Pages

Showing posts with label Joseph Gordon-Levitt. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Joseph Gordon-Levitt. Show all posts

Thursday, September 1, 2016

Upcoming Movie Roundup - September

August was a no-go. It was such a no-go that I didn't even watch The Little Prince off Netflix. Netflix. Could have watched at any time and all I did was watch Stranger Things three more times. Not that that was really a bad decision or anything. That show is the greatest.

September has a handful of movies with interesting trailers, but no must-sees currently. I won't be surprised if I don't go to the theater again this month, and that makes me sad.

Does anything look good to you this month? And have you seen Stranger Things yet? You absolutely must!


The 9th Life of Louis Drax
Sep 2nd (limited); R
This one is pretty interesting just because the trailer was very unexpected. I did not expect a creepy sci-fi element. It's also a mystery and a drama, but the supernatural side is really the most appealing aspect to me. Since it's coming out tomorrow there are reviews already, and it's not looking particularly great.




Sully
Sep 9th; PG-13
Not that this isn't an incredibly neat story or anything, but I wonder if it really warrants a full-length film. It seems like they're adding a lot of drama (via "the untold story") just to push up the run time -- to a whopping 96 minutes. Of course Clint Eastwood is a great director, and Tom Hanks is a great actor, so maybe they can make it all worthwhile for more than just a shot at some Oscar attention. The trailer is definitely of a first-rate brand!




London Road
Sep 9th (limited); NR
This movie is so strange I just had to include it. Watch the trailer to see for yourself because it's hard to describe, but it's a musical -- an actual stage musical being adapted for the screen -- about the small, oddball town of Ipswich when a high-profile murder case made them the center of attention in 2006. And it's a musical. And the music is so strange. Seriously just watch this trailer. Olivia Colman and Tom Hardy lead the cast.




Snowden
Sep 16th (limited); R
I'm not really privy to the controversy about this dude, but putting the true story part aside, this trailer makes this film look like an excellent, tight and suspenseful thriller (even though the main genre it's labeled as is "drama"). That, plus Joseph Gordon-Levitt, and I'm sold. If it proves to be what it promises I'll be looking for it on VidAngel.



The Magnificent Seven
 Sep 23rd; PG-13
This is to me the most interesting release of the month. Which is a little sad considering it's a remake and I'm sick to the teeth of terrible remakes. However, I haven't actually seen the original Magnificent Seven, so that helps a lot, and maybe this will be one of the few that actually is a worthy remake. I love the cast, and the trailer -- even with the modern music that is odd but fitting. I definitely want this one to turn out good, but I won't be getting my hopes up anytime soon.




The Dressmaker
Sep 23rd (limited); NR
On the surface this one seems odd -- a little too odd. But I really enjoyed the trailer. The fashion, the mystery, Kate Winslet... it all has an air of originality to it, and that makes me want to see it. Isn't Liam Hemsworth quite a little bit too young to play this part though. Maybe he's playing older and Kate is playing younger. Like I said, odd.




Deepwater Horizon
Sep 30th; PG-13
Ah, true stories of disaster. You know this is gonna be the biggest drama an action film ever was. And still I list it here. Maybe because it's one of the bigger releases of the month, maybe because it looks like there may be some neat action after all, maybe because Dylan O'Brien is in the cast... who knows.




Miss Peregrine's Home for Peculiar Children
Sep 30th (limited); PG-13
I read the book, but strangely it didn't make me all that interested in seeing this movie. Asa Butterfield as Jacob will probably be perfect, but otherwise the adapting doesn't have that since of love and devotion you look for in franchises like this. The lead girl has someone else's powers, and the other character is cut out completely? What's up with that? Anyway, I will probably watch this, it's just a matter of when -- as determined by how good or bad it is considered to be by fans and critics.



Sunday, October 21, 2012

Why making The Justice League is a bad move.

