The Dark Kight Rises

Director: Christopher Nolan
Writers: Jonathan Nolan, Christopher Nolan, & David S. Goyer
Actors: Christian Bale, Michael Caine, Gary Oldman, Morgan Freeman, Tom Hardy, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, Anne Hathaway, Marion Cotillard, and more of Christopher Nolan's favorite people
[The cast is a mashup of Batman Begins (2005), The Dark Knight (2008), and Inception (2010)]

Rated PG-13 {for teens and up}

It would be a gross understatement to say that there has been some excitement surrounding the theater release of The Dark Knight Rises, the eighth full-length, live-action Batman film and the ending to the most recent trilogy. Will this blend of Bob Kane's classic characters, Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns (comic series-1986) and Christopher Nolan's modernization of Batman be everything its fans want it to be and more? By opening weekend box office standards it was a success, netting $160,887,295 and dethroning none other than Dark Knight (2008) from the third place record, but does that make it a hit? Let's find out!

WHAT I LIKED

Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman.

I could tell within the first couple of minutes of seeing Joseph Gordon-Levitt in this movie that I was going to like him. Phenomenal pick!

*Major SPOILER* (highlight below to view)

I have always liked Catwoman better as an dark ally to Batman rather than the deranged seductress she is more commonly portrayed as, like Michelle Pfeiffer in Batman Returns (1992) and Halle Berry in Catwoman (2004).

The plot twists in this movie were excellent.

The ending credits acknowledged Francis Scott Key as the writer of our national anthem, "The Star-Spangled Banner". 

WHAT I DID NOT LIKE

Bane had one of the worse voice-overs I have ever heard in a film, which is saying a lot when you have seen Kung Pow: Enter the Fist (2002). There was a reported fix because it was mostly inaudible, but this apparently led them to the other extreme. No matter where Bane was, even in an airplane with a bag over his head and a door open, it sounded as if he was leaning over you talking. The only time he voice got dynamic was when he spoke over the football PA system, which made him difficult to understand at times. You would think that a movie with a two hundred and fifty million dollar budget could figure out where the happy medium is.

The whole Batman sounds like he has throat cancer thing got old in Batman Begins (2005), yet somehow it made its way into both The Dark Knight (2008) and now The Dark Knight Rises. Is the need for consistency greater than the need for improvement?

No matter how many times attempted witty humor has failed the Batman movies, DC continues to allow it their movies.

They introduced several new and supposedly important characters into the movie with little background information on them, like Foley. Why?

Either Batman's jet/helicopter is immune to close-range cannon fire and slows missiles or NOTHING, because apparently his jet/helicopter is immune to close-range cannon fire and slows missiles. I am all about suspending some disbelief, but the Bat dodging a cannon that is only feet away from it without moving is less believable than Peter Parker using Bing© in The Amazing Spider-Man (2012).

The Dark Knight Rises made too many mistakes, which ranged from harmless misspellings to large gaps in continuity. These are not only frustrating for attentive viewers but they damage the experience with several viewings. The smaller problems that bothered me the most included: sudden changes in daylight, repeated countdown times on a bomb, poor prop changes, bending science and law for plot, and several set issues. The most annoying problem though, in my opinion... *Major SPOILER* (highlight below to view)

was when Ms. Tate is taken by Bane after Commissioner Gordon's hearing, but then is with Lucius when Bruce breaks in to find him. Bruce is then told after the fact that Ms. Tate was taken to Bane's hideout.

I understand that movies are not perfect, remember the cars driving in the background of the cornfield in The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001), but this was my first viewing. You know that even more will be discovered as time passes.

The ending betrayed the theme of the series.  (see Cinema Blend.com's article)

This movie is incredibly long, to the point of bordering on ordeal status.

FINAL THOUGHTS

I am not going to go as far as Batman & Robin (1997) director Joel Schumacher and claim that Christopher Nolan ruined Batman, but this movie is far from perfection. I give The Dark Knight Rises a B for being better than average.


