Search
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated Batman Begins (2005) in Movies
Feb 19, 2019
Batman has always seemed to make great viewing and with the darker takes on him of the past to decades, great movies. This was a real treat though. It’s almost a rational take on an irrational super hero. Christopher Nolan has managed to give Batman a human face and the world he inhabits a sense of scale and realism. But that’s not to say that it is lacking in the sense of the theatrical.
Back in 2005, the hype for this film was building, with a new take on the old comic hero taking shape. Though I must admit that the design of the new Batmobile didn’t look cool to me, but I loved the concept of rooting him in a real world. The other questionable point was that lack of the big hitters in terms of the villains. The Joker, Penguin, Riddler and Catwomen were dumped in favour of The Scarecrow and Ra’s al Ghul, with only one that I, as the un-indoctrinated in comic book lore, that I had heard of being The Scarecrow.
But this was not to be a typical Batman film in any sense of the word. In June 2005, Batman was reborn and not only had the career of an independently styled filmmaker, Christopher Nolan blown into the big leagues but Blockbusters had just been redefined, an event not dis-similar in effect t those of Jaws and Star Wars in the 1970’s.
Batman, a Warner Bros. cash cow for decades, was about to cross all the main lines within the industry and a blockbuster with art house sensibilities and real intelligence was about to born. It’s not the first, but it opened the door for Nolan and his like to change the way we think about movies of this kind. It doesn’t seem to be that long ago that Marvel was dominating cinemas was some first-rate adaptations such as X-Men, Spider-man and the underrated Hulk, which in many ways may be classed as a prototype for this, with art house direction from Ang Lee.
The plot of Batman Begins isn’t really that important though that’s not to sell it short. It’s a highly developed and conceived story, packed from the opening frame to the 140th minute, but it’s simply the perfect blend of the evolution of Bruce Wayne into Batman, and the usual diabolical plans of the super-villain, only it doesn’t feel like that when you’re watching it. It feels like a well judged story about a traumatised young man, struggling to come terms with his parents murder, and his place in the world.
Luckily for him, his family are billionaires and his butler is Alfred, or more importantly, Michael Caine! There are of course a whole host of contrivances to explain how Batman’s image was forged, how the Batcave was created and where the Batmobile came from, but no-one’s suggesting that this a documentary. This is a more grounded and psychological approach to the story of a nutcase who dressed up like a bat and fights crime without a single superpower to his aid.
But it’s how Nolan brings all this together that works so well. He addresses things so subtly that you can end up missing them if you blink, or at least fail to see them coming. Wayne is turned into a flamboyant excentric to maintain a distance from his friends, if he even has any. The Batcave never ends up looking how we’d expect either, but it is full of bats if that helps and he does park his car there.
It is not until The Dark Knight that we see a Batcave of sorts and that isn’t even in the grounds of Wayne Manor. So, the direction, conception and writing are great, what about the casting? Christian Bale is Wayne/Batman for me, though the animatistic tone to his voice maybe a little overdone, but I do get it. Katie Holmes is the weakest link and am glad that she was recast for the sequel. The rest of the players are first-rate and this may well be on of the best casts ever assembled for a single film in my opinion.
Gary Oldman, so understated as Lt. Gordon, Caine as Alfred is perfect; Liam Neeson is on top form, which he isn’t always, let’s face it and Morgan Freeman, like Oldman and Caine can seemingly do no wrong. Then there’s Hans Zimmer‘s collaboration with James Newton Howard for the score which is one of Zimmer’s best. Howard is an able composer and he clearly provided many of the excellent emotional riffs, but it was Zimmer who brought this together with his dominant, strident style, colossal beats and pacing.
The look and sound of this film sets it apart from so many of its brethren. Batman Begins is a truly original, relentless and groundbreaking movie that is the best of the comic book movies by a mile, but not necessarily the best comic book adaptation. Spider-man or Watchmen for example, may qualify for the fact that they more literally reflect their respective sources but Nolan’s masterpiece is a blueprint as to how film should tackle such adaptations.
And yes, that’s right; Batman Begins is a masterpiece if ever there was one, though a slightly lesser one in comparison to its own sequel, The Dark Knight which may have completely rewritten the handbook.
Back in 2005, the hype for this film was building, with a new take on the old comic hero taking shape. Though I must admit that the design of the new Batmobile didn’t look cool to me, but I loved the concept of rooting him in a real world. The other questionable point was that lack of the big hitters in terms of the villains. The Joker, Penguin, Riddler and Catwomen were dumped in favour of The Scarecrow and Ra’s al Ghul, with only one that I, as the un-indoctrinated in comic book lore, that I had heard of being The Scarecrow.
But this was not to be a typical Batman film in any sense of the word. In June 2005, Batman was reborn and not only had the career of an independently styled filmmaker, Christopher Nolan blown into the big leagues but Blockbusters had just been redefined, an event not dis-similar in effect t those of Jaws and Star Wars in the 1970’s.
Batman, a Warner Bros. cash cow for decades, was about to cross all the main lines within the industry and a blockbuster with art house sensibilities and real intelligence was about to born. It’s not the first, but it opened the door for Nolan and his like to change the way we think about movies of this kind. It doesn’t seem to be that long ago that Marvel was dominating cinemas was some first-rate adaptations such as X-Men, Spider-man and the underrated Hulk, which in many ways may be classed as a prototype for this, with art house direction from Ang Lee.
The plot of Batman Begins isn’t really that important though that’s not to sell it short. It’s a highly developed and conceived story, packed from the opening frame to the 140th minute, but it’s simply the perfect blend of the evolution of Bruce Wayne into Batman, and the usual diabolical plans of the super-villain, only it doesn’t feel like that when you’re watching it. It feels like a well judged story about a traumatised young man, struggling to come terms with his parents murder, and his place in the world.
