Chicago Reader [Reader FREE STUFF: Realm of Horror. October 10 - November 1 - www.illinoisbesthauntedhouse.com] [CHICAGO DRINKS]

 

Sign up for our E-Newsletters:
 


Reader Info
Advertising, subscriptions, staff, privacy policy, contact info, freelancers' guidelines, etc.

[Submit to the Reader's Fiction Issue. The Reader's Fiction Issue Deadline: November 10]

[WIN! $50 Bar Tab at CHICAGO DRINKS]




Digg! Digg this | Post to del.icio.us | E-mail E-mail this to a friend

Movies

The Dark Knight

A Batman for the 21st Century

It’s not just about good and evil anymore—it’s about order and chaos.

The Dark Knight | Directed by Christopher Nolan | Written by Jonathan and Christopher Nolan | With Christian Bale, Heath Ledger, Aaron Eckhart, Michael Caine, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Gary Oldman, and Morgan Freeman

July 17, 2008

As the Bush era drags on, I seem to be developing an irrational hatred of summer blockbusters, those gas-guzzling, road-hogging, radio-blasting Hummers of the entertainment business. The fact that they get worse and worse and still make tons of money doesn’t say much for the national character. New York Times columnist Frank Rich recently conjured up an image of Americans flocking to the movies this summer to escape their woes, as if we were all dust bowl farmers hoping to banish the Great Depression from our thoughts with flickering images of Clark Gable and Mickey Mouse. But while our leaders are waging preemptive wars, torturing innocent people to death, tossing out habeas corpus, and gutting the Fourth Amendment, we probably don’t need to escape as much as the rest of the world needs to escape from us.

The Dark Knight, Christopher Nolan’s second installment in the rebooted Batman franchise, is the rare blockbuster that left me engaged and thoughtful instead of bored and bummed out. With Batman Begins (2005) Nolan shrewdly reconnected the masked superhero with his 1939 comic-book roots as a solitary, pissed-off, vaguely satanic vigilante. But the movie was too big a financial gamble to have much on its mind, aside from some psychobabble about “becoming the thing you fear the most.” Now that Warner Brothers has banked $372 million from Batman Begins, Nolan has a little more freedom to stick his neck out, and The Dark Knight achieves that unlikely alchemy when a piece of American pop culture looks deeply into the national psyche. Its moral dilemmas are perfectly fused with the amped-up action and outsize characters of a summer blockbuster, but they’re impossible to miss. Like all of us, the people of Gotham City have to protect themselves from evil without falling prey to it.

This is no easy task, because Gotham is a cesspool of crime and corruption. Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhart), the city’s crusading new district attorney, hopes to forge an alliance with police lieutenant Jim Gordon (Gary Oldman), commander of a special unit targeting organized crime. But that unit is full of maverick cops whom Dent investigated when he was in the police department’s internal affairs division, and both the DA’s office and Gordon’s unit are compromised by spies for the mob. Frustrated by the paralysis, Gordon has struck up a shadowy partnership with Batman (Christian Bale), who follows no rules but his own. This is just fine with Dent: dining with his prosecutor Rachel Dawes (Maggie Gyllenhaal) and her old friend Bruce Wayne, he compares Batman to the dictators temporarily appointed by ancient Rome when it was under siege—though Rachel points out that Julius Caesar refused to vacate the post. Dent Wayne concludes, “You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain.”

Gotham’s latest menace, a sociopath calling himself the Joker (Heath Ledger in his final role), is especially dangerous because he so clearly perceives and cannily exploits the moral rot creeping into both law enforcement and the larger society. For Batman the world is polarized between good and evil, but the Joker is sharp enough to recognize that for most people the real poles are order and chaos. “Nobody panics when things go according to plan, even if the plan is horrible,” he observes. Lest anyone miss the connection to 9/11 and the so-called War on Terror, Nolan has the Joker blow up Gotham General Hospital; an overhead shot shows a building that covers an entire city block collapsing into rubble. The Dark Knight may be a state-of-the-art popcorn movie, but its Gotham City is a fun-house-mirror image of America, its democratic institutions crumbling and its people perched between anarchy and totalitarianism.

