The Dark Knight is unquestionably great. This is not a novel idea; I don’t think I’m breaking any new ground by saying this. Indeed, I think you’ll find it hard to come across someone who would argue this point — and should you, I wouldn’t entrust them with any heavy machinery, or small children.

Let’s start with the basics: the story is entertaining. Fast paced without being relentless, intelligent without being inscrutable, over-the-top without being ridiculous. It’s dark, it’s thrilling, it’s fun. Also, the Joker.

Heath Ledger’s performance is everything you’ve heard, and probably more. (I don’t know, it depends how much time you spend on superhero fanboy forums.) He steals every scene he’s in, ultimately making off with the whole movie. Don’t get me wrong, if somehow he was removed from the film you’d still have a solid piece of entertainment. But it’s the Joker that’s earning those record-breaking dollars; it’s the Joker that’ll have people talking about this film for years to come. It’s a breakthrough, it’s note-perfect, it’s pretty much all around awesome. It takes a character we’ve always liked and reminds us why.

Beyond that there’s little I can do but point to Batman Begins. If you enjoyed that introductory chapter, you’ll find much of that familiar flavor here. For the sake of oversimplification, let’s say that The Dark Knight is Batman Begins + Joker + dash of special sauce. It’s a recipe for a sequel that likely surpasses the original. It’s a recipe for tasty morsels.

In sum: The Dark Knight joins WALL-E on the best films of the year list. You should go see it if you enjoy incredible character personifications or men wearing capes.

ta-da

This is going to be a challenging review. The challenge, to be precise, is to fill several paragraphs without simply typing AWESOME AWESOME AWESOME ad nauseam.

WALL•E is a work of genius. (If gushing hyperbole makes you sick, you may wish to exit now.) Emotion is a difficult thing to pull off in any medium, and the fact that they have done it with a love story about two robots who don’t speak more than three words of English is reason enough to see it. The fact that they have done it as well as they have is reason enough to see it again.

It is easily the best film I have seen this year, and I say that without exaggeration. “I laughed, I cried” is so much a cliche that now even parodies of “I laughed, I cried” are cliched; yet laughing and crying are both likely to occur, and both equally well earned. The movie deserves every bit of praise it’s going to get, and those who dislike it should probably search their home and car pretty thoroughly, because they may have misplaced their soul.

Since Pixar isn’t content with just one incredible achievement at a time, WALL•E opens with a near-equally incredible short film–inferior only due to it’s length–titled Presto. Now I don’t have any good reason to complain but come on guys. Now you’re just showing off.

It is good. If you did not get that from the previous four paragraphs you should probably get an MRI or something. With the release of this film, Pixar reminds us all why they are the undisputed kings of what they do.

What exactly is it that they do? I was trying to place it, but then I couldn’t; I honestly don’t think we’ve ever seen it before.

falling with style

While discussing Kung Fu Panda, I alluded to the effect of expectations. Many a good movie has been dealt harshly because of expecting great, and many a mediocre film has been let off easy because of expecting awful. However, some films stand as examples of the converse: that expectations do not an opinion make. The Incredible Hulk does exactly that.

It was another film I thought would suck, I admit. The trailers didn’t do much for me, and despite somewhat positive buzz, I could not find it appealing. Yet these low expectations perform no magic dance. The smoke clears, and the film is just okay.

It starts off well, providing a likable, interesting Bruce Banner. The story builds slow, but not slow — methodical. In a good way. It gains momentum and intrigue, slips into familiar action movie tropes — all still fine, nothing to dislike, even if a bit too structured and predictable.

Then we get to the third act, and they throw everything decent out the window to have a big monster fight. A big, boring monster fight.

Yeah, so the first two thirds are not high art, and contain few surprises. But they’re entertaining. They obey their own rules. By the final fight, even these consistencies are jettisoned. Plot and character are abandoned like a sand-filled life preserver, and even fun is left behind, as the entire city of New York is reduced to a single street and a single rooftop for the most meaningless and low-stakes battle of the CGI baddies this summer.

If you’re desperately hard-up for some comic-book superhero action, you could do worse. It’s not a terrible movie; it’s not a great movie. More like The Tolerable Hulk, am i right?

Sorry.

it was at a funny angle

I’ve put off this review, and I can no longer. It’s not getting any easier, and the delay is just increasing my own apprehension. I must admit to myself what I’ve feared all along: The Happening really, really sucks.

