The Dark Knight - Masterpiece or Hype?

So what did everybody think of The Dark Knight? Let's hand this one over to you. Instead of a stuffy review why not give us your thoughts instead? Post a comment here and join the debate.

The Wackness

We've spoken at great length on this site about the potential pratfalls involved in making a typical indie movie and there's none so typical as the low-budget coming of age movie with a quirky indie spirit. Sometimes it works to the point where the movie overcomes the inevitability of the teenagers in question being painfully irritating (see Juno for reference). Other times it doesn't.

The Wackness hits screens fresh from success at Sundance (of course) and sounds like a cross between Charlie Bartlett and Thumbsucker in its tale of a loner high-school graduate who takes to selling pot for a day-job whilst attending therapy with a stoner shrink who is his best customer and could be his best friend.

Where The Wackness succeeds in differentiating itself is in its unusual stylistic choices. It's set in the early 90's for almost no discernible reason (the protagonist is a white-boy who listens to hip-hop instead of grunge, which may set him apart in the 90's but surely a similar distinction could have been made today). The colour grade is extreme and stylised with sickly greens and sepia browns making it look almost like a low-budget thriller or prison drama rather than the light hearted dramedy that it is. It could be jarring but what it does is takes us away from expectation and formula and anything that makes us feel like we've seen this sort of thing before.

The two central performances are of the highest order. Ben Kingsley will get all the plaudits for his entertainingly unhinged, eccentric shrink but whilst his performance is undeniably enjoyable and scenery-chewing, it still falls into the category of predictably quirky. The real kudos should go to Josh Peck who impressed so much a few years ago in Mean Creek and who now offers us a subtle, bravely nuanced performance which has the courage to remain stilted and isn't preening for attention or showing off. The kid is somewhat numb to the world, insulating himself at all times and accordingly that's exactly how Peck plays him.

Unfortunately, the movie is meandering and quite directionless in its story-telling. There seems to be little indication of what anybody wants to do or achieve until right near the end. Consequently, it flags in places and whilst it isn't attempting to be a comedy, it still isn't as funny as it thinks it is. It does finally come together to pack an emotional punch and just about manages to amount to the sum of its modest parts and it deserves extra credit for treating familiar material with a fresh eye. Now that Josh Peck has lost the weight of his younger years, which could have pigeon-holed him, Hollywood should come knocking...if there's any justice (Editors note: there isn't).
3/5

The Mist

The Mist is Frank Darabont first directorial effort since The Majestic. After the success of his earlier films The Shawshank Redemption and The Green Mile, the Majestic was a failure critically and commercially. The Mist, a horror with a seventies b-movie style, his third adaptation of Steven King material sees Darabont return to form.

As the film begins we are introduced to artist Dave Drayton (Thomas Jane) and his family. As night falls a storm hits their little town in Maine. The following morning as an ominous Mist closes in on the town Drayton, his son and his neighbour head into town to get supplies. By saying more we would run the risk of giving away to much. Which would be a really pity, this is a film where the less you know going in the better.

Suffice to say that The Mist is well worth the trip to the cinema. Strangely for a horror it is observing how the characters react to the pressure they are put under rather than the action itself that makes this film so great. The ensemble cast is excellent here with some great performances. Particularly from Marcia Gay Harden and Toby Jones. Even Thomas Jane, though an actor of limited ability, gives a solid performance in the lead role.

The action though is also great, with some excellent CGI. Despite its 126 minute running time, it doesn’t seem like a long film as Darabont keeps us enthralled throughout. Go enjoy!

4/5

The Visitor

It has long been acknowledged that there is barely such a thing as a real indie movie anymore. Most so-called indie movies are actually financed by specialist arms of major studios or by companies that are ultimately owned by the same corporations as the major studios. If a movie is made independently, it is almost always picked up for distribution by a major. So it seems the term indie is used more as a reference to style/genre/ethos than to a specific financial category. As with any style/genre (we use the term loosely here since it probably doesn't strictly fit the bill) there are formulas and audience expectations that make them feel predictable. This is particularly true of the character-based 'life-affirming' indie as opposed to the low-budget guns and gangsters kind. There's definitely a creeping sense among audiences that we've seen it all before.