WHEN SHOULD YOU SEE IT?

For some strange reason, both Batman Begins (2005) and The Dark Knight (2008) lose a lot of their luster when they are viewed without a big screen and surround sound. So if you want to see this movie badly, I would recommend seeing it in theaters, as The Dark Knight Rises will most likely follow suit. If you are trying to save money, then see that thing matinee style.

Batman (1966)

SCORE

Personal Rating: 8 of 10 (B)

Plot: 7 of 10 (A decent story with great plot twists but several big mistakes)

How does this TS review compare to major reviews?
IMDB 9.1/10
Rotten Tomatoes C-87%/A-93%

CONTENT


Violence: 7 of 10 (consistent violence with minimal blood or gore: neck breaks, stabbings, fist fights, bodily disfigurement, shootings, bombings, hostages are tortured and executed)

Language/Profanity: 5 of 10 (infrequent use of the following: variants of "damn", "hell", "bastard", variants of "bitch")

Sexuality/Sensuality: 5 of 10 (a hint at prostitution, Bruce kisses two women, sex is implied, characters are seen wrapped in blankets snuggling/caressing/kissing, implied gang rape)

Spiritual Aspects: 2 of 10 (the name of Jesus is inappropriately used more than once)

Drugs/Alcohol: 4 of 10 (alcohol is consumed at parties and bars throughout the movie, a character appears to be drunk, some smoking)

Marvel's The Avengers

Director: Joss Whedon
Writers: Joss Whedon & Zak Penn
Actors: Robert Downey Jr., Chris Evans, Mark Ruffalo, Chris Hemsworth, Scarlett Johansson, Jeremy Renner, Samuel L. Jackson, and many more!
[A cast of everyone you ever wanted]

Rated PG-13 {Please remember that PG-13 means 13 and up parents, GEEZ!}

Inspired by the comic book marvels of Stan Lee & Jack Kirby, Marvel's The Avengers had fans electrified with a first trailer of voice-overs and an animated logo. The full weight of this excitement was shown in its breaking of opening weekend box office records with $207,400,000, crushing the $169,189,427 made by Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 (2011) by just under 40 million dollars. Money is not everything though, as we have seen with so many super hero movies... *cough* Green Lantern (2011) *cough* So let's take a look!

WHAT I LIKED

I was quite worried that having several main characters and their stories in a single movie would be end in tears, especially since they are super heroes. However, this movie blew me away with a integration of characters like nothing I have ever seen before. Here is my run down...

Hawkeye actually mattered in this movie. Definitely a step up from Thor (2011).

Black Widow was surprisingly important to the story plot. I liked her performance in Iron Man 2 (2010) but her character seemed to work better as member of the super hero team.

Thor had a solid performance that added greatly to the story. I liked Thor (2011) but I felt like he seemed too other-worldly. Marvel's The Avengers gave him the human connection he needed.

The Hulk was a character that took some time to get into the flow of the movie, but once he got going I wished the smashing would never end. Mark Ruffalo's performance as The Hulk not only crushed Eric Bana's The Hulk (2003), a disappointment to the Marvel franchise, but it found room for improvement in Edward Norton's The Incredible Hulk (2008), the salvation of The Hulk series .

Captain America brought the same enjoyable class to the movie that he did in Captain America: The First Avenger (2011) and it could not have fit better.

Iron Man / Tony Stark was the best part of this movie. End of line.*

Awesome characters aside, the combat in this movie did not leaving me wanting anything other than another Avengers movie. 

*Tron (1982)

WHAT I DID NOT LIKE

This movie was over marketed, more specifically over commercial-ed. I really dislike it when I am shown a significant amount of defining moments from a movie without context.

!!!NOTE!!!
I have seen several other reviews that claim Marvel's The Avengers was too formulaic. This is a terrible complaint. A movie with comic roots is going to be formulaic if it is being true to said roots. 

