Dark City

I just saw this recently and, while I liked it, I wasn’t that impressed. Can anyone explain to me why Roger Ebert practically declared this film the greatest ever made and actually compared it to Metropolis? I also recently saw Proyas’ knowing and both films seemed kinda hokey in their execution but I’m always willing to give a film another look if someone can point out its strengths.

Listen to his commentary on the disc, Mike. He’ll tell you himself.

One of my fondest film-going experiences was seeing this in the theater; another was when I saw “The Big Lebowski” in the theater. I need to pick up the “Dark City” special edition DVD soon.

I do love this movie, and the Metropolis comparisons are apt when you consider the set designs and philosophies of both films. However, I disliked the director’s cut since all it did was add in a few scenes that detracted from my viewing experience. For me this was a case where studio constraints aided a film, I’ll stick with the theatrical cut, thank you very much.

I don’t speak for Roger Ebert, but I do enjoy this movie. The lighting is magnificent, the reveals are uncanny, and it’s great how simply made it is.

—PolarisDiB

I love that film. It seemed to slip under the radar, but it was excellent. Way better than the Matrix. The plot was very original and full of surprises.

I think that it was an ingenious way of making a film, with big reveals, and a great mixture between reality and the fantastic. I think that there were flaws in the director’s cut, although one or two of the added scenes were cool. I did like how they took out the opening narration, though, since that kind of complately destroyed everything about any kind of “secret” about the strangers. Frankly, I think a mixture between the two cuts would be best.

Savvy

I saw it at a friends house so I didn’t hear the commentary. Does the DVD come with the theatrical version as well or only the directors? I think I saw the director’s.
JP -
I see what you mean about the set designs and philosophies but it seemed like Ebert was making a case that this was as much of a breakthrough as Metropolis and I just couldn’t buy that.
I agree that it’s easily better than the Matrix.

What Ebert actually wrote was Dark City’ "is a great visionary achievement, a film so original and exciting, it stirred my imagination like _Metropolis_and 2001: A Space Odyssey.‘’ Given Ebert’s extremely high regard for Herzog, it’s perhaps more interesting that he also wrote that “if it is true, as the German director Werner Herzog believes, that we live in an age starved of new images, then Dark City’ is a film to nourish us.”

By the way, Metropolis didn’t even make Ebert’s Top 10 in the last BFI/Sight & Sound poll. He’s got Herzog’s Aguirre, Wrath of God at #1.

I can’t argue with his singular experience of seeing a film and stirring his imagination it didn’t stir mine as much as the 2 films he cited or a few others such as Blade Runner, Brazil, Altered States or even Children of Men. It seems like he and I are just going in different directions when it comes to film design. I noticed he loved Tarsem’s latest color drenched, music video, the Fall as well. I just need my films to breath a bit more. I know the design of Dark City fits the story but they both came off a bit overdone for my tastes.

Pretty big let down for me, I wanted to like this film a lot and thought it started out great, then went downhill. Wtf is up with Kiefer Sutherlands speech patterns, talk about one of the most annoying characters in cinema. That to me was on the level of Jar Jar Binks.

Yeah, Sutherlands tics annoyed me as well. I see what he was going for but it didn’t feel like it worked to me. I was hanging with the film until the very end when it went into climax mode and you could easily predict how every shot was going to go. Perhaps if I had seen it before the Matrix it would have worked better but i’ve also read a lot of superhero comic books back in the day so at this point I get bored when any story suddenly kicks into “It’s Clobberin’ Time” mode. This bores me even more when the story take itself and it’s chosen one character really seriously.

I saw before The Matrix and believe it is a far superior film.

I’m not as high on Proyas, generally speaking, as Ebert is either, Mike. I do think there are some very nice compositions and uniquely expressive use of lighting in his films, though:

Skip the DVD’s altogether, Mike, and go for the Blu. It’s the only way to get both cuts together, and the picture and sound are vastly superior. Saw it at Wal-mart the other day for 15 bucks.

I actually saw it on Blu Ray at a buddies house and it was beautiful to look at.
Matt, the images you posted do demonstrate that Proyas has a strong compositional sense but I guess I just prefer a subtler approach. The visuals that impress me the most are the ones where only seeing a frame might not make you stop but if you saw 20 or 30 second you’d go wait a second here… I do realize that science fiction by it’s very nature sometimes demands dense visuals. Ultimately the style and look of the picture fits the story being told. In the end i felt it didn’t add up to much. I had a similar experience with the Fountain, especially the futuristic scenes in that film. Both Dark City and the Fountain seem like they are building to some profound revelation about love and memory and at the end I’m left thinking I should probably be re-watching 2001 right now.

Second photo from bottom looks like a convention of Pinheads … who’ve lost their pins …

^ Best pullquote ever – “Looks like a convention of Pinheads … who’ve lost their pins …”

I love it.

I liked the film, but felt that 75% of it was exposition concerning the mechanics and philosophy of the city. All the action and plot were crowded in the last quarter. That was its sole, but large failing for me, having me digest all the detail and then wait for something to occur. Dark City reminds me of The Life Aquatic and Appleseed 2004. All three films have an obsessive focus on the setting (be it ship or city), yet each film still manages to eek out a decent, but squashed, story around the massive centerpiece.