The Dark Knight

starring Christian Bale, Heath Ledger and Aaron Eckhart
written by Jonathan and Christopher Nolan & directed by Christopher Nolan
Rated PG-13 for intense sequences of violence and some menace.
96%

Billionaire Bruce Wayne (Bale) in the guise of his vigilante alter-ego, Batman, continues the quest to clean up the streets of Gotham. Assisting him are some old friends and a new ally in the form of Harvey Dent (Eckhart), Gotham’s fearless new DA. But the criminal underworld, driven to desperation, is about to unleash a madman on the city and its inhabitants: an anarchical mass murderer known only as The Joker (Ledger).

After taking their time to lay the groundwork for this character in 2005’s franchise reboot, Batman Begins, the Nolan brothers waste no time in dropping Batman (and us) into the thick of the action. The Dark Knight is a movie that never lets up, gluing the audience breathlessly to their seats for two-and-a-half hours of riveting crime drama packed with emotional depth and chaotic mayhem. It is a deeply exhausting experience, but those who undertake it will be rewarded by what very well may be the best film that the superhero genre has yet offered us.

Everything about this movie demands constant attention. The cast is as amazing as it is loaded with big-name talent (no less than seven stars share top billing). Bale is every bit as excellent as on the previous outing, and that goes double for his supporting players: Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman and especially Gary Oldman. Maggie Gyllenhaal steps in to fill the role of Rachel Dawes (previously played by Katie Holmes), a change which will, no doubt, be universally welcomed. And Aaron Eckhart, as the heroic Dent, a man destined to become (as those who know their Batman lore are aware) the twisted villain Two-Face, provides us with the most fascinating character study of the series to date. Eckhart is well up to the rigorous demands the role presents, as well as the challenge of not being overshadowed by so many great performances.

There can be no doubt whatsoever, though, that this show belongs entirely to Heath Ledger’s Joker. Regardless of anything else that may be worthy of our attention in The Dark Knight, Ledger’s chilling, terrifying, brilliant performance will be what follows us out of the theaters, into our cars, and back to our houses to dog our nightmares. Whether he is on the screen or not, his presence in the film is impossible to ignore. Ledger’s Joker is nothing less than an unstoppable force of nature, laying waste to anything and everything in his path (though never quite how one might expect). There is nothing funny about this character, despite the name. This incarnation of the super-villain revels in cruel (and often subtle) irony, setting up impossible ethical and moral dilemmas to spring on the unsuspecting heroes at every turn.

Despite over 50 years of prior baggage weighing our conceptions of the character down, Ledger and the Nolan brothers have created something we have never seen before (and likely will not again). At some point perhaps halfway through The Dark Knight, I quietly hoped that the Joker would not be killed off, so that the character could return to face off against Batman in future installments. It took me several seconds to remember that, tragically, this cannot be. This film ensures that we will once again feel the sting of losing a great performer in the midst of his prime.

I mention the Nolan brothers as well, of course, because despite the great support of their cast and crew, they are the ones ultimately responsible for the events that transpire on-screen. Their work here certainly lives up to the quality one would expect from the pair who brought us such films as Memento and The Prestige. The Dark Knight is The Godfather of superhero movies: an epic, sprawling tale encompassing a large cast of characters trapped amidst a series of devastating, far-reaching events that will change them forever. It walks the knife’s edge of never allowing the pace to slow without exhausting the audience with wave upon wave of climactic action.

Refreshingly, the action sequences in this movie (of which, admittedly, there are many) do not exist simply to amaze us with large explosions (although there are some) and gorgeous CG effects (which were, to my eyes at least, effectively invisible). Rather, the action is driven relentlessly forward by the sheer tension of suspense as to the outcome of a scene. This film, as its title implies, is a dark and devastating experience. Humor is rare. No character is sacred. The somber tone is obvious from the second the movie begins. In direct contrast to testosterone-fueled superhero movies like Iron Man, The Dark Knight’s tone is oppressively foreboding.

