The scene with batman punching joker while interrogating him, and joker just laughs manically with glee literally sends chills down my spine every time I see it. Such a powerful performance from Heath Ledger. The best scene in the film.
"They need you right now, but when they don't, they'll cast you out, like a leper! You see, their morals, their code, it's a bad joke." Prescient. This rings very true today.
i like your analysis, but you missed the final point. in the end, the Joker was wrong. the civilizing process creates citizens so divorced from everyday violence that in the end, with their hand on a superweapon, they are incapable of murdering others to save themselves. which i believe is true. The endpoint of the movie was that civilization does eventually slowly tame it's inhabitants. As well, it's easy to mistake the POWER Joker has from having no wants or fears for enlightenment. But Gordon and Dent want a city to be better and free of crime--of course they're vulnerable. When you care about people, you're vulnerable. Also, Joker does have attachments--he wants to be right about people. But he wasn't by the end on the boats. Look how angry he was.
Joker more interesting than Bruce? Yes. Taking the "ahead of the curve" line at face value? Eh... that's creepy to me. Seeing past materialistic wants and hating restrictions of society, that's not evil. But Joker is using this state of mind to... kill people. If one does not see that as a regression, I'm legitimately unnerved. Joker using Harvey Dent, killing Rachel, both of these ending up just being almost an additional prank, compared to his grand scheme... With that in mind, I personally don't think Harvey's turn was rushed. And honestly, I haven't been bored with scenes without Joker, even on repeat viewings. Gordon, Dent and Alfred all have shining moments.
I have always been drawn to the arc of Harvey Dent more than the Joker in this film. The movie hinges on Harvey, his rise and fall being a masterclass interpretation of a protagonist's contagonist in cinema. Initially, he is the peer who is everything Bruce cannot be because of Bruce's trauma. Yet when tragedy befalls the woman they both love, he becomes everything Bruce chooses not to be because of Bruce's trauma. Bruce's entire arc in the film is then informed by Harvey. Bruce initially believes that he and the armor are separate and that he can leave it behind. By the end, He realizes that he doesn't share the fate of Harvey because he and the armor are one, it being result of his trauma. The very reason he can't fall in love and have a normal life being ironically what makes him able to weather the storm. His fatal flaw becoming his greatest strength. Brilliant and Beautiful.
I respect your opinion, and while I normally agree on the critiques of Nolan in most of his other films, you are underestimating this particular one. The Dark Knight is an all-time great movie and not only because of the blockbuster spectacle and the Joker. It's a fully realized, auteur's masterwork, exposition is just right and the metaphors are perfectly balanced without being on the nose; there are also further themes realized that you apparently missed. The only thing I would agree on is that in the early part of the middle of the movie, the pacing/editing sometimes gets choppy, but that's it.
This is exactly how i feel about the film. The Dark Knight is something that goes beyond subconscious and gives a beautiful experience. Its hard to explain but its the same thing you witness when you watch a great film, just trying to reach that something hidden in the air which you cant see on screen. Its phenomenal and I dont think Nolan can replicate this.
the dark knight is special because it allowed us to witness the greatness of director and performer(Ledger) in perfect artistic harmony. that only comes around a few times a decade. i feel lucky we got it and can go back and revisit it whenever we wish. truly a gift.
Personally, I find it hard to root for a person that blows up hospitals, destroys emergency service vehicles, and takes innocent lives. 😅 I get this depiction of The Joker is complex, has endearing qualities, and presents interesting ideas about morality, but to describe him as a hero is wild to me! Otherwise, thank you very much for your content; I really think you are one of, if not THE best film reviewer on UA-cam!
I have to disagree on this one, i think the movie works in every aspect, the music, the dialogue, the directing, i think its a very complete piece of cinema but yes Heath Ledger perfomance is beyond good. Just like a curious fact, i read somewhere that in the party scene when the joker arrive and the elevator open, Michael Caine was supposed to deliver a line there but he never seen Heath Ledger with the make up before and when he appeared he was so shocked he forgot even to talk and thats the take they used for the movie.
Nolan's grounded realism was exactly why his take on Batman was so impactful and influential, though. I think people forget that. Until Batman Begins, every take on Batman was either campy, whimsical, gothic, flamboyant, or otherwise unrealistic, and people wanted to see what it would be like if Batman actually existed in the real world (insofar as that is remotely plausible.) The Dark Knight was frequently lauded as being a great crime thriller first, and a superhero movie second. A crime thriller that happened to star Batman. That's why it was so much fun; because it took itself so seriously.
The Joker isn't the hero of the movie. He is the most charming and charismatic character in the film, so I understand why people are attracted to him and You are right, The Joker doesn't fear death, but that's why he isn't a hero. He doesn't care so he isn't taking any risk or confronting a fear within himself thus he isn't courageous in any way. And it seemed like ultimately it didn't matter if the Joker succeeded or failed in his goal and he's not really risking anything. "You and me, we are destined to do this forever" or however that went after his point was proven wrong. Like none of it really mattered.
Christopher Nolan tends to treat his characters as plot devices; emotionally detached and extremely logical. Still though, this movie injected more visceral emotions in me than any movie I ever watched. Respectfully, I think your being a contrarian.
Holy shit you've been doing this for over 4 years, mad respect for keeping it up. Good things coming your way, you add a different twist to movie reviews that people like Jeremey/Chris dont
I like your analogy of the characters feeling a bit like chesspieces. That's kind of what I think a lot of Greek Tragedy is like as well, these characters being brought down by forces other than their own volition. In its own way that means its far removed from the most human drama of course, but there is that same kind of epic sweep to The Dark Knight that Greek tragedies had too, which, for all its faults, gives you a lot to talk about after it's over.
See, I loved Nolan's approach to these films, and thought he was the perfect director to take on the Batman franchise. His approach was: make a good movie first... figure out the "comic book elements" as you go along.
@@tomiecacique exactly. I don’t know why I bother watching her reviews, they’re mostly bullshit. It’s someone talking about a subject they don’t know about.
I normally don't like sequels. It's just a given they are cash cows and are dissapointments. Movies are at their hearts, coming of age stories, and a character can only grow up once. Incredibly rare a filmmaker can so rework and push a film saga, you can see part 2 or 3 with that sense of swing something special for the first time again. Dark Knight just left an incredible impression and is one of if not the best sequels ever made.
I completely agree. I walked out of the theater, I was 27, and I felt nothing. By the time I got home I knew that I appreciated The Dark Knight on an intellectual level, and of course Ledger’s outstanding performance, but as a straight-up film it left me cold and slightly underwhelmed as a fan of the comic and previous film/TV incarnations. Contrast that to Batman ‘89, the first film I ever saw in a theater. I walked out, 8 years old (my mom didn’t want me to see it, but I wasn’t having that), and I was blown away. When I walked out of the theater I thought it was the greatest thing in the world. My first theater experience. To this day I feel that Burton and company captured what I loved about the comics as a kid, and still love to this day (still read comic books)-a gothic detective in a mask matching wits and martial skill with colorful rogues. I miss the gothic aspect of Batman in films, the moody architecture, Elfman’s knock-out score (cloned to success in the animated series). And, Ledger and all of Nolan’s cleverness aside, The Dark Knight misses the mark. Good review.
I love the music and overall mood of Batman '89, but I don't think it made its hero *or* villain interesting. It keeps the real Bruce under wraps for so long that, even for someone who knows his true character, it's difficult for me to feel his conviction in the role of Batman. Other adaptations have shown off how haunted he is by his parents' deaths much better, I feel. Not to mention he kills deliberately in this version which I don't get at all. Joker is really simplistic, has comprehensible goals... big no-no for him, in my book. I do remember getting chills on my first watch, though, when Joker sees his face after the acid, and walks off laughing. Great scene.
I think the only mistake the film made was the killing and hiding of Two Face. They should had his fall from grace trigger the collapse of government over the mext 8 years, and feature him in the scenes that Scarecrow appeared in instead. That way, Rises would have made much more sense
You caught something that explains my dissatisfaction with super-hero films in general: the comics were never intended to be big-screen movies. It distorts the genre. Yes, animated series stay closer to the universe of the comics, and are more fun. Sorry to admit your analysis of Batman is spot on.
"I have to admit when I was 18 years old I saw this movie and thought it was the greatest thing I'd ever seen" -- Me too...it's cause when we're 18 we're still young enough to like comic book movies but old enough to think we know the meaning of life.
Maggie, are there any other villains or antagonists within other media that you feel have a heightened and/or wise ideology that surpass most other characters within it? I find your take on the Joker in TDK to be quite convincing based on the ideology i remember Joker expressing in the film
I think your perception of this film is really influenced by what you want this film to be rather than what it's actually trying to be. Goes to show that people's perceptions about film are very much decided by their expectations.
