Between Reviews: Bat… Seriously
BAT… SERIOUSLY
AUG 3, 2008 - THIRTY YEARS AFTER THE CYCLE OF SUPERHERO MOVIES began with Richard Donner’s Superman, in 1978, we seem to have completed the evolution from comic-book films to those based on graphic novels. It’s not just that the look of these films has evolved alongside the artwork of their print cousins – gradually moving from two-dimensional flat panels to incredibly dense and textured frames. In tone too, these new films, like The Dark Knight, aren’t comics so much as novels, with the weight of detailing and characterisation that are, well, novelistic. Everyone is tortured, everyone has a back story (even if it’s merely a cooked-up back story as with the Joker, but then again, who can really tell?), and everything loops back to everything else, especially when repeatedly reminding us that cause and effect, good and evil are, yawn, two faces of the same coin – a premise that is literalised in the characters of Two-Face and even Batman, who is himself a Manichaean manifestation of the day and night of the human soul.
The days of simple megalomaniacal villains are long gone. The villains today erupt out of the id, the way Brad Pitt burst out of Edward Norton’s subconscious in Fight Club. Batman (Christian Bale) puts the squeeze on the mob, and that action creates the equal and opposite reaction of the mob turning to the Joker (Heath Ledger). The mob, in other words, finds a saviour in the Joker – someone who can, and will, do the things they cannot do – just as Lt. Gordon (Gary Oldman) finds a saviour in Batman. And what the Joker commits isn’t cartoony mayhem – it’s terrorism. 9/11 is explicitly invoked in The Dark Knight, particularly in a bird’s eye view of the smouldering debris of a building that once stood tall and proud – and, as an idealistic corrective, the virtues of political processes and democracy are extolled. In an early scene, district attorney Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhart) holds forth about the Romans and Caesar, and a little later, the big event that you know the villain is going to crash turns out to be an election fundraising party, and towards the end, the occupants of a ferry even get to vote whether they live or die.
Simply put, it’s not a comic-book universe anymore – it’s the real world. That’s what the director Christopher Nolan told us in Batman Begins, where he transformed Batman into Bond, an ordinary hero (as opposed to a “super” hero) who needed the help of Lucius Fox (Morgan Freeman) just as Bond needed Q. This was an unprecedented level of inquiry into the origins of the powers of a superhero, who, in the comic-book universe, is typically self-made. But in the real world, you cannot reasonably expect one man to put together everything he needs to fight crime. He’d require outside help. In The Dark Knight, Nolan pushes Batman further into Bond territory, fashioning mirror events such as the loss of a loved one, or the fight sequence involving a shoe with a knife. The only thing Batman doesn’t possess is a license to kill – because The Dark Knight is about the redeeming power of goodness, where even a rat who wants to cash in on the fact that he has discovered the identity of Batman is shamed into forever safeguarding his secret, for he realises that this is not a good thing to do, especially when Batman is needed to fight so much evil.
If this all sounds like a bit much, it sometimes is. Like its predecessor, Batman Begins, The Dark Knight is never content with doing one thing fully right when it can aim to dazzle you by attempting ten things with varying degrees of success. (Why the Scarecrow had to be brought in for a cameo at the beginning is anyone’s guess.) And like the earlier film, this one too is weighted down by its elephantine ambition of crafting a textured crime drama, and not just a routine good-versus-evil saga. The storytelling is deliberate and laboured, and there’s so much pulling away for the larger picture, with such a densely plotted maze of procedural details, that the simple emotional beats get lost. When Batman faces the death of a loved one, we don’t feel that loss. Our mind tells us that he’s the one most responsible for that death, because if he hadn’t taken to fighting crime and endangered those close to him, the victim may still be alive. But our hearts don’t swell to accommodate this dash of Greek tragedy.
