Skip to comments.'Dark Knight Rises' Review: Nolan Slaps Obama With a Masterpiece
Posted on 07/21/2012 6:39:37 PM PDT by Bratch
From a purely cinematic standpoint, director/co-writer Christopher Nolan's "The Dark Knight Rises" is a genuine masterpiece. Actually, it's a triumph.
Surpassing the extraordinary hype and expectations surrounding the conclusion to his epic trilogy seemed impossible, and yet somehow Nolan achieved just that. The fact that I'm even debating whether or not "Rises" surpasses its perfect predecessor speaks volumes. Without giving anything away -- without telling you if it's tragic or happy or bitter or sweet -- let me just say that the final few minutes of "Rises" represent one of the most intensely satisfying movie moments of my life.
And beyond filmmaking skills that will surely place him among the all-time greats, what kind of crystal ball does Nolan have access to that gives him the prescient power to begin a project years ago that upon delivery would be as timely and relevant as the latest refresh of the Drudge Report? "Rises" is about many things, but it is mostly about a rousing defense of an America under siege by a demagogue disguising his nihilistic rage and thirst for revenge and power as a noble quest for equality.
(Excerpt) Read more at breitbart.com ...
In a Hollywood lost in shallow, narcissistic depravity, Nolan has himself risen as the New Iconoclast -- simply for believing in what is good and being able to express it in a universal way that touches us all.
Surpassing the extraordinary hype and expectations surrounding the conclusion to his epic trilogy seemed impossible, and yet somehow Nolan achieved just that... Without giving anything away -- without telling you if it's tragic or happy or bitter or sweet -- let me just say that the final few minutes of "Rises" represent one of the most intensely satisfying movie moments of my life... "Rises" is about many things, but it is mostly about a rousing defense of an America under siege by a demagogue disguising his nihilistic rage and thirst for revenge and power as a noble quest for equality. Sound familiar?
if obama had a son, he might look like James Holmes.
Nolte is a friend, Brietbart’s partner, and if he says it’s great, it’s great. Now I have to go see it.
oh gag me with a spoon
Batman was fun on tv years ago
this effort to dramatize the original is annoying
and this movie will probably break records.
I never really cared for it on television (except for the Catwoman episodes) but I tend to agree with the sentiment about such movies.
However, I happened to catch one of the movies on cable a couple of years ago and it was just perfectly over-the-top, in the same way the series was. Honestly, I thought that movie was art.
We must have watched different movies. I went to see Batman and it turned my stomach. It is a recruitment movie for the Occupy crowd. Where every rich person is evil and the masses will revolt against their entitled slave owners and be justified in beating and raping them.
A disgusting piece of propaganda. Every slogan ever utter by the Occupy Crowd was embedded in the script. It had everything the liberals love, free unlimited energy that humans can’t be trusted with. Rich beaten, raped and thrown in the streets. Thousands of Americans held in prison after timed served on whim and unconstitutional law. Every business leader was corrupt except one. A Government willing to trap millions in a city because of a bargain with a criminal element. Millions of Americans to scared to fight back against the tyranny of a thousand. The list goes on and on...
Is there any way to skip the first 145 minutes of mindless carange and go right to the good part?
I wholeheartedly agree, with the first half anyway. I doubt that I’ll go see even one more movie based on a comic book, but if it is at the iMax, then I could get sucked in. :’)
And was this placed in a happy and contented context? Doesn't sound like it. And did it have a punchline?
If you believe that the gay "Batman" of TV was the "original", you are ignorant beyond all redemption.
If anything, the Batman movies of the past few years have represented a largely successful attempt to cast off the insulting, effeminate "Batman" of TV and to return Batman to the truth of his comic book origins, which were indeed dark and "dramatic".
The real Batman has never been "fun".
Uh, too bad about this:
“Starring: Morgan Freeman...”
It is a truly amazing movie and trashes the Occupiers.
Pray for America
wow...the WSJ didn’t give it a great review ...now the terrific review..i thought about going..now all the freepers that saw it that said its horrible....
Guess I won’t go, just because i hate endless carnage..anyone else see it that liked it or agreed with this review?
I never saw the comic book hero as 'dark'.
That is a liberal concept.
