okay, i’ve decided to keep it spoiler free, but at the same time discuss the many themes and overall story archs that are involved within the film. i guess the simple questions that need to be answered are:

• is it the best batman movie ever? yes. simply due to its realism. tim burton created a gotham on his standards that for its time of release, was something that people have never seen before, and that is what the public wanted. the schumacher version were exactly what they needed to be during the time of their release, popcorn fillers. in this time of terrorism, torture, and just overall violence, Chris Nolan took a chance by combining a sense of realism with Batman, but because he did it that way, the audience connects better with the film than they could with the other 4 major ones released. Batman Begins was alot like Iron Man in a sense, with the establishment of characters, and now with The Dark Knight, we see what the current crop of superhero movies have to live up to, since everything in the world of Gotham City was already established.
• is it the best comic movie ever? yes and no. i believe that when looking at all the comic movies, the characters and worlds that are created are simply too different and varied based on the collaborations of the directors/writers/actors involved. that being said, i would say that to date, Spidey 2 was the best comic movie yet. but The Dark Knight pulled ahead by simple fraction of a point by not holding back what a city/terrorism/chaos would really be like in Gotham City, while Spidey’s New York always kept that sense of fantasy and sensationalism, you know? however, i will say this, Spidey 2 does have a more fulfilling third act in my book. not that The Dark Knight’s third act was bad. just about the last, oh, i dunno, 7-8 minutes or so.
• is it one of the best films of all time? maybe. it needs more time to develop, for people outside of the comic/fanboy genre to see it. i mean yeah, i know alot of people just saw it because “well, it’s The Dark Knight, like who wouldn’t?” as their reasoning, but I want more opinions from people who hated superhero movies, like all of the devil’s advocates, you know? because right now, i think there is a definite bias going, not that its a bad thing, but it might make the overall opinion of the film in the long run just plain weird and unjustified. i mean c’mon, better than Shawshank and The Godfather? really? but still, it was damn quality filmmaking, and I have to give the entire cast and crew respect for that.

okay, now, onto the film itself, i know that this is going to be a bit lengthy, and i respect you guys if you just skim through it or whatever, but i really feel like i need to get my thoughts out about it, i’ve seen the movie three times now, so i feel like i can really give a well rounded feel about it. okay, so, i guess we should start with the obvious:

Heath Ledger was incredible. however, and this is my only nit pick about the role, I feel like he was given almost TOO much power in the sense of terrorism in Gotham City. which actually made him amazing, but hey, i’m all about the good guys i guess. what really did the role for me was his very small mannerisms. a fall here, a laugh there, a lick of the scars here. i mean, yeah, he had absoutely incredible moments (pencil trick, anyone?) but for me, it was the absolute immersion in the character that provided me with shock and awe. and the simplicity behind his madness. the simple just being. i did feel like some of his monologues were a little forced at the end, with harvey and batman, i just feel it was a little cliche, except for the line, “You’re just too much fun.” which i really believed he felt that way towards Batman, and why he didn’t care about what happened in the long run, because he was enjoying what was going on. and mad props to Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard on the score, because let’s face it, Jaws took 2-3 notes for you to realize what was about to happen, but with The Joker, all you heard was this one note, and fear/anticipation/excitement just flushed over your body. so yeah. does he deserve an oscar? eh, i dunno. i mean, i think they’ll nominate him in the sense that they nominated Johnny Depp for the first Pirates of The Carribean. the complete creation and immersion into a character is what actors are supposed to do, and Heath did it wonderfully. However, being the pricks that the Academy are, I really feel like the lack of subsuquent backstory will actually work AGAINST Heath. yes, there are the stories about the scars, but still, that was just terrifying. i mean even in No Country For Old Men, they gave Woody Harrelson a little bit explaining why Javier Bardem’s character was the way that he was. I really feel that The Academy looks for stuff like that in a film. i mean, yes, his death does in a sense add to the aura and feel of the role, but you didn’t watch the movie going, ‘oh wow, this dude is dead’ the entire time. you really didn’t realize it until after the movie was over. plus, there is really only one distinct time you see him and you go, “oh there’s Heath.” and its not even the part where he doesn’t have any makeup, but rather removing a wig. and for an Australian dude, he masked everything that could have embodied the person to the character in such quality, i haven’t really seen anything like it since Denzel in Malcom X, and well, that’s saying alot. I personally think he’ll get nominated, but they won’t give it to him. not that there are better roles or anything, but they just won’t, i just have a gut feeling about it. it is seriously one of the only times I am really upset over the fact that someone cannot reprise a role for a reason other than money. his death really not only makes this role a testament to him as an actor, but to what was to come from him and his talents. and to know they signed him for 2 movies was the right move.

next on the list is Gary Oldman. ASTOUNDING. seriously, if The Joker wasn’t the villian, this was practically the Commissioner Gordon show. Oldman’s acting was so subtle, yet deep and understanding that you understood his position in the movie. within the first 20 minutes he establishes himself with “I do the best with what I have”, and he sure as hell lives up to it. given the character, you can’t really flesh out Gordon in any other way in the comics than bringing up Batgirl/Oracle/Killing Joke whatever, but Nolan and his brother Jonathon wrote such a damn good part for Gordon that only an actor on the caliber of Oldman could have done it with such greatness. so yeah, if Heath wasn’t in it, and they were nominating people like John Travolta in Hairspray for the Golden Globes last year, and Hol Hallbrook for Into The Wild at the Oscars last year, I really strongly believe that it would be Oldman’s name we would be tossing around about nominations and such instead of Ledger.

