Darkness Rising: A Decade Later, "The Dark Knight" Still Reigns Supreme

“You either die a hero or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain.” — Harvey Dent

Whenever a new comic book film looms on the horizon, I start sifting through my favorites of the genre (“Superman II,” “Unbreakable,” “Darkman,” “Spider-Man 2”) in a vain effort to remind myself that greatness, albeit rare, is still something within Hollywood’s hot-handed reach. Just last night, I unexpectedly gave “The Dark Knight,” filmmaker Christopher Nolan’s dark and brash gem of nightmarish genius, a screening for the first time in a decade and it recently made me think of the late Roger Ebert’s gushing four-star review where he remarked "Batman is not a comic book anymore." I thoroughly enjoyed what Nolan had done with 2005s “Batman Begins,” which to this day I still call the greatest “reboot” film of its kind. So I knew Nolan faced high hopes and fanboy fanaticism with the inevitable sequel. For us, the wait was excruciating, the expectations grand. Worry of its potential inferiority, always on the mind.

Worry, as it turns out, was completely unnecessary.

I’ve expressed to many that I find 2008s “The Dark Knight” to be the greatest superhero film ever made. Nothing comes close. It’s a masterwork on numerous levels, particularly screenplay, score and editing. And, in one case, tragedy. And here’s why…

Christopher Nolan, one of today’s brashest, visual of filmmakers, achieved the seemingly unthinkable. “The Dark Knight” removed Batman/Bruce Wayne from the dark confines of his stable pop culture niches, single-handedly launching the conflicted character and his epic story into the bleak stratosphere of haunting moral ambiguities.

Fifteen years have now passed since the film’s immensely successful release, the onslaught of fanboy euphoria and decades of mawkishly awkward explanation as to the who, what, where, when and how regarding this tragic crusader’s origins and mind-set, humbly concluded. Point being, it was a film that finally got it right in its approach to superhero storytelling — an ironic plight of seriousness for a film whose major tagline was “Why so serious?”

Suffice it to say, Nolan's film was an immutably entertaining pop art/commerce smorgasbord — a triumph of filmmaking that wasn't afraid to draw us into its dark, brave new world, chew us up, spit us out and for no other reason than to bring us back begging for more.

I’ve often compared Nolan’s filmmaking styles (with films like “Inception,” “Memento,” “Dunkirk” and this year’s biopic masterpiece “Oppenheimer”) to that of writer/director Michael Mann’s work, especially “Thief” and 1995s “Heat.” Both filmmakers drawing their inspiration from the likes of underworld crime genre films of Martin Scorsese and William Friedkin, even more-so than borrowed nuances of color-coated pulp comic books.

With “The Dark Knight,” Nolan created a brooding metropolitan nightmare, expanding greatly even on the crevasses and dark corners of “Batman Begins.” But rather than create an existing stylish comic dreamscape, the film uses the modern world to create a very real, scary and claustrophobic universe.

But despite the star power in the likes of Christian Bale and Aaron Eckhart, it was the haunting presence of Heath Ledger that took this film to levels no one could have anticipated. You’ve seen the film and witnessed this for yourself, so no explanation needed outside of the fact this was the performance of a lifetime. Finally, the ultimate Joker stepped forward — gone were the ridiculously cartoonish renditions of Cesar Romero and Jack Nicholson. If you know the comic books, especially Frank Miller’s 1986 genre bender “The Dark Knight Returns,” the Joker is nothing more than a rabid megalomaniacal monster hell-bent on destruction, mayhem, manipulation. His only goal is to inflict pain and fear, and plunge darkness into the hearts of his victims like a dagger. He's a force of nature that no one, not even Batman himself, was able to reckon with. And in this film, Heath Ledger the actor did not exist. With this performance, the Joker reigned maniacal…a living, breathing rage against the law-abiding machine.

So much more can be said for why I will always hold this film in such high regard. But what should be noted are the doors Nolan opened with “The Dark Knight,” the walls and boundaries it leapt, the lines it crossed and the rules it shattered. I’m certain both “Batman Begins” and “The Dark Knight” are exactly what the late Bob Kane himself envisioned when he, in May 1939, created this fearless hero and his crusade to salvage the last remnants of Gotham’s innocence.

Bob Kane would have been proud at what Christopher Nolan achieved — Batman now existed within the higher realms of mythological pathos and dramatic credibility.

Ebert was right - Batman was now indeed more than just a comic book.