Luckily for him, his family are billionaires and his butler is Alfred, or more importantly, Michael Caine! There are of course a whole host of contrivances to explain how Batman’s image was forged, how the Batcave was created and where the Batmobile came from, but no-one’s suggesting that this a documentary. This is a more grounded and psychological approach to the story of a nutcase who dressed up like a bat and fights crime without a single superpower to his aid.
But it’s how Nolan brings all this together that works so well. He addresses things so subtly that you can end up missing them if you blink, or at least fail to see them coming. Wayne is turned into a flamboyant excentric to maintain a distance from his friends, if he even has any. The Batcave never ends up looking how we’d expect either, but it is full of bats if that helps and he does park his car there.
It is not until The Dark Knight that we see a Batcave of sorts and that isn’t even in the grounds of Wayne Manor. So, the direction, conception and writing are great, what about the casting? Christian Bale is Wayne/Batman for me, though the animatistic tone to his voice maybe a little overdone, but I do get it. Katie Holmes is the weakest link and am glad that she was recast for the sequel. The rest of the players are first-rate and this may well be on of the best casts ever assembled for a single film in my opinion.
Gary Oldman, so understated as Lt. Gordon, Caine as Alfred is perfect; Liam Neeson is on top form, which he isn’t always, let’s face it and Morgan Freeman, like Oldman and Caine can seemingly do no wrong. Then there’s Hans Zimmer‘s collaboration with James Newton Howard for the score which is one of Zimmer’s best. Howard is an able composer and he clearly provided many of the excellent emotional riffs, but it was Zimmer who brought this together with his dominant, strident style, colossal beats and pacing.
The look and sound of this film sets it apart from so many of its brethren. Batman Begins is a truly original, relentless and groundbreaking movie that is the best of the comic book movies by a mile, but not necessarily the best comic book adaptation. Spider-man or Watchmen for example, may qualify for the fact that they more literally reflect their respective sources but Nolan’s masterpiece is a blueprint as to how film should tackle such adaptations.
And yes, that’s right; Batman Begins is a masterpiece if ever there was one, though a slightly lesser one in comparison to its own sequel, The Dark Knight which may have completely rewritten the handbook.
Awix (3310 KP) rated Geostorm (2017) in Movies
Feb 7, 2018 (Updated Feb 7, 2018)
Gerard Butles With The Elements
It's a movie directed by the producer of The Day After Tomorrow and 2012, in which Gerard Butler is shot into space to have a fight with bad weather. If the description alone does not make you engage in fairly serious expectation-management, you must be new to this whole going-to-the-movies business.
Um, yeah: Gerard Butler plays a brilliant but maverick meteorologist (stay with me) who invents a global weather control system codenamed 'Dutch Boy' (possibly because the satellites are really high all the time), then gets sacked for being a pain in the neck. Years later, the system starts to go wrong (unimportant people like Afghans and Chinese meet spectacular weather-related deaths) and Butler is recruited by his brother (don't ask) to figure out the problem.
There is a lot of chasing about and a conspiracy and the world's most oddly designed self-destruct system, and the villain turns out to be the person you thought it was all the time. Butler spends most of the movie in space, which at least means Abbie Cornish can do more as a member of the Secret Service who ends up kidnapping the President (it's that kind of movie). Geostorm hasn't quite figured out how to handle having the President as a character in a movie in the current situation: Andy Garcia plays him in a very sensible, nondescript manner, quite divorced from reality.
I have to say a friend of mine said Geostorm was so bad it made London Has Fallen look like a Christopher Nolan movie, but it's not so much flat-out awful as simply very silly, obvious, and predictable, not to mention very much like all the other movies Dean Devlin produced for Roland Emmerich. I suppose the moral should be 'stick to what you're (reasonably) good at'.
Um, yeah: Gerard Butler plays a brilliant but maverick meteorologist (stay with me) who invents a global weather control system codenamed 'Dutch Boy' (possibly because the satellites are really high all the time), then gets sacked for being a pain in the neck. Years later, the system starts to go wrong (unimportant people like Afghans and Chinese meet spectacular weather-related deaths) and Butler is recruited by his brother (don't ask) to figure out the problem.
There is a lot of chasing about and a conspiracy and the world's most oddly designed self-destruct system, and the villain turns out to be the person you thought it was all the time. Butler spends most of the movie in space, which at least means Abbie Cornish can do more as a member of the Secret Service who ends up kidnapping the President (it's that kind of movie). Geostorm hasn't quite figured out how to handle having the President as a character in a movie in the current situation: Andy Garcia plays him in a very sensible, nondescript manner, quite divorced from reality.
I have to say a friend of mine said Geostorm was so bad it made London Has Fallen look like a Christopher Nolan movie, but it's not so much flat-out awful as simply very silly, obvious, and predictable, not to mention very much like all the other movies Dean Devlin produced for Roland Emmerich. I suppose the moral should be 'stick to what you're (reasonably) good at'.
Reading this would be a great cure to insomnia...
This book has been on my shelf for quite some time. Mainly because it's a beast of a read - a huge 650 page hardback book - and I've not had the inclination to read. As my pile of unread books is dwindling drastically, I finally decided to give it a go and overall I was pleasantly surprised.
My biggest surprise when reading the first few chapters was the realisation that this book isn't what the Christopher Nolan film Insomnia was based on. I cant even tell you why I thought this in the first place 😕 Once I got over this, I really got into the book or at least the first few hundred pages. As always with King, the book is very well written with a likeable protagonist and well developed secondary characters. The problem is that the story is maybe a little convoluted and isn't helped by the sheer length of it all. 200 pages in I was wondering how this could be dragged out for 650 pages and whilst it never gets as tedious as you'd imagine, this is definitely longer than it needed to be. Whilst the plot is typical King, it gets a little confusing and 'out there' even for him and I think he could've simplified this a little. Because of this I could only read up to 100 pages at a time as it made me feel rather sleepy - a perfect cure for insomnia I'm sure.
