Reviews

This is one of those rare films where my expectations were not only a bit higher than normal, but they were also equally fulfilled.

Nolan is giving us a number of stories here, almost more like a Gotham Chronicles story than JUST a Batman story. This film is as much about Jim Gordon, Harvey Dent and even the every day people of Gotham as much as it is about Bruce Wayne/Batman or the Joker.

What impressed me about the writing is how Nolan was able to convey, in a very real-world sense, the anxiety and life-questions that a man like Bruce Wayne would have to make as a true, living breathing crime fighting vigilante. There was cause and effect of being such a figure and his impact had more repercussions than he foresaw. The psychological warfare between Batman and the Joker (even Dent) is mostly well-handled and illustrated, adding a nice layer of richness to the film's finished product. However, sometimes Nolan tries to include TOO MUCH, and there's times where scenes are left a bit unfinished or have loose ends, which is too bad, but mostly forgivable.

On the flip-side of "real-world" sensibility, one personal disappointment is that the credo of Nolan's Batman about "realism" (technically and physically) is nowhere to be found here. All the care and effort to explain Batman's gadgets, his trials and errors as a rooftop leaping vigilante all are gone. We don't see the time it takes Wayne to develop something of Fox's into his Batsuit or repertoire. In one scene he's shown it, the next he's using it in almost unbelievable scope and fashion. Much of the action demands much more suspension of disbelief (unlike in Begins), and a lot of it plays out like a James Bond film. In fact, this is more or less "Batman 007", which ultimately, isn't such a bad thing since we're talking comic source material here. Nolan makes up for this deviation with purely satisfying Batman fanfare action sequences and capturing our hero at his best.

The film is a bit bleak and very dark in tone - Nolan doesn't pull a lot of punches and the result is plenty of moments of grim suspense and anticipation. This is wholly satisfying for many Batman fans, especially the Joker, who is played at his darkest core. I found myself holding my breath with anticipation at a few moments, and Nolan seems to change up the outcomes JUST enough to keep you guessing. I wouldn't recommend this to kids under 12 or so. Not so much gory, as it is intense subject matter and mature themes.

I found the performances of all the cast to be top-notch. In fact, the Joker (exceptionally well-played by Ledger) begins the film as a question mark, and ends it just the same, which I think was sort of the angle here. His purpose is more or less to force Batman to question his own limits and reasons for purpose, using madness for this reason above logic, making him Batman's most enigmatic foe.

We also get to see the promotion of Jim Gordon to Commissioner, which was anticipated given his lesser badge status in Begins. Oldman steps up his game from Begins, and his role serves as the best view for the audience.

Maggie Gyllenhaal is a more watchable Rachel Dawes, but her character is little more than a device here. By the end of the Dark Knight, it's clear her purpose was far better suited in Begins as Bruce's childhood friend. Still, Gyllenhaal is plenty serviceable and doesn't take an ounce away here.

Harvey Dent is perhaps, the biggest surprise of the story and I was impressed with Aaron Eckhart's performance. His story is perhaps the greatest arc of the film, although I thought his "point of no return" was a little rushed and hard to believe.

Morgan Freeman is back as our new favorite "Q", Lucias Fox, offering up new technology for Batman's disposal...but we also get to see a bit of his role as head of Wayne Corporation and his own personal convictions and responsibilities.

In the end, I would qualify the Dark Knight as the the best Batman film to date, going back as far as you want to. I can also say this is quite possibly the best COMIC film to date. But what surprised me, was that this was one of the best CRIME films I've seen in a long time.

The Dark Knight offers plenty of bang for your buck.

Despite the fact that I grew up with Sly films, I'm not a huge Rambo fan. But no one can deny the character's place as the iconic action hero. I admit that when I heard Stallone was reviving Rambo (as well as Rocky), I was more than skeptical. But both films were dutifully faithful to their respective franchises and profess now that I was wrong about Stallone - he has garnered my full respect as a quality director and film maker, at least within the confines of his own beloved franchises.

In the case of Rambo, Stallone pulls no punches (no pun intended.) Here we get another glimpse of John Rambo as a lost man. We also get to see him lay down untold destruction on a group of Burmese militia, lead by a very sadistic leader.