FINAL THOUGHTS

This movie was everything I wanted and more. Even with people telling me all the best parts before seeing it. Marvel's The Avengers deserves the rare A for saving the world and my watching experience.

WHEN SHOULD YOU SEE IT?

It is definitely worth the theater ticket. I will be adding this movie to my collection ASAP.


SCORE

Personal Rating: 9 of 10 (A)

Plot: 9 of 10 (An incredible amount of action while still explaining exactly what was needed)

How does this TS review compare to major reviews?
IMDB 8.8/10
Rotten Tomatoes C-93%/A-96%

CONTENT

Violence: 7 of 10 (intense violence but not graphic with minimal blood: constant hand-to-hand combat, a man's eye is gouged out, people of shot/stabbed/burned/bludgeoned/blasted, aliens are shot/stabbed/burned/bludgeoned/blasted/disembodied/crushed/, blood is seen on wounds/playing cards/walls/dead main characters)

Language/Profanity: 4 of 10 (infrequent use of: "damn", "hell", "bastard", "oh my God", and "son of bitch")

Sexuality/Sensuality: 4 of 10 (skin-tight somewhat revealing costumes are worn by the female characters, an intimate relationship is implied between Stark and Pepper by their flirty banter and actions, Banner is nude but given clothes before he is fully shown)

Spiritual Aspects: 5 of 10 (Thor and Loki are constantly referred to as gods or demi-gods, Captain America after meeting both claims there is only one God)

Drugs/Alcohol: 4 of 10 (Occasionally drinking throughout, a character is accused of using "weed")

Wrath of the Titans

Director: Jonathan Liebesman
Writers: Dan Mazeau, David Johnson, & Greg Berlanti
Actors: Sam Worthington, Liam Neeson, Ralph Fiennes, Édgar Ramírez, Toby Kebbell, Rosamund Pike, & Bill Nighy
[The cast was a good combination of old faves and fresh news]

Rated PG-13 {probably not a great idea for small children, especially those afraid of monsters}

A sequel to the Clash of the Titans (2010) remake, Wrath of the Titans had a lot on its plate. The most consistent complaint that I have heard about its predecessor was that people wanted to see more titan fighting and less weird mythological story. Surprise! That is exactly what this movie wants to show you for an hour and a half.

WHAT I LIKED

Not only do you get to see Perseus go to town on several titans but you also get to see the gods fight it out like the immortals in Highlander (1986). The graphics used on the landscapes, these guys, and their weapons was awesome, 3D or not. If I had a spear that shot electricity and turned into a thunderbolt I would want for nothing the rest of my life. Also, the two recasts in the movie (Andromeda and Ares) really brought it like they should have been in the first movie.

WHAT I DID NOT LIKE

This movie really lacked story and depth. A plot, which it did have, involved killing off mythology deities and creatures like they needed to be gone... FOREVER! While I liked most of their interpretations of how mythological beings should look, I wasn't crazy about Cronos (or Kronos) being a lava monster. Though when you consider any other incarnations of him (like God of War III) which are painfully bad, he is more than bearable.

Also, *Minor SPOILER* (highlight below to view)

The character Io, played by Alexa Davalos, who was one of the best parts of the first movie, is not in this movie. They show you her grave in the first few minutes. This was frustrating because they had raised her from the dead at the end of the first movie, only for her to die again between movies.

FINAL THOUGHTS

While this movie lacks greatly in story, it is not lacking in content. I enjoyed the 99 minutes of run-stab-run action. I give this movie a C for being entertaining.

WHEN SHOULD YOU SEE IT?

If you are not a Clash of the Titans remake fan then you are probably wasting your money seeing this movie in theaters, unless you get super cheap matinee tickets like me or just love movies with ridiculous premises.


SCORE
Personal Rating: 7 of 10 (C)

Plot: 6 of 10 (who needs story when you have so much fighting... right?)

