The Dark Knight
That director Christopher Nolan is a genius, needs not be said. It should be obvious by following his small (but distinguished) trail of movies: Memento, The Prestige, Batman Begins … and now The Dark Knight. Each of these movies has been done not only under his direction but also his screenplay and storyline. To add to this, each of the movie is disturbing on a deep level (”Memento” - the man without short-term memory plays the detective to avenge his wife using his body to store clues … “The Prestige” - two magicians cross out from the realm of illusion when they sacrifice everything for their competition … “Batman Begins” - focuses on the inner fear and turmoil of one of the best known superheroes).
“The Dark Knight” replays in a way the first Batman movie, where Batman first meets his most famous archenemy, The Joker. The first movie was a gritty, deeply gothic story with Jack Nicholson which managed to pocket an Oscar, but still suffered from the shortcomings of the first cartoon-inspired movies: it was simple. Just like Superman before it (another DC Comics wonderchild), Batman was a straighforward good vs evil story, with the prevailing superhero. No questions, no second level there. The second Batman movie (”Batman Returns”) was slightly better, while the next two in the Batman franchise were garbage of the purest kind.
What happened in the meantime? Well, DC Comics’ main rival, “Marvel”, pushed through with the three X-Men 3 movies, under the supervision of two cinematographic legends Brian Synger and Brett Ratner. The Novelty of the Marvel mainstay series were several subtle undertones regarding the condition of the hero and what means to be different in a world of intolerance.
Given this, DC Comics had to give a hard reply and this reply came with two wonderful movies: Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, each blessed with a great feature. In Batman Begins the feature was definitely the city itself, a portrayal accurately depicting a dark, gritty and corrupt city, even though both movies have lost something of the gothic atmosphere of the past.
But in The Dark Knight, the feature definitely came from the late Heath Ledger and his portrayal of The Joker. Having some big shoes to fill in (Academy Award Winner Jack Nicholson isn’t someone one can easily measure up to), Ledger turned to a completely psychotic approach with an empahsis on the chaotic. Yes, this is also the main theme of “The Dark Knight”, the balance between order and chaos and the struggle to keep one’s values intact in the face of destruction. To name Ledger as brilliant would be an understatement, but this previously not so font-end actor (who was “blessed” with some less that mediocre roles before “Brokeback Mountain”) managed to give The Joker a whole new face, one in which an unsuspecting audience would never recognize Ledger in.
Both of the newest Batman movies benefited from an all-star crew (Christian Bale, well known from “Equilibrium” and “The Prestige” makes a good Batman, though the purists will regret Michael Keaton … then Gary Oldman, known from “Bram Stoker’s Dracula” makes another good cast as “inspector Gordon” … sir Michael Caine is Wayne’s butler Alfred … Cillian Murphy makes a terrifying Scarecrow, his performace in “Batman Begins” could even match Ledger’s Joker had he been given more screen time). The one uninspired choice was definitely Maggie Gyllenhaal replacing Katie Holmes as Rachel Dawes. While Katie made a criticized appearance the first time, she was still a better actor than the bland and placid Gyllenhaal, who manages to prevent any connection with her character.
All in all, the comics-based movies have changed a lot. Since the original two Batman movies, to which we can add “The Crow” (even though it’s not a product of any of the world’s two powerhouse comics clans, DC or Marvel), the comic-based movies have grown very mature and have brought forth real question and real issues for the public.
In the end … we should return to the old question: who kicks ass, Keaton or Bale? Yes I choose to plainly reject Clooney, Kilmer and West with their below-horrific performances. My opinion is that as Batman, Keaton gets the upper hand while Bale’s version is rather violent and his voice very edited to be artificially scary. Maybe that’s a good point in someone else’s view but not too good in mine. As Bruce Wayne however, the score is quite tied. Keaton makes a very modest, quite and introvert Wayne which works clumsily in the social life, as opposed to Bale’s Wayne which indeed looks like the cosmopolitan spoiled offspring of a business man. Both views have merit but still, Keaton’s interpretation is much more believable given the character’s severe trauma facing the death of his parents.