This is hardly a brainy film, but who would ever expect a Rambo film to be so? What we DO expect is something dramatic and intense action and on the surface, Rambo delivers in spades. But the film's underlying beauty is its message about the true terrors of Burma and like countries. Of course this film is fictional, but Stallone did plenty of research; even the chief villain (Maung Maung Khin) is a former freedom fighter in Burma and I'm sure added his own nightmarish accounts of the realities of the situation.

And let me say this now, this film is a blood bath, but not in a Hollywood sense....in a very realistic sense. When you watch this movie, remember that is happening RIGHT NOW, somewhere in the world. These scenes are the same that can be found in Iraq too.

Not a huge fan of mindless action, nor a violence-junkie, I was surprised by how visceral and powerful this film is. Not for the faint of heart, but if you're a fan of old-school, brutal action films, don't miss it.

It's also a lean 91 minutes long, which is very welcome in today's Holloywood bloating of 2+ hours films.

An excerpt from my comment on Pirates: Dead Man's Chest applies flawlessly here:

"It suffers from all the pitfalls you fear going into a sequel...bloated budget, very little growth from the main characters, overly-complicated plot, countless unnecessary scenes of which very few carry any sort of punch, etc."

It's clear from the outset that Lucas and Spielberg were zeroed in on the punchy, pulp fiction action that Indy was first conceived, vs. catering to a more modern, movie-going audience. If you go into it expecting a freshly scripted, character-enriching experience, you'll likely be disappointed. If you're looking for a nostalgic popcorn-popper, chances are you'll be satisfied.

Many will cry foul over the film's plot being related to aliens. That was the center of pulp fiction in the 50s and clearly that was important to the writers here. I can't argue with the creators in terms of their subject matter, but I will say this: the alien theme, while I understand its origins in the mind of the filmmakers, was a big and VERY NEEDLESS jump in the genre. It reminded me of what a new writer does to a previously existing successful series in any medium, such as a TV show, or comic book. They've got hundreds, if not thousands, of mythologies to choose from and they settle on...campy, American pop culture? A really risky premise and unfortunately, a theme that Lucas insisted on. But hey! It's Lucas' baby, we need to accept the premise to move on, which bring me to frankly, the biggest and most glaring problem....the STORY/SCRIPT/PLOT.

Detailed points:

1. The entire Area 51 sequence: TOTALLY UNNECESSARY. The story could easily have started from the university. Mutt could have been introduced with a lot more care and in such a way I cared when it happened. We could have learned a LOT more about their chemistry and relationship instead of wasting time at Area 51. The same goes for the nuclear testing scene - 100% UN-NEEDED.

2. CARTOONISH VILLAIN and SUPPORTING CHARACTERS - Spalko, played by the very talented and capable Cate Blanchett, is easily the weakest villain in any IJ film to date, being outmatched by not only predecessors, but previous SUB-villains. Case in point - I was more loathsome of the antics of the Nazi general from Crusades, or the slimy Toht of Raiders than Spalko. We never see her worst deeds. Why should we hate her? I knew why I wanted to see previous villains fail, but not so here. More squandered talent in Jonh Hurt and Ray Winstone - their characters were also two-dimensional and forgettable. Again, these issues are a symptom of a bad script.

3. TONS OF PLOT EXPOSITION USING DIALOGUE instead of imagery, actions or scenes. Are you kidding me? This is SPIELBERG. This is LUCAS. And yet they STILL fall into this amateur trap that's preached in Film-making 101? This was the majority of my problem following the details of the story, because it was fed to me through laborious blocks of dialogue. I honestly can't recall how scenes were linked together...there's no "dots" for me to follow having just watched it.

4. ASPECTS OF LOVE. Maybe it's just me, but the way that Marion was re-introduced and the whole "family" dynamic were really flat. Marion seemed more like a token shoe-in than the fiery character we knew and grew to love in Raiders. Another NEEDLESS character. This only made the wedding scene a bigger question mark and awkward. There was NO buildup to that outcome and frankly, the idea of getting married doesn't fir either character AT ALL. They make better adventure buddies that have spurs of passion for one another, but know it would never work between them. THAT is the Indiana and Marion we know and love.... pragmatic and stubborn. No where to be found here.