To be honest, going to see The Dark Knight was like paying to get beaten up, but in a good way. It is emotionally and mentally draining, but somehow also stimulating. But, no matter how intense the experience, I am already sure that I will do it all again simply for the pleasure of watching Heath Ledger’s Joker in action.

Movie Releases Past, Present and Future

A few items of interest:

- Just a few days ago, I saw Fritz Lang’s silent sci-fi masterpiece Metropolis for the first time. I say “saw” as though I watched the entire thing, though that’s not quite accurate. A full thirty minutes (or 1/5 of the total runtime) has been notoriously missing from the film since its original release in 1927. So it was with great surprise that I saw this story broke on the day after I watched the movie. It seems that, like many German things, an original print of Metropolis made its way to Argentina in the late ’20s, and has been there ever since, safely tucked away in a film museum. Of course, the film is not in the best condition, but it will be cleaned up and restored, and someday (hopefully soon) a complete print of this great movie will finally exist after 80 years. Talk about the Ultimate Director’s Cut.

-Looking Closer and FilmChat both have some cool WALL•E-related ponderings posted. It is, indeed, a message movie, but its not the sort of message that certain conservative nay-sayers have angrily claimed.

From Rod Dreher via Jeffrey Overstreet:

WALL•E says that humans have within themselves the freedom to rebel, to overthrow that which dominates and alienates us from our true selves, and our own nature. But you have to question the prime directive; that is, you have to become conscious of how the way you’re living is destroying your body and killing your soul, and choose to resist. WALL•E contends that real life is hard, real life is struggle, and that we live most meaningfully not by avoiding pain and struggle, but by engaging it creatively, and sharing that struggle in community.

From Peter Chattaway in response to a comment by WALL•E director Andrew Stanton:

So the film is saying that people are like robots that need to rise above their programming to be truly human — to experience love and the “I-Thou” of interpersonal relationships? And all the rampant “consumerism” depicted in the film is not there to make a political statement so much as it is to make an existential statement about our enslavement to our basic, mechanistic, animalistic impulses — our enslavement, in other words, to “the flesh”? (Or to our “passions”, as the Fathers might say?)

Yeah, I can dig that. I can totally dig that.

-In the up-and-coming department, there’s a trailer out for the remake of The Day the Earth Stood Still, which will star (among others) Keanu Reeves. I am extremely underwhelmed.

And, finally, here’s one of those early rave reviews for The Dark Knight you may have heard about. Sounds like it’s going to revolutionize everything we thought we knew about superhero cinema. Expectations . . . Rising . . . Must . . . Resist . . .

The How and Why of Criticism, etc.

Just a few items today, several of which are borrowed (with thanks) from Looking Closer.

First, Evan Derrick from MovieZeal has an awesome two-part post entitled “10 Ways to Become a Better Film Critic.” It’s a pretty good list, with some really great quotes from the pros. Check it out (particularly #4). Part 1, Part 2. On a vaguely-related note, here’s a by-the-numbers look at why movie critics matter. Not sure if this is conclusive, but it’s an interesting read.

You have to see this for yourself. In an upcoming comedy, Sacha Baron Cohen will play legendary fictional detective Sherlock Holmes and Will Ferrell will play his sidekick, Dr. Watson. That casting is either insane or inspired (and who’s to say it can’t be both?). I am simultaneously horrified and fascinated, but the result could be hilarious.

And, last but not least, a very cool little quiz for fans of Amadeus. 10 musical excerpts, some composed by Wolfgang Amadeus Mozart, some by Antonio Salieri. Can you tell the difference? I scored an unimpressive 70%, at least 20% of which I would attribute to pure guesswork (as oppossed to educated guesswork . . . I only really recognized 3 of the excerpts).

