">

Friday, August 1, 2008

To discuss a Dark, Fun Knight at the movies...


Ah, "The Dark Knight."
You know how much money this movie has made since it's release? About 30 times more than "The Love Guru."
I finally saw it last night after repeated promises to watch it with a friend, who shall remain nameless if only so I don't have to discuss how she has never seen any of the first three Indiana Jones movies. There's one called the Temple of Doom, for goodness sake. How many times do you get to watch something called the Temple of DOOM? How can that not catch your fancy? It's guaranteed good times.
I digress.
Going into the movie, I had high expectations. How could I not, really? It was getting four stars and thumbs up and wet dreams from every reviewer around, and then there's the whole dead Heath Ledger thing. I would've been more impressed if they would've shot the whole movie with a dead Heath Ledger--CGI is amazing these days-- but that didn't happen.
Ok, so if you're reading this, I hope you've seen the movie so I don't spoil anything for you. That's your warning. If you continue, I'll assume you were the type of kid who shook and gently ripped open your Christmas presents days before to see what you had. Santa knows. Santa always knows.
I gotta say the whole movie was impressive. I mean, really impressive. Ledger does the nearly impossible task of having the audience laugh while still creeping everyone out. I do wonder if Ledger hadn't died, if there would have been as much hype over his performance, but still, this is one of the best villains in a movie in years.
The action sequences are sweet. There are some things I hadn't seen done before, and Batman does a lot more flying (which makes sense, cause, hey, he's a bat) than in past movies.
The acting overall is good enough that you're focused on the story and not, "Oh hey, it's Morgan Freeman." Could've done without Christian Bale's inexplicable lisp and Old Man River-low voice when he was in Batman gear. I'm sure it was to distinguish him from Bruce Wayne, but he was a trenchcoat and a lollipop away from luring small children into an unmarked van. Although, I gotta think the Batmobile would be the ultimate child molester vehicle, right? What kid is going to ignore an invite into that? On a good note, there is no real Batmobile, so children everywhere, breathe a sigh of relief.
I did have a problem with the casting of Jake Gyllenhaal's sister as the romantic lead. Jake had better chemistry with Ledger in Brokeback than Maggie had with Bale, and that could have something to do with the fact that her face looks more post-hit-in-the-face-with-a-shovel than pre-, but at least she delivers her lines convincingly.
Visually, Chris Nolan, the director, does a great job creating Gotham- beautiful overhead sprawls of the city, shadowy corners, desolate locations. He even avoids the problem other "dark" movies have- they're too freakin dark and you can't see what's going on.
Really, the only visual problem I had was with the mayor. He has more eyeliner on than a hooker. Truly. You'll notice it next time you watch, trust me.

So, "The Dark Knight." You get your four stars, your thumbs up, your acclaim from me. But here's hoping no one has to die just before the next sequel for you to pull in $300 million.

1 comment:

Adamma said...

You write very well.

Related Posts Widget for Blogs by LinkWithin