A bit of backstory is in order. I am probably one of the biggest M. Night Shyamalan fans you’re likely to meet. I have every wide-release film he’s ever done on DVD, including Lady in the Water. I know. And I have seen them many multiple times.

I don’t have a particularly logical explanation for this. I like to tell people his style seems custom-tailored to me; that when it’s at its best, it is like a direct line into my brain. I disregard those who fail to understand the brilliance that was The Sixth Sense. I have no time for you if you didn’t appreciate Unbreakable. And should you even think about suggesting that the aliens in Signs shouldn’t have come to a planet with so much water, I’ll probably just punch you in the eye.

The Village faltered, sure. It was a mixed bag, containing wondrous staging one minute, confused ideas the next. Overall I consider it a good movie, with weak elements. Unfortunately, it was a prelude of what was to come.

Everybody pretty much knows by now that Lady in the Water was a bad film. I’m not disputing that. It was one of the most disappointing times I ever spent in a theater. And yet, despite the many (and glaring) problems, there was still magic there. Individual moments, if mentally lifted from their surroundings, that shine. It may be bad, but I’ll watch it any day of the week and twice on Sunday over whatever Paul W.S. Anderson is putting out this year.

However, The Happening is a new low. I mean, it’s still better than anything Paul W.S. Anderson has done but that should really go without saying. Wait, no. Maybe I better explore that.

See, The Happening has me thinking about the various meanings of the word awful. A movie like Alien vs. Predator is awful in a different way than The Happening is awful, though there are similarities. If we consider it in terms of distance, I might say that scenes in The Happening missed being good by a few feet, whereas the entirety of AvP was miles away and actually speeding in the wrong direction.

But only being awful by a few feet is still awful, you know? If someone approached me and told me they’d seen The Happening, and it was the worst film they’d seen all year, I’d find it hard to argue with them.

The issues, in my estimation, are these: 1) the film is not scary, though it should be, 2) the story has no point, or rather the point it has is patronizing and trivial, and 3) the acting is bad and we don’t care about the characters. Actually, maybe those last two should be separate points, for emphasis — because these are very good actors, we know they are, we’ve seen it before — yet their performances here are baffling in their poor and bizarre quality. This must, I’m afraid, be blamed on the material — after all, this is a film in which Mark Wahlberg is asked to both reason with a houseplant and tell everyone around him to outrun the wind.

pimps don’t commit suicide

Mister Lonely is the oddest sort of film to try and write about. It befuddles the mind; it defies convention. For this exact reason — the defying of established conventions — most people will find it outright distasteful, label it awful without a second thought. Of course, most people are idiots — but that’s not a defense of this film, either. I’m honestly not certain what to make of it.

It seems a very personal film, and I like that aspect. I appreciate what the film is trying to do. However, it makes several missteps, and in a few cases, completely misfires emotionally.

There are some very good scenes. There are some poor ones. There is some tremendous acting, mixed with good characterization — a real connection felt — mostly with our two leads. This is sadly mixed with a handful of awkward scenes, even the occasional bout of stilted acting, and the effect is jarring. To make matters worse, the most interesting scenes presented are not (to my mind) ever given a fitting conclusion.

The film wears its independent label like a straitjacket — it is certainly not the most bizarre film I’ve ever seen, but nor is it entirely accessible to a general audience. I do not condemn it for that. Accessibility is overrated in my book; but this being a review, I felt I should let you know.

What else can I say? I would not call the film an overall success. But if you’re seeking something that will make you think — if only about whether you liked it — then you could do worse than Mister Lonely.

you stick by your family

This is really the best sort of place to find yourself, as a movie lover. That moment of sudden stirring of joy — sitting unconsciously straighter — eyes snapped to attention. That realization, with expectations so low, that the film you are watching is actually really good. “Pleasant surprise” does not do it justice.

To clarify: yeah, I didn’t think Kung Fu Panda was going to be any good. Honestly, DreamWorks animation is really hit and miss, and the trailers just didn’t seem all that funny or entertaining. On a lark, we ended up in our seats, surrounded by children, awaiting the darkening of the theater.

And then we were basically blown away.

Can I derail this for one second for a personal rant? Why is it that a packed theater of ten-year-olds was more polite and respectful of the film-going experience than any single group of teenagers or college students has ever been in the history of mankind? Teenagers-and-college-students, collectively, I apologize for my vitriol but if you begin a conversation while the movie is playing even one more time I will turn this car around so fast you don’t even know.

Ahem.

