Dark Knight Rises

Didn't I just review a superhero movie??? Seems like every time I turn around, another one is released. Why can't we have one summer filled with heart-warming, touching stories about two people hopelessly in love but somehow never able to connect. Maybe one of them could be dying from an incurable disease. Either that, or another Rob Schneider movie.

HA! Sorry, I can't continue like that after tasting the bile in my mouth. The truth is, the last few years have been Nerd Mecca in theaters, and I wouldn't want it any other way. And this year, maybe the ultimate in Nerd-vana, is the final chapter in the Christopher Nolan version of Batman: The Dark Knight Rises.

I'm trying to figure out what to say about this movie, because I keep my reviews spoiler-free. But 90% of this movie is spoilers! So... it's got Batman/Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale), Bane (Tom Hardy), and Catwoman (Anne Hathaway). That's about all I can tell you.

Yes, I've enjoyed all three of Nolan's Batman movies, and maybe this is the best of them but...

Just so I'm clear, I don't hate director Christopher Nolan. I want to, but I can't. He's like that annoying kid in school that always tries to get attention by eating paste. It's fun, but is it unique? Nolan is very good at telling a story, and I like the way I can see most of the action (unlike other directors I hate *COUGH*j.j. abrams*COUGH*michael bay*COUGH*). However, he tries to make a movie set in the 'real world'. Some people like this. It's just not for me. I always feel like I'm watching an episode of CSI: Gotham City, or Law and Order CGD (Commissioner Gordon District).

At the risk of getting pelted by fan Batarangs, for me, none of Nolan's Batmen, were very epic. I personally never had a moment where I looked at his style and said, “Wow!”. Yes, they've had some very good stories, and amazing acting, (particularly Heath Ledger as Joker from 2008's The Dark Knight), but I had no interest in seeing this in IMAX, because he didn't do anything spectacular. I could save a few bucks and enjoy it equally on a smaller screen.

Speaking of acting... How about that Michael Caine as Alfred! He was seriously underused in the previous Batmans, and I'm very happy to see them take advantage of his talents here. I genuinely felt for Alfred, and I appreciated every moment he was on screen.

Also very noteworthy was Tom Hardy as Bane. If you ignore how he sounds like Darth Vader with a bad accent, and if you ignore that his storyline is much different than the original comic book, he really does a great job with the role. Even when he just stood there, he felt very imposing. He truly made this character come to life!

Everyone else did as expected by the caliber of their talents. Morgan Freeman is always good as Morgan Freeman (Lucius Fox), Gary Oldman was very Commissioner Gordon-y, and Christian Bale made a great Bruce Wayne, but still too gravely and stiff as Batman. And did I mention Anne Hathaway as Catwoman? I wouldn't mind watching a movie with her for three hours... in slow motion.

Yes, Dark Knight Rises is almost three hours long, but it does move along very nicely. It is fun and has some exciting moments with great acting, (and an extra wow to Hans Zimmer for an amazing musical score). But try to forget what you know about the comic books. Try to forget that Batman has many gadgets he never uses here. Try to forget how horrible Christian Bale sounds when talking as Batman. And try to forget everything you may know about the medical profession.

And did I mention Anne Hathaway as Catwoman?

There are some things you never want to forget...

Deeesher

Another Spiderman Movie

%@&#! reboots. I hate them. I throw up in my mouth a bit every time I hear the word. Sure there are occasional happy surprises like the 1978 reboot of 1956's Invasion of the Body Snatchers, or 2009's Friday the 13th, or the 1982 remake of the 1951 movie The Thing (and yes I am ignoring the 2011 reboot here). Even the Fright Night reboot was kind of okay. But sadly, 98% of the time, reboots are only a painful reminder of how stupid most movies of the 21st century are.

But wait... What if you reboot a successful movie franchise that started in the 21st century??? What an amazingly moronic idea! With that, Sony Pictures presents: The Amazing Spider-man! Not to be confused with Spider-man 2002.

Do I really need to tell anyone what this movie is about? It's another origin story. I'm pretty sure everyone in America from 8 to 80 could write an origin story for Spider-man. Radioactive spider bites friendly neighborhood nerd... Do the math. Then add Gwen Stacy and The Lizard.

As much as I loved the 2002 version, this 'reboot' wasn't bad. Sure it had it's flaws, and I would never call it 'Amazing', but it was one more decent superhero movie from a growing list of other enjoyable superhero movies.

Director Marc Webb, does a decent job, but I'll always wonder if he got the job because of his name. You might remember him from one of his other action movies like... um... Well okay, he had a romantic comedy (500 Days of Summer), that I heard was fairly successful. At times his action was the typical quick edits, and close-ups so you couldn't quite see what was going on, but not often enough to annoy. He does deserve a pat on the head for his efforts, but he's no Sam Raimi.

Now let's compare our Peters. Tobey Maguire (2002 Peter) vs Andrew Garfield (2012 Peter). This was a surprisingly close race in my mind. I've always liked Tobey's Peter, but I have to admit, I quickly accepted Garfield's Peter without a second thought. There were moments where I felt Garfield was a bit too cocky, but in the end, he fit nicely.

I was also quick to accept Martin Sheen as Uncle Ben. I was worried I would only see The Illusive Man from Mass Effect, but he was just as good for Peter as Cliff Robertson was in 2002.

Now let's talk about the not-so-amazing parts.

I love Emma Stone. I wouldn't say I'm stalker material yet, but I did consider it after seeing her in Zombieland. However, I couldn't see her as Gwen Stacy, 17 year old high school genius with an internship in a huge high tech facility who has access to every room in the building. But then, what do I know about 17 year old girls these days.

I also thought Doc Connors (aka The Lizard, aka actor Rhys Ifans) was a bit one dimensional. And as impressive as they made The Lizard, they should have made a bit more effort on his face. Is a lizard snout so difficult to animate???

Then we have Sally Field as Aunt May. This worked if you forget everything you know about Aunt May. But I think at this point in her career, Sally Field will always be Sally Field in anything she does. And Denis Leary was a fine Captain Stacy but nothing 'amazing' here either.

The biggest problem this movie suffers from, is retelling another origin story. We know where he came from! You told us a few years ago, and we remember cause you did it right!  If you forget everything you know about Spider-man from comics, or the 2002 version, it's not a bad story.  The things it did well were done very well, but Amazing Spider-man will never be Amazing like The Avengers, or Iron Man, or even 1978 Superman. I give it a pretty good, but I wonder how well tickets to The Pretty Good Spider-man would sell.

Now let's compare it to Electric Company Spider-man, Nicholas Hammond 1977 Spider-man, and of course, Japanese Spider-man!

Deeesher