By the end of the book I did come to at least enjoy this story more than I thought I would, and even shed a tear or two. This definitely isn't a book for casual readers though and not one of King's best. But if you're looking for a door stop sized challenge, you could do much worse than this!
My biggest surprise when reading the first few chapters was the realisation that this book isn't what the Christopher Nolan film Insomnia was based on. I cant even tell you why I thought this in the first place 😕 Once I got over this, I really got into the book or at least the first few hundred pages. As always with King, the book is very well written with a likeable protagonist and well developed secondary characters. The problem is that the story is maybe a little convoluted and isn't helped by the sheer length of it all. 200 pages in I was wondering how this could be dragged out for 650 pages and whilst it never gets as tedious as you'd imagine, this is definitely longer than it needed to be. Whilst the plot is typical King, it gets a little confusing and 'out there' even for him and I think he could've simplified this a little. Because of this I could only read up to 100 pages at a time as it made me feel rather sleepy - a perfect cure for insomnia I'm sure.
By the end of the book I did come to at least enjoy this story more than I thought I would, and even shed a tear or two. This definitely isn't a book for casual readers though and not one of King's best. But if you're looking for a door stop sized challenge, you could do much worse than this!
David McK (3854 KP) rated Batman: Resurrection in Books
Apr 6, 2025
Michael Keaton's version of The Caped Crusader seems to have undergone something of a renaissance in recent years, with the publication of the Batman '89 graphic novels, and with his reappearance in the otherwise-disappointing movie 'The Flash' from 2023.
So roughly 35 or so years after the original 'Batman' film - which reimagined him from the camp flamboyant character of the '60s TV series to something altogether more serious - we get this novel, set between the events of 'Batman' And 'Batman Returns' and so set in the very-gothic Tim Burton version of Gotham instead of the more-grounded Christopher Nolan version: a Gotham that is still reeling from the after-effects of The Jokers gas attack towards the end of that film.
With said Gas, and the chemical attack earlier in the film in the form of Smylex, kickstarting the plot here by providing the reason behind the creation of what, to me, is one of the lesser-known of Batman's Rogue Gallery - a character that, without giving too much away, I only really first became aware of through playing the Arkham Asylum series of videogames, where he has a larger role in one of the later entries (and who has yet, to my knowledge, make it to the movies - ironic, when you consider his profession).
Him, and the puppeteer pulling his strings - both of whom I have encountered in said video games; neither of which have played a larger role (any?) in any of the live-action Batman films.
As an 'in-between' novel, there's also hints of things to come with cameo's from certain characters who will later play a larger role in Batman Returns, and by one character in particular who the upcoming sequel to this is going to centre on.
So roughly 35 or so years after the original 'Batman' film - which reimagined him from the camp flamboyant character of the '60s TV series to something altogether more serious - we get this novel, set between the events of 'Batman' And 'Batman Returns' and so set in the very-gothic Tim Burton version of Gotham instead of the more-grounded Christopher Nolan version: a Gotham that is still reeling from the after-effects of The Jokers gas attack towards the end of that film.
With said Gas, and the chemical attack earlier in the film in the form of Smylex, kickstarting the plot here by providing the reason behind the creation of what, to me, is one of the lesser-known of Batman's Rogue Gallery - a character that, without giving too much away, I only really first became aware of through playing the Arkham Asylum series of videogames, where he has a larger role in one of the later entries (and who has yet, to my knowledge, make it to the movies - ironic, when you consider his profession).
Him, and the puppeteer pulling his strings - both of whom I have encountered in said video games; neither of which have played a larger role (any?) in any of the live-action Batman films.
As an 'in-between' novel, there's also hints of things to come with cameo's from certain characters who will later play a larger role in Batman Returns, and by one character in particular who the upcoming sequel to this is going to centre on.
FearlessLover (27 KP) rated Dunkirk (2017) in Movies
Jul 31, 2017
Stunning cinea
It' s 1940, 400,000 allied troops are cornered and cut off on the beaches of Dunkirk; with the enemy closing in, and no cover or defence, they await annihilation or a miracle. We experience the moment as the characters do, without unnecessary exposition or dialogue! This proves quite the departure for Nolan; there is a lot here that owes more to silent cinema than anything else, but his images often say all that needs to be said.
An opening frame invites us to join a group of soldiers. Next, the loudest onslaught of gunfire kicks the film into another gear. We are given as much pause for thought as the soldiers we follow. We run with Tommy, played here by a Fionn Whitehead, and like him, we are aware of comrades falling dead next to us, but it is all panic and no time; we will lament their loss later. Set to the ticking of a watch, we feel Tommy's heart pounding with ours, and we know the tone for this audacious movie has been set.
We see the event from different perspectives and from within different time frames. Right now, not many directors can build momentum like Nolan. The jumping to and from different characters' point of view, the corkscrewing impression of the editing, events echoed and mirrored by Hans Zimmer's Shepherd's Tones and persistent, all enveloping score, acting at times more like sound design than music; it all results in a constant rise in tension, to the point of almost being exhaustive.
This said, the editing also serves another purpose. The "Miracle of Dunkirk" is a grand story, with every soldier, every pilot, and every civilian having their own point of view. Nolan wants us to build up an overall picture of the event purely through subjective experience, so of course we spend a tiring week with the terrified boys. Of course we spend a desperate day with a fisherman as he and his familial crew sail their way into action. Lastly, given the fuel constraints of the RAF, whose decisions had to be immediate and impulsive, always a choice between defending the beach or getting home, why would we spend any more that an edge-of-your-seat, quickly-cut hour in the cockpit of a Spitfire, as they do their duty and enter into dogfights to keep the German aircraft at bay? Each timeline is contracted or dilated to give everybody equal measure and importance, whilst staying true to and very much in their situation. Yes, this means we're kept on our toes; we have moments of confusion as timelines cross over and we see the same thing happening from another point of view, but as we head into the finale, as well as the aforementioned tension and release (which is just exciting cinema), we also get to see how, despite very different perspectives, everyone was working together, and how sacrifice and struggle for duty were par for the course for all involved, whether other people knew it or not. It is important that we the audience recognise this bigger picture, and as everything clicks together in an emotive final convergence of efforts, we not only see the justification for the techniques adopted, but struggle to imagine the story told another way. That is, at least, without going down a standard route, with objective storytelling employed.
