On Seeing The Dark Knight in IMAX

Location: Johnson IMAX Theater: National Museum of Natural History, Washington DC
Date: August 8th, 2008
Cost of Ticket: 12.50 (plus service charge)
Cost of Concessions: None Available
Cost of Parking (off site): free (a minor miracle on the Mall in DC)

Total Cost: 14.50

Notes: Admittedly, I was not rushing out to see this film again. I had enjoyed my first viewing, but I also has some issues with the film in terms of pacing and plot logic that nagged at me. Still, it was an opportunity to spend the weekend in DC, visit my girlfriend's family, and see what all the IMAX hype was about.

The screening was sold out, causing many to settle, after fruitless searching, on the neck strain seats in the front of the house. It was interesting to note the obvious tensions of a museum theater putting on this sort of a show: there were no concessions for sale, there were only two showings a day (both sold out), the theater was located at the top of a staircase and had little to no hope of controlling well a crowd of this size... but the cash-strapped museums need the revenue, and the masses was to see their Batman big. Chris Kaltenbach provided a good overview of the situation in a recent article in the Sun.

Then the film began, in all its digital dome technologic glory. Was this an analog print or digital projection? What was up with that red text at the back of the theater underneath the projector (one fellow filmgoer at another screening swore it was closed captions)? Those questions aside, the Dark Knight in IMAX took on a scope and a depth that were, for the most part, breathtaking.

The film was projected letterboxed in non-IMAX filmed scenes, a full five stories tall in IMAX filmed scenes. This was not disorienting to me, but I may have been helped by my previous screening in terms of following along. It was interesting to see establishment shots take on a new magnificence and importance, and to also see the limitations of the form (I would say the major car chase "Harvey Dent transport" scene suffered in the IMAX format, the action becoming blurred to a large degree). But you haven't Batman jump off a roof in Hong Kong and fly around until you've seen it in IMAX.

All in all, I feel that my appreciation of the film has been deepened, but my problems with these recent incredibly popular and profitable summer films remain. In some recent reading, David Mamet may have put his finger on the problem: these films are not so much concerned with traditional dramatic form but rather with how fast they can move from thrill to thrill, set piece to set piece. This screening around, I "got" a lot more of what was going on (like what the heck the Scarecrow was up to in that early sequence). But I still wonder at my ability to keep up with these kids today with their youtube and faceplace and whatnot. Am I reaching a point where popular culture will no longer hold even a vestige of a thrill for me? Will I simply retreat into the Arthouse and shake my fist at the suburban multiplex?

It is funny how time passes. I can remember 1989 Batman (which I am certain I saw repeatedly at said multiplex) only distantly, but that summer was spent in the throes of Batmania, surrounded by merchandise and hype and a film that seemed grittier, darker, more in tune with its time than other releases of the day. It served as a milestone and an paradigm shift and a culmination of several years of comic book geekery for me. I doubt that my take would hold up if I watched Tim Burton's creation today, but I am also certain that this new film serves the same for a new generation of fans, and I look forward to discussing it with my students this fall, as there is no doubt that they saw The Dark Knight this summer. And hey... this old man's got one on them. He saw it in IMAX.