So Kung Fu Panda is great. Well written, funny, great action scenes, and absolutely beautiful art direction. (Chronicles of Narnia, take note: this is how you do PG action. And no whining about it being a “cartoon” either, you were pretty much all animated in the computer anyway.) Throughout the viewing I was continually surprised by the intelligence of the story, and the humanity of the characters. This is a film with heart, but without the patronizing.

In fact, with Kung Fu Panda, DreamWorks is on the level with — dare I say it — Pixar. Do not be fooled by their inept marketing. They’ve literally saved every good part for the actual film.

Coming up: another indie film, Mister Lonely, and I believe next week is The Happening?

there is no charge for awesomeness

This week I took a break from the standard fare offered at your local multiplex, and jogged on down to the Main Art to take in an indie flick. The film was Son of Rambow, and you can quick eyeball the trailer if you’ve never heard of it before.

In short, the story follows two kids who are so inspired by the movie First Blood that they decide to make their own sequel. Their resulting misadventures are humorous, touching, and overall pretty much fantastic.

In point of fact, it is hard to find very much wrong with this film. The story is well written, finding ways to do the unexpected even with the predictable. It contains probably the largest concentration of excellent child actors a film has had in years. We care about the characters, there are several different threads for them to follow, and more of them than we expect get their moment.

Now I feel I should warn you there’s a good chance I’m biased. Rewind a couple decades, (then skip forward a few years) and it was me running around, VHS camera in tow, screeching out battle cries while performing all manner of sweet ninja moves, rad sword fights, and totally awesome lightsaber techniques. I don’t want to say I was better than George Michael, but come on he only ever made the one video. And I will neither confirm nor deny my brothers involvement in these shenanigans; I think it’s more amusing for you and I together if you ask them about it yourselves.

All this to say that as I sat in the darkened theater I felt I was watching a movie tailor-made for me. I’d like to think it will work as well for you but I honestly can’t be sure. Do you want to see a film in which elementary schoolchildren battle armed soldiers and an evil scarecrow to rescue Rambo from prison?

Well than what are you still doing here?

he got hit with the piano

Speaking as someone whose childhood was virtually defined by Indiana Jones, I can tell you that the oft-rumored, long-delayed fourth installment is a bit of a mixed bag. Leaving the theater, I found that I was not disappointed — and yet, neither was I entirely satisfied.

So the big news is that Indiana Jones is old now. Spoiler alert! This is all handled pretty well for the most part, and in some cases, with good humor. At the very least, we never have to endure brief cuts of the actual actor intermixed with ridiculous CG fighting. So yay for Harrison Ford and stunt doubles.

There are drawbacks, however- most notably that the film is now set in the ’50s. There’s really no way around that, I understand, but there’s something about it that just never quite gels. A huge part of what defined Indiana Jones in the originals was the setting and tone. The time update alters these so drastically, we sometimes feel as if we’re watching another movie altogether. It isn’t just the time period either — it’s also the subject matter. Without venturing into actual spoiler territory, let me just say that in terms of plot hooks, I preferred the supernatural/religious basis of the first three.

What we have is an Indiana Jones film that isn’t quite an Indiana Jones film. As if to embrace this, the movie introduces a brand new character (played by Shia LaBeouf), and proceeds to try to share the lead role with him. Like the rest of the film, this partially works. It’s an interesting experience, watching an attempt to evolve an established series in this way — and I think your enjoyment of the film is going to rest on your perception of it.

Do not expect to see Indiana Jones and the Sequel that Resembled the Other Movies. This is an update, a re-imagining if you will, and it is a pretty fun summer action movie all around. There are groan moments; there is some greatness there. It is a qualified success.

There is much more I could probably tackle: the use of CGI, the unfortunate presence of some cliches, some predictability, the bad guys, the action sequences, the plot devices, the pacing, and the climax. But it all boils down to a mantra-like repetition of the same refrain — sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t. I think this holds true whether you know Indiana Jones or not.

Next on tap: I have no idea and I’m way too lazy to check my list right now.

i suddenly remembered my charlemagne

The Chronicles of Narnia: Prince Caspian is a bad movie that a lot of people are going to like very much. I will now attempt to dig myself out of the hole that statement just created.

The problem is that the film is entirely inoffensive. This will trick many people into thinking it is actually good, as was clear Thursday night — because the world is full of simpletons, the theater had to endure applause no less than three times during the movie. But the distance from buttered toast to filet mignon is all the way from here to Lord of the Rings. Speaking of which –

I’m not going to start over who ripped off who, I can’t even be bothered to remember or do the basic research required to know how much of it was the book and how much was the adaptation. Let’s just say that Prince Caspian covers a lot of the same ground that Lord of the Rings and Harry Potter have already covered, only this time nobody cares.