It's into this difficult climate that Tom McCarthy's sophomore film The Visitor emerges. McCarthy's is an actor turned director whose debut film The Station Agent was a small, charming gem that deservedly garnered critical acclaim on the festival circuit and arguably added to the template of 'typical indie fare'.

The Visitor is about a lonely college professor who has effectively resigned from life until he finds 2 immigrants squatting in his apartment. The trio become unlikely friends and life lessons are learned, passion for life is re-ignited, residual grief over dead relatives is surmounted, romance is hinted at, but never overtly expedited (nothing so crass!) and credits role amid much ambiguity.

All this is fine and works extremely well in many indie films, in much the same way as a thriller can be formulaic but gripping if it's treated right. As mentioned The Station Agent is so full of easy-going charm that it succeeds brilliantly within this formula. The Visitor however, is a more difficult beast, to be admired for certain reasons and to be given the cold shoulder for others.

What makes this admirable and unusual for a character-based indie movie is its political edge and it's acute sense of anger at the treatment of asylum seekers. It manages to tackle an issue, if not quite head on, then through the indirect prism of the characters' worlds and is all the better for this angle of exploration. It doesn't feel preachy. It doesn't seek to inform but rather to explore and help find understanding.

That said, this causes some associated problems. The film can never quite decide if this is a story about a man rekindling his zest for life or whether it's a story about a man finding his passion through anger and a sense of righteous indignation. It seems the latter scenario would be fresh and interesting for a film of this type (or for any film for that matter - as Jonny Rotten said; anger is an energy - one too often ignored). Instead, what happens is that the zest-for-life moments sit a little incongruously in such a sombre, morose piece with the result that they feel shoehorned in and stick out as what they are, boring staples of the 'genre'.

It seems a strange criticism to level at a movie but this wasn't as enjoyable and entertaining as The Station Agent quite simply because it lacked that movie's charm. Yet it fails to break new ground and be an unusual example of the form, in that it tries too hard to have charm. Damned if you do. Damned if you don't. It's still a damned good effort and worth a look.

3/5

The Incredible Hulk

Early expectation of this rebooted version of the Marvel’s ‘Hulk’ franchise was not great since some considered ‘The Incredible Hulk’ to be one of the risky releases of the summer. Since audiences were under whelmed by Ang Lee’s decent 2003 ‘Hulk’ film and in the months leading up to the release of this incarnation (co-written by Edward Norton and Zack Penn, and directed by ‘The Transporter’ helmer Louis Leterrier) the internet was rumbling of editing room arguments between Norton and the producers over the theatrical cut of the film; all this combined with a late marketing campaign boded ominously for the film’s release.

If anything ‘The Incredible Hulk’ knowingly owes buckets to the successful 70’s TV series. If you had seen that as a child you too would remember diving behind the couch as David Banner transformed into the Hulk. And it’s because of this connection that there is a warm comfortable familiarity surrounding ‘The Incredible Hulk’. Edward Norton’s ‘Bruce Banner’ reminds us of ‘David Banner’ of the series, wandering the world trying to find a cure for his green condition while encountering troublesome locals who just insist on making him angry.

But this is also a hindrance to the film. ‘The Incredible Hulk’ never feels like more that an extended television episode where the themes and the texture are thin. Edward Norton’s Bruce Banner is somewhat underwhelming and almost vacant. He’s neither as entertaining as Tony Stark or as complex as Bruce Wayne, he’s just a bit, well, boring. Which is a shame since we all know how fine an actor Mr. Norton is and the character of Bruce Banner should be fertile ground for a cerebral exploration into the root of Banner’s rage; maybe a study on repressed paternal rage… Wait, they did that and fans hated it, oh well, no character development then.

