I can't believe that we are already through June. It seems like only a week ago that Iron Man was ushering in a new summer season, a season full of promise and excitement. Some titles have very effectively made good on that promise, while others most certainly haven't. But as we enter the second half of the blockbuster season, which starts tomorrow with the release of Hancock, I can't help but start to wonder not just about the rest of the summer, but the fall and winter films as well. All in good time, I suppose.

Surely very little preamble is necessary this week, because this is the week that I talk about "the big one." Yes, I suppose I can't be ABSOULTELY sure that this week's featured film will end up outgrossing all others to become the No. 1 film of 2008, but I have a pretty good inkling at this point. It looks like Iron Man and Indiana Jones: These Happy Golden Years are both going to finish just north of $300 million, and it looks like WALL-E will be hard pressed to match that number. Hancock could be an overwhelming surprise, I guess, but if there is any justice, the undisputed box-office king of 2008 should, without a doubt, be The Dark Knight. Why, you ask? Well, there are a number of reasons.

Firstly, it's Batman, one of the most visceral, singularly unique characters ever created for the pages of a comic book. Despite the quasi-perverted way the character was originally brought to the big screen by Tim Burton in 1989 (who made one sequel and then handed the reins over to Joel Schumacher, who promptly ran the series into the ground), Batman remains one of the most popular superheroes of all time. He can be found in comic books, graphic novels, several television series (both live-action and animated), and now two series of films, the latter of which, thanks to director Christopher Nolan, has breathed life back into what was thought to be a D-E-A-D character. Additionally, despite his brooding nature and tragic past, the character of Bruce Wayne/Batman strikes a chord with many people that most superheroes don't, given that he does what he does without the benefit of any actual superpowers, but rather with extensive training, a plethora of nifty gadgets and some hella-cool vehicles.

Let's backtrack for a moment ... some might argue that so pie-in-the-sky a prediction as the one I made earlier is totally outlandish, given that Batman Begins barely cracked $200 million in 2005. Too true, but, like I also just said, that was Christopher Nolan and Christian Bale's extremely well-done attempt to resurrect a character that had become a laughingstock. Many didn't quite know what to expect, and I'm sure that most fans who missed the film in theaters watched it at some point on DVD. That film ended by setting the table for this second installment, for which fans have been anxiously waiting for three years. Which brings me to my second reason that this film will be the champion of 2008: this one has the Joker. Batman Begins, for all its virtues, was an "origin" story, basically reintroducing us to this character by starting from scratch. Now that Nolan's gritty determination to create the Batman that was intended by the original creators has been established, however, you absolutely must bring his No. 1 nemesis into the picture, NOW. And Batman's principal enemy was, is and always will be the Joker.

Actually, I misspoke. Cesar Romero, Mark Hamill, and Jack Nicholson all, at one point, played "The" Joker. The character that Heath Ledger plays in The Dark Knight is simply "Joker." By all accounts, a far scarier, grittier, bat(expletive)-crazier character than the well-manicured prima donnas who have graced the small and big screens before him. No perfect hairdo, no plasticine grin carved into his face. No, Ledger's Joker feels like a character to be feared. Period. To quote my friend and former columnist Nicodemus, "He puts all the other 'Jokers' to shame. No one will ever play this character again after this." Which, given the tragic death of Ledger earlier this year, seems like an appropriate sentiment, and should only add fuel to the fire for moviegoers' desire to see this film.

Thirdly, this film is placed damn near perfectly in the summer lineup. By the time Dark Knight hits theaters, WALL-E will be in its fourth week, Hancock in its third and Hellboy II: The Golden Army in its second. Additionally, there is absolutely nothing, nothing at all, that looks as good, or is likely to be as well-reviewed, well-received or well-anythinged for many weeks after this film comes out. I've looked over and over the lineup for late July and all of August, and there just isn't anything that will hold the same appeal. I count only four films that even have a chance at $100 million (those being Step Brothers, The Mummy: Tomb of the Dragon Emperor, The Pineapple Express and Tropic Thunder, three of which are comedies that shouldn't draw away any of TDK's audience anyway), and none of them have a snowball's shot at $200 million. In other words, there's no The Bourne Ultimatum to spoil Batman's party.

