First Viewing, Initial Thoughts

[thehefner]

EDIT: Beware, the comments section has become rather spoiler-heavy!

I've wanted to hold off on this until I've conferred with a couple other people, or even until I've seen it again (on IMAX or otherwise). But so many people are posting about it, and even more, so many people are asking what I thought about it. I've never had so many people contact me out of the blue for the express purpose of hearing my thoughts. Not surprising, I suppose, all considered. But with all that, I guess it's time to post my first impressions, for the record.

So let's talk about THE DARK KNIGHT.

Okay. Here's the thing.

It's fucking amazing. Stunning, powerful, harrowing, haunting, and all other manner of adjectives abused by hack reviewers desperate to have their blurbs used on posters.

I could go on about everyone's performances in this film, virtually all of whom were fantastic. Seeing one of the greatest ham actors of my generation (this is a compliment), Gary Oldman, play the down-to-earth noble heart and humanity of Jim Gordon, the most realistic and grounded person in Batman's world period, was just wonderful. Maggie took a thankless and problematic role and fleshed it out in great ways. Michael Caine, we can watch you forever. Morgan Freeman, same thing (even if he was yet again playing, as one reviewer remarked, the "wise old black man"). Bale was excellent, even if his role suffered from the problem that plagued virtually all the Batman movies before BATMAN BEGINS: the hero being overshadowed by the villains. And the supporting cast, for that matter.

And yeah. Heath Ledger vanished completely. No trace of him remained. As many have remarked, that was the Joker.

Some are calling this film bloated, that a half-hour of streamlining could have truly made it a masterpiece, and I don't know how true that is. The only parts that come to mind is the scene in the garage with the "posers," if you know what I mean, and the subplot of the blackmailing employee, which were great and fun, but I don't know if they added anything to the heart of the story. I'll be wondering that upon repeat viewings, but I will say this: even the things that could have been cut were compelling. That's saying something.

No, upon first viewing, I have no complaints at all for any of that. The vast majority of the movie truly qualifies it at one of the greatest, if not the greatest, superhero film of all time*.

And yet, I cannot and likely will not ever be able to personally embrace THE DARK KNIGHT. All because of one specific aspect.

I'll give that one a whole post on its own, so let's hold off on discussion here until we get to that post. I mean, if you think you know what I'm talking about. I'm sure most of you have an idea, but chances are, you're only half right.



*Except how can one honestly compare this to, say, IRON MAN, which is another serious contender? That's the problem with the geek hyperbole of "best ____ ever!" You ultimately end up being forced to compare apples and oranges.

This could be a whole post in of itself, and maybe I'll address it if and when I write about the HULK movies, based around the following hypothosis that could come very handy in discussing these films: I think THE INCREDIBLE HULK was the better Hulk movie and the better comic book movie... but I firmly consider Ang Lee's HULK was the better movie.

Comments

[tompurdue.livejournal.com]

**** spoilers, even though I haven't seen the movie ****

God, I hope so. I just got through with Roger Ebert's extremely enthusiastic and thoughtful review, and there's just one thing that worries me: freshman philosophy students.

I'm underwhelmed by the moral choice of two sets of boat passengers forced into a classic utilitarian challenge. It's so arbitrary. It's less about the fact that there are impossible moral choices in the world as the fact that it's boring when a human being goes out of his way to create them. It's not that there are too few examples of those moral choices; it's that there are so many real ones that fake, forced ones are dull.

The world is full of situation which defy simplistic situations put in front of freshman philosophy students. It's also full of assholes who pretend that making that fact obvious is some sort of insight. So what? You're not telling me anything I didn't know, and I get ticked when these sorts of observations are presented as if they're some sort of earth-shattering revelation.

Like I said, I haven't seen the film, but I'm worried that it will come down with serial-killer syndrome: presenting violent nutjobs and relying on the fact that they happen occasionally in real life to push the verisimilitude button for extra creativity points that they really haven't earned.

It's not impossible. SILENCE OF THE LAMBS survived on the strength of incredible performances. Which the creators promptly misinterpreted to spin off a bunch of pointless sequels.