Million Dollar Baby: Best Picture, 2004

The 77th Annual Academy Awards were hosted by Chris Rock. In a decidedly odd year for the Academy, Million Dollar Baby received seven nominations: Best Picture, Best Director, Best Editing, Best Adapted Screenplay, Best Actor (Clint Eastwood, also the film’s director), Best Actress (Hilary Swank) and Best Supporting Actor (Morgan Freeman). Major contenders included Martin Scorsese’s Howard Hughes biopic The Aviator (11 nominations, 5 wins), J.M. Barrie biopic Finding Neverland (7 nominations, 1 win), Ray Charles biopic Ray (6 nominations, 2 wins) and Sideways (5 nominations, 1 win). Despite winning more total Oscars (including Best Editing), The Aviator (a dreadful film) lost the two major awards to Million Dollar Baby: Best Picture and Best Director. Sideways took Best Adapted Screenplay, and Ray took Best Actor (Jamie Foxx in the title role). Swank and Freeman won their respective nominations (her second Oscar, his first).

In the film, Frankie Dunn (Eastwood), an old, gruff boxing trainer, reluctantly agrees to coach a female boxer named Maggie Fitzgerald, a determined waitress who dreams of a better life. Freeman is Eddie Dupris, a former fighter who takes care of Frankie’s gym (and narrates the story). As Frankie navigates Maggie towards success in the ring, their relationship deepens and he confronts long-buried emotions regarding his estrangement from his daughter. Maggie, meanwhile, finds in Frankie someone who cares about her far more than her nasty white-trash family back home. Unlike most conventional boxing films (of which there are a surprising number), and, for that matter, most sports movies, the ending proves to be something of a controversial downer (more on that in a moment).

Of course, the backbone of Million Dollar Baby is Freeman’s excellent narration. Honestly, is there a film out there that couldn’t stand to have the voice-over support of Morgan Freeman? He always brings a touch of class, even to inferior material, and this (decidedly not an inferior effort) is no exception. Boxing films, as a rule, generally fail to interest me. I dislike them even when they are well-made enough to warrant appreciation (as Raging Bull is). The saving grace of this movie is that it is not really about boxing, but about two lonely people who fill a gaping void in each others’ lives.

What makes Million Dollar Baby work above all are Hillary Swank’s strong, gutsy performance and Eastwood’s subtle, gruff one. Their quiet moments together are as touching and meaningful as any on-screen relationship I have seen, and all the more powerful because their relationship is affectionate rather than romantic. The necessary fights and training sessions are mere window dressing to the real heart of the film. Their performances make the necessary intermediate scenes (i.e. where the Eastwood character pretends that he will have nothing to do with training the Swank character, although the audience already knows otherwise) watchable and even enjoyable, despite their predictability.

As I mentioned earlier, the film’s ending (in addition to being different) is a source of some controversy, and certainly sets it apart from the average sports flick (indeed, from the average movie). It seems a pity to divulge the ending for fear of spoiling the film, but now that I have danced around it enough to scare off those who do not wish to be spoiled, I shall at least note that it concerns the issue of euthenasia. It is also worth noting that at least as many viewers might dislike the end of the story because it is less than happy as would object ot it on moral grounds. However right or wrong the decisions of the film’s characters may be, though, their actions at least feel germane to the people we have spent the previous two hours and change getting to know. Artistically, I can ask for nothing more than that, and Million Dollar Baby left me feeling good.

WALL•E

starring Ben Burtt, Elissa Knight and Jeff Garlin
written & directed by Andrew Stanton
Rated G.
100%

700 years in the future, a very special WALL•E (Waste Allocation Load Lifter - Earth-Class) unit is the only robot still operational as part of an attempt to clean-up a planet so contaminated humanity abandoned it long ago for the comforts of a luxury star cruiser. WALL•E has been cleaning for a very long time, without really knowing why, and along the way he has picked up a number of unique personality quirks. His solitary life is totally disrupted one day when a sleek, high-tech ‘bot named EVE lands on Earth as part of a top-secret automated mission that the fat, lazy humans back on the ship have forgotten all about. When the time comes for EVE to return, WALL•E (who has fallen in love) stows away, and their arrival back on the cruiser shakes things up in ways no one could have imagined.