A proper review not being complete without comment on the elephant in the room, it must be said that Harry Styles does not stand out like the proverbial sore thumb at all. Frankly, he carries his scenes with aplomb, and surely, following the Heath Ledger lesson, and now this, it is time we learned that, maybe, Christopher Nolan just knows what he's doing better that we do? As to the other big names, there are moments from that remain with me so long after having seen it: Kenneth Brannagh and Mark Rylance can say so much with so little, their faces and gestures doing the heavy lifting to deliver a lot of the human emotion, and it would appear Tom Hardy has Oscar-worthy eyes! You need see nothing more through the course of his drama to have a complete sense of the type of man his Farrier is. We talk about great acting and achieving realism through imagination, but with the knowledge that Nolan actually took everyone to Dunkirk, sank real ships, sailed real ships, flew real Spitfires overhead, employed real explosions on the beach, and even rejected green screen and CGI in favour of cardboard cut-outs, it seems imagination wasn't too necessary for these already consummate actors.
Nolan's principle fan base will be well prepared for what they get; but with his insistence on holding back from the audience any perspective not afforded his characters, ala 'Memento', some knowledge of the "Miracle Of Dunkirk" might put the more casual viewer in better stead. Regardless of which camp you fall into, or indeed of whether or not the movie does it for you, certain things are for sure: With no melodrama or cheese, and no superfluous fluff or emotional subterfuge, 'Dunkirk' is a purely experiential movie, a technical marvel of a war film unlike any other I can name. It also stands as a beacon in Nolan's career, characterised by his desire to cultivate an audience willing to keep up with him. And perhaps most importantly, this is a key moment in world history that is often overlooked; a disaster averted which, had it not been, would have seen the history books written very differently. That this event has been marshalled by a confident and sincere director, who has surely by now cemented his name alongside those of his own heroes, is reason enough to see 'Dunkirk'.
An opening frame invites us to join a group of soldiers. Next, the loudest onslaught of gunfire kicks the film into another gear. We are given as much pause for thought as the soldiers we follow. We run with Tommy, played here by a Fionn Whitehead, and like him, we are aware of comrades falling dead next to us, but it is all panic and no time; we will lament their loss later. Set to the ticking of a watch, we feel Tommy's heart pounding with ours, and we know the tone for this audacious movie has been set.
We see the event from different perspectives and from within different time frames. Right now, not many directors can build momentum like Nolan. The jumping to and from different characters' point of view, the corkscrewing impression of the editing, events echoed and mirrored by Hans Zimmer's Shepherd's Tones and persistent, all enveloping score, acting at times more like sound design than music; it all results in a constant rise in tension, to the point of almost being exhaustive.
This said, the editing also serves another purpose. The "Miracle of Dunkirk" is a grand story, with every soldier, every pilot, and every civilian having their own point of view. Nolan wants us to build up an overall picture of the event purely through subjective experience, so of course we spend a tiring week with the terrified boys. Of course we spend a desperate day with a fisherman as he and his familial crew sail their way into action. Lastly, given the fuel constraints of the RAF, whose decisions had to be immediate and impulsive, always a choice between defending the beach or getting home, why would we spend any more that an edge-of-your-seat, quickly-cut hour in the cockpit of a Spitfire, as they do their duty and enter into dogfights to keep the German aircraft at bay? Each timeline is contracted or dilated to give everybody equal measure and importance, whilst staying true to and very much in their situation. Yes, this means we're kept on our toes; we have moments of confusion as timelines cross over and we see the same thing happening from another point of view, but as we head into the finale, as well as the aforementioned tension and release (which is just exciting cinema), we also get to see how, despite very different perspectives, everyone was working together, and how sacrifice and struggle for duty were par for the course for all involved, whether other people knew it or not. It is important that we the audience recognise this bigger picture, and as everything clicks together in an emotive final convergence of efforts, we not only see the justification for the techniques adopted, but struggle to imagine the story told another way. That is, at least, without going down a standard route, with objective storytelling employed.
A proper review not being complete without comment on the elephant in the room, it must be said that Harry Styles does not stand out like the proverbial sore thumb at all. Frankly, he carries his scenes with aplomb, and surely, following the Heath Ledger lesson, and now this, it is time we learned that, maybe, Christopher Nolan just knows what he's doing better that we do? As to the other big names, there are moments from that remain with me so long after having seen it: Kenneth Brannagh and Mark Rylance can say so much with so little, their faces and gestures doing the heavy lifting to deliver a lot of the human emotion, and it would appear Tom Hardy has Oscar-worthy eyes! You need see nothing more through the course of his drama to have a complete sense of the type of man his Farrier is. We talk about great acting and achieving realism through imagination, but with the knowledge that Nolan actually took everyone to Dunkirk, sank real ships, sailed real ships, flew real Spitfires overhead, employed real explosions on the beach, and even rejected green screen and CGI in favour of cardboard cut-outs, it seems imagination wasn't too necessary for these already consummate actors.
