. The joker is perfectly positioned to fight this batman, it is an argument about what constitutes humanity (chaos or order/kindness or evil) and how it should be ruled over.
It is not a superhero movie in the traditional sense. It isn't slavishly devoted to realism (because the vigilante idiots who get their butts handed to them are the only portrayal of realism, Batman being a much more mythic figure), with its super villains, its nicely symmetrical, eye-sparring scars, and etc; but it isn't resigned to simple, over-the-top theatrics. It is a study of power, and particular its corrupting effects and its relation to people. Batman Begins is very much a Spiderman Lesson (great power, great responsibility, blah, blah), TDK is very much a reminder that this power doesn't trump humanity. It is the antidote to Begins' overoptimism (and the overoptimism of almost any superhero film, or cop film, or anti-cop film), and it is a study in humanity. It leans on reality, when that is helpful, keeping things as grounded as it can, but it is not afraid to make use of the extreme, for reasons of theatrics and for reasons of symbolism.
All told, TDK, while possessing flaws (RICO, null coded type things which, really, don't actually matter), is a fantastic film, was one of the best action films when it came out and holds up surprisingly well on repeated viewings. If all you care about is not knowing, of COURSE it doesn't work on repeated viewings (because, well, you know how it goes). If you care about the ideas that are driving it (and this is largely what the movie is--a movie of ideas), then it is truly excellent.
Also, you're an idiot (I felt I'd treated you far too seriously throughout this, arguing points you didn't actually make and giving some credibility to your objections, which are completely lacking).
).