Because, every once in a while, you just have to quote The Hitchhikers Guide to the Galaxy.

Well it's official. The Justice League live action film is happening. It's scheduled to release in the summer of 2015, and in case you didn't know, Avengers 2 is coming in May 2015. But everyone knows that Marvel and DC are practically sworn enemies, so having their movies compete is no surprise. Nor should it be a surprise to you when I say that Marvel is winning, and DC is trying desperately to play catch-up. Marvel is way ahead, so far ahead, in fact, that I think DC should just give up, or maybe try something original to bring in the money, because making the Justice League is not a good idea.

I have a few reasons why I believe this, and the first is the most obvious. As I mentioned, DC is playing catch-up. They're rushing to get their franchise out before everyone gets too hooked on The Avengers. But it's too late for that already, so what good does rushing do? I can't think of anything... anything good that is. Not-so-good things? You bet. Case in point: rushing a movie leads to a rotten movie.

Ready or not...
Marvel already beat them to the punch, so why the rush anyway? It would be smart of them to wait, and give this film some real attention, and hype, and forget about competing with Marvel. That would give them time to create solo outings to establish characters, and give us time to prepare for a new Batman, and to forget about the Green Lantern. Now something has gotta be done about him. I'm guessing a re-cast, and pretending it never happened, and hoping everyone forgets it really fast. Hey, it worked for the Hulk. Twice.

The biggie for me is that in order to make this movie, the Batman must be rebooted. I repeat: Batman is going to be rebooted in 2015. His latest film was just released just a couple months ago, maybe you've heard of it. One of the biggest trilogies ever? Hundreds of millions at the box office? And they expect us to accept a reboot two and a half years later? It took longer than that to make each sequel! They waited five years to reboot Spider-Man and people still complained, and those Spidey movies weren't even as good as the Dark Knight trilogy. You've probably guessed as much already, but I must say I'm very wary of a new Batman, and will not readily give him my approval.

The only way it could be worse is if Joseph Gordon-Levitt somehow ends up as the rebooted Batman, or if Christian Bale comes back... very unlikely, fortunately.

So far Superman is the only character looking like success here, with his big, realistic and serious movie produced by Chris Nolan and coming soon. If his movie is setting the tone here, I'm wondering how well the rest of the characters will take the serious treatment. Some of them might only get more ridiculous. I know one thing; if Aquaman gets cast then we can dismiss this movie as a flop without even having to see it.

Man of Steel. Looks to match the Dark Knight for dark and brooding seriousness.

While I maintain that this is a bad idea, I am extremely curious to see how they are going to make it work... or not. And I probably won't be too ashamed if I find I have to change my mind and be glad they made it. I was skeptical of the Avengers at first too, though not nearly this much.

I'm sure my opinions will change around a lot over the next two years. I'm excited for the release of Man of Steel, plus casting characters and hiring a director will certainly be interesting to see. And who knows, maybe someone as brilliant as Joss Whedon will step up, snatch a good cast and wrangle the League into submission and success. But in my oh-so-professional opinion, as it stands now, success even close to that of the Avengers will be nothing short of very, very good luck.

Tuesday, October 16, 2012

How to make a John Blake/Robin/Nightwing movie.



… In the opinion of a person who has never made a movie in her life!

I would warn you about spoilers, but if you hadn’t seen The Dark Knight Rises by now you obviously wouldn’t care about it, and therefore wouldn’t even be reading this. So read on.

So the Dark Knight Rises is over and done, Bruce Wayne as the Batman rose to the challenge, and saved the day and the city for the last time. Now he’s gone off, doing some well-deserved life-living with Ms. Kyle, and we’re all very happy for him. It’s a good end to the story. Batman (read: Christopher Nolan) thought of everything, and even passed on the Bat cape and cowl to the young and spunky ex-detective John Blake. A smart choice considering his morals are high, and his first name is Robin.