This infusion of 21st century politics makes Batman a more complicated screen hero than he’s ever been before. Only part of his might comes from his fighting skills; the other part comes from the titanic wealth and high-tech resources of Wayne Enterprises, which Wayne diverts to his secret crime-fighting project. Lucius Fox (Morgan Freeman), the firm’s brilliant R & D man, comes up with all manner of cool gear for Batman, but even he balks when Wayne develops an information center that eavesdrops on every cell phone signal in Gotham. “That’s too much power for one man to have,” he tells Wayne, who doesn’t seem terribly bothered. (Patrick Leahy, one of the U.S. Senate’s most vocal opponents of telecom immunity, even turns up in a cameo, getting roughed up by the Joker at a swank fund-raiser.)

Ultimately Batman and the Joker’s tug-of-war settles on Dent, the “white knight” embraced by Gotham as its last chance for democratic law enforcement. “You’re the symbol of hope I could never be,” Batman tells the DA. The Joker understands this too, and spoiling Dent’s lily-white image becomes his prime objective. (Speaking of spoilers, some are imminent in this review.) As Batman fans know, an explosion turns Dent into Two-Face, a Manichaean character with half his face burned to a crisp and half his soul poisoned by rage. At the end, when the Joker has been captured and Dent put out of his misery, Batman conspires to take the blame for Two-Face’s crime spree. “Sometimes the truth isn’t good enough,” he tells Gordon. “Sometimes people deserve to have their faith rewarded.” Sitting in the theater I wondered, “Can I really be watching a movie that presents Batman as a Christ figure?” I guess if you deliver enough fireballs, you can get away with anything.

The ending may sound like an unconscionable downer, but it’s offset by the humanity of the climax. The Joker has rigged two ferries to explode and given each boat a detonator that will blow up the other; one boat carries upstanding citizens, the other evacuated prisoners, and the Joker warns them that if one ferry doesn’t go up by midnight, he’ll destroy them both. This “social experiment,” as he calls it, is one of those cosmic practical jokes that have made the Joker the comics’ most indelible supervillain, but it’s also an ingenious large-scale version of Dent’s conflict. “When the chips are down, these civilized people, they’ll eat each other,” the Joker declares. But on the prisoners’ boat a lethal-looking convict, bald, tattooed, and bullnecked, snatches the detonator from the wavering captain and tosses it out the window into the water. It’s not every day you see a superhero wearing an orange jumpsuit.   R

For more on movies, visit our blog On Film.

Send a letter to the editor.

Comments

Flag as inappropriate

Ted Pendergrass at 9:13 AM on 7/18/2008

Thanks for the spoiler. :/

Flag as inappropriate

Darren at 10:52 AM on 7/18/2008

Great article as always, but were summer movies really that good back in the day? I grew up with the Star Wars, the Indys, and Goonies, than the original Batmans and T2, than high school with Indy. Day and J. Parks. Did you like those summer movies from those two decades? I feel that the summer movies really haven't changed . . . they just resonate more in the media (box office numbers, spoiler pics and info, blogs, etc.) than the good ole days when moms would send their kids to the cool theaters so they can have a moment alone. I would love to read what summer movies brought you out to the theater back in the day.

Oh and Wayne didn't say: "You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain."

It was Dent.

Flag as inappropriate

BillMe at 1:45 PM on 7/18/2008

I finished your review with a pang of regret. I haven't seen the movie yet, and it seems you've already told me about the ending...I think you should at least warn readers when a paragraph contains spoilers, so they can skip it if they would rather not have the plot revealed.

Flag as inappropriate

Kiki at 2:58 PM on 7/18/2008

There is a spoiler alert in the second-to-last paragraph.

Flag as inappropriate

dan agent at 4:09 PM on 7/18/2008

Why did you spoil the end, even with a brief parenthesesed warning? Gosh, a movie review should not be a Cliff Notes to the film...

