It's been over two weeks since my last post coinciding with the release of The Dark Knight Rises. There are several reasons behind the lateness of this overdue post that I have been looking forward to writing. First and foremost, I didn't want to launch into an overemotional and uncontrolled diatribe regarding the tragedy in Colorado. On the other hand, it would be wrong of me to say I wasn't affected by it, or to not acknowledge it, so here goes the summary of my feelings towards this event:
- My deepest sympathies go out to the victims and their families, whose only wrongdoing was to go to a midnight showing of a film they could have only been extremely excited for, a sentiment I can easily sympathise with.
- I can't even imagine how Nolan and company reacted to the horrible news that yet another work of art is shrouded in tragedy. Four years ago, the world lost Heath Ledger during the post-production of The Dark Knight, which is widely recognised as 'the film that killed Heath Ledger'. Understandably, Nolan had second thoughts about doing the third film at all based upon how Ledger's death affected him. Now we'll have TDKR as 'the film when the Aurora shootings happened'. That sucks, and I can only hope that the artists responsible for this film do not in any way consider themselves responsible.
- Fuck this fit-for-a-straitjacket, thinks-the-Joker-has-red-hair douchebag sideways and send him to the special hell. The End.
OK, out of my system. Now on to the good bits.
Four years ago, The Dark Knight revolutionised the 'Comic Book Movie' and the 'Summer Blockbuster' in two and a half glorious hours of screen time. It showed that, while straying from the source material, a comic adaptation can truly be a legitimate work of film. It shed new light on and innovated classic characters, specifically the iconic Joker, brought to us by Ledger in an Oscar winning performance in a way never seen before by an audience. The film was made even more notorious, again, by the death of Ledger, catapulting TDK into instant cult status. This film is one of my all-time favourites and should be considered one of the best films ever made.
Now, how can a sequel live up to that? Quick answer is that it doesn't.
Seriously, there was no way TDKR wasn't going to be overhyped. The follow up to a film like TDK is dangerous work and is likely to disappoint the most loyal of fanboys the first time through, present company included. I had no idea what I was walking into that Friday afternoon (Hey, Galaxy Cinemas: suck a dick for not having midnight showings) and after having seen it, had no idea how I felt about it. Of course people in my life started throwing out their problems with the film, some of which I agreed with, but I wouldn't let them influence my feelings towards the film. I just hadn't figured out what those feelings were.
And so I went again...and again...and again...and again.
Five showings of one film later, I have my answer for you, my dear readers. But first let's go through the little things.
The movie looked perfect. I even found the scenes, especially at night, clearer than it's predecessors. The score was also on par with the previous films, with the ominous chanting making its appearance poignantly throughout. It made every scene in which it appeared seem more...important, I guess you could say.
The movie looked perfect. I even found the scenes, especially at night, clearer than it's predecessors. The score was also on par with the previous films, with the ominous chanting making its appearance poignantly throughout. It made every scene in which it appeared seem more...important, I guess you could say.
The mainstays do their work well here. Bale continues on as my favourite non-animated Batman; and Caine, Freeman, and Oldman deliver with all the poise you'd expect, all giving established characters a humbled realism that refreshingly stray from their roots as comic book characters. The dilemmas these normal people face are reacted to very understandably and realistically, especially in regards to Alfred's relationship with Bruce. The comic fanboy might watch some of the things that happen in this film and scream 'THAT WOULD NEVER HAPPEN', but sit down and think for a goddamn second. In the realest of worlds where Batman exists, things would totally go down this way.
The new people are what make this movie different from Begins and TDK, in both good and bad ways. I've heard criticisms regarding Anne Hathaway's portrayal of Catwoman as being too much of a 'good guy', to which I say pick up any comic book with Catwoman in it for the last, oh I don't know, 20 years. Catwoman is the quintessential True Neutral character for the DC universe. Yes, her origins began as a villain, and she can still be one at times, but she typically does what's in her best interests, and that usually means not fucking around with the Goddamn Batman. Joseph Gordon Levitt was also great in this as the jaded cop looking to help, and was probably the most relatable character on the list. Did the movie focus too much on him? I'll get to that later.
Bane. I could talk for days about how much I loved this guy. When I first heard that Bane was headlining the last of Nolan's Batfilms, two things came to mind:
- Whaaaaaaaaaa?
- The back breaking scene best be in this movie.
The voice threw me off for the first viewing of the film, but upon revisiting, it grew on me. I can certainly understand why people didn't appreciate it, but like Bane himself, it was a necessary evil. The appearance of Bane in his mask and quasi-mechanical voice just screams intimidation. You see this guy on the streets and you'd go, 'Haha, OK, time to go.' But for the purpose of this film, he couldn't just be that guy. He had to be able to convey emotion, garner trust, and be empathetic in the eyes of the people he was taking rule of in order to influence them. The inflections in his voice remind me of good ol' Patrick Stewart (fitting considering Tom Hardy played Stewart's clone in Star Trek Nemesis), and really, who would you rather have in control of your city than Capt. Picard or Professor X?
Do I shake my finger at Bane for not being fuelled by super-steroids? Absolutely not. That would be the same as getting pissed that Joker wasn't the result of throwing a gangster into a vat of chemicals. It's comic book ridiculous in a film embracing realism, and venom had no place in it. I think that if people were disappointed by Bane, it's because he wasn't Joker. But like I said before, there's no living up to those standards. He was a fitting villain for the story told in TDKR, and an awesome one at that.