This leads us to the reputed missing seventy minutes. Certainly ten or fifteen of those are covered in the opening montage but one has to wonder what was lurking in the cut pieces of celluloid. Where the producers so scared by the underperformance of the 2003 film that they removed any material that wasn’t pertinent to fulfilling a ‘HULK SMASH’ film? Maybe a DVD cut will answer the fans speculation.

‘The Incredible Hulk’ works in its visceral set pieces when the Hulk finally gets to unleashes his fury; notably in an exhilarating sequence on a college campus where the Hulk faces off against the military. And it’s the direction of these action scenes where director Leterrier should be applauded, his experience of OTT comic book action from ‘The Transporter’ films certainly pays off here. Also, Tim Roth’s ‘Super Soldier’ antics are a pleasant surprise by miraculously not looking crap.

The film’s major down fall are it’s characters, from Liv Tyler’s shrinking ‘Betty Ross’ to William Hurt’s over distant and snarling ‘Gen. Ross’, all are literal adaptations from the comic book pages. Something which is not necessarily a good thing since film audiences are more accustomed to some sort of character development.

Of course, we are now in uncharted cinematic territory with this coming stable of ‘Marvel’ films. For the first time in Hollywood cinema, Marvel will be expanding the universe of there characters across several different franchises and ultimately unifying in a team up film of ‘The Avengers’ to be released in 2011. This ambitious and expensive endeavour in turn limits the range of movement of the individual films since they must consider a unity of tone and character for not only their own franchise but the super-franchise of ‘The Avengers’.

At the end of the day, ‘The Incredible Hulk’ looks and feels like an updated version of the classic 70’s TV show, a little bit episodic and underdeveloped but when the Hulk does rip through Bruce Banner quaint garments it’s a real treat.

3/5

Gone Baby Gone

After a four year old girl is kidnapped and a flailing police investigation the child’s aunt hires two private detectives (Casey Affleck and Michelle Monaghan) to look in the seedy crevasses the cops cannot.

For audiences who have seen the Clint Eastwood directed ‘Mystic River’ they will find themselves in familiar territory with ‘Gone Baby Gone’ since both films are adapted from Dennis Lehane novels. It’s not only the sourced author that both films share, there is a sense that director and co-screenwriter Ben Affleck was keeping a close eye on Eastwood’s film when creating this project. And in doing so, he has managed to imitate both the accomplishments and shortcomings of ‘Mystic River’

It’s in the adapting that ‘Gone Baby Gone’ begins to fall short of the mark of an altogether satisfying crime story. The second half of the film feels like an abridged version of the novel where voice over and flashbacks do most of the story telling. Despite this being a detective film where both those devices are staples in the genre, here, they feel like short cuts and take away from an engaging first half.

Despite this Affleck’s directorial debut is a solid success. He brings to what could have been a conventional Hollywood thriller a personal touch, making the landscape of the film real and harnessing solid performances from the cast, notably from brother Casey Affleck. It’s in the films final moments where it regains itself and left this reviewer feeling that writer and director Affleck could become a solid Hollywood director.

Who would have thought ten years ago that younger brother Casey will have the greatest potential to be the leading man over the Affleck brothers. But Casey is a hero for the 21st century, the disenchanted century where our heros are the trusted boys next door.

‘Gone Baby Gone’ is a solid entertaining detective film which are too far and few these days. It’s almost a four star film, almost. The trip up in the second half makes it fall just short of the mark but it will be enjoyed by anyone looking for a good old crime yarn.

3.75/5

Indiana Jones & The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull

Gee whizz! How does one review this movie? Perhaps it would be easier to transport oneself back to childhood to remember the excitement that an Indy film would arouse. If that seems difficult, ask George Lucas how he has manged it. He appears to have remained a child trapped inside the body of an aging Alf the alien lookalike. It seems anything he touches these days is tinged with the feverish and unfocused excitement of a kid with a big train set.