And this is the heart of it — there is just no one to care about. There isn’t a single real human being in this movie — instead they are paper thin cutouts, a passable collage of cliches draped over a competent story-structure skeleton. Every single scene is just another bit of exposition designed to take us to the next plot point. It’s not awful, it’s just meaningless. And if anything, The Chronicles of Narnia was never supposed to be meaningless.

This was my main complaint with the first Narnia film. Aslan’s (spoiler alert!) death and resurrection was completely mishandled — what should have been the most epic moment in film that year was reduced to a nice bit of plot twist. What should have been earthshattering was merely interesting. This crime cannot be overstated.

The film does raise some interesting questions. For example, is it still a deus ex machina if you tell us beforehand that you’re going to use it? This is what Aslan has been reduced to, a story contrivance who does only as the plot dictates, and then offers platitudes cloaked as wisdom by way of explanation. Is a battle still exciting if it is almost totally devoid of danger? A character tells us early on that we may find Narnia “a more savage place” than we left it. This, as it turns out, is entirely untrue. And if one more person elects to punch someone in the face with the hand with which they are holding a sword I am going to buy a sword just so I can punch them with it.

It is a nice, safe movie. If I had kids I would take them to it, and I’m sure they would love it. The movie is filled to the brim with “good enough”. The main problem with this is I despise good enough.

Good enough is the reason we still have road construction every year. Good enough is why the only Christian movie ever that didn’t completely suck was not made by a Christian company. Good enough is the enemy of progress, of excellence. Good enough drowned a bunch of kittens in the lake.

Next on tap: Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull. I am very nervous.

however, he had been burned

And so begins a theoretically regular installment of film reviews, in which I observe a movie from start to finish and subsequently masquerade my opinions as fact for several paragraphs. We begin as the summer movie season already has, with Iron Man. Late to the party, perhaps, but never too late to couch a vague sense of superiority in terms of excess syllables.

Before we begin the review proper, let me just go ahead and say I already know what you’re thinking: another amateur internet blog review by a self-satisfied former film student with a chip on his shoulder, how original. To which I say Yes, but! Two very important things distinguish mine from the others. One, I actually have a super-secret magic formula that allows me to always be right while everyone else is wrong. Two, I do not work at McDonald’s.

Iron Man as a film is exceptionally well crafted. I am not talking about the construction of the sets here. They have made a very enjoyable movie; it delivers solid entertainment from frame one and pretty much doesn’t ever stop. This is not one of those movies that got started, built half the model car, then left glue and paint and plastic parts all over the basement for the next eight months. They built the car, they drove it off the lot, and left everybody wondering how in the world they did that with a 1/32nd scale model.

Let me sum this up for you: IS FUN. GO SEE.

That all being said, Iron Man as an experience was somewhat of a disappointment. If you are the type of person who spends time on the internet, or hangs out with anybody who spends time on the internet, or lives in America, you have probably heard some version of “the buzz”. The version I heard was that Iron Man was “so freaking awesome, you don’t even know.” This seemed pretty high up the scale to me, so I was getting fairly jazzed. Then I heard that in addition to “so freaking awesome, you don’t even know,” it was also “better than Spider-Man and X-Men,” and I nearly got totally hyped. I don’t know if I need to explain the difference between jazzed and hyped to you, but I don’t think I do.

To put it another way, the movie is pretty much perfect for what it’s trying to do, but it doesn’t reinvent the wheel. The bad guy is a stock character, you can pick him out twenty minutes in and he doesn’t do anything to change your opinion about bad guy stock characters. There are times when even the comic-book movie suspension of disbelief bar (itself way up there) is pushed against. Rattled a bit, even. There are minor nitpicks. At the end of the day, I found I had a tremendous good time, but no real rushing desire to run back and see it again.

This is the end of the review, but I feel I should make a final note about target audience. If you found any of the following films despicable, there is no reason to think you are going to find anything to like about Iron Man: Spider-Man, X-Men 2, Batman Begins. Or if you hate fun.

Next on tap: The new Chronicles of Narnia movie. My prediction? It will have wonderful production values, okay writing, and really disappointing acting. Check the next installment to see me self-fulfill my own prophecy.

you shot me in the back