Look, I thought The Dark Knight had a lot of strong selling points: Combine a deft pace with thoughtful characterizations and a whopping IMAX design that turns the entire experience into a plot-driven theme park ride, and you've got one hefty dose of Batman adrenaline.

Still, comparisons to The Godfather Part II notwithstanding, The Dark Knight isn't foolproof -- in fact, no single movie in history is foolproof. The subjective experience of movie watching ensures that nothing can be universally liked by everyone, and rules of civility insist that humanity respect that truism. It's acceptable to feel passionately about a great work of art, and defend that perspective with rigorous argumentation, but much of the outrage over the minority perspective that The Dark Knight isn't any good has made such practical thinking impossible.

Deemed the first critic to pan the movie, New York's David Edelstein went out of his way to list the allegations against him sent along by various Batman fans. The House Next Door editor Keith Uhlich, meanwhile, fielded over a hundred rants in the comments section following his astute critique of director Christopher Nolan's questionable portrayals of violence. What's particularly shocking about this frightful deluge of negative responses is that many of these people began posting their disapproval before they even saw the movie.

This latest cameo in The Dark Knight made be both happy and disappointed. You see, Nicky Katt is so much more than just the Stuka shtick. If you have no idea what I'm talking about, check out the clip above. Basically, it's the dude being super, extra talkative when most other people probably wouldn't. In Sin City, that meant blabbering on after getting an arrow right through your torso. In TDK, that means going on and on about how the high-speed chase just isn't good.

Yes, that super-talkative cop from the chase scene is none other than Nicky Katt, Stuka, the detective in The Brave One, the puss-filled guy in Planet Terror, the Carnoburger Cashier in The Doom Generation, and the marijuana-smoking Clint in Dazed and Confused.

I'm happy to see him wherever he pops up, but please -- Hollywood Powers that Be, don't relegate Katt to just over-talkative guys in the action. He's so much more than light-tongued typecasting!

It's one thing to disagree with somebody. It's another to censor them. That's the central problem with the United Kingdom's decision to condemn The Great Global Warming Swindle, a documentary by Martin Durkin arguing exactly what its title implies.

A response to the global warming awareness popularized by An Inconvenient Truth, Durkin's film was considered disingenuous from the perspective of British broadcast regulator Ofek, which ruled that Channel 4 violated the country's boundaries of impartiality when it broadcast the movie last year. Apparently, Durkin manipulated his subjects in order make them verify his questionable stance that global warming was a conspiracy.

Now, I find it hard to buy into any movie that puts its ugly one-sided argument right in the title, but there's something to be said for freedom of speech in this case. What's the U.K. doing with these nonsensical impartiality laws? Since when do documentaries have to remain objective and avoid agendas? Even your average PBS program takes a side. The ruling suggests a totalitarian mindset where art is subjected to a group think mentality, and that's scary. What if The Dark Knight were banned for condoning torture? Maybe that's an extreme comparison, so try this one: What does Ofcom think about Michael Moore?

So last night I was twiddling my thumbs, watching a re-run of Design Star (shut up) and I suddenly remembered that our friends from Slashfilm had Kevin Smith as a guest on their podcast. Since we're in no way above pimping out something pretty awesome on another site, I'll let you know now that I truly enjoyed listening to Smith talk about how much he loved The Dark Knight -- and, essentially, just hearing these guys all geek out over the flick. (I think they just posted the full podcast for those of you who missed it.)

So anyway, at one point they were talking about the intense marketing for The Dark Knight, and how the hype had reached a ridiculous level just prior to the flick arriving in theaters. But then Smith brought up the point that the hype surrounding The Dark Knight was not even close to the hype surrounding Tim Burton's Batman back in 1989. I was still kinda young (12), but I do remember Batman being the first giant summer movie. And Kevin made a good point in that with The Dark Knight, most of the buzz was online and other folks didn't really know much about it until we got closer to release -- whereas Burton's Batman was everywhere. Of the things I remember, the Bat symbol was on everything -- I vaguely recall walking through the mall in Staten Island and seeing it on walls, on stands and, at one point, in cardboard box form all piled up in the center of the Macy's wing. The hype was out of control for that flick.

So, is Kevin Smith correct in saying the hype for Burton's Batman far exceeded the hype leading up to The Dark Knight? Sound off below ...

Yesterday I kicked this week off with a lovely taste of the luscious ladies man also known as Batmanuel, also known as the Mayor of Gotham. This time, I wanted to go with Polk, played by K. Todd Freeman. Years ago he was Mr. Trick on Buffy the Vampire Slayer, but there's no good embeddable clips of his role online. (And I can't, for the life of me, remember what he did in The Dark Knight. Help!)

So instead, I'm moving on to another player in the Joss Whedon universe. You might have recognized Detective Stevens, played by Keith Szarabajka. While he's the law these days in Gotham, he used to be a man named Holtz, hell-bent on revenge in Angel. Remember? He came through time, all to pay back Angel, and ended up kidnapping Connor and bringing him to a hell dimension? It's all because of the above.