But here’s the problem; we want to see Mr. Blake in action. Please. We got a taste of his upright character, quick thinking skills and determination, and now we’re just dying to see more. We want to see some real action. We’ve known Joseph Gordon-Levitt can dominate action ever since seeing his amazing stunt work in Inception, and he’s had his share of solid lead performances, with more on the way, so why cast this star, ever-increasing in popularity in the role of Batman’s replacement unless someone was planning on capitalizing on it? Maybe it was just because he was perfect for the role, however small it was… or maybe not.

Would it shock you terribly if I said Joe Go-Le was my favorite part of the movie?

Nolan say’s he done with all things Batman, and I say it’s no big problem. It’s not going to happen with him, and it just doesn’t need to. In fact it could help with that been-there-done-that feeling if there’s a new director with a fresh take. I have no ideas as to whom, but it should be someone who can honor Nolan’s work on the Dark Knight trilogy, but take the new franchise a new way. This is very important. I would feel cheated if someone just tried to mimic Nolan’s movies. It’s gotta be fresh. There’s only one thing I can think of that should stay the same, and that is the realistic feel. That is the quality that made this franchise exceptional in the first place. Practically everything else that can reasonably change should. 

Starting with the hero – no more Batman. Rises implies that Blake becomes the new Batman, and that works great for that movie, but if they give him his own movie, I don’t think being “Batman” is going to cut it. In the afore mentioned very important spirit of not making Mr. Gordon-Levitt’s hero a mere re-hash of Mr. Bale’s, it’s just a plain good idea to give Gotham’s new Dark Knight a new name. So, no Batman, and no “Robin” either. He’s just Batman’s sidekick, so that wouldn’t work, and what would he wear? Anything that’s even slightly recognizable as a Robin costume would be totally ridiculous. But everyone already knows the perfect solution anyway. Yep, John Blake is Nightwing.

I mean COME ON. But here's a thought: call it "The Dark Knightwing"! Tee-hee.

Nightwing is the best idea simply because then there would be no threat of him joining The Justice League. And it could work very well, though not without adding a few more problems to the mix, like after Bruce tells Blake that “Batman” can be anyone, why would he go and make up a different identity? Or like the fact that John Blake isn’t Dick Grayson, or, in fact, any comic book superhero at all. I personally don’t care, but I suppose some might… anyone? No? And who would the bad guys be? I don’t know anything about Nightwing villains, are they translatable to film? What if they keep using Batman villains? I say yes to that. 

Personally, I think it can be done, and I think that if “they” want it to happen it will… but I’m beginning to doubt they do; wouldn’t there be some rumors about it at least by now? Still, I’d like to see Blake as Nightwing; similar to the Batman, but with obvious and original differences, using his smarts over strength in a slightly smaller scale film, where he could take on less powerful baddies, like the Riddler, one of my favorites.

Fan art of David Tennant as the Riddler. Um... Yes please.


But honestly, if someone, anyone, makes a movie, that casts Joe Gordon-Levitt as the same character he was in The Dark Knight Rises, no matter what his “name” is, I will want to see that movie. But until that happens – if it ever does – I’ll just enjoy watching the character in Rises, and fill in that character’s blanks myself. Something tells me that’s exactly what we’re supposed to be doing anyway…


Saturday, September 22, 2012

Upcoming Film - The Great Gatsby is going to be a movie... again.



Tom Hiddleston as F. Scott Fitzgerald in Midnight in Paris.

So I recently read The Great Gatsby for the first time. It was after watching the trailer for the movie, coming in 2013. The trailer piqued my interest, and then I saw the book was relatively short, and even looked easy to read. So I read it. And I loved it. I loved the simplicity of the plot, the wit, the imagery, and the first person writing. I imagined Fitzgerald as Tom Hiddleston, writing all those witty lines for my entertainment. It was a lovely, pretty short read, and now, of course, I’m ready for the movie. Because what’s the point of such a great book if it’s not going to be made into a movie?