Nolan's principle fan base will be well prepared for what they get; but with his insistence on holding back from the audience any perspective not afforded his characters, ala 'Memento', some knowledge of the "Miracle Of Dunkirk" might put the more casual viewer in better stead. Regardless of which camp you fall into, or indeed of whether or not the movie does it for you, certain things are for sure: With no melodrama or cheese, and no superfluous fluff or emotional subterfuge, 'Dunkirk' is a purely experiential movie, a technical marvel of a war film unlike any other I can name. It also stands as a beacon in Nolan's career, characterised by his desire to cultivate an audience willing to keep up with him. And perhaps most importantly, this is a key moment in world history that is often overlooked; a disaster averted which, had it not been, would have seen the history books written very differently. That this event has been marshalled by a confident and sincere director, who has surely by now cemented his name alongside those of his own heroes, is reason enough to see 'Dunkirk'.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated The Dark Knight Rises (2012) in Movies
Aug 7, 2019
Christian Bale reprises his role as Bruce Wayne/Batman in the final installment of Christopher Nolan’s Batman trilogy, The Dark Knight Rises,and is forced to come face to face with new villains once again. This time it is the terrorist leader Bane (Tom Hardy) and cat burglar, Selina Kyle (Anne Hathaway).
In the previous movie Batman had to combat the famed Joker who caused havoc in the city of Gotham. Joker convinced Harvey Dent to seek revenge against Batman and those responsible for the death of his lover, Rachel Dawes. Dent decides to use his lucky coin to decide the fate of those he assumes are responsible, Commissioner Gordon (Gary Oldman) and his family being just a few of the people captured within Dent’s grip of revenge. While Batman saved the life of Gordon’s young son, many still die. Batman decided to let the public think that he was the one responsible for all the deaths to keep Dent’s name in good standing with the public. Gordan on the other hand knows the truth.
The Dark Knight Rises is set eight years after the extensive damage the Joker brought upon the city and its residents. During this time, Batman isolated himself within the walls of Wayne Manor as Gotham rebuilt itself with the help of Gordon and John Blake (Joseph Gordon Leavitt).
During a celebration of Dent’s life and his successes, Gordan is tempted to tell the people of Gotham the truth behind the murders eight years ago but finds that it may not be the right time to do so. Terrorist leader Bane arrives and takes over the celebration and wounds Gordon forcing his subordinate Blake to take over. After Wayne learns that one of his projects he had been investing in over the years was actually being used for nuclear devices, Wayne decides to shut down the project. One of Wayne’s business rivals is suspected to have employed terrorist leader Bane to takeover the company and use its nuclear devices against the city.
After finding out the truth Bruce Wayne decides to return to the streets of Gotham as Batman, though the decision is met with great resistance by his trusty butler Alfred (Michael Caine). Bane has taken the lead in bringing Wayne Enterprises down and an intense confrontation leaves Batman hurt and condemned to an inescapable prison. Bane is left free to wreak uncontested havoc on Gotham, once again bringing a violent storm of perilous destruction upon its people. While Batman is stuck in Bane’s prison, we learn the sordid history of Bane.
To say much more would give a lot of the story away. Suffice it to say, The Dark Knight Rises is this year’s best comic book movie so far. The graphics, action, soundtrack and opening sequence are amazing. The storyline leaves you wanting more. Christopher Nolan has does an excellent job in all the installments of Batman but is remarkably exceptional in the third and final installment of the series.
In the previous movie Batman had to combat the famed Joker who caused havoc in the city of Gotham. Joker convinced Harvey Dent to seek revenge against Batman and those responsible for the death of his lover, Rachel Dawes. Dent decides to use his lucky coin to decide the fate of those he assumes are responsible, Commissioner Gordon (Gary Oldman) and his family being just a few of the people captured within Dent’s grip of revenge. While Batman saved the life of Gordon’s young son, many still die. Batman decided to let the public think that he was the one responsible for all the deaths to keep Dent’s name in good standing with the public. Gordan on the other hand knows the truth.
The Dark Knight Rises is set eight years after the extensive damage the Joker brought upon the city and its residents. During this time, Batman isolated himself within the walls of Wayne Manor as Gotham rebuilt itself with the help of Gordon and John Blake (Joseph Gordon Leavitt).
During a celebration of Dent’s life and his successes, Gordan is tempted to tell the people of Gotham the truth behind the murders eight years ago but finds that it may not be the right time to do so. Terrorist leader Bane arrives and takes over the celebration and wounds Gordon forcing his subordinate Blake to take over. After Wayne learns that one of his projects he had been investing in over the years was actually being used for nuclear devices, Wayne decides to shut down the project. One of Wayne’s business rivals is suspected to have employed terrorist leader Bane to takeover the company and use its nuclear devices against the city.
After finding out the truth Bruce Wayne decides to return to the streets of Gotham as Batman, though the decision is met with great resistance by his trusty butler Alfred (Michael Caine). Bane has taken the lead in bringing Wayne Enterprises down and an intense confrontation leaves Batman hurt and condemned to an inescapable prison. Bane is left free to wreak uncontested havoc on Gotham, once again bringing a violent storm of perilous destruction upon its people. While Batman is stuck in Bane’s prison, we learn the sordid history of Bane.
To say much more would give a lot of the story away. Suffice it to say, The Dark Knight Rises is this year’s best comic book movie so far. The graphics, action, soundtrack and opening sequence are amazing. The storyline leaves you wanting more. Christopher Nolan has does an excellent job in all the installments of Batman but is remarkably exceptional in the third and final installment of the series.
The Marinated Meeple (1853 KP) created a post in Oscars Discussion
Jan 29, 2020
Jesters_folly (230 KP) rated Tenet (2020) in Movies
Sep 18, 2020
Contains spoilers, click to show
Tenet has a good premise, a CIA agent is recruited to help find the source of a number of objects that have been 'Inverted', meaning that they run in the opposite direction of time. Unfortunately the film feels like Christopher Nolan (the writer) took James Bond, Men in Black (without the aliens) and the Red Dwarf Episode Backwards (without the comedy), put them all in a bag, gave it a shake and tipped the contents out.
