LUCIDMEDIA

The Dark Knight's Return

Written by Adam A. Donaldson Friday, 01 August 2008 15:45

In the midst of an economic downturn, anything that makes an average of $30 million per day goes beyond your regular, run of the mill success story. This past weekend, The Dark Knight managed the amazing feat of crossing the $300 million mark in just 10 days, adding $75.63 million for a domestic gross of $314 million since its July 18th opening. It remained number one at the box office despite strong competition and already people are talking about it overtaking Titanic as the biggest film of all time, or at the very least becoming the first film of the 21st century to top $500 million.

Want to see The Dark Knight in IMAX? Good luck, it remains a sell-out in all IMAX locations its showing in, securing its place as the number one IMAX run of a film for all time with a total box office of $22.37 million and counting. It thoroughly demolishes the old record set by Spider-Man 3, along with that film’s records for best opening day, best three-day weekend opening and quickest film to reach $200 million in total box office. But if at all, it seems that the continuing success of The Dark Knight has been muted, either because it comes as no surprise or because people are treating at as a fragile commodity: breath too hard on it and the whole thing might break. There is no shortage of articles on the subject on the web, many of them slant towards the reporting of the film’s ongoing success though. Only Entertainment Weekly seems to dare to ask: where do we go from here? First, let’s look at the film itself. Is its success being driven by its potential status as a future classic or are we all just caught up in the moment? Is Heath Ledger truly deserving of a posthumous Oscar or are we just obsessed with the talent of an actor taken before his time? How will we see The Dark Knight five years from now? Having seen the film, I know myself that it’s a marvellous piece of pop art, full of energy and gravitas. Ledger is mesmerizing as the Joker, converting even the most strident devotees of Nicholson over who in the end is the better Clown Prince of Crime.

That’s not to say though that The Dark Knight doesn’t have its critics. New York Magazine’s David Edelstein is one of them. In a review for National Public Radio (NPR), Edelstein said “On paper, this morality play is fascinating, but a lot of the movie doesn't transcend its talking points. The psychological twists are dubious and the plotting herky-jerky, with leaps in logic. The Dark Knight plays as if it were written by Oxford philosophy majors trying to tone up American pop.”

Now that’s hardly the most damning indictment of a film I’ve ever heard or read, but apparently it provoked a tidal wave of anger and vitriolic name calling that supposedly forced a comment board moderator to get out his electronic eraser. “That's scary,” writes Matt Zoller Seitz, founder of the House Next Door blog. “Is there a collective yearning for a masterpiece out there? Is it a Heath Ledger RIP thing? Or is it groupthink, aided by Warner Bros. hype – a hive mind phenomenon in which ecstatic love for the film has been unconsciously agreed-upon in advance as the only acceptable response to this film, which in turn means that anyone who dares deviate, and ask for something not necessarily better, but different, is an enemy of the people who must be crushed?” Still, the reaction overwhelming leans towards the “masterpiece” camp than it does the “overrated” brigade. Is this a polarizing division between a passionate majority and vocal minority? Hardly, it’s just unfortunate that Dark Knight’s defenders seem to be taking criticism of the film so seriously, like a jealous guy that tries to provoke a fight by saying, “What, my girlfriend’s not good enough for you?” From my point of view though, this is healthy: a passionate and engaging discussion of the merits of a film that everybody’s seeing, talking about and then seeing again.

But honestly, I’d rather talk about where the Batman franchise can go from here. The Dark Knight is such a high point that you can’t help but think that there’s no where left to go but down. Can a third Nolan-directed Batman ever hope to top the critical and commercial fire sale that is The Dark Knight? Of course, a lot of questions surround the sequel will be solved when the question of whether or not Nolan will be back is answered. And much of Christian Bale’s participation is predicated on Nolan’s, and besides, Bale’s now working on his second franchise playing the new John Connor in Terminator: Salvation.

Story-wise, where the franchise goes next is predicated on the hotly debated topic everybody’s having coming out of The Dark Knight: is Two-Face dead? Film School Rejects has a great article on the subject. Writer Brian C. Gibson notes, “If Gordon and Batman were to conceal his death and lock him up in Arkham that would give Two-Face even more of a reason to hate Gotham and its officials. Talk about ammunition for revenge, the guy would come out swinging. So go see the film again. If I remember correctly, Batman even said something like ‘Noone can ever see him like this.’ Would you say something like that about a dead man? Everyone knows he is disfigured, but not everyone knows about his newly acquired vengeful and murderous personality.”

When talking about the movie before Heath Ledger’s untimely death, Nolan said that the big mistake of the Tim Burton’s first Batman film was that he killed off the Joker in the end. Certainly, if death isn’t good enough for the Joker, then why should it be any more acceptable for Two-Face. If I recall correctly, Aaron Eckhart signed up for multiple Batman films, which just could be a safety for studio suits, but why would get a talent like Eckhart to sign up if you’re not going to use him? The return of Two-Face would be a natural extension of the themes of The Dark Knight: escalation, the notion that things have to get worse before they get better, the fact that salvation cannot come without substantial cost. Would not the public revelation that Gotham’s white knight is now a grotesque spirit of vengeance be a powerful place to launch a story from? It would question what little authority capital Commissioner Gordon’s procured and push Batman himself into a further grey area. Exactly where does the Batman lie on the scales of ethics? Is he part of the solution or part of the problem? And in the week and half I’ve been thinking about this film since I’ve seen it, I wonder: who else can pick up heavy villain baggage left behind by Ledger. Many of Batman’s rogues’ gallery have identities rooted in supernatural abilities (Poison Ivy, Mr Freeze, Clayface) or are otherwise kind of silly unless handled properly (Mad Hatter, The Ventriloquist and Scarface). Rumours flew about during pre-production that Philip Seymour Hoffman was part of the film playing the Penguin and the Anthony Michael Hall was being set-up as the Riddler. Well, one of those rumours turned out to be just plain wrong and the other seems unlikely if not also entirely wrong.

One stray line of dialogue in The Dark Knight points to one villain in particular, or rather make that villainess. Yes, Morgan Freeman’s line about the new Bat-suit being cat proof opened the door to speculation about Catwoman popping up in part III, and a former Catwoman threw some fuel on that fire Monday. Julie Newmar, who was the first of three actresses to play the part in the 60s Batman series, told the New York Daily News that “Angelina [Jolie] would own the part. My industry friends tell me [she] has made inquiries about the role. I can understand how it would pique her interest. Catwoman is Batman's one true love. She's tremendously popular with women because she's both a heroine and a villainess.” What makes this rumour further interesting is an odd bit of trivia. According to Sam Hamm, who co-wrote Tim Burton’s Batman and worked briefly on Batman Returns, the original dyad for Returns was to be Two-Face and Catwoman before the studio stepped in with their number two pick: the Penguin. Hollywood is cyclical and time always catches up, so isn’t it natural that the game plan from years gone by come up again for consideration. Truth be told though, as long as we’re not entering Egghead or King Tut territory, I’m pretty open to the possibilities.