I assume that the one and only reason this is being made into a movie again is so Carey Mulligan can play Daisy Buchanan. She is obviously the only person who should ever do it; she’s perfect for it. I heard Daisy’s very specific voice effortlessly as I read, and it sounded exactly like Mulligan. I’m excited to see her, but what about the rest of the cast? Well, here come my opinions, ready or not.

Carey Mulligan looking lovely as Daisy from the trailer.

I will never complain about seeing Joel Edgerton in a movie, and I think he is very well cast here as Tom Buchanan. As I read the book, I forgot Edgerton was going to be staring, but I knew there was someone I was forgetting from the cast. I didn’t look it up though, because I wanted to keep my imagination untainted. Ironically, I imagined Tom to look rather like Tom Hardy, whom Edgerton played a brother to in Warrior.

Tom Hardy and Joel Edgerton in Warrior.
 I was this close to unknowingly imagining the character as the person actually going to play him. When I finished the book and looked at the cast list again I had a pretty good chuckle. And then I was very happy of course.

Obviously, Edgerton will be great.

Tobey Maguire’s look as Nick from the trailer stuck with me pretty well, but one thing about him worries me... Maguire’s usual characters are at least slightly awkward, especially in the way he talks, but Nick wasn’t like that; he was more normal, laid back and observing; like the audience or reader in character form. Tobey Maguire is not the person I would think of for this role, but he if does it right… i.e. if he leaves all things “Peter Parker” behind, this role has the potential to be my absolute favorite of his.

Here Maguire is wondering if he should play the character to my liking, or not. Please do!
(I noticed people suggesting Joseph Gordon-Levitt for Nick, and I think he would've been amazing, but I am heavily biased on that particular subject.)

And finally the main guy, Gatsby himself. And I don’t know what to say. The fact is I'm having a hard time seeing DiCaprio as Gatsby. He’s a great actor and I have no doubt he can perform it well – he does play insecure, desperate characters exceptionally – but he just doesn’t seem quite right. His voice is wrong, his looks aren’t classic enough... I guess I just can’t hear DiCaprio say “old sport” and not have it come out funny – in a bad way. I’m pretty sure my worries will be proven wrong in the end though, and he’ll be a fine Gatsby.

 
See? He looks fine. I should relax, right?

No one really jumps out at me as being better for the role than DiCaprio anyway. Certainly no American actors, but is that important? Mulligan and Edgerton are British and Australian respectively, and the newcomer playing Jordan is also an Aussie, and I’m sure an American accent is no problem for them. If I think British, Cary Elwes comes to mind, and he naturally has some of Gatsby’s qualities… if only he were twenty or so years younger. Jude Law is also an interesting thought, and he has the air, and also the acting chops for the role. If it were up to me to cast the film, he’d probably be my pick, but alas, I’m just a consumer and must be satisfied with DiCaprio, and as I said I’m sure he’ll be fine, at least.

 
A very young Cary Elwes, and...
Jude Law looking very dapper.



















This book is in need of a successful film, and the trailer looks promising, and faithful to the source material, if a little modernized feeling. It’s going to be in 3D, which is odd, but if it’s quality 3D, I won’t complain, and who knows, it might even be improved by it. Visuals seem to play a big role here if you can judge by the trailer, and 3D was made for big visual movies. I’m excited to see it, then remember my opinions on it from now, and see how they've changed. And now that I have stated my opinions, I will move on and get excited for different movies, like the first installment of The Hobbit, and wait patiently for May 10.

Looks promising now - we'll see for sure in eight months.