How does this TS review compare to major reviews?
IMDB 6.6/10
Rotten Tomatoes C-25%/A-70%

CONTENT

Violence: 7 of 10 (there were quite a few flying bodies, and of course punching, throwing and stabbing)

Language/Profanity: 2 of 10 ("Go to hell! That's exactly where I'm headed.", I don't remember much beyond that)

Sexuality/Sensuality: 2 of 10 (innocent romance, there is a single kiss, one character sarcastically claims another has feelings for him)

Spiritual Aspects: 3 of 10 (unless you have a problem with Greek gods and/or their deaths then there isn't much here)

Drugs/Alcohol: 1 of 10 (nothing of consequence)

John Carter

Director: Andrew Stanton
Writers: Andrew Stanton, Mark Andrews, & Michael Chabon
Actors: Taylor Kitsch, Lynn Collins, Samantha Morton, Thomas Haden Church, Willem Dafoe, & Mark Strong
[This movie had lots of familiar faces even if you are terrible for names]

Rated PG-13 {definitely a movie for teens and up}

Based on Edgar Rice Burroughs' classic novel "A Princess of Mars", John Carter of Mars showed that deviation from an original source can work if the source is used as an inspiration rather than a fanboy-pleasing crutch. I am, of course, comparing this to a similar Disney experiment, Prince of Persia: Sands of Time (2010), which struggled greatly with complications from its video game series to film conversion. 

WHAT I LIKED

It was very obvious that this movie's budget exceeded 200 million. Contrasting movies like Green Lantern (2011) and Prince of Persia: Sands of Time (2010), which squandered their high budgets with cheesy and even painful CGI, John Carter put those funds to good use with beautiful landscapes and non-distracting CGI.

I was also impressed with the acting in this movie, as others like it have suffered from the unnatural and awkward flirting bug, which I hear some of the fans of the novel wanted.

I absolutely loved this movie's throwback to the classic space opera feel, placing it in with some giants of film like Flash Gordon (1936) and Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope (1977). Besides their vast scope, there is something about these films that is just charming. Needless to say, I left the theater wanting a follow up story.


WHAT I DID NOT LIKE

My only real complaint about this movie is how poorly it was marketed. It was not until the day of its release that I saw a good trailer (embed below) and became interested in seeing it. All other marketing and trailers were painful at best.

FINAL THOUGHTS

This movie definitely surprised me with both its creativity and quality. This movie is easily deserving of a B rating.

WHEN SHOULD YOU SEE IT?

I would definitely recommend as a rental. If you enjoy movies like this then you should consider seeing it in theaters.


SCORE

Personal Rating: 8 of 10 (B)

Plot: 8 of 10 (obviously had book roots)

How does this TS review compare to major reviews?
IMDB 7.0/10
Rotten Tomatoes C-51%/A-69%

CONTENT

Violence: 7 of 10 (it is fairly violent: with constant gun and sword battles, executions, a torture scene, a beheading, a saddening flashback, and skeletons to match)

Language/Profanity: 5 of 10 (there was some: with "hell", "damn", and "goddamn" sprinkled covertly into it)

Sexuality/Sensuality: 5 of 10 (healthy sexuality is show: characters exchange longing looks but do not have sex until they are married, his wife is shown covered in sheets afterward)

Spiritual Aspects: 5 of 10 (this a big issue in the film: as the angel-like bad guys claim they run the show under the guise of a deity, that their powers are technology that isn't for sharing, and that they will do whatever it takes to stay on top)

Drugs/Alcohol: 4 of 10 (John walks into a bar for a drink early in the film, and is shown drinking a few times)

Redline

Director: Takeshi Koike
Writers: Katsuhito Ishii, Yoji Enokido, & Yoshiki Sakurai
Actors: Takuya Kimura, Yû Aoi, & Tadanobu Asano
[A cast of very famous anime voice actors]

Not Rated {for adults only}

R-r-r-r-r-r-r Redline, Katsuhito Ishii's action-packed racer, has continued to built in popularity since its first showing in 2009 at the Locarno International Film Festival, especially in animated media circles.

