Search
Search results
Chrissie Hynde recommended Search for the New Land by Lee Morgan in Music (curated)
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Morgan (2016) in Movies
Jun 19, 2019
Producer Ridley Scott has teamed with his son Luke for the new
Horror/Suspense film “Morgan” which blends Horror and Suspense in what may
well be a new franchise for FOX.
The film follows an isolated research facility surrounded by trees where
an experiment named Morgan (Anya Taylor-Joy), has had an “incident” which
has caused the parent company to dispatch a troubleshooter named Lee
Weathers (Kate Mara) to evaluate the program.
The cold and no-nonsense Weathers meets some hesitation from the research
team as they see her as a company tool intent on closing their program and
years of research and being unable to see the potential and progress of
their work.
As Weathers and the audience gets to know Morgan, they learn that she is a
genetic creation who became aware and functional at a very early age and
her recent act of violence has her confined to a cage where she listens to
music, plays Chess, and spends her time dreaming of her former visits
outside.
As Morgan is evaluated it appears that there is far more to her than first
appears. The creation is capable of great empathy, wisdom, and
appreciation for beauty, but also has a very dark side, which can appear
out of nowhere.
As the complex study and interactions with Morgan unfold, Lee and the
scientists are faced with a series of difficult decisions that sets things
on a course from which they may not return.
The film takes a while to get up to speed and does not have anything that
viewers have not seen before. I was able to figure out the twists to the
film early on and an incident that is referred to in the film would have
made a far more interesting film than what we were given. Perhaps it is
being saved for a possible prequel because as it currently stands,
“Morgan”, is an interesting if formulaic film that borrows from several
other films.
The funny thing about it is that like “Prometheus” the more I
thought about it, the more questions I had and perhaps like his father,
Scott is using the film to setup a much larger universe and future films.
I only wish there was a bit more to this as the premise though interesting
does not have enough for the versatile and talented cast to do and they
deserved much better.
http://sknr.net/2016/08/29/morgan/
Horror/Suspense film “Morgan” which blends Horror and Suspense in what may
well be a new franchise for FOX.
The film follows an isolated research facility surrounded by trees where
an experiment named Morgan (Anya Taylor-Joy), has had an “incident” which
has caused the parent company to dispatch a troubleshooter named Lee
Weathers (Kate Mara) to evaluate the program.
The cold and no-nonsense Weathers meets some hesitation from the research
team as they see her as a company tool intent on closing their program and
years of research and being unable to see the potential and progress of
their work.
As Weathers and the audience gets to know Morgan, they learn that she is a
genetic creation who became aware and functional at a very early age and
her recent act of violence has her confined to a cage where she listens to
music, plays Chess, and spends her time dreaming of her former visits
outside.
As Morgan is evaluated it appears that there is far more to her than first
appears. The creation is capable of great empathy, wisdom, and
appreciation for beauty, but also has a very dark side, which can appear
out of nowhere.
As the complex study and interactions with Morgan unfold, Lee and the
scientists are faced with a series of difficult decisions that sets things
on a course from which they may not return.
The film takes a while to get up to speed and does not have anything that
viewers have not seen before. I was able to figure out the twists to the
film early on and an incident that is referred to in the film would have
made a far more interesting film than what we were given. Perhaps it is
being saved for a possible prequel because as it currently stands,
“Morgan”, is an interesting if formulaic film that borrows from several
other films.
The funny thing about it is that like “Prometheus” the more I
thought about it, the more questions I had and perhaps like his father,
Scott is using the film to setup a much larger universe and future films.
I only wish there was a bit more to this as the premise though interesting
does not have enough for the versatile and talented cast to do and they
deserved much better.
http://sknr.net/2016/08/29/morgan/
Awix (3310 KP) rated The Resident (2012) in Movies
Apr 26, 2019
Icky, undistinguished psycho-thriller finds Hammer in House of Mystery and Suspense mode. Except there's not much of either, given that no-one ever moves into a lovely new apartment and finds it's just as good as it seemed on the viewing. The usual fem jeop ensues as Hilary Swank's doctor has to fend off not just her landlord (Jeffrey Dean Morgan) but his elderly dad (his eminence Christopher Lee, in a regrettably small part).
