Sunday, July 22, 2012

2012: The Year in Film: "The Dark Knight Rises" Review

So Chris Nolan is unquestionably one of the 2-3 best directors working today. His Batman series is absolutely in the running for the best trilogy in cinematic history. For my money, the list consists of The Godather trilogy, Lord of the Rings, and Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy. Pretty solid company, and that's a discussion for another day, but my main point is simply that these films are important, not merely as comic book or "genre" films, but as legitimately great works that have value far beyond mere entertainment. In resurrecting arguably the most popular character in all of American fiction and treating him seriously, Nolan changed comic book movies forever,(along with Bryan Singer, no doubt)showing the world that characters from the world of comic books can and should both provide great works of entertainment and be taken seriously doing so. Even if his films weren't tremendous (they are), that alone would be a significant achievement. Combining a filmmaker of Nolan's talent with a cast including such legitimately great talents as Christian Bale, Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman and Gary Oldman, and you're doing great, award-worthy work with a character who not so long ago was participating in nonsense that included benippled suits. Batman Begins and the Dark Knight are two of the best films released in the last decade and are among my favorites. (even though I personally think that Batman Begins is underrated and The Dark Knight is overrated, they are still very fine films in the 8.5-9 range) So let's take a look at how the capstone is, shall we?

First, it goes without saying that 1.) you should have watched Batman Begins and the Dark Knight before seeing this movie, and 2.) it will be near impossible for me to review this flick without having at least minor spoilers. I will keep them to a minimum, but it's simply not possible to discuss most flicks and this one in particular using vague platitudes. I will keep big details out. Let's rock.

Following the events of The Dark Knight, where the actions of the Joker took everything to an insane level and drove Harvey Dent to murder and madness, Batman took the fall for Dent's crimes and Bruce hung up the cape and cowl as new tougher crime laws passed in Dent's name were used to crush organized crime in the city.  Batman hasn't been seen in years and Gotham is enjoying a period of peace for the first time in decades while Bruce waits on the sidelines.   Against this backdrop a new, sinister force called simply Bane is rising that threatens to bring Gotham to its knees and forces the Batman back into the game in a new, changed Gotham with some new faces that only make the game more complicated.   Bane's plan?  Simply destroy Bruce Wayne and force Gotham City to tear itself apart.  As an older, rusty Batman faces his biggest challenge yet his survival and the survival of his beloved Gotham are both very much in doubt.   Did that read like the future back of the Blu Ray box? Sure. But I told you I'd be keeping things largely spoiler free..

The good:
  • The acting is great, top to bottom.  Just about everybody brings their A game, especially Caine, Hathaway and Hardy.  Bale is very strong and brings an interesting new dimension to the Bruce Wayne/Batman character.  Blog favorite Tom Hardy is tremendous as Bane, bringing a physicality, a competence and a very human menace to the man who represents Batman's biggest challenge.  The fact that he does all of this while most of his face is covered by a mask is remarkable.  Batman's supporting cast of Morgan Freeman as Lucius Fox, Gary Oldman as Commissioner Gordon and Michael Caine as Alfred all do what they've done throughout the films in this series, and that's raise the quality of every single scene they are in.  I would argue that Fox, Gordon and Alfred represent Batman's mind, spirit and heart respectfully, but that's a discussion for another day... Caine, especially, does great work in depicting Alfred at his most concerned and paternalistic.  Let me say it, I've been hating on Anne Hathaway as Catwoman since the moment she was cast, but she's tremendous.  Truly a revelation.  I apologize to everyone involved for doubting that she could pull it off.  Let me say that if you didn't like Anne Hathaway before, you'll definitely like her after seeing this flick.   Joseph Gordon Levitt is more than capable as rookie cop John Blake, who has a special interest in Batman.
  • Obviously, the filmmaking is tremendous.  The movie looks great, plain and simple, and Nolan has a real filmmaker's eye for knowing how to use atmosphere to build his films.  As we've seen, Batman is a character who can very easily descend into the silly, but Nolan smartly builds a gritty, realistic world in which he drops these otherworldly characters and as a result is able to craft smart dramas that exist in a world that's extremely true to life despite featuring comic book characters. 
  • The story: it's clear at this moment that this is a true trilogy with one long, overarching narrative.  Each film, while having a self-contained storyline, is also part of a greater whole, where previous events echo and shape current interactions and events.  This isn't a situation where things happened that are discussed but seem distant, the actions of the characters in prior films are felt and have a real presence in later films.  This is a trilogy with a beginning, middle and end, where each successive chapter builds and expands the story, or legend if you'd prefer, of the larger-than-life Batman.  The scale of this film is unbelievably epic and the stakes much higher than what passed before... a more than fitting end to one of the great stories of our time.
The bad: [note: there isn't very much]
  • The opening half hour of the flick or so, while undoubtedly awesome (Bane's introductory scene is great), is rather confusing and sort of all over the place.  I understand that there was a lot of introductory things to get out of the way, but the film opens and you aren't quite sure what the hell is going on.
  • It's a BIT too bleak.  Soul-crushingly so.  Now the Dark Knight was a bleak flick as well, and Batman Begins isn't exactly sunny, but this flick is just straight-up deathly serious and super dark.  I'm a pretty dark guy myself, but it was right on the verge of being too much.  3 hours of bleakness is a lot.
  • The score, despite me loving the use of the "rise" chant, was a bit much.  It's grinding and intense and a little over the top. 
  • I have the same problem I had with The Dark Knight re: henchmen.  Where, exactly, are these murderous thugs finding these obsessively loyal, competent henchmen?  Bane just kills his cronies left and right... why would anyone work for him?
Like I said, the bad is minor compared to what the film does right.  I just didn't want you guys to complain when I didn't drop a 10 spot on you. 



In all, it's dark, it's satisfying, it's epic, it's terrifically done, and if it's not as good as The Dark Knight, that's mainly because the storyline is SO much darker and we don't get the maniacal glee of the Joker for distraction, rather the obsessive destruction of Bane.  If it wasn't the ending we needed, it was certainly what we deserved.  Go see this movie.

9/10

2 comments:

Allister Sears said...

Oddly enough, the henchman situation didn't bother me at all. I just assumed that they were a more cultish version of Ra's's henchmen, blindly following Bane no matter what he did to them.

AB said...

Yeah, but, not all of Bane's henchmen were members of the League of Shadows. The mercenary-type dudes were, but the vast majority were just Gothamites. Why would they blindly follow a murderous madmen?