Flag as inappropriate

church at 5:25 PM on 7/18/2008

nice spoiler. warning or not, it's completely unprofessional.

sloppy.

Flag as inappropriate

JL at 7:46 PM on 7/18/2008

I don't think summer movies are getting worse - it sucks that they've become less original and more focused on franchises than ever before (pretty amusing that the last Indiana Jones movie was also followed by an enormous Batman movie - and this was 19 years ago), but the overall quality has sadly been the same for many years.

Flag as inappropriate

GGD at 1:03 AM on 7/19/2008

Thank God I saw the movie before I read the review. Was a spoiler alert BEFORE the actual review too much to ask for? You give a (semi) warning for two-face and just completely spoil the criminal's decision. Not cool, man.

Flag as inappropriate

Dog at 2:28 AM on 7/19/2008

I believe it's all hype (which is good for the box office, yes?) about this being Ledger's final role. One more film is yet to appear with him. FYI: The movie trailers spoiled most of his best moments in the film.

Flag as inappropriate

Qwertz at 4:24 AM on 7/19/2008

A Terry Gilliam film coming out next year is going to be his real last movie.

Flag as inappropriate

Mango at 10:11 AM on 7/19/2008

This film was almost as intellectually numbing as the final line of this review.

Flag as inappropriate

Franco at 12:37 PM on 7/19/2008

Damn it, PLEASE put a spoiler alert before the last two paragraphs. Doesn't anyone edit these reviews before they're published?

Intriguing review, but I had no desire to find out the ending. Unacceptable in an open forum, downright criminal here.

Flag as inappropriate

J.R. Jones at 2:12 PM on 7/19/2008

I know it's shocking to think that a movie writer might have some design other than hyping the product. But our reviews are conceived and written as think pieces, and the demands of constructing a good argument supercede everything else. If I have to give away a late plot development, my reasoning is that the added insight will enhance your viewing more than simple suspense.

Besides, the spoilers here were explicitly marked. Remember when mom told you not to touch the stove, and you did anyway and burned your hand? Well, don't touch the stove.

Flag as inappropriate

Shaney C at 6:04 PM on 7/19/2008

Spoiler alert or not....
A review should be based on the performances, the plot, and the overall quality of the film, not a huge spoiler for those who have not seen it yet. Thankfully I saw the movie before someone told me about this mediocre review.

I feel like your review was the book version of the movie.

Flag as inappropriate

Julius at 8:57 PM on 7/19/2008

Mr. Jones, you're right -- your first responsibility is to write a compelling argument about the film, and I think you definitely succeeded. And even though some of these responses are completely overblown, I also don't think it would have negatively effected your argument in any way to put the spoiler alert at the very top of the review, bracketed and prominently displayed. I think it is currently couched, as it stands, in the rest of the text of the review, and even though surprises don't make or break a film, some people do like them.

Could all of us just have a tiny bit more consideration for others please??

Flag as inappropriate

Samir at 9:02 PM on 7/19/2008

Why so many complaints about the spoiler? If you don't want the movie ruined then wait until you have seen it to read the reviews. You don't need the validation of a critic to decide which movies to watch and which to skip. Just go out on a limb and trust your own judgement.

Love your work Mr. Jones. You always have a unique and sensitive perspective.

Flag as inappropriate

Jeff Fries at 2:21 AM on 7/20/2008

Ah, the joy of comments

Flag as inappropriate

Kyle at 2:15 PM on 7/20/2008

First of all, in response to Darren, Dent said it first, but Batman said it later in the film as well.

In response to everyone else, I enjoyed the review. I believe a review is meant to be read after you enjoy the movie, so the spoilers didn't bother me. I view reviews as a means to reflect on what you saw in a more thoughtful manner. It's a way of sharing ideas. People shouldn't be going in to movies with a spoiler-filled review building up their expectations... Next time, just skip the review and watch the movie first, instead of criticizing this author!

Flag as inappropriate

Kyle at 2:20 PM on 7/20/2008

Samir said it well.

