The Dark Knight

Opening Date: 07/18/2008

STUDIO: Warner Bros.

TRAILER: Trailer

ACCOMPLICES: Official Site

The Charge
Why so serious?

Opening Statement
The most anticipated nerd movie in recent history, Christopher Nolan’s follow-up to the relaunched Batman franchise, The Dark Knight has wowed early reviewers, captivated fans with an engaging online guerrilla advertising campaign, and immortalized the young Heath Ledger’s role in infamy. It also currently stands at #4 on the IMDb Top 250 list.

Is this the magnum opus of comic book adaptations? Or is it simply (gasp!) another mediocre sequel?

A little of both, as it turns out.

Facts of the Case
Things are looking good for Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) aka Batman, protector of Gotham City. Due to his constant vigilance, crime in Gotham is slowly decreasing, and citizens are beginning to appreciate his actions, even attracting some unwelcome imitators. Unfortunately for Batman, his heroic vigilantism has attracted some more unsavory elements. The mob presence, which once ruled Gotham under its well-dressed shoes, now finds themselves at a loss. In their place, rapidly rising is a new kind of criminal, an anthesis to the caped crusader, given flesh and form by way of the Joker (Heath Ledger).

Despite the efforts of stoic police officer Lt. Jim Gordon (Gary Oldman) and rising star D.A. Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhart), the three are unable to anticiate this new threat. The Joker is unlike any element Gotham has ever seen before, killing without motive, striking surgically, and rapidly descends Gotham into fear and disorder. Batman struggles with this new challenge, fearful of the person he must become in order to subdue such a wild and elusive threat. He also struggles with his growing conflict and admiration towards Dent. As a symbol of hope for Gotham, Dent can inspire people in a way Batman cannot… but he may lose his longtime love, Rachel (Maggie Gyllenhaal) to his charm.

The Evidence
Never has a film in recent memory inspired so much glee and anticipation in the masses as The Dark Knight. People have been seething for this film, frothing at the bit, anxious for what may be the most satisfactory comic book adaptation ever put to film. If you are one of those people, and you have yet to see The Dark Knight, you may as well stop reading this review now, because you will probably not like what you are about to read.

As sequels go, The Dark Knight hits home, and hits often, upping the emotional ante, adding new villains, pulling out a compelling performance from the late Heath Ledger, one that is sure to be his headstone on a short but brilliant career, and entertaining audiences through its crushingly long running time. It is a good film… but only a good film. Greatness, incredibleness, holy realms of bodaciousnes; despite what you may have heard (or perhaps more accurately, desperately want to believe) these are all elements that have eluded The Dark Knight.

Brooding and melancholic, the emotional tone of the film dives straight into the nether regions and never once comes out, creating one of the more maudlin comic films in recent memory. The Dark Knight is obsessed with the space between good and evil, black and white; a duality best reflected by the film’s second villain, Two-Face, who himself is a walking metaphor for the themes examined. Tossing around meandering philosophical musings on the nature of evil, of justice, of heroism, Batman struggles endlessly (and annoyingly) with the realization that he must betray the very values he swore to uphold in order to get the job done this time, and cannot quite seem to wrap his head around it. Likewise, both Gordon and Dent fight their own consciences in order to bring down a criminal threat that seemingly has no conscience of any kind.

The Joker is the polar opposite of Batman, emerging from the shadows of Gotham as a cruel kind of counter-balance. Had Bruce Wayne never donned a cloak and started leaping from buildings, we ask ourselves, would the Joker have emerged? For every ying, there must be some serious yang, and that is exactly what Heath Ledger brings to the role. Ledger is undeniably creepy and frightening as the cackling, rambling, insane crime boss, throwing the entire city into chaos for the sheer desire of chaos. A fantastic and noteworthy performance, Ledger gives the role his all, and is the star of the film from start to finish. Every sequence he is on screen is magnetic and mesmerizing. Still, it is a problematic performance, one inexorably linked to Ledger’s untimely death. Had the young man not passed away so tragically, it is unlikely the masses would be carrying on in quite the same fashion, calling for awards and whatnot. To be brutally honest, Ledger’s performance is fantastic, but not Oscar winning material by any stretch. His performance is very good, but not godly.