I’m not sure if this is personal preference or influence from other thinkers, but it seems like most of your complaints are not grounded in the film itself but a tangential idea that you are trying to put on the film. The Joker is not the hero. The central struggle of the film is not minimalism vs. extravagance. It is a deep dive into the complexity of the relationship between good and evil. Pragmatism vs. Idealism. The Joker exposes the difficulties with idealism, because ideals are great until people start to die. Until our own beliefs actually have to stand against problems and trials that inconvenience or even threaten us. For many people there is a mere shallow connection to the moral ideals they claim. Joker exposes that because he showcases The willingness to compromise the bold ideals we claim to have until the moment where it actually cost us something. We also see the complexity of good and evil in an imperfect world. It’s easy to castigate people who allow injustice to persist, but then we see the effects of what can happen when evil is actually confronted. If you just appease evil or try to keep it at bay there can be uneasy alliances where some people get hurt but most people get to live blissfully separate from it. When you decide to actually go after evil you run the risk of a war that everyone must be committed to winning. And that means sacrifices will be made in the process. There is also the issue of compromising your own morals to confront evil. Do the ends justify the means or is it important to defeat evil while still maintaining that moral standard?! Very gripping with layers of that conflict in every scene and every character. Even the mob bosses and criminals wrestles with the moral questions in the face of Jokers evil. Personal preferences are fine but I think objectively this film is brilliant and this review short changes that.
Totally disagree with you and feel you missed this masterpiece completely..One of the GOAT films in any genre...Masterful acting from every character, including gylennal and eckhart, art direction, cinematography, sound, film editing..Hands down Nolan's greatest film with a reminder that heath ledger was a national treasure..Everything since made by Nolan- dark knight rises, interstellar, inception, tenet, oppenheimer, has been heady and overwrought
You make me miss the late 2000s constantly! I saw this in theaters too. I am 9 years younger than you though lol. I loved that the movies coming out then (2008-2009) really captured me and exposed me to an new world in movies. I miss the aura it had from that time. Having seen your first few video reviews like district 9 and zombieland, adds to how you remind me of that time. Sorry kinda a weird comment.
Many people wondered how did brice Wayne got back to Gotham in the dark knight rises. I'm a school bus driver, and in the dark knight, the bank robbery scene, I have issues with that in the same veins. Because the bank is in downtown, not that many school busses traverse through that area, because we're time specific and the downtown traffic can be unpredictable, also, that many busses, the bus lot wouldn't be in downtown where traffic would be extremely delayed by a line of bus getting back to the lot, or bus drivers wouldn't drive through downtown to get back to the lot. Also city center comprised of business buildings, banks, not residential area with schools. Okay, there're apartments buildings in downtown area, and there could be schools downtown, but that many busses, people wouldn't be able to get anywhere, with stop signs flashing constantly. How often do you travel downtown and see a school bus, unless on a field trip to museums, that's normally downtown.
@@craydogdog1530 Nolan is a good filmmaker, he has a bunch of good films and a few great films, but outside of the mainstream blockbuster realm there are so many amazing directors that approach film in a more artistic or challenging way. Just a handful off the top of my head, but there are lots of other great filmmakers. Stanley Kubrick Paul Thomas Anderson Ingmar Bergman David Lynch Lynne Ramsay Martin Scorsese Akira Kurosawa Alfred Hitchcock Yasujiro Ozu Steven Spielberg Coen Brothers Nicolas Roeg Agnes Varda Andrei Tarkovsky Bong Joon Ho Park Chan-Wook Douglas Sirk
the film told us that Joker is unbeatable because he is fearless and has no plan, but he plans a lot, and the fearlessness didn't help him much (just on one occasion he's facing batman's bike) .
I subscribe!, youre very knowledgeable, you get informed, you get the facts and when you want to you express your opinion very clearly. You seem cool, stay safe!
Yeah, although it's true that the power of the character of Joker is his "nothingness" and him being more of a symbol, or proving a point, then having individual goal with some motive, on the other hand this fact in some way outgrew the movie itself and what it is trying to say with the Batman character. I think the ultimate victory of Batman/Bruce Wayne could be the realization that the Joker is somewhat the other side of him and in the end "fuse" with the Joker - being protector, yet accepting those both sides, the light and dark, of humanity. They kept Joker in the end more in the oldschool villain territory by having him be angry, because his plan with the civilians on the ship didn't work, they weren't that corrupt as he thought. So in the moment you can see that he individually cared for his plan and seeing himself personally involved in proving a point. And Batman just won over him.
Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker is amazing, watched it when I was growing up. Also, Heath Ledger's performance of the Joker is incredible but does NOT exact the joker in anyway. Not the same elegance, mannerisms, or malevolence. I don't find his performance all that intimidating but it was "chaotic" for sure.
Wow. Found mold on my shelf today, and it's killed my DVD copy of "The Dark Knight". That the film is attacked a second time [... sort of] via this review is spooky. Sooooooooo disagree with your reservation on including Two-Face. To pit Batman against just the Joker would be the trap of repeating Tim Burton's first "Batman", a trap Nolan is too smart to fall into. At the same time you can't pull a "Spider-Man 3" and pair the Joker with Rogues Gallery member(s) that'll overload the film on a conceptual level. (Which you seem to claim it did.) The solution is Harvey Dent. The casting of Aaron Eckhart allows him on a first viewing to exist comfortably as the B villain; on the other hand his grandiose speeches and strategies reinforce in-text the hypocrisy the Joker is criticizing .... while the notion of coin-flipping as fairness makes the broken Dent an even nastier agent of chaos than the Joker is. To me Dent is the one with the arc; neither Batman nor the Joker change much in the 2 1/2 hr. runtime. Plus: no other way than Dent compromising the system's legitimacy could Nolan justify the existence of "The Dark Knight Rises".
You missed the point, many of the messages and themes of the movie - most which are not possible to present in a UA-cam comment alone. A collective society needs rules, structure and control to exist. The Joker represented chaos and anarchy and suggested that such a system cannot survive and that rules and control could be broken, that society is a sheet of falseness and will crumble at the smallest spark of chaos and lies. While this is true to a certain degree, humans have evolved in a way that no matter the adversity we somehow bind and come back as a collective group in the end. There is an inherent sense of rising together in the face of adversity that has kept the human race going for generations. You could look to the many wars, especially the World wars after which society still somehow manage to bring itself back up from ruins (either with help from within the group or from outside) and Europe and Japan rose from the so called ashes of destruction. So while I think that your interpretation of Joker is correct to a degree, Nolan is alluding to a greater theme of unity and morals of the society that no matter how many Jokers may try to disrupt the societal fabric, humans will manage to overcome it as a group and time will heal the many wounds created in the process - supported by the lies, corruption and control by figures of power like Batman, Government and the law, returning the group to a time of status quo that can be maintained till say a new Joker may arise and the cycle repeats. I have to disagree with your interpretations, as you are seeing it through the singular point of view of the Joker. Also you missed to mention David S Goyer who was instrumental in writing the Batman trilogy. To state that you don't like a movie is simple, that is your inherent inability to connect to it and being naive in the process. When people say to me they didn't like The Dark Knight, I pity them for not broadening their thoughts with the ideas Nolan present inside it and exploring the ideas within it, rather just subjectively denying it as a comicbook movie after watching it. I rate this review a 1/10, only point earned for the Joker ideas presented herewith, everything else seems to be the rambling of a teenager who hasn't decided if the video should be horizontally flipped till now ;)
Part of Nolan’s brilliant approach was in not making a comic-book movie. He made a classic drama like Heat that just happened to feature comic-book characters. That made all the difference in terms of tone and plausibility.
A simple display of how much potential great work was lost when Ledger died so young can be seen in watching him play Ennis in Brokeback Mountain (all internal) and then the Joker in this film (assertive and right-out). It would be nearly impossible to believe those two were the same actor.
@@BruceWayne-pm6co It looks like the style draws from those great iconic dark, thriller, murder mystery stories such as The Long Halloween, Dark Victory, Hush and Court of the Owls.
Heath is fantastic but I always felt the Dark Knight was wildly overrated and never liked Bale as Batman. Still some of the action set pieces are great.
I don't agree with some of the criticisms here I definitely agree that Harvey Dent should have been the principal villain for the third film, not Bane. This is still five star film though
I respect the vision he tried to portray but I agree with you. Gotham looks somewhat dull, same thing with Batman as a character. If you’re into video games try to play Batman from telltale games. Best Bruce Wayne/Batman character arc.