Flag as inappropriate

J.R. Jones at 8:57 PM on 7/20/2008

I've been thinking about this a lot because some commenters got so exercised about the so-called "spoilers." I still wouldn't change the last two paragraphs, but here are a few thoughts:

1) Originally the last paragraph gave away even more of the ferry-boat episode, but my wise and able editor, Mike Miner, talked me into deleting this info and managed to make my point carry pretty well without it. So we do think about these things.

2) If you've seen the movie, you know that the last half hour is a cornucopia of cliffhangers, so giving away one of them doesn't seem like a capital offense, as it would be if you told someone the ending of THE USUAL SUSPECTS--or, to use a more recent example, the turning point of HANCOCK, which was sublime.

3) I know the sentiment against spoilers is fan-based, but I think it's also encouraged by the studios' marketing divisions, with don't-give-away-the-ending campaigns pumping up a lot of phony excitement for movies that aren't worth seeing.

4) When I was a kid, there was a PBS series called THE MEN WHO MADE THE MOVIES that gave me my first exposure to Alfred Hitchcock. It excerpted the shower scene in PSYCHO, and later I read how shocked people were by the scene, not only because of its brutality but because it upended the plot of the movie. So when I finally saw PSYCHO, I knew exactly what was coming and why--and it still scared the hell out of me, as it does now, multiple viewings later. So I think great works of cinema are inherently spoiler-proof.

By the way, if you want to read a great thread about the social content of THE DARK KNIGHT--which I was kinda hoping this would be, instead of a debate about spoilers--go to davekehr.com.

Flag as inappropriate

abe at 12:00 AM on 7/21/2008

We are truly becoming a bit TOO obsessed about spoilers these days. Nice reivew.

Flag as inappropriate

kdollarsign at 12:07 PM on 7/21/2008

stuff that I think

1 - In the age of skimming, the spoiler alert should be more prominently displayed.

2 - The reviewer has a right to spoilers, esp. when the movie is a COMIC THAT'S BEEN AROUND FOR DECADES. But I'm smart, so I avoided all critical reviews until seeing THUH FILM.

3 - My boyfriend had a really awesomely diabolical thought regarding the boat scenario -- whoever pushes the button blows THEMSELVES up.

Flag as inappropriate

Hysan at 12:12 PM on 7/21/2008

I didn't read this review until AFTER I saw the movie, which is what any smart movie fan should normally do. Come on, people.

Flag as inappropriate

MOVIE FAN at 12:21 PM on 7/21/2008

Dear J.R. Jones, STOP THE SPOILERS you idiot! Angrily, A Disappointed Fan who will NEVER read your reviews again.

Flag as inappropriate

Kirsten at 12:51 PM on 7/21/2008

Movie Fan - Umm, hello did you not read JR Jones reply to several of the spoiler complaints & if you actually go see the movie you'll see that there are several more cliffhangers surrounding the ending.

Flag as inappropriate

New Fan at 1:39 PM on 7/21/2008

This review shed new light on the movie for me. I like how it put it in a fresh and insightful context. I enjoyed this review more than any other I read. It's also hard for me to believe the amount of whining that goes on in the comments section.

Flag as inappropriate

yeastInfection at 2:09 PM on 7/21/2008

I was also a bit distressed to start reading spoilers in the second-to-last paragraph, despite your protests that, "...besides, the spoilers are explicitly marked".

By this you mean, "...(speaking of spoilers, some are imminent in this review)..."?

You are dealing with a bit of a difference in media here. Reading online is lower resolution than print.

Even the eyes of regular online readers tend to get fatigued after reading a longer article, resulting in involuntary jumps in their eye movements that may cause words or sentences to be missed.

In this case, most online readers (myself included) found this alert too subtle.

It's pretty common practice on websites or Usenet groups for individuals reviewing new movies, books or other media to put a line of text reading "Spoiler alert". This text is spaced from the other copy to minimize people including the spoiler text in their visual field (remember people tend to read text in chunks, not word by word).

