Showing posts with label christopher nolan. Show all posts
Showing posts with label christopher nolan. Show all posts

Thursday, June 13, 2013

This Man of Steel flies high


I have to say it's not very often that I see a movie, think about it for 24 hours and find even more things to like about it. It's quite often the other way around. Going into a screening of Man of Steel, I was worried we were going to get too much of Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight angst and not enough of the charm that has made the character so endearing for seven decades. Not to worry though, Zack Snyder, David Goyer and Nolan have turned out a very well-balanced film full of action and real human emotion.

By now, everyone must have an inkling of Superman's origin story, be it through the comics, the Christoper Reeve movies or TV's Smallville. It's certainly not something that needs to be retold again, taking up the first hour of the movie and boring the fans to tears (like The Amazing Spider-Man did). Snyder and Goyer have opened the film on the planet Krypton and followed the story of the planet's destruction (yes, regardless of the rumors, Krypton does indeed explode) quite closely to Richard Donner's 1978 film … yet it somehow doesn't feel like a retread of something we've already seen. The credit goes to the totally different ecological system of the planet (no ice planet here), and the performances of Russell Crowe (Jor-El) and Michael Shannon (Zod). You know right from the start that Zod is badass, but even pacifist Jor-El engages in a smackdown against him before the Kryptonian council sends Zod and his people to the Phantom Zone.

After baby Kal-El – the first natural born child on Krypton in centuries (they're all manufactured to perform various duties from floor sweeper to politician) – is sent to earth, we are mercifully spared his whole childhood and pick up with a grown Clark navigating life trying to keep his true abilities under wraps. Of course, he does something that gets nosy news reporter Lois Lane on his trail, and here the story does depart from the traditional mythology – Lois knows Clark Kent is not of this earth and he is forced to show her what he can do. It's so refreshing to not have to deal with the whole "why is Lois so stupid that she can't see Clark is Superman" thing. It's like a weight has been completely lifted off of the story, and when Zod and his army arrive on earth (and their escape from the Phantom Zone is very well explained), Lois is just as important to stopping them as is Kal-El (only referred to as Superman in one scene by military personnel).
Once Zod arrives, the film kicks into high gear with an epic battle that stretches from Smallville's Main Street to the center of Metropolis. The question is why does Zod want Kal-El so badly (no, not for revenge for his time in the Phantom Zone), and what are his plans for earth? It's actually quite a chilling scenario that is going to take teamwork from Kal-El, Lois and the military to stop.

I have complained about how Star Trek Into Darkness was nothing more than a rehash of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan, and if you want to come right down to it, Man of Steel is pretty much a rehash of parts of Superman: The Movie and Superman II. But, whereas I was angry with the direction Star Trek went with the story (if you're going to intentionally break away from the original timeline, then give us original stories, for Pete's sake), I found a lot to like about the way the material was handled in Man of Steel. Did we need to see Zod again? Maybe not, but in the context of this being an "origin" story, it was necessary since he is the most recognizable Kryptonian villain and there is a reason he's on Kal-El's tail. Thankfully, there is no Lex Luthor, although there are references to LexCorp a couple of times.

There is also just enough material in the film that will take long-time fans back to the first two Christopher Reeve movies, but it never feels like it's just there to pander to the fans (I liked that the first time we see Lois, she's getting out of a helicopter instead of into one). And Snyder and his team have managed to ground the film in reality outside of the almost way over-the-top battle between Kal-El and Zod. Scenes with Clark and his mother, or just quiet moments between him and Lois feel authentic, as do the flashbacks to his youth (well, except for the new version of Pa Kent's death), and the actors are playing the characters as if they were in anything but a superhero movie. They're certainly not as earnest as any of the Dark Knight characters, but I totally appreciated the genuine human emotion they bring to the characters. Besides the crazy, Metropolis-leveling battle, my only real eye-rolling moment was when they seemed to go out of their way to let us know this "savior of earth" is 33 years old. I know there have been correlations to Kal-El and Jesus in the past, but this little bit of info was just a bit ham-fisted.

Other than that, and the wretched 3D conversion (we had to wait a whole year for that?!), Man of Steel ranks up there with the best of the superhero films, but the question now is with Kal-El having already saved the planet from an alien invasion of sorts, where can he go next? The Reeve Superman was able to rescue kitties from trees and save California from destruction at the same time, so I hope we get more of those small, charming moments in the next film (already in pre-production). We've seen what the excellent Henry Cavill can do with the character (and he sells one particularly gut-wrenching moment that drew gasps from some audience members, including myself), and I am more than ready to see where he and Kal-El will go next.

Sunday, July 22, 2012

The Dark Knight Rises –
An Epic Conclusion

I was fortunate enough to see The Dark Knight Rises just hours before the senseless tragedy in Colorado, but it seems a little frivolous to even try to sit down a critique the movie only days afterward. I want to send my thoughts and prayers to those who have been affected by this violent act.