I agree with you in large part. (Though I do give Todd Phillip's Joker much higher marks and it has proven to be very prophetic of 2020.) I tend to look at Christopher Nolan as Kubrik on steroids. He does leave one thinking, but ultimately it evaporates. And I have heard so many people say that The Dark Knight is not only the best comic book movie of all time, but more absurdly, the greatest film ever. But I think you are on the money. It all comes down to the Joker. To Heath's Ledger's anarchic performance. And the last time I watched TDK the action scenes just bogged everything down. And that is the problem with comic book movies. The fans demand action, great filmmaking can only take so much action. I compare comic book movies to the huge Roman epics in the 50's and early 60's. No matter how good they are they are still bloated and elephantine and that certainly includes Ben Hur and Spartacus. It is the very rare director like Kurosawa who can make action meaningful. Comic book movies are like that. It is almost impossible to escape the conventions. Which is why I give Joker such high praise. Thanks for taking on The Dark Knight and Christopher Nolan.
@@anntimme3274 Copy isn't the right word. And there are many more influences. It holds up as a separate work. And that is the point. It won't fit into the superhero genre. And that's a very good thing.
YEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!! How I have felt for years but could never articulate it perfectly, well done on all levels about Batman and Nolan, Thank you!
While good movies I don't think either The Dark Knight or Joker needed the Batman license. For me, giving the Joker a definitive origin story robs the character of his power. The Joker should be a force of nature not a momma's boy who is beaten up by three teenagers. The best live action Joker was Mark Hammil when he played The Trickster on the 90's Flash show. The Dark Knight needed at least 20 minutes cut from it, starting with the boat stuff. I don't think anyone has made THE Batman movie yet.
@@shegg8453 I wouldn't say quite that, they both have hallmarks of the characters. Unless you're referring to the Trickster in which case, oh yeah he's definitely The Joker. LOL
I wouldn’t say the recent Joker film is a definitive origin story. It’s the most realistic origin of how he came to be but at the same time the film ends with him in a mental institution, with seemingly no scars from the terrible car crash he endured. It leads me to believe the entire film Joker is just a story spun by the joker himself to his caseworker. A story. As he doesn’t even know himself as to how he became how he is. He laughs at the caseworker, telling her she wouldn’t get what he was laughing at. He’s laughing at her coming death and at the meaninglessness of living a life with no real past or future. He kills the caseworker and the movie ends with him running through the hallways with her blood on his feet. Which I then imagine is the cue for him to come under the care of Harleen Quinzel M.D.
the only movie ive ever gone to where i stood up in the theatre and clapped before it was even over.....it does so many things right on multiple different levels....even if it wasnt a Batman movie, it would still be Great.
What pissed me off was Rachel two timing Bruce & Harvey on the animated series he & Harvey were friends had Harvey walked in on Rachel kissing Bruce he would've been heartbroken. Had Bruce read the letter she left him rather than tell him to his face that she was marrying Harvey Bruce would've been heartbroken either way both men would've been betrayed by the same woman makes me glad they killed her off. And I agree that Harvey becoming Two-Face did happen too quickly it should've been a slow burn & we watch as his personality changes it starts to affect his relationship with everyone around him especially Rachel. She then turns to Bruce Harvey sees them together & he becomes very jealous & accuses Rachel of having feelings for Bruce which she does in a way but knows she can't be with Bruce because he's Batman. And like she said in the first movie when she touches Bruce's face "This is your mask your real face is the one criminals now fear" in the climax the Joker arranges it that Harvey ends up killing Rachel this causes Harvey to finally snap the last of his humanity dies with Rachel.
I dont think Nolan is the right person for the franchise?? Dark Knight is considered the greatest comic book movie of all time and top 3 IMDb, 94% on RT. Get fucked.
what's interesting Dent being in the third film is that the original treatment had Joker being in court and Dent being scarred I love this movie and I think it's near perfect. The only thing I have with it is the whole Batmna taking the fall which is a bit too noble for him and yes the expository dialogue can be a bit much
When you mention Nolan's sympathies lying with Batman, it reminded me of John Milton writing Paradise Lost. He who went to relative extremes in order to uphold God's status as a righteous dictator, by giving us nuanced depictions of Genesis' characters, to explore the truth of each one. This is of course resulting in a depiction of Satan that was so seductive in his thinking, arguably more so than the "heroes" found in Jesus and God. In both cases we ask how much of it was intention.
Do you read much comics yourself. I only ask because I see Alan's Moore's masterpiece of a graphic novel that is Watchmen on your book shelf in most of your videos?
I enjoyed the Dark Knight. Though I hated the Two Face character. Harvey Dent was cool, but when he started flipping that coin every 2 minutes, my god it was annoying.
Wow you ripped this movie apart; no stone left unturned. I'm glad Nolan did this instead of Aronofsky with his Batman: Year One, hard to picture Joaquin or Freddie Prinze Jr playing Batman but I wouldn't have been opposed to it. Great video !!!
Personally, I love this film. But I absolutely appreciate your opinions and to some degree I agree that it is deeply flawed. The dialogue being clunky and expository is no doubt an issue with almost all Nolan films, and one of the reasons I loved Dunkirk, Nolan shines when he lets his images and ideas play out without explanation. I think like you mentioned in your review, the joker holding up a mirror to batman's (AMERICA'S) ideologies as well as Nolan himself as a director creates this amazing cognitive dissonance in the film, where you really start to deeply consider what the Joker is saying, and don't simply write him off as a mentally ill maniac or a psychopath. He is treated with a degree of respect that you would have for any great foe or adversary. The film ultimately tries to disprove the Jokers nihilistic viewpoints when the two groups of civilians don't kill each other, and Batman takes the W, in "typical" hollywood fashion. But then there's the fact that his victory included a massive lie to "protect" the public and nothing about this film by the end feels clean cut or morally black and white. It feels as if Batman (america/capitalism) do what they HAVE to do to keep society functioning at pretty much whatever cost to morality, honesty and individual rights/freedoms, but it isn't presented as particularly heroic (or maybe that's how I chose to interpret it). The entire film seems like a deconstruction of itself, Joker is the critic of shitty hollywood blockbuster filmmaking, and of America's ideals themselves, and he is by far the most intriguing and profound element in the film. I think Two Face works as a plot device here and it adds to the philosophical debate in interesting ways, but I agree that they short sold his character by trying to cram his entire arc into his 30-40 mins of screen time here. As much as I'd like to say the Joker is underutilized, I feel like he is in the film the exact amount that he needs to be to make the consistently show stopping appearances he does. It's a great film both intentionally and in spite of itself, it's great because it has the balls to expose it's own flaws on a deep , fundamental and philosophical level. That is the thing that makes it infinitely smarter and more interesting than 99% of comic book films, including the rest of Nolan's Batman saga IMO. Another area where I disagree, is in the films look. I actually think the grounded, gritty, realistic minimalism WORKS for this film. Sure it's fuckin absurd that some guy in a batsuit is running around this gritty scorcese looking crime epic punching dudes, but I think that presenting it this way helps you accept these dark, piercing ideas about our society in a much more believable and frightening way than if everything had a hyper real/stylized feel and look to it. If you're going to use these ideas to hold a mirror to society, it helps if it looks and feels like the society it's about. I think this is a necessary element of what makes this film work, though I totally understand and appreciate that the lack of creativity and style in the visuals could go against someone's personal preference.
I had just turned 40 when I saw The Dark Knight. I had to ponder was it as bad as I thought ? Or was I a jaded old fogey ? I decided , it was a pretty mediocre film.
as a crime thriller it succeeds, as a batman/ joker film it succeeds what’s not to like ? the film doesn’t take any Ls fa me and a lot of the criticisms are rooted in hypotheticals “if joker wasn’t in it bah bah bah”
@@huey6248 I think the main reason is that they're isn't really much special about it I'd say. It's a very surface level movie that only interesting once Heath Ledger is on the scene.
I am so sorry to hear you again talking against Christopher Nolan movies. I could not disagree more. I usually like your reviews but not when you talk about Nolan films. You are very wrong, it is only my opinion.
Love love love that you just do not give a fuck. Your review was like a freshly poisoned dart aimed at the neck of popular convention and I’m all here for it. This film has become a sacred cow for many; as venerated as ‘The Godfather’ in certain circles. For me however, every rewatch since its theatrical release has only proven to be more and more underwhelming and problematic. Heath Ledger’s legendary performance notwithstanding, the film is a textbook example of diminishing returns. Ponder its messaging a bit too closely and it’s a little like sucking on air. The film posits itself as grand ‘thinking man’s’ entertainment’ - and while it is grand, it is also clumsy and hollow in its quasi-philosophical queries into societal ills and human duality. Give me Heath Ledger’s Joker any day but the rest of it I just don’t know what to make of.
