My review of The Dark Knight—with concomitant musings on the state of our culture, just for fun!—is over at The Auteur’s Notebook. Here are a couple of tastes: “This may seem like faint praise, but about the highest compliment I can give Christopher Nolan’s The Dark Knight right now is to say that there were many long stretches during which I didn’t even realize it was a superhero movie;” “Anybody who infers and then goes on to imply that [Ledger’s] labors here somehow led to his death is slandering him in the worst way—by impugning his professionalism, for one thing.”
The whole thing’s here, and you can comment there or here. Enjoy!
Thanks Glenn, great write-up and the film itself sounds intriguing. Unfortunately we here in the UK have to wait until the 25th July to clamp eyes on the film.
Great review. I’m seeing it tonight, and will have my own review up tomorrow at my blog.
I have to say, I wish that superhero films were as mature as superhero comics. Mainstream audiences think it’s the other way around, but the current storylines in “Daredevil” and “The Immortal Iron Fist” are about as assured if not more so than any superhero film I’ve seen yet.
Any hopes I have for Zack Snyder’s upcoming “Watchmen” adaptation are dashed when I hear that Warner Bros would like to keep the movie’s running time between 2 and 2 1/2 hours. Alan Moore and Dave Gibbons’ 12 issue series had parallel storylines, secions in prose, etc. that I just can’t see being done any justice in such a short length of time.
Snyder even said he shot enough material to release an extended cut on DVD should Warner win that battle. But that just smacks of commercial opportunism to me.
What happened to all the great, epic movies with intermissions? I think the last two features I remember seeing where we broke for an intermission were Branagh’s “Hamlet”, and the nineties reissue of “Lawrence of Arabia”. Those films elevated cinema, in my opinion, to a night out that could rival a night at the opera or at the theater.
Are people still saying that Ledger’s death was somehow related to this role? I thought that one had faded away. If not, yes, the rumor is sort of a slap in his face.
Anyway, I think Nolan is probably, outside of Spielberg, the best living director of big, commercial films. His films are rich, haunting, unique, and he has a great eye. I’ll take him over James Cameron any damn day of the week. And “The Prestige” stomped all over “The Illusionist” as far as I’m concerned. How Neil Burger could read that Millhauser short story and then turn it into THAT movie is beyond me. But that’s another matter, I suppose.
Tony, I’d heard that the plan for all the ancillary matter in “Watchmen” was to put it all – “Tales of the Black Freighter”, “Behind the Mask”, etc. – on a DVD to be released concurrently with the main film’s theatrical release. You might think that also smacks of commercial opportunism, and maybe it does, but to me it also seems like a legitimate way to include those nebulously essential (if that makes any sense) elements, which, by the way, I wasn’t expecting to see at all. So better this than nothing, I say.
Bill, no less an eminence than David Denby couldn’t help himself: “as you’re watching him, you can’t help wondering—in a response that admittedly lies outside film criticism—how badly he messed himself up in order to play the role this way.” David Edelstein: “Scarier than what the Joker does to anyone onscreen is what Ledger must have been doing to himself—trying to find the center of a character without a dream of one.”
Hmm. I see on his blog, Mr. E. is taking exception to some of his readers calling him a “prick.” I dunno, Dave—what the heck, why not just try to, you know, OWN it?
It’s not just prick-ish, it’s also kind of, you know, stupid. Veteran film critics should be well past looking at acting in that mystical-horseshit way.
I agree, but I wasn’t trying to connect Edelstein’s observation to the reactions his review engendered. That last bit was just me giving a little love peck to a former acquaintance, as it were.
I can see that, except that just now I went over to his blog, and Edelstein says this:
“I can swear on Heath Ledger’s grave that I have never tailored a review — positive or negative — for the sole purpose of making a name for myself.”
That’s shabby and tasteless.
In Edelstein’s defense, he’s letting off steam over the cumulative effect of moronic responses to his reviews over the years and frustration over the ever-increasing infantilization of American culture. My generation (the first Baby Boomers) gave up comic books (as well as most televison) by the time we got our drivers’ licenses. I love Nolan and understand the economics of Hollywood, but I wish he’d do something more original.
That was a little condescending, wasn’t it?
http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0„20213004,00.html
“ENTERTAINMENT WEEKLY: Don’t you have the slightest curiosity about what Watchmen director Zack Snyder is doing with your work?
ALAN MOORE: I would rather not know.
He’s supposed to be a very nice guy.