That's not to say that Tenet is a bad film it's just, well that's the thing, I'm not entirely sure what the problem is. There are some films where some scenes feel off until something is revealed later on (I found this with the meat locker scene at the beginning of Bloodshot) and Tenet is one of these, which is the point, the film is about time travel/manipulation and so you are only given some of the information first time around, but I think Tenet gets too jumpy.
Tenet starts with a good old action scene then slows right down as the Protagonist (he has no name) tries to find out information, this part drags a little. The it begins to get Timey Wimey. There is a fight scene where the choreography seems a bit off and then the story begins to pick up pace.
There are action scenes that are, at least in part, backwards and, to be honest I think Red Dwarf pulled it off better. The rules of the inversion don't always seem to make sense but, to it's credit, when trying to explain some of the science they do say that they don't know and that things happen.
You have to keep your eyes open, much like a certain Red Dwarf episode consequence sometimes precedes action so, sometimes there is a clue to what is going to happen. But there are also time loops and some loops have other loops and things happen that you have to wait for a character to explain.
There are also things that happen in the first scene that are only hinted at so there is a set up for some sequels.
So, over all, we have Bond'esq ode to a Red Dwarf episode that is mostly entertaining, predictable in places and slow in others. Is it worth a watch? Yes but don't expect a big budget time travel sci-Fi extravaganza.
That's not to say that Tenet is a bad film it's just, well that's the thing, I'm not entirely sure what the problem is. There are some films where some scenes feel off until something is revealed later on (I found this with the meat locker scene at the beginning of Bloodshot) and Tenet is one of these, which is the point, the film is about time travel/manipulation and so you are only given some of the information first time around, but I think Tenet gets too jumpy.
Tenet starts with a good old action scene then slows right down as the Protagonist (he has no name) tries to find out information, this part drags a little. The it begins to get Timey Wimey. There is a fight scene where the choreography seems a bit off and then the story begins to pick up pace.
There are action scenes that are, at least in part, backwards and, to be honest I think Red Dwarf pulled it off better. The rules of the inversion don't always seem to make sense but, to it's credit, when trying to explain some of the science they do say that they don't know and that things happen.
You have to keep your eyes open, much like a certain Red Dwarf episode consequence sometimes precedes action so, sometimes there is a clue to what is going to happen. But there are also time loops and some loops have other loops and things happen that you have to wait for a character to explain.
There are also things that happen in the first scene that are only hinted at so there is a set up for some sequels.
So, over all, we have Bond'esq ode to a Red Dwarf episode that is mostly entertaining, predictable in places and slow in others. Is it worth a watch? Yes but don't expect a big budget time travel sci-Fi extravaganza.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Dunkirk (2017) in Movies
Jul 11, 2019
In May 1940, as Germany advanced into France, Allied troops found themselves surrounded at the town of Dunkirk with little time to escape. In the distance, the Germans sought to capture or kill each of the nearly 400,000 men. French and British soldiers began the slow process to evacuate using every naval or civilian ship available. Dunkirk examines the heroism involved by everyone on the land, sea, and air in their attempt to get their countrymen home.
When we discuss, reflect, or are taught about World War II, we often think the turning points of the war as the Battle of the Bulge, Leningrad, Midway, or D-Day. In doing this, we overlook moments like Dunkirk. Christopher Nolan exposes how vital this moment was in determining the fate, not only of the war, but the world in Dunkirk.
It is hard to describe what the film is like just from the visuals. It captures you and surrounds you by making the audience feel as though they are witnessing these events from a third-person perspective, as well as, through the eyes of those involved. The film itself is not limited to just the war or a discussion of the circumstances that led up to the war itself. There are no major battles shown, however, the film demonstrates quite vividly the horrors of war, the confusion, the chaos, the brutality, and the fear that each moment might be your last.
Dunkirk, masterfully tells the story of those involved in the evacuation of those troops that found themselves being pursued by Nazi Germany. Each frame will have audiences fearing for the safety of the men on the screen and hoping that they will somehow make it home despite all indications that their fate is sealed. Nolan gives audiences the opportunity to see the events in a multilayered way so that we can understand all of the moving parts involved in this massive undertaking. It renews the appreciation that many of us have for those who fought in World War II and offers a new sense of appreciation for younger generations who are far removed from those events. Most impressive about the film is its ability to be more historically accurate in displaying the different people who actually were fighting. It is not, like Saving Private Ryan, a film that exaggerates American participation in the war to make it look as though the only people fighting were Americans and Nazis. Dunkirk shows how the French, British, and Belgians, of various colors and backgrounds were fighting well before summer of 1944.
The film also pulls of quite an ambitious task by removing the Nazis from the film. This is not to say that there is no German presence in the film, rather, they minimize the focus on the Nazis in order to keep the focus on those evacuating and those involved in assisting with the efforts. In my viewing, I felt that this strengthened the film in adding to the fear by having a faceless enemy, one that could be lurking around the corner or coming around the corner at any moment. This added to the tension to make audiences feel the fear that so many of these young men must have had as they waited to board their ships to get home.
Dunkirk is impressive, emotional, and full of tension. It raises the bar with respect to how historically-based films should be in the representation of events. It does not rely on one linear story to capture the audience. It is an intelligent and overdue homage to the men and women who did all they could to ensure that these men made it home.
When we discuss, reflect, or are taught about World War II, we often think the turning points of the war as the Battle of the Bulge, Leningrad, Midway, or D-Day. In doing this, we overlook moments like Dunkirk. Christopher Nolan exposes how vital this moment was in determining the fate, not only of the war, but the world in Dunkirk.
It is hard to describe what the film is like just from the visuals. It captures you and surrounds you by making the audience feel as though they are witnessing these events from a third-person perspective, as well as, through the eyes of those involved. The film itself is not limited to just the war or a discussion of the circumstances that led up to the war itself. There are no major battles shown, however, the film demonstrates quite vividly the horrors of war, the confusion, the chaos, the brutality, and the fear that each moment might be your last.
