Reviews of the Past: The Philosophy of The Dark Knight
From August 4, 2008:
Phew! This is, like, the third time I've been to the movie theater in as many months, but I'm behind the times a bit. I am not one of the die-hards that even had time to stand in line for an early showing of The Dark Knight at my local cineplex or IMAX, but it was next on the must-see list, so I went as soon as I could find spare moments. I don't know if I'll be so lucky with another film I've wanted to see, but might not get the chance before it bombs out, The X-Files: I Want to Believe. This review is not about Mulder and Scully's latest adventure, however, but about the latest sequelized incarnation of Batman.
I loved Batman more when I was younger. He's sort of the anti-hero, isn't he? This theme gets explored to various depths in The Dark Knight, but, more to the point, he's a very rich guy with very cool toys and very big traumas. That's why I have trouble calling him a "superhero." He's not really a fantastical, powerful sort of person who hails from another planet, mutations, or random spider bites. Of all the guys in the comic book universe, with the exception of a couple other esteemed peers (like the Green Hornet), Batman is the real person's comic book hero. He could actually be real, so long as there's a guy with a lot of money and access to mind-blowing technology. Because this line of escapism has been dulled for me since childhood, with fantasy taking on shades of reality, I've lost some interest in Batman, but not as a general rule. I still love the franchise and the themes it explores, and I love Christopher Nolan as a director. He's taken the could-be-real quality of Batman to new levels, and with a rousing and bone-chillingly disturbing portrayal of The Joker by the late yet wonderful Heath Ledger, The Dark Knight has reached heights to which no comic book movie, with the possible exception of the very first Superman movie, has soared.
The Dark Knight focuses intently on the consequences of vigilante-ism, and the idea that an action produces an equal and opposite reaction. Christian Bale reprises his role as Bruce Wayne/Batman. This time, the caped crusader has successfully aided Lt. Gordon (Gary Oldman) and District Attorney Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhart) in cracking down on mob rule in Gotham City. Except, Batman has inspired many to take up the mantle of being a costume vigilante and other, more disturbing, consequences. A new player, hellbent on chaos and, as if in answer to the costumed crimefighter's own extreme measures, enters the scene. Little is known about The Joker (Ledger), other than he has a penchant for fire, violence, and those signature cards from a playing deck. He aligns himself with the angry mob bosses, so long as it suits him, and swears vengeance against Batman and the rest of Gotham City through several increasingly sickening schemes (to the extent that they're pre-planned, upon which he waxes philosophical later in the movie). He targets Gotham's finest, including Mr. Dent and Lt. Gordon. Given the appearance of the greatest sycophant in the comic's history, Bruce struggles with the relevance and benefit of being Batman, discussing this topic with his longtime friend and butler Alfred (Michael Caine), business associate and technological genius Lucius Fox (Morgan Freeman), and clandestine love, Rachel Dawes (the graciously recast Maggie Gyllenhaal). The movie resolves this question in an interesting way, that is both satisfying and puzzling at the same time.
To say that the Dark Knight surpasses Batman Begins in terms of movie making brilliance is an understatement. It's to Heath Ledger's credit that this is even possible. For me, the Joker and Mr. Ledger stole every single scene. Unfortunately, I was plagued by random thoughts, such as "It's too bad that this is his last movie," and "What's going to happen if the Joker doesn't die...how could they ever bring him back?" Because Batman needs the Joker. Sure, there are other arch-villains tucked away in the annals of the comic's and franchise's history, but none of them are as intriguing and as yang to Batman's yin as the Joker. Most of the major comics have primary villains - the ones that truly matter to the lexicon of the comic's mythology. I mean, Superman has villains like Doomsday and Bizarro, but they're just icing on the cake. The substantial stuff underneath that icing belongs to Lex Luthor.
But I digress. The Joker, and Heath's portrayal of him, is what really amps up this movie. Mr. Nolan and Mr. Ledger took the most banal, elementary essences of that character and brought those to the fore while underplaying some of the more cartoonish aspects of previous incarnations of the Joker's (including Jack Nicholson's in Tim Burton's Batman). What resulted is a truly frightening, disturbing, and sociopathic villain - the worst nightmare of a terrorist, played to gruesome effect. Without this performance, The Dark Knight would have been just another sequel. With it, the sequel surpasses the original film in both entertainment quality and artistic sensibility.
Aaron Eckhart, however, I think will be probably be overshadowed and underrated as time passes. His earnest take on Harvey Dent breathed life into a character that was mishandled badly in previous movies. His struggles with good and evil are the heart of the picture and the fulcrum around which Bruce struggles with his own decisions to put on a cape and jump from rooftops. I really felt for Harvey and his passions, good and bad, throughout the movie. He's very Anakin Skywalker, in a way, if you think about it.
Maggie Gyllenhaal was the next best thing about this sequel. Replacing Katie Holmes, whether Katie volunteered or not, was a very good decision. The character arc got some closure (not saying how), and it was done in a graceful and believable way by Ms. Gyllenhaal. I never missed Katie once. And, normally, I detest recasts. But I also detest Katie Holmes. There, I said it.
The cinematography was great - great, subdued lighting gave the movie a surreal quality but kept it from getting too dark, even in daylight, when it could have done and has done in the past. I had problems, though, with the editing. I knew the film was shot in Chicago. And it looked like Chicago. I mean, I couldn't get past that. I even think I caught a glimpse of the Sears Tower, or at least key buildings visible from the Michigan Mile shopping district, so the editors have some splainin to do.
The other problems were in pacing and plot devices. This movie was long, to the point where I started to feel it, and it had several false endings. The payoff was worth it, but when a movie is as intense as The Dark Knight, the tension relief is best suited through some attempt at comedy (which there was precious little of and only reserved for the Fox and Alfred characters and, darkly, through The Joker), not through a complete drop in the action pacing. I don't want to get too detailed because I don't want to give away any spoilers, but the pacing was very choppy, and most so in the last third of the flick.
What it lacked in comedy and expert pacing, however, The Dark Knight made up in sheer philosophical and intellectual prowess and bravado. This comic book movie was not content merely to entertain with big toys and explosions but to pose some questions and get the viewer to think in the end - the thinking person's comic book? The concept is original, yes? To Mr. Nolan's credit, since he shared the screenwriting honors, this is the most appealing aspect of the movie for me and makes me want to buy it and watch it from the beginning, to watch the arguments and questions unfold again. Thus, The Dark Knight easily passes my test (and it's a sequel and, therefore, part of a set). I also rate it an 8 for having minor flaws but being very good. It was very very good and is doing much for making me a Batman fan(girl) once again.
What I think is interesting, especially after watching Chinatown earlier in the day, is how this film really presents the notion that the bad guys might just win after all, and that the lines between good and evil are more gray than black and white. I can't get too far into that topic without spoiling the film, so watch the movie for now, and later, I might write something heady and philosophical myself about The Dark Knight as it compares to other movies of the same ilk. Also, check out the Fantasy group for further discussion on this film.