Jul 30th, 2008, 10:12 AM
Finally saw it last night.
A good movie, but to me, not a good as "Begins", and heres why. Chigago. Plain and simple. They expanded the scope of Gotham to such a degree that I find it hard to belive that one man (however driven, motivated, or equipped) can be more than a piss in the ocean.
In Batman begins, Gotham was tighter, more claustrophobic, and ultimatly better represented than it was portrayed in Dark Knight. If you expect me to buy into the technology presented in the movie, what makes you think I wont buy into the stylized representation of Gotham used before? Realism in a super hero movie can be overdone as well.
I did enjoy the reversal of the dynamic from "begins". Bats and Rah's al Ghul took dramatically different paths for what each thought was the greater good in that one. In Dark Knight, Bats and the Joker went down the same chaotic path but for different ends.
I also appreciated that Bats didnt have a new, totally restylled batmobile just for the bleeding hell of it. True that the left it open for a new one in the next movie, but at least we have an explanation why, same with the suit.
Finally, to the acting. Ledger was fine, but I think he missed the mark by a bit. To me, the joker historically does what he does purely for laughs, not to make any kind of point, just because its fun to hurt people. In the novel, "no man's land" Joker pushes his shinks head through the bars in his cell at arkham, and strips off his ears. He thought it would be a hoot to be sitting there, wearing his doctors ears, when the guards came for him. THAT'S the joker I wanted to see. Ledger came close, but I think his joker was motivated by the wrong thing.
Two-face was handled deftly as well, and the makeup was gruesome and stunning, but more importanlty, ultimatly beliveable.
Overall, this movie was fantastic, but at the end, I thought they could have trimmed a tight 20 minutes out of it, and made it better for the effort.