The Dark Knight

So, this was the must see movie that everybody had to go to the night that it opened. I know, I was there. I was also there two nights later. No big deal. Aside from the fact that Christian Bale is a total nut-case in real life, he plays Batman rather well. Notice I said Batman... Not THE Batman. Everybody who was annoyed by this, please raise your hands!! This completely depersonalized him. It made him seem less known, as if this were one of the first times that anybody had been talking about him. You would think that if he were breakin necks and cashin checks as much as we remember since we were in the thumb-sucking days, he'd be known as Batman, without the frickin THE. Stupid. The reason that it probably annoys me the most is just because this is the first movie, of what, maybe 7 or 8, that they refer to him as the Batman. Probably more like the batman, no capital B. Just upsetting.

Anyway, there was much more to this film than that, sorry Mike. We'll talk about the acting first. Without a doubt, Ledger was the man in this film. It would have still been a great movie, but it wouldn't have had the same jaw-dropping experience that it handed out if somebody else would have taken on the wacky role. Spielberg had it right when he said that the best thing that can be done is to cast a movie well. Nolan knew what he was doing (assuming he made the decision) in casting Ledger. When I first heard that he had the role of the Joker, I immediately thought of Nicholson, and I couldn't see Ledger playing this same role. Then I realized that I was right. He didn't do the same role, he played one that was much different. And better! It was unreal how he took the original, kooky role of the Joker, and kept it the same, while also making him an extremely ominous foe for (the) Batman. Even now, almost a year later, I am blown away by how well he played this role. It's unfortunate that he couldn't stick around to follow it up. The book talks about film acting and stage acting. The major difference, according to these writers, is the film acting can be must less "acted out." The expressions and voice inflections can be much less subtle, as there is no large audience sitting a hundred yards from the actor that needs to see these things. Ledger still played this role with stage acting, as far as I'm concerned. Everything that he did was very exaggerated. That is what made his role so amazing, though. He was completely mental and delusional, but at the same time, he saw his end goal and had an extremely complex plan to help him reach it. Now that we've covered Heath Ledger and his role, I think we should look into the role played by Aaron Eckhart as Harvey Dent. I really think that he should have gained more recognition for this role. Has anybody seen Thank You For Smoking? This guy can act his ass off! Maybe it's just that he is one of my favorite actors, but I really think that the character development that he portrayed was obviously the most significant of anybody in the film, and he handled it very well. He was very convincing as the White Knight, and also as Two-Face, who was seconds away from potentially killing a young boy. I do feel, however, that they went a little overboard with his makeup as Two-Face. Whatever. Maggie Gyllenhaal was cast to clean up the role that Tom Cruise Jr. wouldn't have been able to complete. Finally, the confidant. Alfred was, as always, great. There is a reason why Michael Caine has been in more movies than almost anybody. He plays such versatile roles, and with such believability.

There are movies that make it big that have the "nameless" and "starless" casts. This movie wasn't quite the same. If you take a look at the names, it is very obvious that they were swinging for the fences on this one, and it ended up working out for them rather well. The people behind the scenes knew exactly what they were doing with this film. Once again, this movie was almost entirely shot with a subjective view. The lighting and color was used very well in the beginning of the movie when the faux batmen (its lowercased cause they sucked) were fighting the drug dealers and the Chechen's men. They stayed very well hidden in the shadows, which was convenient because it hid their hockey pads.

The protagonist and antagonist in the movie were very obvious: the Joker and (the) Batman, respectively. I have to say, however, that Alfred deserves some of the protagonist honor. He was the one that keeps Batman/Wayne in line. "You spat in the face of the criminal underworld, did you think you wouldn't get a response? Things were always going to get worse before they got better." This lights the proverbial fire under Wayne's ass, reminding him that he is the Dark Knight, and that these types of things will happen, but he needs to do something about it instead of giving up. Alfred is the catalyst that keeps this train moving.

The Dark Knight is a great movie, and I predict that it will be talked about for years and years as the turning point for the franchise storyline (Batman Begins was still a little elementary at points), and also as one of the most memorable single actor performances of this, or many generations. It seems like many movies come out that really should be awesome, like the second and third installment into The Matrix trilogy, as well as the most recent installment, dare I mention it, in the Indiana Jones franchise. Awful. My point is that The Dark Knight took these crappy movies and put them through a blender. The Dark Knight was better than its predecessor, Batman Begins, and I have to say I will be absolutely blown the F away if the next installment is better than this one was. Sorry for the harsh letters, Mike.

nydailynews: jack nicholson warned heath ledger on joker role

(sorry for some reason it won't let me paste...)

I think these guys make a very valid point. The movie is going to be huge, no matter what. And now, one of the lead roles dies, and it appears that it is linked to the character that he is playing. There is no way that we can watch this movie, and not be somewhat sorrowful. In every action that Ledger does as the Joker, we as an audience are reminded that this role took him away from us.

