The Dark Knight
Warning: Contains spoilers.
I can’t figure out why I like the Bale Batmans so much (foxy Bale himself aside). Both movies lean heavily on storytelling maneuvers that I tend to hate, and both movies arrived in a flurry of ancillary “news” and charged expectations that usually mean I’m going to park it on the Netflix queue until the dust settles. But I like the Bale Batmans a lot, and while I would give the edge to Batman Begins, I really dug The Dark Knight.
This is not to say that The Dark Knight is a great film. It isn’t bad, and the things it does well, it does extremely well — but it trips up its own pacing with repetitive lectures on the nature of fear, abstractions regarding black and white and grey, and what Gotham is alleged to need (often prior to/during what is intended as a climactic fight scene; see: Ebert’s Talking Killer). The tempo didn’t really work in the first place: the way each fight or chase sequence is choreographed is frantic, but not urgent, and then the sequences in relationship to one another don’t have a good rhythm, so the tension created is not emotional, not related to the story, but physical, from cringing at repeated Foley fusillades — all in what seems like an effort to compensate for the PG-13, which permits gory crunches only out of frame.
And Rachel Dawes is acted with more conviction in TDK (not that that’s saying much), but Maggie Gyllenhaal’s best efforts still don’t give the character much depth; Dawes is a foil, a collection of tied-to-the-train-tracks clichés who spends the bulk of her onscreen time looking pretty and righteous in order to motivate the heroes and/or mouthing platitudes about Choices and What Have You Become blah blah give the woman a sidearm and an inner life already. I don’t generally interpret reactive female characters who have nothing of their own to do as an affront to the sisterhood, but once Dawes is tied up to an explosive, I’d like to see something about that trope subverted.
On the other hand, when the movie does try to turn a comic-film cliché on its head, it doesn’t pull that off either, although it comes close, and the effort is interesting. The chronic over-explaining that characterizes both films thankfully did not extend to the Joker’s motivations; a tiresomely flashbacked trauma he suffered as a child wouldn’t have worked, and that the script didn’t go there is a point in its favor. The insistence on the Joker’s essential randomness, on the idea that sometimes evil just…is, feels real, but also feels out of place in this particular story. So much is made of the city needing a hero, a white knight, of Batman’s code; it’s simplistic on a metaphorical level, but it works for superhero stories. It’s why superhero stories work at all. The concept that good and evil fall along defined axes is important to the genre, so to choose a villain with no axis as the place where your execution emphasizes subtlety over formula is a fresh choice, but there’s a reason nobody else tried it, and it’s not satisfying here, either.
And yet, it flies, despite the problems with the construction. The acting is full-stop outstanding, from everyone, but especially from Gary Oldman, who is not a beauty like the others and is kitted out in third-period-chem drag. He brings an “oy vey” attitude to the role that, along with the un-prettied-up “he’s just a guy” costuming, gives the story depth. Everyone else is fantastic, too, and I almost didn’t notice the bombastic dialogue because of how well the cast kept it connected to real emotion. It’s very easy to overdo, and I don’t love Bale’s vocal choices when he’s in the suit, but his Bruce Wayne is miles better than previous iterations, serious but not campy broody-Boreanaz like Keaton.
As for Ledger, well, I loathed Nicholson’s Joker, so Ledger didn’t have to do much to impress me, but that’s just what happened: he didn’t do much, and that impressed me. Yes, Ledger’s Joker is hammy, but Ledger isn’t — twitchy, but businesslike and not too pleased with himself. He pulls a couple of faces that reminded me a lot of the comic-book snake’s-head Joker that used to freak me out as a kid. It’s not a quiet performance, but its menace is more genuine, and for two hours, I came as close as I could to forgetting that it won’t be repeated. From a human standpoint, it’s gratifying that he went out with that. I don’t know if we’d be hearing the Oscar talk had he lived, but it’s the same sort of work as Ennis Del Mar: just what the character asked, nothing more.
It’s far from perfect, The Dark Knight. I still don’t believe Rachel Dawes is dead, because we didn’t see a body. The whole police-department mole thing is confusing and in my opinion unnecessary.I didn’t see the point of the Cillian Murphy cameo; if you’re going to use that guy, use that guy. But it has a few wonderful moments that keep it in the air — Batman crouched above Gordon’s apartment when his wife is told he’s “dead”; the way Michael Caine renders disappointment; Fox turning off the monitoring system; the convict chucking the trigger out the ferry window (I didn’t like the handling of the denouement of that sequence — i.e., there is no denouement, the hell? — but I have to say I didn’t see that coming at all). It isn’t put together very well, the story, but it has such affection for its characters, and it believes uncynically in what it’s trying to be, and it is trying to be a sad, beautiful story. Whether it’s succeeding or failing at any given juncture, it’s entertaining; watching it try to be what it wants to be is two hours well spent.