5. FLAT ENDING. By the end of this film, I need to understand INDIANA JONES better. Just like I did at the end of Temple of Doom. Just like I did at the end of Last Crusade. But here? I knew nothing more about him. No new leaf turned. Just kind of going through the motions of what the filmmakers THINK we need to see of him. And even in THAT respect, the scripts fails - little use of the whip, a pistol or even most glaring yet....

His WITS! Pay attention....this film included NO part of Indy using his ingenuity or outwitting the bad guys when his back was against the wall. I found myself out-thinking the film. That should never happen.

Then there's all the more petty complaints that people have that many I agree with, but were not the most damaging, such as the nuclear testing sequence, the Tarzan and Brando homages, etc. These were somewhat tacky elements, but FORGIVABLE if the story/plot/script is any good at all, which unfortunately and almost inconceivably, is not true here.

I think the reality is, this is a franchise that is not meant for modern thinking movie goers. The suspension of disbelief is harder to come by. That isn't to take anything away from Indiana Jones, it's just a simple observation that timing is almost just as critical as subject matter in the formula for success. But it's also glaringly apparent that Lucas is totally out of touch with movie goers and his audience. I really wish that when he considered reviving the Star Wars and Indiana Jones franchises, he realized that such beloved treasures as those had NOTHING to gain, yet EVERYTHING to lose. Crystal Skull is, unfortunately, another unnecessary black mark on Lucas' legacy, not unlike Phantom Menace or Attack of the Clones.

Despite my disappointment and long-winded criticisms, many will enjoy this film for what it is. Still, one can't help but be befuddled that after 19 years, this is best the Lucas and Spielberg could come up with.

I enjoyed this film, but make no mistake - it is a popcorn film, so take it for what it's worth.

Not even being an avid film or literary buff, I could name half a dozen other films or books this movie borrows from - the action (the Matrix), premise of thought police (Orwell's "1984"), mood control (Dick's "Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep") and even the final scene (Fight Club).

The biggest problem for me is the premise itself as I found it somewhat difficult to believe - the idea that to eliminate the threat of war, society has been reduced to the point where they all consciously (though under law) sedate themselves, lest they "feel", which is punishable by death with no due process or trial. I had a difficult time taking scenes seriously where cops are raiding warehouses where stereotypical thugs are moving illegal goods such as...paintings? Lamps? Trinkets? I guess Wimmer needed some physical representation for people being guilty of "feeling", but these types of notions just seemed like reaching for straws.

Being such a far-fetched reality is problematic is more ways than just the suspension of disbelief of the viewer - it also makes it nearly impossible for the actors to remain true to the premise. There are times when the authoritative figures themselves show emotions of happiness, satisfaction, or anger. It really seems more like a drug that eliminates all GOOD feelings, not ALL feelings. This is also consistent with how the law is upheld.

I felt the above problems could be solved in one of two ways:

1. Set in an obviously DISTANT future. This is how the Matrix sells the idea of us being "batteries" in a completely dystopia earth. Yes, Equilibrium is clearly set in the future, but there is little to suggest that it isn't near future. There's really no futuristic technology, so again, the idea of "feeling" being illegal (something that makes up our very essence) is just too far fetched for most viewers.

2. The other means of fixing it would be to have set the entire thing on an alien planet with an alien race. In my opinion, this would have been the best setting as it takes away from our innate rejection of such a premise and ultimately, a more original idea.

Even given the above complaints, the film has great production value. Wimmer does a nice job of putting you in this world. I felt the pacing was good and it was as well acted as one could hope under the film's premise. There were moments that did their job, such as several "crossroads" scenes, where Bale's character is put on the spot, between a rock and a hard place and you hold your breath wondering what he'll do.

In the end, if you're looking for a decent sci-fi futuristic action flick, this is certainly worth a viewing. If you're a film stickler and bent on original content, or something overly cerebral, it's probably a pass.

How hard is it to write a watchable film with Vince Vaughn, Paul Giamatti and Kevin Spacey? Apparently VERY difficult for the writers here.

