The Dark Knight Rises (2012)

It was a cool Friday morn and The Chief had wiped the sleepy dust from his eyes, stuffed his bag with a particularly sour selection of pic n mix, a bag of sour cream and chili popcorn (amazing) and an sparkling apple drink and headed off to the 7:45am showing of The Dark Knight Rises.

In 7 words or less: Is the Bat breakable? Let's find out

What's it all About? Set 8 years after events from The Dark Knight, the Batman has been strangely absent from Gotham City but when a mysterious new foe appears in the guise of international mercenary and terrorist Bane, the cape and cowl come out of the closet and a bitter, punishing war is fought for the soul of Gotham. 

Best bits? The initial punch-up between Bane and Batman is visceral, raw and unflinching. Bane is a seemingly possessed mountain of a man who exudes confidence and venom in every way. Before they even fight, he is convinced that the shadowy man in black will fail and submit to his unrelenting pressure. Batman however feels that even against insurmountable odds he will succeed purely based on the notion that he has to. This adds a certain gravitas to the scene.

I love good moment of redemption and salvation and the scene where Bruce Wayne 'rises' is full of emotion and fist pumping satisfaction. 

I almost forgot the opening kidnap scene which is a balls wild affair that will have you ooing and ahhing in equal measure at the sheer audacity of the events that unfold before your eyes.

Did it make you think thoughts? Ok, so here's the skinny. It's no secret that The Chief didn't like the previous installment, The Dark Knight. Too much bad plotting and clumsy, sloppy film making conspired to make me feel it was all a big waste of time. I had been advised by fellow slumpers to go into this trilogy ending act with an open mind and 'remember that I like Batman'. Even so, the travesty that was TDK was still fresh in my thoughts like a child's scraped knee but like that child I was ready to jump back on the bike and take her for another spin. If truth be told I kind of wanted this to be a big fat Penguin like failure to prove that a grim and gritty Batman movie just appeals to the lowest denominator. Like a victim of a bank robbery my hands are up. I've been caught in a bat-trap with egg on my face........This film is ace.

One of the main reasons this film succeeds is because of the lack of the main protagonist. It might seem strange but because Batman has minimal screen time it means the remaining cast of characters has to step up their game and step it up they do. There are strong performances, especially Joseph Gordon-Levitt, as well as a compelling story that features emotional highs and lows. It rattles along at a frenetic pace that includes no fluff or padding and resembles a lean, mean, sculpted six-pack flaunting hunk rather than a flabby, overweight gym-needing 30 something it could have become in the wrong hands.

I have a few quibbles about some of the content here. Firstly, whereas the punch sound effects in TDK had a horrible thud to them, the producers here seem to have gone the other way and every back hand, right hook and uppercut clanks like the sound of an iron coffee pot being being slammed onto a draining board. Not good. Secondly, the final confrontation between Bane and Batman is somewhat limp when you consider what has gone before and the soul changing events that have lead both characters to this point. A final twist is also seemingly tacked on towards the end but will have Batman aficionados, who know their bat history, offering up a wry smile as a certain character makes a key appearance. 

There are lots of nods to the Batman comic mythos mainly focusing on the 'Knightfall' storyline and although some of this history is slightly altered it won't, or shouldn't, have the fanboys up in arms (I know this for I am one such fanboy having read Batman comics for over 20 years).

1993's Batman Knightfall story arc

Several other points had me worried pre film but by the end my concern had melted into a gooey pile of relief. I initially thought that the 2hr 45 minute run time would not only crush my spirit but also leave me with a dead bum in need of a massage but I never actually felt the film dragged. Whether or not the eye bleeding sharpness of the IMAX screen or the, oft times, ear splitting thumping score by Hans Zimmer helped me to stay in the moment I can't say. Only an 'at home' viewing will help me determine if 165 mins is too much. The appearance of a bat copter in the trailer had me groaning and it didn't actually seem a necessary inclusion whilst watching the film but it's purpose was rectified by the film's closure. Lastly I was worried that Anne Hathaway's super thief Catwoman character would derail the main plot revolving domestic terrorism. It should be noted however that the name 'Catwoman' is never actually mentioned and the Selina Kyle character proves to be a demur, sexy, high kicking femme fatale that moves the story along in the right ways. She's smoking hot as well!

As far as the end goes, it manages to be massively unsatisfying and then wholly satisfying all in the space of a couple of minutes and brings all the characters full circle.

Would you watch it again? Hot damn, yes I will.

