Good, not great

Rating: 8/10 (7 January 2013)

Anybody who has seen or heard of this movie knows the hype surrounding Heath Ledger as The Joker. Ledger definitely "became" another person or character to the point where you would never know it's Heath Ledger under the clown makeup, because he drastically changed his voice and mannerisms in his own portrayal of The Joker. It's also hard to recognize Ledger PHYSICALLY because the black makeup around his eyes makes it harder to tell it's him, versus if he had white makeup around his eyes, like Jack Nicholson did. I must say that Jack Nicholson's Joker would have been even better if he would have changed his voice and mannerisms so it would be harder to tell it was him underneath that makeup. Ledger's Joker was not truly Joker-like overall, even if his portrayal is how the comic book Joker "supposedly" is (that's very debatable). His portrayal of The Joker was adequate for this realistic modern Batman movie. Cesar Romero's version was good for the campy 1960s TV series and the 1966 movie, and Jack Nicholson's version was good for the 1989 movie. But I often think of Ledger's famous line, "Why so serious?" I think that's a legitimate question he could have asked HIMSELF - "Why so serious?" Not enough laughing and clowning around for my tastes. Ledger did a good job ACTING, but the Joker should be funnier and live up to his name, The Joker. There should be a balance of evilness and dark humor. The Heath Ledger Joker was 85% evil, 15% funny. In contrast, the Jack Nicholson Joker was about 50% evil, 50% funny. But in defense of Ledger, he had to do what Christopher Nolan wanted him to do, for the most part. Unfortunately, Nolan's "realistic" approach to Batman doesn't allow The Joker to be truly Joker-like.
It was nice to see that this movie gave a tip of the hat to Cesar Romero during the bank robbery scene at the beginning of the movie. Heath Ledger is wearing a mask that is nearly identical to the one that Cesar Romero wore during the TV series episode The Joker Is Wild (1966). Romero wore the mask while singing opera at The Gotham City Opera Company during the Pagliacci performance.
I don't understand why the cops, after capturing The Joker, didn't wash the makeup off The Joker's face so they could see who's underneath the makeup. I would think that would be the first thing they'd do, but they didn't do it. If you like comic book movies with a lot of realism and seriousness to them where humor is almost nonexistent, then this will be your cup of tea. This movie has everything -- explosions, references to DNA, the latest technological gadgets, you name it. You know the setting is in 2008 when you watch it. I give this movie 4 stars instead of 5 because I think it fell short as far as having a true Batman comic book movie feel to it and for the lack of humor. I think this movie is way too serious and humorless. It tries to be so realistic, yet we've got Harvey Dent walking around with open wounds on his face, half of which is missing. Apparently there's no such thing as infections in this realistic world of Gotham City in The Dark Knight. Also, in a "realistic" world, if there was a guy roaming the streets wearing greasepaint on his face, people would laugh at him and not take him seriously and he'd get arrested easily, just like that "real life Spiderman" guy from a few years ago who appeared on the news climbing buildings. Any kook like that gets arrested. Easily. The same can be said about Batman, a guy dressed in a bat suit. People in a "realistic" world would laugh at him. If you're going to make a movie based on comic book characters, make it look like a comic book movie, not something that looks like a realistic and serious cop drama on prime time TV. On the other hand, if you insist on taking the "realistic" cop drama approach, you might as well go all the way with it. In other words, don't have anything in the movie that's unrealistic or unbelievable, such as Harvey Dent's face. Otherwise, the realism starts to get diluted and leaves you scratching your head.
Tim Burton got it right. He took the approach of making a comic book movie look like a comic book movie, which allowed him to get away with unrealistic and unbelievable things. Why is it that Christopher Nolan is ending the series after three movies, with The Dark Knight Rises being the final movie? It's very simple - he's running out of believable villains that he can use in his "realistic" crime drama world he's created. You can't have The Penguin in the realistic world he's created. You can't have Mr. Freeze, either. You can't have Poison Ivy, and on and on and on. Those are vintage comic book villains that simply would not fit into Nolan's Gotham City, which, by the way, looks too ordinary. Why does the Ledger Joker wear greasepaint on his face and green dye in his hair instead of being a guy who has white skin and green hair as a result of falling into a vat of chemicals? The answer is because in the realistic Nolan world, chemically discolored skin and hair couldn't happen. Why doesn't the Ledger Joker use a squirting lapel flower, a hand buzzer, etc.? The answer is because in Nolan's realistic world, these things would come off as unrealistic and campy. When you think about all the things I've mentioned, you can easily see that Nolan has sucked most of the character, life, feel, and atmosphere out of the Batman that we knew from the time period circa 1940 - 2005. Look at what he's done to the characters as well, including the iconic Joker.