Tags: Christian Bale Dark Knight Gary Oldman Heath Ledger Maggie Gyllenhaal Michael Caine Morgan Freeman movies untimely demises
That was a great review and can I just say an increasing rare balanced review? The internet polarizes reviews so much that almost everything is best thing ever — aka The Quinn :) — or worst thing ever.
Anyways I read the review twice. Once normally then again in Bale’s silly Batman voice of constipation.
I find it interesting that I agree with everything you say, yet I did not enjoy the movie particularly. Perhaps it’s because I never liked the darkness and mental masterbation that went along with the Dark Knight to begin with, or perhaps it’s just that all of the negatives you sighted bothered me more and the positives you sight impressed me less, but I did not enjoy it.
On the otherhand I also disliked virtually everything about Harvey Dent’s storyline — something which you really don’t bring up. From his completely inappropriate courtroom behavior in the beginning (He punches a witness and doesn’t spend the rest of the movie fired from his job and in jail waiting for the pending charges of assault, battary, and contempt of court?) to the crappy idealized make-up job they did on him when he became evil (seriously, if I was burned that badly I’d be dead, if not from the injuries themselves, then from the open wounds that were a magnate for infection. Previous Harvey itterations have always had him horribly scarred but not with soft-tissue holes. I found it very jarring). And they had Aaron Eckhart playing him, so I really wanted to love him.
Great review! I liked the movie a lot, but had some of the same problems with it that you did. I liked Eckhardt, too, and thought he played Arthur Dent well. Eckhardt always seems a little creepy and evil to me, and no DA is going to be perfectly sweet and lovey, even if he does have morals. I couldn’t really see why he loved Rachel so much that he’d turn into Two Faced upon losing her, though. That’s some chemistry I never bought.
A lot of people are all “this is the best movie I’ve seen in years,” which makes me sad for them. It’s better than Hellboy II, though.
Did you read Stephen Hunter’s review, in the post? He said he thought Maggie Gyllenhaal was too not-as-pretty-as-Katie-Holmes to play Rachel Dawes, and that she gave the character too much depth and intelligence, when he just wanted to look at someone hot. This is the same guy who wrote an essay a couple years ago about how he hates the end of summer because then women stop wearing sun dresses, and so he can’t leer at them with quite as much satisfaction anymore, so… I guess this is to be expected. I thought Maggie did as well as she could with a role that wasn’t well-written, that Katie Holmes is a pod person, and that Stephen Hunter is not retiring a minute too soon.
Man oh man, the con chucking the trigger out the window was my absolute favorite part. Probably related to the fact that I want to be a public defender when I grow up, but still.
It’s exactly right, what you say about Ledger. I found myself thinking halfway through the movie, “It CANNOT be right that part of what I’m wanting to praise about this performance is that it’s somehow ‘unaffected.’ That’s not…that can’t possibly be what I mean, given the weird talking and the makeup and all that.” What I meant is just what you said, which is that although the CHARACTER is showy, the ACTOR is not. Wonderful distinction.
Re: Nicholson. Have you read any of his interview comments lately, particularly the MTV interview? Egads. Great Moment in Douchebaggery award for that man, please.
My husband made me go see this with him. He LOVED it. I enh-ed it. Two things really bugged me:
(1) I get that Batman has to have a special Batvoice or everyone would know who’s under the Batmask…but honestly, he just sounded like he needed to BLOW HIS NOSE. Batman shouldn’t sound like boogers, I think.
And (2), the end drove me crazy – in fact it still bothers me. The Joker is just left hanging there on the side of the building. So like in the morning, will it be the building custodian’s problem to unhook his ass and get him down? Ugh! Drove me crazy.
Sars – no outrage over how the movie blatantly wasted the presence of William Fichnter?
I agree over the Cillian Murphy scene – why bother? The way that was stuck in there made it seem like a plotline was filmed and then later cut out. I did love seeing Anthony Michael Hall in there, though.
The whole plot with Lau, the Chinese businessman was also kind of confusing and probably unnecessary. And I agree with the first Kate – the Two Face effect was waaay overdone.
Everything else I completely loved.
I’d go so far as to say Bale is the only good Bruce Wayne – movie, wise. (Caveat: I never saw the live action television series or anything from the 1940s or 1960s Batmen, and don’t intend to.) He’s also the best Batman. This alone is enough to make the movies miles better than any previous.