Nolan wants to suffocate us with his sepulchral atmosphere, but he won’t let us do the work of whipping ourselves into a blue funk. He insists on being our tour guide through these stygian depths, holding our hands and pointing out and explaining every single thing (and considering this is a very intricate story, that’s a lot of explaining, underscored by insistent music of dread, as if a cello quartet were playing the lower registers in the pit of your stomach). And this includes The Significance Of The Title, which is helpfully underlined before the film’s close, as Gordon talks about Dent as Gotham’s white knight. (“Ah,” we’re meant to shake our heads in sorrow, “so that’s why Batman is the dark knight.”) There are times in The Dark Knight you feel like shaking Nolan and screaming, “Yes, yes, we get it. This is a serious work of art. Now can you just get on with the story, please, and allow the greatness to emerge from the film rather than being thrust down our throats with non-stop signifiers?”
You cannot will a great movie into being. It just happens – if you’re lucky, and if about a few thousand variables click satisfyingly (and somewhat improbably) into place. The undoing of The Dark Knight appears to be that its greatness was pre-ordained (and heartily embraced by millions) to such an unprecedented extent that the film had to merely show up, and it would already be a masterpiece. And even if you haven’t bought into the hype, such a level of expectation is awfully hard to barrel past. It feels funny to say this, because The Dark Knight is certainly not a bad movie. It is consistently interesting, well intentioned and well crafted, with a lot of expertly executed action eye candy – but the numerous story threads aren’t tied together in a fully satisfying way. The Dark Knight shapes up into a solidly good movie – and while that’s hardly an insignificant achievement, that’s all it is. There’s very little here that seizes our very being and soars towards becoming the great one its makers were attempting – the superhero version of Michael Mann’s sprawling crime epic, Heat – except, perhaps, when the Joker is on screen.
This character was set up at the end of Batman Begins, when Gordon handed the caped crusader the playing card that’s this villain’s signature, and you get the payoff here – in spades. Despite the regulation hamminess and the scenery chewing, this is not just another cackling criminal. The Joker that Ledger incarnates is a demon of dystopia, an evil force animated by the surrounding corruption and decay – and the rot shows on his face. Where Jack Nicholson’s Joker was a psycho-clown defined primarily by lips twisted into a cleanly drawn leer, Ledger’s villain is an almost-tragic Pagliacci figure, with raccoon eyes and smeary lipstick, and with caked-chalk pancake breaking into skin-toned frown lines, as if the worries of fighting the forces of good were insistently gnawing away at him. He’s so committed to his anarchic causes, he even issues manifestos that appear to parody the self-righteous proclamations of our politicians. “This town deserves a better class of criminal,” the Joker hisses, and Ledger strives so single-mindedly towards delivering on this mission statement, you want to add a postscript: “And this criminal deserved a better class of movie.”
Copyright ©2008 The New Sunday Express. This article may not be reproduced in its entirety without permission. A link to this URL, instead, would be appreciated.
I agree with the details of your review, but for me the impact of the film as a whole outweighed the qualms I had about it. Maybe that will change on a second viewing.
Batman is hardly in this film. The film really belongs to The Joker. Even without Heath Ledger’s death his performance would have been the standout.
Do you find Gordon all right? Thought his lines were awfully cheesy in B B. And it’s many times worse in this one. When everything else is so fantastic I can’t imagine why Gordon has to be like this. I don’t understand! I just don’t!
So, you didn’t like Heat that much? I thought it was slightly underrated, although probably not by the fans. I have watched it atleast a dozen times. It is not without flaws- certain subplots are’nt developed well or probably not needed in the first place and some of the characters are too eloquent. Or maybe, that is why you think it falls short?
Ravi K: The overall film certainly is nothing to be sneered at - but this piece was just my reaction to the “it’s an unqualified masterpiece” hype. I just wanted to point out why the film didn’t work at THAT level for me.
If you remember, I wrote a similar piece about Spidey-3, where I said it wasn’t as dreadful as the hype suggested it was. Again there, I just wanted to point out that the film had a few merits. Both these pieces aren’t “reviews” so much as a reaction to the overblown praise/blame.
Reg. “Batman is hardly in this film.” But that was the case even with Keaton. He was overshadowed first by Joker, then by Penguin and Catwoman — who, by the way, I thought they’d bring back in the third installment of that franchise, considering she’d used up only eight lives and was still purring about
Saranya: I actually like the character — primarily because it’s played by one of the original bad boys. It’s an inspired bit of casting to see Oldman as Gordon.