The film is a very satisfying end to the trilogy. For many third films, the ideas are no longer fresh, writers can't think of new things for characters to do, so they get small cameos that make no sense. Dark Knight Rises is such a big film that there is plenty to do for everyone, so much so that new characters are even introduced and given significant screen time. Bale does very well as Bruce and Batman. Catwoman is great, Gordon and Alfred are great.
Any fan of Frank Mimller's Dark Knight Returns will be very satisfied with this film.
You liked the queer related sub themes in the Bam Pow Sock TV Batman?
Wow, you and I saw the same movie, but what I saw was totally the opposite of which you write. I guess that is what makes America so great, seeing something from all angles.
I’m hoping all the OWS crowd goes to Batman Rises and gets to see what happens when Anarchy finnally rules, sometimes the great goal is not really what you wished for. Sort of like voting for Hope and Change!!
I expect a liberal slant to movies I watch and for the most part can tolerate it for the visual enjoyment and chance to see the world through another perspective. I don’t mind having my views challenged. However, Batman was so over the top I left the movies angry and disappointed. Hasn’t happened in years. Sure I left disappointed several times, but never angry. The script was childish in its arguments and as I mentioned full of slogans. As a side note, I pay for the D-Box seats where I can seat comfortably with plenty of leg and arm room, so it wasn’t that.
They are the villans. Worse, they are duped villans tricked into becoming pawns, blindly following a greater evil. What occupier in the real world can look at this movie and feel better about the Occupy movement?
Huh? I think you missed the point. By a mile.
I’ll see it when it comes out on TV and don’t really care what critics think.
When I finally saw Avatar, I decided that it was visually stunning and great with music. The plot was idiotic, overdone, and made no sense to a critical thinker. The stone age natives drive the light speed capable humans off the planet yet the humans couldn’t nuke them from orbit. You know, just to be sure.
oh gag me with a spoon
Man oh man; did you ever just date yourself. That has 80’s written all over it.
This movie shows the occupy movement in a very negative light.
Catwoman’s friend go into a rich apartment and declares this is everyone’s home now.
The villian Bane and his minions fuel resentment for the rich (class warfare) and sound just MSNBC.
They beat rich people and declare they are going to take what is really theirs.
bruce loses all his money investing in clean energy
Every Occupy Wall Street slogan was utter during the movie. Whether they were following a greater evil as you state (they didn’t know this, to them he was their savior), there was a lot of satisfaction in the movie by the masses in destroying the rich’s property, raping, killing and overthrowing them. The Government was evil, the rich were evil, every business leader corrupt, the oppressed under the boots of the champagne swillers, and the bad guy, though evil portrays himself as the leader of a successful occupy movement which pleases the masses in general. They never knew they were going to die, they were happy with the result and didn’t fight back.
Similar thoughts here. I have yet to read a Nolte review that wasn't a complete bullseye. He's one of the few that I trust.
I am one who does not buy into, and has never been convinced of, the dark, deep hidden meanings attributed to many films. Sure some are overt, but 99% are no more than a movie and people see what they want to see.
Since when has 'heroic' become 'dark'?Really?
I never saw the comic book hero as 'dark'.
That is a liberal concept.
As I mentioned, I expect to see a liberal slant. I tolerate it for the most part. But Batman was so over the top it was literally a parody of what is wrong with Hollywood.
I think you missed the whole point of the movie, which is that all those slogan was a facade underneath which is just nihilism, and that Batman fought to save the city from them.
He lives in a cave! Hello!
(...by the way, Nolte panned Hunger Games as leftist agitprop, and he was right...)
The movies states through example that the government is willing to imprison it citizens on a whim, rich are corrupt and immoral, the rich deserve to have the possessions forcefully taken from them, we can’t be trusted with unlimited energy (which of course is readily available), we have a weak and timid population (I guess that is why they had to choose a liberal mecca, it would not have happened in the south or in Michigan [Wolverines!]), that for the most part humans do not have one redeeming quality, etc... the script was written by Chris Matthews.
The best thing about the 60’s TV show was Catwoman ( Julie Newmar , Eartha Kitt , Lee Merriweather ) !
Nevermind...that was Ed Morrisey’s review at Hot Air I’m thinking of:
I don’t know if Nolte reviewed it or not.
Infantilization of culture.