Film critics are often criticized themselves for being the wrong audience for a movie they've panned. Whether it's old white guys who aren't the right audience for a Tyler Perry movie or old white guys who can't appreciate a "chick flick," the subjectivity of certain reviewers is sometimes even called out for being too racist, sexist or otherwise prejudiced. We saw a high level of apparent chauvinism going on recently with the release of Sex and the City, and now it's happening again with Mamma Mia! Last Friday, in her his review, New York Sun critic Grady Hendrix* noted that Mamma, "has been getting generally good reviews, but it's also been getting trashed by some critics who all have one thing in common: They're men." And the claim has now been escalated by Liz Smith, who quotes Hendrix in the Page Six section of today's New York Post.

Despite my half-belief that Hendrix has a point about some male critics, I didn't want her his claim to go unchecked. Especially because her his review went out on the same day that most newspaper reviews went out. Meaning, how could she have known the true demographics of all negative and positive reactions? Going through all the Mamma Mia! reviews sampled on Rotten Tomatoes, here is what I discovered:

The first giganto film of the summer has been given a DVD release date, according to Video Business, and if all goes accordingly it looks like you'll be able to enjoy Iron Man in the comforts of your own living room (legally) on September 30. There's no word on special features yet, however Amazon now allows you to pre-order three different versions, including your standard single-disc ($34.99), a two-disc special edition ($39.99) and a Blu-ray Special Collector's Edition ($39.99). (Note: Those are the list prices and each DVD is cheaper through Amazon.) The article also says to expect Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull to hit DVD in October with Kung Fu Panda in November. One imagines (and hopes) Hancock, WALL-E and The Dark Knight will all hit DVD by Christmas as well.

But back to that Iron Man DVD. Those of you attending San Diego Comic Con might want to listen up because Marvel will be hyping up the DVD at their Comic-Con booth by passing out a flash drive containing a sneak peek at the Iron Man DVD. Of course, should we get our hands on one, you'll be the first to know what's on it.

So, who's buying this DVD?

Update: Thanks to Cinematical reader Jeffrey for pointing us toward a look at the limited edition Crystal Skull packaging for the Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull DVD over at Amazon. Check it out below ...

When I got to the theater an hour and fifteen minutes early on Thursday night and faced an almost entirely packed theater, I almost turned my tired butt around and went home. But then there was the Watchmen trailer, and then the wonderful The Dark Knight. The film wiped away every bit of tiredness and had me not only in a flurry of awe, but in small cameo sightings. Batman's latest romp is not only a great and worthy film, but also an excellent smorgasbord of cameos and talent.

Over the next week, I'm going to share my five favorite cameos in the film, and there's no way I can start with anyone other than Batmanuel. When Nestor Carbonell's face popped up, my brain raced to fit the face to a memory. Soon I realized -- it was Batmanuel from The Tick ... as the Mayor of Gotham! Between the power of Batman and the machismo of Batmanuel, it's surprising that any evil dude would dare to set up shop in Gotham City. Now if only the DVD for this film has a goofy short film where both of the winged heroes save the day...

I'm sorry for being so cryptic with the title, but I would like to save those who haven't seen The Dark Knight yet from a few of the film's big reveals. That said, if you haven't watched the movie yet, I'd suggest not reading this post. Unless you don't care either way, here we go ... spoilers ahead ...

On the phone with Cinematical's Scott Weinberg last night discussing which jewelry we're bringing to Comic Con (I have the perfect, purtiest necklace for the Terminator: Salvation panel!), we got to talking about The Dark Knight. More specifically, we pondered Scarecrow's purpose in this film. Why was he there? Why bring Cillian Murphy on set for one scene with very little to do and then not come back to him for the remainder of the flick?

Now, the purpose of the scene itself was pretty clear: To re-establish Batman's war on crime and to show how the hero's popularity has spawned a number of copycat Batmans. So they bring these two drug gangs together for a secret meeting/transaction, and one of them is run by Scarecrow. And just as business is about to go down, a bunch of Batmans arrive on the scene -- all hell breaks loose -- and the real Batman eventually gets the job done.

Great. Wonderful. So why was Scarecrow there again?

Now that The Dark Knight has shattered box office records, it's only fair to start discussing the inevitable third installment. Of course, we hope Christopher Nolan, Christian Bale and their team will return for a third film, but we know that's not guaranteed. However, there's no way Warner Bros. is going to ditch Batman while he's on top, and so we should assume serious talk of another sequel will take place within the next month or so. In the meantime, that leaves us to talk and talk and talk and talk. Today, let's talk Batty's next enemy.

I'm going to leave the poll off today's post because there are just so many Batman villains through the years that it's impossible to narrow it down to four or five for a poll. I'd much rather give you my two cents and then open up the discussion in the comments section below. That being said, I don't think I'd like to see someone like Penguin or Catwoman (both are kinda boring in my opinion) -- buuuuuut, I wouldn't mind Riddler showing up to drive Gotham wild with all sorts of ridiculous riddles (and imagine that viral scene). But maybe he's too close to Joker, so perhaps we could go with Deadshot, Black Mask (who actually makes sense in the Nolan-verse) or The Mad Hatter.

How about you? Which villain would you like to see show up in the next Batman film?