I can see where people are bothered by the voice thing, but it doesn’t bother me. It makes sense – for both the scary and identity reasons.
For me, on a scale of “meh” to “obnoxious”, his gritty batman voice rates about 10,000 rungs below Clooney’s “Hi, I’m George Clooney – but for the next two hours call me Batman” voice coming out of the suit. (Same reason he made a not-great Bruce Wayne – from what I can tell, George Clooney pretty much always plays… George Clooney.)
I watched the Keaton Batman about 1000000000 times as a child, and I did grow up loving Nicholson’s joker, so I wasn’t sure how I would react to this movie. I’ve totally revised my opinion; this is what the joker should be. I’ll probably always nostalgically enjoy the camp 1989 version, but I’m so glad this blew it away.
Batman is my favorite superhero, by far, so I guess I’m biased in how much I love these movies. (Sorry to make you sad, F. McGee) Think, like, Trekkies/Lord of the Rings/Star Wars geeks: That’s me, only for Batman, so I’m just insanely happy the franchise is revived and awesome, rather than an embarrassing disaster (crystal skulls, what?).
(Amy – the police/swat team are in the building. Batman rushes off to find Dent/Gordon and the SWAT team is staring all confused/afraid at the upside down Joker.)
He punches a witness and doesn’t spend the rest of the movie fired from his job and in jail waiting for the pending charges of assault, battary, and contempt of court?)
This. The guy’s punching witnesses and he’s supposed to have been the generally-acknowledged better-than-Batman good guy? Nobody in Gotham cares about the process at all? I admit I’m more sensitive to this than a lot of other people (for instance, to go on a complete tangent, I always wanted to write a piece of fan fiction where a bunch of British wizards are holding Free Sirius Black protests because you do not hand down a life sentence without a trial), but there should be more people objecting to this shit.
Bale’s Batvoice has always gotten to me a little, too. It sounds like it hurts. That kind of thing is bad for your vocal folds. Maybe this is why Batman doesn’t do a lot of talking?
But I love these movies. Love them. I’m pretty easy to please when it comes to comic book movies, I guess–all I require is they not be silly and cartoonish, and then I’m in heaven.
As far as the Joker being left hanging, I think the assumption we’re meant to make is that he was taken down and hauled off to Arkham, especially since the cops were already on the scene ‘n all before Bats even when into the building.
amy – my bf had the exact same problem with the ending and I have to agree. I felt like they spent a lot of time setting up a sequel and not enough time telling the story they were trying to tell.
Also, on the Maggie Gyllenhaal tip: I really like her as an actress and have seen her do some work that I really enjoyed. I think she did the best she could with Rachel Dawes, but I am still stumped about why both those guys loved her so much. She’s written as a judge-y, uptight, finger-wagging scold and I’ll be damned if I can see the appeal of that.
My favorite all-time Joker has to be from the animated series, the one voiced by Mark Hamill. Obviously they couldn’t go super-dark with him in a kid’s show, but he definitely had that “I’m just going to fuck with people cos it’s fun” thing going on. (It bears mentioning that the guy they had voicing Batman in that series had a Bruce Wayne voice and a deeper, tougher Batman voice, but the latter didn’t sound like a bad Dirty Harry impression.)
Haven’t seen this movie yet, precisely because of the Big Speeches About Morals And Fear that bogged down the first movie (“Why do we fall? So we can provide material for endless moralizing flashbacks!”). I really disliked Batman Begins, but then I thought the Burton Batman movies were fantastic (Nicholson aside). It helps that Burton never felt much need for his characters to speechify, and that his Batman was clearly the craziest motherfucker in Gotham.
There’s something about this gritty-realism approach that just doesn’t work for me, Batman-wise. I mean, here’s a guy who dresses up like a bat to fight clowns, furries, and mutants, and we’re trying to make him low-key and believable now? I hate to say it, but — why so serious?
I agree with almost all of your observations, but I was bored stiff at this movie. I thought the dialog was laughably bad and could not have cared less what happened to Batman. I didn’t care what happened to any of them actually…. except Gary Oldman. I have a deep and true love for that man.
And why did it have to be so darn long? I felt like it took so long for so little to happen.
He punches a witness and doesn’t spend the rest of the movie fired from his job and in jail waiting for the pending charges of assault, battary, and contempt of court?)
The witness pulled a gun on him while on the stand, punching him was self-defense.
This was the first Batman (or Spiderman or… well, I saw Hancock, does that count as a superhero movie?) movie I’ve seen, and I enjoyed it about as well as I expected.
