Home subscribe manage Las Vegas Review-Journal
  Jobs Cars Homes Shopping Travel Weddings Golf Best of Las Vegas Photo   Search:

RECENT EDITIONS
Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat

Neon


MOVIE REVIEW: "The Dark Knight"

Stealing the Show: Batman seems like supporting character as Ledger's Joker haunts 'Dark Knight'







Why so serious? Because "The Dark Knight" wants desperately to be taken seriously.

It certainly takes itself seriously -- sometimes too seriously for its own good.

Newsvine Digg Fark Technorati reddit StumbleUpon del.icio.us Slashdot Propeller Mixx Furl Twitter MySpace Facebook Google Bookmarks Yahoo! Bookmarks Windows Live Favorites Ask MyStuff myAOL Favorites

Most Popular Stories
  • NORM: Tales of the City
  • NORM: 'Business as Usual'
  • TICKETS: Jonas Brothers, Nine Inch Nails announce upcoming shows
  • RESTAURANT REVIEW: Market Grille Cafe
  • PLAYER'S EDGE: Boyd Gaming introduces B Connected players club
  • SOUNDS: At A Crossroads
  • TICKETS: Jonas Brothers add show
  • MIKE WEATHERFORD: Betting on big name has downside
  • INTERVIEWS: Getting into the Game
  • SHOW REVIEW: Chicago



  • Even without the real-life death of Heath Ledger, who plays the movie's maniacal Joker, this sequel to 2005's "Batman Begins" cloaks itself in funereal black.

    It's almost as if somebody sprinkled ashes in the popcorn.

    Yet nobody's likely to choke; this is a movie perfectly pitched to the nasty desperation of the times.

    Which means it's not much fun. Then again, nobody's in the mood for fun these days.

    Except, of course, the Joker, who makes his own fun -- by triggering everyone else's fear.

    And in Ledger, this "Batman" movie has a Joker for the ages. (Or, more precisely, the age.)

    Unlike the jolly, look-at-me Jack attack Jack Nicholson unleashed in Tim Burton's 1989 "Batman," Ledger's Joker doesn't take over "The Dark Knight" so much as haunt it, establishing an anarchic spirit that permeates the proceedings.

    You notice I haven't mentioned "The Dark Knight's" title character yet. That's because Batman himself (once again played by Christian Bale) often seems like a supporting character in his own movie.

    And that's in part because the movie serves up such an overstuffed buffet of characters, plots and counterplots.

    For starters, there's the Joker, fearlessly ripping off Gotham City's most intimidating criminals (led by a smilingly corrupt Eric Roberts), making life even more complicated for incorruptible Gotham City detective Jim Gordon (Gary Oldman) and his team.

    And did we mention that Batman's vigilante presence has inspired a host of copycat caped crusaders who aren't quite as adept at vanquishing the bad guys?

    Alas, writer-director Christopher Nolan and his co-writer, his brother Jonathan, don't bother to develop that potentially fascinating concept.

    Instead, they turn their attention to crusading district attorney Harvey Dent (earnest Aaron Eckhart), a white-knight contrast to Batman's dark knight.

    Dent's at the center of the movie's two interlocking triangles, providing a link between the Joker and Batman in one.

    Because Dent's professional and personal partner happens to be none other than lovely lawyer Rachel Dawes (Maggie Gyllenhaal, much more convincing than Katie Holmes was in "Batman Begins"), they're also two sides of a romantic triangle that includes Rachel's ex-flame, billionaire-about-town Bruce Wayne -- alias the Dark Knight himself.

    But let them weave their tangled webs and anguish over emotions and ethics. The Joker's got some bullet-spraying, bombs-away mayhem on his mind -- and whatever he thinks, he does without thinking.

    Not without laughing, however. As one of his mayhem-on-wheels trucks reminds fellow Gothamites, "(S)laughter is the best medicine."

    There's plenty of slaughter throughout "The Dark Knight," which packs plenty of punch in its spectacularly staged stunt sequences.

    At least they seem to be spectacularly staged; with Nolan's slice-and-dice approach, you never can be sure, since much of the action is so choppy it verges on the incomprehensible. Sure, stuff blows up real good, but you're not always sure which stuff is blowing up, or where or why or how.

    Sometimes Nolan's Cuisinart-style dramatic structure works; at other times, it drags out some peripheral sequences and truncates seemingly crucial scenes -- for example, a fateful, face-to-face confrontation between the Joker and Dent.

    Which brings us to "The Dark Knight's" most successful face: its human one.

    Veteran Oscar-winners Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman contribute welcome gravity and warmth to their limited but pivotal roles as Bruce Wayne's faithful family retainer Alfred and Wayne Enterprises right-hand man Lucius Fox, respectively.