Really has very little to differentiate or commend it beyond Lee's creepy cameo and some fun and games with the chronology at one point; you find yourself wondering just why you're watching a film with such an unpleasant vibe to it - it's kind of playing the game where it seems to be perfectly okay to dwell at great length on the most repellent behaviour, as long as there's a bit of carthartic vengeance in the end. I am seldom convinced by this, especially not when the rest of the film put together in such an average manner.
Really has very little to differentiate or commend it beyond Lee's creepy cameo and some fun and games with the chronology at one point; you find yourself wondering just why you're watching a film with such an unpleasant vibe to it - it's kind of playing the game where it seems to be perfectly okay to dwell at great length on the most repellent behaviour, as long as there's a bit of carthartic vengeance in the end. I am seldom convinced by this, especially not when the rest of the film put together in such an average manner.
Sarah (7798 KP) rated Dreamcatcher (2003) in Movies
Nov 9, 2019
A little bonkers
I’ve read the book, and I still found this film to be bonkers and completely crazy. So I really don’t know how anyone who hasn’t read the book can watch this film and have a clue what’s going on.
To be fair, even for Stephen King this story is a bit far fetched and a slightly confusing mix of genres. The film follows the basic plot from the book although obviously missing a lot of the more detailed aspects. It has a good and very decent cast, although sadly some like Timothy Olyphant and Jason Lee. And I’m really not entirely sure how I feel about Morgan Freeman being the bad guy, he definitely feels a little miscast. The effects in this are rather poor too, even when considering it was made in 2003!
Overall it’s not a bad film and watchable if you’ve read the book, but the crazy plot isn’t made any less sane and I really don’t think the boys friendship is highlighted as much as it should be like it has in some of King’s other films (IT and Stand By Me for example).
To be fair, even for Stephen King this story is a bit far fetched and a slightly confusing mix of genres. The film follows the basic plot from the book although obviously missing a lot of the more detailed aspects. It has a good and very decent cast, although sadly some like Timothy Olyphant and Jason Lee. And I’m really not entirely sure how I feel about Morgan Freeman being the bad guy, he definitely feels a little miscast. The effects in this are rather poor too, even when considering it was made in 2003!
Overall it’s not a bad film and watchable if you’ve read the book, but the crazy plot isn’t made any less sane and I really don’t think the boys friendship is highlighted as much as it should be like it has in some of King’s other films (IT and Stand By Me for example).
Chris Sawin (602 KP) rated Cop Out (2010) in Movies
Jun 22, 2019 (Updated Jun 23, 2019)
Jimmy Monroe (Bruce Willis) and Paul Hodges (Tracy Morgan) have been working as partners at the NYPD for the past nine years. They have a reputation at the precinct for doing things their own sporadic and wreckful way that isn't normal procedure and usually winds up getting them into hot water with the captain. A suspect is brought in for interrogation and when he finally spills the beans on a drug deal happening that afternoon, Jimmy and Paul think it's best to act on it right then and there. After their plan fails, their suspect is killed and months of work is flushed down the drain. Jimmy and Paul are suspended for 30 days without pay, which isn't good news for Jimmy since his daughter is getting married and has the typical expensive wedding of her dreams in mind. Jimmy plans on selling a collectible baseball card that could pay for his daughter's wedding and then some, but the card is stolen by some crackheads before he can get the chance. Now Jimmy's just trying to get the card back to pay for his daughter's wedding, but him and Paul, who's too distracted with his wife's possible infidelity to really concentrate on the task at hand, are thrown into something much deeper.