Since this film tops the list of "most anticipated movie of the year" on many filmgoers' lists (including my own, and, I'm guessing, many of you reading this), I will not go into great detail about the actual story, for the simple fact that I haven't got much information to expound on anyway. I have tried to keep as far away from anything the even remotely resembles a spoiler, and Nico has been gracious enough to be extremely vague on the few details he did impart to me. For obvious reasons, I want to be as much in the dark (no pun intended ... well, maybe a little) about how this film will shake out as I possibly can. And even if I knew said details, I'm sure I wouldn't be revealing them here; some things are sacred, after all.

However, if you WERE wondering, almost all of the main cast members who survived Batman Begins are back: the multi-talented Christian Bale, of course, is back in the lead role; the legendary Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman reprise their roles as Alfred Pennyworth and Lucius Fox; the eminently talented Gary Oldman returns as the newly-appointed Commissioner Gordon; and Cillian Murphy returns as the twisted Dr. Jonathan Crane (aka The Scarecrow). Maggie Gyllenhaal takes over for the much-maligned Katie Holmes as Rachel Dawes, and the cast is rounded out by recognizable names such as Eric Roberts and Anthony Michael Hall, as well as Aaron Eckhart, who steps into the shoes of the extremely central character of Gotham City District Attorney Harvey Dent.

As an aside, I'm sure that all who are fans of the comic book or, at the very least, have seen Batman Forever know very well that Harvey Dent will eventually become the twisted, bipolar villain known as Two-Face. However, the subject of just how he makes that transformation was barely touched on in that particular movie, but is shown in excruciating depth in this film. I have little doubt that this will have an impact on the plot developments of future Batman films.

Last summer, when I was still relatively new to the Ultimate game, I made the mistake of believing that despite, what Transformers and Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix were priced at, one could not possibly win one's league without one or the other of those films. Boy, was I wrong. The idea of shelling out $75 (in Box Office) for one title should have sent up a ton of red flags, but I ignored them. And yes, both films did very well, but for the same amount of cash, I could have picked up The Bourne Ultimatum, Rush Hour 3, The Simpsons Movie and Superbad, a combination that would have doubled my investment. (John Belushi voice: "But NOOOOOOOOOO!") The point is, no matter how stellar a film looks, and is likely to be, one has to be careful about shelling out the largest portion of your funds for one film.

Fantasy Moguls predicts 15 Top 5 points, but I think TDK will do better than that. I predict it will win not only its opening weekend but also its second, and score no less than 17 points in that category overall. Eight PTA points seem a bit low ... on the one hand, Iron Man pulled in 12 back in May, but, then again, there were a lot fewer films being released back then, especially arthouse films. Dark Knight will have to compete for PTA points against Lou Reed's Berlin and Hounddog the week it opens, Boy A and American Teen the following week, and Brideshead Revisited the week after that. So all told, eight sounds about right, but it could hit double digits.

Fantasy Moguls also predicts a User Rating of 8.0. Batman Begins scored an amazing 8.3, and I envision Dark Knight equaling that feat, if not surpassing it. However, their estimate of TDK's total take, a mere $225 million, is way off. Early tracking (if you put much stock in it) puts the opening weekend at over $100 million, which seems reasonable, given that this film will be hyped as much as Iron Man and IJ4 were. Both of those films had monster OW's, and both of those films were able to break $300 million (but only just). However, I look for TDK to pass $300 million in its fourth or fifth week, and top out north of $350 million, which would make it the 13th film in history to do so, and the first since Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest did it two years ago. I personally am hoping that it can do $375 million, for that would make it the second-biggest superhero flick of all time (behind only Spider-Man's $403 million).

But do even THOSE stats justify putting it on your June or July slates? In the June Ultimate leagues, TDK is priced at a hefty $45 (and an even heftier $49 in July). That's ... a tough choice, folks. Even if it matches the stats that I predicted, would that still make it worth it? Maybe only just. After all, how can one exceed expectations when expectations are already through the roof? If Steve Mason's early predictions about the tremendous opening weekend that Hancock may have are borne out, then that would certainly seem to be a better pick, on its face, than TDK. (It's priced at $34 and $38 in the June/July leagues, respectively).