He may very well be, but the thing is that he’s also the person who made 300. I’ve not seen any recent comic book films, but I didn’t particularly like the book 300. I had a lot of problems with it, and everything I heard or saw about the film tended to increase [those problems] rather than reduce them: [that] it was racist, it was homophobic, and above all it was sublimely stupid. I know that that’s not what people going in to see a film like 300 are thinking about but…I wasn’t impressed with that.… I talked to [director] Terry Gilliam in the ’80s, and he asked me how I would make Watchmen into a film. I said, ”Well actually, Terry, if anybody asked me, I would have said, ‘I wouldn’t.”’ And I think that Terry [who aborted his attempted adaptation of the book] eventually came to agree with me. There are things that we did with Watchmen that could only work in a comic, and were indeed designed to show off things that other media can’t.”
I think Moore’s points are well taken.There are some things film can do that comics can’t, but the vice versa is pertinent. There aren’t many cinematic images that provide the particularly irrational rush of a great Jack Kirby double-truck layout, for instance.I think Nolan’s choices relate to what becomes Batman most CINEMATICALLY, and are admirably imaginative. The movie may even surprise Mr. Scobie.But Alan Moore’s beard is gonna fly over to America and give him a smack if he keeps up the comics-as-kid’s-stuff stance…
Well, yes…I actually agree that turning “Watchmen” into a film – ANYBODY turning “Watchmen” into a film – might not be the best idea. But maybe Snyder can pull it off. He’s far from my first pick, but I’m willing to wait and see.
Hey Glenn,
I’m looking forward to seeing “The Dark Knight,” but expectations for the film have reached nearly hysterical proportions. Check out the user comments on Rotten Tomatoes- especially those for Denby’s review. Any critics who say that the film is anything less than this generation’s “Citizen Kane” are being placed on the Axis of Evil by people posting on the site, although most of them, I assume, have not yet seen the movie. More than a few of them also pointed out how a majority of the negative reviews came from NYC critics and, as a solution, proposed burning the city down and called for its critics to be drawn and quartered.
I think you put it kindly when you referred to “cultural adolescence” in your review.
Istand by my specific reservations about Denby and Edelstein’s notices, but yes, the Batmania is a little scary. And while cultural adolescence is worth bemoaning, these hysterical manifestations of it aren’t entirely new. I’m somehow reminded of the insane mail “Giant” director George Stevens got after James Dean’s death.
While I look forward to seeing the movie with “adolescent” glee, I must admit, I don’t expect it to be on the par of “The Godfather Part II” as I’ve heard several ridiculous comparisons state.
Glenn, you’ve seen it. Please confirm that it does not threaten to replace the “Godfather Part II” on my list of favorite movies (where it comfortably resides at #2 behind “Il Conformista”).
Hi Glenn,
Just out of curiosity… If your review over at Auteur’s Notebook would have been written for Première, how many stars would you use to grade it. (I was just wondering how it would add up on rotten tomatoes and metacritic.)
One of the big problems with Watchmen translating to film is a narrative trick that can only work in a comic. I can’t quite give it away because it spoils the ending, but late in the book the reader is presented with two different events happening, and they appear to be connected. They are, but not in the immediate way the reader thinks.
Snyder can pull that off- Lost pulled it off this season- but it has a greater chance of a) confusing the audience and b) being view as a massive cheat on film.
Glenn, I am curious about whether you found much of a political subtext, because others certainly did. Even up to some right-wing critics comparing Batman to Bush (I’m not making this up); popularity in the toilet, surveillance everywhere, determined to protect us despite ourselves, gosh darn it. Anything to that?
Dan, it’s been so long since I read “Watchmen” that I’m having trouble remembering what you’re referring to. Can you give me a non-spoiler hint? If not, that’s fine.
Glenn,
Was it better than the Sex & the City Movie (which I enjoyed tremendously?)
Fanboys on Rotten Tomatoes (who hadn’t yet seen the movie) were pretty rough on early critics who panned ‘300’, too, and that was hardly a timeless classic.
Nothing on Snyder’s CV suggests he has the smarts or the soul to generate anything more than a few silly thrills with Watchmen. My expectations are not high for that project.
Whoa. Lot of questions. Answers in reverse order.
Bemo: Yeah, it is better than Sex and the City. By my sights. But rather lacking in the female eye-candy component. No surprise.
Campaspe: The right wing analogies do not hold. Batman conducts his surveillance undercover, knowing full well that it’s ethically and constitutionally wrong, driven by his own desperation. The Bush programs are done in broad daylight, rationalized by the likes of Yoo and Addington and given a pass by Congress. (Bill is gonna hate me for this.) Different animals, different results, different everything.
Rodrigo: Star ratings. Bane of my existence. When we started the film reviews at Première, we didn’t have them. I agreed to incorporate them at the behest of a new editor. Regretted it. But, since you ask, if I were giving it a star rating, it would be a solid three. Suck on that, fanboys.
