Written on 8:19 PM by Jack B.
As someone who loves Joan of Arc and believes, much like that legendary cynic Mark Twain, that she was "by far the most extraordinary person the human race has ever produced" I find the film nauseating and disrespectful and don't want to waste time explaining it. But it is a foremost example of what NOT to do if you are planning on making a film on a historical person.
When you have to begin your movie about one of the most chronicled people in pre-modern history (we know more about Joan through her trials and re-trials than virtually any other person in medieval history) with a gigantic lie - that of her sister (who DID exist and was NOT murdered) being murdered and raped all because the filmmakers could not imagine Joan actually being motivated by anything so "silly" as patriotism or religious sentiment then you know the movie is not worth it. And it doesn't help when you pretend your main characters is Joan of Arc when it's really someone you made up - the thing about Joan was (and this struck people at the time) is that all the while she said God had sent her she was very normal, plain-spoken, even keeled, she was even very witty, smart and sharp (read some of her testimony and see what I mean). Milla Jovovich portrayed her a screwed-up manic religious fanatic - not the kind of person that could have scared the English or inspired the French.
Posted in
joan of arc,
movies,
reviews
|
Written on 8:11 PM by Jack B.
I went to an 11am showing today - the theater was 3/4 packed on a Friday Morning (and it was the second show of the day) so that says something about how big this is going to be. All those glowing reviews for this movie are right on, this is one movie that's actually much BETTER than the trailers for it. So here's my review, complete with spoilers (complete with one big twist at the end that I didn't see coming but in retrospect was completely obvious). If you hate that kind of thing turn away when you come to that part...
First of all let me begin by saying that in my opinion
Batman Begins is now the
best movie adaption of a comic book
EVER (and I'm counting
Spiderman I and
Superman I). Warner Brothers should sign Chris Nolan and David Goyer to an eight picture deal because they more perfectly get Batman than any "Hollywood" type I've ever seen. The script was tight and fluid with no unnecessary exposition and no glaring plotholes.
I loved how things fans nitpicked like the cowl (which turned out to be too stiff and defective) and the Batmobile (which needed to be Tank-like to get out of those jams) were directly addressed. Now on the that big twist, turn away if you don't want to be spoiled...Okay, everybody else still there?....Well then let's just say that even those fans who thought Liam Neeson would have made a better Ra's than Ken Watanabe got their noses tweaked (and that's all I'm going to say about that). The killing of the DA opens the way for Harvey Dent in the second film (and Two-Face in a third). The Joe Chill reference automatically places the film out of the Burton/Schumacher universe (and it makes even Burton's films look like cartoons by comparison). Its as if Nolan and Goyer knew exactly what complaints people would have and got them out of the way.
The absolute best thing about this movie though is that its about Bruce Wayne and not "Batman". In the first 4 films we had 3 different actors play Batman and didn't matter because all that mattered was if he had a square chin. Bruce Wayne the man didn't matter. Here the opposite is true, we see Bruce more than Batman. We understand what drives him and the script's focus on the twin forces of "fear" and "justice" drove it home, as does Bruce's discovered love for being a Wayne and what that represents (in the end he decides to rebuild the burnt down Wayne Manor exactly the way it was after spending most of the movie not caring about his Wayne legacy) and as what Falcone jeeringly called "the Prince of Gotham" - we see this is
his city and what he'll do to protect it. Also, the stressing of Bruce's parents especially Thomas Wayne, of their example and the imprint on Bruce and on Gotham was better done then even in the comics. We can see why he spends every waking minute trying to prevent other people from losing what he had.