It won't have a User Rating as high as TDK's, but it may translate to more bang for your buck in the long run. And in Box Office? Wow, what a difference ... it will cost you only $44 in the June leagues, to which I say: "Bargain!" I certainly cannot say the same for July, where it is priced at a whopping $61. Yikes. I'm sure that there is nothing that I can say dissuade some of you from spending over 60 percent of your budget on one film, but I have little doubt that you could find a better-producing combination of films for roughly the same amount of money (for example, you could get Step Brothers, The Pineapple Express and Stars Wars: The Clone Wars for only $1 more than you would spend for just TDK). Whatever you decide, good luck!

And now, we come to a film that is also being released on July 18, but is about as far removed from the brooding, comic-geek appeal of TDK as is possible. This one is a musical, a romantic comedy adapted from a Broadway play to the big screen: Mamma Mia! Yes, just as Sex and the City had the chutzpah to stand toe-to-second-weekend-toe with IJ4 (the end result of which was the four 40-plus New Yorkers whacking our favorite archaeologist with their Louis Vuitton purses and stepping on his neck with their stilettos ... uh, metaphorically speaking), Mamma Mia! is taking on the Caped Crusader in a very shrewd bit of counterprogramming.

In this film, which screams "chick flick" even more than the surprising hit Hairspray did last summer, Amanda Seyfried plays Sophie, an 18-year-old girl who is nearing her wedding day. She wants to invite her father, whom she has never met, but her mother (played by Academy-Award winning actress Meryl Streep) isn't much help because she doesn't know who dad is herself, given that she was rather, ah, active in the monts before the time of Sophie's birth. Having narrowed the list of candidates to three people, Sophie decides to invite all three: Sam (Pierce Brosnan), Harry (Colin Firth) and Bill (Stellan Skarsgard). Ooh, awkward.

As you probably already know, this film's entire soundtrack is made up of songs originally sung by the Swedish group ABBA, who were very popular from the mid-'70s to early '80s. Most know their music: They produced such hits as "Dancing Queen," "Fernando," "Does Your Mother Know," "Take a Chance of Me" and, of course, "Mamma Mia," among many others. In fact, it is of interest to note that one of the producers of this film is Benny Andersson, who was a member of ABBA. It is also interesting to note that two of the other producers are Tom Hanks himself, along with his wife, Rita Wilson. Hmmm ...

I do like ABBA if I'm in the right mood, but as I said last summer, I'm not really big on musicals. I hugely underestimated Hairspray, which amassed a terrific $118 million last summer, effectively doubling even my most optimistic predictions. I am determined not to make such a huge mistake again, but I must say, I just don't see the same appeal for this film as I do (in retrospect, of course) for last summer's musical extravaganza. In Mamma Mia!, the cast just isn't as star-studded, the play isn't as well-known, and, not to put too fine a point on it, not everyone is into ABBA.

This film is priced at $21 in the new July Ultimate leagues ($24 in Box Office), even though Fantasy Moguls predicts only five Top 5 points, three PTA, a 6.9 User Rating and $90 million in receipts. Those stats honestly sound pretty good to me, but the price tag is just too high if that ends up being the case. It would have to outdo all of those stats by nearly 20 percent just to be worth it, and even though chick flick-musicals most certainly have the power to be surprise hits, I don't see it happening in this case. But, hey, I've been sooooooo wrong before ...

Well, that will wrap it up for me for another week. Please return next week, when I will be assessing two films that have the audacity to enter theaters seven days after Batman has laid waste to box offices all over the country: Talladega Nights cohorts Will Ferrell and John C. Reilly team up once again, trying desperately to make audiences forget both of their last solo projects. This time the fellas are two 40-plus live-at-homers whose parents tie the knot, making them, yes, Step Brothers. Also, a mere six years after the TV series went off the air and a mere 10 years after the first full-fledged feature film (try saying that three times fast), Chris Carter reunites Agents Mulder and Scully for another otherworldly go-round in The X-Files: I Want to Believe.

Rest in peace, George.

Shrykespeare didn't mean it, Shirley, when he said that very little preamble was needed about the Batman movie. And he may have been wrong before, but has he really been "sooooooo" wrong? That seems a little harsh. Tell him what you level of wrongness you attribute to him at shrykespeare42@gmail.com.