I expected, for the entire duration of the movie, to see Rachel make another appearance. And I still, still, do not understand why he went after Harvey instead of Rachel. (For the sake of the storyline, of course; but I can’t get it to make sense in my head, no matter how brilliant and noble and honorable a DA Dent was.)
I did, however, see the detonator-toss coming as soon as the convict stood up. Before then, actually – something about the way he moved his eyes just before he stood up. His speech confused me a little bit, and I started to doubt my own instinct, but as soon as he said “Let me do what you shoulda done did already” I cheered a little inside and knew I’d been right.
Honestly, out of all of it, the part the rubbed me wrongest? Alfred opening and reading Rachel’s note to Bruce. The guy behind me was coughing when she handed it to him, so I missed exactly what she said; I know she said it wasn’t sealed, but even so, a butler of Alfred’s… caliber?… would not have opened and read the note. They kick you out of the butler club for that. Maybe she told him too while the coughing fit was going on, but otherwise, that really jarred for me.
“I expected, for the entire duration of the movie, to see Rachel make another appearance. And I still, still, do not understand why he went after Harvey instead of Rachel. (For the sake of the storyline, of course; but I can’t get it to make sense in my head, no matter how brilliant and noble and honorable a DA Dent was.)”
He didn’t go after Harvey. The Joker deliberately told Batman the opposite locations of Harvey Dent and Rachel, knowing (from his earlier interaction with Batman when Rachel was in danger) that Bats would go after Rachel, and knowing that only whoever Batman went after would be saved. And as he showed later, the Joker just wanted to completely fuck up Harvey Dent, for the simple reason that everybody had all their hopes riding on good ol’ Harvey.
Aside from that, I loved this movie. I was all “wtf?” at Bale’s hilarious Batman voice, and Two Face’s open-wound prancing around simultaneously freaked me out and annoyed me (my parents are both M.D.’s and I have spent my ENTIRE LIFE listening to them bitch about unrealistic medical portrayals in film and tv), but other than that, I loved loved loved it. I already want to see it again.
Interestingly, I found myself agreeing with pretty much everything you said, but I absolutely loved the movie and am planning to see it again, hopefully in IMAX. But, I’m pretty easy with movies in general, Batman is my favorite superhero, I have a really high cheese-tolerance, etc. My standards, admittedly not very high, and if I like a movie enough I’ll usually ignore any flaws (this is why I would be the worst movie reviewer ever).
My favorite all-time Joker has to be from the animated series, the one voiced by Mark Hamill. Obviously they couldn’t go super-dark with him in a kid’s show, but he definitely had that “I’m just going to fuck with people cos it’s fun” thing going on.
YES THANK YOU. Batman: The Animated Series was howevermanyepisodes worth of AWESOME when I was a kid and, dammit, now too, and Mark Hamill made a great gleefully sadistic Joker.
And I still, still, do not understand why he went after Harvey instead of Rachel. (For the sake of the storyline, of course; but I can’t get it to make sense in my head, no matter how brilliant and noble and honorable a DA Dent was.
You know, I had the same reaction, and then I figured it was meant to show us that Rachel’s right and Bruce can never be just Bruce again because Batman has consumed him, and THEN I read a review that mentioned totally offhandedly that it was brilliant to have the Joker give Bruce the wrong address, which makes the fake-out seem way less cheap and also makes sense since the Joker did want very badly to take Harvey Dent down morally, and this plan would have the added bonus of making Batman feel like crap.
Is this the correct theory? I’ll have to watch the movie again to see (yay!) but the review I read (can’t remember where) seemed to have come to this conclusion with no handwaving, i.e. basically for me the big reveal was that Bruce had chosen Dent, while for this reviewer the big reveal was that the Joker set him up. Anyone else come to that conclusion?
The guy behind me was coughing when she handed it to him, so I missed exactly what she said; I know she said it wasn’t sealed, but even so, a butler of Alfred’s… caliber?… would not have opened and read the note.
She said you’ll know when to open it, which is pretty vague, and the note specifically referenced her having accepted Dent’s proposal/married Dent (forget which), so it does seem she wanted him to read it because otherwise, those were pretty vague instructions. Does that help Alfred’s case, or do you still think he’s being too nosy? :) (And did that bother you more than the fact that a butler is being played with a working class accent?)
The clear implication of “it’s not sealed,” which followed his question of how he was supposed to know when the right time was to give Bruce the note, was that he was to read it. She didn’t say it in so many words, but that’s why he opened it and read it — she told him to, so that he’d know when to give it to Bruce. I, too, thought it was unusual, but her instructions were essentially to review it and use his judgment, and he followed her instructions.