Clearly, I'm talking out my ass here. I'm just saying that I've got some trepidation.

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

As well you should. You're thoughtful about things in ways that no one else I know is, which is kinda why I have no idea what the hell you'll feel about things, but I'm always very interested to hear your thoughts anyway. Definitely see it and let me know what you think. I'd like to see these ideas followed up on once you do.

I wonder what a good example of a real moral choice would be, by which I mean, one that would fit the theatricality of the Joker.

[tompurdue.livejournal.com]

The Joker's theatricality is deliberate, and that's part of what makes it interesting. But it's also the serial killer problem, artistically speaking: how do you make somebody who makes malignant moral choices interesting? Yeah, you can, and yeah, some people do. But since it's self-defeating, it's rare, and hard to relate to. Some people like to watch the violence; others enjoy the vengeance story line. Neither thrills me.

Shakespeare did it all the time, as with Iago. If you care too much about how Iago actually goes about it, the story rather falls apart. (The level of coincidence looks like a Three's Company episode.) And you have to be very careful about making overly-simplistic choices about motivation, because they feel facile.

In Shakespeare's case it's made interesting by powerful language and strong performances. It sounds like Nolan has done much the same thing, though with visual language rather than spoken. It sounds like he's avoided the trap of pointing the camera lens at the simple things and moved past them to more interesting ones.

[princessebee.livejournal.com]

The scene also plays with the assumptions of human nature: one boat is filled with dangerous criminals, the other with good citizens.

At the end of the day, though, we don't know who amongst those criminals acted in desperation, and who amongst those good citizens hides dirty secrets. But we are cultivated by society to view criminals as worth less, and more likely to behave ruthlessly.

And I thought the scene played very nicely with those assumptions. In this way it absolutely was in line with Joker's theatricality, as was the subplot involving the blackmailer.

I can't even conceive of being spoiled to the point of knowing this level of detail AND making judgements on it prior to viewing, but your thoughts are interesting so I want to know: what would you have Joker do to present a 'true' difficult moral choice, that is unforced and uncultivated?

Another fact is, mostly these forced dilemmas are THEORETICAL only, wheras Joker in this film makes them ACTUAL which forces them out of the textbook. In this way they DO become real dilemmas, because it's no longer academic.
I don't think the film presented this stuff as earth-shattering revelations at all, but as a sick game Joker was playing because it amused him.

And he is anything but a serial killer.

[gore-whore-5.livejournal.com]

Half right. Chances. You pick your words so well, my dear.

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

Heh, I didn't know if anyone would pick up the "chances" part. :)

[gore-whore-5.livejournal.com]

Babe, if I did it, somebody else must have.

Also, I'm sorry I didn't call you tonight. I've been busy all day. Give me a call when you have time. I'm much more likely to answer the phone than to pick it up and call someone.

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

You'd better call me up sometime (dunno when I'm free next, though) because last time I tried, my phones didn't go through to yours!

[gore-whore-5.livejournal.com]

Yeah, it does that. A lot. I can't wait until either our contract expires or we actually have enough money to blow to get out of it and switch to someone else. I'm so sick of fighting with my phone to get service.

I'll call you tomorrow. When is a good time?

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

Um... not sure. 10ish? Try around then! I'm doing the show at 7:00, but I imagine I'll be home by then.

[princessebee.livejournal.com]

You know, I had a feeling something wouldn't click right for you. For me, it was perfect but I'm not a huge Two-Face fan. Presuming that is what you're talking about.

I also thought Rachel was totally fridged. At the same time, I still think it was great.

I'm keen to hear your thoughts!

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

Yeah, I'll write 'em up tonight to tomorrow, and when I do, I'd very much like your thoughts on my thoughts.

I may also touch upon the fridging; angrylemur wrote a well-thought-out and impassioned rant against it here:

http://angrylemur.livejournal.com/190715.html

She makes a rather strong argument. I personally liked what Maggie brought to the table, but I don't know if I disagree with the lemur.

[princessebee.livejournal.com]

She's 100% right. I noticed it and was discomfited by the lack of significant female roles.