Mr. Dayoub: “Godfather Part II?” Not so much. Even less on “The Conformist,” for heaven’s sake. But we are here dealing with a community for whom the advice “Get real” doesn’t even vaguely resonate.
As far as the commenters who want to kill the NY critics who haven’t shown sufficient fealty to the film, what can I say but…
Hmm. Can’t seem to download/embed that great rathergood clip of kittens lip-syncing Iron Maiden’s “Run to the Hills.” Damn it all.
This is a true story: My brother, whose political views are similar to my own, used to belong to a Washington Redskins forum, and eventually became a moderator. His political views were at odds with the head moderator, and they occasionally butted heads. Eventually, my brother got tired of it and quit the site. Recently, he decided that, what with the new NFL season approaching, that he would let bygones be bygones, and he returned to the forum. Only to find out that the moderator he’d clashed with had been killed by a bear.
All of which is to say, I don’t hate you, Glenn. Life’s too short. And bizarre and disturbing, for that matter.
Bill, I didn’t expect you were actually going to hate me. I was just funning with you. I hope you know how highly I value your input here.
I know, but that story was on my mind. Pardon me for the grotesque interlude, and thanks for the compliment.
“There are some things film can do that comics can’t, but the vice versa is pertinent.”
Glenn, if you’ve got any interest in it, I’d like to read your take on the Watchmen trailer (and, more broadly, Snyder’s vision of slovenly faithful comic adaptations) in a post of its own.
Campaspe, I now see that the main source of the “Batman as Bush” theme is Slate’s Dana Stevens, whose “Let me show you my Pokemans—no, I mean it, GET OVER HERE AND LET ME SHOW YOU MY POKEMANS” fulminations over the putative insufficient abortion-related dialogue in “Knocked Up” was one of the low points of critical discourse last summer. So that explains a good deal.
Bill: Well, two events seem to be happening simultaneously in the comic’s penultimate chapter. When the truth about the events’ relation to each other clicks, it’s like an atom bomb is dropped on the reader.
It has a LOT to do with the way Dave Gibbons and Alan Moore structure the pages of the chapter, with half the page taking up each event, so it looks like both the top half (a conversation between three central characters) and the bottom half (events on a NY street corner) are parallel. But they’re not.
I don’t know how Snyder could get away with surprising the viewer in that way unless he did a splitscreen shot, but since so much vital exposition is given in the conversation scenes, it would confuse the issue, since characters would be talking over each other. And if they did it like the “Ji Yeon” episode of Lost, I think it would piss people off.
So right there, in the translation to film Watchmen loses one of its best “OMIGOD!” moments.
I feel like I’ve said too much already, and I’m not entirely sure audiences will swallow that ending either.
Oh yeah, I just remembered:
“Without WATCHMEN, LOST wouldn’t exist”- Damon Lindelof
Re Lindelof: I guess, by extension, one can say that without Flann O’Brien neither “Watchmen” NOR “Lost” would exist.
I hope the notion comforts the shade of Myles Na Gopaleen, somewhere…
Well, without Robert Mayer’s novel SUPERFOLKS Moore’s SUPERMAN: WHATEVER HAPPENED TO THE MAN OF TOMORROW? wouldn’t exist either.
And without James Joyce, Flann O’Brien probably wouldn’t exist. Whose turn is it now?
Can you believe this? I go to the midnight show last night to one of 6 screens showing the film.
Mine is the only screen where they place a reel of the film out of order!!! And it’s not discovered till we’re halfway through the film, about the part (MINOR SPOILER) where the cop funeral takes place. AND due to the late hour, they don’t want to fix it, so instead they offer everyone two free passes.
Have you ever been at the dead center of an angry mob with no way out? I was seriously fearing for my life about the time that one guy that always instigates these kinds of things starts yelling, “I don’t want your stupid passes. I paid to see ‘The Dark Knight’ tonight, and I’ll wait till 3 or 4 am if I have to. And I think everyone here will do the same,” with echoes of “Yeah, Dark Knight,” heard throughout.
Glenn,
OK, now I’m intrigued to see the kittens lip synching “Run to the Hills,” maybe even more so than seeing “Dark Knight.” Where can it be found?
Tony—damn, that’s a scary story. Of all the movies for a screw-up like this to happen!
Nathan—the “Run to the Hills” clip seems to have disappeared off the internets entirely, but the work of its animator, Joel Veitch, can be found at http://www.rathergood.com/. I’m particularly taken with his visualization of Electric Six’s “Gay Bar.”
It is worth asking, is “adolescent” material really necessarily inferior to adult material? I’ve never really agreed with the view- which critics like Denby seem to emphasize- that “maturity” is an inherent virtue in art and that immaturity is something to be looked at warily even if done well. After all, as a great man once said, what’s the point of growing up if you can’t be childish sometimes?