I think The Dark Knight is a terrific action movie, but not a great Batman movie. The protagonist is a gritty action hero, and he wears cool bat-motif armor, but he doesn't feel like Batman to me (in part because Batman's code against killing is nowhere to be seen). The Dark Knight is a better movie than Batman: Mask of the Phantasm, but I think B:MotP is a better Batman movie. Likewise, Heath Ledger is astonishing, and his antagonist is completely terrifying. But whoever that guy is, he's not The Joker. For me, part of the essence of The Joker is that he usually seems like a clown/comedian in his demeanor. His actions make him terrifying, but in his behavior, he genuinely thinks he's being funny almost all the time (at least to himself). Only very rarely does his scary psychopath nature peek through openly into his persona. Ledger's Joker almost always just seems like a psychopath. Don't get me wrong: he's GREAT as this psychopath. It just doesn't feel like The Joker to me. To me, Mark Hamill is still the definitive Joker.
My problem with The Dark Knight is the wrong actor is playing Bruce Wayne / The Batman. Think about this. Christian Bale has no empathy. He's a cool cold diffident personality. Bale undermines the film; he has neither the range nor the personality for the part. The emotional center of the story is like a black hole. Let Bale play Harvey Dent the politician. If Aaron Eckhart had played Bruce Wayne / Batman -- and he looks the part with his physicality, features and build -- we'd have a warmer, more poignant Bruce Wayne / Batman to add another dimension to the relentless nihilism, and much-needed emotional contrast to the Joker and what the Joker represents. An opposite. With these cast changes all the story elements would have balanced out.
Heath Ledger's Joker indeed seems to have no fear, but I think he's not as not-caring and chaotic as he'd like himself to be. Though, he's pretty close. He so desperately wants to prove humanity is as bad as he is. The thing he says about killing people with a knife. "savor all the little emotions" This is his way of getting emotions from people, forming some kind of connection, desperately. Because he obviously never had that, and is venting that through his actions. He definitely has some inhuman qualities that make him as powerful as he is, but there's still an undercurrent of trauma and pain there, I believe. He's still, deep inside, a kind of desperate and sad man, but is so far gone that he can revel in it.
The Dark Knight is the most overstated film of all-time. It's literally Heat in dress up but not as clever, engaging or as deep. Ledger is great though.
have to disagree with it ripping off heat,it has a similar tone and is shot similar but everything else is different heat is a heist movie for the most part and DK is crime drama mixed with comic book movie
Great review , but for same reasons you rooted for Joker, I did for Bruce Wayne. Yes , Joker was the most perspective one but here lies the danger of confident idealogues/know it all types , direct effect of it being on Harvey Dent. Bruce Wayne being the only character who seems in doubt throughout and also the only main character in the series which is capable of change not necessary due to external factors. Also still manages to defeat the terror of Joker. Though one thing I don't like about the trilogy is how Bruce Wayne and Batman's internal struggles are the same. Batman Begins did a good job though in making Batman a theatricality symbol.
I do disagrre with her on the other actors they may not be good as heath leager but they hold their own in peformance where a non super hero would do .
@@racewiththefalcons1 The Dark Knight is supposedly a conservative film and Maggie is definitely liberal. Maybe she's more anarchist than we thought. Of course those Antifa poseurs are just sociopaths.
@@deepfocuslens Unless you are some RNC poster child, virtually everyone in their twenties (I still refuse to believe you're 30) is liberal. Also I'm using the word in the original sense not the new bastardized version. I don't see being liberal as a bad thing. LIberal or not I do appreciate that you don't wear your politics on your sleeve. In fact you usually are far outside the fray like some kind of beautiful alien observer.
@@stopthephilosophicalzombie9017 It's certainly not a bad thing in the basic sense of the word. But I'm pretty opposed to this current radical liberalism. I'd say I'm independent. I hold both conservative and liberal values but don't associate directly with either in the current political climate. But I think a lot people assume that because I'm the artsy psychedelic girl, I must immediately be one of the radical leftists. I guess I can understand why. It's rare when I see otherwise as well. But...not the case with me.
ugh, I wish I was as articulate as you are because I couldn't help but feel you illustrated my exact thoughts and gripes with the film in such a detailed and intelligent manner-particularly your explanation of the Joker as the one person who is truly free in the film, and how his character is almost a deconstruction of his own creator, Christopher Nolan. One thing you mentioned briefly which I thought you would expand on was the utter shallowness of Alfred's anecdotes, specifically his story of the bandit in Myanmar. The bandit who steals money from authorities just to throw it away being seen as illogical and operating without reason is such an unbelievably colonialist understanding of his motives; one that just doesn't apply to the complexity of Joker. For something that's quoted more than line in any superhero film, it baffles me how poorly conceptualized this part of the movie is and makes me think perhaps Nolan intended for Joker to be the true hero of the story, although I don't think he's that smart.
Personal take, I really dislike this movie. I think Batman Begins did a great job putting together an origin story that also worked as a film, I'm really impressed by how well the plot flows. This just felt like an action film where they renamed the terrorist Joker and the action hero cop Batman. It's cursed with all the contemporary pandering, like a bomb-in-stomach trying to out do Saw, or the fake moralizing with a cringy social experiment ending. There are monumentally stupid parts too, like Batman hacking every phone in the city at once which is both impossible and immoral. Did Ledger pull off a great performance?, yes. And yet I can't like him (the way I can enjoy Hamill or Nicholson) because te plot of his film feels so fake and contrived. (Down to the stupid no origin story thing, which was a thing DC comics was trying to do at the time, but when your villain has no clear origin or motivation or goal or arc...lines kids quote like "some just want to watch the world burn" are honestly terrible! The Two-Face makeup was awful and the ending was dumb ("Blame the murders on me...not say, the Joker who just killed 10 people and tried to blow up the city") I think this is only fun for people who never saw a 2000s action film and think this is uinque.
I wish Batman had as much depth in this movie as The Joker did. He's a guest star in his own movie. And Harvey Dent totally should have been saved for the final movie in the trilogy. His whole arc feels cramped here.
i felt like the whole film narratively was about harvey dent tbh sure he became two face went evil kinda quick but there’s little grains scattered throughout the film that kinda imply his twisted judgment on what’s fair. also i mean his girl died, that’s enough to turn anyone cruel.
The scene with batman punching joker while interrogating him, and joker just laughs manically with glee literally sends chills down my spine every time I see it. Such a powerful performance from Heath Ledger. The best scene in the film.
And on top of that Ledger told Bale to actually hit him.
I love that scene but it takes so much damn time to get to it. Feels like a scene that should’ve been at the start of the second act.
Heath Ledger was mature beyond his years....his screen presence was undeniable.
'The Dark Knight' was the last film I went to watch multiple times upon its release. It felt like more than just a 'superhero movie'.
"They need you right now, but when they don't, they'll cast you out, like a leper! You see, their morals, their code, it's a bad joke." Prescient. This rings very true today.
i like your analysis, but you missed the final point. in the end, the Joker was wrong. the civilizing process creates citizens so divorced from everyday violence that in the end, with their hand on a superweapon, they are incapable of murdering others to save themselves. which i believe is true. The endpoint of the movie was that civilization does eventually slowly tame it's inhabitants.
As well, it's easy to mistake the POWER Joker has from having no wants or fears for enlightenment. But Gordon and Dent want a city to be better and free of crime--of course they're vulnerable. When you care about people, you're vulnerable.
Also, Joker does have attachments--he wants to be right about people. But he wasn't by the end on the boats. Look how angry he was.
Joker more interesting than Bruce? Yes.
Taking the "ahead of the curve" line at face value? Eh... that's creepy to me. Seeing past materialistic wants and hating restrictions of society, that's not evil. But Joker is using this state of mind to... kill people. If one does not see that as a regression, I'm legitimately unnerved.
Joker using Harvey Dent, killing Rachel, both of these ending up just being almost an additional prank, compared to his grand scheme... With that in mind, I personally don't think Harvey's turn was rushed. And honestly, I haven't been bored with scenes without Joker, even on repeat viewings. Gordon, Dent and Alfred all have shining moments.
It's just in this movie in the comics Batman is better if you know...
@@awesomebird7172 I don't know what you are saying.
@@kylefrank638 wdym?
@@kylefrank638 i meant comic versions are better...
@@kylefrank638 read the long halloween and scott snyder's/frank miller's runs on the characters
I have always been drawn to the arc of Harvey Dent more than the Joker in this film.
The movie hinges on Harvey, his rise and fall being a masterclass interpretation of a protagonist's contagonist in cinema.
Initially, he is the peer who is everything Bruce cannot be because of Bruce's trauma.
Yet when tragedy befalls the woman they both love, he becomes everything Bruce chooses not to be because of Bruce's trauma.
Bruce's entire arc in the film is then informed by Harvey.
Bruce initially believes that he and the armor are separate and that he can leave it behind.
By the end, He realizes that he doesn't share the fate of Harvey because he and the armor are one, it being result of his trauma.
The very reason he can't fall in love and have a normal life being ironically what makes him able to weather the storm.
His fatal flaw becoming his greatest strength.
Brilliant and Beautiful.
