Dark Knight Rises 4.5/5 (8.5/10) - VERY MILD SPOILERS
Christopher Nolan perfectly wraps up his perfect Bat-Trilogy with what may well be the best movie of the three - and, by association, the best Batman film to date. One gets the feeling that Rises will be VERY hard to beat as Movie of the Year - even in a year that has already given us Brave and Avengers Assemble.
In terms of its place within the Nolan trilogy, Dark Knight Rises is the action third of the equation. Where Begins was all about character development and The Dark Knight perfectly balanced both elements, this one has more focus on set-pieces and moves at a much quicker pace. Despite still leaving some space for character development (especially of the new characters), this third installment assumes the viewer is already familiar with the characters and their quirks, and sets about telling its story right from the off. The biggest surprise is that it does not come off any worse for it.
In fact, aside from a minor continuity error towards the end (the equivalent of a wrestler no-selling an injured body part), everything about this third installment is spot-on, from the performances (ALL of them) to the way Nolan handles multiple villains and a large cast while still maintaining a cohesive, easy to follow and logical story (take notes, Spider-Man 3!). Most important, this is a movie that works even WITHOUT its titular character on-screen - and it is a testament to Nolan's film-making abilities that he can craft a Batman movie with about 15 minutes of costumed Batman and get away with it. In effect, more than a superhero romp, this is a story about a city coming together under duress - an angle which may irk more youthful viewers, but will resonate with more mature, intellectual audiences. There is still plenty of whizz-bang-pow action (with two major setpieces, and the introduction of two new vehicles which, for a moment, make Rises look like a toy-driven moviemercial straight from the 1980s) but most of the movie's plot is driven forward by ancillary, non-costumed characters, in particular Joseph Gordon-Levitt's rookie policeman (and later Detective). Of course, whenever Batman's on screen, the cool factor rises about 200%; but the fact that the large chunks in between keep the viewer riveted is this movie's greatest strenght.
Performance-wise, the cast here is absolutely stellar. Catwoman has her dignity restored with a powerhouse performance by Anne Hathaway (this movie's Heath Ledger, who one hopes will meet with a less tragic end), but the real surprise here is Gordon-Levitt, an actor who was previously associated with goofy comedy, but who really gets to flex his acting chops on this one. Elsewhere, Christian Bale is fittingly sullen and sombre, and Michael Caine will no doubt make grown men cry with his heart-wrenching turn as Alfred. Marion Cotillard, as the vaguely ethnic, vaguely accented (but with a perfectly Anglo-Saxon name) Miranda Tate, is pleasantly layered (making the impeccable twist at the end that much better), while Tom Hardy, as Bane, has little to do apart from looking menacing and sounding like Darth Vader. Every other performance is also very strong (even from the child actors!), making this one of the finest ensemble casts in recent memory.
But while this is a very, very strong movie, it, of course, is not perfect. Aside from the irksome detail mentioned above, one must still note how ridiculous Bale's Batman voice sounds - even if, this time, the human perspective of the movie sheds some light into it. One gets the feeling that, if there was to be a costumed vigilante trying to hide his Joe-Schmoe identity, that would be exactly the type of over-the-top voice he would go for. However, this is ruined by the fact that Bruce Wayne is not a Joe Schmoe, and has above-average intellect and intelligence - meaning he could certainly have picked a much better voice.
However, none of these (very minor) nitpicks detract from what is one of the best superhero movies - scratch that, one of the best MOVIES - in recent decades. Where Avengers Assemble was a big, loud geekgasm, this is the equivalent of a romantic night with a steady girlfriend: less exciting, less showy, somewhat quieter, but also much deeper and more involved - and, in consequence, much more satisfying. If not for the (unfortunately still prevalent) comic-book/silly/cheesy/dorky stigma, this would be appreciated alongside sinilar gems such as The King's Speech. As it is, it will remain an amazing movie damned to being worshipped only by a certain (albeit large) niche. At least until it swoops the Oscars, the same way a 'geek movie' about little people with rings did over a decade ago...
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Nacho Libre 2/5 (4/10)
After an auspicious debut with the charmingly goofy Napoleon Dynamite, director Jared Hess fails to live up to his promise with this follow-up - mostly as a result of a totally misguided approach. All the pieces were in place for an interesting movie - potentially strong characters with believable motivations, a charmingly goofy story and a subdued Jack Black, which is always the best kind of Jack Black - but somehow Hess completely fumbled the execution of the puzzle. Rather than explore his character's nuances and quirks - as he did on Napoleon - he chooses to derive his 'humour' from entirely predictable (and not at all funny) sources. Look, they all speak with Spanish accents! And Nacho is fat, but he wants to be a wrestler! And wrestling is fake! Isn't it hilarious?!