Ledger’s stellar performance is both a blessing and a hindrance for The Dark Knight as a whole. When the Joker is on-screen, all is well, but it is unsettling to realize that Batman repeatedly gets outperformed in his own movie at every turn. Bale delivers his dialogue as if he just finished smoking seventeen cigars in rapid fashion, syncopating his dialogue in an emphysemic and ridiculous snarl. As Wayne, he is melancholic and moody, and as Batman he is just plain angry. In comparison, Ledger is vibrant, dynamic and completely committed to his performance, literally stealing the entire film away. Any scene with Aaron Eckhart also eclipses Bale, belting out a hammy but passionate turn as the saving grace of Gotham, and gets a surprising amount of screen time devoted to his tale. To avoid any spoilers, nothing more of his fate will be discussed here, but suffice it to say, the film is as much his as it is the Joker’s.

As sequels go, The Dark Knight is satisfying overall, coming back to the plate with more of everything the first film had; more fighting, more explosions, more dark and somber brooding and more over-the-top villains. It also came back with a running time of over two and a half hours. The Dark Knight is punishingly long, cramming in enough erstwhile plot points, zig-zags and twists in to fill out two or three films. The ambition is impressive, and occasionally achieves moments of inspired brilliance, but they are disappointingly brief. The vast majority of the film is solidly average, and really needed to be a good thirty minutes shorter. Too many times, the narrative simply felt lost in a sea of calculated fight scenes, bank heists, explosions, car chases, running from point A to B to C without any narrative oversight. The film peaks early, and never really climaxes into anything substantial or dramatic—it simply bumps up and down like the constant beeping of an EKG machine.

Shot primarily in Chicago, The Dark Knight has cinematic style aplenty and audiences gorge on iconic shot after shot. Some of the compositions are nothing short of phenomenal, and for all its murky, angry cynicism, The Dark Knight is a beautiful-looking film. If you get the chance to see it in IMAX, go ahead and treat your senses.

Closing Statement
A solid sequel, but The Dark Knight buys a little too much into its own hype. The film is overly long, moody, sullen and ill-tempered, with a muddled plot that meanders in philosophical conundrums about the nature of good and evil instead of taking audiences into a narrative story worth remembering. We are left with mere fragments and sequences, like a jigsaw puzzle tossed on a table—all the pieces are here, but the film never bothers to assemble them. Ledger’s performance is impressive and memorable, but not the gold-plated euphoric grand slam required to rest the entire film upon his shoulders.

There are moments of solid execution and iconic imagery, but the majority of The Dark Knight is disappointingly average. It hurts to admit it, but here we are.

The Verdict
Good… but not great. Fans hoping for the moon will be disappointed, so tether your expectations accordingly, and you will enjoy The Dark Knight a lot more.

7/10

Q: What were your impressions of your Gotham Knight segments?

AO: I loved them… and I wanted more! This was one of my first real voiceovers and, to do it for Batman, was quite an honor. My husband and all of his cartoony friends were really into it. They all watched my copy of the movie and dug it. I have to admit that it’s fun being in something that my guy friends could get into. So now I’ve got my macho cred, too.

Q: What did you think of the physical appearance of your character?

AO: I was thrilled. I’ve always wanted curly long locks, so that was so cool. And she’s super cute. I loved she wasn’t too stuffy. Sometimes with lady cops, they try to be too much like guys. She was foxy, she had jeans and a cute little blazer. It was fun to see her when we were doing the voices, but it’s really cool to see the film in its final form.

Q: What were your initial impressions of the script and your role in the story?