Dunkirk, masterfully tells the story of those involved in the evacuation of those troops that found themselves being pursued by Nazi Germany. Each frame will have audiences fearing for the safety of the men on the screen and hoping that they will somehow make it home despite all indications that their fate is sealed. Nolan gives audiences the opportunity to see the events in a multilayered way so that we can understand all of the moving parts involved in this massive undertaking. It renews the appreciation that many of us have for those who fought in World War II and offers a new sense of appreciation for younger generations who are far removed from those events. Most impressive about the film is its ability to be more historically accurate in displaying the different people who actually were fighting. It is not, like Saving Private Ryan, a film that exaggerates American participation in the war to make it look as though the only people fighting were Americans and Nazis. Dunkirk shows how the French, British, and Belgians, of various colors and backgrounds were fighting well before summer of 1944.
The film also pulls of quite an ambitious task by removing the Nazis from the film. This is not to say that there is no German presence in the film, rather, they minimize the focus on the Nazis in order to keep the focus on those evacuating and those involved in assisting with the efforts. In my viewing, I felt that this strengthened the film in adding to the fear by having a faceless enemy, one that could be lurking around the corner or coming around the corner at any moment. This added to the tension to make audiences feel the fear that so many of these young men must have had as they waited to board their ships to get home.
Dunkirk is impressive, emotional, and full of tension. It raises the bar with respect to how historically-based films should be in the representation of events. It does not rely on one linear story to capture the audience. It is an intelligent and overdue homage to the men and women who did all they could to ensure that these men made it home.
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated The Dark Knight Rises (2012) in Movies
Feb 19, 2019
Contains spoilers, click to show
After four years, since The Dark Knight ended, leaving us wanting more and seven years since Christopher Nolan reinvented the comic book adaptation with Batman Begins, The final chapter of The Dark Knight Trilogy has arrived.
With this much hype, would it possible live up to potentially bloated expectations? The first reviews hit last monday, with 4 to 5 stars being the consensus. Well, it did! The Dark Knight returns one last time, after eight years have passed since the events of The Dark Knight and Batman had retreated into the rebuilt Wayne Manor as Commissioner Gordon (Gary Oldman), maintaining the lie that Harvey Dent was Gotham’s The White Knight, and not the maniacal Two-Face, had managed to clean up Gotham City.
Batman was no longer needed but in the meantime, Bane has arrived in the city with grand plans for its destruction. I won’t go much further into the plot that this, though I will probably write a more spoiler heavy review for the Blu-ray later in the year. But for now, I will try to maintain the film’s integrity.
When we first meet Bruce Wayne after almost a decade of seclusion, he is a broken man, both physically and mentally following the murder of his childhood sweetheart, Rachel Dawes in the previous film and the toll of nightly combat. So the first port of call is to bring Batman back to the streets of Gotham. The sense of excitement is palpable and very much a part of what makes Nolan’s films tick.
He draws his audience into the narrative as if we are part of the events and the universe as it unfolds, leaving us not just wanting Batman to return for the sake of the action but for Gotham’s sake as well. Bane, played so excellently by Tom Hardy, was a little difficult to understand from behind his mask, but still conveyed an enormous amount of presence and power, as he lays siege to the city but not as Terrorist per say, but as a freedom fighter or revolutionary, with many visual references to the French Revolution to keep us going.
Anne Hathaway’s Catwoman, though not named as anyone other than Selina Kyle, was a credit to her character as well as the actress. Dark, sultry, seductive and agile, her feline credibly was intact, whilst still being a very human character. Her duplicity was bread from desperation rather than evil and her motives convincingly drive her in both good and more dubious endeavours.
*** MAJOR SPOILER***
The less said about Talia Al Ghul the better, but the for those aware of her role, it was well-played, though her final scene was the hammiest in the film, possibly the entire trilogy.
Then there’s the supporting cast, such as Mathew Modene, who does a great job as Dept. Commissioner Foley and Cillian Murphy’s back again, as the subtly unrecognisable Scarecrow, who besides some frayed shoulder’s on his jacket, could have been anyone,and that’s the beauty of Nolan’s Batman universe. It’s fluid and you can’t count on anything on anyone for too long.
But this franchise would be nothing without Hans Zimmer percussive score, pounding as much as it was gentle, it works well among with Nolan’s direction to craft the near perfect conclusion to the Trilogy. Both riff on earlier films and supe it up accordingly whilst maintaining the film’s integrity.
In the end, my expectations were met and exceeded. Nolan has crowned his trilogy with a film which is of the same calabar as the two which preceded it, filling in many of the blanks, choosing the right characters to take on and doing so a variety of ways, touching this time on the flamboyant Bain, though scrapping the “Venom” plot from the comics, creating an intriguing Catwoman and building another major character in the form of R. John Blake (Joseph Gordon-Lovett).
The ending of the film is just perfect, not only for this but for the entire Trilogy. With nods to Inception though I believe that it is just a nod and not as similar as some would protest, but this is epic in the way that The Dark Knight never tried to be and Batman Begins didn’t need to be. The threat is apocalyptic, in keeping with the genre, but believable in keeping with Nolan.
The same can be said for the action, though I must admit, the sentimentalist in me wanted to see the Batmoble/Tumber back, though it was there in triplicate, as Bane steels three prototype Tumbers from Wayne Enterprises, for his private army, but the Bat (Batwing) was stunning, and the Batpod made a reappearance. The Final showdown will leave you breathless, the perfect blend of direction, Zimmer’s score and some of the most intense and meaningful action you’ll see on the big screen.
The only real faults with The Dark Knight Rises stem from its scale and change in direction. It’s more about Batman’s evolution from crime fighter to savour. Less intense on a personal level, but much grander in its ideals and horror as Gotham is destroyed on scale never seen in a film of this type. But it’s not as far-fetched as one may think, as it grounds itself with historical references, such as the French Revolution, which was hardly far-fetched, though it was hard-hitting and is well translated here.
