Dark Knight: Less fun than having your appendix out.

[richardf8]

After reading much critical acclaim Morgan and I went to see this with a friend of ours from Shul.



Batman/Bruce Wayne is the greatest villain in this universe. The Joker? Acting according to his nature, barely responsible for his own actions, as with a rabid animal running loose in a town the only moral course of action is to kill him. And Batman fails to do this. Why? I can't tell. Does he think that a justice system that has already failed tragically to hold him once is going to do anything about him? Indeed the Joker has effectively destroyed any semblance of Law and Order by the time Batman sends him hurtling to a certain death, only to save him at the last minute.

The Joker argues that Batman's refusal to reveal his identity makes Batman responsible for the Joker's murders. Harvey Dent correctly identifies this as a terroristic threat, and acts accordingly. Batman is not responsible for those murders. But having had the opportunity to kill the Joker and having passed it up, every single murder that the Joker now commits is on Batman's head, as far as I can tell.

And what the hell is up with that paternalistic BS that Batman/Bruce Wayne and and Commissioner Gordon pull at the end with preserving Harvey Dent's image as Hero and demonizing Batman further because "the common folk need something to believe in?"

When all is said and done, this film was a morally bankrupt morass of angst and horror that failed either to entertain or edify. Christopher Nolan has perpetrated an act of narrative sadism on the public, and the public, it seems, is either sufficiently depressed or sufficiently masochistic to sustain the film in the top rankings.

I go to movies to be entertained, if I want to stare into an abyss of moral depravity lacking either hero or savior, I'll watch CNN.

A word on Heath Ledger - his portrayal of the Joker was excellent, and I suspect led him to his death. Jack Nicholson, who has portrayed The Shining's Jack Torrance, Satan, and the previous Batman's less disturbing joker is said to have warned Ledger about the role. From Jack Nicholson, such a warning is to be taken seriously.

Comments

[lordrunningclam.livejournal.com]

I guess I liked the movie a lot more than you did. I liked that they finally came up with a credible origin story for The Joker. I liked that they turned him from a ninny prankster into a totally amoral psychopath whose only motivation is chaos and destruction. I liked the moral ambiguity of Batman and the clever double bind sort of situations the Joker placed him into. I think it's OK that they preserved Harvey Dent's public image (and yes, I think he's dead, he did his villain turn in this movie). I want to see this movie again, although I'll probably wait for the DVD to come out - I was thinking of going to the Imax version, which was too hard to get into at the time. I do think it is the sort of movie that takes more than one viewing to fully appreciate.

Who knows, after a second viewing maybe my enthusiasm for it will fade a bit, but I don't think so. However, I do think that the current superhero movie phenomenon in general says something about us as a society. I lack the anthropological and psychological vocabulary to express it, but I don't think it is particularly flattering. Or maybe Hollywood just tapped out every other source of ideas.

[deckardcanine.livejournal.com]

I liked that they finally came up with a credible origin story for The Joker.

I.e., none at all. He gives conflicting histories behind his scars. Maybe his subtle message is, "Wanna know how a man gets as villainous as me? Take your pick. Any of these will do the trick."