Batman: The Dark Knight

Let me start by being clear on this one point: this movie is not bad. It's just not all that great either. When compared to the phenomenal amounts of CRAP coming out of hollywood, it's pretty entertaining, but it's certainly a far cry from the "perfect movie" reviewers everywhere have been telling me it is and anyone who says otherwise is a moron.

The story is clunky and simple, certainly nothing there to challenge the viewer to think about and Heath Ledger's roll was... was... average. I suspect the only reason people have been saying otherwise is because of Mr Ledger's unfortunate circumstance of being "not alive anymore". But sad a fact as that may be, i'm going to call a spade a spade here. It's not like i can offend the deceased anyway (believe me, i'm sick enough to have tried). Besides, to be fair, most of it certainly isn't his fault.

But, why am i giving the movie reviewers rave as "the best batman yet" a thumbs down? Well, where do i begin? How about at the beginning with the story:

The reason people say the joker steal's the show is because, literally, that's all this "show" is: the joker. It's 2 and a half hours of joker. Joker joker joker. In fact, you'd think with so much action and plot oriented around the character they would've found time to (even accidentally) flesh the man out. But, no. Not in this movie. There's even a point where the police CATCH the joker and are interrogating him. Just when you think you're finally going to learn something about the criminal who's been harassing gotham city since literally the opening scenes of the movie, one of the random cops makes it clear that the joker has literally NO distinguishing characteristics, other aliases, matching dental records, fingerprints or any other hints at an origin or existence outside of "the joker". That's right, the enemy of gotham city, batman's nemesis, the biggest name in villainy in the entire DC universe is a complete UNKNOWN!

Excuse me while i scream my head off into the sky.

...

There, that's better...

While some may find this a "minor point" for the movie, they'd be wrong. It's a point that pretty much breaks my cardinal rule of what DEFINES a decent bad guy (and by this, i mean, as college profs are apt to say, what's "necessary, but not sufficient"). More than anything, ANYTHING, your audience should KNOW YOUR BAD GUY! This is part of, nay... the GREATEST part of, what makes a true villain truly villainous. In the first Batman movie (michael keaton, jack nicholson, etc) there was the whole theme of "joker makes batman makes joker...". Joker was still a psychotic criminal, but you KNEW something about him. You understood why he was the way he was (even if it was a twisted tale, as it truly should be). But in the Dark Knight, the writers drop this MOST VITAL OF PIECES and make the joker psychotic... just because. It's such a lazy concept they even had to have michael caine (alfred) overtly tell batman that "some men just want to watch the world burn".

Wow... just, wow. This, coming from a movie that tries to make the distinction between "a hero you deserver" and a "hero that you need". I guess when considering Heath Ledger didn't WRITE the role, he did a decent job... but in order for an actor to TRULY deserve that "excellent job" credit, he needs the writers to be there right along with him and if they are not he needs to be the one to make the writers change their lines (and yes, actors have made writers rewrite roles to fit their acting).

Moving away from Heath Ledger for a bit, let's talk about the other almost completely overshadowed enemy of the movie: Two Face. His roll is so unnecessary and meaningless in the movie it's easy to see why he's completely overshadowed. He was much more important as district attorney Harvey Dent but even then had an unaccountable mean streak and over dependence on a two headed coin that you just don't care enough when this so-called "white knight" falls from grace. Ultimately, this villain (but probably not entire character) could've been removed from the film and the only thing that would've happened is the movie would be half an hour shorter. Considering that by the end of the movie it feels artificially lengthened, i suspect that half hour wouldn't be terribly missed.

Fans of the first film will be happy to note the horrible acting of katie holmes has now been replaced by the horrible acting of maggie gyllenhall (had to look that one up). While katie's character was wooden and unmemorable ("she was in batman begins?") gyllenhall's character takes unmemorableness to the next level by being such a blatant story-device you hardly bat an eye when she's murdered halfway through the movie by the joker. My literal reaction was one of mild disinterest and considering it happens in an over-the-top explosion, that's saying something:

"Did rachel (gyllenhall) just die?"
"I think so."
"Oh."

Overall, i could keep ragging and raging on the story, but i think by now you get the picture. The movie has good action sequences (but in these days of superb CGI, what doesn't?) and a number of almost insurmountable challenges for the dark knight you do feel a little of the suspense coming through. But even this is marred by one too many scenes of belief suspension for it to make the movie. While the former batman movies made you suspend disbelief with batman's encyclopedic knowledge of chemicals and forensics, The Dark Knight takes it to the next level. After batman survives a fall from a skyscraper onto a car in the streets and walks away like it was a hangnail, you pretty much know that nothing the movie throws at him will make him break a sweat and that just does "wonders" for the immersion levels of the film.

In the final showdown, batman shows joker that the city's not as ruled by fear and emotion as he had hoped before finishing him off once and for all with a deadly cocktail of sleeping pills, pain killers and alcohol (i know, tasteless) thereby ending the joker's deadly and mostly pointless reign of terror. There's still the lingerings of the two-face plot, but since, as even other reviewers have noted, "heath ledger steals the show" you simply don't care and are pretty pleased to find that even this wraps up without much fuss in less 20 minutes because in your mind, "the movie ended with the joker".