Sign In Now ►
or Create A New Account ►
Rank This Matchup or Comment/Reply Below
Definitely going with 2001 here. TDK was way overrated.
well, depending on who you ask, the "overrated" label is bound to be thrown around aggresively for both of these movies. Also, depending on who you ask, you're bound to hear a lengthy, passionate argument as to why both movies are masterpieces. With The Dark Knight, the philosophical meaning of the movie could be seen as a bit too heavyhanded and intrusive to the flow of the story. There's too much going on. 2001: A Space Odyssey, on the other hand, could be viewed as being too elusive with its meaning (even though many people could talk for hours about how deep it all is). Or, that there's not enough going on. Personally, I enjoy 2001 more for the mood and visual experience than for what it's all about. The Dark Knight, though, despite it being a bit overloaded, is a more entertaining motion picture. I don't think either movie is as great as some might claim, but I like both of them. Both are worth investing 2 1/2 hours of my time, but I'm willing to do it more often with The Dark Knight.
I´m agrreing on the TDK is overrated thing.
As over-rated as The Dark Knight is, at least it doesn't have what feels like 20 minutes of just colours.
I'm with Andrew, this is a tough one. Ultimately gave it to 2001, because I can't help but love a movie that summarizes humanity's rise from primordial ape-monsters to ultimate consciousness. Also HAL forever. Still love ya, DK!
I ultimately love both of these films. And they are in my top 20. But I must go with The Dark Knight, more story involved, better acting and entertainment.
The Dark Knight has an unforgettable performance from Ledger, and a generally solid story to go with it, but the pacing is just off, and when the Joker isn't on the screen, interest dwindles. 2001 is just perfect though, from beginning to end.
I love TDK, but this isn't even close. 2001 FTW.
The Dark Knight. I always had mixed feelings about 2001. It has some of the best visuals and cinematography ever, a fantastic score and a memorable 'villain', the HAL 9000. But it's also very boring. Nothing really happens in the movie, which is the main reason I don't like other artsy movies like this one. And also, everything in the movie could have a meaning (for example the space baby and the monolith), but if many people have different interpretations of those elements in the movie, isn't the movie in a way pretentious? I'm not trying to offend anyone, I don't hate the movie, but I don't particularly like it either. It's just confusing.
2001: A Space Odyssey. Seeing it is an experience I will never forget as long as I live. It took me to a whole other state of mind. The Dark Knight is pretty damn memorable too, but few movies can top Kubrick's masterpiece in my book. @MysticSpoon, I can see why 2001 may come across as pretentious, but I think its ambiguity is the main reason why it is so timeless.
Yeah @JRyneChattanooga, it's more of an experience in my eyes than a movie. And you make a valid point: the ambiguity of it can be studied and be discussed about and makes the movie, in a way, timeless. So I do know why people love the movie, however I do not myself. But hey, different tastes, different movies.
Yeah. To each their own. I will admit that I avoid watching 2001 because seeing it the first time was so special and I don't want my opinion to change. There's no doubt that it is a great movie, but I think over familiarizing myself with it could diminish some of its magic in my eyes. By contrast, The Dark Knight is compulsively watchable and I've seen it multiple times.
How can I choose between The Dark Knight and 2001: A Space Odyssey ?
Two great films, two memorable villains. It's close, but I'll go with the Dark Knight with its more memorable cast.
The Dark Knight it is. I'm not a massive TDK supporter, but I think it wins handily here.
I just watched 2001 for the first time last night, and i'll tell ya, it's only good the first time you watch it I think, it was good but I could probably not watch it again. The Dark Knight, and I do believe it is a little overrated but I can rewatch it more than 2001
SquareMaster316, was the villain in 2001, HAL 9000? Some I didn't understand the film but it was good
I'll go with the film that was actually entertaining. Not a tough choice at all.
TDK by far.
I can't believe that this is even a debate, much less that 2001: A SPACE ODYSSEY (a serious contender for the greatest film ever made and the most iconic film by America's greatest filmmaker) is actually losing to a movie about a guy in a cape. More adults need to read books without pictures.
Is cinema art or entertainment? This matchup, more than most, elicits such a question to be asked. To me, movies are entertainment...and not much more. I mean, seriously, isn't calling cinema an art form a bit like calling a bowler an athlete? You really have to stretch the definition of the word to make it fit. That's why so many here, myself included, see The Dark Knight as the better film. It's simply more entertaining. Sure, one could say that we are merely a bunch of mouth-breathing dolts who are easily dazzled by "a guy in a cape." However, one could just as easily say that anybody who goes to a movie to get their artistic and cultural nourishment is somebody who desperately needs to read more "books without pictures." In the end, it's hardly an injustice that The Dark Knight is currently doing so well in this matchup; it's a damn entertaining film and, to many, that's what really matters. End of rambling mess.
"Is cinema art or entertainment?" Well, it's both, really. And I don't think it's really a stretch. I don't see how one could argue that it's NOT an art form.
For our purposes 'Art' (without embroiling ourselves in defining its various subdivisions) is entertainment. I also don't see how one could argue that cinema is NOT an art form. I too dig movies about silly dudes in silly capes, but will nevertheless concede that more adults should learn to read or, failing that, should resist the urge to voice their opinions. Anyway, I side with Batsy.
Eh, I don't know, I suppose it's all an "eye of the beholder" type of thing. The gist of what I was trying to say, though, was that there's more than one optic through which one can look at a film's quality; hence The Dark Knight could legitimately be viewed as better than 2001: A Space Odyssey, even though it may not be as conventionally "artistic" as Stanley Kubrick's film.
TDK is arguably a better movie about Batman than 2001, I'll give it that.
Oh yeah, I totally agree with you on that point. If you find The Dark Knight to be the better of the two, have at it. I haven't even seen 2001 yet, I was just trying to make a point.
on Mar 7
It's an insult to movie-making at large to chose TKD over 2001. Christian Bale's voice for Batman was very cheesy and annoying. 2001 is the greatest sci-fi film ever made. End of story. 2001 wins.
on May 10
I find 2001 more entertaining.