Vijay: Oh, did I suggest that? When I said: “becoming the great one its makers were attempting – the superhero version of Michael Mann’s sprawling crime epic, Heat” I meant exactly that, that this doesn’t become a GREAT sprawling crime epic like Heat, which was a much more masterful examination of the whole “I’m your evil twin” conceit - and everything that Nolan is trying to do here, Mann already did there.
Heat is one of the flat-out masterpieces of the 1990s, IMO. No one does that action/existential crises thing as well as Mann does, and that film works on so many levels, it’s staggering. And this, despite the fact that I’m not a fan of the latter-day De Niro and Pacino.
You know, the fact that this fils have all these over reaching ambitions is so fascinationg anf promising in itself - that a film like TDK strives to work on more than a summer-blockbuster level is great for viewers - it doesn’t even need to succeed (though it would have been fabulous if it did), but I love the fact that some of these big-budget joyrides are transcending into something that is consciously artistic and layered in its design.
BR:
Totally agree with that last line. Also, I felt that somehow the portrayal of Batman was ‘too human’. Having been fed on a Miller’s and Waid’s Batman, I was actually thinking why they showed him ‘weeping’ for Rachel’s death.
Btw, not sure you have read this but Mark Waid’s Tower of Babel is one of my favorites. Batman totally rocks in that one.
Thanks.
The Dark Knight is about the redeeming power of goodness, where even a rat who wants to cash in on the fact that he has discovered the identity of Batman is shamed into forever safeguarding his secret, for he realises that this is not a good thing to do, especially when Batman is needed to fight so much evil
Baradwaj: how did that scene have anything to do with the redeeming power of goodness? Lucius Fox doesn’t shame the rat, he subtly threatens him.
Mostly agree with your review though. I also had a couple of problems with the film’s structure - e.g. the careless, almost throwaway manner in which we are informed that the Joker has had Dent and Rachel kidnapped (it seemed almost like there was an editing problem in that scene). And that Heat connection is very interesting too.
Btw, after watching The Dark Knight (especially the scene towards the end where the Joker is suspended upside down like a bat, to underline that he and Batman are mirror images), I felt motivated to watch Unbreakable again. Have you seen the deleted scenes on the DVD of that film? There are a couple of interesting ones, including one of Elijah at a playground as a child, which added resonance to the superhero-supervillain contrast.
Im a sucker for titular significance, Eklavya comes to mind , but it didnt end up with the expected Saif cutting
Dark Knight has enough going on in it for a repeat viewing
And yes Gary Oldman after Harry Potter and Batman needs to do something for his evil mojo
@Jabberwock - I’m pretty sure BR is referring to another scene with the rat later in the movie…
BR did you review Spiderman 2?
As for the Heat connection, I’m sure I read an interview with Nolan or someone connected with TDK that the opening bank robbery sequence was inspired by Heat.
Hi Baradwaj,
That was a great review. I’ve seen the movie twice so far and didn’t know that it had this many subtexts (the stuff about democracy that you mentioned). Anyway, it is one hell of a film and I loved every moment of it. Heath Ledger was brilliant. I thought Gary Oldman was great as Gordon, sad that there is mention of him any of the reviews.
Sal: Oh, of course - it’s always nice when even a summer blockbuster has brains and ambition. TDK vs the new Mummy, say… where’s the comparison, even?
Srini: But I think the “too human” was there in Batman Begins too.
Jabberwock: No - like kaos says, the other scene, later on. When he seems faintly relieved that someone like the Batman is still around.
Sujith: “And yes Gary Oldman after Harry Potter and Batman needs to do something for his evil mojo” - oh yes. Have you seen Sid and Nancy?
Elizabeth: Can’t remember if I did. Let me check… Oh, but there’s a lot more than just the bank heist from Heat here.
Raj Balakrishnan: Thank you. Well, generally, you can read whatever you want to in a film, but I thought the bits about democracy culminated nicely with the “voting” on the ferry.
Joker , to an extent somehow reminded me a social version of nandu (alavandaan).
Except for a couple of scenes, the editing in this movie was top class !
BR:
Yes, Batman Begins had the same theme too. And, I had a problem with that one as well.
One thing which appeared contradictory between the two movies was that Batman had no problem letting Ra’s die but here he has to save Joker at any cost.
