Hyperbole aside, this is still a brilliant crime thriller and the best "comic book movie" I've ever seen. The entire cast is phenomenal and Heath Ledger is a revelation.

Rating: 10/10 (21 July 2008)

"Batman Begins" was a critical success and audiences loved it, but -- probably due to the declining quality of the films before it -- not many people turned out to see it during its theatrical run. It was also one of the first of many "franchise reboots" -- yet wasn't clearly advertised as such, and it took time for people to realize that, as a film, it stood on its own from the Burton/Schumacher pictures. It was a modest success (with less than $400 million worldwide) but its real legacy was solidified on DVD, where it became a best-seller and one of the defining titles of the Hi-Definition DVD war. Positive word of mouth slowly but surely turned it into a blockbuster -- the exact opposite of, say, "Spider-Man 3," which opened huge but performed poorly on home video.
Warner Bros. had a keen eye on the progress of the film, and obviously they had a lot of faith in director Christopher Nolan and the areas he could take the sequel. Whereas "Batman Begins" was a so-called "origins story" and therefore had to sacrifice a few action sequences in favor of character progression, "The Dark Knight" showcases a more organic blend -- there's plenty of action here but there's also just as much character development, which -- at least for me -- made it somewhat more satisfying. I really liked "Batman Begins," but "The Dark Knight" makes it look like child's play.
Everybody was excited about The Joker, of course. And Heath Ledger is phenomenal. I remember when he was first announced for the role in 2007 and the Internet community was, to say the least, quite baffled. I was one of the few who seemed to have an understanding of what Nolan was aiming for, but some fans despised the casting decision. It wasn't until the first theatrical trailer that a palpable shift in mood could be detected -- suddenly all the doubters realized just how dark Ledger was taking it. And shortly thereafter, of course, Ledger died tragically of an accidental prescription drug overdose -- I still remember reading the news that day in January and thinking, "What?!" I don't think anyone ever expected it. And although in retrospect it was a rather selfish thought, one of my first questions was: "How will this affect 'The Dark Knight'?" Thankfully, Ledger had completed filming on the movie and his last performance is a real tour-de-force. Many people have a nostalgic affinity for Jack Nicholson's Joker, but honestly, I've always found it to be Jack playing Jack more than anything. Yes, it's a fun performance, but not nearly as terrifying or convincing as Ledger's, whose Joker isn't just funny or just dark - he's a twisted psychopath. You find yourself laughing at the most horrific aspects of his behavior, but often times -- such as after the brilliant hospital scene -- you can hear people's laughter in the theater gradually fade as they realize *what* they're laughing at, and how disturbing it is. And that's really the key to the character, and something even Nicholson didn't land on: the horror behind the laughter. Everything about his performance - the verbal and facial tics, the little details - causes you to believe this psychopath is real. Nolan's remark about Ledger being "like the shark in JAWS" is dead-on -- he isn't a consistent character in this film, but he'll suddenly appear out of nowhere (in sync with James Newton Howard's and Hans Zimmer's schizoid "Why So Serious?" theme) and tear through the movie's core. This is one of *the* performances of the decade, and the only bad thing about Ledger's role in the film is that it's so good it almost causes you to overlook how good everyone else is.
Aaron Eckhart is wonderful as Harvey Dent, and is arguably the most "human" of all the characters in the movie. I found Christian Bale's Bruce Wayne to be surprisingly downplayed in this film, but Eckhart is the one whose character has the most dramatic arc in this movie. It's a testament to Eckhart's skills that he makes Harvey both realistic and tragic -- you believe this guy is real, even though his emotional and physical transformation takes place over the course of less than an hour.
Another aspect I loved is Nolan's direction -- he has found his footing here. I thought his style in Batman Begins was a bit cautious at times, like he was trying to find his comfort zone for a big franchise film, but he's far more self-assured here -- the back-and-forth editing between scenes really heightens the tension. It makes "The Dark Knight" less of an action film and more of a crime/mystery thriller -- there are some remarkable twists in this picture and the build-up is, at times, unbearable.
I could go on about this film for ages, but I've already run out of room. Suffice to say, it's every bit as good as I had hoped. Is it the "best film of all-time" (as its current ranking on IMDb would imply)? No, of course not. But in all honesty, and hyperbole aside, it *is* one of the best films I've seen this entire decade and certainly one of the most remarkable -- especially for its genre. Nolan has taken "light entertainment" and given it brains, heart, and depth -- even more so than the first time around. On top of that, he's given us villains and anti-heroes we care about -- backed by superb performances by all involved. It's a wonderful motion picture experience, and the feeling it gave me after it had all ended can only be described as "emotionally draining." Like the best works of Scorsese or Fincher or other gritty/visceral directors, this movie left me feeling overwhelmed when it had ended -- but in a good way. If you see one movie this summer, make sure it's "The Dark Knight."