Occupying Wall Street, if only
I would say that director Christopher Nolan’s greatest ambition with his
Batman trilogy is to make the effort worth his time and talent. Here is a guy
who has made some of the best and most original movies of the past ten years (Memento, The Prestige, Inception) and
yet finds himself in between each of his better projects having to make yet
another Batman picture. He made the first one because he was not yet a famous
director. He made so much money that he was practically forced to complete a
trilogy. Of course, in this day and age, trilogies are things of the past when
more money can be wringed out of the type of fans that feel they are honor
bound to “must see” every movie about a character (see Twilight, Harry Potter, Terminator, Pirates of the Caribbean, Spiderman). But with this movie I think we can be
certain that Christopher has finally paid all of his Hollywood dues. From here on out we should be able to
enjoy his creative license unfettered by silly comic books
Comic books are silly. They are so silly that almost every trick a
serious movie director can throw at an adaptation of one cannot completely
overcome the unreality of it all. It takes a great director to come close
though and Nolan employs some rather great tricks to get as far as he did.
First, he has created a true never before scene spectacle by embracing
IMAX and physical effects as opposed to 3D and CGI in his action sequences.
There is a rawness and realism to physical effects that makes violence feel
more visceral than computer generated effects. Compare the fight scenes in this
movie with another comic book tent-pole this year, “The Avengers,” and you will
see what I mean. There is an element of horror present in the way the main villain
Bane, played by art house muscle-man Tom Hardy, goes around beating the shit
out of people with his bare hands that is noticeably absent in “The Avengers.”
You look at the way he kicks ass and go, “ouch.” It’s good stuff. (On another
note, a serious detriment to the effectiveness of the action is the PG-13
rating. Bane twists and breaks a lot of necks in this movie, but these actions
are only visually implied and always just off-screen.) The IMAX is incredible and actually
worth paying more money to see (as opposed to say anything but “Avatar’ in 3D).
The cool thing is that Nolan is not just using IMAX for cityscapes and sunsets;
he is using it for conversations and fistfights. And it isn’t for just a scene;
half of the movie was filmed with IMAX cameras. There is more clarity, there is
more detail, and it is far grander.
Second, Nolan actively tries to ignore elements of the comic book. Take
for instance the character of Selina Kyle, played by Anne Hathaway. In the
comic book she is a leather bound fanboy fantasy known more often as
“Catwoman.” The name “Catwoman” is not uttered in this movie, nor does Selina
Kyle spend her alter ego time in fetishistic leather carrying a whip. Nolan
rightly chooses to drop these details and focus on the woman. In fact, he does this
with Batman, played again by Christian Bale, as well. There is far more Bruce
Wayne in this movie than his alter ego. And it works too. Usually it is the
villain that spruces up a sequel because the hero is already established. Not
here, Bruce Wayne is a more compelling character than the mysterious Bane. Of
course it doesn’t hurt that Bane is never without this breathing contraption
that covers his features and masks his emotions and motivations. You need to be
able to see evil geniuses without their disguises in order to grasp the
understanding needed to truly fear them. Masks are for flunkies like Darth
Vader. Keep that in mind as you watch this movie.
Third, Nolan always contains an undercurrent of current political issues
in the Batman movies. In the second movie, we had the Dark Knight providing
vigilante justice against terrorism using techniques Dick Cheney would deem
absolutely necessary. (It is a relief to see a movie tilt right in its politics
every once in a while if only for originality’s sake.) In this movie, we have a
strong current of class warfare. One of the early targets of Bane is the stock
market where he takes several bankers as hostages. Then there is Selina Kyle, the
cat burglar who steals from mansions and tells a vacuous billionaire, “There is
a storm brewing, Mr. Wayne. You and your friends better batten down the hatches.
Because when it hits, you’re all going to wonder how you thought you could live
so large and leave so little for the rest of us.” It would be an incredible and
ballsy thing to do and pull off this type of conflict. Here you have Batman,
whose alter ego is a billionaire playboy who inherited all his wealth and
stature, and on the other side you have Bane, a man born with nothing in what
is referred to as the worst jail on Earth. He escapes and builds his army of
menial laborers and wayward forgotten youth underground in the sewers of Gotham
city till one day he rises up to daylight and takes over the city. Unfortunately
even though Bane professes that his many acts of terrorism are acts of class
warfare against the greedy and ungrateful rich amongst us, it turns out it is
just a cover for more humdrum motivation. Bane wants to simply destroy Gotham
entirely. I know, I know. That disappointed me too. It’s a recycled nefarious
plot that the movie freely admits is identical to the one in the first movie, “Batman
Begins,” except this time the villain is going to try it with a nuclear bomb.
There is a problem with
that of course visually speaking. For those that remember “Batman Begins,” the
Gotham in that movie looked and felt like a leaking shit-bucket, something that
would actually make sense (using warped logic but still some logic) to wipe off
the face of the Earth. You can’t say that of the city in which “The Dark Knight
Rises” takes place. There has been a rather grand transformation of Gotham
between the years, even more so considering the way the city looked like in
“The Dark Knight.” I mean the first place looked fictional, the second place
looked very much like Chicago, and this one is obviously Manhattan. The
inconsistency is something that might make one wonder just where the hell is
Gotham and why can’t the makers make up their mind about it. As far as I can tell,
they changed the city to Manhattan in order to service a plot point. They
needed a place with bridges to blow up. Again, the problem is that Manhattan
nowadays looks unavoidably like a big pile of money. So a story about class
warfare could certainly work, but a story about destroying a city because of
its wretchedness wouldn’t. I will however give the movie credit in one
important respect. It wasn’t the logistical nightmare that “The Dark Knight”
was. Bane’s plans may be too grandiose to be plausible but they still followed
the internal logic of the character as opposed to the meticulously thought out
miracles of foresight the Joker, supposedly an agent of chaos, kept
accomplishing.
Let me take a moment to explain what I mean by “too grandiose to be
plausible,” because that phrase strikes to the heart of what the problem is
with most comic book movies. Nowadays these movies are not simply content to be
fun-filled frivolity. Nolan’s Batman trilogy is perhaps the best example. There
is plenty of psychology, pathos, and Deep Meaning all over these movies. However
the schemes of the villains are far too successful to make any sense given how
simplistically they are accomplished or on the other hand how simplistically
they are brought down. Because of this, the movie gains a feeling of unreality
whenever say an entire police force armed only with handguns decides it would
be good tactics to charge a line of tanks and machine guns at least fifty feet
away from it in a narrow alley (and actually succeeds in doing so). This
feeling of unreality tends to undercut all of the psychology, pathos, and Deep
Meaning. There’s this great quote from Spiderman. It goes, “With great power
comes great responsibility.” In respect to moviemaking, writers and directors
have the power to pull heartstrings, change minds, and make us care deeply for
the lives of fictional people. At the same time though, if they choose to
commit the viewer to such catharsis, they also have the responsibility to not
fill the rest of the movie with contrived bullshit. That means if you want to
make me care about Michael Caine crying up a storm, I better not see action sequences
that confound the laws of logic or physics or both later on in the movie. I
really don’t think that is too much to ask. For the record, “The Dark Knight
Rises,” for the most part does not have this problem. It just has it to the
point where I cannot say it is a great movie. It isn’t.
No comments:
Post a Comment