Monday, August 4, 2008

Movie Review: The Dark Knight

Friday I saw this movie for the second time. The Dark Knight, the sequel to Batman Begins, is much darker than its predecessor. In fact, this movie was more visceral than many movies I have seen recently. Given this movie's blockbuster records and the fact that it has potential to be the highest grossing movie ever, I figured I should review it.

Gains: +10
The plot and graphic nature of the script danced with an R rating but never stepped over the line. This tightrope walk gave you all the benefits of experiencing the danger and horror while sparing you the gory details. The layered plot was even more savory on the second viewing and whetted my appetite for future viewings. The idea of a terrorist bringing a city to its knees in fear is compelling, but just when hope hangs by its thinnest thread, great decisions are made and great deeds are performed, and not just by Batman. I hate when movie scripts give me reasons to pity villians. These reasons usually whitewash the villian's own choices. The tangled web of conflicting stories the Joker tells gives you more a view into his mindset and goals than into his past. He seemingly comes from out of nowhere and began his campaign against the natural order of his society. This appeared to be more a case of plot function than of oversight.

The Joker is amazing. Rarely does anyone overcome the hype. Heath Ledger crushed the hype beyond anything I have ever witnessed. Too bad he died. I loved the cast: every single character had meaningful lines and roles. The movie was 2.5 hours long and none of the space felt wasted. For the first time in a long time, I felt in real time how long the movie actually was, but I was not interested in having it end.

Without giving anything away, I have to say that the ending of the movie gave me chills. In self-sacrifice Batman gives up the portion of his character he holds most dear, for the good of his city. His reasoning: because his Batman persona can shoulder the responsibility.

The movie is violent, but even after two viewings I cannot remember any blood. This is a small point, but it's a critical hinge, I think. A character is horribly mutilated, but the terrible scarring is more fascinating than disturbing. Though the injury changes him, the guy is still the same man with the same issues he had before his disfigurement.

Losses: -2
The movie is dark and sinister. While this adds a couple points, it also gets logged as a loss. I'm totally okay with darker plots, but for those who are more sensitive, this will take away from the movie. Truth be told, the movie is more sinister than actually scary. Of course, for kids this movie could be nightmare inducing. You are warned. The darkness is not for effect, it serves a purpose in the plot. When things get muddled, when you stare darkness and chaos in the face, only then do you see the true hero reveal himself.

The movie is violent. Even the good guy does massive amounts of violence to bad guys, even as he tries to hold onto his rule of never killing people. The Joker lets nothing stand in his way to total chaos. He will kill anyone or entice people to kill each other in order to achieve his ends.

Edit: After Amber's comment about Katie Holmes and Maggie G., I felt I needed to address it in the blog. Maggie G. is one of my favorite actors. Katie Holmes is not. But after watching the Katie/Christian Bale chemistry and then seeing the Maggie/Bale version, I have to say that Katie was much better for the role. The character Rachel has a critical role in the film, and it would have worked far better if Katie had the role. The chemistry between Batman/Bruce Wayne and Rachel needed Katie Holmes.

Final Judgement: +8
Moral themes ooze abundantly from the pores of this movie but never get preachy or removed from the story. This gives the movie depth way beyond even good Hollywood movies. More viewings of The Dark Knight will help me determine if I think it deserves to replace Serenity as my most favorite movie. It's definitely in my Top 10, which means I will have to look at the list to decide what gets bumped off. Even if you have reservations about seeing it, I would highly recommend that you give it a viewing.

4 comments:

Amber said...

Personally, I have not even seen the movie, but would add one more point for replacing Katie Holmes with Maggie Gyllenhall. She's phenomenal in a way that Holmes will never equal.

Mercutio said...

Check under the "Edit" portion for my response. I should have addressed it the first time. :)

Amber said...

Strange. In the first film, I felt zero chemistry between Holmes and Bale.

Anonymous said...

i still wish Katie Holmes had stayed on board as Rachel Dawes for the Dark Knight; it was as though all that time spent getting familiar with her character in Batman Begins was lost...

Followers