BARBELITH underground
 

Subcultural engagement for the 21st Century...
Barbelith is a new kind of community (find out more)...
You can login or register.


Underground > Film, TV & Theatre >

Batman: The Dark Knight

  
  

Page: 123(4)5678

 
 
H3ct0r L1m4
16:32 / 18.07.08
my only concern in regards to a third movie is how are they going to top it? how can they possibly make the Riddler, for example, interesting after this Joker? the other villains look pale in comparison: the Penguin, Catwoman... it won't be easy.
 
 
Eskay Uno
17:03 / 18.07.08
This is great cinema, pure and simple. Great script, riveting direction, effective sound design (I liked what they did w/Batman's voice), wonderful acting - few films of any genre rarely bring it all together this well.

The cinematography is especially spectacular. If there is one near you, do try and see this in Imax. The use of CGI is impressive; very minimal and often appears where you wouldn't expect. Many blockbusters CG their environments for example, but not here - Gotham was not a green-screen city, it felt real in a way that Spidey's New York or Metropolis in Superman Returns (and even Gotham in Batman Begins) didn't. Seeing it in Imax really immerses you in this environment and it's quite the experience.

Though Ledger's performance is uniquely enthralling, the entire cast is exceptional. The story gets very personal, but the actors make it feel epic. The philosophy behind myth and symbol established in Begins is taken to the next level, and Bale + Ledger really bring power to their costumed performances. Men and myths dance around a decaying city, with the bad guys revelling in the filth and the good guys trying to grow something noble out of it. Batman and Joker by Bale and Ledger are forces, they never once feel like indulgent fetish dudes playing dress-up.

Though it flies by even at 2.5 hours long, apparently there was an initial 3-hour cut that had to be trimmed. I hope the eventual dvd release provides the added footage because there were certain spots towards the end that seemed rushed (certain character choices maybe skipped a few steps, but I won't spoil the details).

Highly entertaining, and sure to raise the bar for future superhero films to come.
 
 
--
17:20 / 18.07.08
H3ct0r, I thought the same thing about how they'd follow up Heath's Joker. How could they top that? Maybe they could use Grant's whole Black Glove storyline.
 
 
FinderWolf
17:21 / 18.07.08
Loved the "French Connection" callback shots (speeding to the scene of crime under an elevated subway) and Heath/Joker with his head out the window of a police car, like a mad dog with its head out the window going nuts, tongue wagging, feeling the wind in his face and whirling his head around...
 
 
FinderWolf
17:22 / 18.07.08
I would trust Nolan and his writers to hopefully come up with something worthy of a third movie, if Nolan chooses to do one (which seems likely, but who knows). Also, ho knows what they have cooked up at this point in terms of plot for a 3rd film, if anything specific...
 
 
Aha! I am Klarion
18:19 / 18.07.08
It is better than Empire Strikes Back, in my opinion.

It is the only action film that has ever truly ever to confront me with moral issues that made me question my own morality and maturity. It is a brilliant, brilliant film. One of the top ten movies of all time behind Citizen Kane and the Godfather.

The last 30 minutes or so are absolutely riveting cinema.
 
 
Mark Parsons
20:39 / 18.07.08
H3ct0r, I thought the same thing about how they'd follow up Heath's Joker. How could they top that? Maybe they could use Grant's whole Black Glove storyline.

Ledger was signed for a third movie, so whatever follow-up/conclusion Nolan does tell, it'll apparently be missing a massive supporting pillar.
 
 
mercurialblonde
02:52 / 19.07.08
I saw this today. It was incredible Ledger's joker becomes an insane force of anarcy on the bleek gotham landscape(and it's never been bleeker--is there a more hopeless city>) It was incredible. All of the performances checked in. With Ledger giving a performance that should win him an oscar.

Nolan, I don't even like Nolan, but this is his best movie. This was the smartest non-comic capes story I've ever seen, and just as a movie, I think we're talking about something that is on the level of a movie like Chinatown. Like that league of movie. Incredible film.

Best experience I've had at a summer movie in maybe ever.

