There are so few good films, The Dark Knight looks like one.

Rating: 6/10 (18 August 2008)

I fail to see what is so brilliant in Batman "The Dark Knight". Is it the title? Because it certainly not the film itself.
Let's start with what is (if not Oscar worthy) goodIn "The Dark Knight" the acting is not at stake. Special mention to Heath Ledger; he managed to do something interesting with the character of the Joker. Tough job as the Joker's past is indeed a mystery. All we know in the film is that his motivation is fairly limited. He just wants to bring chaos not so randomly it seemsIt is hard to embody someone with as little background elements as water in the Sahara desert and a motivation as thin as air. Plus the script did not really help with the endless version on how he got his scars. However Heath Ledger manages to deliver a good performance by playing a pretty generic sadistic psychotic. Christian Bale is hard to judge. Spending most of his time in a bat suit doesn't really help to determine whether or not his performance is good. Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman do so little than even the credibility they are supposed to provide is inexistent. Finally Aaron Eckhardt plays a rather uninteresting Harvey Dent; His "Two-Face" part is too short to indeed develop his character. To close the acting chapter I have to point out how poorly written the script sounded. I didn't get away with one memorable quote. Not a good sign
On to the film itself: very well shot even though one has to regret in the opening shot the reflection of the edge of the helicopter in the building's glass. Moreover did you notice how generic Gotham is depicted? Some would have you believe it was a deliberate choice to make Gotham looks more realI tell you it was driven by laziness and zero artistic vision. This is symptomatic on how seriously the film is taking itself Secondly I profoundly questioned the coherence of the film. Let me push forward my evidences by throwing at you the questions that popped in my head while watching the film from the most trivial to the more important ones: Why can the dogs chew on the bullet proof bat suit? Why a witness could pull a gun on a Lawyer while being on the witness stand? (body search anyone?) How the Joker manages to keep a pencil straight on a table while a dozen of gangsters are trying to reach out to him for a good old hand to hand Fight. Why the most famous patient of a hospital under terrorist threats can't be evacuated? Why the Joker would sets fire of a dollar bills pyramid? He said that money is not important to him. What's important to him is bringing chaos. But then why would he rob banks for a living then? Why is Bruce Wayne so obsessed with an ugly girl? How does this Sonar thing works? How could two Ferry Boats live the shores full of petrol barrels without any crew members noticing a thing? How can the Joker blow out an entire Hospital despite announcing it? Can someone explain the strategy of Police Commissioner Gordon who pretends to be dead so that the Joker will focus on Harvey Dent instead? Why is Harvey Dent mad at Police Commissioner Gordon and Batman more so than mad at the Joker? Would you? Why is Batman endorsing the crimes for Harvey Dent? Couldn't Gordon and Batman agree to use the Joker as Scapegoat? I know it seems like I am writing the "Cantique" of Nitpicking but there are way too much small incoherent things in the plot to make the whole film stands on logical ground.
Christopher Nolan wanted to redefine the notion of Hero by proving that there isn't such thing as PerfectionThe Dark Knight proves if need be that everybody has flaws. Batman has flaws he has a dark side. The bright shining knight, Harvey Dent has flaws. Both of them can become as dark as they were shining onceBut are we ready to be confronted with the dark side of our Knights? Are we ready to rage War on Terror? Are we ready to give away some of our Freedom? Things will get worst before they get better. But during those darken days our very Society will be at stake. Christopher Nolan did a very good job in refreshing the Batman Series. Certainly I liked the job he did with the first one, encapsulating the film's Mythology in some kind of possible contemporary Reality. But too much is too much. Here it appears ridicule at best, chocking sometime and often incoherent. As a director scaring people is an easy thing to do. Depicting the process of Fear is way more difficult.
Time of hardship is here. We don't know where we're going and it's quite something to live in fear. We need a light, we need Knights. But do we need darken Knights? One thing for sure, there are no "Shining Knights"... So at the very least we need to understand how fear transforms into courage sometimes and how the control of this courage and the course of action are important and can't lie in the hand of one Man or a few. The problem is, Batman "The Dark Knight" lacks any understanding of the danger of Fear. Whether it is the Fear of one Man or the Fears of a given Society