We're dealing with dynamic data here; the spoiler warning can easily be something that appears for one or two weeks and then disappears; after that, the vast majority of the readers will have seen the film anyhow.

Making this concession in the future (only for the online version) might keep comments focused on your actual insights and observations, rather than a steady stream of complaints about spoilers.

I do want to read the rest of the review, and will return to it after I've had a chance to see the film. Certainly, other people will see the film and want the same as well.

I don't believe anyone is asking you excise or change the two final paragraphs, just make it more obvious there's spoilers present.

The sentiment against spoilers is more than just fan-based. Many people simply like the sense of suspense, the thrill of not knowing, and the ride of finding out the answers.

Flag as inappropriate

yeastInfection at 2:13 PM on 7/21/2008

One particular observation you've made resonates with me: "...for most people the real poles are order and chaos." You've succinctly expressed the reason that holds progressive change in check. Change, real, fundamental change, only seems to occur in larger societies when the alternative to continued inaction is inescapably chaos.

All the spoiler crap aside, I look forward to seeing this movie with that observation in mind, along with your other words.

Flag as inappropriate

Glenn Fancher at 3:17 PM on 7/21/2008

Please include more left wing talking points and Anti Bush rhetoric at the top of your reviews. Frankly, they add an intellectual weight to cinematic discourse. At the same time confirming that we are an evil country with an evil president that has stripped us all of our civil rights.Thanks for framing the nature of the summer blockbuster against the dark times of the Bush era.

Flag as inappropriate

miguel at 3:24 PM on 7/21/2008

Really, who gives a shit?

Flag as inappropriate

robert at 11:08 PM on 7/21/2008

we want a batman reviewer who follows rules, not a joker reviewer who does whatever he wants! :-)

Flag as inappropriate

villainx at 12:34 AM on 7/22/2008

flip a coin?

Regarding the ferry part. You read the upright citizens as being filled with humanity in not blowing up the other boat? I thought it was kind of ambiguous. I don't remember the vote, but it was in favor of frying the others, right? And instead of compassion or heroism, the dude wasn't simply a coward?

Flag as inappropriate

Nudge the Budgie at 1:40 AM on 7/22/2008

Terrific article, J.R.

With regard to all of this hysteria over "spoilers" - My best friend, Mark, plays it like this: If there is a movie that he's really looking forward to seeing, he refuses to watch any trailers (either in a theater or on TV) for the film, or read any articles about it, before he pays his $9.50. Sometimes I wonder how he ever even HEARD of the movie to begin with... but I think he has the right idea, in a sense... movies aren't just about the "ending", no more than sex is just about the orgasm. If you want to be surprised, just go see the movie first. It's that simple. (Moths: Stay away from the light!)

This country could use a Dark Knight right now... though I'm betting that Mr. Obama will turn out to be a plausible substitute, when he assumes the reins early next year, and gets this runaway carriage of a nation back on the path.

Oh, just one more thing:

The butler did it.

Flag as inappropriate

Moviegoer at 5:10 AM on 7/22/2008

Mr. Jones,

I highly recommend that for every movie review you write from here on in, you include no less than one spoiler in every paragraph. You'd instantly become my favorite reviewer.

P.S. and don't forget to include the "spoilers are imminent" warning in the last paragraph of each review.

P.P.S. Roseybaum is currently my favorite reviewer in case you're wondering.

Flag as inappropriate

john at 9:06 AM on 7/22/2008

I appreciated Mr. Jones's insights. And his spoiler warning, elegantly playing off the use of the word "spoiling" in the previous sentence, made me smile. I would not trade it for an all-caps "spoiler alert" at the top of the review.

Mr. Jones, thanks for the Dave Kehr plug. There is plenty of food for thought to be found at that thread.

Flag as inappropriate

paul c. at 12:25 PM on 7/22/2008

I can't think of a movie that is LESS political than "The Dark Knight." I know the movie is based on a comic book character, but it is set in a big city, filmed more or less realistically, and bears no resemblance at all to big city, or big nation politics. aside from Lucius Fox's comment about eavesdropping on cell phone's, there's nothing in this movie that connects with the real world.

