For some reason, I have this quote in my head. Partly because of it being in the trailer, partly because I absolutely love the way he delivered his greeting.

I dreamed about Ledger last night. We were in some big city. He was standing in the background in Joker garb while something else I don't remember happened in the foreground. I waved at him.
I told him, "I liked your performance in the movie."
He said in the Joker's voice, "Did you laugh?"
I said, "Yes."
He said, "Good."
Then he walked away skipping with his hands in his pocket.
It was a cool, benign dream.
:)

I felt that way too, but as I've thought about the movie over the weekend I've come around to the conclusion that The Dark Knight may be our first mainstream pro-Bush movie.

Now that you mention it, I see it. I didn't notice it during the movie though.

That's where Anthony Michael Hall was!

You need to see Begins again. It is 100% about fear from beginning to end.

Yeah, that kinda bugged me. "It's okay to invade everyone's privacy by tapping into their phones in this time of crisis because I'm doing it for a good reason." Bleh.

And:

Doing bad things is necessary, but it is important that the hoi polloi maintain their distrust of you for doing them. But doing them is still an important thing.

Am I the only one who didn't read "pro-Bush", "jab at Bush" into this movie?

A little dissent here: The Dark Knight is an OK movie.

As a piece of cinematic escapism - it was great. It had my (mostly) full attention from beginning to end. But when the credits ended and I started to think about it, there were a ton of quibbles that prevented it from being the great movie I hoped it would be.

(Before I present those quibbles, remember that I do like the movie - I'm just being contrary for the sake of this discussion.)

Unlike iSm, I really liked the Gotham City of Batman Begins. Gotham was never just Chicago to me.

The only thing I didn't love about the Batman from Begins was the squished face made by the cowl and... the growl. In this movie, more squish, more growl. I know it's reminiscent of the Frank Miller Batman, but I was always more of a Neal Adams Batman kind of guy.


The plot. Was there one? Or many? I know the film wanted to be "complex", but the fact that there were several "ticking clock" episodes throughout the movie made for a lessening of overall suspense, IMO.

Two-Face. For a classic Batman villain, he really wasn't much of a menace, was he? He bumped off a corrupt cop and a mob guy, and then threatened the life of Gordon's kid. And then he dies. And nobody remembers him.

Which brings me to: The Ending. Does Batman really need to be the fall guy for Dent's criminal actions? Why couldn't they just blame The Joker? Or any other number of scenarios? He's such a hero, that now he gets chased. Whatever.

And lastly (for the moment), what about the sound mixing? There were important lines of dialog that were all but swallowed up my explosions and the booming soundtrack. I didn't really want to have to strain to hear Gordon's final monologue.

In all... it's a good effort that I will undoubtedly revisit when it comes out on blu-ray later in the year. But for now, I think it pales in comparison to Begins. And yes, Hellboy II is a better "comic book movie".

A final note on Heath as The Joker. It was a wonderfully written part - and Ledger did a fine job with it. Crazy villains tend to be the best parts in drama. I'll bet that, as written, it could have been done just as well by a number of other actors. LSPE and Tom mentioned Johnny Depp. I don't disagree.

No, you're [BTD] not the only one. But then we're not the only ones who did.

And when I say "pro-Bush" I don't mean to say the movie intentionally sets out to redeem the actions of Bush but that in exploring the themes of how society responds to terrorism (and seeing echoes of 9/11 in the movie is very common, at least among film critics) the results shown in this movie have the side effect of essentially mirroring many of the policy decisions made by the Bush administration around secrecy, forging ahead despite public disapproval, illegality justified by the nature of the threat, etc.

It is quite possible that ideas of 9/11 or George Bush never entered into the heads of those making the movie. But Isaac Asimov used to tell a story about attending a lecture where the speaker was going on about some hidden meaning in one of his books. At the end Asimov spoke up and said he'd never even considered such things let alone intended them to be in the story. The response from the lecturer was essentially that just because he wrote the story didn't necessarily give him any great insight into its meaning. Asimov agreed with that.

In my thinking over the weekend I also came to the idea that rather than fitting in with superhero movies, The Dark Knight might actually be better paired with No Country for Old Men. Where the latter is in many ways an exploration of the individual's response when confronted with evil, The Dark Knight focuses on the macro of society's response.

heh- who says it was a dream?

No- I did not either.