Like I said, this movie is a huge hit, so this did not hurt it in any way. If anything, it made us tune in a little more to the Joker's character and study his ways to understand what truly happened with Ledger.

CNN.com: Ledger fans demand the Joker retired from film

This is also a very interesting viewpoint that i surely would have never dreamed up. Michael Jordan had his jersey retired, why can't we have the role retired... The one question that comes to mind is this, would they be calling for this if Ledger had not passed away? No. They would have been calling for him to play the Joker again, assuming the role came up again. They would have been better off bringing up maybe somebody like Pat Tillman, a relatively unheard-of NFL player who lost his life in the fight across the pond. Would Tillman have had his jersey retired from the Cardinals organization otherwise? NO! I think their idea is a unique one, but also one that I will not support.

Slumdog Millionaire

Strait up, this movie surprised me. I don't mean to come down on the Oscars and the decisions that they have made before, but this was much different than I expected it to be, when looking at previous "Best Film" nominations. There were some movies in this list that I just didn't agree with. Films like "There Will Be Blood" just did not deserve the recognition it received. It was more or less the longest drawn out drama ever made, with a brutal scene at the end of the film.

Slumdog was great for many many reasons. It grabbed the audience right away. In the first 5 minutes of the film, Jamal is getting the crap kicked out of him, being questioned about who knows what. That was something I appreciated. You could tell they were trying to get an answer out of him by the things that they were saying to him, but at the same time, the viewer does not know exactly what they are asking of him, and why they are doing so. This immediately creates a bond between Jamal and the audience. We knew, one way or another, that he was innocent, and that these people were being inhumane.

So we start to dig a little deeper into the film and Jamal's character, as well as the character of Salim. The first time we see Salim, he is giving Jamal a hard time because he lost a customer to the outhouse due to Jamal occupying it. This causes Salim to let his brother down for the first time of the movie--with many of the occasions to follow--by locking him in the outhouse when the celebrity came. Salim let him down saying no to letting Latika in the cover with them when it was raining. Jamal obviously ignored this, and invited her in. Salim let Jamal down by putting the gun on him and kicking him out of the apartment, so that he could more than likely enforce his will on Latika. Next, he let him down by leaving for a number of years. Jamal finds him by searching for him, then they meet up again. Salim lets Jamal down again by capturing Latika with his gang at the train station, right as Jamal thinks he has her. In a weird way, all of these things that Salim does indirectly makes him the hero, or protagonist of the film. In the end, he becomes the hero by doing the opposite of what he's done his entire life: he selflessly lets Latika go to Jamal at the game show. In doing so, he knew he would die. His death was almost poetic. He had been betraying his brother his entire life, then when he finally does the right thing, he ends up dying. And what does he die in, but a tub full of money. Salim had betrayed his brother time and again for this money, and now it was surrounding him in death.

I'm usually not a terribly big fan of the flashbacks, but this film did an amazing job with them. I never got confused at all. There was never really a point that a viewer needed to ask a question, because the film spelled out the present time situations so well with the flashbacks. There would be points that the viewer would think to themselves, "Well how did he know that?" With each question that the host would ask Jamal, then Jamal would in turn get the question right, there would be a flashback. The fact that all of these flashbacks happened in chronological order right along with the questions, that was a little convenient, but lets face it, the entire plot was a little out there. Thats what makes this such a great film, though. It's one of those rare films that could happen, probably couldn't, but it could. These are the types of films, i reiterate rare films, that make us believe a little more in ourselves. These are the types of movies that people like Terrell Owens should not be allowed to see, because they are confidence boosters. They take your doubts and show them the heel of a shoe. Anyway, I thought that this movie did really good with keeping all of the different scenes and life stories in line.

The cameras did a good job at making the intense, violent scenes more real for the viewer. They made us feel as if we were sitting right there in the action, both with the the subjective viewpoint, and the intense sound effects. The same is done when the host is asking Jamal the questions. It appears as if Jamal does not know the answer at times. What makes this happen? The camera zooming in on him, showing his eyes darting back and forth, as if he is searching for an answer on the floor. The music is getting louder and faster, the host is making smartass remarks, and Jamal is saying nothing. Then, like a snap of the fingers, Jamal says the correct answer to the question, and the sound effects are gone, the camera angle as back to normal, and the stupid host has shut his pie-hole.

This movie was great and it deserves all the hype is has received. To think that it almost did not make the box office is ridiculous. Thank God Fox Searchlight has more sack than Time Warner, or I wouldn't be writing about this great film. The funny thing, to me anyway, is that as I would almost say this is one of the best films I've ever seen, it is one that I probably won't watch more than twice in my life.