Yet, in another way, I didn't like the movie; it was very draining emotionally and physically. Eerie, too, and not just because we were watching the last cinematic images of the late actor, Heath Ledger. Yes, there was definitely something eerie about the maniacal, hysterical Joker adeptly played by Mr. Ledger. But there is something else. Maybe it's like what my friend Cindi pointed out: there's no "hope" in the story. There's nothing hopeful about humanity left at the end, but only feeble sparks of hope throughout. Whereas in the first film, "Batman Begins" there was a hopefulness that cut through the darkness of Bruce Wayne's and Batman's world. Yet, this film left us with nothing. No wonder why Mr. Ledger was emotionally and physically exhausted after making this film.
With "Batman Begins", we got to experience the mystical quality of the Batman character, and travelled with Bruce Wayne on his spiritual quest, one that sought to bring light back to the dark streets of Gotham. The Bat Signal is that metaphor. We also got to see Christian Bale erase all the other celluloid images of Batman away. He became Bruce Wayne/Batman in that film. Yet, we didn't really get to find out more about Mr. Bale's Bruce Wayne as much in "Dark Knight" as we did in the first film, nor were there as many touches of humor in the sequel (I refer to the humor of humanity as evidenced between Alfred and Wayne/Batman, and not the inhuman sardonic wit of the Joker).
So why was I excited about wanting to see "Batman Begins" right after I stepped out of the movie theater (and later wanting to buy the special edition DVD for my collection), but with "Dark Knight", why do I wish to never see it ever again?
Anyone?
Namaste.
2 comments:
did you see the same film as I did? hopelessness????? the whole point of the last act was that in a world of chaos people *won't* turn on each other. the criminals didn't blow up the civilians and the civilians didn't blow up the criminals. how much clearer could the message be?
if you want a message, it's that Gotham didn't need Batman, that regular people can do good on their own.
really, I thought it was all pretty clear.
Dearest Olaf the Mythic:
This is why I'm seeking out the opinions and insights of those like yourself, oh wise one!
When my friend said there was no hope to the film or any example of redemption in humanity, I did point out the scene with the two boats. I thought it was a very interesting point the filmmaker made by having the criminals be the ones to come up with the "right" decision. There was no contemplating, vote-taking, and waffling like the civilians did in taking up precious seconds of everyone's lives. It was a simple "human" solution. So point well taken.
I still don't know why my initial reaction at the conclusion of the movie was "I liked it" but then didn't? Maybe I either didn't think it through enough or perhaps even "over-thought" it? Maybe I was too sleep-deprived?
Or maybe it was because I know my dad would have loved this new interpretation of Batman, and the saddness of him not being there to watch it with me, made me watch the film through a veil of death? And even though I was never a fan of Heath Ledger's, perhaps the saddness of his death underscored my viewing experience?
Namaste.
Post a Comment