Ta-daaaaaa! It's... gone!

Man, two weeks later, and people are *still* commenting on my criticisms of THE DARK KNIGHT and Harvey in general. If you go there, you'll find several people with critiques and analysis almost as long-winded as my own, not arguments or even heated debate but rather thoughtful, reasoned discussion pretty much all-around. And I swear, I can't think of any point where any other film has provoked so much thoughtful discussion (whether positive or negative) from so many people, especially here from my friends(-list).

But I don't take this as commentary on the "brilliance" of THE DARK KNIGHT, joining in on the chorus of critics and fans who are hailing it as "Oh thank god, we finally have ART in a mainstream movie!" Rather, I keep feeling it's more indicative of mainstream pop entertainment in general, that we don't have enough popular films on average to even reaching these heights of discussability. And/or the films that we do have, not enough people see, so we can't/don't/won't discuss "art" like this on a regular basis.

Shit, when I saw THERE WILL BE BLOOD, no one I knew wanted to have a long, analytical examination about the film and its themes, about whether Daniel Plainview was truly evil or tragically sympathetic, whether the film was truly about oil or family. For that, I had to go to my mother and then join an LJ community comprised of squealing fangirls who write in all caps and swoon over the chestless moppy wonder of Paul Dano. Clearly, there's something wrong with society.

And really, THE DARK KNIGHT is hardly a perfect film, yet people have been jizzing ever since they saw it, and I fear for many, no amount of reviewing and reconsideration upon repeat viewings will make them stop humping the film's leg to see it as it is.

And maybe it's because of those people that I wince whenever people start hailing it as "art," implicitly or explicitly proclaiming that it's the first time superhero films have achieved a status higher than escapist popcorn fare. I don't even know where to begin with that.

Like, is THE DARK KNIGHT really that un-Hollywood-y as we seem to think? Is it really different from or superior to, say, IRON MAN, which actually seriously honestly was arguably as epic and deep as THE DARK KNIGHT, but people didn't notice that because it wasn't all dark and angsty? Are these people being condescending to other such films, or is this pointing towards a certain kind of geek who wants to see their fandoms depicted in only the most serious, somber fashion, because they're still insecure about loving "immature" fare?

I don't know where to start, and frankly, my brain is not with me, so have some links.



First of all, leave it to the lovely lovedatjoker to rather perfectly sum up (and exceed) my thoughts on Heath Ledger's Joker and whether or not he truly is the "definitive" take on the character. Like her, I fear that we'll be seeing far too many airheaded fools embracing Heath and only Heath's take as the one true holy perfect take, imbuing it in everywhere from comics to fanfic to cosplay. And as awesome and rich as Heath's performance was, it says something about Joker when I say it would severely limit the character to reduce him to that one take.



Finally, as I mentioned in my critiques, I found certain elements of THE DARK KNIGHT's ending to be somewhat... ambiguous. People are still arguing whether or not... certain things happened.

Well, for those who do know what I'm talking about and don't mind SPOILERS... allow me to point you towards this and then this, specifically producer Emma Thomas' comments.

Told ya. Now all they have to do is run with it, if they want. Fingers seriously fucking crossed they do. If they do, and if they handle it correctly, it could well assuage a few of those complaints I had and make THE DARK KNIGHT even better as a result.

Maybe then I might finally join in on the "art"gasms.