is that image of Harvey Dent with the Joker Face copywrited? because I want to use it for a picture in my band’s EP cover

get back to me at http://www.myspace.com/dundermifflinowns

thanks.

That said, I do respect people’s opinion and I won’t aim to try to change yours, but I do disagree with you on two points in particular.

First, Gotham is meant to be a dreary place. I understand you don’t want to bring your Batman fanboyism in to bias the review, but I would point out that you are trying to compare Gotham in Nolan’s version to Burton’s. Doesn’t that bias it a bit? =P

Seriously, I love Burton’s take, but what Gotham truly represents is something else. Gotham is supposed to be dark and dreary, how else could Batman fit in? (Just imagine Batman in the world of My Little Pony… Gee, there’s a cross-over I’d pay for. ;)) It’s why I loved the contrast between Batman as the Dark Knight and Dent as the White Knight. Who did the people turn to? The one they thought brought justice, peace, and light to their world. I think that Gotham had to be without the charm and character Burton’s had in order to pull that story off.

Second, I contend that this is a great movie. I’ll grant that for the easy going movie audience who just wants to sit through an entertaining movie… no, it’s not that entertaining. What I think the Dark Knight offers is a deeper look in philosophy and moral choices that are often overlooked. I’m a bit of a philosophy nut, and I squealed like a child in a candy-store when I saw the Prisoner’s Dilemma being used in a real-world context.

But perhaps the better lesson was when I was reading a forum I frequent. A user posted that they believed there was no choice in regards to the joker. S/He believed that a person like the joker ought to be hunted and killed mercilessly, without due process of law. The reason? Specific deterrence, the Joker was out killing, so to prevent more death, you kill the Joker. But the beauty of this post is that killing the Joker without hesitation is what the Joker wanted. A system of anarchy, a place where people resort into a Hobbesian state of nature. In other words, people left the movie supporting the Joker’s ideals.

I thought the movie was entertaining and well worth the admission fee. I thought this made it a good movie. But what makes it a great movie is the fact that it calls into question the foundations and assumptions of society in regards to what is just and what’s not. A movie that leaves you with that question deserves slightly more than being called a ‘fun-filled’ action flick.

With that, I’ll get off my soap-box. Take what I said with a grain of salt, heck if you disagree with everything I said, just ignore me and be on your way. =P

Myself, I liked the way Gotham City was portrayed in this movie. It seemed like a real city not some futuristic/retro acid inspired Tim Burton monstrosity or the neon circuses of Batman Forever or Batman & Robin.

I think all the explanation needed for the Joker came from Alfred “Some men just like to watch the world burn.” That being said, since the Joker wasn’t killed off I suspect that there would have been future developments with the character.

Why is Batman Batman? was covered pretty well in Batman Begins and shouldn’t have to be rehashed every installment unless it serves a point as in Batman Forever.

I agree with the killing, it needed to be done though I think it might have added to the plot if it had happened during the earlier opportunity.