I preferred Hancock to The Dark Knight (Batman). Hancock was fun, entertaining and I left the cinema with a smile on my face. I left The Dark Knight puzzled as to why this film was causing so much excitement. On Rotten Tomatoes right now Hancock is on 34% to The Dark Knight’s 94%. Sure it was well acted and made, but I felt it lacked something in the storyline. (Actually, my favourite reviewer Jim Schembri from the age has rated Hancock three and a half stars to three stars for The Dark Knight)
Sometimes at the movies my mind wanders and I start to think about my own life. It’s like the movie is pushing me to apply a narrative to myself. Neither of these films did that. No film has done that for me in a while. Maybe i’ve changed or filmmaking has got worse…Or perhaps both; because films are definitely worse. Often it’s possible to read the and not see any in the listings that are worth seeing.
Anyway The Dark Knight’s 94% I don’t get that. It was long and predictable and didn’t seem to attribute many desires and drivers to it’s characters that tied me to them and therefore I didn’t really care when a lot of them died. SPOILER ALERT: And just about everybody was dying.
So there was some profoundity I pulled out of The Dark Knight. The joker represents relativism and the whatever attitude. He didn’t really care about what he did or who he did it to or really anything so he could do anything. That is scary. But I think there’s more and more people like that. “Whatever” is bad. It’s impossible to reason with “whatever” to influence “whatever”. It’s just there and annoying.
Okay so enough rambling; I am just trying to get back into blogging.