Well, no, Mr. Hess, it isn't. Everyone knows wrestling is "fake", and everyone also knows plenty of fat men make it big in the business - one need look no further than the Big Show, Andre The Giant or Big Van Vader for proof. And ethnic accents, in and of themselves, are not funny. What's worse, the tone of the movie is wildly inconsistent, one moment going for Napoleon-esque humour, the next revelling in sub-Eddie Murphy fart jokes and pratfalls, and missing both targets. The treatment of the characters is equally wavering, with Hess apparently not able to decide whether Nacho and Esqueleto should be portrayed as out-and-out comedy jobbers (hint: that WOULD have worked) or honest shmucks who are simply not very good (hint: that would ALSO have worked, provided they were shown to get better, which never happens). Instead, he settles for having them get beat up by midgets and parade around in form-fitting 1970s style pants (leading to sights which cannot be unseen) before pulling a happy ending out of that cavity he seems, at times, so obsessed with. The uniting thread throughout is the absence of laughs, making this just another dull, forgettable gross-out comedy. Hess's style is evident throughout the movie, as is the potential to make something much better, but somehow it never gels. A shame.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Machine Gun Preacher 1.5/5 (3/10)
Exceedingly poor attempt at an 'inspirational' biopic, which goes out of its way to attempt to portray a revoltingly unsympathetic man as a good person, and fails miserably. Sure, the real Sam Childers built an orphanage for children in Uganda, and has been fighting child-enlisting militias there for years; however, just from seeing this movie, one does not get the sense that he has, in any way, changed. Oh, to be sure, now his tantrums are directed at small business owners and government officials (rather than his long-suffering wife), but that does not make them any less childish and unlikeable. Sam still shuts out people who do not deserve his acrimony for the pettiest of reasons - something human beings are taught not to do at around the age of seven. To make matters worse, the movie is lathered in Bible-thumping Christian ideology, going as far as to imply that Childers would not have "changed" if not for the POWER OF JESUS! (Which may have been true, but is hammered over audience's heads in disturbingly cultish fashion here.) Some of the scenes with the African children do click, and the cinematography is superb, but unless you are in the mood for less than subtle Christian propaganda with an incredibly unlikeable protagonist, you should skip this one.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hidalgo 3.5/5 (7.5/10)
Refreshing throwback to the Golden Age of cinema, which reminds the viewer of what "The Movies" used to be all about. Basically Indiana Jones meets Lawrence of Arabia by way of Australia and an Errol Flynn epic, Hidalgo purports to tell the true story of Frank T. Hopkins, a long-distance rider who managed to outlast hundreds of locals in an endurance race across the desert sands of Arabia. However, it is clear to anyone who has even seen a movie that gigantic narrative liberties were taken, making this more of an escapist epic than an accurate biopic.
As noted, the entire feel of the movie is that of an epic from the 1940s, complete with cheesy sets, dastardly villains, exotic locations, poshly-accented ladies, the Sheik's rebellious daughter and, of course, a square-jawed, larger-than-life hero (played with abandon by Viggo Mortensen, in a role which might have been Errol Flynn's). The result is a rollicking cinematic romp the likes of which have not been seen since Harrison Ford dodged a giant rock, over twenty years ago. There is not much by way of character development here, nor should there be - this is an entirely escapist experience. Hidalgo does not aim to make its audience dwell on the metaphysical complexities of life; instead, it offers them a chance to forget their worries while watching a rugged, pure-hearted hero perform heroic deeds - just like those epics in the 1940s would. And in that aspect, it succeeds, making for a perfect two hours of fast-paced, light-hearted fun.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Little Shop of Horrors 3.5/5 (7.5/10)
This 1986 remake of the 1960 Roger Corman movie (and of the stage musical) thrives on the fact that it is never anything but a knowingly cheesy B-movie spoof (right down to an incredibly, purposefully wooden cameo by Christopher Guest). Mixing Burtonesque, artificially Technicolor sets with low-budget effects and catchy Alan Menken doo-wop numbers, director Frank Oz (he of Yoda and Muppets fame) crafts a breezy, pleasant, and oftentimes hilarious experience (Steve Martin steals the show as the cinematic mixture of Honky Tonk Man and Isaac Yankem, DDS, while Bill Murray makes for a worthy substitute to Jack Nicholson as a masochistic patient). Even normally annoying actors such as Martin or Rick Moranis are kept in check here, making for a breezy, entertaining viewing experience, which seldom drags and may well provide a few laughs. See it for the cult factor, or with friends over a few beers.
And as you've probably heard, imitation is the sincerest form of flattery. As I said, I cannot really compare the two in any real way...they are different films. But obviously, Romero's version will be the one on the greatest films list, no arguments about that one. All said and done Snyder did a respectable job imo, I know I might catch a lot of heat for that but it's just how I feel.
