DARK KNIGHT - Moview Review

I saw the movie "Dark Knight" yesterday at a multiplex. The movie is too good, but I am confused about the genre I should place it in. It is a superhero movie, action movie, thriller, social drama, great face-offs through dialogues, great photography, great acting, moral drama where characters play mind-games (see Heath Ledger to know what the evil looks like. One of the promos for the movie said for the character played by him "Joker" – "Joker doesn't have any shades of Grey. He is absolute.")

One of my colleagues who watched the late night show said to me next morning that he couldn't sleep because Joker's slurping face came before his eyes the moment he closed his eyes. Such is the effect this character has on mind. So much so that even superhero Batman finds it difficult to understand his motivation and hence find a way to corrupt him. In one of the scenes, Joker burns all the money that whole of underworld had as parallel black economy saying that "Crime because of money is petty. All present day crop (of convicts) is sub-standard. Gotham city needs better grade (of criminals), of those who do not do it because of these petty gains." He, in another scene, questions "You do good, that is good, but what is good. That's a good question. I mean, if what I do was labeled good, you would have felt good in doing this as well. Its about everything going as per plan. If I blow a lorry full of soldiers, you won't feel a prick, because its acceptable in world's sinister plan. But if I kill a single poor Mayor after announcing that I will kill him, your world topples over its head because its not what the plan is. I do not plan, but make sure to demonstrate that no plan succeeds." Well, others have done their part very well, including Christian Bale as Batman. Special effects are top class, so is specially-done photography with new-gen camera with INOX experience (didn't know what it means, till I saw it and it looks spectacular). But no one comes close to what Joker stands for – pure evil, who is surprisingly convincing.

Are TV serials barometer of societal paradigms?

What precedes what - TV content or socially popular/ acceptable norms? Its a classical debate just like "Do films affect society or society gets reflected in films?" If saas-bahu serials are famous and have lot of viewership, does it make the content "in-vogue". Logically, YES.

There will always be people who will have a niche liking for specific content. And there will be a choice of masses. Many a times, the short-tenured fashion (fad) lives like a tornado - momentarily powerful and just that. The bitchy programs are perhaps like that. It was attempted earlier too - in 2001, Neena Gupta presented "Kamzor Kadi Kaun", a game show with participants eliminating by group vote the one they all feared was most likely to succeed, thus increasing individual's chance in next round..... and the program was a flop, signifying perhaps that India was not ready for such a show then. But it seems to have changed now, with Raodies, Big Boss, Get Gorgeous, Splitsville and many other shows capturing/staging the acrimony between participants/ mentors to enhance their TRPs.

High viewership for such programs do reflect achange in Indian choices, even if they may be limited to a specific section of population (read youth). There will always be alternate programming available for arty/ serious/ moral/ traditional/ cultural viewers and its possible that many choices of their are not "mass choices". But so be it.