These children are NOT AMUSED!

I suppose it does not reflect well on me to have so much fun at the expense of these kids, but it just isn't getting old. Good Times.

Yeah, this is happening.

So my last "review" of The Dark Knight was more advertisement than anything of actual substance, but, you know, its not like anybody's paying me to do this or forcing you to read, so get over it. Anywho, as we sit here today, I have seen the Dark Knight two more times and this last time, I saw it on the IMAX. If you haven't seen it on the IMAX and its a viable option for you, I highly, highly reccomend doing so, it will be worth the trip, because seeing it on the IMAX definately enhances the experience. I've already been giving thoughts to seeining it again on the IMAX while I can. I don't go see movies 4 times in theater, I just don't, but I have totally nerded out on the Dark Knight.

Warning for those of you who have not seen the Dark Knight yet (and if you haven't, I can only imagine you've just been released from prison, been living in the woods mailing explosive packages or are just being that jerk who rebels for the sake of being rebellious and if you're that guy, get over it, join the flock): While I'm not going to be blatantly posting spoilers, I'm not going to be avoiding them as I write this either, so they might be there. There, you've been warned. Now either go see the damn movie already or sit down shut up and enjoy the blatant ass-kissing I'm probably about to do.

Where to start? I guess I'll start with where you should start when reviewing a movie with as much history as the Batman franchise, and that is how you are acquainted with the franchise, because that definately colors how you view the franchise. To this day, I have never actually read a Batman comic. I've never been much of a DC guy, for whatever reason. The Batman I got into where the Animated Series and Michael Keaton... and Adam West (Come on, admit it, we all love him and that campy series). Those where what I loved, what I know and through which I have viewed the Batman mythology. The Animated Series really caught me as a kid because it was one of the few cartoon shows that didn't pander to the kid crowd, which made it cool. It could do serious. Also, I remember a few years ago when I found out that Luke Skywalker was the voice of the Joker and to this day, i still have trouble wrapping my head around that concept. Bless you, Mark Hamill, bless you. Also, I loved the original Batman movie. Tim Burton certainly has a flair and I would would go to battle for Michael Keaton as the best Batman. The sequel creeped me out as a kid (and still does, honestly). In all honesty, I actually liked the third and fourth one's when I saw them. I still think three is all right, definately a step back from Burton's Batman films, but not altogether bad. However, kind of like the Matrix sequels, upon subsequent viewings of the fourth one, I have developed a strong hatred for it. To this day, I still hold a grudge against George Clooney, even though his role in that disaster is limited.

Fast Forward a few years and enter Batman Begins. I entered that movie hesitantly, coming off the disasterpiece that was that fourth Batman movie. I had no idea who Christopher Nolan was and I'll be honest, I had difficulty differentiating between Christian Bale and Christian Slater. Christian Bale, I knew from Equilibrium, which a friend had reccomended to me and I was imminently impressed with him, but didn't have him committed to memory. Christian Slater as Batman was not something that inspired confidence (not a direct knock on Slater, really. he was great in True Romance, but I just don't think he's got Batman in him). Then there was the villain combination of the Scarecrow and Ra's Al Ghul, which did not inspire much confidence, even though Ra's was slated to be played by Ken Watanabe, who ruled in the Last Samurai (a movie I love, even if Tom Cruise is a nutball. Dude's still Maverick in my heart). They did not strike me as A-List villains, particularly Ra's. The supporting cast did inspire some confidence, because Michael Caine, Gary Oldman Liam Neeson, and Morgan Freeman (get well soon) aren't going to suck and its unlikely you'd get all these guys on board for a crappy movie. I also harbor a crush for Katie Holmes (even if she is being smothered by Crazy Tom. Anybody think that, like, Nicole Kidman held the keys to Tom's sanity? because when they were together, dude didn't seem to me to be so out there and it was only after their break-up that the wheels came off, I digress). As it turn out, I love Batman Begins. One of the things that impressed me about this interpretation of Batman was how it didn't feel like a comic book origin story. They told a story that made an emotionally scarred rich kid who becomes a bat themed masked vigilante and they made it make the kind of sense that works in movies. It was a movie that, I felt, you didn't have to be a fan of the comics (or cartoons) to enjoy, while also providing a backstory that showed the beauty of "interpretation." They didn't stick to the perscribed story, instead they explored the mythology and worked with it to create their story. Christian Bale rocked. I love this man. Liam Neeson played his role extremely well, as well. Poor guy seems kinda typed cast into the mentor role since Star Wars, but the man works it, Cillian Murphy is also underrated in what he does with the Scarecrow. Scarecrow wasn't much of a threat, sure, but he managed to be a great mix of creepy and slimey. Also, it seems to me Katie Holmes gets a bad rap for her performace. Seems to me Rachael is a thankless role to begin with. She's not great, but I wouldn't call her a negative. My biggest problem with Begins was the Batman voice. When under the cowl, Batman adopts a deep gravelly accent that was a bit much. However, over subsequent viewings, I've noticed the voice in this movie less and less and it makes sense for a few reasons. Its definately better than Superman, who looks acts and sounds exactly the same as Clarke Kent and no one notices. Also, in context, Batman is supposed to be a nightmare, not a person, so its another way that the voice works. It was a minor irritation, but one I've moved on from.

Now on to The Dark Knight. Going in, my concern was how can they possibly follow up on a movie as good as Batman Begins. I also had reservations of revisting the Joker. As I said, I was a big fan of the original Batman and Jack's performance is definately on my mind. My reservation are added upon when my buddy tells me that they cast Heath Ledger was the Joker. The pretty boy from the Patriot and that Knight movie? And you've got him trying to do a role Jack has already done? Uh-oh, they are f'n it up. ... Yeah, I look like a moron now, but... yeah, I'm a moron. Of course, my confidence is slightly restored when I saw an image of Ledger's Joker and found it thoroghly creepy, maybe this has got a shot. I mostly tried to avoid the previews, but you can only avoid so much and The Dark Knight has been everywhere for a while. It helped that the previews ruled. Then, of course, there was Heath Ledger's untimely passing and it became impossible to avoid elevated expactations for the Dark Knight. Also not helping keep expactations in line, there was Iron Man, which was another great comic book movie and had to be competition for Batman Begins and The Dark Knight as the best Super Hero movie.

It is astonishing that a movie with this much build up can not only deliver, but to deliver so thoroghly as the Dark Knight does. One of the recurring problems in comic book movies, especially sequels, is trying to do too much in their movies. Its a problem that plagued that latter Batmans, the third X-Men and Spider-Man films, among others. Either introducing too many new characters and new plot threads that nothing is allowed to develop or satisfy. The Dark Knight illustrates the difference between "trying" these things and "doing" them, because The Dark Knight is a big movie that does a lot, plot-wise and character wise, not to mention action wise. Where other movies fail to explore and develop their mythology or allow their threads to evolve into something satisfying, The Dark Knight succeeds because it manages to rush these elements without feeling like they are rushing. Through tremendous scripting and direction, the movie moves both briskly enough to keep the viewer engaged through its long running length, but also slow enough to allow the characters to develop and deliver the exposition necassary to make them count.

The atmosphere established in the Dark Knight is also a tremendous accomplishment. A problem many comic book movies have is creating a tension surrounding that world. The Dark Knight manages to create an atmosphere of true tension. Even the established characters don't feel safe. This is not a movie where everything is going to turn out all right, where good triumphs over evil and the good guys are always right and better than the bad guys. Eliminating this sense of safety has to be considered one of the top accomplishments. Many supposed triumphs are hollow triumphs, if they are evn triumphs at all and there are true consequences for the character's actions. There is no doubt that this is a dark and violent movie (its a wonder that it got a PG-13, then again, the MPAA is far more concerned with protecting our eyes from sex than they are violence, so whatever), but it is not without its moments of triumphs and levity. Insteadm I'd say that it is because the darkness faced by the good guys is so oppressive that their triumphs, even the modest ones, are so much more satisfying.

Heath Ledger is certainly one of the lightning rods of conversation surrounding this movie. It has become almost impossible to seperate this performance from the actor's death. There's something about dying young that can turn even the pedestrian into genius in some minds. However, Ledger's Joker is not pedestrian. As it stands right now, I'd have a hard time making a case that he should not be awarded an Oscar for this role post-humously (not that I'd want to take that position). I also think that its likely he would not be considered for that award had he not died. However, I don't think its fair to say that he wouldn't deserve it. This is truly an amazing performance. Ledger's Joker is truly a frightening, yet magnetic character. He manages to be terrifying and amusing all at the same time. The degrees of seperation you see between Joker's humor and his madness probably says something about you. Some of the stuff people laughed at from the Joker was a little disconcerting. In general, you just don't take roles that Jack has done and do them better, you just don't, but that's what Ledger does. his Joker makes Jack's look like a harmless prankster. One of the most impressive aspects of Ledger's performance, to me, is how he disappears in the role. While the makeup certainly helps and deserves its own props, Ledger still manages to be almost invisible. I didn;t see or hear heartthrob Heath, all I saw was the Joker. This Joker is a character that is exhausting to watch, I can only imagine how exhausting it would be to play. I think this performance is going to be a lightning rod of conversation for years to come, but, whether its because of his death or not, has earned its lofty elevation and any awards it may bring.

