The Dark Knight Rises

It was only after the second viewing that I fully understood and appreciated why Nolan turned the wheel after the acclaimed second film and once again rode the comic book waves, just like he did with the first one. More than anything else, the third film concludes the trilogy. I can understand the disappointed responses that were expecting something in the style of a funny anarchist madman Joker, but I don't buy the criticism about the poorly told story. The phrase "monstrous epic," used by many around here, suits this film better than anything else. The uncompromising Bane brings Gotham to its knees with brute force to make it suffer before giving it a taste of death. As well as its black-caped guardian. This isn't the Nolan brothers expressing their worldview, this is a critique of everyone for whom the idea of social justice is a political idol. Therefore, before the last atom completes the fission reaction, it is necessary to rise physically, but especially spiritually. This is the engine of the entire film, building Nolan's precise narrative that works both in the characters' dialogue and in the surprisingly spare but superbly raw action. All of this is then only perfectly complemented by Zimmer's thunderous music, without which the film would work a third less. If anyone wants to restart this at Warner Brothers, they should be thinking about changing careers by now. PS: Christopher Nolan is, along with David Fincher, the best cinematic storyteller of his generation. No question about it. (07/26/2012)

A monumental film – maybe too much so. It exhausted me as if I’d had to carry Bane on my back for three hours. The Dark Knight Rises has a massive scope, it follows about a billion different characters and the network of motivations and relationships among them it’s never very clear (at least not after watching it once). In all this burnt-out expanse, it needs to resort to various shortcuts (someone always comes and meets someone – without it being clear how they knew that said someone would be there – then they say something important and carry on – repeat and rinse after a bit) and pathetic holy speeches (and I won’t even mention the bus full of orphans), while Bane’s plan and its execution feels very dodgy. Yeah, it’s (only) a “comic book movie” and you also can find similar “comic book” twists, motifs and dialogues in the previous two parts, but here it’s a bit too much and Nolan is trying to take his very realistic concept too far. Naturally, the movie is technically flawless. In the end, it’s the character of Bruce the one who gets most of the attention, so as a conclusion to “his” trilogy, it does work well in all its fatality and epic (8/10). As a standalone film, however, it grinds a little. Let’s hope that in two years Christopher will go for something smaller. PS: Of course, it’s very likely that watching it a second time will make the film feel more cohesive, complex and clear (as usual with Nolan), but I don’t feel like going through it again so soon. (08/01/2012)

Horse versus hoarse. The Dark Knight Rises and I told myself that I would not be bowled over, but... I was, like a pin. The finale of the trilogy that can be faulted for just one thing. Unlike The Dark Knight, which found it’s own way and not be a mere Hollywood sequel, the conclusion of the trilogy suffers from this syndrome, mainly in the closing third. It’s simply exactly the same as The Dark Knight, just in a more epic, spectacular, dumber and over-the-top packaging during which Nolan is chasing too many birds in bushes. Often less is more, but in that case it is an exception that proves the rule, because even though this is a worse movie than part two due to the fact that Bruce Wayne (or else his alter ego) isn’t “sort of extra" and, in the deep shadow of the Joker, Dent, Gordon trio, this time plays central role (despite being absent for at least half the movie); and thanks to that emotions work and thanks to that consequently the conclusion of the concluding part works SO exceptionally, despite the fact that nobody pays the ultimate price. Which seems almost out of place. However, part one remains unsurpassed, not because it’s so much better, but it’s the only one that isn’t pretentious. P.S.: And if there will be a number four, in view of the trend that has been set, the only person capable of filming it would be Michael Mann. (07/26/2012)

Not so bombastic anymore! From the realistic waters of the last part, we’ve drifted off down a sewer into the comic-book waters of part one. But this is not the movie’s main issue. But why trump the joker when it’s enough to equal it. Too much happens with too little room. Those 164 minutes just aren’t enough and some moments don’t resound as they could. In fact, Batman returns twice here, which is a lot for one movie. The introductions to new characters is maybe a little rushed (but left an impression). But disappointment sets in during some scenes. The expanse and the story’s message are of course above average. In this respect, Wayne’s journey couldn’t have had a better conclusion. And no let down from Zimmer, either. Not everything. Not yet. Thumbs up for the second time in the IMAX. The huge scale of the screen at last does justice to the dimensions of this picture. The action scenes are absorbing, particularly fly-pasts around Gotham. Awesome. (07/26/2012)

The ending of Nolan's trilogy is outright weak, although seemingly everything fits together like a puzzle. In three films, Batman was born, fell, and was reborn only to let the Bat fall back to sleep. In the third film, the theoretical highlights include Anne Hathaway as Catwoman and Marion Cotillard as Talia al Ghul, but even they don't rank amongst the best displays of acting in DC films. (05/09/2022)