Until we talk to George, you'll have to put up with an adult review for the moment. Crystal Skull has a set-up that, like it or hate it, comes right out of the Spielberg and Lucas playbook. Indy becomes embroiled in the a quest for a Crystal Skull that the Russians (the new baddies) are seeking as it may have powers that are not of this earth i.e. extra-terrestrial. So it's heroes, action and aliens and a bit of sci-fi. The key to this quest is finding an loopy professor and the mother of Shia LeBeouf's cheap imitation of a young Brando. Yes, we are now in an era that Lucas and Spielberg can personally remember, the 1950's. Thus the reds are under the bed, the UFO's are in the sky, everybody looks like an extra from Grease and soft focus apple-pie Americana is everywhere.

Lucas and Spielberg lay all this on thick but somehow the 1st act still works quite well. It zips along at a nice pace and with good humour, charm and top-notch action set-pieces that never let Indy veer into CGI superhero territory. We feel his human limitations and believe the peril we're seeing even if the Russians obviously went to baddie shooting school. Then the quest and the goal arrive and he sets off upon Act 2 and things start to creak until they fall apart.

A horribly expedited plot leads to a quest we don't quite understand involving characters we don't really care about for reasons we're unsure of and we begin to wonder why everybody doesn't just pack it up and go home. That said, putting on rose tinted kid glasses, wasn't this the case with the previous 3 and they worked quite well. The plot is of course irrelevant so as long as all the other ingredients work then what's the problem?

Well ingredient 1 is the breakneck, popcorn friendly old-school action sequences that had us all having epi-fits as kids. Well the bad news is these just don't work. Though impressively choreographed and executed as one would expect of Spielberg, they betray the spirit on an Indy movie in that a) Indy and many of the other principles feel superhuman and immune to injury of any sort. b) Simplicity is jettisoned for an orgy of over-the top action with CGI that feels like it's straight out of The Mummy. There are (almost) no booby traps, closing walls, bridge's over corcodile pits and trap doors from which to rescue his hat. Instead we have characters impossibly swinging from tree to tree on vines as if they are Spiderman, surviving waterfall drops as if they were immortal and straddling 2 jeeps simultaneously as if they were...well, as if they were on a green screen stage in front of a wind machine quite frankly. In other words, simple effective visual drama is exchanged for meaningless, supposedly awesome spectacle. The curse of the CGI era. Shock and awe over story.

Ingredient 2 is Indy's dry wit. Apart from the first act it's mostly missing. Harrison Ford just doesn't have the timing any more and his one-liners are hopelessly cheesy. When he winds up for one, we see Harrison not Indy and we cringe appropriately. To be fair, he's not the only one to let the side down. It's perhaps harsh to say but there might be a reason that Karen Allen hasn't had much work since Raiders. 2 words. Ham Sandwich.

Ingredient 3 is Indy's repeated character arc of reluctant sceptical hero who ends up doing things for the right reasons and truly believes in the mystical power at the end. This is hiding among the mess somewhere, but it's unfocused and unclear and ultimately unsatisfying.

Ingredient 4 is our respect and love of Indy for just being so damn kick-ass and all-knowing. Here he makes so many mistakes that the audience are just screaming at him to cop on! Keep an eye out for his relationship with Ray Winstone's shamefully underwritten character as an example.

To be fair, this isn't a disaster. The set-up is good and it offers us a chance to view Indy in a new era and in an altered cultural landscape, which justifies his return. Dispite the criticisms above, this is still an Indy movie and there are enough traces of the original ingredients of the recipe to make this taste like the real thing. It's fun, it's unpretentious, it's technically well-crafted, and it seems to have been done in the right spirit. Whereas John McClane's return pissed all over the legacy of a rounded trilogy and offered no artistic reason for the comeback, this just about manages to fall closer to Rocky than Rambo in this emerging aging hero sub-genre.

Lucas and Spielberg neither deserve a pat on the back nor a bat to the head. I can't help wonder how Lucas would defend our criticisms if he had the chance. Based on this slice of Americana apple-pie, one suspects he might stay stuff like gee whizz!

2/5