Okay, what did I miss? I read nothing but glowing reviews of Batman The Dark Knight, and I watched it Tuesday night....and it was, like, alright.
The plot holes were big enough to drive a John Deere through. And the denouement was nothing if not underwhelming. WTF??
On the other hand...Heath Ledger, may he rest in peace, was totally AMAZING! Honestly, I had expected that the praise of his performance had been inflated by the media and Hollywood because of his untimely and sad death. I figured he'd get an sympathy Oscar, you know, because he croaked. But, by God, he really was great. If he is voted Best Actor, I won't argue. And though it's a little selfish, after seeing that stunning performance, I'm even sorrier that he died. Imagine what we might have seen; what he might have done had he lived. His death is not just a tragedy for him and his...but for us. We are a little poorer for his death too.
But getting back to the movie. Am I the only one who thought the plot was sloppy and stupid? Am I the only one that thought that when you warn people they are potential victims of a clever and devious criminal, you don't let them stand in front of wide open, uncovered, plate glass window brightly lit in the middle of the night? Am I the only one that knew immediately that in a hostage situation, what appears to be masked gunmen, lined up single file, standing in plain sight and directly in the line of police fire, just might be the hostages?
Seriously, how stupid are Gotham City police?
Am I the only one that didn't get the central, plot revolving "choice" the Joker offered Batman? There were two people in danger. Batman had time to save only one. The idea, I guess was that he had to choose between them, condemning one to die. Horrors.
Well, except that the police were part of the scenario: so there was an entire police force ready to rush to the aid of the "other" one. Lessens the finality and the curse of the "choice" it seems to me.
"I'll save her, you save him." Not that gut wrenching. Not that tough. Not that soul-searing a choice, really.
Okay, it didn't quite work out. But the CHOICE was the point of the exercise from the Joker's point of view. And it was, well, stupid.
And did anyone else care what the hell happend to the chick, whose name I can't even remember? What a two-faced lying selfish bitch. Am I wrong??
She keeps Bruce on a string, promising to be there when he can give up being Batman, while all the time, planning to marry Dent. Kind of a whore, really. I just couldn't work up any sympathy when she bit the big one. Call me insensitive.
As for the denouement, according to the reviews I read (wishful thinking as far as I can tell, by Conservatives who wanted it to be so) Batman realizes that playing by the rules when fighting an enemy without rules, and who exploits your "rule-keeping", doesn't work — so he goes Medieval on the bad guys. I was SO looking forward to that.
But no. A formerly good guy (Dent) turns crazy bad and goes Medieval on good people, murdering several of them (exposing the fact that his "goodness" was about a millimeter deep) and rather than allow Dent's Dudley Do-Right image tarnished in the public eye after his death, Batman accepts the blame for what he did, preserving Dent's White Knight image for a desperate-for-hope populace, while assuming, in the minds of those same people, the image—but not the reality—of the evil, Dark Knight.
Noble? Sure. The right message about fighting wild, pointless, maniacal, destructive, evil effectively? Not so much.
Tell me where I'm wrong here.
Pros: The action was stupendous. And loud. The Joker was a tour-de-force. Watching Christian Bale do anything on screen is worth the price of admission.
Cons: The plot sucked wind, and the characters were less realistic than in a comic book.
Did I mention that Morgan Freeman's hysterical response to Batman's single slight deviation from absolutely police-legal protocol was so farcically absurd and so extreme it actually made you blink and assume you must have missed something?
Overall, I have to recommend the damn movie because you absolutely have to see Heath Ledger's Joker. Oh...and the action scene at the warehouse. Holy Shit. But other than that, snooze through the rest.
The Gunslinger
Joebama American citizens 2024 print
8 months ago
I thought it was about 45 minutes too long, about the same length of time as the Two-Face add-in. But Heath Ledger was great.
ReplyDeleteFirst:Welcome back!(Tho I did have a Sarah Connor scenario in mind:"where did Gunny go?"Yikes!).Good points on "Dark Knight".Thing is,I watched "Rescue Dawn" (w/Bale) and "I'm Not There" (pic w/both Bale and Ledger playing Bob Dylan,and 4 others as well),so I was a little disappointed,as well.Still,a good movie,tho not up to Andrew Klavan's wish-essay.Thought it ironic that Maggie Gyllenhall was in this,considering her bro Jake was in "Brokeback" with Ledger (ONLY movie of his I haven't seen-just couldn't go there!).Suggest watching "Damn You,Batman" funny vid on "thosearentmuskets.com" for a laugh.Welcome back.
ReplyDeleteMr.Holton has a point,re:Two-Face add-in.The more villains added to Batman movies,the more diluted,and the plot/sub-text suffers.Hollywood,like the politicians,never learn,it's just "Pile it on!"
ReplyDeleteGS
ReplyDeleteWelcome back.. gotta recharge them batteries. Amen sister.
Re: Dark Knight.. I too thought Ledger was great.. but there is a point in here somewhere on how evil can infect a person. I wonder how much of his joker persona invaded his waking life.
What I didnt really care for was the moral equivalence that the movie reached for when it equated Batman to the Joker. It was as if they were saying that by fighting evil with extreme prejudice you become evil. I just dont buy that argument.
Take care and gird your loins for the coming Dark Ages...
Bill Henry
Someone said: "Sometimes good men must do bad things, but it does not make them bad men."
ReplyDeleteAlternatively, Saddam Hussein loved his daughters. Doesn't make him a good guy.
And the problem with that sentiment in the movie is that Batman DIDN'T fight evil with evil. The worst he did was briefly eavesdrop on private conversations to find the Joker...over which the Morgan Freeman character had a total cow ...in the face of the Joker's glee in the random murder of multitudes of innocents, mind you.
It was patently stupid, and so off-key for the character and such an insult to common sense that it clanked like a broken motor...and stopped the flow of the movie in its tracks. Only Hollywood could come up with something that stupid.
Or someone who's been to college.
Did I miss some serious vigilante action by our hero? When he took down the SWAT teams in the warehouse (without killing them), it was only because they were about to kill the "masked gunmen" they were too stupid to realize were hostages.
Otherwise, he was a paragon of restraint. Certainly more than I would have been. Indeed, if anything, the rigid adherence to "rules" was shown to be useless and foolish in the face of unremitting evil...but old Batman still could not drop the coin.
Watch "Shooter" with Mark Walberg...and see how it should have ended!
Had Batman actually done what Marky does, he could proudly go into that good night, as the Dark Knight...reviled for what he actually did, but having DONE what was actually necessary.
That's an ending I could have gotten behind. This one left me cold and extremely unsatisfied.
Unusual after spending a couple of hours with Christian Bale...hehe.