Bruce Wayne completes his journey from the boy who witnessed his parents murder, to a young man who could not grow beyond it, to a man who lost himself in a journey to understand the criminal mind. Finally returning as Batman, who defied his mentor to protect his beloved city, to a master detective. But here, he returns to his roots.
The billionaire who never cared about his wealth as much as he cared for the people of Gotham, he ends up exactly where he needed to be. Decide for yourself, whether it’s a happy ending, sad or satisfying, but either way, it was not only the best way to advance the saga, but the best way to end the series as a whole. Thanks to Nolan and his crew, we now have the most definitively brilliant Batman series EVER committed to celluloid, (or digital), and no matter what is to follow, whether it is to be the Justice League mash-up or another reboot, I suspect that it will be a long, long time before anyone can beat these.
With this much hype, would it possible live up to potentially bloated expectations? The first reviews hit last monday, with 4 to 5 stars being the consensus. Well, it did! The Dark Knight returns one last time, after eight years have passed since the events of The Dark Knight and Batman had retreated into the rebuilt Wayne Manor as Commissioner Gordon (Gary Oldman), maintaining the lie that Harvey Dent was Gotham’s The White Knight, and not the maniacal Two-Face, had managed to clean up Gotham City.
Batman was no longer needed but in the meantime, Bane has arrived in the city with grand plans for its destruction. I won’t go much further into the plot that this, though I will probably write a more spoiler heavy review for the Blu-ray later in the year. But for now, I will try to maintain the film’s integrity.
When we first meet Bruce Wayne after almost a decade of seclusion, he is a broken man, both physically and mentally following the murder of his childhood sweetheart, Rachel Dawes in the previous film and the toll of nightly combat. So the first port of call is to bring Batman back to the streets of Gotham. The sense of excitement is palpable and very much a part of what makes Nolan’s films tick.
He draws his audience into the narrative as if we are part of the events and the universe as it unfolds, leaving us not just wanting Batman to return for the sake of the action but for Gotham’s sake as well. Bane, played so excellently by Tom Hardy, was a little difficult to understand from behind his mask, but still conveyed an enormous amount of presence and power, as he lays siege to the city but not as Terrorist per say, but as a freedom fighter or revolutionary, with many visual references to the French Revolution to keep us going.
Anne Hathaway’s Catwoman, though not named as anyone other than Selina Kyle, was a credit to her character as well as the actress. Dark, sultry, seductive and agile, her feline credibly was intact, whilst still being a very human character. Her duplicity was bread from desperation rather than evil and her motives convincingly drive her in both good and more dubious endeavours.
*** MAJOR SPOILER***
The less said about Talia Al Ghul the better, but the for those aware of her role, it was well-played, though her final scene was the hammiest in the film, possibly the entire trilogy.
Then there’s the supporting cast, such as Mathew Modene, who does a great job as Dept. Commissioner Foley and Cillian Murphy’s back again, as the subtly unrecognisable Scarecrow, who besides some frayed shoulder’s on his jacket, could have been anyone,and that’s the beauty of Nolan’s Batman universe. It’s fluid and you can’t count on anything on anyone for too long.
But this franchise would be nothing without Hans Zimmer percussive score, pounding as much as it was gentle, it works well among with Nolan’s direction to craft the near perfect conclusion to the Trilogy. Both riff on earlier films and supe it up accordingly whilst maintaining the film’s integrity.
In the end, my expectations were met and exceeded. Nolan has crowned his trilogy with a film which is of the same calabar as the two which preceded it, filling in many of the blanks, choosing the right characters to take on and doing so a variety of ways, touching this time on the flamboyant Bain, though scrapping the “Venom” plot from the comics, creating an intriguing Catwoman and building another major character in the form of R. John Blake (Joseph Gordon-Lovett).
The ending of the film is just perfect, not only for this but for the entire Trilogy. With nods to Inception though I believe that it is just a nod and not as similar as some would protest, but this is epic in the way that The Dark Knight never tried to be and Batman Begins didn’t need to be. The threat is apocalyptic, in keeping with the genre, but believable in keeping with Nolan.
The same can be said for the action, though I must admit, the sentimentalist in me wanted to see the Batmoble/Tumber back, though it was there in triplicate, as Bane steels three prototype Tumbers from Wayne Enterprises, for his private army, but the Bat (Batwing) was stunning, and the Batpod made a reappearance. The Final showdown will leave you breathless, the perfect blend of direction, Zimmer’s score and some of the most intense and meaningful action you’ll see on the big screen.
The only real faults with The Dark Knight Rises stem from its scale and change in direction. It’s more about Batman’s evolution from crime fighter to savour. Less intense on a personal level, but much grander in its ideals and horror as Gotham is destroyed on scale never seen in a film of this type. But it’s not as far-fetched as one may think, as it grounds itself with historical references, such as the French Revolution, which was hardly far-fetched, though it was hard-hitting and is well translated here.
Bruce Wayne completes his journey from the boy who witnessed his parents murder, to a young man who could not grow beyond it, to a man who lost himself in a journey to understand the criminal mind. Finally returning as Batman, who defied his mentor to protect his beloved city, to a master detective. But here, he returns to his roots.
The billionaire who never cared about his wealth as much as he cared for the people of Gotham, he ends up exactly where he needed to be. Decide for yourself, whether it’s a happy ending, sad or satisfying, but either way, it was not only the best way to advance the saga, but the best way to end the series as a whole. Thanks to Nolan and his crew, we now have the most definitively brilliant Batman series EVER committed to celluloid, (or digital), and no matter what is to follow, whether it is to be the Justice League mash-up or another reboot, I suspect that it will be a long, long time before anyone can beat these.