It almost seems unnecessary to confirm that Pixar has gone and knocked another one right out of the park, but they have. With WALL•E, however, they have not only brought to the screen the visual flair and riveting storytelling to which we have grown accustomed, they have all but reinvented the wheel with respect to what we expect when we go to see an animated film, a cartoon. This movie probably has the best shot of any animated film ever at winning the Oscar for Best Picture, (to say nothing of the awards it is all but guaranteed to win). WALL•E is pure movie magic from beginning to end, an experience more than anything else. It is entertaining, enthralling and, yes, even enriching in its beauty and its simplicity.

The most amazing thing about WALL•E is that it barely relies at all on spoken dialogue. I predict that this film will be huge overseas. The language it speaks is universal. Because so little of the movie contains any actual dialogue, there is nothing to impair our enjoyment of the visual feast of ideas that is on display throughout. The first third of the film, which revolves almost entirely around WALL•E and his activities on earth, is among the greatest sequences I have ever seen. I felt that I could watch an entire movie built solely around that, and not get bored or restless.

Ben Burtt, the legendary sound designer behind the Star Wars and Indiana Jones movies, supplies the non-verbal robots with their voices, a whole synthetic vocabulary the likes of which haven’t been heard since R2-D2 first charmed audiences in 1977. Burtt outdoes himself here, several-fold. The endearing language of the title character together with his amazingly-expressive body language are certain to captivate. If WALL•E and his robot friends don’t win you over, you have a heart of stone.

Another key supporting player in this nearly-wordless masterpiece is yet another fantastic score by Thomas Newman (who previously worked with Pixar on the excellent Finding Nemo). His beautiful, haunting music (which I have enjoyed so much in films like Road to Perdition, American Beauty and Little Children) is a perfect fit for this project, and thanks to the relative silence the audience has no trouble enjoying it.

WALL•E invokes a variety of science fiction themes and conventions along the way, and isn’t above some truly hilarious nods to classics like 2001: A Space Odyssey, but there is no denying the creative originality at work here, either. Certainly the last thing one would expect from a cartoon about robots would be one of the most touching love stories of recent years. It pushes all of the right buttons without even seeming to try.

Superlatives fail me, and I am loathe to discuss WALL•E overmuch lest I spoil a single moment. We will all, no doubt, be hearing a lot about this movie in days to come. You should see it. It’s as simple as that. I must spare a moment further, though, to mention the very beginning and the very end. The short with which Pixar opens the film is “Presto,” a raucously funny slapstick bit concerning an on-stage altercation between a talented magician and his uncooperative rabbit, is an instant classic among Pixar shorts. As for the end, just in case you are not regularly in the habit of doing so, stay for the credits. Yes, in WALL•E, even the end credits are among the best I’ve ever seen. I can’t wait to go again tomorrow.

All the kids are singing it.

This clip is part of a song from the upcoming Hamlet 2 (which stars Steve Coogan and looks, to me anyway, rather hilarious). To those who are easily offended by pseudo-sacrilege, you have been warned. I, for one, am struck (much to my amusement) by how much this sounds like something you might hear at a particularly hip and progressive Christian youth group. Anyone agree?

(Thanks to FilmChat for the heads up.)

Get Smart

starring Steve Carell, Anne Hathaway and Alan Arkin
written by Tom J. Astle and Matt Ember & directed by Peter Segal
Rated PG-13 for some rude humor, action violence and language.
54%

When a massive security leak compromises the identity of almost every agent in US super-spy organization CONTROL, the Chief (Arkin) is forced to promote his top analyst, Maxwell Smart (Carell). Smart, together with Agent 99 (Hathaway), encounters a series of zany misadventures as he criss-crosses the globe to stop a nuclear plot perpetrated by CONTROL’s evil rival, KAOS.

