Pop culture Politics Perversion Advice Speedmonkey.net

AddThis Social Bookmark Button

Latest & Greatest

please stand by

Skank of the Week (NSFW)


Shauna Sand's Nipple

Movie Review

The Dark Knight

Details

Views: 123
Rating: 3
Votes: 0
Comments: 0

Rate

Images

Tags

Dark Knight, Dr.Tom, Movie Review
This is certainly one for the books as far as its genre goes, so SEE IT. That being said, there are weaknesses too that no one seems to be pointing out. Overall, the film is a success, and will likely change some jerkoff studio fuckheads' minds about "Just feed 'em crap and sell the toys, it's a comic book movie for god's sake," as it manages to be a real movie (as 'Batman Begins' did) that can entertain comic geeks as well as civilians.
 
The story begins in a Gotham where Batman has now made a difference in that criminals feel endangered when doing their business under the infamous bat signal in the sky. However, Batman (Christian Bale) has failed to inspire the citizens to take the action against crime he was hoping for, as the only folks who seem to wanna help are dickheads who dress like Batman and try to do his job for him (basically, 'World of Warcraft' goons in costumes on their time off from intermediate karate class). Then, a ray of hope makes itself evident in Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhart), the city's heroic new district attorney who isn't afraid to stand up to the villains and do it without a mask. When they are introduced by Lieutenant Gordon (Gary Oldman), it seems to be a prosperous alliance for the citizens -- the only problem is a new villain in town named The Joker (Heath Ledger), who is bent on bringing down everything organized in the world, even if it's 'organized' crime. As MacBeth would say, there is no method to his madness, but one thing he does respect is that Batman is the ying to his yang, which makes for the relationship the characters always had in the comics that "Batman" in '89 missed. From there on, I won't spoil the story, go see it, it's good, but it does suffer from a bit of sequalitis at times. For one thing, Maggie Gylenhaal is Katie Holmes' Rachel... So, um... Why? Sure, Gylenhaal is three times the actress Holmes is, but it doesn't show here at all, there's even a crying scene without tears that the actress should be plain ashamed of. On top of that, let's face it, Holmes is way hotter, and if the role is limited to "the love interest" as it is here (for both Bruce Wayne and Harvey Dent), it's a tad more stressful when the hotter chick is in trouble at the hands of the bad guy. Sure, Gylenhaal's got a sexiness factor, but hers is a sassy and zippy one, while Holmes is of the hot good girl variety, so it's like watching a whole different character that we're not really attached to that much get treated like the love of Wayne's life that we got to know for over two hours in the last flick. Since the Rachel role is limited in this one to just reacting off what the men here are up to, you'd figure that a team this professional could've bitten the bullet and rewritten the fucker to allow a new female lead to play a new female lead. Alfred the butler (Michael Caine) suffers the same fate here, being reduced from the well-rounded human who works as a butler we met in the last flick to the simple old guy who does everything that's required of him and is constantly there to know best in case anyone in the world opens their mouth with some hint of confusion. By the end, it seems a trifle one-dimensional. And, sadly, the other character who needed to have some more darkness in him is Harvey Dent. While his fall from grace has him doing some technically bad deeds, it seems like a slight cop-out that one tragedy gets him to suddenly go bad. The backbone of "Batman Begins" was how complex the transformation from victim to vigilante was, and this one tosses that theme out the window. There's also a cameo from a beloved "Batman Begins" character in here that couldn't be lamer, especially considering what could have been done with the said character after the wonderful buildup the first installment gave us for them. When they appear, it's an appearance that seems to be there for the real dorks in the audience to go "Ooh! Ooh! It's THAT character! YAAAAAYYY!!!" After that, pltlp (farting sound). Then there are the sequalish lines here and there that are for the same people to go "Ooh, remember how they said that in that one part in the last movie too?" And, finally, there are the moments of too much damn dialogue that look good on the paper of a comic book and just sound lame when said by real people (what a grip of "Spiderman 2" suffered from as well, and this flick is supposed to be in a league of it own from "Spiderman 2," given the real-life feel it's going for). In fact, the bulk of the dialogue in this one needed a makeover, as the word 'subtext' is basically said aloud (get it?). When Ra's Al Ghul pontificated in the first flick, it was okay for a philosopher-warrior from the mountains of some weird place in Asia. For everyone else, it's a tad much to say exactly what they're thinking whenever they speak.
 
