‘Dark Knight’ is violent? Uh … du-uh!

No sooner did I realize how good “The Dark Knight” was – and make no mistake, Christopher Nolan’s movie is very good – then I began anticipating the naysayers.

The film, which broke the opening-weekend record set a year ago by “Spider-Man 3” – making an estimated $155.3 million to Spidey 3’s $151.1 million – is attracting almost universally positive reviews .

But those naysayers are there. In one wire report I read this morning, a woman was complaining that Nolan’s film wasn’t more like … uh, “Hancock”?

“This is not a regular comic-book movie,” said the woman , who took her husband and two children, ages 11 and 14. “I know it’s a good movie, but it should have been rated R.”

Excuse me. I’m not going to debate the merits of the MPAA’s rating system. That battle was fought and lost years ago, mostly over the board’s rating movies too harshly. I’m not about to damn the MPAA now for giving a graphic novel some slack.

I know I’m starting to sound like a Republican here, but where the hell does individual responsibility come into this process? Television trailers and promos for “The Dark Knight” have been playing for months, and what the movie is has been no secret.

Let’s not even mention the many Internet sites that have offered up spoilers by the dozens. Let’s just ask one simple question: What exactly about the title “The Dark Knight” is misleading?

Look, “Batman Begins” wasn’t “WALL-E.” What would make anyone think the sequel would be any lighter?

If you’re unable, or unwilling, to do the minimal amount of homework necessary to determine if a film is something your children might find disturbing, then you need to take a few parenting classes.