I’ve been a fan of Get Smart reruns for many years, so you might say I was among those who approached this modern-day reimagining with trepidation, and with certain expectations. The casting of Steve Carell in the title role (not to mention Alan Arkin) seemed inspired, to say the least. Still, how well would the filmmakers be able to translate the Cold War-era espionage humor into a more modern climate.

The answer, unfortunately, is not well. Not well at all. This script is a complete disaster which doesn’t function on any level. Foreshadowing, plot development and expository dialogue are the clumsiest I’ve seen in some time. Borrowing the germ of its story and most of its best ideas from much funnier spy spoofs like Johnny English was not the route to take. And, yes, a movie starring Mr. Bean had more laughs than this. Unsurprisingly, Get Smart is at its best when it returns to its roots, with the cone of silence, the shoe phone, Max’s ubiquitous catchphrases, etc. Homage, however, is kept to a minimum. The humor is forced, unoriginal and disconnected from the action, the dialogue is frequently painful and there are more than a handful of already-dated political cheap-shots. Above all, the material is devoid of subtlety, which, I guess, is probably the greatest crime a satirical comedy can commit.

Frankly, I was appalled to find myself embarassed for the plight of the fine actors on the screen. Carell and Arkin do great work, and Hathaway (though not quite Barbara Feldon) was very good as 99. Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson is as hilarious as always when lampooning his own persona, and it was nice to see small roles filled by the likes of Masi Oka (Hiro Nakamura from TV’s “Heroes”). Cameo appearances by Bill Murray and Patrick Warburton (who doesn’t often show up in live-action fare) were also welcome. That this movie is even tolerable is almost entirely thanks to the inherent humor of performers like Arkin and Carell.

Sadly, the material couldn’t even begin to live up to the talent enlisted in support of it. Little wonder when one notices that the director’s last decade has been spent on Adam Sandler movies and The Nutty Professor II. It’s not like I never laughed, but I cringed three times for every chuckle. At first it seemed like they might just be trying too hard, but eventually it became apparent that the writers just weren’t trying at all. Anyone could have written this script, and it feels like a slapdash rough draft meant to give shape to further doctoring efforts.

It looks like the first season of the original television show is finally getting a DVD release soon (perhaps the only positive benefit of the big-screen treatment). I plan on picking up a copy, and I recommend that you save any money you might otherwise have spent going to the theater this week and put it towards that. The DVDs are due out in early August, and I plan to spend all of the time from now until then putting
this adaptation well out of my mind.

A Note from AMPAS

The Academy has just made a change to the rules governing the Best Original Song Oscar for next year: No film may have more than two nominated songs. A quick glance back through the Academy annals reveals that the rule change would only have been relevant four times in Academy’s history. In 1991, Beauty and the Beast became the first film to score three song nominations, winning one. Three years later, Disney did it again with The Lion King, which also won.

Then, of course, for the past two years running, with 2006’s Dreamgirls and 2007’s Enchanted (another Disney release), films have racked up triple song nominations, and lost both times. I wonder if, had either film won, the Academy would feel it necessary to implement a rule change. In any case, just because I like lists, here’s a quick history of double song nominee films (those marked with an asterisk had a winning song):

1980 — Fame*
1983 — Flashdance*, Yentl
1984 — Footloose
1985 — White Nights*
1989 — The Little Mermaid*
1992 — The Bodyguard, Aladdin*
1993 — Philadelphia*
2003 — Cold Mountain