Batman is of course not supposed to take a life but then Nolan can have his own interpretation. My only grouse is he has to be consistent.
Any chance you caught the new Mummy movie?
Regards
Srini
One more thing - having said all that, I still did like both the movies. They were much better and refreshing than the all other ones. I would guess Catwoman and maybe Penguin will make their appearances in the next movie.
Baradwaj, thanks for clearing that up, I am a big Heat fan as well. Never regretted the fact that in the time it took me to re-watch it so many times, I could have probably caught a few other flicks. It is like revisiting an old favorite of yours in the playlist time and again
MumbaiRamki: Nandu? Hey, that’s an angle I never thought about.
Regarding “the editing in this movie was top class,” let me quote from Sidney Lumet’s Making Movies: I’ve read that a certain picture was “beautifully edited.” There’s no way [a critic] could know how well or poorly it was edited. It might look badly edited, but because of how poorly it was shot, it may in fact be a miracle of editing that the story even makes sense. Conversely, the movie may look well edited, but who knows what was left on the cutting room floor. In my view, only three people know how good or bad the editing was: the editor, the director, and the cameraman. They’re the only ones who know everything that was shot in the first place.
Srini: The new Mummy movie? Not yet. And, from the looks of it, not likely.
Vijay: “Never regretted the fact that in the time it took me to re-watch it so many times, I could have probably caught a few other flicks.” Ah, but that’s the magic of being obsessed (or even possessed) by a movie. Such practical considerations are quite redundant. And to think you were giving me grief about re-watching measly one-and-a-half hour art films
Baradwaj, you have read Making Movies! You are already more qualified than most Indian filmmakers
All said and done, it is still based on a comic book series. So you might want to cut the film some slack, especially about nolan’s spoon feeding. I didn’t mind it cos i felt i needed it and i think i can speak for most of the general movie watching audience.Not everyone has the same level of insight as you and i mean that respectfully.
Great review.I think i should go back and watch it again with all the added knowledge i have gained from reading the reviews from various blogs including yours.
OK. I just got back from a second viewing and my enthusiasm for the movie is not diminished in the slightest, and as a disclaimer I add that this comment is totally adrenaline fueled. I would pay the entry fee to watch the movie again-no qualms.
Yes, the dialectic is obvious, it is after all a superhero movie, but the very fact that I can use the word dialectic in a sentence describing the movie means it is a step above the normal fare. There is a great deal of information to process and on added viewing the movie doesn’t fall apart, rather it comes together better. C’mon Rangan, how many summer movies would allow you to use Freud’s “ID” and “Manichaen” in the same review without it requiring a large stretch of the readers imagination?
Regarding the would-be snitch its not Batman who makes him feel bad, its Wayne who does, and that is emotional manipulation at its best by a man who is willing to do anything, to keep his identity a secret. If anything it shows a gray area to Batman. I like that little touch of using the identity to maintain the anonymity.
Ledger deserves his own post methinks. I can’t do justice to the performance with mere words, but maybe you can. From a character writing stand point there was never a time until now, in the graphic novels, the cartoon series (which I loved) or the earlier Burton versions where I felt this with any certainty: In a hypothetical “bizarro” universe where Batman was bad, The Joker (hereafter I’m going to try and refer to him in caps like Irene Adler or The Beatles) might actually have been good. All he wants is things to be fair, and I cant argue with that. I wanted to watch the movie again before hunting down “Gotham Knight”. Seen those yet?
Mumbai Ramki: I have seen and loved Nandu, but The Joker is a cut above to me, simply due to the ambiguity of his psyche’s origin. Nandu had a very well defined source for his psychosis. The Joker, does not - something even someone as eminent as Ebert seems to have missed in his review.
I had the same confusion as Jabberwock over yout rat statement
A very good writeup from your side. TDK is a very good movie but people have already started calling it a classic, which is way over the top.