    Oldman and Eckhart, meanwhile, manage to make the good guys they play as interesting as they are admirable, always an impressive feat.

    Just ask Christian Bale. He's one of the most intense, compelling actors around. (Check out "Rescue Dawn" or "3:10 to Yuma" if you need a reminder.) Bale's all sleek smirk as Bruce Wayne, but as Batman he can't always move beyond the cowl and the growl to tap into his character's divided soul.

    That inevitably leaves the spotlight to Ledger, who responds with a performance that's both carefully controlled and gleefully unhinged, showing the Joker to be fully alive to the power of anarchy -- and his ability to create it by pushing people's buttons. Including ours.

    Wisely, Ledger doesn't dwell on the "why" of this Joker's madness, leaving us to ponder that unanswerable question. (That's the tantalizing secret to all such memorably unsettling villains, from "Psycho's" Norman Bates to "Silence of the Lambs' " Hannibal Lecter to "No Country for Old Men's" Anton Chigurh -- no matter how many possible explanations we consider, we can never really be sure.)

    It's a tribute to Ledger's talents, however, that we don't ponder them, or his tragic demise, while in the Joker's grip.

    It's only after "The Dark Knight" fades to black (with the dutiful promise of another sequel, of course) that the sad truth hits us: The franchise may belong to Batman, but this installment belongs to the Joker.

    Contact movie critic Carol Cling at ccling@reviewjournal.com or 702-383-0272.



    Leave Your Comment 8 Reader Comments
    Terms & Conditions
    The following comments are provided by readers and are the sole responsiblity of the authors. The reviewjournal.com does not review comments before publication nor guarantee their accuracy. By publishing a comment here you agree to abide by the comment policy. If you see a comment that violates the policy, please notify the web editor.

    Some comments may not display immediately due to an automatic filter. These comments will be reviewed within 48 hours. Please do not submit a comment more than once.
    Current Word Count:

    Jason wrote on July 27, 2008 09:22 PM: Ms. CLING, I think before you gave the new film a rating, you should have taken into account that this movie is actualy based on the graphic novels of the same name. Please find you way to getting a copy of these and read them. Light may yet be shed for you into the dark world that this Knight is defending. The true story (not real life story) is found with-in those pages. While you have been a critic of the movie, you failed to see the story.


    Griffin wrote on July 20, 2008 11:43 AM: Why does the RJ even use Carol Cling to review a movie like this? She has, on repeated occasions, shown that she doesn't like real action movies (vanilla Indy flicks don't count)or "dark" movies one bit. She's a tired old lady and has no business reviewing films like these. EVERY review I've seen about this movie is very positive.

    Hey RJ, why don't you go get a 16 year old male to review "Fried Green Tomatoes." You wouldn't, and you shouldn't continue to employ some hack to review your movies. Sorry for the anger, I've just been sick of this woman's reviews for the last 15 years and this one finally just pushed me over the edge. The Dark Knight, a "B"..... frigging hilarious lady - go get a different job already and bring a real movie critic in. Find Roger Ebert's review of this movie if you want to read a review by a real movie critic.


    RP wrote on July 18, 2008 09:40 PM: I didn't know the R-J employed a movie critic. After reading this, I still believe that they do not.

    If I wanted a rambling diatribe, I'd read the editorial page or a Gibbons speech...


    Joelyn wrote on July 18, 2008 07:48 PM: I agree Sean. Shes odd and doesn't seem to embrace the cinema. I watched the midnight showing and was happy to be apart of that craziness lol
    The movie was great and actually was "a movie" compared to other marvel films (which are also great). It had the intensity and direction that we need to see in a movie based off of a comic book. I loved it and will probably see it again this weekend.


    maria wrote on July 18, 2008 07:12 PM: The movie is great, as a comic book fan and movie lover I recommend all to see it. I just read 5 online movie reviews and only this one was negative. Maybe it was too intense for Cling, but the action is non-stop, and some people can't handle it. If you only like family films or fans of the joel shumacker batmans, then The Dark Knight isn't for you.


    Sean Parker wrote on July 18, 2008 01:42 PM: Carol cling is a terrible movie critic. She seems to have no joy or understanding of cinema. After attending a screening of The Dark Knight last night, and then reading this review it left me wondering. Did she see the same movie that i had seen? please outsource your reviews.


    Horacio Cambeiro wrote on July 18, 2008 11:44 AM: Yeah! Finally the Bat Guy is in Vegas again!

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RGB7r6fUwV0

    ^^


    Justice wrote on July 18, 2008 08:45 AM: Can't wait to see it. Why So Serious!