Eight years have passed (in movie time) since the events of The Dark Knight, Gotham City is crime free thanks to the Batman (although he and Commissioner Gordon decided to give the late Harvey Dent all the credit so as not to smear his name), but a new menace has come to town in the form of Bane, a muscle-bound mask-wearing thug bent on reducing the city to ashes and giving the 99% what they deserve. What's a retired superhero to do, especially when the man inside the costume is himself a broken down husk living the life of a recluse inside his gigantic mansion? When Bane and his men manage to acquire a copy of Bruce Wayne's fingerprints (courtesy of cat burglar Selina Kyle) and wipe out his fortune on a bad investment and then set off a series of bombs beneath Gotham City that cuts them off from the rest of the world, Wayne has no choice but to don the cape and cowl yet again.

The Dark Knight Rises is Christopher Nolan's epic conclusion to his Dark Knight trilogy that started with Batman Begins back in 2005. The new film actually closes out the story introduced in that film, virtually ignoring the events of The Dark Knight (Nolan preferred not to have any references to The Joker out of respect for the late Heath Ledger), so a refresher view of that film may be in order before tackling the new one. The introduction of the villain Bane, played by Tom Hardy (unrecognizable under his mask, with his face only being seen once in a fleeting flashback), brings us back to the first film in the trilogy because his reason for coming to Gotham is to finish what Wayne's mentor-turned-bad guy Ra's al Ghul (Liam Neeson) started – get rid of the corruption and return the city to the people. Bane wants to steal a device created by Wayne Industries that was intended to produce free, unlimited, green energy, but of course it's a device that can also be turned into a bomb with a little tinkering (which is why the device was never publicly revealed). The question is: How does Bane even know about this device? He's obviously got someone on the inside of the corporation helping him, but who?

We're also introduced to Selina Kyle (Anne Hathaway), the sexy cat burglar (never referred to as Catwoman) who is tied in to Bane's plan, and Miranda Tate (Marion Cotillard), the partner on the green energy project who lost a lot of money when it was tabled, but becomes Wayne's ally after the failed takeover of Wayne Industries. It's up to her and Lucius Fox (Morgan Freeman) to keep the city safe once they discover what Bane is up to. And there's also John Blake (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), the idealistic young police officer who learns what really happened to Harvey Dent and the sacrifice the Batman made to save the city. But with all of these characters either trying to save or destroy the city, not everything is as it seems and there is one major plot twist in the third act of the movie that completely changes everything you thought you knew was going on (and anyone familiar with Batman lore probably already knows the big twist and the true identity of one of the characters).

So with all of this action, not to mention the psychological aspects of Bruce Wayne and Batman, is the movie all its been expected to be? I say yes, even with its various problems. I've seen plenty of griping from the hardcore Bat-fans about the plot,the ending, and inconsistencies … and the fact that for a Batman movie, there is actually very little Batman (or Bruce Wayne for that matter). Yeah, it is odd to conclude a story with the title character barely there, but does that make it a terrible movie? Not at all. I was engrossed by the story and shocked by the reveal of the villain's true identity (no, I don't follow the comics or graphic novels), and Nolan's staging of the action is masterful, especially when you know that most of it was done on set and not with CGI effects.

Are there problems with the storytelling? Definitely. Sometimes it doesn't make a lick of sense and the twist pretty much undoes everything you believed up to that point. Yes, there is a shocking lack of Batman, and the movie actually gives Bane the bulk of the screen time. But none of that mattered to me. The only thing that really bugged me was Bane's ridiculous voice. When the first trailer hit, everyone complained that you couldn't understand a word he said through the mask. Apparently that's been fixed, but now it's just too clear and … bizarre. He sounds like Christopher Plummer in Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country! It's very odd to see this huge, muscular guy talk like a 70-year-old Englishman (and in the graphic novel, Bane is actually from South America!). The voice was off-putting, and anyone could have been under that mask (which reminded me of the Tusken Raiders of Star Wars). The pluses, though, outweigh the negatives. Despite the original scoffing, Anne Hathaway was excellent as Selina Kyle. She was sexy, alluring, and could really kick ass. Plus she brought the film most of its lighter moments when things were starting to get a little too dark and depressing. Joseph Gordon-Levitt was also an excellent choice for Blake. He was totally believable in some pretty unbelievable situations, and he gets a nice character arc that runs through to the end of the movie. And I have to give props to Michael Caine, returning as Alfred. He has a terrific scene with Bale as Alfred has had enough of Wayne dressing up as the Batman that left me in tears.

Overall, The Dark Knight Rises may not be a perfect film, and it certainly can never live up to the extremely high expectations some people had placed on it before it opened, but it was still an epic (nearly three hours) film with some terrific performances that fittingly brought to a close Christopher Nolan's version of the Batman story. And that is certainly the key thing to remember – this is Christopher Nolan's vision of the Batman story. He says he's done with it now, but the ending suggests the story could continue. I'm certain it will in one way or another, but for now, this version of the Batman saga is done and it's been a great ride.