Thanks, I prefer the “masterpieces” of professional wrestling matches.
The writer is smoking crack, or rather he’s seeing what he wants to see. Nolan wasn’t slamming occupiers (as if the occupy “movement” was even worthwhile enough to slam). He’s not criticizing anyone. The main villain, Bane, speaks with a preacher’s tongue and has a large coterie of selflessly devoted followers - features indicative of being ultimately driven by adherence to some sort of ideology. But if that’s the case, what is it? If you want to see him as driven by a variant of Marxism - you can; and if you don’t so desire you’re free to see otherwise; his rhetoric is kept scrupulously vague.
Nolan’s not trying to make a statement with his movie, he’s trying to entertain. That’s why there’s no shortage of explosions, and fistfights, and a latex clad babe performing high kicks. The movie flirts with ideas in order to create the illusion of depth; but ultimately anything you see therein is nothing but what you want to see. I have no doubt that some occupier has walked out of a movie theater this weekend convinced that Bane was the exact epitome of an extremist right winger who needed to put in his place by our socialist champion Bruce Wayne.
No, he doesn’t ‘live’ in a cave, he operates from a cave.
The movie stated no such thing, characters in the movie said it, and they were the antagonists whom the audience isn’t supposed to identify with. Unless you somehow thought the movie wanted the audience to identify with Bane and not with Batman?
The villains were portrayed with bombasity and care precisely to deconstruct them.
I doubt I will go to a theater to see this movie, but if I do I will take a gas mask and be packing heat.
SPOILER ALERT highlight below if you want to read.
Bane announced at the football stadium that if anyone attempted to leave Gotham he would blow up the city, showed them the bomb, and murdered the scientist right in front of them. He also killed the mayor in the box seats. I feel this occupation of Gotham was actually modelled on France, in both the German occupation in WWII, and in the reign of terror after the French revolution. The reign of terror part is with Dr. Crane (the scarecrow villan from the first film) being the judge sentencing the wealthy to exile or death. Modelling any characters after the French Revolution is not a compliment.
The situation also sets up a lot of heroism on the part of commisioner Gordon, who runs the resistance, and even his office rival. Most notable is the new character police officer who wants to replace Gordon, then becomes a coward who will not resist, but finally when the counter revolution comes, goes to the front of the charge and dies a hero fighting the occupiers.
Furthermore, look at the character development of Selena Kyle, the Cat Woman. She starts out completely sympathetic to the Occupier mentality, even before Bane arrives. She is the one who whispers, "You think this can last? There's a storm coming, Mr. Wayne. You and your friends better batten down the hatches, because when it hits, you're all gonna wonder how you ever thought you could live so large and leave so little for the rest of us."
But by the end of the film, she has switched sides, and her most memorable line: "You don't owe these people any more! You've given them everything!" And she is not saying that as someone just interested in money or the rich. She now has contempt for the people of Gotham, including the occupiers, that they are not worth fighting for. This story arc completely disavows the Occupy movement.
I don’t care what any reviewer says about “Hunger Games,” I thought it was a pretty decent movie, true to the book, and pretty conservative.
I agree with you up to a point, I don’t think the movie is nearly as clearly rightwing as Nolte is making is out to be. But nor do I think it’s completely value neutral. For one thing it clearly drew analogy of Bane’s “revolution” to the French revolution, which was decidedly a leftist revolution.
The city’s rich were as much as a villain a Bain. Every rich person an oppressor of the masses. The government an oppressive regime. Not one hero in the ordinary masses, instead they enjoy the rape and pillaging of the rich. Destroying their property that they didn’t earn.
The movie could have been so much better if Nolan had faith in humanity. Where citizens fought back, where some of the rich offered food and belongings in support of the poor, where people helped people out of the kindness of their hearts, where honest businessman contributed in this time of need. Where people stood up and died for the cause of right. Nolan has no faith in America or the American people, his portrayal is the opposite of what America is.
Perhaps, it seemed to me to be inspired by the Russian revolution - the kangaroo courts seemed to have the whole "soviet justice" vibe about them.
I saw you say that the other day and was a little surprised. I didn’t think it was as bad as, say, Avatar, but still thought it was written from a lefty persective. Oh well, different strokes and all that. I’m hoping to see the Batman movie this evening.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.