And has a summer movie ever had a darker ending? I think this trumps Empire in terms of bleakness.

After the Joker, the things that we have to hold onto as rays of hope in the city, just seem silly.

Combine this movie with what Grant and Miller are doing in their Bat books--and we're in a fantastic time to be a Bat-fan.
 
 
deja_vroom
04:09 / 19.07.08
my only concern in regards to a third movie is how are they going to top it?

As for me I couldn't care less. I'm so happy that they got so faithful to the material after all these years, I'll just grab two of these babies when they come out on dvd - one to watch, one to keep - and run for the hills. Whatever happens, there now exists one perfect Batman story on film (which finally achieves that feeling of recognition that was so effortlessly present in the animated series, or in Batman's brief but cool appearance in " Justice League: The New Frontier").
 
 
Keith, like a scientist
05:38 / 19.07.08
I was so glad to see that the hype surrounding Ledger's performance was completely warranted. I'm watching the film and I keep thinking "I know this is Heath Ledger, I've seen him in movies, I know what he looks and sounds like, but... where is he?" The Joker is fully alive in the movie, it's really quite an amazing feat. The mannerisms, the voice, the laugh, it's just a spectacular piece of total acting immersion.

As for the film outside of the can't-help-talking-about-Ledger-Joker, Nolan really hit it out of the ballpark. An exciting plot, a complicated and intelligent discussion of corruption and criminality. It has more to do with Serpico than anything, really. Certainly elevating the entire genre/idea of comic book movies. The quite obvious nods to Heat gave me a happy, too.

However, I do have to say, the ferry sequence, which, after the totality of the movie before it, felt a bit unnecessary and excessively laborious. I could see them cutting 15 minutes out of it and making the film a much leaner, more focused experience. Also, I really dislike the fakey Batman gravel voice. A bit over-the-top for me.
 
 
FinderWolf
14:07 / 19.07.08
The way Bruce saves that one regular civilian guy at the end (scene with Bruce in regular clothes in his sports car) really delighted me. And just the look that they exchange after he saved that guy's life, spoke volumes.

I guess we'll wait a day or two to talk about major spoilers? What do you all think...?
 
 
Dead Megatron
15:23 / 19.07.08
Time to get awed:

Oh! My! God! All those extremely hyperbolic reviews about Ledger's take on the Joker were not exaggerating in the least. It will make you forget Anthony Hopkins' Hannibal Lecter. The Hamill-voiced Timm-universe Joker had its scary moments (most notably in Batman: The Mask of the Phantom and The Return of the Joker) but man!,even sitting down doing nothing this Joker was scarier than that Joker at his best. His first scene, in the gangster meeting, was so intense that I only realized I was holding my breath when I sighed with relief when he finally left, And I was not the only one,for I could hear several people in the theater sighing too. Tho it was not restrained by "realism" (he was a self-professed "agent of chaos" that out-schemes the "schemers" only by "just doing things" by impulse, even tho such thing are so complex in their execution, requiring lots of tech knowledge and resources, which makes him seem "super-human" somehow, not to mention the apparent lack of reason or motivation for him to be what he is), the character still felt real, thanks 100% to Ledger work. I like the way he was portrayed as a profoundly disturbed individual who seeks to prove everyone is just like him deep down (he describes himself as "not crazy", "just ahead of the curve") by pushing them to commit horrible acts out of fear. And his self-destructive wishes are so deep that he actually seeks to commit "suicide by Batman" just to try and push his enemy into violating his moral code, it's just genius. If I wasn't keeping this spoiler-free and uncritical praise-free, I could go on for two pages saying things like, "OMFG, did you see when he did that thing with the...", "Or when he burned that...", and on and on. But still, I have to quote that one line:

"How about a magic trick? I'll make this pencil disapear"

I agree with other poster when they say there's going to be difficult to make a sequel for this movie. How can you possibly improve on that? Where else can the story of such characters go? What villain can top the Joker? On the other hand, my fanboy sides is already craving for more of Nolan's Batman, imagining which badguys will he pick and what will he make them do.