okay, let’s do Aaron Eckhart. now, when I heard this casting, I was estatic. probably more than I was when hearing the Ledger annoucement. i really felt like if anyone else other than him did Harvey Dent when the role was announced, I really felt like Nolan would have been misstepping. and in the final product, let me just put it this way: as Harvey Dent, Eckhart was the right choice, the right way to go, definitely, I loved the role, his personality, his chemistry with Maggie Gylennhall, who is definitely getting overlooked in this film, and overall, as the backbone to the story, being Gotham’s “White Knight” in contrast to Batman. i’ll even go so far to say i really liked the direction Nolan took with the whole transformation into to Two-Face, which is WAYYYYY different from the comics and was not expecting, even though they give you a nice little tease in the beginning. but as Two-Face, i dunno. maybe i’m biased due to the fact that i really am into character makeup and non CGI stuff, because let’s face it, if you’re really going to flip an 18 wheeler in one sequence, why not take the time and make a prosthetic? i mean yes, this is me being picky, but i dunno, with the quality of some stuff like Hellboy 2 out, i just felt like it was a huge cock tease or something. i mean i get what they were trying to portray, but the makeup itself just didn’t do it for me, and i feel kinda weird about that. and well the whole Two Face character arch really didn’t sit well with me the first time through, but after the second and third viewing, i really really really understood it and enjoyed it. i mean the whole subplot with the coin was genius. so yeah, that’s all i have to say about that.

now onto the other players. Christian Bale, you’re the man. i just have one beef with your Bat-voice, but hey, to each his own, i’m down with it as long as you keep bringing quality shit to the screen. i mean, let’s face it, you’re even looking badass in a Terminator movie, and well, no one thought that series could be saved. i really can’t say anything that hasn’t already been said. He’s the best embodiment of Bruce Wayne yet, the best Batman yet, and well, I think that he’s really established himself, cause he’s got a really thick accent too, so kudos for masking that shit man. Michael Caine, even though some of his screen time was cutdown a bit, i’m okay with that, because he played a fairly central, important, and overall climatic role that with more of, the audience would have felt he was a little overdone as Alfred, but with less, you would have wanted so much more. Morgan Freeman for the Win!!!!! seriously, i thought his screentime also was going to get cut dramatically, but instead, his role was one of the most important ones in the movie, giving the basis for one of the central themes of what is right and what is wrong and where does one draw the line? finally, castwise, there’s Maggie Gylennhall. i seriously am halfway upset with the fact of her only being seriously hot for one scene. she had such a dynamic and overall arch that really satisfied not only the viewer, but seemingly, the cast as well. i really can’t imagine katie holmes hanging acting wise with this crew, and i’m kinda happy that she was not in it.

writing wise, i have no beef. for a 2 and 1/2 hour movie, it keeps moving, going, and overall your attention. you really can’t go to the bathroom or turn away from the screen, because every scene is important, and like every brilliant filmmaker, everything in the scope of the screen is there for a reason. i mean, it does diverge from the comics a bit, but it was done in such a tasteful and overall just plain awesome fashion you can’t really be upset about it. cinematography wise, its gorgeous. its a dark film yes, but city lights have never been so captivating to me. the score should be nominated for an oscar. the music in this film is astounding, i don’t think i have ever heard such quality in captivating an audience, and just for the joker theme, not even referencing the Harvey Dent theme or the main Batman theme. the behind the scenes effort with this film showed astoundingly, whether it was the lack of CGI in the action sequences, the feel of the film, the wardrobe and costumes, cause i mean, like i said, the suits in the movie were badass! but still, it seemed like it was such an effort to produce a quality film, that i dunno, it was almost too good for what people were saying and even for what i was expecting.

however, for as much praise, there is bad. and i mean, i already discussed the last 7 minutes and the two face makeup/cgi/whatever it was. but i think the overall biggest flaw in the film, and some people may hate me for this, but whatever. the batpod intro scene to me was a little gay. i mean i loved the joker aspect, and the car chase before it, but when that moment happened, i felt like i was supposed to be like ‘YEAH FUCKING SWEET’ but instead i was like ‘what the fuck?’. plus, the scarecrow scene in the beginning felt a little forced and weird to me, cause for having an actor the caliber of Cillian Murphy on the set, i would think the Nolans would want to use him for more than just a cameo slot. or well, plus, I fucking love Cillian Murphy. however, those about are my only beefs in a 2.5 hour movie. seriously. i also felt that Richard Alpert (Nestor Carbonell in real life) was a little bit miscast as the Mayor. maybe because i kept having LOST flashbacks, or maybe because as the Mayor seemingly losing control of a city, he acted a little too confident at times. while some other people’s major complaints were the whole Lau/Hong Kong storyline, i felt that without that in the movie, you would have lost some of the gadget/detective aspects of the film. so psh to you haters. i also beleived that there is nothing they can really do in the sense of continuting the series. i mean, with heath’s death, where can they take the series from here? especially in the sense of villians and storyline, not even like batman and gotham. i feel that the way the film ended actually works against the franchise, and there’s nothing they can really do for a 3rd movie in my opinion. so yeah, a 3rd movie to me would practically tarnish this one.

overall, The Dark Knight was amazing. it pretty much set not only a standard for comic book movies, but for summer flicks in general. to show quality instead of just flash! bang! boom! in a summer movie is a HUGE risk, but to even them out and make sure everything is evenly done, well paced, and not too cheesy, is very hard to do, so i give mad props to the Nolan crew. i am going to get it once it comes out on DVD. i will probably freak out even more over the making of’s and special features once i get my hands on them, and even if there are some deleted scenes, would I freak about that! so on a scale, what would i give The Dark Knight? oh i dunno, how about a 9.9995 out of 10. because it was damn close to perfection, but i had my little nitpicks, just as i believe everyone else will.