I just can't detach from the brilliance of the Joker to let it truly ruin the experience for me.

Reading everyone's quibbles has me sighing and feeling anxious, like I'm not critical enough or missed something but... there was so much that was right in this film and how it was true to the world of Batman that altogether I'm happier to focus on what I do like.

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

I think you can fully and completely embrace the Joker here while still finding things to criticize. It doesn't detract from the Joker one whit.

But really, your feelings make absolutely perfect sense to me. Your very favorite character, someone so close to your heart, was so brilliantly brought to life! Had they gotten Harvey right all the way through, I'd likely be right there with you!

[princessebee.livejournal.com]

It's interesting, I didn't like to say anything before you saw it but I just knew, when I was watching it, even as I was loving Two-Face, that you wouldn't be happy! And I can understand that. If they'd gotten my Puddin' wrong, I would've been distraught.

It's why I find the above comments interesting. The comparison is made to Shakespeare, which to me further underscores the contrivance and theatricality of Joker's action - yes, of course they're contrived, that's what he DOES. He's an embodiment of chaos, therefore he creates situations, and lets them go where they may. It's not a simple case of them or us - it's a case of them dirty criminals and us good citizens. It's a heavy point, a clobbering over the head, but that's deliberate.

You KNOW how much I bitch about Joker being reduced to a mere kuh-RAZY serial killer in stories, and I just didn't get that from this film. Maybe I'm blinded by the brilliance of the performance.

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

It's not even as simple as "they got him wrong," as... well, it's complex. Again, I look forward to your thoughts. For me, it's the monkey wrench in the works. You were there to see the Joker's movie, with everyone else along for the ride. If I'm not mistaken. Me, I was there to see Harvey Dent's movie. From both personal and an objective standpoints, I have serious issues to raise from the scarring onward.

But I will say, where they succeeded in avoiding the traps that many bad writers fall into with the Joker, they failed when it came to Two-Face. Both characters are seemingly simple and straightforward on the surface, and yet both are far, far more complex that people seem to realize (much less depict well!). It's a fucking miracle they did it with Joker. But Harvey... eh, we'll get to it, we'll get to it.

Also, I'll totally check out Tainted Love once things calm down on my end and I'm in a more relaxed headspace. I'm working on it, bit by bit! :)

[princessebee.livejournal.com]

Weeeellll, I don't know that I'd say I was just there to see Joker - I wanted to see a great Batman film and I felt it delivered - but yeah, he was the primary point of interest for me.

Hrm. Was having the two characters in the film a mistake? It was very much Joker's movie. More so even than Batsy's. And perhaps I even loved Two Face because of how Joker tipped the scales. Because of how Joker was willing to let Harvey blow his head off if the coin came up scarred.

[thehefner.livejournal.com]

My mistake then. I mean, I was there to see everyone, the whole thing... but Harvey was my primary focus above all others, even above Mr. J's, which is really saying something. The only time I felt myself near tears was when I saw the bandages on his face.

And I don't think it was a mistake, necessarily. But for the most part, they should have saved Two-Face for the next movie. They... argh, another reason I'm holding off going into details is that I wanna try to keep this post as spoiler-free as possible (even with Tom's post above). Really, once I start going into explicit details, I'll just go on and on.

[princessebee.livejournal.com]

lol lol. Just stick a spoiler warning in the OP. I think the fellow up above pretty much ruined it for everyone reading anyway!

I was teary eyed for Harvey a few times.

But when we toasted Heath at the end, I broke down.

[princessebee.livejournal.com]

I'm off to see if for a third time... lol... I might try watching it with a more critical eye though I tend to focus on the positive as a rule.

[princessebee.livejournal.com]

ps: one day I'd love for you to read my story Tainted Love, which is a depiction of the full seduction and twisting of Harley by Joker. I tried to take it as far as it could go with him as insidiously and subtly corrupting her as possible.

[angrylemur.livejournal.com]

Maggie brought more to the role than anyone could have expected her too. The problem was with the writing, not with her performance.

I really can't stress that enough. I'm a big fan of hers.