You comment -- "an overhead shot shows a building that covers an entire city block collpasing into rubble." There's no such shot. There's an overhead shot of a building exploding, and a different overhead shot of a pile of rubble. But linking an explosion of a four story building to the destruction of the Twin Towers is critical overreaching.

My biggest complaint of the movie was that the geography was muddled, especially in the chase scenes. Movie chase scenes -- whether they are semi-realistic like in "Bulitt" or "The French Connection" or in totally fictional places, like the climax of the first "Star Wars" movie, have provide the moviegoer some sense of geography to create tension. The one chase scene in this movie is a hodge-podge of shots, with no sense of where the pursuing characters are in relation to one another. sure, it looks cool for Batman to scoot in and out of buildings on his cool scooter. But there's no relationship built between where he is and where the Joker is for much the scene. All flash with no substance.

Flag as inappropriate

yo at 2:26 PM on 7/22/2008

JR - get better with your comic book history, champ.

"As Batman fans know, an explosion turns Dent into Two-Face, "

Actually, as Batman fans know, Harvey Dent became Two Face via acid, not fire.

The rest of your review was simply angry.

Just because you got your rocks off knowing what was going to happen in Psycho doesn't give you the right to belittle everyone else.

And, to go against Glenn's rampant tongue wagging on your behalf (which is oh-so indicative of how eeeevil Bush stole his civil rights, oh wait. No it isn't. At all), if you wanted to initiate discussion on the political aspects of the movie, maybe you should have constructed your review a little better.

If you really wanted to make a bold statement, h ow 'bout comparing Gotham to our own lil' cesspool of corruption: Chicago.

You'd have a field day with that.

But, no. You ignorantly step over an obvious talking point to clumsily attack another talking point which no one is talking about.

Don't blame the readers if you can't write, champ.

Flag as inappropriate

re: Yeast Infection at 3:58 PM on 7/22/2008

"In this case, most online readers (myself included) found this alert too subtle."

This sentence sums up everything that is wrong with internet discourse, citizen journalism, the leveling of the playing field, etc. What evidence do you have for "most"? You mean the silent majority that hasn't chimed in on this idiotic discussion of spoilers? How do you know what they think?

Flag as inappropriate

Truthandjustice at 9:12 PM on 7/22/2008

Following up on yo's comments, I like the part in the movie where Bruce Wayne tells Harvey Dent, "One fundraiser with my friends, and you'd never have to have another funraiser again."

Sounds like something Obama's buddy Tony Rezko would say

Flag as inappropriate

Comie at 5:30 PM on 7/23/2008

This is a spoiler for a batman film. You can no more spoil a batman film than you can spoil the bible. Its not as if Harvey Dent doesn't become Two Face or the Joker tries something diabolical. Nobody goes to see batman for incredible plot elements anyways.

Flag as inappropriate

Chris at 12:28 AM on 7/25/2008

I sorry, what movie did the rest of the country see that I didn't? I think I enjoyed the trailer for the watchmen more than the dark knight!

Flag as inappropriate

blinky at 10:15 AM on 7/25/2008

Dear spoiler babies,
I also didn't want to read any spoilers for this film, so I waited until AFTER seeing it to read the long review.
If you've ever read a long review before, you should understand that they aren't meant to funcion solely as consumer reports (see the movie/don't see the movie). They are film criticism, in which the movie's ideas and its place in society and other fancy sounding shit is discussed. In order to be robust, sometimes these discussions include specific shit that happens in the movie.

You went out of your way to read a few thousand words about a movie you haven't seen and now you're all righteously indignant because details of the movie are given away?

It sucks that something you were looking forward to was perhaps diminished by learning some details ahead of time, but this was YOUR fault. Don't like spoilers? See the film BEFORE reading essays about it.

I for one enjoy reading the criticism offered by the Reader guys and would hate to see their discussions restrained or otherwise limited out of consideration to people that seem to lack common sense.