Finally saw it yesterday. Enough said already by you and folks up yonder, so shall say my bit for the unsaid only… Heath L’s impending Oscar. It was a great performance, but that’s it - not an Oscar winning one, like is being touted. I mean Heath will probably win it because he’s no more (hate to be in the shoes of the other nominees who know they will lose eventually :-), isn’t that how the O committee works - ha ha. Feel that maybe the Oscar should go to a performance worthy of the award and not becos a pill poppin junkie overdosed his way to glory…but hey, its my view and maybe Neil Young when he sang Needle & the Damage Done…
At last got your comments on the film…but i wish you had spent some more time/space on the different threads that Nolan tried to touch upon in this film…and the ending…i agree with you that this film is inconsistent varying between the above average and the great…about the tying of the loose threads…isn’t that a nolan hallmark…remeber “memento”…”the prestige”….
Deepak:
“C’mon Rangan, how many summer movies would allow you to use Freud’s “ID” and “Manichaen” in the same review without it requiring a large stretch of the readers imagination?”
BR did not compare this movie with ‘usual summer movie’, because this movie is far superior to any summer fare or superhero movie.(Everything after the comma is my personal view
). It is only when you compare this movie to the very best that BR found it lacking.
Gaurav - Agreed. Hence the disclaimer at the top.
I guess I’m just wondering what the right apple is (for comparion purposes), because this was never going to be “Heat” (orange) simply because the protagonist here runs around in a mask and cape and the antagonist wears makeup at a level rivaled only by our yesteryear favorite, Ramarajan. And the title explanation, as if to a child (visual pun intended), was overkill but that portion was more about the soundtrack/montage shots, I wasn’t paying a lot of attention to Gordon.
“When Batman faces the death of a loved one, we don’t feel that loss….. hearts don’t swell to accommodate this dash of Greek tragedy.”
I couldn’t disagree with you. A running staple of any movie like this (superhero or plain action movie) is that the love interest is saved at the last minute, or gets a long poignant death scene if she dies. The twist Nolan brings to this element (not just the death, but its abruptness - she’s cut off when about to say something) is tragic and more importantly, scary (If she’s dead, who’s next?). It’s very powerful IMO
“And to think you were giving me grief about re-watching measly one-and-a-half hour art films”
Baradwaj, really? I dont remember now. We had some disagreement over 2001 sure, but that’s about it I thought. In case you were referring to my question on the extent of readership for your “Part of the picture” series, it was a very general one borne out of curiosity, not related to my taste/opinions in any way.
I often discriminate only between pretentious and other flicks man, not between mainstream and arthouse(actually in the case of a lot of European and other non-Hollywood films I wouldnt even know whether the film was considered mainstream or art film in the first place). For instance, I watched Volver recently and liked it a lot. I could’nt care less about whether it is considered mainstream or arthouse in Spain. Same with Veedu or Ab Tak Chappan or dozens of other movies I have liked which may or may not be considered mainstream. I just dont buy the notion that only what Adoor or the other “jolna pai”s (as Raj would put it :-))do is high art and the rest is somehow inferior.
Heat itself is an example of how a film, which is considered mainstream, works at so many levels for us. It didnt have to be terribly offbeat, snail-paced,intentionally complex, abstract and open-ended and directed by an eccentric in order to work at a high level. Not that these are bad qualities, but they should’nt be prerequisites to declaring something great.
“And this criminal deserved a better class of movie.”
Oh, you had problems with the movie? Can I borrow a pencil? I’m going to have to perform a magic trick.
May be this is not an “unqualified masterpiece” and it might not do well with repeat viewings (or your replays-in-the-mind theory) but it is a spectacular viewing experience. I don’t remember having this kind of a rush in a cinema hall in a long time…maybe kill bill.
OT: The Three colors pieces were excellent. Any plans for Decalogue? So that people can give you grief for watching one hour art films.
sivaramakrishnan: “Not everyone has the same level of insight as you and i mean that respectfully.” Actually, you may be mistaken about that. Everyone has insight into things — it’s just that most of us are tuned to relax/chill/have popcorn mode when watching a movie and so it usually passes by as a visceral blur.
Deepauk M: But, but… Batman has always been Manichaen. I didn’t need Nolan to tell me that
Dude, as I said somewhere, this isn’t a comprehensive, weighing-all-things review. Just some stray thoughts after one viewing.