While, to a certain extent, Ledger owns this movie, the rest of the cast does its job tremendously. Christian Bale is Batman. I used to be a staunch supporter of Keaton, but Bale just own this role now. I'm not entirely sure how to explain this, but one of the things I love about Bale's Batman is that he is a complete character, he doesn't play Batman and Bruce Wayne, where one is more obviously the strength than the other, he plays it as Batman/Bruce Wayne, if that makes any sense. There isn't the seperation between the ego and the alter ego. The way it is played, clueless billionaire playboy Bruce is clearly an act and it is clearly used and manipulated by Bruce (in Begins, his brilliant get out of my house speech). In this movie, the subtle move of dumping out his wine at his party. Bruce's billionaire antics provide some of the moments of levity in the film. Bale doesn't display the insecurity some stars have when they are not the sexiest character. He doesn't try to steal thunder from his co-stars and, instead, works with them to enhance their scenes. He did so opposite Russell Crowe in 3:10 to Yuma and does so here when opposite Ledger or Eckhart.

Speaking of Eckhart, he also provides a, rather unexpectedly, great turn as Harvey Dent. He brings a lot of charisma to Dent and plays him with a great mix of brashness and swagger. You see how this man can earn the nickname Gotham's White Knight. He also gets to show his chops, as Harvey Dent's fall is as important a part of this movie as the Batman or the Joker, if not more important and Dent does a very solid job of playing this role.

Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman are their usual excellent selves in their supporting roles. They bring with them a dignity to any role they play that you just can't quantify.

Gary Oldman is excellent as Gordon. Oldman is a guy who has made an excellent career out of playing scene chewing villains or other over-the-top characters, has done well going against that type recently, with Gordon and as Sirius Black in the Harry Potter movies. He was painfully underused in Begins, but gives a really underrated performance here as the good cop, struggling to do the right thing in a world that has little room for good people.

Maggie Gyllenhal replaces Katie Holmes as Rachael Dawes. The change is largely cosmetic, IMO. If you aren't paying attention, you probably wouldn't even notice, as Gyllenhal plays Rachael very similar to Holmes. It just seems to be a thankless role.

One of the other aspects I love about The Dark Knight is the sense of continuity between Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. While I don't think its necessary to see Begins to appreciate The Dark Knight, it certainly doesn't hurt. The Dark Knight picks up in a logical point from where Begins left off. There isn't that need to reset or reintroduce things. The world of the Dark Knight is the same as the world of Begins. I love that they brought Cillian Murphy back for a cameo to tie up one of Begins's loose ends (it also provides one of my favorite lines in the movie).

The movie is not without its flaws, but they are nitpicks as much as anything. The Batman voice is exposed here, as Batman has more lines and more important lines and that voice is distracting when delivering them (to be fair, Batman had been battered, stabbed and shot when he delivers some of them, which I think is quickly forgotten). Also, what the hell happened at Bruce's party after Batman falls off the roof?

I have a lot of faith in Christopher Nolan. Not just for his Batman series, but his other work (I highly recommend Memento with Guy Pearce and that guy and girl from the Matrix. Great movie. Insomnia is pretty good, but more impressive is the fact that Nolan is able to restrain Al Pacino and Robin Williams), but how the hell do you follow this movie up? I mean, I don't think you can possibly top this movie, but it is just too good, making too much money and had an ending sequence that just leaves me salivating for more. The ending, while I don't think necessarily requiring a sequel, sets up one beautifully for the most part. This is further complicated by Ledger, as I just don't think you can recast the Joker in a sequel (who the hell would want to try and follow that?) and it seems pretty clear that Joker was in the plans for one. Without a return of the Joker, what Batman villains are left that could really follow this one and work for the themes? I hope they make a third, because that ending was just too awesome not to follow up on, but I just don't know if you can realistically expect them to match what will have to be the unrealistic expectations it'll have. However, as long as Nolan and Bale are on board, I'll give it a shot.

See it.

... Go.

...

...

Why are you still here? What were you expecting? ... A review? Oh, yeah, that's kinda my thing. Well honestly, unless you've been living under a rock, you've heard, by now, about how great this movie is. Well, honestly, I have nothing else to add to those, so I'm not really going to try. I could probably link you to a few if I must.

...

Ugh, fine, I'll say a little more.

Fan of the comics: you've probably already seen it... twice

Fan of comic book movies: Definately see it. It makes other comic book interpretations look like they've been done by amateurs

Fan of Batman Begins: Are you serious?

Fan of Heath Leadger: You need to see it... like 7 times at minimum. He's going to take home a few awards.

Fan of Christian Bale: ... And you haven't seen it yet? You're reading this. Are you high?

Fan of action: Just f'n go already!

Fan of acting: It ain't all about the explosions. Go.

Fan of movies: Stop reading, its obvious, by now what I'm going to say.

Not a fan of anything: Ya know, you'll probably still love this movie.

Though, I wouldn't take Grandma or the young ones. That's about it. Otherwise, you really don't have an excuse as far as I'm concerned.

Just f'n go! If you've already seen it, you know how good it is, go see it again. Give these people your money. Support movies like this, don't let your girlfriend (boy that's a generous assumption) force you to see Mamma Mia. If you are forced to, buy a ticket to the Dark Knight anyway!

Rating: Take a guess.

Sadly, this probably isn't even my most poorly written review.