emerging creativity

Sunday, October 12, 2008

Login |
Signup

Launch Radio

Gallery

1 of 2

Launch in Window

Article Tools
print
email
share
- Del.icio.us
- Digg
- reddit
- Facebook
- Newsvine
- Permalink
save

The sun never shines in Gotham City

The Dark Knight lives up to its name

By Kathleen Keish
Published: July 21st, 2008 | 11:50am

Batman is certainly no stranger to the big screen. From Adam West's portrayal of the caped avenger in the original 1966 film adaptation to Tim Burton's stylishly directed perspectives in the late '80s and early '90s, Batman is as synonymous to summer blockbuster as Kurosawa is to Japanese cinema.

But never has Batman been portrayed as he is in Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight, the follow-up to his 2005 blockbuster Batman Begins. The old crew in still in tow, including Christian Bale as the enigmatic superhero and billionaire lothario Bruce Wayne, Michael Caine as his trusty butler, Alfred, and Morgan Freeman in yet another God-like role as Bruce Wayne's business manager and financier, Lucius Fox. None fail to impress on some level; Bale is still a mysterious as ever, while Caine and Freeman provide the film's minimal comic relief.

Some changes were made, including replacing the unimpressive Katie Holmes with the equally unimpressive Maggie Gyllenhaal, though this is no fault of her own. The role of Rachel Dawes was suppressed to the bare minimum of possible characterization. The love triangle between her, Wayne, and Gotham District Attorney Harvey Dent, portrayed by Aaron Eckhart, is lukewarm at best. Though Wayne still clings to hope of a normal life with Dawes, he rarely betrays his cool; had it not been touched upon so heavily in the first film, the viewer may not even know that Wayne and Dawes were formerly involved. Though Gyllenhaal is a steep improvement over Holmes, Dawes' only purpose in the film seems to be fuelling the fire to Dent's eventual dark side.

While both Batman and Dent battle their inner demons, pondering their respective roles as saviors of the city, it is not a superhero but a supervillain who provides the crucial element that sets this film apart from others of its kind. While Heath Ledger's portrayal of the Joker has been much discussed since his January 28 death, it is obvious while watching that the hype would be just as huge if he had not died. He is truly impressive as the Joker; though dressed in a circus-like purple and green suit and comical clown make-up, he proves to be the darkest of all Batman's archenemies.

Refusing money from Gotham City's mob bosses, even burning it in disdain of monetary motives for murder, the Joker simply enjoys being evil. He despises Batman for being unable to kill him, or anybody else for that matter, and often pits normal people against their evil instincts. Some parts of the film border on uncomfortable in a similar manner to genuine horror movies. The Joker is so nonchalant it is startling; he has no motives but pure pleasure at seeing people brutally and sadistically murdered.

While Ledger's performance is truly deserving of the Oscar buzz circulating through the industry, the rest of the film is sorely lacking. Nolan is inconsistent at keeping with the anonymity of Gotham City; in several scenes, it is obvious that filming took place in Chicago. Also, the screenplay allows for little to no characterization by any performer. Though this is effective in the Joker's case, it serves only to make the viewer feel even more disconnected from the already enigmatic superhero. Batman betrays no emotion; Bale plays this role similar to his performance in American Pyscho, a comparison that should be more likened to the Joker. However, the Joker seems to have more emotion in killing than Batman does in saving. This is disconcerting in several scenes, as Batman seems to have an incurable case of PMS. Between self-doubt and pointless sacrifice, it is almost as if Batman doesn't want a normal existence in any sense of the word, a point also made by Dawes in her reasoning to not be with him.

Maybe Ledger's performance is really just that good, but it is always disappointing when the movie's villain is more exciting and impressive than the hero. Christopher Nolan has made a quality film, but whether or not his direction will continue to live up to its standards are debatable. Ledger set the bar high, and it is Batman himself who lowers the expectations.

Comments

Please login to be able to comment on this article.

JessicaBlumensheid (2 months)
Amazing film. Heath's never been so ghastly horrifying. I'll watch it again and again. Agreed, his role is worthy an Oscar. I specifically enjoyed the part where he was scurrying out of the hospital still in the nurse getup. It kind of put a smile on my face, even though it was horrifying all the same.

JessicaBlumensheid (2 months)
p.s. Kat, great write up for a great film!

freshieandzero (2 months)
Agreed - great review! Ledger was the only thing memorable about this film. It was a bit dark and violent for me to recommend to anyone to see it, but your review pointed out the other reasons why I found the film lacking - especially Christian Bale's boring performance and what is WITH his deep & breathy batman voice??