I still have no idea how Santa is younger and looks 20 years older than Vince (who plays the BIG brother). I must have missed that part of the story but in reality, it really didn't matter. Many scenes seemed out of place and contrived; the kind of "funny notion" scenes that are drug out WAY too far to where any sense of comedy is lost.

The director/producer tried to go "tear jerker" at the end, which would have been suitable if ANYTHING leading up that point had been worth following.

Ugh, major disappointment. I can see how some people might enjoy this OK, since many people will take any garbage they're fed, but I would strongly encourage waiting for DVD on this one. NOT worth the $23,978 it takes to get your family to the movies these days.

Quick note to all screenwriters, both aspiring and established - any attempted humorous bit using of the song "Staying Alive" is no longer funny or acceptable under ANY circumstances.

I literally got drowsy watching this film, mostly because it's almost 100% regurgitation with almost no original elements to allow it to stand on its own.

The primary plot is simple, but the editing and pacing seemed off for the whole movie...including mis-timed music inserts that seemed put in more for the sake of it, rather than anything necessary. Even the voice talent was flat. Madonna and De Niro? Neither did anything for me and the parts probably would have been better served by starving talent. Freddie Highmore and Mia Farrow are fine, are hindered by the script.

To be fair, most kids will probably enjoy this, strictly from the fantasy element. But it's hardly worth the $4,000 (estimated) is takes to see a movie in the theaters these days.

*CONTAINTS SPOILERS!* While good action sequences and flawless special effects hit the mark, there's far too much fluff and predictability and qualify this as a great film. I'd dare call it a mess.

It suffers from all the pitfalls you fear going into a sequel...bloated budget, very little growth from the main characters, overly-complicated plot, countless unnecessary scenes of which very few carry any sort of punch, etc.

The biggest problem? The screenwriters clearly were writing to cram in every square inch of anything popular in the first film and force these elements to carry the whole picture....and carry it...and carry it...etc.

Some examples - Depp's initially amusing character comes off as very 2-dimentional and cartoon-ish, repeating literally one of 2-3 mannerisms throughout every scene. Honestly one of his less memorable performances, but it's really the fault of the script more than Depp.

Keira Knightley's character goes from convincing Sparrow to "be a good man", then when he does so, she does a complete 180 and makes out with him, ultimately to trick him so that she and the other crew members can escape free and clear of the Kraken. What? That's hardly the Elizabeth Swann we've come to know and understand. Also her death defying sword play compared to her flailing around helplessly like an 8-year old girl when "the boys" fight. This contrast is too stark to overlook.

The inclusion of Norrington is paper thin, and totally unnecessary....not even his completely unexplained connection to the "white-wigged bad guy" saves his role. And by the way, I refer to him as "the white-wigged bad guy" because I have no idea who he was, except obviously someone powerful and holds the key to Turner, Swann and Sparrow's pardon and freedom. Why he was even seeking the "treasure" is never made clear.

There was very little drama…no emotional punch whatsoever.

On the plus side, the action sequences were well-done, especially the Kraken scenes. The special effects for the Flying Dutchman crew and Davy Jones were excellent as well (Bill Nighy's performance is commendable and on par with Geoffrey Rush.)

If you have a deep love for the fabled stories of the sea (Davy Jones, the Flying Dutchman, the Kraken, etc.) then this is worth a watch. If you're into mindless Hollywood entertainment, this is worth a watch.

But if you're looking for a sequel that takes everything you loved from the first film and takes it all further, don't get your hopes up. It's all about the money behind re-hash values, not substance.

***MINOR SPOILERS AHEAD*** Well, for those of us who consider themselves Tim Burton fans, this film doesn't disappoint. Burton is yet again able to connect to a wider audience, while still interjecting his darker style and presence. Johnny Depp as Wonka is somewhat of a Jekyll & Hyde character....removed from human contact long before the Gold Ticket winning children arrive; all the while he struggles with his own inner demons when it comes to children, human empathy in general and a closeness to those he loves (in this case, his father.) As expected from Burton, the film's environment and world is greatly exaggerated, which is as the story calls for. Freddie Highmore and David Kelly add a more believable and human side to the film, while Wonka provides the mad hatter elements and quirky dialog. Sometimes his mannerisms and demeanor work and sometimes they don't.