I actually liked that The Scarecrow only showed up for one scene. It was a nice reminder that in the world of Batman, the villains almost always come back. Sometimes they come back with huge plans for evil and sometimes they come back just for insignificant little side plots, but either way if you send them to Arkham they always come back.
Re: Batman saving Dent instead of Rachel – it was our impression that the Joker reversed their locations when he gave them to Batman, knowing Batman would pick Rachel, and wanting to screw with him a little more. My eagle-eared wife noticed that later in the film when Harvey gave the location to the Commissioner.
Elayne, when Batman was interrogating the Joker, Joker gave him two addresses for the locations of Rachel and Harvey. Batman took off for the location he thought was Rachel’s and you can hear Gordon mention that they have to go to the location they think Harvey is at. But since he is the Joker, he decided to flip the locations, so while Batman thought he was going to the address Rachel was at, it was the wrong one.
Thanks, y’all! I totally missed the switching of the addresses – ever notice how when it’s a movie you’re kinda “meh” about, everyone’s quiet and respectful and polite, and when it’s something you’re actually interested in and trying to follow the plot of, people won’t shut up or turn off their cell phones or sit down or take their crying kids out? There were so many distractions and disturbances that I feel like I missed half the movie – OH, and the theater lights came up during the scene where Two-Face is threatening Gordon’s family, and the theater staff opted to *make an announcement* that they couldn’t turn the lights down, it’s because of the run-time of the movie, we apologize for this etc etc. We were all like, “SHUT UP! God, we can barely see the screen, and now we can’t HEAR anything either!” I intended to request a refund on the way out, but there were about 60 people ahead of me doing the same thing and I was tired so, screw it.
Anyway, so, clearly I missed some important plot points. Thanks, y’all, for clearing them up for me.
Thanks to all who note that Two Face, however motivated, would have been very, very DEAD. When Gordon went to see him in the hospital? He’s in a regular room, one piece of gauze over his face, and no one is wearing any protective clothing? The Joker couldn’t blow the place up fast enough in my opinion–no one going to a hospital with those procedurals would come out alive. Not to mention the “Oh, you don’t want painkillers? Okey-Dokey!” attitude.
Here’s another thing that began to bug more and more as the movie went on–I understand that Batman and Joker are “two sides of the same coin” and are locked in this suicidal love affair/death dance thing, but NO ONE else in this famously corrupt city put a bullet in the guy? At the end, there:
Joker’s hanging from a string, laughing away, the SWAT team clearly expecting to reel him in–if I’d been a member of that team, the plan would be: haul him in, throw him down, one to the head and two to the chest, and a glare all around to my fellows– “Anyone got a problem with this? ANYONE? Didn’t think so.”
Sars- what did you think of the Havey/Two Face Arc?
Great review.
As others have said, I didn’t find it entirely credible given how Dawes was written that Dent would lose it to that degree and have her as the motivation; you have no eyelid on one side, and DAWES is why you’re so pissed?
But I really liked Eckhart’s performance; he can be really smarmy, but he can also be really warm and level, and he brought those qualities to this role prior to the Two-Face part…and did a pretty good job with the Two-Face part, too, under the circumstances. The script didn’t do very well with that, it felt kind of abrupt and unearned, but the only reason it came close to working was Eckhart.
Like I said, in the hands of lesser actors this movie could really have been a weak joke. It’s sort of like Mamet dialogue: if the actor doesn’t commit to it 100 percent, it can’t work, but when the actor is committed and not skating through it, you aren’t distracted by it.
Sars, the way I saw it was more that the death of Rachel was more like the straw the broke the camel’s back. Of course it was a gigantic straw but at the same time I got the feeling throughout the movie that Dent was getting more and more beatdown by the city and the system and starting to lose it. I mean he kidnapped and basically did a mock execution on the guy who shot Gordon, before he ever became Two-Face.
More egregious than leaving the Joker hanging around at the end of the film: when the Joker drops Rachel out of the window at Bruce’s party, Batman follows and saves her and then… end scene. What about all the other party guests who were left to make small talk with the not-at-all incapacitated Joker? Did he forget he went there searching for Harvey? Did they all have a few more drinks and then share cabs home?