Gaurav Agrawal: Thank you. “TDK is a very good movie…” Yeah, and somehow “good” being seen as a diss in this case. If only I had a buck for everyone who came up and asked, “But how could you not like TDK?” Grrrr…
Suharsh: “Feel that maybe the Oscar should go to a performance worthy of the award and not becos a pill poppin junkie overdosed his way to glory” Oh man. Oh man. Though you’re right of course…
Arijit: But Memento and Prestige and even Insomnia were “stories” that needed to be tied up. For this one, something with so much artistic ambition, I felt there was a lot of patronising.
Deepauk M: And by the way, I don’t think Heat is an orange to TDK’s apple. Nolan does take a really close look at the intricacies of a crime empire — for instance, that whole detour in Hong Kong. Why was it there if not to add grit and texture and a sense of “real-worldness” (the larger world, that is)? There’s a Scorsesean/Mann-ian underbelly to TDK, and I don’t think the comparison is off.
Akasuna no Sasori: “It’s very powerful IMO” And it wasn’t IMO. Hence my point.
Vijay: No, no — your admission of watching the three-hour Heat many times made me remember what you wrote on the “Blue” post: Apart from Hindi films, if you have to watch these other films “many times” I wonder whether you ever get off that couch at all
Gaipajama: “Can I borrow a pencil? I’m going to have to perform a magic trick.” Good one, good one
And thanks. No, haven’t planned Decalogue yet. The Ed. was okay with three back-to-back Kieślowskis, but *ten* may take some convincing
Though I might just do A Short Film About Love. I love that one.
Louwe this. I’m sick of reviews that say this is the best super-hero film ever. One went so far as to put it in the top 10 movies of all time. Spew happens.
J.A.P.
I was reminded of Dhoom-2 in many ways, with the Joker/Hrithik landing up at the scene of crime without any difficulty, but Batman/Abhishek had to huff and puff their way in
Why has no one mentioned about the Sholay connection , i wonder.? I would really like to know a trivia or two about that coin trick of dent’s..`
I think what bothered me most about TDK was that it was trying so hard to be profound and “deep” that at times it came across as self-aggrandising.
I know, I know, comic books (or graphic novels if that’s a more accurate term) aren’t considered shallow or childish anymore, they’re all dark and meaningful and whatnot, but I think this film suffered from a case of taking itself too seriously.
I don’t mean it needed slapsticky moments and cheesy one liners. I just think the director should’ve relaxed a bit and not have spent so much of the movie trying to force its “greatness” (as BR put it) upon the audience.
All through I felt that Nolan was screaming “wasn’t that line/shot/scene just wonderfully, incredibly symbolic and filled with meaning?” and the film left me feeling, well, tired.
Which is why I asked about whether you reviewed Spidey 2, BR. You may disagree with me, I don’t know, but what made me love that film was the sense that nothing was forced, it just..was. I got the impression that Sam Raimi and Co. made the film that they wanted to make without much studio interference or delusions of grandeur.
Baradwaj, ahhhh OK
But then, I was really curious about the time that you spent on watching all this, you know.It seemed like you had to be on one long endless viewathon in order to get thru your watch-list in a work week.
I wonder what you would have written if you were the first one in this world to watch the movie and to write a review on it…
Rangan….Any thoughts on kuselan…have u seen it yet
for all the grandeur visual spectacle, i wud say TDK failed to connect emotinally at any level.no tightnenings of the stomach, no heart wrenchers.. the complete disassociation you feel when rachel dies is the perfect example for this.
all said and done,i wud really lik to know more about harvey dent’s tossing coin.something straight out of an sholay? was i just coincidence?or am i missin something here?i cant quite bring myself to ask “did tdk copy from an indian movie?” however good the referred movie was:-)
J. Alfred Prufrock: Okay, but be warned, the next post we may not be in such happy agreement, so let’s agree to a conditional detente this one time
Ramesh: Dhoom-2? Egad. If there’s a living equivalent of spinning in the grave, Nolan’s doing it now.
Nirmal: That’s just the character, Two Face. The coin has always been a part of his shtick. See, for instance, this Wiki entry.
Sureshkumar: Or if I’d written it without the hype around the film…
karthik: Not yet, and wasn’t planning to. I’ve heard it’s really bad. Why? You think it’s worth a post?
