The Dark Knight broke about sixteen million box office records when it came out, and understandably so – the online marketing campaign was arguably the best ever put together, and the hype surrounding Heath Ledger’s joker (which was already bubbling before his untimely death, and went into orbit after) was always going to lead to a big run for the film. It’s since made several “Best of 2008” lists and Ledger’s performance has earned deserved plaudits and a posthumous Oscar for the actor.
However, a review I saw of the film described it as “not only the best Batman movie ever made, but the best comic book movie ever made”. I take issue with this statement, because I think there is one movie that outdoes it in both categories, and that film is Batman Begins, Bale’s first outing as the caped crusader.
The main reason that I hold this opinion is that while The Dark Knight is on a much bigger scale, with a much better villain, it has serious flaws and major problems that do not plague its predecessor, not to mention the fact that it could not exist without Begins having been made when it was and how it was. In fact, after careful thought, I cannot think of anything I would change about Batman Begins – but there are at least 4 things I would chop off from TDK before I considered it a perfect film.
Although the plot of any film in which a grown man dresses as a bat to fight criminals will always stretch the limits of realism, Batman Begins marks the first genuine attempt to show not only what made Bruce Wayne into Batman but how he did it. Origin films are notoriously difficult to convincingly pull off, but so detailed is the back-story of Bruce’s teenage and early adult years (almost completely ignored in every other film to date) that the audience buys into it completely and it seems utterly plausible. The end result of this is that the film is a personal, emotional journey set against the backdrop of a crime-fighting superhero. I’ve always loved the idea of looking deeper into Batman’s psyche, and that’s why the first film with Michael Keaton was long one of my favourite films of all time, and it’s something that was promised but not delivered by The Dark Knight.
To highlight this journey, Batman Begins is fairly limited in its use of characters. There are three villains, none of whom outstay their welcome. Tom Wilkinson is excellent as Carmine Falcone, but never on screen long enough for us to tire of him, and the same can be said of Cillian Murphy’s Scarecrow and Liam Neeson’s Ras-al-Ghul. All three are characters from the original comics but steer clear of the more predictable options that have been tired out before, with not a Catwoman, Riddler, or Penguin in sight and only the merest hint of the Joker at the end – itself a brilliant touch.
The film concentrates on Bruce’s journey and Nolan could not have picked a better actor than Christian Bale for this. Bale is an excellent actor, so we shouldn’t be surprised that he turns in such a great performance here, however I think that his Bruce Wayne in this film has to go down as one of the great storytelling performances, not just in this genre of film either. The inner turmoil that drives his Bruce is played to perfection, and his Batman is as terrifying as he is heroic.
The Dark Knight, on the other hand, is positively teeming with characters that, in my opinion, drag the film down. Whereas Begins picks a plot device and sticks to it, The Dark Knight seems to have tried to fit two films into one. Given the quality of the two leading actors in the film, the entire movie could have just been an extension of the interrogation scene and my instincts tell me we would have been in for a treat. However, the Hong Kong visit (visually incredible, but only tenuously related to the plot and not actually needed in the film), the very existence of Coleman Reece’s character (an interesting idea, and played well for some comic effect but not actually needed in the film), Jim Gordon’s faked death (not really very suspenseful since he isn’t Commissioner at the time so we know he’s not really dead, and it doesn’t actually help or change the plot in any way and isn’t actually needed in the film) are all surplus to requirements and only serve to add to a feeling of disjointed hesitancy in the movie.
One major problem, in my opinion, is the decision to include Harvey’s transformation into Two-Face, and then seemingly play out his entire character arc in 15 minutes. Now, the rumours are abounding that he might be back in the next film, but even if he is, we are talking about a character that Batman has to battle despite knowing that he is the man who was suppose to save Gotham. Given Bale’s predilection for playing characters suffering from turmoil to a high level of brilliance, and Aaron Eckhart’s more-than-accomplished performance as Harvey Dent, the promise for a third film concentrating on the battle for Gotham between these two seemed almost too good to be true. But this potential has surely been snuffed out by the cluttered and rushed ending to the film. Controversially, I want to mention another troublesome issue with the film, which is the performance of Heath Ledger as the Joker.
First things first, I am all too happy to leap onto the bandwagon supporting Ledger’s portrayal of this old villain as a cinematic revelation. However, the sheer magnetism that Ledger brings to the role leads to some inbalance within the film. Ledger, while undoubtedly incredible, overshadows the performances of the other actors on show to such a degree that their talents are all but wasted. Bruce Wayne hardly ever appears in the movie, and when he does the story is never really about him, he is just a pre-amble to Batman’s next appearance. Gone are the doubts and troubles that clouded the young man in the first film, and in their place comes a kind of playboy bravado childish attitude which ill-becomes the character and the man who plays him. And as for other scenes in which Ledger does not appear, the audience are simply left wishing that he did. Michael Caine, superb in a role which has traditionally offered little for the actor inhabiting it, is relegated to a few comic asides and technological lackey for Wayne’s somewhat convoluted comb through the records of the Gotham Police.
Then there is the still-troubling character of Rachel Dawes. Created specifically for the first film, Christopher Nolan had two films and almost 4 hours of screen time to convince us that she brought something to the series, and he never quite pulled it off. People have criticised Katie Holmes’ performance in the original film, but I think that’s just symptomatic of people’s desire to criticise Katie Holmes. I liked her in the first film, and I think Maggie Gyllenhall does an acceptable job following her in the second, but I’m still not convinced of the character’s importance or relevance. Certainly we don’t feel our world caving around our ears as we realise she is doomed the way we would have about Basinger’s Vicky Vale. Certainly for the time being, Michelle Pfeiffer’s crown as the cream of the crop of Batgirls is safe.
Other characters then fill out the film. A nice enough but unnecessary return for Murphy’s scarecrow, Eric Roberts as Sal Maroni (again, an original character from the film and a crucial one in Harvey’s story, but not really used to any effect here) and Nestor Carbonelli’s mayor never really makes any kind of substantive difference to the movie’s plot, good though he is. Lau is relevant to the story, although it would have been easier not to include him, and far too much time is spent on him, and even Gamble is used just enough to count, but not enough to really make a difference.
There are plenty of other issues with the film. Most notably, if the Joker really is a guy without a plan, how come he managed to anticipate every move made by his adversaries and plan ahead to ensure that everything worked with military precision? Why include Bat-Sonar? Why, why why? It’s convoluted, ridiculous, and could easily be overcome by having a CCTV system that Lucius could tap into. When the convoy is diverted by the burning fire truck, why go onto Lower 5th, why not just drive down the other side of the road, since no cars are on it anyway? Who are the 5 people that Harvey killed and are 2 of them actually cops? And how does Gordon know about it anyway?
Not that Begins is without its problems of course, no film is, but there is considerable time and effort invested in the plot and the character arcs within it to ensure that the film works on just about every level. The emotional intensity of the later encounters is set up through a slow process at the beginning and this is something which never happens in TDK. It starts big and fast, and it stays big and fast throughout, which means we never really get a chance to digest anything, thus compromising our reactions later.
I felt it on the first night I watched The Dark Knight, and now, 5 viewings later, my mind is still not changed – the film has much to recommend it (most of it being Ledger, who is simply brilliant) but it tries too hard and as a result never really accomplishes anything to a satisfactory level. Perhaps the third film will come to the rescue and tie up the loose ends, but when it comes to handing out the “best Batman movie ever” awards, I think that Batman Begins should be head, shoulders and cape above the rest.
No comments:
Post a Comment