I respect your opinion, and while I normally agree on the critiques of Nolan in most of his other films, you are underestimating this particular one. The Dark Knight is an all-time great movie and not only because of the blockbuster spectacle and the Joker. It's a fully realized, auteur's masterwork, exposition is just right and the metaphors are perfectly balanced without being on the nose; there are also further themes realized that you apparently missed. The only thing I would agree on is that in the early part of the middle of the movie, the pacing/editing sometimes gets choppy, but that's it.
Dude, you're just saying the opposite of what she said. Should've been more specific.
This is exactly how i feel about the film. The Dark Knight is something that goes beyond subconscious and gives a beautiful experience. Its hard to explain but its the same thing you witness when you watch a great film, just trying to reach that something hidden in the air which you cant see on screen. Its phenomenal and I dont think Nolan can replicate this.
"If all you care about is money then this town deserves a better class of criminal" The Greatest line a villain ever said
the dark knight is special because it allowed us to witness the greatness of director and performer(Ledger) in perfect artistic harmony. that only comes around a few times a decade. i feel lucky we got it and can go back and revisit it whenever we wish. truly a gift.
Personally, I find it hard to root for a person that blows up hospitals, destroys emergency service vehicles, and takes innocent lives. 😅
I get this depiction of The Joker is complex, has endearing qualities, and presents interesting ideas about morality, but to describe him as a hero is wild to me!
Otherwise, thank you very much for your content; I really think you are one of, if not THE best film reviewer on UA-cam!
It's a great film. I left the cinema totally pumped and went back the next day to see it again.
I have to disagree on this one, i think the movie works in every aspect, the music, the dialogue, the directing, i think its a very complete piece of cinema but yes Heath Ledger perfomance is beyond good. Just like a curious fact, i read somewhere that in the party scene when the joker arrive and the elevator open, Michael Caine was supposed to deliver a line there but he never seen Heath Ledger with the make up before and when he appeared he was so shocked he forgot even to talk and thats the take they used for the movie.
Nolan's grounded realism was exactly why his take on Batman was so impactful and influential, though. I think people forget that. Until Batman Begins, every take on Batman was either campy, whimsical, gothic, flamboyant, or otherwise unrealistic, and people wanted to see what it would be like if Batman actually existed in the real world (insofar as that is remotely plausible.) The Dark Knight was frequently lauded as being a great crime thriller first, and a superhero movie second. A crime thriller that happened to star Batman. That's why it was so much fun; because it took itself so seriously.
I think one of the closest movies to capture that comic book feel was Unbreakable. You could review it. You never reviewed any Shyamalan films.
Very good analysis. Heath Ledger's performance always reminds me of Brandon Lee in the Crow.
Reminds me a lot of Alex from A Clockwork Orange
@@pgp Totally that's there too. He took inspiration from a lot of sources so it seems.
Totally borrowed from the look and vibe of The Crow, as well as A Clockwork Orange for sure.
Cause ledger ripped brandon off
The Joker isn't the hero of the movie. He is the most charming and charismatic character in the film, so I understand why people are attracted to him and You are right, The Joker doesn't fear death, but that's why he isn't a hero. He doesn't care so he isn't taking any risk or confronting a fear within himself thus he isn't courageous in any way. And it seemed like ultimately it didn't matter if the Joker succeeded or failed in his goal and he's not really risking anything. "You and me, we are destined to do this forever" or however that went after his point was proven wrong. Like none of it really mattered.
Christopher Nolan tends to treat his characters as plot devices; emotionally detached and extremely logical. Still though, this movie injected more visceral emotions in me than any movie I ever watched. Respectfully, I think your being a contrarian.
Holy shit you've been doing this for over 4 years, mad respect for keeping it up. Good things coming your way, you add a different twist to movie reviews that people like Jeremey/Chris dont
I like your analogy of the characters feeling a bit like chesspieces. That's kind of what I think a lot of Greek Tragedy is like as well, these characters being brought down by forces other than their own volition. In its own way that means its far removed from the most human drama of course, but there is that same kind of epic sweep to The Dark Knight that Greek tragedies had too, which, for all its faults, gives you a lot to talk about after it's over.
See, I loved Nolan's approach to these films, and thought he was the perfect director to take on the Batman franchise. His approach was: make a good movie first... figure out the "comic book elements" as you go along.
@@tomiecacique exactly. I don’t know why I bother watching her reviews, they’re mostly bullshit. It’s someone talking about a subject they don’t know about.
I normally don't like sequels. It's just a given they are cash cows and are dissapointments. Movies are at their hearts, coming of age stories, and a character can only grow up once. Incredibly rare a filmmaker can so rework and push a film saga, you can see part 2 or 3 with that sense of swing something special for the first time again.
Dark Knight just left an incredible impression and is one of if not the best sequels ever made.
I completely agree. I walked out of the theater, I was 27, and I felt nothing. By the time I got home I knew that I appreciated The Dark Knight on an intellectual level, and of course Ledger’s outstanding performance, but as a straight-up film it left me cold and slightly underwhelmed as a fan of the comic and previous film/TV incarnations.
Contrast that to Batman ‘89, the first film I ever saw in a theater. I walked out, 8 years old (my mom didn’t want me to see it, but I wasn’t having that), and I was blown away. When I walked out of the theater I thought it was the greatest thing in the world. My first theater experience.
To this day I feel that Burton and company captured what I loved about the comics as a kid, and still love to this day (still read comic books)-a gothic detective in a mask matching wits and martial skill with colorful rogues. I miss the gothic aspect of Batman in films, the moody architecture, Elfman’s knock-out score (cloned to success in the animated series). And, Ledger and all of Nolan’s cleverness aside, The Dark Knight misses the mark. Good review.
I love the music and overall mood of Batman '89, but I don't think it made its hero *or* villain interesting. It keeps the real Bruce under wraps for so long that, even for someone who knows his true character, it's difficult for me to feel his conviction in the role of Batman. Other adaptations have shown off how haunted he is by his parents' deaths much better, I feel. Not to mention he kills deliberately in this version which I don't get at all. Joker is really simplistic, has comprehensible goals... big no-no for him, in my book. I do remember getting chills on my first watch, though, when Joker sees his face after the acid, and walks off laughing. Great scene.
Nowadays people just think rapid talking about their own worldview and eccentricity is film reviewing.
I think the only mistake the film made was the killing and hiding of Two Face. They should had his fall from grace trigger the collapse of government over the mext 8 years, and feature him in the scenes that Scarecrow appeared in instead. That way, Rises would have made much more sense
You caught something that explains my dissatisfaction with super-hero films in general: the comics were never intended to be big-screen movies. It distorts the genre. Yes,
animated series stay closer to the universe of the comics, and are more fun. Sorry to admit your analysis of Batman is spot on.
"I have to admit when I was 18 years old I saw this movie and thought it was the greatest thing I'd ever seen" -- Me too...it's cause when we're 18 we're still young enough to like comic book movies but old enough to think we know the meaning of life.
Maggie, are there any other villains or antagonists within other media that you feel have a heightened and/or wise ideology that surpass most other characters within it? I find your take on the Joker in TDK to be quite convincing based on the ideology i remember Joker expressing in the film
Just not sure how you can say Eckhart is not depth enough for the Two Face role. He was fantastic- brought much emotion and depth to the role
Enough for me to not subscribe her channel.
I think your perception of this film is really influenced by what you want this film to be rather than what it's actually trying to be. Goes to show that people's perceptions about film are very much decided by their expectations.
I’m not sure if this is personal preference or influence from other thinkers, but it seems like most of your complaints are not grounded in the film itself but a tangential idea that you are trying to put on the film.
The Joker is not the hero. The central struggle of the film is not minimalism vs. extravagance. It is a deep dive into the complexity of the relationship between good and evil. Pragmatism vs. Idealism.
The Joker exposes the difficulties with idealism, because ideals are great until people start to die. Until our own beliefs actually have to stand against problems and trials that inconvenience or even threaten us.
For many people there is a mere shallow connection to the moral ideals they claim. Joker exposes that because he showcases The willingness to compromise the bold ideals we claim to have until the moment where it actually cost us something.
We also see the complexity of good and evil in an imperfect world. It’s easy to castigate people who allow injustice to persist, but then we see the effects of what can happen when evil is actually confronted. If you just appease evil or try to keep it at bay there can be uneasy alliances where some people get hurt but most people get to live blissfully separate from it. When you decide to actually go after evil you run the risk of a war that everyone must be committed to winning. And that means sacrifices will be made in the process.
There is also the issue of compromising your own morals to confront evil. Do the ends justify the means or is it important to defeat evil while still maintaining that moral standard?!
Very gripping with layers of that conflict in every scene and every character.
Even the mob bosses and criminals wrestles with the moral questions in the face of Jokers evil.
Personal preferences are fine but I think objectively this film is brilliant and this review short changes that.