Now on to the acting - Bale was great. All those who wanted him for Batman were exactly right. The brown hair threw me off at first but it was easy to see him as Bruce Wayne, playboy (and even the younger Bruce since he still has a boyish face) but I knew,
I KNEW, he was Batman in the scene when the crooked cop (Gordon's partner) is bunjeed up to the rooftop and the angry sinister voice that Batman makes wanting answers (so unlike Bale's Bruce) is
EXACTLY what I think Batman would sound like if he was speaking to the criminals of Gotham. Gary Oldman has once again proven why he is one of the best movie actors in the world today - the man who has made a career out of playing nuts, criminals and homicidal maniacs was pitch perfect as the most honest cop in Gotham, the world-weary blue collar middle-aged family man Jim Gordon. Michael Caine's perfomance was also proof of what is great this about this film. Caine is a big name legendary actor - in the old Batman films he would have been cast as a colorful villain (like Chris Walken) or supporting character (like Jack Palance) that would have allowed him to chew the scenery. But no, despite not looking at all like comic book Alfred, he perfectly captured the character's twin roles of both servant and surrogate father, reminding Bruce of his duty to his family and his duty to himself (and Alfred got the best lines too). Morgan Freeman and Rutger Hauer are always good in my book and Cillian Murphy, despite not looking like my idea of Dr. Crane, was suitably creepy. Tom Wilkinson tries a little too hard to disguise his Britishness by playing Falcone as Gotham's version of the stereotypical Italian crime boss and doesn't totally succeed. Katie Holmes was a kind of weak link, not because her acting was that bad (although it wasn't great either, she was just
BLAH), but because the role was so dull that any talented starlet her age could have pulled it off.It didn't help that although Holmes is in her mid-20s, she still looks like a teenager and thus hard to buy as an experienced assistant DA.
Art design was wonderful. No more faux-art deco New York version of Gotham but a totally realized modern city with its own look and feel (with Wayne Tower and the Wayne family at its center) A city with both its rich and poor areas, a perfectly done urban jungle. The score by Hans Zimmer was not as melodic or rhythmic or super-heroish than Danny Elfman's Batman theme but I think it suited perfectly to the darkness and oppressiveness of Gotham before Batman brings a little light to the city.
Biggest pops from the audience I was sitting with - the double slap out of nowhere by Rachel to Bruce in the car, first appearance by Batman in Falcone's warehouse, Lucius's line to Earle at the end "What, you didn't get the memo?" and of course the Joker card which had people going "Wo!". Almost everyone applauded when the end credits started. My favorite line though had to be exchange between Gordon and Batman "There's only one of you" and Batman replies "Now there are two of us". That perfectly exemplified what these two men, so different and yet so similar, have in the comics but which is left out in the earlier Batman films as unimportant.
The only cons are the character of Rachel which seemed like just another excuse to have a love interest (which I don't think a Batman movie neccessarily needs) and shoe-horning her into both Bruce's childhood, the DA's office prosecuting Falcone, needing protection from Crane etc. just smacked out damsel-in-distress syndrome. Bruce revealing who he was (although never actually saying it) was a tad unbelievable to me as well. I also noticed the same (
shiny) green car she drove Bruce off in the beginning is the same (
STILL shiny) green car she's driving seven whole years later. That must be some car!10. All in all I dearly hope WB had Nolan, Goyer, Bale, Oldman and Caine tied down to more than just 3 picture deals. Given Bale's young age, they can keep this particular Batman franchise going for more just 4 pictures and I would look forward to one of these coming out every 2-3 years or so. Nolan's a smart cookie too, unlike the mistakes in the past with killing the villains, the Scarecrow is alive at the end, Arkham is emptied (thus explaining why Gotham is home to the crazy villains) and Ra's probably survived. I would love to see Talia (Ra's devoted daughter and, besides Catwoman, the only woman in the comics to have Bruce's heart - as opposed to Batman's - for more than just a couple of issues) in one of the next 2 films.
The film has it all, action, drama and a good one-liner every now and then. The directing is fluid and the script is tight. The supporting cast actually
support instead of focusing the attention on themselves and Bale is definitely now a top-tier star who has more than shown himself capable of not only being a fine actor (which he's been since he was a child) but one capable of carrying a blockbuster film by himself. Chris Nolan has grown from the relatively small-budget of Memento to now doing justice to a hundred-million dollar budget and creating a work of art. A comic book film that stands on its own as an action drama even if you've never heard of Batman before (if such people exist). Nolan has just catapulted himself to A-List director with this film, just as Peter Jackson did with the
Lord of the Rings films.
Its a terrific film that more than meets the hype. If I was into rating films by stars (which I absolutely refuse to do) I would give it four stars of out four.
Posted in
Batman,
movies,
reviews
|