Oh, and I really appreciated the fact not just finally addressed, but also fixed, the fact that the costume kept the Batman from turning his neck, which was something I though was stupid and annoying in every bat-movie so far.
 
 
Paralis
20:23 / 19.07.08
I think I'm with FinderWolf on this not being as enjoyable a film as Spiderman 2--only I don't think I liked that as much as ze did either. Seemed to suffer from a lot of the same annoyances as the first film--too long, crushing seriousness, the BATVOICE, and a general "oh but that's EXACTLY WHAT I WANTED YOU TO DO!" gotcha-style narrative that maybe qualifies as Christopher Nolan's trademark.

Bale and Ledger both were very good, and the duality effective understated despite that bit of exposition in the MCU lockup. Favorite moments being Bats and Joker each at their most costumed, when Bruce wrecks his car and that briefest of shots of the Joker, sans makeup and in uniform.

Beautifully shot, yummy score, and better overall source material made this a far better film than Batman Begins (which I thought a massive slog and never watched again), but there's something a little disorienting about the urge by certain parties to say that this somehow transcends comic book film, that it is somehow a SERIOUS CRIME FILM, when so much of it is so tremendously silly. It may be the best film of the summer, but intuition tells me there's one of those every year, and that seems like it should be enough.
 
 
Mark Parsons
06:52 / 20.07.08
I loved it and heartily applaud it, but I had serious dissapointment with Harvey's final leg of his journey. It felt tacked on what with the rather godlike force of joker blowing though Gotham. (and isn't the idea of Two face that he is half good and half evil, a man constantly at war with himself rather than "just" a baddie who will kill you or not based on a coin toss?)

In the end, it felt as if the movie coasted to an exhausted stop instead of "ending."

I almost wish Nolan would not make a third movie/get out while the going is good, as I can't see any way of wrapping things up thematically or morally without Joker and I cannot imagine the part without Ledger.
 
 
Seth
12:42 / 20.07.08
These reviews are getting in the way of pre-release speculation for the majority of people who live in a territory in which this film has not yet been released. I've just proposed a moderation action for locking it, please can you start a new thread if you want to discuss the film.
 
 
Aha! I am Klarion
15:30 / 20.07.08
Another thing I really enjoyed about the film was its conscious lack of awe inspiring moments. There was plenty of awe to be had, but never once did the film really seem to linger in on the deeds of the heroes with an emotional swelling of music...it was mostly refreshingly lacking in sentiment.

Also it is the first movie in a long time relatively free of over-wrought christian symbolism (yes, I know Batman sacrifices himself in a way, but he doesn't really get crucified or anything...like Spider-man in "Spider-man 2").

The film also does amazing things by introducing a new (or at least fresh) visual language of movement in vertical spaces.

---

On a side note, did anyone see the (un)conscious homages/stealing from both "No Country for Old Men" and "There Will Be Blood" (i.e. The motif of dogs and the use of the siren-like orchestra to connote madness).

Ironically, I actually think "The Dark Knight" will be better regarded in the coming years than either of those brilliantly crafted, but morally retrogressive films.

This is not because it is a comic book movie transcending its genre (which is a crap assessment for so many reasons), but because it is transcendent piece of art: definitely a future AFI top 100 film.
 
 
H3ct0r L1m4
16:44 / 20.07.08
\\he was a self-professed "agent of chaos" that out-schemes the "schemers" only by "just doing things" by impulse, even tho such thing are so complex in their execution, requiring lots of tech knowledge and resources, which makes him seem "super-human" somehow, not to mention the apparent lack of reason or motivation for him to be what he is\\

it won't surprise me if in the next movie it's revealed that the Joker had a certain Edward Nigma as his shadowy co-schemer...
 
 
Aha! I am Klarion
17:43 / 20.07.08
Actually, you have to realize that the joker was indeed a schemer, but he is a schemer that doesn't care for his own safety in the least. He is a master manipulator. He has a death wish (think about when he fakes his own death) but it has to dealt by someone worthy. With his discussion with Harvey he is lying. His ultimate goal is Harvey's corruption.

