An Objective Review

Rating: 9/10 (18 July 2008)

I have never been a comic book fan. The last one I ever read was an "Archie" from the 1960s. That being said, I do like adaptations of comics and graphic novels. They make great stories and even better movies that even reach the mainstream audiences. Recent example like "Spiderman", "Ironman" and "The Incredible Hulk" have shown that these films handle the crossover very well when in the hands of competent direction.
I loved "Batman Begins". It seemed a much more realistic and serious attempt than the earlier "Batman" franchise movies. Even with Jack Nicholson as the Joker, those movies came off as more silly than fun.
SPOILERS*** "The Dark Knight" was obviously on my short list of movies coming out this year that I really looked forward to. And overall, I wasn't disappointed. The is a really good movie. It is not, IMHO, an exceptional movie.
It IS an exceptional performance by Heath Ledger. A true "tour-de-force", knock-you-upside-the-head, smile-till-it-hurts performance that makes the film stand out as this summer's best. Dead or alive, he deserves the Oscar and I'm betting he will get it, albeit posthumously.
You can tell that he totally "immersed" himself in the role and that might have created the environment that led to his death, as reported. One can't easily move in and out of character when one takes it "so seriously", pun intended.
But as I hinted in my overall enjoyment of the film, this performance alone does not make this an exceptional movie. I realize that the Fanboys are going to take exception to that comment. But if all aspects are looked at objectively, this, I believe, will be the common opinion.
Christopher Nolan takes us on a great ride. He is easily placed near the top of a list of directors who can envision the transformation from comic to film with ease. He tells a great story, fills it with unique action sequences and captures the feel of the darkness that lives and breathes in Gotham City.
But it is partly this "capturing" that keeps it from being a truly great film. The overall look of the picture is dark, very dark. Not just visually (which it is greatly) but also in a negative emotional level. Very few scenes show daylight. Very few scenes show hope. And at 152 minutes... that's a lot of "darkness" for a viewer to experience.
Yes, I realize that the movie is called "The Dark Knight". And that "darkness" was an important factor in "Batman Begins" to let the audience feel what it is that drives Bruce Wayne to become this hero of the night. But in this episode, it just goes a bit too far. That coupled with Batman's gravely voice (done to extreme by Christian Bale) makes the movie hard to see and hard to hear. My ears aren't that great, but even someone with perfect hearing is going to have trouble getting all this dialogue, in one viewing, as it's often mumbled.
The other performances are generally up to, or above, what you would expect from such a great line-up. Morgan Freeman and Michael Caine, give their usual perfect performances in roles that suit them well. And Gary Olldman is at the top of his form as Commissioner Gordan. This is one of the finer portions of the film as he gets to expand his character beyond past entries.
Aaron Eckhart, I'm sure, did what it was that the director likely wanted for him but his performance is hurt by a mild flaw in the story writing. He plays the new District Attorney Harvey Dent who comes into town on a white horse, ready to take on any and all bad guys at any cost. But in the latter part of the story, he suddenly becomes unable to survive the "any cost" part. His love, Rachel Dawes (played sufficiently by Maggie Gyllenhaal, but not as tenderly as Katie Holmes did) dies near the end and suddenly this White Knight can't see beyond the pain to go after the true culprit in her death. He morbidly becomes "Two Face" (arch criminal in some Batman comics?) and blames Gordon and Batman for all his woes. This was the weakest part of the story for me, and I believe that had they left out this plot-line it would have made the movie a bit shorter (which would have helped the overall picture) and it would have kept the focus on the duel between Batman and the Joker, and that's where the focus of this film should never have strayed from. Just as in "Spiderman 3", this movie is hurt by 1 too many plot-lines.
But these are simply minor annoyances that, although they do detract from the film, simply keep it from being the best Superhero movie of all time. That award, I think, still belongs to "Spiderman".
In conclusion, go see "The Dark Knight", you will not be disappointed. And the performance by Heath Ledger is absolutely not to be missed. He makes Jack Nicholson's attempt look amateuristic, which it truly wasn't. But this one goes so close to perfection that anything pales in comparison.
My rating for the movie would have been a 7+. add in Ledger's stellar performance (a perfect 10) and we get the movie close to a 9. A half point deduction for the "Two Face" distraction and the length and darkness of it and we end up at a very solid 8 and 1/2! I know that many fans will think this a perfect 10, and I can understand their point, but they are biased. For the overall movie lover who gets as much enjoyment out of "WallE" as he does "Shawshank Redemption", this movie will fall somewhere just below those but well above many others.