Totally disagree with you and feel you missed this masterpiece completely..One of the GOAT films in any genre...Masterful acting from every character, including gylennal and eckhart, art direction, cinematography, sound, film editing..Hands down Nolan's greatest film with a reminder that heath ledger was a national treasure..Everything since made by Nolan- dark knight rises, interstellar, inception, tenet, oppenheimer, has been heady and overwrought
I wonder how many times you need to see a movie to creative a review with such incredible clarity and insight!
@Deepfocuslens Great video to talk about The Dark Knight. Heath Ledger is the Joker.
I love your enthusiasm and emphasis and elaborate ways of reaching the audience
Its crazy to think this movie is 10 years old now.
No it's not it is 12 years old now it was released in 2008!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
@@TechNoir-wz5ic14 years now
You make me miss the late 2000s constantly! I saw this in theaters too. I am 9 years younger than you though lol. I loved that the movies coming out then (2008-2009) really captured me and exposed me to an new world in movies. I miss the aura it had from that time. Having seen your first few video reviews like district 9 and zombieland, adds to how you remind me of that time. Sorry kinda a weird comment.
Many people wondered how did brice Wayne got back to Gotham in the dark knight rises. I'm a school bus driver, and in the dark knight, the bank robbery scene, I have issues with that in the same veins. Because the bank is in downtown, not that many school busses traverse through that area, because we're time specific and the downtown traffic can be unpredictable, also, that many busses, the bus lot wouldn't be in downtown where traffic would be extremely delayed by a line of bus getting back to the lot, or bus drivers wouldn't drive through downtown to get back to the lot. Also city center comprised of business buildings, banks, not residential area with schools. Okay, there're apartments buildings in downtown area, and there could be schools downtown, but that many busses, people wouldn't be able to get anywhere, with stop signs flashing constantly. How often do you travel downtown and see a school bus, unless on a field trip to museums, that's normally downtown.
Nolan is one of the greatest directors of all time
I mean, if we're talking greatest 100-150 directors of all time I'd agree with you. There are MANY filmmakers better than him.
@@andrewreed4924 Like who?
@@craydogdog1530 Nolan is a good filmmaker, he has a bunch of good films and a few great films, but outside of the mainstream blockbuster realm there are so many amazing directors that approach film in a more artistic or challenging way. Just a handful off the top of my head, but there are lots of other great filmmakers.
Stanley Kubrick
Paul Thomas Anderson
Ingmar Bergman
David Lynch
Lynne Ramsay
Martin Scorsese
Akira Kurosawa
Alfred Hitchcock
Yasujiro Ozu
Steven Spielberg
Coen Brothers
Nicolas Roeg
Agnes Varda
Andrei Tarkovsky
Bong Joon Ho
Park Chan-Wook
Douglas Sirk
@Tyler Jones Yes he is.
@@andrewreed4924 There not just blockbusters, they're very deep and thought-provoking.
the film told us that Joker is unbeatable because he is fearless and has no plan, but he plans a lot, and the fearlessness didn't help him much (just on one occasion he's facing batman's bike) .
I subscribe!, youre very knowledgeable, you get informed, you get the facts and when you want to you express your opinion very clearly. You seem cool, stay safe!
Yeah, although it's true that the power of the character of Joker is his "nothingness" and him being more of a symbol, or proving a point, then having individual goal with some motive, on the other hand this fact in some way outgrew the movie itself and what it is trying to say with the Batman character. I think the ultimate victory of Batman/Bruce Wayne could be the realization that the Joker is somewhat the other side of him and in the end "fuse" with the Joker - being protector, yet accepting those both sides, the light and dark, of humanity. They kept Joker in the end more in the oldschool villain territory by having him be angry, because his plan with the civilians on the ship didn't work, they weren't that corrupt as he thought. So in the moment you can see that he individually cared for his plan and seeing himself personally involved in proving a point. And Batman just won over him.
Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker is amazing, watched it when I was growing up. Also, Heath Ledger's performance of the Joker is incredible but does NOT exact the joker in anyway. Not the same elegance, mannerisms, or malevolence. I don't find his performance all that intimidating but it was "chaotic" for sure.
Nahh idc nobody else could have made a better batman trilogy, this movie is a masterpiece and you won’t ever change my mind
Wasn't trying to.
TDKR is hot garbage tho
R Brooks it’s really not that bad lol
Wow.
Found mold on my shelf today, and it's killed my DVD copy of "The Dark Knight". That the film is attacked a second time [... sort of] via this review is spooky.
Sooooooooo disagree with your reservation on including Two-Face. To pit Batman against just the Joker would be the trap of repeating Tim Burton's first "Batman", a trap Nolan is too smart to fall into. At the same time you can't pull a "Spider-Man 3" and pair the Joker with Rogues Gallery member(s) that'll overload the film on a conceptual level. (Which you seem to claim it did.) The solution is Harvey Dent. The casting of Aaron Eckhart allows him on a first viewing to exist comfortably as the B villain; on the other hand his grandiose speeches and strategies reinforce in-text the hypocrisy the Joker is criticizing .... while the notion of coin-flipping as fairness makes the broken Dent an even nastier agent of chaos than the Joker is. To me Dent is the one with the arc; neither Batman nor the Joker change much in the 2 1/2 hr. runtime. Plus: no other way than Dent compromising the system's legitimacy could Nolan justify the existence of "The Dark Knight Rises".
You should review Robert Bresson's films
You missed the point, many of the messages and themes of the movie - most which are not possible to present in a UA-cam comment alone. A collective society needs rules, structure and control to exist. The Joker represented chaos and anarchy and suggested that such a system cannot survive and that rules and control could be broken, that society is a sheet of falseness and will crumble at the smallest spark of chaos and lies. While this is true to a certain degree, humans have evolved in a way that no matter the adversity we somehow bind and come back as a collective group in the end. There is an inherent sense of rising together in the face of adversity that has kept the human race going for generations. You could look to the many wars, especially the World wars after which society still somehow manage to bring itself back up from ruins (either with help from within the group or from outside) and Europe and Japan rose from the so called ashes of destruction. So while I think that your interpretation of Joker is correct to a degree, Nolan is alluding to a greater theme of unity and morals of the society that no matter how many Jokers may try to disrupt the societal fabric, humans will manage to overcome it as a group and time will heal the many wounds created in the process - supported by the lies, corruption and control by figures of power like Batman, Government and the law, returning the group to a time of status quo that can be maintained till say a new Joker may arise and the cycle repeats. I have to disagree with your interpretations, as you are seeing it through the singular point of view of the Joker. Also you missed to mention David S Goyer who was instrumental in writing the Batman trilogy. To state that you don't like a movie is simple, that is your inherent inability to connect to it and being naive in the process. When people say to me they didn't like The Dark Knight, I pity them for not broadening their thoughts with the ideas Nolan present inside it and exploring the ideas within it, rather just subjectively denying it as a comicbook movie after watching it. I rate this review a 1/10, only point earned for the Joker ideas presented herewith, everything else seems to be the rambling of a teenager who hasn't decided if the video should be horizontally flipped till now ;)
Part of Nolan’s brilliant approach was in not making a comic-book movie. He made a classic drama like Heat that just happened to feature comic-book characters. That made all the difference in terms of tone and plausibility.
What are your opinions on Tim Burton and Joel Schumachers Batman films?
A simple display of how much potential great work was lost when Ledger died so young can be seen in watching him play Ennis in Brokeback Mountain (all internal) and then the Joker in this film (assertive and right-out). It would be nearly impossible to believe those two were the same actor.
Are you excited for Matt Reeves' take on the character? The trailer looks like a good mix of realism and style and I love the casting.
the trailer feels like a gothic take which I LOVE
@@BruceWayne-pm6co It looks like the style draws from those great iconic dark, thriller, murder mystery stories such as The Long Halloween, Dark Victory, Hush and Court of the Owls.
Talia Mason I agree and especially The Long Halloween which has me excited because it’s my favorite graphic novel ever
Heath is fantastic but I always felt the Dark Knight was wildly overrated and never liked Bale as Batman. Still some of the action set pieces are great.
the joker is the hero, the batman is the villain.
the joker is an agent of change, the batman protects the status quo.
based
Hi, great review!
Are you excited about the Dune remake?
Thanks.
I don't agree with some of the criticisms here I definitely agree that Harvey Dent should have been the principal villain for the third film, not Bane. This is still five star film though
I liked how she acknowledges the animated series and i agree with her thoughts on the Harvey Dent character.
I respect the vision he tried to portray but I agree with you. Gotham looks somewhat dull, same thing with Batman as a character. If you’re into video games try to play Batman from telltale games. Best Bruce Wayne/Batman character arc.
Great video....been waiting for this review for a while.
Have you seen Arrival? If not please do. You would love this movie.
