The Dark Knight was a good movie but it was not a perfect film. The dialogue was still mediocre just like the first one. Christian Bale's Batman-voice annoyed alot of people(I didn't think it was that bad). Harvey Dent's demise was unnecisarry. The Hong Kong subplot was unnecisarry fat that could have been trimmed. The action ranged from "enjoyable but disconjointed" to "confusing and difficult to follow". Because I still have no idea what was going on in that construction site scene. The pacing is too rush-rush and doesn't give you time to relax and take a breather so by the end you're just exhausted and worn out rather then elated. So watching it becomes a great undertaking. It's not a movie you can just pop in and watch like the first one was. And yes I'm a purist who hated the make-up thing.
But mostly, it's just not a very fun movie. And that's not really a bad thing, neccissarily. Because the film is a powerful film due to it's unwavering maturity, complexity, and realism. I just think that in his strive for credibility for the genre, Nolan sacrificed the number one rule of pop-corn movies and superherodom: He forgot to make it fun. This is Batman, not King Lear. He runs around in tights beating up cartoony criminals. This is not something that requires a lot of intellectual insight here. I'm not saying I want Adam West or anything. I'm just saying he could have toned the realism down a couple notches and still made a great film, but not nearly as overbearingly mature and complex. Because, to be honest, I had more fun in 5 minutes of Iron Man then pretty much all three hours of the non-stop intellectual overbearingness of The Dark Knight.
So if it doesn't get an Oscar nom, then I won't be surprised because there might be members of The Academy who agree with me.