Maybe this is a really obvious, noobie pick. It's the most recently-released film to make it onto my list, and the only direct sequel, but it had a really profound impact on me in terms of what a superhero movie could seriously achieve, and what a crime drama could be made to do. I didn't really know what to expect after Batman Begins, but this is a different beast entirely. By taking the concept of a masked vigilante utterly seriously, Nolan was able to transcend the limitations of previous superhero films, most of which ultimately failed because they either stayed too true to their source material, or strayed too far. Batman, however, because he lacks super powers, is one of those characters who can be as fantastical or grounded as writers want him to be. In the case of The Dark Knight, by removing the 'comic' element from the 'comic book' character and locating him in an utterly realistic space, we actually have an idea how a costumed vigilante might function in the real world; much more convincingly, I think, than Zack Snyder managed with Watchmen. That's not a criticism of comics, or Watchmen in particular, only that The Dark Knight continues to surprise me with the depths it plumbs. And, I think, the fact that Batman never treats his existence as a joke causes the likes of Jim Gordon, Harvey Dent and Rachel Dawes to accept him as well.

If I have a criticism, it's the unwavering linearity of the narrative. Not that I expected flashbacks or felt the story called for any Memento-like screwing of chronology, but, as Yazz once pointed out, 'the only way is up.' Escalation seems inevitable when time is marching inexorably forward, as it does here, with the effect being that The Joker's downfall feels almost predestined since there has to be a point at which people – humanity – will just say 'enough is enough.' But this is really a minor criticism, as that same escalation is also riveting and daring –  the first time I saw the film I was utterly convinced that one of those ferries was going to blow up, such was the audaciousness of what had gone before.

But audacious isn't the right word. It implies a sense of recklessness or cheekiness that just isn't present in The Dark Knight. Christopher Nolan is in complete control, and while the utter seriousness of the film might also be considered another flaw, it's also one of its greatest strengths – an utterly compelling and very brave adaptation of an extensive and much-loved mythology that will not be matched for a very long time.

Here's some thoughts from my original review:

"Heat, a film which Nolan was clearly influenced by, proves the necessity of this kind of sprawling, epic narrative, as it mirrors the sprawling nature of the cities which are at the centre of these stories."

"Comparisons to Heat are totally justifiable for two reasons: firstly, the cinematography loves to linger on the cityscape.... Secondly, when the action hits, it hits hard. It's brutal and bone-crunching."

"Bale's performance is ... like watching a slightly less psychotic Patrick Bateman (or maybe just a psychotic who channels his neuroses differently? It's certainly a question the film raises)."

"[Aaron Eckhart's] transformation into Two-Face is horrific and tragic, thanks in no small part to The Joker whispering in his ear, and their scene together after Dent's little accident makes for one of the film's most convincing and blackly comic scenes."

"After all the trailers and images of The Joker, I still have trouble recognising Ledger, so deeply immersed is he in the role.... [He] effortlessly sweeps aside any lingering memories of Nicholson's over-the-topJoker."

"The Dark Knight should easily go down as the movie of the year. It's epic without losing sight of its characters, it actually develops themes established in Batman Begins (that's themes, not merely plot threads – some sequels tend to confuse the two), and it doesn't pull any punches."