I agree with you in large part. (Though I do give Todd Phillip's Joker much higher marks and it has proven to be very prophetic of 2020.) I tend to look at Christopher Nolan as Kubrik on steroids. He does leave one thinking, but ultimately it evaporates. And I have heard so many people say that The Dark Knight is not only the best comic book movie of all time, but more absurdly, the greatest film ever. But I think you are on the money. It all comes down to the Joker. To Heath's Ledger's anarchic performance. And the last time I watched TDK the action scenes just bogged everything down. And that is the problem with comic book movies. The fans demand action, great filmmaking can only take so much action. I compare comic book movies to the huge Roman epics in the 50's and early 60's. No matter how good they are they are still bloated and elephantine and that certainly includes Ben Hur and Spartacus. It is the very rare director like Kurosawa who can make action meaningful. Comic book movies are like that. It is almost impossible to escape the conventions. Which is why I give Joker such high praise. Thanks for taking on The Dark Knight and Christopher Nolan.
Joker is a copy of taxi driver and the king of comedy and phoenix joker can never really be in the superhero world it wouldn’t fit
@@anntimme3274 Copy isn't the right word. And there are many more influences. It holds up as a separate work. And that is the point. It won't fit into the superhero genre. And that's a very good thing.
YEEEEEEEESSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!!! How I have felt for years but could never articulate it perfectly, well done on all levels about Batman and Nolan, Thank you!
You Forgot to mention the most influential Joker of all time....
... Jared Leto In Suicide Squad
Oh shit. How will I ever be able to face the public again?
deepfocuslens Great review as usual. Have you seen The Imitation Game? I’d love to hear your articulate thoughts on that movie.
If by influential you mean worst. He was horrible in BR2049 also.
Stop the Philosophical Zombies it’s sarcasm :)
@@alexanderg1297 I know.
While good movies I don't think either The Dark Knight or Joker needed the Batman license.
For me, giving the Joker a definitive origin story robs the character of his power. The Joker should be a force of nature not a momma's boy who is beaten up by three teenagers.
The best live action Joker was Mark Hammil when he played The Trickster on the 90's Flash show.
The Dark Knight needed at least 20 minutes cut from it, starting with the boat stuff.
I don't think anyone has made THE Batman movie yet.
mask of the phantasm ???
@@huey6248 Sorry, should have been more specific, live action. LOL
You're right though, fantastic Batman movie!
Nominally?
@@shegg8453 I wouldn't say quite that, they both have hallmarks of the characters.
Unless you're referring to the Trickster in which case, oh yeah he's definitely The Joker. LOL
I wouldn’t say the recent Joker film is a definitive origin story. It’s the most realistic origin of how he came to be but at the same time the film ends with him in a mental institution, with seemingly no scars from the terrible car crash he endured. It leads me to believe the entire film Joker is just a story spun by the joker himself to his caseworker. A story. As he doesn’t even know himself as to how he became how he is.
He laughs at the caseworker, telling her she wouldn’t get what he was laughing at. He’s laughing at her coming death and at the meaninglessness of living a life with no real past or future. He kills the caseworker and the movie ends with him running through the hallways with her blood on his feet. Which I then imagine is the cue for him to come under the care of Harleen Quinzel M.D.
the only movie ive ever gone to where i stood up in the theatre and clapped before it was even over.....it does so many things right on multiple different levels....even if it wasnt a Batman movie, it would still be Great.
You should have more subscribers. The way you review movies, you rarely talk about the synopsis, rather motif of the directors and actors.
What pissed me off was Rachel two timing Bruce & Harvey on the animated series he & Harvey were friends had Harvey walked in on Rachel kissing Bruce he would've been heartbroken. Had Bruce read the letter she left him rather than tell him to his face that she was marrying Harvey Bruce would've been heartbroken either way both men would've been betrayed by the same woman makes me glad they killed her off. And I agree that Harvey becoming Two-Face did happen too quickly it should've been a slow burn & we watch as his personality changes it starts to affect his relationship with everyone around him especially Rachel. She then turns to Bruce Harvey sees them together & he becomes very jealous & accuses Rachel of having feelings for Bruce which she does in a way but knows she can't be with Bruce because he's Batman. And like she said in the first movie when she touches Bruce's face "This is your mask your real face is the one criminals now fear" in the climax the Joker arranges it that Harvey ends up killing Rachel this causes Harvey to finally snap the last of his humanity dies with Rachel.
I dont think Nolan is the right person for the franchise?? Dark Knight is considered the greatest comic book movie of all time and top 3 IMDb, 94% on RT. Get fucked.
what's interesting Dent being in the third film is that the original treatment had Joker being in court and Dent being scarred
I love this movie and I think it's near perfect. The only thing I have with it is the whole Batmna taking the fall which is a bit too noble for him and yes the expository dialogue can be a bit much
all nolan films have super corny dialogue
The greatest superhero movie of all-time
When you mention Nolan's sympathies lying with Batman, it reminded me of John Milton writing Paradise Lost. He who went to relative extremes in order to uphold God's status as a righteous dictator, by giving us nuanced depictions of Genesis' characters, to explore the truth of each one. This is of course resulting in a depiction of Satan that was so seductive in his thinking, arguably more so than the "heroes" found in Jesus and God. In both cases we ask how much of it was intention.
Do you read much comics yourself. I only ask because I see Alan's Moore's masterpiece of a graphic novel that is Watchmen on your book shelf in most of your videos?
Most Nolan films are like Russia getting read for war xD
I enjoyed the Dark Knight. Though I hated the Two Face character. Harvey Dent was cool, but when he started flipping that coin every 2 minutes, my god it was annoying.
Great review but I like Phoenix's Joker best. Just my two cents. I just got through watching My Octopus Teacher. Would love to see you review it.
Wow you ripped this movie apart; no stone left unturned. I'm glad Nolan did this instead of Aronofsky with his Batman: Year One, hard to picture Joaquin or Freddie Prinze Jr playing Batman but I wouldn't have been opposed to it. Great video !!!
People saying it's the best movie of all time are going a bit far but I still really love it. And of course Ledger was fantastic
Excellent analysis. Very interesting perspective.
Personally, I love this film. But I absolutely appreciate your opinions and to some degree I agree that it is deeply flawed. The dialogue being clunky and expository is no doubt an issue with almost all Nolan films, and one of the reasons I loved Dunkirk, Nolan shines when he lets his images and ideas play out without explanation. I think like you mentioned in your review, the joker holding up a mirror to batman's (AMERICA'S) ideologies as well as Nolan himself as a director creates this amazing cognitive dissonance in the film, where you really start to deeply consider what the Joker is saying, and don't simply write him off as a mentally ill maniac or a psychopath. He is treated with a degree of respect that you would have for any great foe or adversary. The film ultimately tries to disprove the Jokers nihilistic viewpoints when the two groups of civilians don't kill each other, and Batman takes the W, in "typical" hollywood fashion. But then there's the fact that his victory included a massive lie to "protect" the public and nothing about this film by the end feels clean cut or morally black and white. It feels as if Batman (america/capitalism) do what they HAVE to do to keep society functioning at pretty much whatever cost to morality, honesty and individual rights/freedoms, but it isn't presented as particularly heroic (or maybe that's how I chose to interpret it). The entire film seems like a deconstruction of itself, Joker is the critic of shitty hollywood blockbuster filmmaking, and of America's ideals themselves, and he is by far the most intriguing and profound element in the film. I think Two Face works as a plot device here and it adds to the philosophical debate in interesting ways, but I agree that they short sold his character by trying to cram his entire arc into his 30-40 mins of screen time here. As much as I'd like to say the Joker is underutilized, I feel like he is in the film the exact amount that he needs to be to make the consistently show stopping appearances he does. It's a great film both intentionally and in spite of itself, it's great because it has the balls to expose it's own flaws on a deep , fundamental and philosophical level. That is the thing that makes it infinitely smarter and more interesting than 99% of comic book films, including the rest of Nolan's Batman saga IMO. Another area where I disagree, is in the films look. I actually think the grounded, gritty, realistic minimalism WORKS for this film. Sure it's fuckin absurd that some guy in a batsuit is running around this gritty scorcese looking crime epic punching dudes, but I think that presenting it this way helps you accept these dark, piercing ideas about our society in a much more believable and frightening way than if everything had a hyper real/stylized feel and look to it. If you're going to use these ideas to hold a mirror to society, it helps if it looks and feels like the society it's about. I think this is a necessary element of what makes this film work, though I totally understand and appreciate that the lack of creativity and style in the visuals could go against someone's personal preference.