To tell the truth, I wasn't looking forward to this film at all. I'm a pretty big fan of most of Kevin Smith's work, but he didn't write the film. It could be argued that he did write Jersey Girl and that could be considered a bomb, but his films usually average about $25-$30 million anyway. A Kevin Smith film isn't really about bringing in a large amount of money at the box office. His charm is in his writing, especially the dialogue and interaction between characters. There's a very specific audience his films will appeal to and none of them have really branched away from that. But him not writing this one made me think, "Eh. Not sure what that'll be like since he didn't write it." When it comes to Bruce Willis, I've never talked to anyone who dislikes him entirely. There always seems to be at least one of his films everybody enjoys. Die Hard, The Fifth Element, and Sin City are just a few off the top of my head. The real buzz-killer for me though was Tracy Morgan. He's just never been funny to me. He was beyond lame on Saturday Night Live and 30 Rock has never been able to hold my attention for very long. Not to mention all the trailers for Cop Out didn't make me laugh. Thankfully though, first impressions can be so very wrong.
One of Cop Out's biggest charms is that it feels like a buddy cop comedy you've seen before, but have forgotten how much you enjoy it. The film feels similar to a 48 Hrs or Beverly Hills Cop film. Bulletproof is also a good example. Cop Out is pretty much what you expect when it comes to roles Bruce Willis chooses as it's pretty much no different than his role as John McClane on the surface, but he's a lot funnier this time around. As far as Tracy Morgan goes, the funniest thing I could remember him saying was his one line in Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back ("Man... I don't know what the f--- you just said, Little Kid, but you're special man, you reached out, and you touched a brother's heart.") until this film. He was downright hilarious at times. The only person who was funnier than Morgan was Seann William Scott who stole every scene he was in. Even though Kevin Smith didn't pen the script this time around, it still feels like a Kevin Smith film. It could be due to the fact that Jason Lee has a small role in the film, but I like to think it's because Cop Out offers the same kind of comedy you'd find in a Kevin Smith film with a bit more action. It also took me forever to place Scarface from Half Baked as Poh Boy.
Cop Out is surprisingly funny and incredibly entertaining. Give this film a chance even if the trailers may not be doing anything for you. I felt the same way and wound up thoroughly enjoying the film. After a long, stressful day at work, an R-rated comedy with a lot of laughs is one of the best ways to relax and this film offers just that. It's a great film to go into with no expectations other than to just have a good time.
To tell the truth, I wasn't looking forward to this film at all. I'm a pretty big fan of most of Kevin Smith's work, but he didn't write the film. It could be argued that he did write Jersey Girl and that could be considered a bomb, but his films usually average about $25-$30 million anyway. A Kevin Smith film isn't really about bringing in a large amount of money at the box office. His charm is in his writing, especially the dialogue and interaction between characters. There's a very specific audience his films will appeal to and none of them have really branched away from that. But him not writing this one made me think, "Eh. Not sure what that'll be like since he didn't write it." When it comes to Bruce Willis, I've never talked to anyone who dislikes him entirely. There always seems to be at least one of his films everybody enjoys. Die Hard, The Fifth Element, and Sin City are just a few off the top of my head. The real buzz-killer for me though was Tracy Morgan. He's just never been funny to me. He was beyond lame on Saturday Night Live and 30 Rock has never been able to hold my attention for very long. Not to mention all the trailers for Cop Out didn't make me laugh. Thankfully though, first impressions can be so very wrong.
One of Cop Out's biggest charms is that it feels like a buddy cop comedy you've seen before, but have forgotten how much you enjoy it. The film feels similar to a 48 Hrs or Beverly Hills Cop film. Bulletproof is also a good example. Cop Out is pretty much what you expect when it comes to roles Bruce Willis chooses as it's pretty much no different than his role as John McClane on the surface, but he's a lot funnier this time around. As far as Tracy Morgan goes, the funniest thing I could remember him saying was his one line in Jay and Silent Bob Strike Back ("Man... I don't know what the f--- you just said, Little Kid, but you're special man, you reached out, and you touched a brother's heart.") until this film. He was downright hilarious at times. The only person who was funnier than Morgan was Seann William Scott who stole every scene he was in. Even though Kevin Smith didn't pen the script this time around, it still feels like a Kevin Smith film. It could be due to the fact that Jason Lee has a small role in the film, but I like to think it's because Cop Out offers the same kind of comedy you'd find in a Kevin Smith film with a bit more action. It also took me forever to place Scarface from Half Baked as Poh Boy.