Saturday, September 8, 2012

Premium Rush


The always sensational Joseph Gordon-Levitt is Wilee, a smart and nimble bike messenger in New York City. His bike has one gear and no brakes, but he apparently doesn’t actually have a death-wish, he just loves the rush of speeding though traffic and using his lightning-quick reflexes to not get killed. Of course, not getting killed is a lot easier when no is actually trying to kill you. Not that Michael Shannon as crooked cop Detective Monday is really trying to kill Wilee, he just wants the package he’s carrying. But Wilee is a stickler for the rules and loyal to his friend who gave him the package, and refuses to let Monday have it. The package must be either at its destination or in the hands of Monday at seven o’clock, and the time is now five-thirty. Let the hour-and-a-half chase through the streets of New York commence.


Yes, this movie is just an hour and a half, unusually short for an action flick these days, but in the end it didn't matter, because the story was put together right, and filled up the exact amount of time it needed. Perfect in length, with remarkable balance, it flies by with zero slow spots, but never rushes over anything too quickly. Every once in a while, a well-timed flash-back will fill you in a little bit more on the plot, which is by no means complicated, but I for one never took notice. I was way too busy watching Gordon-Levitt kicking butt at a break-neck pace, and enjoying every minute of it.


Gordon-Levitt was, of course, the reason I wanted to see this film, and it was a good reason; he always performs so well and this was no exception. But there is more worth watching to this film besides a good and compelling hero. For example, there are three more good-guy characters that get a chunk of screen time. Wilee’s girl, Vanessa, (Dania Ramirez) her roommate, and sender of the mysterious package Nima, (Jamie Chung) and Wilee and Vanessa’s co-worker Manny (Wole Parks) who barely makes the title “good guy” as he’s annoying and amazingly self-absorbed. They were good, without adding to, or detracting from the movie very much at all. Then there’s Michael Shannon, the bad guy, and he was a very good and creepy bad guy. A love-to-hate-him sort of fellow, and kept the tension up throughout the movie.
 
Action films are a dime a dozen, with their overly stylish, mostly unbelievable action sequences and stunts, and fiery explosions. They go way over the top, and yet we still sometimes manage to get bored watching them. I’m not going to say the action here is anything really new, lots of movies do have quality action after all, but I sure did enjoy it like it was new. Mostly, I think, because it was real, with no green screen and little special effects. It felt real, and it was refreshing, and exciting. And by "real" I don't mean "shaky and quick-cut." The director David Koepp kept the camera smooth, so every stunt is clear and enjoyable. Definitely action worth seeing, and good thing too, because the action never stops, so if it was lousy, the movie would be practically nonredeemable.


None of the elements in Premium Rush are very original. The most original being that our hero is a bike messenger, which probably hasn’t been used much because it just doesn’t seem like a great idea. But take the basic plot, all the usual action flick formula, and the one original element, and – this is the key – make it well, and you will end up with a good movie that is at its very least worth watching. A movie that doesn’t feel like it came out of a factory. Joseph Gordon-Levitt automatically raises the quality of any movie he’s in by at least 75%, but really he’s just icing on the cake; something that will tempt someone like me to see this non-factory-made movie. Still, Gordon-Levitt is my favorite part of the movie, but thanks to every other part being quality as well, I was satisfied that his abilities weren’t wasted on trash. Not without its flaws, but this film is what it claims to be; a non-stop from beginning to end, rip-roaring good time at the movies. Grab your helmet, and hold on tight.

- 3.8/5 stars

Monday, August 20, 2012

The Dark Knight Trilogy


(Spoiler warning: they may pop up anywhere… especially at the end!)

Batman Begins--

The trilogy begins with a ground-breaking idea that superheroes can be taken seriously, and gives us a totally believable origin story for one of the world’s most believable superheroes. There are three points to cover (in my opinion) in order to make a good, complete story, and the first is covered exactly right in this movie; the hero.