As with most films these days, they could have shaved 20 minutes off of it to keep its pace. For me, that would have included cutting the relatively worthless musical numbers that we're subjected to as each child is dramatically sucked into the factory's inner workings.

However, the message is what we're left with, which is ultimately to be grateful for what you have and good things will come to you. We finally connect more with Wonka as he accepts the concept of family and allowing people to be close to him.

Definitely worth a viewing for visuals alone and memorable performances from Depp and company to boot.

This is a great comedy all the way through, though it fails to escape some of the most cliché romantic comedy traps. Such as the final "profession of love" sequence. However, I found myself laughing out loud throughout the entire film, and that for me, is rare.

Vince Vaughn and Owen Wilson play their parts flawlessly, especially Vaughn. He's at his best in this type of role, a character reminiscent of his breakout performance in Swingers, though he ultimately shows more depth here.

Though the story often times seems over the top and contrived, it all seems perfectly OK and as a viewer wanting to be simply entertained, it does so well. Besides, there are enough genuine offbeat scenes and humor to keep it fresh (the Vaughn bedroom scene comes to mind).

The whole nudity issue that seems to be so prevalent in the hype is GROSSLY OVERRATED. I'm not even sure why anyone who has seen it would think twice of it. All the nudity is not much more than flashes; certainly nothing to warrant the buzz it has created.

In the end, this is a genuinely funny film and worth seeing, especially for fans of Vaughn, Wilson or Rachel McAdams.

As a pure side note, I was surprised that most of the people in the theta when I saw it were significantly older, most over 55. I guess its appeal is more wide spread than one might think.

Man oh man. Lucas and company have done the unexpected, which was pull off a near masterpiece to salvage the prequels and perhaps the entire Star Wars franchise as a whole among its deepest fans, which I consider myself to be.

Technically and visually, this is perhaps the best film of all six. True enough, nothing will take away from the magic of any of the first three, but this film can easily be held in their ranks and in many ways, goes beyond. It's almost a stand-alone film, with only the back-story of the Clone Wars being necessary to fully understand it. It could have easily been the only film of the prequels and been just as satisfying.

I'll spare you the plot that so many of you know; what is finally touched here is an emotional understanding within the Star Wars universe, much like both EMPIRE and RETURN OF THE JEDI were to able to capture through the relationship between Luke and Vader. What are captured are many things: a history and deeper portrayal of Palpatine and his rise to power. The pain of Obi-Wan as he watches his apprentice fail. The burning desires of Padmé to retire with Anakin and their baby to a life of normality, free of politics and code. Lastly, we bear witness to the walls caving in around Anakin in his attempt to maintain balance between the Republic he has been always sworn to protect, his wife and unborn child(ren) and finally his ambition for power to protect all of the above.

Lucas takes the time to allow the viewer to absorb the events unfolding, to demonstrate the scale of the dark curtain known as the Empire falling and lastly, to show the beauty of the Star Wars universe.

Though I would regard SITH as perhaps the most emotional of all six films, it still maintains a breakneck pace of action and sheer visual splendor. He uses elements that have been void of all six films, which only enhance the film's flavor, such as dream sequences, and cinematics that again, allow the viewer to take in the rich environments.

The pacing of the film is very well done, far better than either Episode I or II. The stunning visuals, sounds and design are right there with the likes of the Lord of the Rings trilogy and perhaps beyond, because the worlds are all immersive. You're never once reminded that you're sitting on earth in packed movie house. You always remain in that galaxy far, far away.

The performances of Ewan McGregor, Ian McDiarmid and (mostly) Hayden Christensen (whose performance did not impress me in ATTACK OF THE CLONES) are standouts, especially McGregor and McDiarmid.

I know that I was taken to the first two Star Wars films when I was young, but I only remember going to RETURN OF THE JEDI (I was 7.) This film brought closure to all of the prequels and has now enriched the originals even further. Because in the end, despite such grim events transpiring, you're left with a glimmer of hope that inspires you to root for the likes of Luke, Obi-Wan, Yoda (and ultimately, Vader) all over again.

Hats of to Lucas and all hands on deck, this is a must see film for any Star Wars fan and even those who have yet to discover its magic.