Cop Out is surprisingly funny and incredibly entertaining. Give this film a chance even if the trailers may not be doing anything for you. I felt the same way and wound up thoroughly enjoying the film. After a long, stressful day at work, an R-rated comedy with a lot of laughs is one of the best ways to relax and this film offers just that. It's a great film to go into with no expectations other than to just have a good time.
Gareth von Kallenbach (980 KP) rated Evil dead rise (2023) in Movies
Apr 19, 2023
Usually when a film series is embarking on a fifth outing the challenges
of keeping things fresh and original yet being new and creative can be a
massive obstacle.
Horror series ranging from “Halloween” to “Friday the 13th”, “SAW”, and
“A Nightmare on Elm Street” all faced issues with moving the series along
yet trying to stay true to the original film that inspired them and in
every case; failing to fully capture what made the original film a hit.
“Evil Dead Rise” is not only the latest entry into the series but a bold
take on the cinematic series as it abandons the remote cabin setting of
the first two films and the reboot in favor of an urban setting.
The film does open in a remote lakeside locale before jumping a day
earlier to California where estranged sisters Ellie (Alyssa Sutherland)
and Beth (Lilly Sullivan) reunite. Beth has been working as a guitar
technician and bristles that her sister refers to her as a groupie.
Ellie is raising three children after their father left and informs her
sister that the building they are living in is scheduled to be demolished
so they will have to move soon which is a shock to Beth as she has learned
that she is pregnant and is trying to figure out her life all the while
seeing what she thought would be a source of stability for her upended.
The arrival of an earthquake allows access to a hidden area in the parking
garage of their building and since the locale was a former bank; the kids
soon find a hidden book and records which the only son Danny (Morgan
Davies) hopes he can sell despite his sister Bridget (Gabrielle Echols)
admonishing him constantly to leave it alone and return it to where it was
found.
The book turns out to be a Necronomicon or “Book of the Dead” and as fans
of the series know; nothing good ever comes from one and thanks to playing
old records left by a Priest describing his thoughts on the book; a
summoning incantation is read and this causes Ellie to become possessed
and unleash grotesque carnage and terror on her family.
What follows is a gory and at times intense game of cat and mouse
punctuated by moments of levity as the demonic infestation knows no end.
The film has the over-the top- gore that is expected of the series and the
makeup and effects are very effective. Writer?Director Lee Cronin has done
a great job capturing the tone of the series while moving it forward as he
cleverly incorporates lines and nods to the series without making them
seem forced.
Some may find the excess of blood too much but the series has always been
known for taking things to the extreme as the blend of horror and comedic
parody is what made the original film such a success.
In the end “Evil Dead Rise” does enough to keep fans of the series happy
and hopefully we will be seeing a new entry in the series in the future.
3.5 stars out of 5
of keeping things fresh and original yet being new and creative can be a
massive obstacle.
Horror series ranging from “Halloween” to “Friday the 13th”, “SAW”, and
“A Nightmare on Elm Street” all faced issues with moving the series along
yet trying to stay true to the original film that inspired them and in
every case; failing to fully capture what made the original film a hit.
“Evil Dead Rise” is not only the latest entry into the series but a bold
take on the cinematic series as it abandons the remote cabin setting of
the first two films and the reboot in favor of an urban setting.
The film does open in a remote lakeside locale before jumping a day
earlier to California where estranged sisters Ellie (Alyssa Sutherland)
and Beth (Lilly Sullivan) reunite. Beth has been working as a guitar
technician and bristles that her sister refers to her as a groupie.
Ellie is raising three children after their father left and informs her
sister that the building they are living in is scheduled to be demolished
so they will have to move soon which is a shock to Beth as she has learned
that she is pregnant and is trying to figure out her life all the while
seeing what she thought would be a source of stability for her upended.