The AFI Genre Report

One of my favorite television events of the summer is the AFI television special . . . and I straight-up missed it this time around. This year’s list was the “10 Top 10,” a list of the best examples of various film genres. The full report, straight from the horse’s mouth, can be found here (or here, for the slightly more accessible Wikipedia article). It’s not a terrible idea, but I think it may be indicative of a rather foolish desperation on their part. It seems from this latest list that they are becoming hard-pressed to come up with new ideas, and yet they’ve gone and blown a decade’s worth on a single special. Why not spend the whole special on a single genre? Perhaps with a top-25 list instead? Meanwhile, the genres which were ignored include Horror, Comedy, Action/Adventure, War and Musical. Strange omissions considering some of the genres that were deemed worthy of our attention. Let’s tackle those one by one:

Animation is a fun one to consider, though perhaps a bit pointless when 90% of the list is (albeit rightly) either Disney or Pixar. I don’t have any real complaints about Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs claiming the top spot (it is both great and significant), except that it implies that no one has improved on the genre since its inception. In fact, nearly half of the list is comprised of the first few animated features ever made, and then it essentially jumps to the 1990s. I would have bumped Beauty and the Beast and Finding Nemo up several spots and replaced Shrek with something else.

Romantic Comedies, on the other hand, is a poor choice, no doubt made to pull in a more widely-varied audience. “Comedies” would have been a much better pick. I’m not really qualified to comment, though. It’s obviously not my preferred genre.

Western is, of course, a quintessential American film genre, and this is a pretty good list for the most part. Not much room for revisionist westerns, of course, but overall not bad. The Searchers is a great pick for the top spot. Cat Ballou, on the other hand, is a bizarre choice, even for #10 . . . especially when The Magnificent Seven didn’t make the cut (despite, I hear, having its theme music used to represent the genre).

Sports is undoubtedly the worst genre choice on the list. Almost anything would have been a better substitute. And, of course, the two top spots go to *shudder* boxing movies. Yuck. And Caddyshack? What is that about? Most egregious of all, however, is the exclusion of Chariots of Fire (and, yes, they did use that famous theme, as well). Bad call. Monumentally bad call.

Mystery is probably the best list of the bunch. Five Hitchcocks and some really great film noir. No significant problems here (though I’m sure there are some great films missing from the list that could replace some of the weaker entries). Vertigo is the right choice for the top spot.

Fantasy is by far the weakest entry here, thanks in great part to a ridiculous inclusivism. It also includes the most ridiculous oversight: No Princess Bride. What is that about? That and, not one, but two Christmas movies, Big (?!), and a refugee from the Sports list. I guess they simply couldn’t think of anything to fill things out.

Science Fiction probably should have been combined with Fantasy (that would have eliminated the problematic categorization of Star Wars, for instance). A Clockwork Orange doesn’t really belong here, either. Small hope for a more obscure entry like Gattaca to take its place, though. I would have replaced one of the campy entries with Planet of the Apes, for sure. I see AFI is still laying claim to 2001 as an American film, as well. Nice. Well, it’s not the only British film on the list.

Gangster is another important American film genre, I suppose. And their are some great films on the list. Just like animation, however, it’s a bit predictable. There are no real surprises here. I suppose that’s true of westerns, as well, but not quite as much.

Courtroom Drama is an awesome grouping of movies, but I’m not convinced that it legitimately belongs here. Surely this, even more than any of the other selections, is a sub-genre of mystery, crime, thriller . . . something like that. It definitely swiped a few entries that could just have easily made the mystery list.

Epic is just a crazy mess of a genre pick. It sort of seems to mean “movies that are really long and don’t fit anywhere else.” That’s why we can have Titanic, The Ten Commandments and Lawrence of Arabia (another British flick!) in the same group. Well, I guess they’re all vaguely historical, but the title of the genre seems to imply a certain scale. One could almost call this genre “Oscar” . . . over half of it is made up of Best Picture winners.

All right, AFI . . . Do better next year. Not that I’ll stop paying attention either way.

How Cool

Check out this awesome collection of the Top 10 Rube Goldberg Machines from movies. I can’t find any of them on YouTube, so you’ll just have to go watch them all there. I assure you, however, that it is well worth the trip via hyperlink.