D.C.M.M.M: The Dark Knight: Simple isn't always easy

Regarded as the best in the trillogy, and has gone down in infamy thanks to their lead villain dying of depression thanks to his role in the movie, sufice to say, people were happy with how it turned out. At the time, I was too, though times change, so lets see if it still holds up.

Very quickly: Sound mixing is still stupid, fight scenes still feel clunky, and the amount of exposition is starting to get worse. Moving on.

The big screen can't contain all this angst

Since Batman Begins, Chicago... I mean Gotham, has been cracking down on crime more and more, the mobs are starting to loose their hold on the city thanks to Batman and the new District Attorney, Harvey Dent... and then the Joker shows up... I genuinely can't explain the rest of the plot, as everything else that happens is simply because the Joker wants to. I'm all for this in theory, as the Joker is an anarchist character in this. The problem I have with this is that in order to get that base summary, you have to peal through a lot of exposition, a lot of fat. It looks deeper then it actually is as a result and, like with Batman begin, there isn't a lot up for interpretation, there's just more explaining. Ironically the best part about this is the Joker, because they never really explain him. Don't get me wrong, they explain people like him, but they never explain him, things are left as a mystery, which I very much appreciate. The reason I harp on this so much is because the movies are trying to come off as something intelligent, movie that are for a more pristine viewership, so at times, it kinda feels like they're slapping you on the head with a 2x4 going "This is what we mean idiot!", to which I go "You can't have your cake and eat it too". The kinds of movies that they want to be are praised in that crowd as they assume intelligence, where they can leave things up to artistic merit, something even bayformers movies do at times, so all the explanations don't help it in that regard. If you want to be an artistic movie, be an artistic movie. If you want to be an action movie, be an action movie. If you want to be both, then do a better job at it.

"Hello and welcome to chef's anonymous"

While Batman begins was shot in Chicago, it does a better job at feeling like Gotham. Here, if feels like they didn't even try. It's obvious that this is Chicago, even to the point where the architecture has drastically changed between movies. While the locations don't hold up, the ideas for the action moments look good, and some moments are really well done (yes they really did blow up a hospital), but I can't help but look at the way Batman fights in this. It feels clunky, it never feels natural and you can tell that nothing ever hurts in it, which granted, they're not meant to get hurt on set, but what I mean is the weight. In many other movies, you know it's not real, but the way it's shot, edited, the sound design and the fluid motions make it feel natural, that their actions would actually hurt. Here... it never feels that way,  as such it always feels underwhelming.

"Dey see me rollin, dey fleein"

Honestly, the Joker is the only thing I can completely call as a positive for this. Yes, it is that good. Yes, Heath Ledger is genuinely terrifying as The Joker. But a great villain can only do so much for a movie. Now I will say, I do like this movie as a fan, but when I write reviews, I review them with a different mind set, and in that mind set, this movie is not as good as people make it out to be because again, it hides behind fake artistic choices with explanation, explaining something that would work better if it left more up to interpretation, again, show don't tell. But for now I think a break from DC is in order, so come back on Saturday. Yes, Saturday. In the mean time, if you want to buy a copy of this for yourself, for whatever reason: http://adf.ly/1XOh9W