The arrival of an earthquake allows access to a hidden area in the parking
garage of their building and since the locale was a former bank; the kids
soon find a hidden book and records which the only son Danny (Morgan
Davies) hopes he can sell despite his sister Bridget (Gabrielle Echols)
admonishing him constantly to leave it alone and return it to where it was
found.
The book turns out to be a Necronomicon or “Book of the Dead” and as fans
of the series know; nothing good ever comes from one and thanks to playing
old records left by a Priest describing his thoughts on the book; a
summoning incantation is read and this causes Ellie to become possessed
and unleash grotesque carnage and terror on her family.
What follows is a gory and at times intense game of cat and mouse
punctuated by moments of levity as the demonic infestation knows no end.
The film has the over-the top- gore that is expected of the series and the
makeup and effects are very effective. Writer?Director Lee Cronin has done
a great job capturing the tone of the series while moving it forward as he
cleverly incorporates lines and nods to the series without making them
seem forced.
Some may find the excess of blood too much but the series has always been
known for taking things to the extreme as the blend of horror and comedic
parody is what made the original film such a success.
In the end “Evil Dead Rise” does enough to keep fans of the series happy
and hopefully we will be seeing a new entry in the series in the future.
3.5 stars out of 5
RəX Regent (349 KP) rated Ben-Hur (2016) in Movies
Feb 20, 2019
Who thought it was a good idea to remake Ben-Hur? Well, on paper, it would seem to be a possibility. Ben-Hur has been hitting our cinema screens since 1907, with three other theatrical versions before this one; a short silent effort in 1907, the 1925 silent epic and the blockbusting MGM epic from 1959.
But this follows stage plays, TV movies and even animated movies, all based on General Lee Wallace's 1880 novel of the same name. But if a comparison is to be made, let us focus on the 1959 Charlton Heston movie. That, which ran for over three and half hours, takes its time to establish characters and situations, then takes us on a journey across the Roman Empire as we follow the turmoil of Judah Ben-Hur, betrayed by his best friend, a Roman who he considered to be a brother.
This journey takes place and parallels the life and ultimate execution of Jesus Christ and with this parallel, Judah is gradually inspired to temper his vengeance against his friend turned enemy and after the famous chariot race and the hollow victory therein, he will witness the crucifixion and through several machinations, find solace in the fledgling Christian movement.
So, how does this version hold up? To the 1959 version; not very well. This two-hour action movie is centred around the chariot race from start to finish, something which happens in the second act of the 1959 version but this is NOT the conclusion, but a catalyst for the finale.
Here, even though the events play out in a similar fashion, they are rushed and none of the character moments are earned. It is as if the film was pitched soley on the concept of showing an action packed chariot race in the 21st century.
If you want to see a modern interpretation of this race, possibly cinema's greatest such sequence, then look at Star Wars: Episode I's Podrace which captures the spirit perfectly. The positioning of this race and its significance to the plot was the same in the 1925 version as well, yet the fifteen minute 1907 short pretty much cherry picked the same plot elements as this 2016 version, which is quite telling really.
There was little interest in the story, just a cynical desire to bring this iconic movie back to the big screen and milk it as they would any franchise. But Ben-Hur is a poisoned chalice, so iconic that it would have to have offered something new without losing the original feel to succeed, as this classic simply did not warrant a remake.
But if you are going to remake it, give it a mega budget, which they did not, an all star cast, again, not the case and bring on board a top director to lead this project.
Instead we have a cast of relative unknowns, with Morgan Freeman being the most notable cast member, the director of such movies as Wanted (2007) and a small budget of just $100,000,000, when a blockbuster these days is usually pushing $200,000,000.
The main selling point for the previous two Ben-Hurs was the scale. These were epics and pushed the technology, filmmaking styles and never shied away from the strong religious overtones. Here it looks like it is given little more than lip service hoping to pander to the religious right.
It failed. Darren Aronofsky's Noah (2013) made more of an impact and it divided audiences, but at least it was faithful to itself, pushed boundaries and left its mark on cinema.
