Home > The M.O. > Archives > 2008 > July > 17 > Entry
‘The Dark Knight:’ This comic book movie ain’t no joke
Leaving a comic-based action movie, it is rare that the first thing you find yourself discussing and marveling over is not the mesmerizing action sequences, the incredible set designs, the tongue-in-cheek humor or the special effects. Such was the case with ‘The Dark Knight.’ Upon exiting the screening with Statesman film critic Chris Garcia, we immediately began to ponder the complexity of the morality play unfolded by co-writer/director Christopher Nolan.
As we attempted to untangle the web of messages and their allegoric intent, I began to wonder whether our struggle was a testament to Nolan’s accomplishments or failings as a filmmaker. In the end, I would say it was a little of both, although more the former than the latter. For as much as ‘The Dark Knight’ causes us to think about virtue, villainy, and human nature (wrapped in a dazzling and, for a comic book movie, very realistic visual package), it also confounds at times, partly because Nolan jumbles myriad complex ideas into his overly-lengthy film and introduces and removes said ideas, plot devices and characters at break-neck pace.
That said, the film, while falling short of the absolute masterpiece for which the talented Nolan, whose skills of labyrinthine storytelling are legend from movies such as “Memento” and”The Following,” seemed to be aiming, is fantastic … the best comic book movie I have ever seen. Rare is the movie that can hold up a mirror to the audience and make us ask questions about the choices we make as a society, questions regarding our safety, our perception of virtue, our honest with ourselves and our need to be protected to the point of being coddled. There are certainly overtones of terrorism that pervade the movie, almost all in the form of the sadistic Joker played by Heath Ledger.
In the months leading up to the movie, there were whispers of whether Ledger could be nominated posthumously for an Academy Award for his portrayal of the character played most famously in film by Jack Nicholson. I was skeptical to say the least when I heard what I considered must be sentimental postulating. After seeing the movie, I would almost be surprised now if he doesn’t get a nomination, although it is obviously early in the race to project. Ledger plays the sadistic villain whose past is an ever-evolving string of meaningless lies that vary depending on the intent of his manipulation with a psychotic’s glee, but relies more on subtlety in his mannerisms than did Nicholson. A flick of the tongue here, a crooked giddy-up in his step there, a face covered in make-up that looks like it was applied by Dameon, all riding shotgun to the perverse, intriguing and slightly effeminate lilting that reminds one of Marlon Brando doing a straight imitation of Jimmy Cagney. Straight up creepy.
Ironically, despite his sociopathic behavior, the Joker is one of the few characters who appears as he is. He is the least troubled and the most self-aware. His purpose is to be a catalyst of chaos, not to scheme and deceive or struggle with questions of right and wrong. I can not remember a character in recent cinema who has amused and disgusted simultaneously as Ledger’s Joker does. And, considering the serpentine philosophical quandaries in which the other characters in the film find themselves, the Joker’s honesty, lack of vulnerability and certitude are somehow a breath of fresh air. Air that just happens to be filled with sarin gas.
Read Statesman film critic Chris Garcia’s excellent review here.
Permalink | Comments (0) | Post your comment Categories: Movies
Comments
Austinites love to be heard, and we're giving you a bullhorn. We just ask that you keep things civil. Leave out the personal attacks. Do not use profanity, ethnic or racial slurs, or take shots at anyone's sexual orientation or religion. If you can't be nice, we reserve the right to remove your material and ban users who violate our Visitor's agreement. Click here to report comment abuse.