Young Bruce Wayne sees his parents murdered in front of him and grows into a hate-filled man with his eyes on revenge, whatever the cost. Life-changing words from the girl he loves and a crime boss change his mind and send Bruce around the world in an attempt to understand criminals, and what it’s like to have nothing. A mysterious man finds him and offers him a chance to change and make a change with just a little ninja training and spiritual guidance. The latter doesn’t exactly stick for Bruce, as he decides he will never needlessly kill anyone, when it’s required of him to finish his training. He becomes a League of Shadows drop-out, and returns to Gotham determined to honor his father, and serve the city, mostly by locking up every criminal he can find. Using a piece of advice from his mentor - and to protect his loved ones - a costume is in order, and before you can start to sing “na na na na na…” the Batman is born.

The majority of Bruce Wayne/Batman’s character development happens in this movie; at the end he’s a hero, and this movie is about his journey, from beginning to heroism. And finally it's done right - finally we get to understand Bruce. He’s no longer stylized, campy, melodramatic, or plain silly; he’s real, and his superhero status is believable.

The amazing, and visionary director, Christopher Nolan, is of course the person to thank for this. He knows how to make a movie true to life without tossing out the pleasure of watching a movie for entertainment. The key appears to be to make it dark; the real world is a dark place after all. But there is more to it that just that, and what really impressed me were all the details. Why bats, for an example? “Bats frighten me,” says Bruce, “it’s time my enemies shared my dread.”


Christian Bale is Batman. He wonderfully embodies the complex character with powerful subtlety. Previous renditions of the character practically crumble into nothing, and anyone who may try to take on the role anytime in the near future would probably be crazy, and therefore would do a bad job of it. And who else could ever play Alfred but Michael Caine? I mean, come on. Gary Oldman is perfect as Gordon, a more traditional brand of hero everyone loves to cheer for. Don’t forget Morgan Freeman as Mr. Fox, and Katie Holmes as Rachel Dawes is lovely, but unfortunately doesn’t last. And the antagonists, Cillian Murphy, and Liam Neeson, put out their due amount of evil and creepiness according to their character to satisfaction.

Batman Begins is a classic movie really, starting with a flawed character in need of change, and ending with that character saving the day and becoming a new person; a hero. This is done to perfection, but “ending” is the key word here… there is a good and satisfying end. Batman’s identity as a hero is established, and the character’s arc is complete, but this is only the first movie, and we want more, so, what now?

The Dark Knight--

Well, there's two of my three points left to cover, and the second one is a test. We have to know that the Batman can hold to his morals, and will never give up on his city no matter how bleak things get. Usually, this is where a sequel comes out, trying to re-sell the same format of the first film by putting a different plot on it, and that’s why sequels don’t work… usually. There’s no worries when Nolan is at the helm. He knows how to make a sequel that doesn’t feel like a re-hash. The key now is to go even darker, and more intimate, and bring on a storm of trials to push our hero to his limits. Enter the Joker.

Heath Ledger’s turn as the Joker is very good… very, very good. Perhaps too good... in a word, convincing… in the highest sense of the word. We’re not supposed to understand him, and honesty, I don’t want to. And with his great performance, it’s easy to forget everyone else in the movie, but Bale continues to be good, despite this movie not being quite as much about his characters development as the previous one. Maggie Gyllenhaal does a fine job replacing Holmes, and adds spunk to Rachel. But Aaron Eckhart as Two-Face Harvey Dent is my personal favorite. He holds up very well against the Ledger's overpowering Joker and leaves a heavy impression with a sad and thought-provoking role.


The movie as a whole, in fact, is very thought-provoking, but also very entertaining, with great action, and real drama; it’s a truly well-done movie that succeeds on every level it goes to. If you can survive the darkness, the contrasting light is well worth it. Or just sit back and enjoy the artistic beauty, or the smart involving script, and stylish action. I always consider the middle movie of a trilogy to typically be the worst, due to the difficulty of providing a satisfying beginning and end to the story, but I don’t have any evidence at all to prove that here. This is the most well-done film in the franchise, and in my opinion, also has the best ending of the three movies.