The one grain of his truth that he expresses to Harvey is the idea that chaos "is always there [beneath the surface]."
 
 
PatrickMM
21:45 / 20.07.08
I reviewed the film here. Despite not thinking much of Batman Begins, I really liked the film. I think it's the best of this recent batch of comic book movies. Ledger is without the question the spark of the film, and is absolutely mesmerizing whenever he's on screen. All the praise for his performance is justified.

Though, I don't think it in anyway diminishes the Nicholson performance in Burton's Batman. This film was set in a realistic, crime thriller universe, and Ledger's performance worked for it, but I don't think it would have necessarily worked for the film that Burton made. Nicholson was so much fun to watch, even if he was just playing himself, and I think the two incarnations of The Joker can happily co-exist.

SPOILERS FROM HERE ON OUT!








What really bothered me, which I strangely haven't seen mentioned anywhere else, was the inexplicable Gordon's dead, oh wait he's not, development, which not only had no narrative point, it also made the emotional impact of Rachel's death basically nil because we'd already seen death treated as something that isn't permanent. I was thinking "Wait, so is she really dead," not feeling the emotion of the moment, and that was due both to it being a surprising twist, but also because of what happened with Gordon earlier.

And, I'd agree that the whole ferry sequence dragged things down. I think it worked thematically, but without any main characters involved, it didn't have that much emotional impact. Much like the hostage situation at the end with Gordon's family, the people in peril are ciphers, there to manipulate our emotions, not real characters. And, with that Gordon thing at the end, why not have his daughter be the character in peril, and at least give us that little nod to what Barbara Gordon might become.

And, that Batman voice is still absurd. I'm thinking it might be along the lines of All Star Goddamn Batman, where he's putting on this absurd Clint Eastwood imitation, but no one in the film makes reference. One person making a joke about the voice would have made it work for me, but because no one in the film references the absurdity, it's up to me too.

But, they could have just shown a blank screen for any of the scenes without The Joker, and the film still would have been great.
 
 
Aha! I am Klarion
00:07 / 21.07.08
Yeah, but anyone who saw the preview knew Gordon wasn't killed off. Of course, it is easy to a capitalize on an assassination attempt by faking your own death, not so much with an explosion in TNT and dynamite land.



"Of course, it is easy to a capitalize on assassination an attempt by faking your own death..." Typing that made me worried that I lived on a beet farm for a second.
 
 
PatrickMM
00:30 / 21.07.08
I'd seen the trailer, but not so much that I could recall specific footage and know he would survive. Plus, I don't think that's the best kind of writing, assuming people will already know what happens from the trailer. In the world of this film, I believed they would kill off Gordon like that. And, I'm still unclear what was gained by faking his own death, was it that the mob was going to target him next? Either way, the scene where they tell his wife he's dead is pure audience exploitation.

And, yeah, it makes more sense for him to fake a death from gunshot, but if you're opening that door, couldn't Rachel just as easily have been in a different warehouse than the one that blew up and they were just faking that phonecall for the sake of the Joker because the cop who was supposed to deliver her to the warehouse wasn't really dirty. Makes about as much sense as the Gordon development did.
 
 
Aha! I am Klarion
00:44 / 21.07.08
Does anyone think that they will release a directors cut on DVD. I know that the original cut was longer and that it might fill-in some of the minor gaps of the film.
 
 
FinderWolf
01:12 / 21.07.08
And I'd just like to say - Eric Roberts, who I usually view as a second-rate, cheesy actor, was actually quite ok in this.
 
 
PatrickMM
01:29 / 21.07.08
Eric Roberts was great in this, and though he's been slumming it lately, he did give one of my all time favorite film performances as an overbearing stage husband in Bob Fosse's Star 80. It's one of the darkest films I've ever seen come out of a Hollywood studio, and he's brilliant.
 
 
Hallo, Paper Spaceboy
01:58 / 21.07.08
Does anyone think that they will release a directors cut on DVD.