Rating (out of 100%): This trilogy has been wildly up and down as far as I'm concerned (the general public love them all mind you) but Nolan et al have definitely saved the best for last. A fitting send off that actually stands on it's own without needing the first two. I give The Dark Rises an unexpected 92%

A Royal Affair 'En Kongelig Affaere' (2012)

In 7 words or less: Something rotten in the state of Denmark

What's it all About? It's a Danish period drama, but hear me out. Set in 18th century Denmark, English princess Caroline has been trained since birth to become Queen of Denmark, and looks forward to meeting her husband. She has heard that he is handsome and artistic, sharing her love of theatre and music. On arrival she finds King Christian VII to be a simpleton at best, a lunatic at worst. His tutor believes his problems to be minor, stemming from excessive masturbation. Caroline spends an uncomfortable night with Christian, but becomes pregant, which gives her an excuse to avoid his company. Christian, like a petulant child becomes angry and decides to leave on a year-long tour of Europe. On his travels, he acquires a new personal physician, German doctor Johann Struensee (Mads Mikkelsen). Struensee becomes adept at handling the volatile King, and quickly develops a very strong influence over him. He also hides strong democratic leanings, being a proponent of the Age of Enlightenment and admirer of Voltaire. As his control over Christian grows, so does his political power, putting democratic laws into the King's mouth, overthrowing the royal council, and eventually gaining law-making powers himself. At the same time, Struensee's relationship with Queen Caroline grows closer, as she finds herself falling in love with this fellow outsider with radical ideals. Their subsequent intoxication, on love and political power, inevitably leads to their tragic downfall.

Best bits? Alicia Vikander's delicate performance as Caroline, showing her struggling to reconcile her multiple roles as a wife, mother, and queen with her own personal desires as a woman, all in a foreign country that is both strange to her and necessarily close to her heart. Mad King Christian's excellent suggestions for new laws e.g. a day where all the court ladies must go around naked, or a motion to make his Great Dane hound an honorary council member.

Did it make you think thoughts? Definitely. On my cycle ride home my head was full of thoughts about benevolent tyranny, the rights of man, democracy, monarchy, fate, true love, the meaning of marriage (and royal marriage in particular), Mads Mikkelsen's lack of wig, and an overwhelming desire to learn more about Danish history. I also wanted to learn Danish. 'Day' seems to be the same as in English, so I'm on my way.

Would you watch it again? I knew nothing about this period in Danish history, and even if artistic licence was exercised, it still must have been an incredible time to be an ordinary citizen, revelling in new freedoms before turning on the very peple who had granted them to you. Mikkelsen's performance, showing a man who wants to do good before becoming corrupted by power, still chimes with us today. The cinematography, art direction and costumes were all beautiful, setting off the opulence of court starkly against the sheer filth and misery of the lives of indentured serfs. I look forward to adding it to my DVD collection, and only wish that it had been available for more people to see, rather than just those who live near an art house cinema.

Rating (out of 100%): Beautiful, fascinating and a bit with a dog - 90%

The Dark Knight (2008)

In preparation for The Dark Knight Rises I dusted down my copy of this film to get me in the mood.

In 7 words or less: You wanna know how i got these scars?

What's it all About? After saving Gotham city in "Begins" the caped crusader has struck fear into the city's criminal bosses. With the help of Gordon and the new D.A. Harvey Dent they hit the crime families where it hurts them the most, their wallets. In desperation the mob turn to an unhinged bank robber to exact retribution. The Joker. Aaaand.here.we.go!

Best bits? From the silence of the opening credits to Jim Gordons final speech , this is a masterpiece of crime fiction.
The interrogation scene is just word perfect , the chase sequence and the flipping truck, the batpod bursting out of the tumbler! the magic trick! pretty much any scene with Heath Ledger. But lets not discount Christian Bale's layered ,complex character. Sure the Bat voice can do with some work but he gives some real depth to Wayne as he did in the first movie. 

Did it make you think thoughts? Now i love the Avengers , that was a childhood wet dream of comicbook characters come true, but this, this is grown up stuff. This drew on the fears of terrorism, chaos, pandemonium and what a person would do to survive. As the joker puts it : "they're (people) only as good as the world allows them to be, I'll show you when the chips are down, these "civilised people" will eat each other!". 

Not only that , we don't get the hero saves the day ending (spoilers) rather we get the hero takes the blame for the two face killings and becomes the outcast to hide the truth and preserve a false hero's legacy. It rises (no pun intended) the conclusion above your average superhero story asking the question, is being the hero important or is it making a difference no matter what the personal cost? Ironically, isn't that the most heroic thing of all? Taking the bullet or saying you fired the gun so a more acceptable hero can make the world feel safe in the right way we perceive it should be, with a dashing, successful and socially acceptable hero, not the weirdo who likes to dress up as a giant bat. 

in conclusion The Dark Knight Rises will be  possibly more a story of redemption for the Batman character. While the tag line is "the legend ends" it does say he rises first.