Hmmm… a couple of things that are easier to understand if you’re read the source material the movie is based on (I outgrew most superhero comics a long time ago, but have always made an exception for Batman):
1. Dent punching the witness – There’s a series out there called “The Long Halloween” – by Jeph Loeb and Tim Sale. Much in the vein of Batman: Year One (which is a retelling of Batman’s beginnings written by Frank Miller), this 13 issue series focuses on Batman’s early years. Anyway, the arc deals with the transition for Gotham from mob town to well… Gotham with an asylum full of nuts. It also retells Harvey Dent’s/Two Face’s origins. In the series, Harvey Dent has taken Falcone (BB’s mom boss, he didn’t really go crazy in the comic books, he dies later on) to trial using an informer. The informer, however, has been placed by the mob, so that when Harvey is cross-examining him, he is in a position to throw acid in his face (he has a “fake” bottle of antacid). Harvey is taken to the hospital, wakes up and sees his face, boom goes crazy. So the deal with Harvey punching his witness on the stand? Total fakeout for fans who already had read “The Long Halloween”. For a split second I would have bet the farm Harvey would have become Two Face at the beginning of the movie.
2. Joker’s non beginning – While canon suggests that Batman actually creates the Joker (he’s a two bit thief that Batman chases into a factory full of chemicals, and who is horrifically burned in a chemical accident that Batman causes), most writers for the comic book play it fast and loose with his beginnings. In “The Killing Joke”, which is another one of the sources that Nolan has stated he borrowed from, Joker tells Batman: “Sometimes I remember it one way, sometimes another… if I’m going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!” (the same arc shows that one possible backstory has to do with Joker losing his wife and child and then having a horrific accident to top it off). The fact that he always tells a different tale is also reminiscent of the Warner Brothers’ “Batman” animated series by Bruce Timm, that has one hilarious episode where the Joker (voiced by Mark Hamill, whose voice I could have sworn Ledger was almost channelling) tells each person he takes hostage during a caper a different origin story, most of them in the realm of black jokes. Besides, having the Joker just be fits in the theme that Batman created chaos in the city’s criminal underworld, and something had to emerge out of that chaos. So in that sense, Batman still created Joker, just indirectly.
3. Leaving Joker hanging – The whole leaving him hanging thing is an homage to “The Dark Knight Returns”, wherein an elder Batman has one final showdown with Joker and realizing how his rule not to take a life has allowed Joker to take so many over the years, he comes very close to crossing the line. He stops at the last moment and only breaks Joker’s neck rather than throwing him down to certain death. However, the Joker in one of his crazy spells decided to take that opportunity to kill himself so that Gotham police (who are looking up at them) will blame Batman for his death and start hunting him. As for whether that’s the out that Nolan & Co would take in the event of a 3rd movie (which seems almost a certainty at this point, given how well TDK has done at the box office) so that they don’t have to brink Joker back by using another actor, no one can say.
Harvey Dent had a dark, histrionic edge from the start, reflected in the courtroom heroics (I’m embarrassed that I didn’t realize that was an origin story fakeout!), the “Two-Face” knickname among the police, and the freakout with the henchman. Aaron Eckhart really did that well. I agree with GT that the injury, anger, and grief after the explosions just broke his restraint – but I think he had it in him all the time. He had a choice, before and after the explosions, to stay the course, be lawful, and serve as the “white knight,” at whatever personal cost, or to indulge his dark side. He’s a tragic foil for the real hero, so he had to make the wrong choice.
I also definitely agree with Sars that Heath Ledger was astounding, Gary Oldman RULES, and that Christian Bale is the best Bruce Wayne, by a landslide. He’s believable as a separate person instead of just Batman without the suit, and that person seems to really be a playboy, with all that implies – the traditional Wayne philanthropy and ethical business dealings, sure, but also grating ostentation and self-indulgence. It’s a very good choice as part of the overall disguise and pathology; the “Bruce” persona has to have artifical elements just as the “Batman” one does. Neither can be too true to the real Bruce, if indeed that could be clearly defined, or someone will make connections.
As for the Batvoice, I really like it, conceptually – voices are very hard to disguise in real life, and the best way to do it without electronics is to disrupt the basic vocal tone as he does. Just using a lower register for Batman and a higher one for Bruce wouldn’t fool these people, in this universe; Jim Gordon and the Joker, at least, would be able to hear and twig to the core tone, unlike, say, the folks in the Adam West TV universe. The growl is also off-putting and weird on an aesthetic level, but that has to be intentional – the whole Batconcept is to strike terror into the hearts of evildoers, after all.