We live in the Era of Director's Cuts so, yes, we can expect a Director's Cut fairly quickly. The real question is, will Nolan go Ridley Scott's route ("No, really, this is the absolutely final, perfected Blade Runner cut! Honest!") or something more restrained? Only reviews and sales will tell.
 
 
Paralis
04:29 / 21.07.08
I watched it again tonight to get certain details (chronology, mostly) straight in my mind before I could offer any specific opinions. And while there were so many specific parts I loved more for their obvious attention to detail, so much of the plot as a whole suffered with a chance to piece it all together.

Admitted disclaimer: I've never read a Batman comic, but Gordon's fake death didn't work for me at all because it felt like a sharp departure from canon--particularly its happening without his being appointed commissioner. The only thing I can compare it to is that scene in the beginning of the 1989 Batman, when Bats gets shot, goes down, and the criminals think he's dead (I, a gullible 8 year old watching it on VHS, was very confused). It's so inconceivable that I assumed it was dramatic irony. What took the weight out of Rachel's death was the 24-hour flip from her commitment to Bruce if he gave up Bats to her briefest engagement to Harvey when he didn't.

I think the whole middle act, from the assassinations to Rachel's death felt arbitrarily messy and weightless, from the bizarre outdoor, downtown staging of the state service for the dead Commissioner to the decision to leave the Joker, unbound, in a room with breakable windows and a potential hostage. The police clear the streets to ensure a safe route for Dent's transit to County, and when one side of the street is obstructed, to forgo planning and air support and take the lower road all the while acknowledging the extraordinary risk (like Turkeys on Thanksgiving, indeed), while an aerial shot of their descent shows the other side of the road unblocked and unoccupied (because, again, the police had cleared the street for safe transit). There's so much that happens because of the tropes established in the film itself, both the endemic corruption of Gotham's power structures as well as the Joker's specific corrosive influence that it feels like the writers shouldn't have to rely on having characters make transparently poor choices.

And I don't get it. The film's thematically beautiful, and the attention to detail in the performances (Ledger's, of course*, especially, but also in every cameo except perhaps Tiny Lister's) is simply stunning (I think we could all make lists). But the plotting is just inane, and I don't understand why (except of course that it had to be, to move the plot). It really is a tremendous spectacle, though.
 
 
Sean the frumious Bandersnatch
06:38 / 21.07.08
I like how you can take Batman out of the film and not make much of a difference to the plot. If anything, it's a stronger movie as Harvey Dent vs. the Joker than the "look at how cool Batman's cell phone eyes and motorcycle that pops out of his car thing is" distraction.
 
 
Paralis
07:43 / 21.07.08
And, I'm still unclear what was gained by faking his own death, was it that the mob was going to target him next? Either way, the scene where they tell his wife he's dead is pure audience exploitation.

This bothered me too, and it only just clicked now. The entire second act doesn't make sense linearly, but only in Nolan time. The scene where the police regret to inform Gordon's wife about his death is necessary so she can blame Batman. This is necessary so he can have the crisis of conscience that makes him want to turn himself into the police. Which is necessary for Dent to take the fall, which is necessary for the chase (which is necessitated when the police knowingly forsake the safe route for the shooting gallery), which is necessary for the really quite inexplicable bit where Batman falls off of his motorcycle* so Gordon can reveal that he is alive and THIS WAS HIS PLAN ALL ALONG.

At exactly what moment surrounding the attempted assassination of Gotham's mayor Gordon hatched this eerily prescient scheme being an open question. Also kudos to the man so bent on faking his own death that he declines medical attention after taking what we can only assume was a live round in the back, protective vest or no.

* - I get the chicken and the screaming and the homage to the scene where Nicholson shoots the Batwing out of the sky and why Bats isn't going to run over the Joker because that would break his One Rule. But after shooting through parked cars, dumpsters, a train station and doing that elaborate 3D u-turn does he wipe out on relatively open asphalt? Because if he didn't, Gordon wouldn't be the one to catch the Joker (is the only thing I can come up with).
 