Flag as inappropriate

blinky at 10:49 AM on 7/25/2008

Sorry to be so snotty above. I guess it wouldn't hurt anything for these long reviews to have a generic header that says "Beware: Spoilers" or something along those lines.

Flag as inappropriate

J.R. Jones at 7:41 AM on 7/26/2008

Truthandjustice: That's a great quote, one I wanted to include myself but couldn't for lack of print space. The fact that Bruce Wayne is the richest of the super-rich, and that he's turning away from his father's more benign but ineffectual philanthropy, could sustain a whole other essay. And as other writers have pointed out, visually the movie takes place in two different worlds--the world of glittering skyscrapers were the wealthy clink cocktail glasses, and the world on the street, which is dark, squalid, and hopeless.

Flag as inappropriate

Timmy at 9:37 AM on 7/28/2008

good review, very good hollywood movie. what's rosenbaum think?

Flag as inappropriate

Looking for Jonathan? at 1:29 PM on 7/28/2008

He hasn't posted anything yet, but you can find him here:

http://www.jonathanrosenbaum.com/

Flag as inappropriate

Disappointed at 5:42 PM on 8/1/2008

I hate to be simplistic, I wish I could have gotten something original from this, something that I didn't already know. But instead, I got a standard combination of liberal cynicism and a synopsis, two things that I already know enough about. If you had delved more into the art of the movie--discussed the differences between his morality and the Joker's, or if you made a clean, meaningful comparison between Gotham City and our times, not just "hospital blowing up=9/11," I'd have loved this review. As it is, I feel as though you're no better then those depressed, popcorn eating Americans you criticized at the beginning.

Flag as inappropriate

Tim at 1:20 PM on 8/12/2008

You need to give substantially more warning before having a spoiler. Thanks a lot for ruining the movie.

This isn't some film school class so reviews should be written without a spoiler. I am reading the review before I have seen the movie, not after.

Flag as inappropriate

kilika at 3:17 PM on 8/12/2008

Very good review. Better than Trib. could ever hope to produce. I just saw film and agreed 100%. PS Folks it's a film don't get wrinkles on your face ver a spolier gees it's Batman.

Flag as inappropriate

re: Tim at 7:11 PM on 8/12/2008

Yay, let's have this whole stupid conversation over again! This isn't film school class so f you're reading the review and you don't see the spoiler alert, IT'S YOUR OWN GODDAMN FAULT.

Flag as inappropriate

rblo at 5:13 PM on 8/13/2008

I'm sooo bored with you people.

Flag as inappropriate

me at 1:16 AM on 9/29/2008

Yes, there was a spoiler alert. Also, I like to read reviews AFTER I've seen a movie to see if I took away the same things from it that the reviewer did. And I must say in this case I did not. I felt like it was a golrification of Batman as Ceasar. For one, even though Lucius balks at the surveillance system spying on all of Gotham, in the end it proves indispensable in thwarting the Joker the terrorist and is thus justified. At the end of the movie lying to the people about the purity and nobleness of a leader, even though both were compromised, is also justified. This reminded me of Bush's constant refrain along the lines of, "History will vindicate me" even though in order for that to happen history will have to be reinterpreted or rewritten entirely. It's all so machiavellian and undemocratic. To me this was almost an endorsement of the way Americans conduct thmeselves in the 21st century. It seems to say, "Sure we may have some MINOR problems (stress on the word MINOR) but in the end we are still righteous and we must stay the course without reexamining the core of what we believe we stand for as a people." Maybe this is just my personal view or maybe I misread the movie, I don't know.

Add a comment

Required, but will never be displayed

This math problem is an anti-spam measure

(please read our policy)



From the Reader blogs

On Film Pat Graham: Is "presidential cool" a contradiction in terms? When it comes to presidents in movies, apparently not.
10/7 at 5:33 pm

 



We welcome your comments and suggestions. Click here to send us a message.

©1996-2008 Creative Loafing Media All Rights Reserved.