WHY SO SERIOUS?

[fivebyfive]

*

There is already buzz about Heath Ledger getting an Oscar nomination for The Dark Knight, which will almost certainly happen. But I genuinely believe that it would have, even if he had not tragically died. It's a phenomenal performance.

The movie is far better than the good (but not astounding) Batman Begins, which was mostly notable for

Comments

[foxyfyzx]

You used 'quibble' twice... however, great review, although i have yet to see it, but i do have time... :)

[fivebyfive]

Thanks, you should definitely check it out!

I'll use quibble as many times as I like thank you!

[sarcasticsiren]

"Hubba hubba hubba. Money money money. Who do you trust?"

One summer, I think I watched that movie like every day. I have it more or less memorized. I became a screenwriter so I could write a good Batman sequel starring Chris O'Donnell, and then he would fall in love with me.

I can't even WAIT to see this movie. IMAX is sold out everywhere, so I'm going with a regular screening at Burbank tonight. Sigh.

This town needs an enema!

[fivebyfive]

One advantage to being up in Seattle is that people aren't quite so nutso about movies. There were four screens playing the movie at midnight last night so I had no trouble walking in 10 minutes before midnight.

The downside being that when I saw Hancock, obnoxious teenagers were shouting across the aisle when they wanted someone to pass the popcorn. I almost kicked their seats. I would have REALLY thrown down if they'd done it during Batman.

I almost quoted that exact line and I totally thought of you. Then I decided to leave it for you to comment with. :)

Re: This town needs an enema!

[gnumoose]

I saw it in a packed theatre in New York City this morning. It was amazing how when the WB logo came up, the theatre was totally silent.

I was impressed.

Why so serious?

[fivebyfive]

Yeah even the crowd I was with was pretty respectful, which is not always the case here. Maybe because it's Batman, or maybe because it was a midnight screening and everyone was really there to see that movie, rather than just seeing whatever to kill time (as it seemed was the case with dumb teens in Hancock since they inexplicably left during the last scene. That's another pet peeve of mine: can you really not stay the final two minutes to see the end of the movie?)

I take movies pretty seriously so it's nice when the audience actually allows you to enjoy it without stupid disturbances. I actually saw someone answer their phone during a movie once and I just about killed the kid.

[kuhn]

While you said not to quibble, I'm going to have to disagree and say that I thought the Joker was written perfectly. There's no real explanation for what he is, so it's best left up to mystery. I was particular impressed with how much depth Ledger gave to a character that really has nothing underneath the surface.

We do know what he wanted. As Alfred so eloquently put it, "to watch the world burn."

[fivebyfive]

I saw the film again and studied the character a little more closely. I do still feel there was a bit of a "why?" missing in his and most other characters. They seem to be acting as types more than real people. They feel constrained by the story mechanics as if they can't really make their own choices. As I said, it is actually the Joker who feels the most free and spontaneous in the story.

The "why?" needn't be a childhood trauma or origins thing, since that has been done with the Batman villains in the previous movies. More like a knowledge of what he gets out of it. Obviously he takes pleasure in the pain of others, in chaos, but I do want to more about his psychology - like why he enjoys pranks and tricks so much, connecting some of the dots there. Why he uses the image of the clown. Again, not an end-of-Psycho huge backstory thing, but some clues in the dialogue that gave us a little more insight.

It's a small thing, but for me it's one of the things that made the movie fall just a little short of excellence.

[kuhn]

Yeah, I can see that. Like I said, it didn't bother me, but I can understand it.

For me the film fell just short of excellence because of how heavy-handed it was at times. The ending voice-over repeated lines verbatim just to make sure I got the moral.

Also, the acting and logic on the ferry full of non-convicts was not believable to me.

[fivebyfive]

Yeah I agree that was a weak link. Nolan isn't very good at directing the non-name actors because I remember the moments with one-liners being bad in the first movie too. That ferry scene felt way too stock action-movie whereas the rest of this film was really going against that. Having the police woman have to spell out for the audience "Harvey Dent" when the two cops with last names Harvey and Dent were killed is another example of how this movie dumbed itself down a few times and became exactly what it is being praised for not being. As I keep saying though, these are relatively minor problems that just knock it down a notch or two (meaning it is still a cut above almost every other film of this kind).