 
FinderWolf
13:32 / 21.07.08
I guess it was 'let's fake Gordon's death' because the Joker & co. were going to target him next, and he feared for his family's safety.

As for Batman's motorcycle wipeout, this was a bit odd - he just does a sharp turn, falls off, is unconscious (and after all the insane stunts you pointed out). Once Gordon saves the day, we don't see Batman getting up from the crash going "uhhhrrr' or anything. Ah well, those motorcycles are dangerous things...
 
 
FinderWolf
13:33 / 21.07.08
Although I loved the mumbled death wish "IwantyoutodoitIwantyoutodoit" Heath had going there.
 
 
HCE
17:44 / 21.07.08
NOT-EXACTLY-SPOILERS BELOW

Having seen this, I have to ask -- is this possibly the best movie ever? I recently re-watched Olmi's "Tree of Wooden Clogs" and just thought, what a pile of shit. The pacing is horrible in this thing, it's been twenty minutes and fuck-all has happened, you have no idea who the main characters are, and it frankly doesn't hold much hope of getting better. Then I watched Tarkovsky's "Solaris" and leaving aside for a moment the utterly shitty quality of the special effects (he obviously didn't have access to contemporary high-quality materials and processes) -- the acting is absolutely awful. There's no depth at all to any of the portrayals and it's next to impossible to give a shit about anybody.

Contrast these to Nolan's film and you see that what makes it so incredible is that hits not just one mark, but all of them: the pacing is neither frantic and MTV-style nor sludgelike, but plays you just perfectly to keep you on the edge of your seat, while the exposition is also a masterwork of balance -- you know enough to care, but not so much that you're bored. It's hardly necessary to say a word about the look and style, but if you did, that word would be "exquisite" and the acting manages a kind of hyperplausibility that yields, oddly enough, a sort of Verfremdungseffekt -- you see yourself seeing the film and all comes together in this incredibly profound way.
 
 
tickspeak
20:03 / 21.07.08
I'd written a long, angry post listing in detail all the reasons I hated TDK, but I abandoned it because most of them boil down to my personal moral stand against shoving Batman into a "Realistic" milieu. Also, I had to sit in the front row, so I had a headache the whole time, which may have colored my response.

But brb's post above gave me hope--acid sarcasm seems a good response to some of the less-hinged ecstatic reviews I've come across. So I'd like to concur. Nolan's "style" is anything but "exquisite". What's exquisite about the hideous Batman costume (apparently pulling a gray-and-black shirt over the exposed armor so that Batman looked, y'know, cool, would have ruined the "Realism") or the lazy "fuck it, no one will know that it's just Chicago" production design? Or the action sequences that managed to be both choreographically pedestrian and visually confusing?

While we're at it, what is "exquisite" about a 2+ hour movie that has a grand total of 2 memorable images in it (to my mind, Ledger as the nurse and that one where Batman is perched on the edge of the skyscraper at dusk)? I mean, this is fucking BATMAN--heir to a world of bizarre, disturbing, and beautiful images and symbols. I guess Joker Gas, a potential source of extremely disturbing and memorable pictures, just wasn't as Realistic as grenades and more grenades.

And did anyone else find its politics a little icky? Yes, sure, Batman is always kinda fascist...but TDK was particularly unexamined in its classifications of "criminals" and "terrorists" and depictions of same...

Man, fuck this movie. IRON MAN was boring, too. I don't know why I continue to let myself get invested in these things. I better start the WATCHMEN hate now, before I get sucked into that one, too...
 
 
Aha! I am Klarion
22:41 / 21.07.08
"abandoned it because most of them boil down to my personal moral stand against shoving Batman into a "Realistic" milieu."

No offense, but I take issue with you argument. You are confusing the moral issues of the film with your own aesthetic preferences--which actually strikes me as somewhat (no offense) amoral whining about the films lack of fun or hipness--I get the sense that you are wrongly dismissing "film's" ability to be art and saying entertainment has to be somewhat cartoonish, harmless, ironic, and safe.

