Know Your Enemy
"When Ledger isn't on screen, 'The Dark Knight' goes on for so long, it should be called 'The Long Dark Knight Of The Soul'. It has no sense of fun, no spirit of joy or play. Instead, it offers up a lot of moralistic waffle about how we must hug a terrorist."
Cosmo Landesman in the Sunday Times. There was always going to be at least one dissenting voice. Can't pass comment myself, as I haven't seen it yet.
Monday, July 28, 2008
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
The terrorism stuff is much subtler than "Cosmo" thinks. Also, the rest of the cast are stunning, the plotline is brilliant, the action is great and the CGI is almost completely absent (the one place you notice it is a mistake, precisely because you notice it. Also because it's stupidly over-the-top.) Go see it, it's fantastic!
it's maybe a bit long, but it doesn't drag and it's probably the most thoughtful, character driven blockbuster that I have ever seen. He's right about Ledger though: sensational performance. Genuinely frightening.
If you're a fan of the Frank Miller batman (and you bloody should be), then you're going to like this.
Good film.
ST
Actually, now having read the review, I think that Landesman misses the point. He scores easy points by suggesting that the whole post-9/11 vibe of the film is undermined by the fact that Ledger's Joker creates terror just for the chaos it causes and for no other reason. He suggests this is a poor comparison with Bin Laden. Well, if you ask me, that's making the huge assumption that Bin Laden and his ilk really are ideologically driven and not simply a bunch of chancers claiming every atrocity that they think will suit their own ends.
In this, I think Landesman misses the point.... and he also misattributes the crucial quote ("some men just want to watch the world burn") to Gary Oldman and not to Michael Caine.
If I was to criticise this film, it's for the sense that, when fighting crime and terror of this magnitude, anything is justifiable in reponse. This skirts uncomfortably with Guantanamo and the Terror laws for me. Nolan ultimately shys away from this, but for Landesman to peg batman as some Guardian reading liberal is so far off the mark, you wonder if he's seen the film at all.
Hmmm.
It's good, and certainly worth seeing.
But then, I enjoyed Iron Man, so what would I know?
ST
ST: Have you left a comment to that effect on the online review? I noticed someone there has picked him up on the misattributed quote - if that indicates his attention was lapsing, perhaps that proves his point about the film dragging, but then that might just be a cheap way of getting himself off the charge of bad journalism. Depends how charitable you're feeling, and I'm guessing that in the case of yourself and Simon, it's not very.
Simon: Not a big fan of Cosmo, are you? What with the 'Hot Fuzz' review you took exception to, and everything...
no, I haven't commented on the article, but the quote isn't that far into the film, and it's a really important moment (at least in our understanding of the Joker), so to misattribute it takes some doing, if you ask me. It's like he's going out of his way to dislike the film. As blockbusters go, this is I think as intelligent as you will find. He's right about batman almost being incidental though. He's there, and he's clearly important, but the themes we're dealing with seem bigger. And he's right about Ledger too... a remarkable performance. More frightening than Lecter. By far.
From the reviews I've read, his reviews are at least half based on a negative correlation with budget. Dark Knight cost a lot so it was never going to get his thumbs-up, but even he can't fault Ledger (or Oldman, or Caine, or...).
On the other hand... Batman Begins made the crucial point that actions are more important than intentions (it was the motto for that film) and by that rationale, both the Joker and Zawahiri are similar. They both use explosives to cause fear and panic, and in the longer term to damage or destroy the American Way of things.
The HK stuff is, indeed, a slightly blunt metaphor for rendition &c. but that doesn't stop it being enjoyable. The domestic surveillance reference, on the other hand, is all three of clumsy, poorly-handled and scientifically impossible. Fox voices disagreements but isn't held to his morals, Wayne never seems to hold an opinion one way or the other, and no-one else ever finds out. It isn't given enough time or thought to develop into anything interesting so it hangs around as a bad note in (here's the potted summary) and otherwise superb film.
I can't even face reading the review after what you've all referenced from it here. Terrorism? 9/11? I didn't find any of that in it. I just found it thoroughly entertaining and genuinely thought provoking, without any need for political analysis.
Quite why everything must have a subtext related to our times is beyond me. I go to the flix for some escapism, not to have the troubles of the world rubbed in my face.
It's a great movie. Not perfect, but great fun.
Post a Comment