I also liked the use of all those huge plate-glass walls. Death threats and guns aplenty, people crashing through windows right and left, and they’re still sitting in their glass offices, on display? Bruce’s goldfish bowl penthouse is the safest place in the city? Bruce/Batman lives somewhere so completely transparent? Ack. Instant reptile-brain twitchiness, plus the whole thematic-analysis switchboard lighting up re: duality, light/dark, appearances, contradictions, vulnerability, etc.
All in all, quite a good use of my viewing time, with iconic performances and plenty of very effective resonances and food for thought on its central themes. It wasn’t perfect, but I’m more than willing to meet it halfway where necessary (why, hello, Michael Caine’s accent) and it further illuminates my internal, Platonic ideal Batman (and Joker, and Two-Face, and Whole Batman Deal.)
(I also enjoyed Hellboy II, for very different reasons, but with the same willingness to meet it halfway as needed. And unlike the excellent but harrowing Pan’s Labyrinth, you can watch it over and over to catch all the cool effects!)
I had another issue with Bruce Wayne’s house being the safest place in town – had the Joker not just rolled on up in there recently, with no effort at all? And the Joker had just interacted with her there, so… He’s not an idiot. That’s the first place he’d look for Rachel.
@Helen
I was also bugged by the lack of resolution regarding Batman’s party . My friends’ explanation was that the Joker must’ve assumed Dent was Batman, and b/c Dent was in love with Rachel, that’s why Batman a) was on the scene, and b) went after Rachel.
I really disliked Batman Begins, but then I thought the Burton Batman movies were fantastic (Nicholson aside). It helps that Burton never felt much need for his characters to speechify, and that his Batman was clearly the craziest motherfucker in Gotham.
Yes. I’ve retained two impressions from Batman Begins: it was so loud I watched most of it with my fingers in my ears, and Cillian Murphy is creepy. I don’t know that I’d have chosen Michael Keaton for Batman but I liked Nicholson as the Joker; the fact that he’s been playing that same role in every film since isn’t the movie’s fault.
Mostly, though, I can’t take superhero movies seriously and Burton had exactly the right sensibility for me. I don’t mean any disrespect to those who do take them seriously – filmmakers or fans – but I don’t need ponderous speechifying from these characters, personally. Especially since Batman doesn’t even have the “with great power comes great responsibility” issue as it’s usually framed within this genre; as I understand it, he’s got no superpowers, he’s just a rich man with nifty gadgets.
Seriously. Sars, this is right on. I also had a serious problem (why so serious) with the not telling people the Joker switched the addresses. It’s mentioned…nowhere. Batman doesn’t even register shock when he sees Harvey on the floor instead of Rachel. Kind of an important plot point.
My husband and I finally saw this last night and we both loved it.
@Liz in Minneapolis:
One of the things my husband said as we discussed the movie over dinner last night was that any actor who plays Batman should be playing three characters: Batman, Bruce Wayne the philanthropist and businessman and, Bruce Wayne the public playboy. It is difficult to pull off (see all previous Bat-men) and Bale does it seemingly effortlessly. The growly voice did not bother either of us overly much.
Heath Ledger played the Joker to chaotic perfection.
Gary Oldman is perfect as Commissioner Gordon. I was totally fooled during the chase scene with Harvey in the armored car. I thought the driver was another of the Joker’s men. Psych!
The Harvey Dent/Two-Face make up was (according to my husband, the Bat-fanatic) taken directly from the art in the comic books. So, it may have been “unrealistic” as far as an actual burn, but it is accurate to the drawn character.
It’s two out of two for Chris Nolan as far as we are concerned. Anyone want to take a guess as to who the next villain will be?
As to the next villain, I’ve heard rumors swilling around about talks with Angelina Jolie about playing Catwoman. I’m all about Catwoman, less all about Angelina. Too… obvious and boring. I’d like to see Catwoman played like the Joker was – riveting, masterful – not just some hot chick in a tight suit. I’m thinking Angelina won’t go past Hot Chick in Tight Suit. So, hopefully the rumors are either wrong or don’t pan out.
As to Two-Faced – yes, he looks exactly like the comic book. I don’t think we can get too worried over that. I thought the makeup in this movie was great in general, and I like how the Joker’s changed.
I think the problem with Jolie as Catwoman, is that every time I would see her on screen she would take me out of the movie. I mean people like Gary Oldman and Morgan Freeman really become their characters, but if Jolie was Catwoman, I would be like “hey, its Angelina Jolie!” every time she came on screen.
I have to admit I am hoping for Catwoman, too. But not Jolie…please, no. I feel like if they did that it would just throw the entire franchise out the window. I hope the producers will cast someone unexpected–as they did when they chose Heath Ledger as the Joker. I still remember how the fanboys (including my husband) howled with derision when that was announced. But Ledger pulled it off magnificently.