But by the end, my jaw was literally on the floor as the maimed Massalia reconciled with Judah and the pair ride off into the sunset together, all forgiven....
WHAT!!!
And more importantly, what was the point? Jesus sacrified himself, (in the story) so that people like Judah would put down their swords and learn to forgive, yet in the end, Judah and Massalia sacrifice nothing as they both regain their friendship and live happily ever after. In the previous versions, Ben-Hur beat Massalia but he has the last laugh as his mother and sister have been left with leprosy, that is until Jesus' death sparks a miracle which cures them. This was his reward for seeing the error of his ways, not getting his family and his friend back.
In the end, this is not a bad action romp, very watchable and is an entertaining spectacle but ultimately forgettable. It will entertain for two hours but leaves you with nothing to think about, unlike the books, plays and films which have preceded this.
A real shame...
But this follows stage plays, TV movies and even animated movies, all based on General Lee Wallace's 1880 novel of the same name. But if a comparison is to be made, let us focus on the 1959 Charlton Heston movie. That, which ran for over three and half hours, takes its time to establish characters and situations, then takes us on a journey across the Roman Empire as we follow the turmoil of Judah Ben-Hur, betrayed by his best friend, a Roman who he considered to be a brother.
This journey takes place and parallels the life and ultimate execution of Jesus Christ and with this parallel, Judah is gradually inspired to temper his vengeance against his friend turned enemy and after the famous chariot race and the hollow victory therein, he will witness the crucifixion and through several machinations, find solace in the fledgling Christian movement.
So, how does this version hold up? To the 1959 version; not very well. This two-hour action movie is centred around the chariot race from start to finish, something which happens in the second act of the 1959 version but this is NOT the conclusion, but a catalyst for the finale.
Here, even though the events play out in a similar fashion, they are rushed and none of the character moments are earned. It is as if the film was pitched soley on the concept of showing an action packed chariot race in the 21st century.
If you want to see a modern interpretation of this race, possibly cinema's greatest such sequence, then look at Star Wars: Episode I's Podrace which captures the spirit perfectly. The positioning of this race and its significance to the plot was the same in the 1925 version as well, yet the fifteen minute 1907 short pretty much cherry picked the same plot elements as this 2016 version, which is quite telling really.
There was little interest in the story, just a cynical desire to bring this iconic movie back to the big screen and milk it as they would any franchise. But Ben-Hur is a poisoned chalice, so iconic that it would have to have offered something new without losing the original feel to succeed, as this classic simply did not warrant a remake.
But if you are going to remake it, give it a mega budget, which they did not, an all star cast, again, not the case and bring on board a top director to lead this project.
Instead we have a cast of relative unknowns, with Morgan Freeman being the most notable cast member, the director of such movies as Wanted (2007) and a small budget of just $100,000,000, when a blockbuster these days is usually pushing $200,000,000.
The main selling point for the previous two Ben-Hurs was the scale. These were epics and pushed the technology, filmmaking styles and never shied away from the strong religious overtones. Here it looks like it is given little more than lip service hoping to pander to the religious right.
It failed. Darren Aronofsky's Noah (2013) made more of an impact and it divided audiences, but at least it was faithful to itself, pushed boundaries and left its mark on cinema.
But by the end, my jaw was literally on the floor as the maimed Massalia reconciled with Judah and the pair ride off into the sunset together, all forgiven....
WHAT!!!
And more importantly, what was the point? Jesus sacrified himself, (in the story) so that people like Judah would put down their swords and learn to forgive, yet in the end, Judah and Massalia sacrifice nothing as they both regain their friendship and live happily ever after. In the previous versions, Ben-Hur beat Massalia but he has the last laugh as his mother and sister have been left with leprosy, that is until Jesus' death sparks a miracle which cures them. This was his reward for seeing the error of his ways, not getting his family and his friend back.
In the end, this is not a bad action romp, very watchable and is an entertaining spectacle but ultimately forgettable. It will entertain for two hours but leaves you with nothing to think about, unlike the books, plays and films which have preceded this.
A real shame...
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.