This film is a bit hard to describe, other than that is like Speed Racer (tv series-1967, film-2008), The Fast and the Furious (2001), and F-Zero: GP Legend (2003) rolled into one movie, so I will refer to a favorite comment about the movie...
"You will leave Redline with no pants, socks or even underwear as they would all be blown away by the sheer bombastic brilliance of Redline." - Luke Halliday, Capsule Computers

WHAT I LIKED

Redline has phenomenal art with awesome coloration. It boasts seven years of development and over 100,000 hand drawn images. 

While some have said that Redline lacks a story, I would argue that it is a story played in action rather than with words. It is true this movie tells you very little about anything other than the Redline race and a little back story on each of the champion racers, but this movie does a great job of giving you big enough pieces of the puzzle that you can put them together, except for a few weird parts.

The detail and effort put into the development of each character is amazing. A character may only get a few seconds of screen time and yet you can tell that they really spent time thinking out that character and their motivation. This, however, can be a bit confusing until you have seen JP enough to establish that he is the main character.

I really liked the race tracks in this movie. Mostly because they weren't really tracks or even roads.

Hands down, my favorite element in this movie is the speed. The racers drive so fast that they bleed and their cars explode. Just when you think they are going as fast as they possibly can... they go faster and faster AND FASTER!!! It reminded me a lot of Dragon Ball Z (1989), where the characters, despite hitting their power limits, continue to gain power.

WHAT I DID NOT LIKE

This movie is weird. A tiny bit less of that would have been nice.

I really dislike how much more profane the English dub of this film is, most of which is completely unnecessary.


FINAL THOUGHTS

While I thoroughly enjoyed this movie, its appeal is not universal. I give it a B- for being great movie but  far too weird to be an A movie or close to one.


WHEN SHOULD YOU SEE IT?

Definitely a worthwhile watch for anyone who appreciates phenomenal art and can tolerate or enjoy absurdity.


SCORE

Personal Rating: 8 of 10 (B-)

Plot: 6 of 10 (An intriguing but overly complex mess)

This movie is on Evan's personal favorites list.
I recommend watching this movie in the original Japanese.

How does this TS review compare to major reviews?
IMDB 7.3/10
Rotten Tomatoes A-83%

CONTENT

Violence: 7 of 10 (most race scenes contain tense action, characters commonly drive so fast that they bleed out their noses and mouths, punches result in blood, there gun/ship fights where characters bleed/explode/die, a guy is punched then his teeth are pulled out of the glove that hit him, a character is disintegrated, and a character is absorbed by a monster)

Language/Profanity: 8 of 10 (occasional use of the following: "hell", "horndog", variants of "ass", variants of "shit", variants of "damn", "bastard", variants of "c**k", "p***y", and variants of "f**k")

Sexuality/Sensuality: 6 of 10 (there are several scenes where clothed boobs noticeably bounce, an innuendo about racing making someone hot, implied adultery between a racer and his female boss, a reoccurring dream sequence features a suave racer with two scantly clad women in the back who he kisses at the same time, a female character is topless with breasts showing while watching tv for nearly 30 secs, there are two scandalously dressed racers who are referred to as "rejects from a porno", a group of fans in bikinis is seen at the end of the race, and a loving kiss is shared between embracing characters)

Spiritual Aspects: 2 of 10 (one of the cars is named "Godwing", the names of Jesus and God are inappropriately used, and a female character is referred to as a goddess)

Drugs/Alcohol: 6 of 10 (characters smoke hookah/cigarettes/cigars often throughout the movie, occasionally alcohol is consumed, legal/illegal betting is key to the story, in two scenes cocaine is consumed, and character mentions "tweeking")

[Japanese trailer]

[English trailer]