Okay, now the bitching part of the review is over and it's time to praise the grand accomplishment this thing is in a world where bullshit like that Indiana Jones crystal crap makes it to the screen with big names and talented people behind the scenes. For all its weaknesses, there is a reason I seem to be the only critic who's pointing them out, and it could be because this flick is such a breath of fresh air when compared to pretty much every other fucking thing with action and stuff like that in it that gets pushed on us. I can't imagine the dying hope in the minds of real movie critics who see EVERY movie that shits itself into the multiplex, so I can't judge them for overrating this one. Plus, HOLY MASHED POTATOES, BATMAN, this thing is a far cry from some of the slander Hollywood has put on one of the coolest fictional characters ever. Here, Batman is Batman, not some actor with a suit that some gay homo director insisted have nipples on it so he could have a real-life image of the Batman he fantasized about as a boy. Granted, this one kinda sorta lets Batman look sillier than he did in "Batman Begins" here and there with some moments where he'd be much more effective being silent and scary than offering some witty little comeback with his raspy snake whisper-yell, but he's still 'THE Batman' enough to make you slightly jealous of how cool he is. The action's SUPERB here, and the only regret that I had watching it was having already seen some parts on the previews that I wish could have been a bigger surprise (although, as an anti-spoiler spoiler, some images on the previews and things said by director Chris Nolan in interviews have been purposefully misleading!!). Nothing about the action is uncool, that's that. And as far as that saying about the story only being as strong as its villain...
 
God killed the wrong gay cowboy. No shit, Jake Gylenhaal should've been taken, not Heath Ledger. No more lame movies with him in a role that an actual actor deserves, ol' Reese Witherspoon would be available, and (if it were sooner than Ledger's death) maybe Maggie would've gotten depressed and bailed on the project so they could just write out the love interest role altogether and focus this thing more on its villain, because Heath Ledger left us with the ONLY Joker there has ever been outside of a comic book. Sorry, Jack, you're still Jack and you're cooler than hell, but you danced to Prince, and let's just face it that no villain would ever do that unless he were raping a male model. Honestly, maybe I'm only picking on this film's little shortcomings because of how damn lame it is that this is the last thing we get to see from Ledger now, this young, brilliant actor who didn't really start showing us what he really was made of until just recently in "Brokeback Mountain." This Joker is the Joker that anyone who's a real Batman fan has been waiting for, and also a villain that anyone who's never even heard of this 'Batman' character can look at and go "Damn, that guy scares me." Again, it's quite possibly Ledger's performance that ruins the flow of this thing, because the role was written and acted with such damn perfection that it makes the rest of the movie look like it's trying to keep up with him. When we're instructed by the story to spend more time focusing on a villain that isn't him, it's like the film is dragging us away from him as kicking and screaming children. And when the rare case occurs that his would-be victims get rescued just in time, we're almost angry that the story doesn't let him get to carry out something that evil so we can be more frightened and repulsed. If anything, even if you're a snob who can't stand silly movies about anyone in a cape or some bitch who made her boyfriend go out to "Sex and the City" but won't try this one for his sake, SEE THIS MOVIE FOR LEDGER'S PERFORMANCE. Like a great first date, you leave it wanting more, and the only lame part of it is that, in this case, you won't get it. HEATH LEDGER 1979 - 2008
 
All in all, the Dark Knight doesn't outdo "Batman Begins," the Joker does. The first one was about Batman, and this one is about the Joker, and its weakness lies in that it tried to be about a little more than that in its ambitiousness (a moral dilemma Lucius Fox (the always-great Morgan Freeman) has in one part tries to draw one of the many parallel references here to the war on terror and ends up just making you side with Bush about it), but it does end up delivering as a great sequel, great popcorn flick, and great entertainment, so see it, see it, see it, see it, see it, see it.
 
(four bongs)

Read more movie reviews

Comments

There are no comments on this item.


Name
Email
Comment
 

Top Viewed Stories

FMK

please stand by

Blogroll



don cherry

Speedmonkey - Pop culture, pics & more.

Dating Advice | NSFW | Celebrity Gossip | Galleries | Movie Reviews | Music Reviews | Video
Mixed Martial Arts | Hot 100 | Contact