I really liked Michelle Pfeiffer as Catwoman in “Batman Returns”, even though I do remember at the time wondering what the hell Tim Burton was thinking. Any “new” Catwoman must be more than just a body in a catsuit–otherwise the character simply will not work. Catwoman in the comic is as smart as she is beautiful. Hopefully, Nolan will continue to bring the comic book’s characters to life on-screen the way he has done so far.
I think Kristen Bell could make Catwoman a very interesting character. It may depend on how they write it, though. The franchise doesn’t really seem to think very highly of well-rounded female characters. Jolie would be the obvious choice, to me – which, maybe not a bad thing, but I love unexpected casting.
“I’ve heard rumors swilling around about talks with Angelina Jolie about playing Catwoman.”
GOD. FORBID.
I read that one of the scriptwriters involved with the franchise said “No penguin, and no catwoman, as long as I’m writing it”. Nolan has also said that if he has his way he would rather do new villains rather than ones that have already been done to death (like Catwoman, who even got her own movie). Then again, while Bale & Co. have been hired for the full 3 movies, allegedly Nolan only signed up to do 2, so it’s still in the realm of possibility.
I’d rather see Riddler done right, or even see an obscure but really well done villain like Calendar Man.
@ F McGee
I hadn’t heard the one about Angelina as Catwoman, I had heard a rumor about Johnny Depp as the Riddler, but I wouldn’t put too much stock in anything until the contracts are signed.
I saw the movie in Imax last night (and a tip for anyone planning to do that; hang onto the armrests during the Hong Kong Skyscraper scene if you don’t want to get seasick) and I have to say it’s the most i’ve enjoyed Batman since the original Keaton movies… everything after that was wayy too cartoony and don’t even get me started on Val Kilmer.
I found a lot of the same problems that other people have mentioned, Gyllenhall doing her best with a very one dimensional character, Dent’s turn to evil being somewhat incomprehensible and too many conflicting plotlines going in every direction.
One thing I did want to reference was that I was having a little bit of a ‘Bourne Supremacy’ problem during the fight scenes, namely that the way it was shot often made it incredibly difficult to figure out what was going on particularly in the nightclub scene with Batman trying to find the moles in Gordon’s team…
Beyond that Heath’s performance was the highlight of the film for me and i’ll be interested to see if the Oscar buzz pans out (although somehow I don’t see that happening)
Jim Carrey’s Riddler was so fucking annoying that that’s a can of worms better left closed, in my opinion.
Duly noted… and agreed incidentally. But then again pretty much everything Jim Carrey does annoys the *&%*$ out of me.
A couple of people have mentioned ‘Batman’ canon; would anyone have any recommendations on where to start for someone who hasn’t read any of the comics but would like to? I’m ready to go get “The Long Halloween” since you guys mentioned it, but are there other good or logical starting points?
Well, after 1986 and a series wide (as in every series in the DC universe) reset, your best bets are “Batman: Year One” by Miller, followed by “The Long Halloween”, and Sale & Loeb’s followup “Dark Victory” (a retelling of the Robin origin, as well as a further exploration of of the themes that begun with TLH). And then you have to read “The Dark Knight Returns”, which is practically what started the coming down its current hyperrealism path that Nolan is trying to recreate, but chronologically is about an old and tired Batman. And if you want to expand it to other heroes in the DC pantheon continuity “Kingdom Come” is a great collection to have.
“I think Kristen Bell could make Catwoman a very interesting character.”
Thanks Krissa. Yes it most certainly would be a good choice. If they wrote the Catwoman as a flirty-snarky type, she could be awesome. I think her role as Elle (?) in Heroes would be the type of Catwoman she could pull off well. But snarkier.
@ Becca
Year One, The Long Hallloween, and Dark Victory are how I got into Batman comics. They give a good overview of the Batman origin, the mob story, and the intro of Robin. For a really good Joker story: The Killing Joke and The Man who Laughs. Both contain fantastic, but brutal depictions of the Joker. For my money, though, Paul Dini writes the best Batman stories. He was heavily involved in writing Batman: The Animated Series and also writes Detective Comics which is more about Batman as a detective (obviously) than a superhero. Batman: Death and the City is a good recent one. Hope you enjoy.
I…do not remember EVER having posted anything like the above. Seriously. How did that get there? None of it has ever resided in my cranium, most of which is reserved for OTH and Twin Peaks trivia. I wouldn’t know Paul Dini if I ran him over with an ice-cream truck.