"The Dark Knight Rises"

So, I purposely waited on writing my review of this movie because I needed and wanted to see it at least a second time to solidify my opinion on the movie. After seeing it a second time, I now want to see it a third time to further, further solidify my opinion. But as it goes, I have seen this movie twice now and whilst is may not be a great movie, it is still a really good movie that I really liked. Christopher Nolan really did himself a disservice when he made "The Dark Knight." How, in heaven or on earth, could he live up the the expectations? The answer? He couldn't. It was impossible. Again, that's not to say that "The Dark Knight Rises" isn't a good movie. It is indeed a very good movie. There's just too many great parts for it to not at least be better than good. But to say that it's as good or better than "The Dark Knight" is absolute silliness. In my opinion, I even liked "Batman Begins" more. But just because I liked those movies more, it doesn't mean I didn't like this one. There are few movies that I like more than those two movie. So, first up we should discuss the good, and first up is Anne Hathaway as Selina Kyle. I'm listing this first because she was probably the biggest surprise to me. I thought she was great in her adapting personas to fit her given situations, her facade of who she pretended to be as "Catwoman" (which I'm very glad they never actually used the term "Catwoman") and who she really was, and just in general a surprisingly good, solid, and believable performance. Not once did I think to myself that she couldn't win in any fight she was in. Let us next move to the villain Bane. I loved his voice! Once I was able to tune into it, which was pretty quick, it was incredible. He was a big, ferocious, mean man. The fight scenes between him and Batman were incredible, living up to and exceeding all expectations in that category. It was brutally painful to watch as he destroyed Batman and his monologuing (because what villain doesn't monologue?) during that scene was brilliant. A small thing, but one I liked, was how he was just huge. He wasn't cut, with rippling pectorals and an 8-pack abdomen, he was just big, and I'm glad of that. He was a true menace with a plan to carry out and no one his equal to stop him. As for the usual suspects, they were great in reprising their roles.* As far as other aspects, concentration must be given to the story. It was great to see the contrast between the opening scene of the foreboding pain headed toward Gotham and how in Gotham itself we began slow, it was peaceful, and a veritable victory against organized crime. The escalation of tension and trouble that followed was superb as it lead up to the breaking of the Batman. How can one not shout for joy when Batman finally returns? The line delivered by the cop ("Oh boy, you are in for a show tonight, son!") couldn't sum up the feeling that every audience member should have been feeling any better. This was not just a return of the Batman to Gotham, this was a return of the Batman and Gotham to us the audience. It was a spectacular moment in the escalating trouble. That constant build up was almost as captivating as Batman's rise from the prison and the culminating war led by these two larger than life individuals. To see the police finally realizing the symbol that Batman was, the hope he provided, and the lead that they should follow was downright inspiring. It was amazing to see that fulfillment of Batman's hope of inspiring good in people to take back their city. It was equally fantastic seeing Bane versus Batman: Part II as it was watching Part I. Batman was still getting destroyed, but you also saw and realized that Batman hadn't given the people of Gotham everything just yet, and he was well on his way to doing so, and it showed in the fight and in his choices later. Now in repeating all these things I liked about the movie, it's hard to understand why I didn't think it was great, but this movie is far from without problems. Whilst this movie was filled with great parts, it didn't seem to quite fit together as a whole very well. "Disjointed" was the word shared with me by one J. Micah when I was expressing this and I kind of agree. The flow wasn't quite there and part of it I think had to do with the gap between the breaking of Batman and his subsequent rise. That was a longer time period to cover and I feel it may have broken up the flow too much. But it defense of this break, that sequence may cause the viewer to feel as if it's going slow and stir impatience in waiting for what's next, and you have to imagine that's what the people of Gotham were also feeling, but most likely with a little more dread and despair than the audience. Now, despite the emotional investment I had from the simple fact that the prequels caused me to have one and the emotional parts that existed throughout, I didn't feel as emotionally invested as previous installments. The focus on making this movie bigger and better was on the larger scale action and situation. This seemed to take away from the emotional story a bit for me. As much as I enjoyed the addition of Joseph Gordon-Levitt's character, he seemed like a contrived character, at least in his purpose of guiding us and Bruce through the emotional journey of Mr. Wayne. I didn't like how he "just knew" that Bruce Wayne was Batman from seeing him when he was a boy and thought he wasn't needed for us to know, understand, or see Bruce's journey, Alfred or Lucius who already knew could have served that purpose. At the same time, it may not have been as important for him to guide Bruce's journey as it was for Bruce to guide his. As far as the ending of this movie and this trilogy goes, I really did like it, and would say love it except for one thing I'm slightly torn by. And whilst torn on the issue, it's also one of the reasons I love the ending. I did find it much more satisfying the second time around, but that could have been just because I now knew what was coming and not relying on my expectations which more often than not sets one up for disappointment. But the sacrifice of the Batman, coming back when he didn't have to, willing to give his life to be the necessary symbol to combat the "necessary" evil, and the end to his journey as the Batman was very satisfying. But in his sacrifice, was he not building the Batman and the symbol of self-sacrifice on a lie? Wasn't that the problem at the beginning of the movie, the lie built upon Harvey Dent? It is different in that Harvey went off the deep end and crazier than usual whilst Batman made the necessary sacrifices to win the day, but being set up as one who gave his all, up to his life, is somewhat diminished by the fact that he didn't give his life whilst Gotham is left believing he did. Conversely, he did give all that was necessary and you couldn't have asked any more of Bruce Wayne as Batman. He was indeed the hero that Gotham needed and ultimately deserved. In "Batman Begins" we are offered a promise of the creation of more than just a man, a symbol that would return to Gotham long enough to inspire the people that their city didn't belong to the criminal and corrupt, a legend. At the end of "The Dark Knight Rises," that promise is delivered. Despite the movie's deficiencies, despite disjointed or lack of emotion at some parts, this was ultimately a satisfying ending to Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy.

* I love Gary Oldman!

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1345836/