The Avengers is the greatest fast food burger I've ever had.
The Dark Knight is a juicy grilled burger from a 5 star restaurant.
I love The Avengers, but its not a great film. Its not. Joss Whedon even said it himself. He felt its a great experience and he's 100% correct, it is a GREAT experience. It's a great thrill to watch, but at the end of the day, there isn't really anything artistically significant to the film. It PERFECTS what its trying to do. It PERFECTS it. Whedon made the exact film he wanted to make and its great...it wasn't trying to be deep, or artistically pleasing, and thats fine.
Something 'deep' with layers does NOT automatically make it better. Its all in the execution. Like I said, Whedon's execution was near perfect. Something like Prometheus , which was a hell of lot deeper and attempted to raise much more discussion than The Avengers was simply not that well executed. Therefore, it was an ok film, but The Avengers was simply better because it didn't bite more than it could chew. It bit exactly what it needed and, again, perfected it.
HOWEVER, when something thats greatly executed, but not 'deep',(I quote it because I don't particularly care for that wording, but I don't know how else to describe it in simple terms for the sake of the post) like The Avengers meets something that IS deep, but is just as well executed...well...it just can't compete. It's like the well coached unranked football team that knows its X's and O's and plays really DAMN good, but the #1 team is simply stronger. The unranked team has played near flawlessly, but hey so has the #1 team thats bigger, stronger and faster. At the end of the day, in that exact situation, the #1 team wins 10 out of 10 times.
See, The Dark Knight was directed by arguably the best blockbuster director since Spielberg. It's DP was an Academy Award winning DP who is widely considered one of the top DP's in the field right now. It was written by the three headed monster of Goyer, who specialized in the comics, and the Nolan brothers who come up with quite original stories and, with Goyer to sprinkle the comics into the pot, were able to create a grand Batman story. TDK's cast was filled with Academy Award winners and nominees. It's special effects crew was an AA nominated group. TDK had the top football recruits on its team. They were already at the advantage.
Then, they actually get on the field and they live up to their awards and hype. The film is a wonderfully shot, incredibly acted and meticulously fined-tuned film that, from a technical standpoint, was 100 steps ahead of the rest of the genre. What about the creative side of the film? Well, Nolan gave us the grittiness of the Batman from the comics. he gave us the sorrow, the rage and the drive that Batman possesses in the comics. He gives us a setting similar to The Killing Joke, Batman:Year One, The Long Halloween, and Dark Victory. He gives a tone that resembles those same comics and a bit of the tone of The Dark Knight Returns, thought a tad lighter. Make no mistake, ignoring Rises, the Batman in TDK, had he stayed Batman, would wind up as cynical as the Returns Batman. Nolan then gave us the characters from the comics. They may not have looked exactly like their comic counter part, but their overall ideals and their overall needs, desires and purpose was shared with their comic counterpart. Nolan depicted these character's actions and purposes in a realistic way, which is where his realism comes in. What do I mean by that? Well, Nolan looks at Joker from the comics and says: heres a crazy guy, who dresses up as a clown, commits heinous crimes for the fun of it. Why would someone do that in the world I live in? So Nolan finds connections with The Joker and our world and he came to the conclusion that someone who acted as The Joker would probably be an anarchist and a 'agent of chaos', so we get the anarchy, which in turn causes the terrorism themes to pop up in the film. I believe Nolan when he says he wasn't making political statements with these films, but depicting our world realistically, while asking real questions and bringing up real discussions in art will lead to the art naturally creating these other themes from real life leading to Joker naturally becoming a sort of terrorist head in the film.
Nolan does the same thing with Batman. Batman's a fighter of justice and a bit obsessed with that. He comes to the conclusion that someone like that in real life, would probably be a bit paranoid and possibly cross the moral line to stop someone like The Joker. Its sort of like his white whale. And make no mistake, Joker is Batman's white whale in Miler's The Dark Knight Returns. So, again, naturally Batman sort of brings out the counter terrorism themes and wa-la: the film becomes an embodiment of the Post-9/11 world, particularly Post-9/11 America and yes, I believe Nolan had no intention of doing exactly that, but thats what's great about truly great art: it begins to form itself and take the artist along for the ride. The film isn't Pro-Bush or Anti-Bush like many people try to claim. It just is. Its depicting our world as if it was a comic book world. Its up to the viewer to decide who's actually right and wrong, just like its up to them to decide who they feel is right and wrong in politics. However, the paranoia, the anxiety regarding this unstoppable force that seems to enjoy committing these acts, feels very real due to its real world parallels. But unlike, say ST: ID, where it was clear the film was forcing politics in(they dedicate the film to the troops which is a nice gesture, but why else would they do so?) and it suffered because it didn't help the plot. However, all of that was not forced in TDK, it came to be and it flowed perfectly in the film because these sorts of themes are dealt with in Batman comics for years. The whole 'counter-terorrism: is it helping or actually causing more harm' theme felt throughout TDK that made it so relevant is a theme that has been a part of Batman for years! Hugo Strange has been asking Batman that question since the 1970s. Its part of Batman. Nolan embraced the character. He embraced the depth of the character and went all for it.
If TDK was made into a shot-for-shot graphic novel adaption that is set after Year One and before The Long Halloween and you read those three Graphic Novels in a row...TDK would fit perfectly. TDK is Batman comics on screen. Nolan embraced the crime noir aspects of Batman and focused on that. That's no less the character of Batman than running around with the super powered Justice League. TDK is a comic book film.
TDK is also just a ****ing great film in itself. It mirrors society and asks questions, but like life, doesn't answer all of them. It excites, it entertains, but there's something stronger, something cerebral underneath it. Like all great art, it examines society.It examines humanity. It examines violence and the need to counter violence with more violence which is a theme VERY essential to all SUPERHERO FILMS, because thats what superheroes do. It also asks us if the hero is always right...Rachel tells Bruce that him giving himself won't stop The Joker...but The Joker's show seemed to mostly be for Batman. Batman was HIS white shark too. Perhaps Joker would have stopped, like the crying kid just wanting attention who stops after the silent treatment. We don't know. Nolan doesn't tell us. He probably doesn't know either. Batman did what he felt he had to do, isn't that noble enough? Do noble intentions matter if they end up leading to more harm? Alfred thinks so. Alfred convinces Batman its a war and it gets worse before it gets better. We know what the characters think. But as all great art does, TDK doesn't forcefully give us the answer. Like life, you aren't handed everything tight up neatly in a bow. You're left to decided.
The Dark Knight is ****in' art. It's exciting. It's fun. Its discussion-worthy. That's simply greater than a 'great experience' every time.
t:
