An action movie. Nothing more

Rating: 5/10 (8 August 2008)

When I read the enthusiastic reviews in Italy and I saw this movie ranked 1st in the IMDb's Top 250, I thought: "It's strange, the other Batman (Begins) was not so brilliant, what's happening with this sequel? Is it really this masterpiece? Is it really in the same league with movies like 'Clockwork Orange' or 'Apocalypse now'?". No, it's not in the same league. Not at all. When I saw it, my delusion was strong. It's a good blockbuster action movie, but nothing more. Let's see.
The following comments contain spoilers. Be careful.
The script is not so original. There are tons of action sequences, but what can I say? I've seen it all. I've seen the robbery made by violent people, fighting against the guards and killing each others (in all pulp tradition, since "Reservoir Dogs"). I've seen the ransom in China by plane ("Spy Games"). I've seen those action sequences with cars and armored vehicles in all American movies. (And this Batmobile is really awkward). I've seen the killer who kills by chance ("No Country for Old Men"). I've seen the super-mega-sadistic-mad-chaotic-evil-serial-killer in action who creates dilemmas and plays with his victims (in "Seven" and in the "Saw" saga). I've seen it all: "The Dark Knight" is nothing new. And it's very predictable: you really can predict any sequence before seeing it. There are a lot of absurdities. The heroes could kill The Joleker dozens of times, but they never do it. Why? Are they retarded? The "two ships dilemma" (I don't want to reveal more about that scene) is not realistic at all. There are only a couple of surprises, but the 2/3 of the movie doesn't create any suspense. What about the actors? The only two heroes of acting in this movie are Heath Ledger and Aaron Eckhart. Heath Ledger, with his Joker, bears quite the entire movie. All the other characters became secondary. Aaron Eckhart is really powerful and he confirms his talent shown in "Thank You for Smoking". What about the others? Christian Bale is one of the most talented actors of his generation, but in this movie he keeps only one expression all the time, with or without mask. His Batman has no personality. Maggie Gyllenhaal is one of the most interesting (and underrated) independent actresses of the New Hollywood, since "The Secretary". But in this movie she can act only in few sequences and she has no chance to show her real talent. Morgan Freeman and Michael Cane are giants, but in this movie they barely appear. Finally: I've never seen so many waste of talent! The good side of the coin in Christopher Nolan's work is: his philosophy. It's really positive and constructive and all his movie is coherent about it. It's just like the positive answer to "No Country for Old Men" and to modern nihilism: in the Cohen's movie, Evil is the absence of values and it's unstoppable. In "The Dark Knight", Evil is again the absence of values, but it's a minority, not the rule. So, we can fight Evil and defeat it, with or without super-heroes. But all those themes could be and should be explored better. "The Dark Knight" explores nothing.