Fuck socialism
@@somewhere8538 Great insight thank you
Nice review. Next you may want to review Drive (2011). Regards
Wow guess I have to check this one out this Chris Nolan guy seems pretty cool
I had just turned 40 when I saw The Dark Knight. I had to ponder was it as bad as I thought ? Or was I a jaded old fogey ? I decided , it was a pretty mediocre film.
as a crime thriller it succeeds, as a batman/ joker film it succeeds
what’s not to like ? the film doesn’t take any Ls fa me and a lot of the criticisms are rooted in hypotheticals “if joker wasn’t in it bah bah bah”
@@huey6248 well the joker runs the film,I love it to but the fannbase overrates it
@@huey6248 I think the main reason is that they're isn't really much special about it I'd say. It's a very surface level movie that only interesting once Heath Ledger is on the scene.
do batman begins review pls
Easily still the best comic book movie
You mentioned Into the Spider-Verse in your review for this film. I would love to see your review of Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse.
I am so sorry to hear you again talking against Christopher Nolan movies. I could not disagree more. I usually like your reviews but not when you talk about Nolan films. You are very wrong, it is only my opinion.
Love love love that you just do not give a fuck. Your review was like a freshly poisoned dart aimed at the neck of popular convention and I’m all here for it. This film has become a sacred cow for many; as venerated as ‘The Godfather’ in certain circles. For me however, every rewatch since its theatrical release has only proven to be more and more underwhelming and problematic. Heath Ledger’s legendary performance notwithstanding, the film is a textbook example of diminishing returns. Ponder its messaging a bit too closely and it’s a little like sucking on air.
The film posits itself as grand ‘thinking man’s’ entertainment’ - and while it is grand, it is also clumsy and hollow in its quasi-philosophical queries into societal ills and human duality.
Give me Heath Ledger’s Joker any day but the rest of it I just don’t know what to make of.
I like how you make comparisons to the other Jokers as well…
And completely leave out Jared Leto 🤣👏🏼
Sadly, his Joker was a joke.
I think The Dark Knight is a terrific action movie, but not a great Batman movie. The protagonist is a gritty action hero, and he wears cool bat-motif armor, but he doesn't feel like Batman to me (in part because Batman's code against killing is nowhere to be seen). The Dark Knight is a better movie than Batman: Mask of the Phantasm, but I think B:MotP is a better Batman movie.
Likewise, Heath Ledger is astonishing, and his antagonist is completely terrifying. But whoever that guy is, he's not The Joker. For me, part of the essence of The Joker is that he usually seems like a clown/comedian in his demeanor. His actions make him terrifying, but in his behavior, he genuinely thinks he's being funny almost all the time (at least to himself). Only very rarely does his scary psychopath nature peek through openly into his persona. Ledger's Joker almost always just seems like a psychopath.
Don't get me wrong: he's GREAT as this psychopath. It just doesn't feel like The Joker to me. To me, Mark Hamill is still the definitive Joker.
the hand to hand combat isn’t even that great tbh
Martin freeman would be a great Harvey Dent. Jason Bateman.
My problem with The Dark Knight is the wrong actor is playing Bruce Wayne / The Batman. Think about this. Christian Bale has no empathy. He's a cool cold diffident personality. Bale undermines the film; he has neither the range nor the personality for the part. The emotional center of the story is like a black hole. Let Bale play Harvey Dent the politician. If Aaron Eckhart had played Bruce Wayne / Batman -- and he looks the part with his physicality, features and build -- we'd have a warmer, more poignant Bruce Wayne / Batman to add another dimension to the relentless nihilism, and much-needed emotional contrast to the Joker and what the Joker represents. An opposite. With these cast changes all the story elements would have balanced out.
Who said Bruce was weak? Not me. Aaron Eckhart was in great shape and plenty tough. He's also a better actor than Bale. @@KrisBryant99
I still love this movie, Ms. Kael.
Heath Ledger's Joker indeed seems to have no fear, but I think he's not as not-caring and chaotic as he'd like himself to be. Though, he's pretty close. He so desperately wants to prove humanity is as bad as he is.
The thing he says about killing people with a knife.
"savor all the little emotions"
This is his way of getting emotions from people, forming some kind of connection, desperately.
Because he obviously never had that, and is venting that through his actions.
He definitely has some inhuman qualities that make him as powerful as he is, but there's still an undercurrent of trauma and pain there, I believe. He's still, deep inside, a kind of desperate and sad man, but is so far gone that he can revel in it.
The Dark Knight is the most overstated film of all-time. It's literally Heat in dress up but not as clever, engaging or as deep. Ledger is great though.
Yeah, that sums it up
Your comment comes off as the Reader's Digest version of online TDK complaints. At least say something new, else you just get the eye roll.
why does it need to be clever ? it’s just cool, cool stuff happens, cool stuff is said, sounds cool etc
have to disagree with it ripping off heat,it has a similar tone and is shot similar but everything else is different heat is a heist movie for the most part and DK is crime drama mixed with comic book movie
Great review , but for same reasons you rooted for Joker, I did for Bruce Wayne. Yes , Joker was the most perspective one but here lies the danger of confident idealogues/know it all types , direct effect of it being on Harvey Dent. Bruce Wayne being the only character who seems in doubt throughout and also the only main character in the series which is capable of change not necessary due to external factors. Also still manages to defeat the terror of Joker.
Though one thing I don't like about the trilogy is how Bruce Wayne and Batman's internal struggles are the same. Batman Begins did a good job though in making Batman a theatricality symbol.
I do disagrre with her on the other actors they may not be good as heath leager but they hold their own in peformance where a non super hero would do .
Maggie sounding a little antifa-ish in this review lol
Well, Batman does represent fascist authoritarianism in this trilogy, and even more so in the next film.
@@racewiththefalcons1 The Dark Knight is supposedly a conservative film and Maggie is definitely liberal. Maybe she's more anarchist than we thought. Of course those Antifa poseurs are just sociopaths.
@@stopthephilosophicalzombie9017 Wow. I have no idea how you assumed I am liberal.
@@deepfocuslens Unless you are some RNC poster child, virtually everyone in their twenties (I still refuse to believe you're 30) is liberal. Also I'm using the word in the original sense not the new bastardized version. I don't see being liberal as a bad thing. LIberal or not I do appreciate that you don't wear your politics on your sleeve. In fact you usually are far outside the fray like some kind of beautiful alien observer.
@@stopthephilosophicalzombie9017 It's certainly not a bad thing in the basic sense of the word. But I'm pretty opposed to this current radical liberalism. I'd say I'm independent. I hold both conservative and liberal values but don't associate directly with either in the current political climate. But I think a lot people assume that because I'm the artsy psychedelic girl, I must immediately be one of the radical leftists. I guess I can understand why. It's rare when I see otherwise as well. But...not the case with me.
ugh, I wish I was as articulate as you are because I couldn't help but feel you illustrated my exact thoughts and gripes with the film in such a detailed and intelligent manner-particularly your explanation of the Joker as the one person who is truly free in the film, and how his character is almost a deconstruction of his own creator, Christopher Nolan. One thing you mentioned briefly which I thought you would expand on was the utter shallowness of Alfred's anecdotes, specifically his story of the bandit in Myanmar. The bandit who steals money from authorities just to throw it away being seen as illogical and operating without reason is such an unbelievably colonialist understanding of his motives; one that just doesn't apply to the complexity of Joker. For something that's quoted more than line in any superhero film, it baffles me how poorly conceptualized this part of the movie is and makes me think perhaps Nolan intended for Joker to be the true hero of the story, although I don't think he's that smart.
Personal take, I really dislike this movie. I think Batman Begins did a great job putting together an origin story that also worked as a film, I'm really impressed by how well the plot flows. This just felt like an action film where they renamed the terrorist Joker and the action hero cop Batman. It's cursed with all the contemporary pandering, like a bomb-in-stomach trying to out do Saw, or the fake moralizing with a cringy social experiment ending. There are monumentally stupid parts too, like Batman hacking every phone in the city at once which is both impossible and immoral. Did Ledger pull off a great performance?, yes. And yet I can't like him (the way I can enjoy Hamill or Nicholson) because te plot of his film feels so fake and contrived. (Down to the stupid no origin story thing, which was a thing DC comics was trying to do at the time, but when your villain has no clear origin or motivation or goal or arc...lines kids quote like "some just want to watch the world burn" are honestly terrible! The Two-Face makeup was awful and the ending was dumb ("Blame the murders on me...not say, the Joker who just killed 10 people and tried to blow up the city") I think this is only fun for people who never saw a 2000s action film and think this is uinque.
Lets welcome the new intellectual reveiwer....others like stuckman seemed novice....now you have proved them to be mere naive.
I wish Batman had as much depth in this movie as The Joker did. He's a guest star in his own movie. And Harvey Dent totally should have been saved for the final movie in the trilogy. His whole arc feels cramped here.
i felt like the whole film narratively was about harvey dent tbh
sure he became two face went evil kinda quick but there’s little grains scattered throughout the film that kinda imply his twisted judgment on what’s fair. also i mean his girl died, that’s enough to turn anyone cruel.