Would you watch it again? Yes, definitely. Depending on how good the new one is I cant wait to have my trilogy at Christmas!!

Rating (out of 100%): Batman films formed my childhood and after the evil piece of crapness that was ....was....i cant say it ....batmanandrobin .....this and the first film really rejuvenated my faith in the franchise. I love this film so i'll give it a 95%. Who ever is brave enough to take on the franchise after Nolan is done has their work cut out.

Batman Begins (2005)

In preparation for my 7:45am showing of The Dark Knight Rises on Friday I thought I'd revisit the previous Nolan works

In 7 words or less: How shall I fight crime? Batsuit!

What's it all About? After Bruce Wayne's parents are murdered, he finds himself travelling the globe and after receiving extensive combat training decides to go back to Gotham City, put on a black suit and confront crime head on as.....The Batman.

Best bits? There's a small spoiler here but I assume everyone who will read this has seen the film anyway. The bait and switch with Ken Watanabe supposedly playing the character of Ra's Al Ghul was nice as were the scenes whenever someone got spayed with The Scarecrows fear gas. A demonic looking Batman is fearsome and actually scary.

Did it make you think thoughts? This film should have been called Bruce Wayne Begins as we get so little of The Batman. He doesn't appear until an hour in and after that has little scene time. And when he does show his face it's a fat chubby face. I'm not really a fan of Bale and even though he's ok as Mr Wayne, when he dons the suit he just looks silly. Add in the laugh inducing, cringe worthy attempted gravel voice and, for me, the films biggest downfall is it's main protagonist. Not great. Katie Holmes is pointless and annoying and still looks like the 15 yr old girl she played on Dawson's Creek and Tom Wilkinson's yankee accent is sketchy. On the plus side, Cyllian Murphy as The Scarecrow is good fun, Michael Caine is great as beleaguered family butler Alfred,Gary Oldman is pretty solid as a Gotham copper and Morgan Freeman slots in nicely as Wayne's inside man with all the tech and gadget. 


The word around Slumpy Towers is that The Chief is a hater of the Nolanverse Batman saga. This is not the case. Sure there are many things I don't like but at the end of the day it's a solid action adventure. Would it have worked without the eponymous 'Bat'? Yeah it would. It could just have easily been some kind of combat gear wearing vigilante. I suppose you can repost by saying that it was the start of the franchise and was never going to be a balls wild cape and cowl fest. Herein lies another issue I have. For me, the best super hero films are the ones that don't take themselves seriously but have a cheeky knowing nod to all things campish and jesty. Iron Man, The Avengers, yes even The Fantastic Four and the first couple of X-Men films all do this well. The world was obviously ready for a grim and gritty 'realistic' take on super heroes but not I. You have to remember we're dealing with a silly genre filled with silly names and silly costumes but I suppose Nolan probably did the best he could. At least the action is tight, the sets spectacular and the script (on the whole) is good. Ultimately Joe Public ate it up.

Worst bit? This had me cringing

Would you watch it again? Yeah. It might seem like I've trampled all over this but there is enough to like to warrant repeat views (in the event I can't find my copy of Burton's '89 version)

Rating (out of 100%): One of the main criticisms levelled at the recent Spider-man flick could also apply here. Did we really need another origin story. We all know Bruce Wayne's parents were murdered and then he chose to dress up as a creature of the night to fight crime. Maybe we do but an hours worth of build-up? No. Anyway, when the dust has settled I give give Batman Begins an over hyped but still enjoyable 80%

Domino (2005)

In 7 words or less: Keira Knightley trades period dresses for shotguns

What's it all About? The 'trueish' story of a young rich kid who flunks out of school and embarks on a career as a bounty hunter. Along the way she gets involved in a double crossing, heist gone wrong that makes the s**t hit the fan.

Best bits? Any of the scenes involving Chris Walken's sleasy tv exec are great value, as is the introduction of former 90's 90210ers Ian Zierring and Brian Austin Green for the formation of a reality tv show that follows the exploits of our bounty hunting squad.


Did it make you think thoughts? I really thought I would hate this. Why did I watch it then? I dunno, I guess I'm a bit of a sucker for crap films I can slag off. Accessed denied here though as it was actually quite enjoyable. The intro is good and gives a large chunk of background info without dragging too much. Once the action starts it is hard, fast and fairly brutal. The relationships are interesting with Mickey Rourke playing the hard as nails leader of the rag tag group and Edgar Ramirez, his more than a little psychotic right hand man, having a mega crush on Domino but never doing anything about it. I wasn't too keen on the whole film being shot in a washed of sepia tone but that's a minor quibble.