However, I think the aesthetic was fresh with a capital "F." I also feel that the aesthetic reflected well-on the thematic elements of the film.

Also, only the most superficial analysis would simply conclude that the politics were icky. Here is my take on the moral and political arguments I think the film connotes:

-The Joker is correct in his assessment that "chaos is there [underneath the surface of everything]." However, the reality of this chaos lurking beneath the surface is not a reason to harm people via its exposure. Even if it is a few thin stripes, the veneer of civilization does greatly separate us from completely or more barbarous forms of civilization. The Joker is that really sucky amoral emo kid who wants to make his bad felt by everybody else (ever notice how his theme music sounds like something Trent Reznor would compose?) either through violence or through misplaced deconstruction.

-I read a review that sugested that the film was a George Bush apologia (it called Bush "the Dark Knight President"). This doesn't work when you think about it. The central flaw in this argument is that more than having the gusto to make tough but moral decisions (ha!), the central feature of the bush admin. has been the manipulation of image and the media. From the aircraft carrier flight deck, to the oft repeated phrase that "history will prove us right", the admin. is almost totally concerned about appearances. Batman doesn't care about appearances (he is the "dark knight"), he doesn't want followers or converts--he is using his skills to fight corruption and evil.

-The Batman of the film isn't a fascist (even by the estimation of the term ur-fascism), but an active agent for social change. He wants the town to get better. He wants, both in his action as Wayne and as Batman, to produce a situation where the "good" people of Gotham can have freedom and self-actualization. This isn't Miller's anal Batman of "the Mission!" but a progressive Batman...he even helps the homeless (Batman Begins).

But really, when is a Fascist the one being chased by dogs? And would a fascist not kill someone?

-Batman has a higher level of cognitive and moral intelligence. Yet he is emotionally still a little boy...More on this and my take on the Gordan trick later.
 
 
Aha! I am Klarion
22:49 / 21.07.08
I want to rephrase the "amoral whining" with something a little less harsh or critical. I don't want that to be taken as insult.

"amoral concern" would be better.

"I know [whiners] and that's [not] one of them"
 
 
TeN
03:26 / 22.07.08
here's my take:
http://www.brrrptzzapthesubject.com/?p=433

I loved it.

as far as the "fascist" argument, I compared the film to Peckinpah's Straw Dogs, another incredibly dark, violent film that got labeled "fascist" by a lot of people when it came out
I think in both cases the label is unfair
Peckinpah got criticized for "praising violence" but his claim was that the film was merely an "exploration of violence" [note that the word "vigilantism" can be substituted for "violence" here and it still works, as well as being applicable to TDK]
I'd defend Nolan by saying the same thing
Batman's vigilantism isn't wholeheartedly praised
it's a lot more complicated than that
there's a lot of doubt and a lot of criticism of Batman embedded in the film, and Nolan and Bale have said as much themselves when discussing in interviews how they viewed the character:

"As we looked through the comics, there was this fascinating idea that Batman's presence in Gotham actually attracts criminals to Gotham, [it] attracts lunacy. When you're dealing with questionable notions like people taking the law into their own hands, you have to really ask, where does that lead? That's what makes the character so dark, because he expresses a vengeful desire." - Nolan

"[his crusade is] something that has an end. Can he quit and have an ordinary life? The kind of manic intensity someone has to have to maintain the passion and the anger that they felt as a child, takes an effort after awhile, to keep doing that. At some point, you have to exorcise your demons. [...] Now you have not just a young man in pain attempting to find some kind of an answer, you have somebody who actually has power, who is burdened by that power, and is having to recognize the difference between attaining that power and holding on to it." - Bale

that second one taps a bit into Adam's comment about him being emotionally still a child

btw, PatrickMM, I completely agree with all of your criticisms, and also with your assertion that "they could have just shown a blank screen for any of the scenes without The Joker, and the film still would have been great"
I remember saying something very similar to my friends in praising the film
Ledger stole the show, no doubt
 
  

Page: 123(4)5678

 
  
Add Your Reply