Do I shake my finger at Bane for not being fuelled by super-steroids? Absolutely not. That would be the same as getting pissed that Joker wasn't the result of throwing a gangster into a vat of chemicals. It's comic book ridiculous in a film embracing realism, and venom had no place in it. I think that if people were disappointed by Bane, it's because he wasn't Joker. But like I said before, there's no living up to those standards. He was a fitting villain for the story told in TDKR, and an awesome one at that.
Now I'll get to the story itself. The problems I originally had with this plot were closely tied to the hype the film had following TDK. It was long, unnecessarily convoluted, and let's face it: there didn't seem to be a lot of Batman. I do still think that Bane's plan to manipulate and lull the citizens of Gotham into a false sense of hope was unnecessary considering he was just going to blow them up regardless, but since that's the way the story went, it was well put together. I also don't feel comfortable with the '8 years later' aspect of the beginning of the film as I feel it was used as a crutch to pull a Chris Benoit on Ledger's Joker, striking him from the records and pretending it didn't happen rather than honour his memory in some fashion. They go on and on about Harvey Dent, but no mention of the man that drove him to what he became. It's a little thing that really wasn't needed in this film, but it drove me nuts nonetheless. Now, I mentioned the thing with the John Blake character being featured a little too much, considering he's brand new and unestablished in the Batman lore. The first viewing, this pissed me off. Again, with every viewing, I got more OK with it simply because the character played an important role in proving some of the crucial points overarching the trilogy. Also, it was nice to have a relatable character in all this mess, and Gordon-Levitt did a great job being that guy, with a fresh perspective similar to that of the audience.
The biggest complaint I've heard is regarding the lack of Batman throughout the film. In a near three-hour long film, you have maybe 30 minutes of Bats. On paper, that sucks, but here's the thing. This is not an individual movie, like other threequels can be. It is a conclusion to a single story that began with Batman Begins, was continued in TDK, and this is how it ends. Also, you need to recognise that this is not even how it was supposed to end. The final film was to again follow Joker and the rise of the super villain, in one form or another, but it was not to be. As far as back-up endings go, this one's pretty damn good. This film takes important elements of the previous movies and brings them around full circle. It's one long story split up, not three different stories, and therein lies why it's OK for Batman to not be in as much of this film. Look at Lord of the Rings, for example. Those are three excruciatingly long films all surrounding a ring, but neither that ring or it's bearer are on screen for more than half of the series' running time. Everyone was talking about it, motivated by it, and there was no question the story was about this ring. In this scenario, Batman is the fucking ring.
The film won me over with the portrayal of certain scenes that I found epic beyond words and consider to be some of the greatest scenes in a movie that I've ever witnessed. The Gotham bombing comes to mind, with the collapsing of the football field and destruction of the bridges. The moment during the National Anthem where Bane says 'That's a lovely, lovely voice' I find humanises a character that didn't have much humanity in him, and I appreciated it. The conclusion of the film had an emotional impact on me, as anyone who knows me could assume. It spoke to me in many ways as a fan of the character and lore. But the hero of the day here was the first encounter between Bane and Batman. The scene as portrayed in the comics is built up as this great confrontation between Bats and a villain he barely knows who can match him mentally as well as physically, a match that he has never seen up to that point. The face-off was extremely well built up and tension filled, up to the finish with Bane breaking Batman's back. It is one of the most iconic scenes in the character's lore and one of my favourite Bat-moments. I was almost worried that this was not to be included in this film once learning of Bane being cast, but I was pleasantly surprised. The meeting between Batman and Bane, from the dark sewer environment, to the silence of the background, the sounds of the fight itself, everything created this severely intense moving picture. The entire time I was amazed by how this scene came together, and kept thinking 'Jesus Christ, he's getting his ass kicked...', not something a fan is used to thinking about in regards to the Dark Knight. It fucking delivers, and made me so very happy.
In conclusion, I feel that TDKR suffers from 'Star Wars Syndrome', which is a thing I just invented (you're welcome). Return of the Jedi was great, and a terrific ending to the story, but The Empire Strikes Back was the better movie. The same is true here. For the story that was told from start to finish, TDKR was a great conclusion. Every important point that has been stressed throughout the films was established here. The ideals of the Batman carry on, regardless of Bruce Wayne's actual involvement. Balance and Justice can be attained without going to extremes. It was as real an ending as it could be considering the source material, and I'm glad to see it end because it should, and not because it just couldn't make money any more. So many franchises, TV shows especially, drag on after their prime just because there is still some money in it. Nolan ended this series the way he wanted it and saw that it was done.
Now, as I predicted, they are already talking about a reboot of the series, but straying from this and going back to a more sci-fi/fantasy way of going about things. I'll look forward to that, but am more than happy to see my favourite character of all time portrayed in this fashion.
Thank you, Christopher Nolan. Keep doing things.
Knight Owl
In conclusion, I feel that TDKR suffers from 'Star Wars Syndrome', which is a thing I just invented (you're welcome). Return of the Jedi was great, and a terrific ending to the story, but The Empire Strikes Back was the better movie. The same is true here. For the story that was told from start to finish, TDKR was a great conclusion. Every important point that has been stressed throughout the films was established here. The ideals of the Batman carry on, regardless of Bruce Wayne's actual involvement. Balance and Justice can be attained without going to extremes. It was as real an ending as it could be considering the source material, and I'm glad to see it end because it should, and not because it just couldn't make money any more. So many franchises, TV shows especially, drag on after their prime just because there is still some money in it. Nolan ended this series the way he wanted it and saw that it was done.
Now, as I predicted, they are already talking about a reboot of the series, but straying from this and going back to a more sci-fi/fantasy way of going about things. I'll look forward to that, but am more than happy to see my favourite character of all time portrayed in this fashion.
Thank you, Christopher Nolan. Keep doing things.
Knight Owl
No comments:
Post a Comment