At The Movies

Vigilantism As Art Form - The Dark Knight

I've been meaning to write this review for weeks. I've seen the thing twice! Is it that good? Yes... But not without its obvious and not so obvious faults. He's not exactly Iron Man, and he's not exactly the Punisher, but the re-imagined Batman has many of these elements going in to this new brooding incarnation.

I keep saying I'm not sure about these comic book adaptations, but the more they make them, the more they seem like they are going to be the staple of adventure movies in the decade to come. One thing is for sure, these movies have matured and come of age within the context of cinema since the Superman movies in the late 1970s.

What's Good About It

I wonder about the merits of an epic action movie based on a comic book, but this one makes good on its promise. In fact I've never particularly liked either Superman or Batman so I'm actually suspicious about any offering from the DC stable as opposed to the Marvel stable. Having said that, this new series of Batman movies starring Christian Bale are making amends for the quixotic, idiotic, bizzaro and inept entries that collectively starred Michael Keaton, Val Kilmer, and George Clooney.

The lighting and cinematography in this film is singularly sepctacular. It's one of the best pieces of lighting you will likely see this year. The sound is also astoundingly good. The film bristles with a filmmaker's kind of enthusiasm for the medium itself, and that is rare. The Spiderman series is the only one that comes close to combining the comic book tropes nicely into the cinema form.

The performances are interesting and in the case of Heath Ledger, totally riveting to watch. Gary Oldman as Jim Gordon is a fascinating study in understatedness, considering his earlier incarnations as bad cops galore; this is the guywho played Lee Harvey Oswald in 'JFK' after all. It's just not the kind of comic book movie that was around even 10 years ago. The constant drive towards a method-acting realism by the performers keeps the film consistently engaging. Gone are the extrvagances of a Jack Nicholson Joker or Jim Carey Riddler. In its place is a psychotic monster with guns. It's a long, long, long way away from when they used to throw up graphics of 'Kapow!' on the screen with every staged punch for the Adam West TV series - and it's a better viewing experience for it.

The lesson is, when you do any movie, be committed and true to the universe in which it is set.

What's Bad About It

Through out the movie, there is a sense in which the citizens of Gotham want to stand up and be counted. The ordinary people who are peripheral to the plot want to do good deeds. Perhaps they are inspired by the Harvey Dent character, or in the case of Brian, the guy in the hockey pads, he's inspired by Batman himself. Batman cares little for it. When he is aksed what the difference is, Batman's response is "I don't wear hockey pads."

It's funny the first time but there's a sting. Batman actually doesn't have a moral or ethical standing above Brian the wannabe. He simply has better means to put his vision into action. He can do it - and Brian can't - because he is rich and powerful in the city. Brian, the ordinary guy can take a back seat and keep out of the way. Frankly I think that's... uhh, for the wont of a better word, fascist.

So when in one of the shocking developments the psychopathic Joker kills Brian in his Batman get up and hangs him outside the mayor's window, it's a real drag. It's the moment you realise that the Batman text has nothing to do with the better instincts of people at all. It's kind of a dark fascist fantasy about survival of the fittest, dressed up as a battle between good and evil. It acknowledges that it is a battle between one kind of psychosis against another - and I'm not sure I like that patina at all. Indeed, the second time I saw it, the moment that made me almost cry (I kid you not) was when they show the video the Joker takes of Brian moments before his death.

The ordinary dude dies in the face of not only psychosis but Batman's disregard. It's a terrible, terrible moment that just flies by in the film. But I kept thinking where is Batman's personal responsibility to that citizen whom was inspired by his deeds? We're the ordinary people. Are we to be the victims of the powerful all the time? In a real world absent of Batman, are the filmmakers saying we're a bunch of putzes? Is one ordinary person, not up to the task of changing his world? Not sure I like the ramification of that at all.

Other Thoughts

I refrained from mentioning it here at the time he died partly because I'm not really into sensational deaths as such. Besides which plenty of people were blogging the event and what would be the point in duplicating those efforts here?

If you're going to check out of life, even accidentally as the case may be it would be nice to hit as high a note as Heath Ledger did with his Joker before turning out the lights. I know there is talk of a posthumous Oscar and all that. Trust me, it's much more deserving of finer accolades than a measly Oscar.

A few days before the film opened in Sydney a TV station played 'Casanova' starring Ledger, and it was stunning just how good Ledger was in that film. Then there was that wonderful debut in Hollywood with '10 Things I Hate About You' as well as his turn as one of the Grimm Brothers in Terry Gilliam's 'The Brothers Grimm'. Were reminded by this film that Heath Ledger actually was a colossal talent and his passing is an immense loss to the world of cinema.