Whisper it quietly, but a pertinent question is doing the rounds of Hollywood: just how much did Heath Ledger’s tragic death have to do with Batman’s astonishingly successful launch?
The film raked in nearly $160m at the box office over the weekend, making it the most successful opening in US history. It got rave reviews, and according to IMDB is now officially the best flick ever (users gave it an average rating of 9.6 out of 10, more than The Godfather).
With The Dark Knight due to hit the rest of the world’s cinemas this week (stand by for long queues, sell-out screenings, and tickets changing hands for a fortune on the black market) it’s difficult to maintain a sense of perspective. But here goes…
For my money, despite a couple of incredible performances (Ledger is brilliant) and wonderful set-pieces, Batman’s latest outing is weighed down by its own pomposity. There’s too much over-reaching, too much over screeching, and the central love story doesn’t really work. It’s at best an eight out of 10.
That’s also the “film industry” view, or at least, the view explained by Variety’s executive editor Steven Gaydos, who I just interviewed.
Gaydos reckons the film has achieved commercial greatness thanks to a canny PR campaign that centres around the legend of Ledger (rather than, say, the appeal of the film’s supposed lead actor Christian Bale).
The reason for this is simple: while there was always an appetite among die-hard Batman fans for the release, its maker Warner Brothers realised that Ledger’s death represented a “perfect storm” which would send public demand for the film into the stratosphere. It was the tipping point at which a decent action flick became one of the biggest cinema launches of all time.
The million – or rather billion – dollar question will now be as follows: can the new Batman now sustain its appeal to become one of the most lucrative films ever? Or will it suffer a significant audience "drop off" during the second and third weeks of release?
For now, opinion is divided. To some The Dark Knight reflects a cynical piece of Hollywood marketing. To others, it provides a truly fitting tribute to a gifted actor who died six months ago, at the age of just 28. Only time, of course, can tell who is right.
Its a great film and Ledger's tragic death brought in people who wouldn't normally see a superhero flick.
Posted by: ky | Monday, 21 July 2008 at 09:35 PM
Ledger's performance easily surpassed all expectations, with wit, grit, dark humour, and a seductive philosophical dimension, that resonates long after the end-credits roll. I will watch the film several times, if anything, to reflect on his masterful delivery of great dialogue. He alarms equally, if not more with his psychotic (psychological) musings than with displays of depraved violence, and makes you think! :)
Heath Ledger, great actor, really admired him since Casanova.
However, on balance Batman the Dark Knight really is a somewhat pompous film in places, Bale's voice as Batman is "nails scrapping a blackboard" awful, and the love story was flat and chemistry free. I want to know where the heck Katie Holmes was? She would have addressed a major barrier to the film, providing a sporting chance for its merit to indeed, exceed the appetite created.
Posted by: Athena | Tuesday, 22 July 2008 at 02:56 AM
Dear Mr Adamas,
why are your articles so blindingly banal and obvious?
Posted by: Bill | Tuesday, 22 July 2008 at 10:44 AM
Guy,
Sterling work you are doing out there in LA and I hope you have been in touch with the rug merchant. As for the Heath Ledger issue, good on you for challenging the sentimental consensus - "career defining, seminal performance, give the boy an Oscar". I have no idea if he or the film is any good because I have not seen it, but it is one of those Diana Princess of Hearts moments and I think you are right to put the question.
Rob
Posted by: Robert Procope | Tuesday, 22 July 2008 at 12:58 PM
This movie would have been huge even without the tragic death of Ledger. It is not the best movie of all time, but it is the best movie in a long time. Ledger definitely owned each scene he was in and without him the film would have failed. I don't know why they tell Bale to talk in that Clint Eastwood voice when he's Batman, but that needs to go. Other than that, the movie was excellent.
If you don't like super hero movies, at least go see this just so you can catch Ledger's outstanding performance.
Posted by: Tyler Stevens | Tuesday, 22 July 2008 at 02:51 PM
This was an excellent movie that would have done well anyway. I'm sure Heath Ledger's death had an impact on the amount of people who went to see 'Dark Knight' on opening weekend, but his portrayal of the Joker is brilliant and indeed Oscar worthy.
Posted by: Jtorres | Tuesday, 22 July 2008 at 03:10 PM
I could care less to see the movie. After Ledgers death, it seemed as though the making of this movie may very well have contributed to his demise. I don't care to give money to those profitting from the fall of an actor. Bad carma.
Posted by: Ann | Tuesday, 22 July 2008 at 07:49 PM
The numbers may not have been as big if not for Heath's death. But they would have been close. Ledger's performance is more than oscar-worthy, it really is breath-taking. He did own every scene he was in and the movie combined unreal photography, action, and psychological depth. Excellent directing and production and is in my opinion one of the finest films ever made. Heath outshined Bale but Bale played an outstanding batman once again, whether you like the batman voice or not! I agree if a diff actress played the love interest there probably would have been more chemistry and made the film near perfect. So id give it 9.99 out of 10 for that reason. Oh..and its about as close to an R-rated film there is..im surprised it pulled out a pg-13.
Posted by: Curt | Wednesday, 23 July 2008 at 12:21 AM
It is laughable to read all the hype about poor Ledger's performance - are the general public that stupid? Yes they are are.
How can the performance of an actor dressed up as a silly psychotic man be so talked about? Are we all in kindergarden still? Batman was never meant to be taken this seriously.
It is also an terrible insult to the memory of Ledger - everyone has missed the point as usual. The guy was on massive amounts of prescriptions drugs - he could not take the responsibility of his family - he had terrible anxiety, he was losing his looks due to the drug taking, he was stressed, alone, terrified before he died - and then the media hype tells us he was so happy to be playing this macabre monster - I don't think so...he must have poured all his hysteria and angst and mental illness into it and that is what the public pick up on and see it as a 'performance'. Ridiculous. It is time that adults grow up and start seeing that these incredibly violent 'fairy tales' are actually very damaging to people's mental state and Ledger is a good example to us all about how this kind of life and film effect young people. If anyone saw his final portrait by that Australian artist shortly before he died - you will see a man in REAL LIFE tormented and ill - a shadow of his former self. I doubt on his death bed if he was thinking about his performance as the joker. It is shameful how the industry has warped his death into a money maker and how stupid we all are to WANT to fall for it. I want these stupid violent movies out of circulation together with the violent music of today because society can't handle it.
Posted by: Brigitta | Tuesday, 05 August 2008 at 09:05 AM
I 100% agree with this blog. The Dark Knight was a boring flick from beginning to end. Heath Ledger's death and career were the only reasons why this movie was a success.
Posted by: Viper | Wednesday, 17 December 2008 at 10:55 PM