Would you watch it again? Yeah, I would.

Rating (out of 100%): There are enough twists, plot devices and interesting characters to make this a worthwhile watch. I give Domino a bonesy 74%

The Black Dhalia (2006)

In 7 words or less: LA Confidential take two...just more confusing

What's it all About? Set in 1940's America, two cops are hellbent on trying to solve a murder spree. As they become more obsessed with finding the killer their and dark secrets come to light, their personal lives start to unravel.

Best bits? The opening boxing match between our two heroes is brutal and exciting as is the tension created from the inevitable love triangle.

This guy's shooting at us

Did it make you think thoughts? Man, I'm really starting to love the genre that is crime noir cinema. The waistcoats, hats and constant cigarette smoking paints a vivid picture of post war Americana. Eckhart is believable as Lee Blanchard who hides a troubled past beneath his buff macho exterior. Johansson sizzles as always as his femme fatale all husky and sultry. The third part of the main trifecta is Josh Hartnett an unfortunately he proves to be the weakest link. It's not that he's bad, far from it, he plays the well as the spunky young upstart, it's just that you wonder if he will be forever remembered for his teen based roles.

I know

Even with a tight script, engaging story and good performances there are still some negatives. The scene in the lesbian club where half the women are dressed as men is a bit weird and unnecessary as is the scene filmed directly from the point of view of Bucky. Also, towards the end the twists and turns get ramped up and as more characters are introduced, the relationships and names become ever harder to follow resulting in a confusing mess. 

You know that's bad for you?

Would you watch it again? It did enough for me to want to give it another go.

Rating (out of 100%): I give The Black Dhalia a bullets 'n broads 75%

Singin' In The Rain (1952)

In 7 words or less: Musical about the making of a musical

What's it all About? With silent films going out of fashion, Don Lockwood (Gene Kelly) and his studio boss decide to make a 'talkie'. Unfortunately his leading lady Lina Lamont (Jean Hagen) is from Noo Yoork and they decide that her strong raspy accent should be dubbed over with that of new sweetheart Kathy Selden (Debbie Reynolds). Providing the comedy clown bits is the rubber limbed Cosmo Brown (Donald O'Conner). 

Best bits? The choreography on display here is so good it nearly blew my nutsack off. The title song might be good but there are even better dance numbers on offer. The 'Good Morning' scene is ace.



'Make 'em Laugh' is another display of an amazing routine featuring such skill it will make your eyes bleed. 



Did it make you think thoughts? Wow, today's actors sure are lazy toerags. Back in the day you had to act, sing and dance to be able to tread the boards and hit the heights of stardom. Kelly and O'Connor are so precise, skilled and likeable you wonder if they're robots programmed on the 'entertain' setting. The two female interests are equally as good and match our male protagonists blow for blow. Debbie Reynolds is gorgeous and Jean Hagen turns the feisty meter up to eleven. Great stuff.



The sets are sprawling, the songs spectacular, the direction immaculate, and the technicolour glorious. All in all a super tight production.

Would you watch it again? Hot damn I love this film. Yes I will.

Rating (out of 100%): I can't believe I'd never seen this before this morning. What a chump. If you don't have a smile on your face whilst watching this you're dead to me. I give Singin' in the Rain a stormy 90%

Broken Arrow (1950)

In 7 words or less: Is peace possible between Cowboys & Indians?

What's it all About? During the the latter part of the 19th century, US settlers are at war with native American tribes. After Tom Jeffords (Jimmy Stewart) saves the life of a young brave, he begins to wonder if the horrors of this conflict can be put to rest with the establishment of a peace treaty.

Best bits? The relationship between Jeffords and Indian Chief Cochise is believable and develops at a pace that allows the viewer to become caught up in the politics and pugilistics of the conflict.


Did it make you think thoughts? This film came at a time when most western cowboy centred flicks were depicting native American Indians as nothing but stone cold killers who were set aside by the rest of society and it sought top buck that trend. Broken Arrow may be crude and sometimes heavy handed in its pursuit of the view that, 'they're just like us', but it's a great film that would have opened a lot of eyes back in the 50's. 


Would you watch it again? The topics of prejudice and isolationism are still relevant today and that means this film will hold up to repeat views. That's a yes by the way.

Rating (out of 100%): A ground breaking film that can be enjoyed by non-western lovers as much those familiar with the genre. I give Broken Arrow a non-broken 70%