Okay, it was Doctor Who, but my point stands.
I think linking Batman to Bush is very reductionist, but I believe the political subtext is there for a more general commentary about real-world terrorism and reactionary vigilantism (which is one way to view the contemporary spread of Western ‘democracy’).
This is especially evident in the “hifalutin conceits about chaos”, which show the complexity of how interdependent the ‘white’ and ‘dark’ are in their perpetual collaboration with each other.
The Joker is clearly labeled a terrorist, but I think the Nolan brothers do a very good job in putting Batman on the same spectrum, instead of relying on a simplistic opposition between the two.
However, I think the point about the film being constrained by the superhero genre is a key one. I think the film might ultimately excuse the ambivalence we’re supposed to feel toward Batman by falling back on the iconography it’s trying to transcend.
Funny: I’ll be seeing _The Red and the White_ tomorrow night!
A lesson in internet morality, that is!
I saw “The Dark Knight” this weekend. This unofficial adaptation of “The Killing Joke” was spectacular. Heath Ledger floored me. I can’t stop talking about it, or thinking about it. I lover you, Christopher Nolan.
One problem: I think a police veteran, a District Attorney, and an Assistant Disctrict Attorney would have pretty intimate knowledge of RICO, so that bringing it up in certain situations wouldn’t seem like a light bulb was going off. But oh well.
Hey Glenn,
Saw “The Dark Knight” over the weekend and liked it, though “Wall‑E” still certainly gets my vote for this summer’s best studio film. Did you see the full-on assault at the House Next Door after a negative review was posted on the site? It was like an Internet version of “Invasion of the Body Snatchers.”
Yeah, Nathan, those Knightmaniax are kinda scary. What’s the psychological term for it not being enough that you like something, but you require everyone else like it JUST AS MUCH? I mean, these are likely people who never read “House Next Door” before in their lives. Likewise the odd ducks who skulk around Rotten Tomatoes and howl like banshees that “Dark Knight” didn’t get 100 percent. Rather unsettling. (And yet, the spectacle of David Edelstein waxing self-righteous about having to endure asinine, nonsensical personal attacks is comedy gold.)
Great stuff and a bit of a relieving echo chamber for my own current discontent. Part of the problem with contemporary immaturity is that there isn’t much of an intellectual culture (willing to) refute it. Save for a few (admirable) cranks, the highbrows of our age have embraced postmodernism whole-hog. There’s a quote from Jean-Pierre Gorin which I love (see here: [url]http://criterion.com/asp/gorinten.asp[/url])
“And, as an added bonus, for those who want to understand the sixties beyond the banalities that are ritually uttered about them, every scene of Fists in the Pocket, with the convulsive beauty of its framing and composition, amply proves how much this period was made by people so steeped in classical culture that they fantasized it could be solid beyond its fragility, shaking it to the core and ultimately ushering in a world they could themselves hardly live in.”
This to me, sums up perfectly the irony of 60s invention (the last era to successfully stand astride the yawning gap between high and low culture) giving way to a kind of rootless, empty sensationalism.
But I digress. I actually liked The Dark Knight (my review, or reaction, is here – [url]http://thedancingimage.blogspot.com/2008/07/dark-knight.html[/url] – and while it’s not as good as yours, I haven’t had as much practice). Seems like you did too, without quite buying into the “best film of the last 20 or 30 years” hype (I actually read that in one comments section).
Unfortunately that second /url bit seemed to get in the way. Here are the websites again:
Jean-Pierre Gorin
http://criterion.com/asp/gorinten.asp
My review of The Dark Knight
http://thedancingimage.blogspot.com/2008/07/dark-knight.html
On the politics of The Dark Knight, I actually kind of concur with the view that it’s, if not adamently right-wing, at least kind of conservative. Sure the surveillance is “undercover” (which is arguably worse) and “one-time”, but who’s to say the Pandora’s Box can be closed? And the distrust of the public is right at the forefront, though the film is admirably ambiguous enough to suggest that perhaps this distrust is misplaced. It’s the Joker who empowers people, and Batman who tries to protect them from themselves.
Though I’d draw the line at Bush comparisons (Batman’s neither incompetent, nor a moron) the Right is not entirely off-base seeing some of itself in the movie. Which, though I may not wholeheartedly endorse the politics, is not such a bad thing in my view – Hollywood pictures are usually so reflexively liberal (not far left-wing, as they often side with the military and cops) that it’s refreshing to see a thoughtful political picture, of whatever stripe, but particularly one giving voice to a pessimisstic (but not cynical or dismissive) view of “the people.”
The Dark Knight is cautiously paternalistic, to be sure.