AO: It was cool for me because my character is a peacemaker. Usually the roles I get are the in-your-face instigator or fighter, but the nuance with her is as a peacemaker — getting her partner to calm down and understand that Batman just might not be a vigilante. It was fun to play that angle, because usually I’m playing the one screaming and fighting. As a person, I would say I’m sort of a peacemaker, but I think I’ve evolved into that role. When I was younger, I was more of a fighter. L.A. has helped me find that side of myself.

Q: The core theme of your segments, especially the “Crossfire” chapter, deal with trust. Do you trust easily?

AO: I think I trust fairly easily… which is odd for a New Yorker. But I think I do trust because I’ve had pretty good experiences. I think I’m also a good judge of character, so that’s a good combination – it’s worked out well for me so far.

Q: With this being your first full-blown animation experience, was there any nervousness in the recording booth?

AO: I just wanted to do a good job, and Andrea had given me such a great vote of confidence. Batman is such an icon and, for me, it was an honor to even be doing it. You want to be great, you want to bring justice to the characters, and bring these characters to life. It’s a whole different style of acting and the artwork is so impressive that I guess it was a little nerve-racking to try and do that, but it was also fun. I was definitely nervous going it alone at first, but when Gary (Dourdan) came in and we started to do some scenes together, that’s when it really, really came alive. It felt like we had a cool thing going in the studio and, watching the film now, I remember certain moments when our energy together was really working well. He walked in and that really turned the switch for me. The relationship those two characters have on screen — we were able to do that in real-time in the booth. He pushed me to meet his energy. So I really enjoyed the support of Andrea and Gary.

Q: What helped you more in preparing: your experience on the stage or your experience in front of the camera?

AO: Stage acting has helped me in every aspect of my life, not just acting. I think it gives you a confidence and helps to always keep you on your toes. My best friend is a member of an improv comedy theatre, and it’s like she always says: “Anything can happen at any moment.” In theatre, you have to always be prepared. There’s nobody there to save you. You have to figure it out for yourself. It’s a good skill for life and, definitely for any other work that I’ve done, it’s been my saving grace.

Q: Would you like to do more voiceover work?

AO: I want to do as much as I possibly can. I love it, love it, love it. Voiceover is so good, you can do crazy voices and all kinds of characters. Being Latino, it’s hard to get cast for anything that isn’t specific. People expect me to be that larger than life character they’ve already seen, and it’s so specific that it’s hard to get other parts. In voiceover, they don’t judge you on your looks or your past roles — I can be a 90-year-old man or a tiger or whatever. It’s very freeing. So I want to do as much voiceover as I can.

Q: Are you a fan of the comic book or superhero genre?

AO: I’ve always been a comic book fan, but I’m a girl — so I liked Archie and Betty and Veronica, Mad, and Cracked. I liked super heroes, but I was more for live action, like Linda Carter as Wonder Woman. Of the Saturday morning cartoons, I liked Super Friends and Animalympics. Otherwise, I wasn’t a huge cartoon girl.

Q: Are you a Batman fan?

AO: I guess being in New York, you always have a certain affinity for anyone who lives in Gotham. But I was raised as a Superman girl, because my dad is a Superman freak. I mean, he didn’t name his kid Kal-El or anything like that, but he is obsessed with Superman and he loves Smallville. When I got the job on Ugly Betty, and they told us were were going to air on Thursdays at 8 pm. I told my parents and my own father started saying ‘What am I going to do? What am I going to do?’ It’s because we were going to air against Smallville. He kept asking ‘What am I going to do? I can’t miss my Smallville?’ I told him, “Dad, you’re going to watch Ugly Betty.” Ultimately, we had to get him a TIVO. But I couldn’t even believe it was a quandary.

For more information:

Batman: Gotham Knight (official site)

Batman: Gotham Knight (behind the scenes)

Wikipedia: Ana Ortiz

Told you so.