Well, VIR wanted me to write a review for "The Dark Knight." I did so. Here's what I posted on Facebook and over in the Blog Lounge:
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Good afternoon, movie-goers, if it is a good afternoon, which I doubt. As the Blue Star rises up out of the East and shines down upon the Hillcats, only confrontation and argument do I foresee as I have to defend my spiritual beliefs at 2:00 PM. Such is the way of things, I guess.
I hate movie reviews that drag on forever with stodgy paragraphs and discount quips before the reviewer finally suggests whether or not the movie under scrutiny should be viewed. I'm going to get my recommendation out of the way, up front. Go see Christopher Nolan's "The Dark Knight." It is a stellar motion picture, the best in probably five years. Not since "The Godfather, Part II" has a sequel outdone its predecessor. The $10 is all worth the thrill and inspiration one would receive from viewing "The Dark Knight."
In this sequel to "Batman Begins," Batman (Christian Bale), Lt. (soon to be commissioner) Gordon (Gary Oldman), and Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhart) form a triumvirate to deal with the local mafia and a sociopath named "the Joker" (Heath Ledger). The Joker plays the pivotal role as the arch villian with the mafia merely collateral and at the mercy and persecution of both the law and the law-breaker. The Joker is a scarred, unkempt clown, the likes of which would be seen in a horror movie. The Joker cannot be bought out with money. He has no conscience to appeal to. He just wants to raise Hell. In a way, he wants to psychologically de-clothe Gotham City and reveal the heart of darkness, the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. It's up to the Caped Crusader to restore order on both sides of the law.
This is arguably the first film in a long period where the villain's performance upstages the hero. The late Heath Ledger's portrayal of the Joker, as much the antithesis to Batman as the Redskins are to the Cowboys, is masterful and original. Speculation leading up to the movie was on how close Ledger's rendition of the Joker would mimic Jack Nicholson's classic role. I can tell you this: there is NO RELATION other than the name and a few homage scenes in the movie. Nicholson's Joker was centered on gags, whereas Ledger's Joker is centered more upon statements and much drier humor. Ledger's Joker is more philosophocal and much more cunning. Also, his Joker is more scarred both internally and externally than the 1989 version. One common theme between the two Jokers is their signature just before they kill a victim. Nicholson's Joker would ask, "Have you ever danced with the devil in the pale moonlight?" It is a mere statement, lacking backstory and life, much like a sentence out of an inkjet printer manual when compared Ledger's Joker's recounting of twisted tragedy and emotional illness in his life. The Joker's father cut the corners of his mouth to put a smile on his face after a fit of rage with his mother. The Joker himself swooshed razor blades, like Listerine, to prove some trivial point to his wife after an argument. Ledger's Joker is darker; he's not a clown. His makeup deterioates throughout the film, giving off a rotting appearance. His hair becomes greasier and greener. He is base; he is vile. He is evil and cannot be bargained with. He fits in seamlessly with Christopher Nolan's solemn vision of the Batman story.
"The Dark Knight" in many ways is the "first" Batman movie, at least of Christopher Nolan's tenure. "Batman Begins" was as we would expect: a preamble of sorts. We were shifting into first and second gear with that one. With "The Dark Knight," Nolan takes it into overdrive. This movie does have scenes that compare and/or pay homage to Tim Burton's 1989 "Batman." The first notable one is when Batman, on his Batcycle, for want of a better term, plays a game of chicken with the Joker. Remember in "Batman" when Batman takes the Nightwing and flys it straight at the Joker and misses? It's the same thing, except this time, Batman is on a motorcycle. The Joker's final scenes in "The Dark Knight" are eerily similar to his predecessor's in "Batman." He's up on a skyscraper with the risk of falling to his death, and actually does fall, Ledger's Joker does, but is rescued by Batman. The final scene with Ledger's Joker is where he's upside down, his jacket and hair tossling in the wind, his face falling with gravity but appearing to be lifted upwards. It looks similar to the final scene in 1989 when the Joker was dead on the pavement, all spread out and smiling.
"The Dark Knight" aslo pays homage to Two-Face's comic book orgins. In the comic books, as well as in "Batman Forever," Harvey Dent is hit with acid in the face while prosecuting a crime boss. In "The Dark Knight," the mafioso on trial pulls out a gun and fires duds at Dent. Dent takes the gun, breaks it, and punches the witness in the face -- an interesting new twist on an old story. It's scenes like these that only validate the updates and renditions that Christopher Nolan put on the Batman franchise.
Take how Batman saves the hostages in the end. He uses sonar and cell phone technology, all with the aid of Lucius Fox (Morgan Freeman), to track down the Joker in the skyscraper under construction. In this area, Batman is superior to Superman. With technology changes, Batman will always have a different twist, a new way to approach the world. Superman's powers are irrevocable and unchangable. They are what they are. The Batman story can adapt to any age.
The special effects in this movie redefine spectacular and awesome. The only issue I had with the special effects, where I felt they were cheesy, was when the helicopter crashed and rolled towards the police truck carrying Harvey Dent. Other than that, the special effects were magnificent, as well as the makeup. Aaron Eckhart's Two-Face is the Two-Face that was meant to be seen on the big screen, not Tommy Lee Jones' campy cross-dresser, all respects to Mr. Jones. The acid-blotched side reveals the perpetually snarl, the crazed eye, the brokeness of Harvey Dent. When one views such a hideous face, one can only marvel and gawk at the burned side. This is the Two-Face that was meant for the movies.
The scoring for the film was decent. It's not worthy of purchase, but the music fits every dramatic scene. The sound effects were as one would expect at a blockbuster, action flick.
Movies today try to show what it would be like if a terrorist attack took place, whether it's intentional or happenstance. When I saw the chaos and drastic measures that THE CITIZENS took in this film, I thought, "Oh, my goodness. This is what would actually happen during a terrorist attack." Like I've said for a while, when artists get it right, they get it right. Christopher Nolan hit the nail on the head, like when the Kinks said, "There is no England now," and in that song "Pleasure and Pain": "There is no right or wrong; just pleasure and pain." Artists can be spot-on, and Christopher Nolan was.
So, in conclusion, do yourself a favor and see "The Dark Knight." You won't be disappointed. It could very well win Heath Ledger a posthumous Academy Award. The work Heath Ledger took upon himself to become the Joker really paid off. If one does not see "The Dark Knight," it would be bigger than missing Super Bowl XLII, when the Giants whipped the 18-0 Cheatriots.
I am Marcus Aurelius Maximus and I approve of this message.