I won’t go over plot details here, mostly because I can’t exactly remember them straight, but basically, the Joker raises @#!*% , and destroys lives, and then we watch the aftermath, and how characters deal with their crumbled worlds. Harvey Dent begins a good man, but he breaks under pressure and becomes the very thing that destroyed him. Bruce gets the same treatment, but he somehow hangs on. Broken, but not defeated Batman maintains his heroism, (to the audience at least) and holds to his morals. He is committed to doing whatever it takes to save the world. Now we know that for sure. There’s only one thing left now. We saw the journey to his being a hero, and he scraped through the test at great personal cost, now all we need is an end.

The Dark Knight Rises--

But we don’t know that. I think I’d be happy to see more movies about Bruce Wayne beating the odds and defeating evil for as long as they continue to be good and entertaining, but Nolan knows… yes, he knows a lot of things… and he knows we need an end. The third point; every story needs an end, and Nolan has it covered in Rises. It’s got to be hard to end a franchise, but if you don’t, it will eventually fizzle out anyway, so it’s best to end it sooner, and end it well. Though, “well” is a rather dull way to describe the way this movie wrapped up the franchise. “Satisfying,” “amazing” and “epic” are better words for the job.

Of course, there can’t be just an ending, so this movie provides a new test for the Dark Knight as well. Eight years later, the Batman is in hiding, and Bruce turned to a recluse is never seen either, but the fix he offered up in the last movie stuck, and the city has been a better and cleaner place. Until Bane shows up, terrorizing the city as he puts his devastating plan in motion. Bruce is eager become Batman just one more time, and thinks he’s ready to give his life to save the city, but this time he’s not the only one willing to give everything to stand against evil.

Commissioner Gordon has always been helpful, but in the Batman’s absence he steps up, and does all he can to keep the evil at bay, along with newcomer Joseph Gordon-Levitt, who jumps right in as John Blake, a young, idealistic cop with spirit, who is this movie's most straight-forward and honest hero. Then there’s Anne Hathaway, also new, playing Selina Kyle, who has her share of problems, but does the right and selfless thing when it really counts. I like that these characters are really focused on and fleshed out as leads along with Bale, and the ensemble feel they bring to the movie is great.


Played very well by Tom Hardy, Bane is sufficiently evil, and his composed, boiling rage disturbing. He’s powerful in every way, but thankfully doesn’t overpower any other characters. Marion Cotillard as Miranda Tate is disappointing in the best way possible, with both the good and bad side played convincingly. Maybe it’s only because I tried to stay spoiler-free going into this movie, but I thought the plot twists were handled very well, and weren't too confusing, or unbelievable.

How could anyone doubt that Christopher Nolan knows what he’s doing? He very successfully wraps up the trilogy with this film, not getting lazy in any aspect, giving us smart and unique plotting, involving acting from an all-around stellar cast, and powerful tone. Probably the hardest of the three movies to do right, but right it definitely is. My only complaint is very small; that it gets a little slow in the middle, but hey, at two hours and forty-five minutes, “a little slow” for a few minutes is pretty impressive, especially when you're not making a Lord of the Rings movie.


These three movies are built very differently, yet they fit together like it had been planned the whole time, and each brings something unique to the table. This dark, thrilling and powerful trilogy has really set a high standard for movie heroes of a super persuasion, by succeeding as more than just a superhero movie. It ponders the meaning of heroism, the effects of evil on society and the individual character, and delves in deep. It gives us an awesome, breath-taking visual experience, and a dark, chilling, but ultimately rewarding story, just brimming with thoughtful details. And finally, it gives us the right conclusion, where good prevails against the dark and the hero is rewarded for his sacrifice. A hero, a test, and an end… our Dark Knight delivered and gave us a solid, satisfying conclusion that resonates. My appreciative thanks go to Nolan, for a deep, exciting, and unique franchise.

- 4&1/2 of 5 stars, for each movie.


Hello, John Blake franchise?