Batman Continues

Rating: 10/10 (27 July 2008)

Heath Ledger's performance as the Joker in the Dark Knight may have been one for the ages and certainly worthy the ensuing Oscar buzz, but I can't shake the feeling that much of the praise surrounding the Joker has been misplaced.
While the focus on Ledger is certainly understandable given both his riveting performance and tragic death, not enough is being said about the writing and direction of his character. Writer/Director Christopher Nolan are the main factors behind one of the most menacing villains in movie history, which is no exaggeration.
Discarded are the traditional motivations for movie villains, including greed, pride and revenge. The Joker is in it for something much more curious, entertainment. Many of the Joker's scenes of dialogue reminded me of the monologues of the recently deceased George Carlin, who claimed to revel in major catastrophes and saw massive human death as a form of entertainment. The reason Carlin's bits were so funny and the Joker is so fascinating is that both touch on a taboo that is the cause of much guilt in our society, which is that most people have some enthusiasm when other people suffer.
It is not a concept most people are comfortable with, but the evidence for this phenomenon is undeniable. Go to cnn.com, and you will see that most of the stories with the most hits have nothing to do with public policy or global warming, but deal with sex and death. NBC's Dateline, once a beacon of investigative journalism has now turned into a role call of young, attractive, murder victims. Not that there is anything wrong with that. NBC is simply serving its audience, and so is the Dark Knight.
The Joker is surrounded by a cast of criminals who he is almost bored with. He disparagingly calls them "schemers," "manipulators," and at one point he declares that Gotham City "deserves a better class of criminal, and I'm going to give it to them." It sounds almost altruistic, like he is performing some sort of public service. And it is true, the Joker is a better class of criminal. Next to the Joker, the other vicious thugs in the movie seem like small-time hustlers. Their motivations are boring, their actions are predictable, and they don't even have the type of integrity that binds good criminals together. They will turn on each other just to make a little money.
The Joker, on the other hand, is more concerned with issues and behavior. He is like a mad sociologist. He murders an innocent person every night for a short period of time, simply to test the reaction of Gotham City and its vigilante hero, Batman. The Joker detests the criminals as well as law enforcement, because they make futile efforts to control society. He sees society as too fluid and unpredictable to be controlled as both sides would like. The Joker is a criminal genius who makes extensive plans for specific tasks but has no overarching initiative. No goals to build a criminal empire in order to gain wealth. In this sense, the Joker is a more sympathetic villain and certainly more watchable.
I mean no slight to the late Ledger, but this is a pretty hard role to screw up. The Joker is just so intrinsically fascinating as are the other major players in the Dark Knight, including Gotham City, which this time, resembles a bloated Chicago.
Christian Bale plays billionaire Bruce Wayne and his alter ego Batman, who has grown tired of the police's ineptitude in dealing with organized crime, so he ends it himself. This Batman is a more deep and mysterious Batman than the one I have seen in previous Batman movies (Unfortunately, I have not seen Batman Begins, though I now hope to see it as soon as possible).
He believes Batman's main role is to provide a symbol of hope and security to the people of Gotham City. We get the sense Bruce Wayne would trade all of his personal wealth to keep the idea of Batman alive. He is a worthy counterpart to the Joker, because he is not interested in the possible vain rewards of his pursuits. Batman vs. the Joker is a battle of values. Structure vs. Chaos. Preservation vs. Disintegration. Self-righteousness vs. Indifference to human suffering.
This is very deep film, indeed. I have not mentioned the other characters performed admirably by the likes of Michael Cain, Morgan Freeman, Aaron Eckhart, and others, nor will I. I have only so much space, and what I admire above all else in the Dark Knight is its vision and inventiveness.
There is just enough realism and just enough exaggeration in all the right places to create both a relatable and mercurially riveting story at the same time. Gotham City is larger than life and the only place complex and nuanced enough to be an appropriate stage for these two villains.
It must be noted that while this is a Batman movie it is not a kids film. Many critics and other social commentators have cited the film's violence as the primary reason to deter children from seeing it. However, I would be more concerned with taking children to see a movie longer than two and a half hours with so many dark, complicated issues right on the surface of the film. Compared to the subject matter, the violence is quite tame. I can not give an estimate of what age of child should be permitted. It all has to do with the maturity of the child. If your seven-year-old is sophisticated enough to appreciate many dark elements of this film working in perfect harmony, by all means, take him. He will have seen one of the best fantasies he ever will see.