Hey BR! Was just reading your review of Departed. And I have a question - you had mentioned the soundtrack usage. Now, I would reckon it is the lyrics of those songs you meant there as apt usage. Also, if the lyrics had been similar but had been freshly composed rather than being old hits that you know by-heart, would you still have been able to relate to that as apt usage? Just a curious thought, you know. It didnt do much for me primarily because
a) I didnt know those songs beforehand
b) I find it difficult to decipher the English in those songs in the first listening.
So, the question is did usage of those songs add to or subtract from the film’s ‘greatness’ or even goodness. I talk greatness because you do mention that this is not a great film, so apparently, you do have yardsticks for greatness. if so, my primary interest via this long boring comment is in knowing what part BGM has to play in that?
Also, how does one compare and contrast this with say the john Williams or IR approach of BGM?
Do you want to do something on different BGM approaches - ‘cos you do notice BGM soundtracks when they are interesting.
What I mean is the Vairamuthu debate in a different context - (i.e.) the complaint that post-80’s lyricists in Tamil have that music is ‘drowning out’ lyrics. I mean, these guys grew up when the lyricist(read Kannadasan) was the king and a regular point of awe for tamil movie goers was how Kannadasan captured the essence of the movie in ‘ 2 lines in a song’. I think with IR, the focus changed to how his music, his ludes and the BGM did the same.
Now, if you think about it, it seems to me that neither BGM nor songs nor apt playbacks in the background are really necessary - however, in some cases, it does seem like it elevates the movie.
Is that an idea worth an essay from you?
raj: “if the lyrics had been similar but had been freshly composed rather than being old hits that you know by-heart, would you still have been able to relate to that as apt usage?” No - because these are old and very popular songs that claasic rock stations serve as a staple and regular listeners know by heart — so a new song wouldn’t have had that impact. But then, Scorsese always uses old songs to under line themes. he went as far back as St. Matthew’s Passion for Casino.
New music in Hollywood films is mostly “mood music” — i.e. love scene, therefore soft-pop, an so on. If themes, etc., need to be underlined, I’ve rarely seen brand new songs used.
It’s like the BGM funda you mention — and that’s an interesting idea for a column. Let me chew on it…
Rangan….Kuselan was a huge disappointment. Rjini was awesome in the climax but thats about it. Think the movie clearly lacks soulhich the original mush have possessed in abundance. They should seriously ban Vasu from making films. He’s truly a ‘Classic’ Annihilator….Rangan, maybe a future column ??
Finally a semi dissing of the “no.1″ movie of all time. I saw it twice and ledger looked all ham and no bones. Read the Killing Joke yesterday and realised that Nolan has not made a comic book adaptation. This is not a batman, superhero movie, Its a dark gangster cop flick. If you don’t feel maggie’s death thats because Nolan wanted it that way.
brangan, why do I get the feeling that the music-critic in you is under-utilised? Could one of your columns be music-related?
I am sure there should be takers for that in the Indian Express readership.
raj: *Another* column — apart from Between Reviews, Part of the Picture and the weekly reviews? How nice, in a post about Batman, that you seem to think I’m sonme sort of Superman
You are of an opinion that Nolan packed too much in the movie - it seems apparently that is the reason people loved it so much. Recently the movies, for us Hindi viewers both Hindi and English, have been so under-whelming that something that packed too much was always going to get that attention.
Although only time will tell if the tag ‘greatness’ this movie has been so far able to attract lasts long or just proves an initial bubble.
I absolutely loved it. The only eye-sore was that scene with two ferries. That was just stretching a bit in this otherwise perfect entertainer. One thing I would give Nolan credit for is that much of the Joker’s violence was rather implicit. Especially that scene where he breaks the billiard cue and leaves it to the minions of that Black mafia - with a dialog that ‘we are hiring but there is place for only one’ or something similar. He left the scene to my imagination and I realized how imagination could be lot more powerful, and scary, than the on-screen reality (to mis-quote Einstein).
personally speaking, I wouldnt mind if one of the existing columns is dropped to accomodate the new one - that is what I was thinking - well, you want to know which one I would want to take away from your portfolio?:-)
Totally agree with your review!