The Dark Knight Rises (2012, U.S.)

Ugh. What just happened? I saw this with my brother, who was seeing it for the second time, and his reaction seemed pretty close to mine, even knowing what was going to happen. It was so confusing. I feel like I'm throwing the word "disjointed" around a lot these days, but that's just what it was. The timeline was very unclear. It seemed like events were happening very close together, but suddenly a change in the weather indicated that it had actually been months or more. (I think we decided that the main timeline, not counting flashbacks, was a little over a year.)

The acting was good, the sets were good, the costumes were good, the Bat-toys were awesome (I love that motorcycle thing)... But the plot was just overly ambitious and the writing lacked flair. The villain Bane was supposed to be the coolest villain of all time, but I found him almost ridiculous. His face mask is never adequately explained, his voice was supposed to sound creepy and just ended up getting on my nerves, and various plot twists (which I won't give away) completely ruined the power he had as a villain and all of the impassioned speeches he gave (probably the best writing in the movie). Perhaps a lot of the let down stems from being the third in a series where the first was really fresh and the second was well-crafted and featured one of the most brilliant performances by one of the most brilliant actors of his generation (Heath Ledger). Or maybe it was just that unwieldy. It's hard to enjoy something when you're trying so hard to keep up. It's one thing with a foreign film or intense drama, but a super hero movie... I like smart movies with capes, but this wasn't smart, at least in its entirety.

I am having a hard time putting my feelings into words here, so I'll give it up. Stick to the first two installments.

Rating: 2.0

Sherlock Holmes: A Game of Shadows (2011, U.S.)

I have heard a lot of people say that they liked this one better than the first one, and I have a hard time deciding whether I agree or not. I remember liking the first one a lot when I first saw it, but when I rewatched it about a week ago, I only liked it about as much as anything else. So, hard to say. Still, this movie was great.

I think I said it before, but I'll say it again. Jude Law and Robert Downey Jr. have such chemistry on screen, to the point where they really don't need any leading ladies. Not in a romantic sort of way or anything, but their witty banter and physical comedy seem interrupted by a lady's presence. They're just too funny. Still, the other actors were good too. I was so excited to see Noomi Rapace out of her goth Salander gear and with a few more healthy pounds on. She made a very good gypsy. The guy who played Moriarty was also eerily good, with that nerdy, seemingly good-natured facade masking pure evil. Oh, and Stephen Fry as "Shirley's" brother = priceless!

The plot was very twisty and convoluted and involved a big conspiracy, and it was fun to watch the whole thing unwind slowly and with such Holmesian flair. I don't want to give anything away, but it was definitely big. And the ending... wow-wee! So shocking, so funny, so entertaining.

And to save my favorite guy for last: Hans Zimmer is just a musical genius, and I loved his soundtrack for this movie. It's no POTC, but it's definitely heading in that direction. His compositions were all very original sounding, but with a hint of inspiration from the plot or setting. It's hard to explain what I mean, but there were some pieces that seemed very Victorian and some that seemed very industrial, etc. The best ones, however, were the ones that were gypsy inspired, with the fiddle and all. Just perfectly done.

I would definitely watch this one again.

Rating: 4.5

Pirates of the Caribbean: On Stranger Tides (2011, U.S.)

I just don't know what to say about this one, so I won't say much. I think the whole thing is just tired. I loved the first one when it came out (so much that I saw it 8 times in the theater before buying it on DVD the day it came out). I really liked the second and third ones (when nobody else seemed to), though I thought they should stand alone more like the first one did. Now somehow, I was really disappointed by POTC4, while every other review I've read seems to call it as good as the first one or even the best of the four. What?!

Change is good, and their stories were definitely complete, but that didn't stop me from missing Will and Elizabeth. Instead, Penelope Cruz appears as a former flame of Jack's. Now normally she irritates me to no end, but I thought she was actually pretty good in this movie and even had believable chemistry with Depp (who, I doubt I have to tell you, was just as awesome as ever). But then we have her father Blackbeard, played by Ian McShane. They keep talking about how evil he was, but I just didn't see it. He definitely wasn't as evil as Davy Jones, he wasn't as evil as Cutler Beckett. Heck, he wasn't as evil as Barbossa was in the first movie. This was especially disappointing because normally I find Ian McShane to be a very strong actor. So that's it for new main characters. Secondary characters? Forget about it! There was no Pintel and Ragetti, no Annamaria, no Mr. Cotton (or parrot), no midget worth his salt, no Marines-turned-pirates. Even Mr. Gibbs was rather blah in all this. Instead, we have a priest who was captured by Blackbeard, who is constantly preaching about the importance of faith and who falls in love with a mermaid. The preaching was downright annoying, and the romance was a chemistry-less flop. (No pun intended. Get it? Mermaid!)

The plot was also a huge disappointment. The third movie sets up the story of Jack off to find the Fountain of Youth, because he's terrified of death and wants to live forever. Instead, we find him on a quest for the fountain of youth for somebody else, and he doesn't seem that disappointed when it's not for him. That just doesn't make sense for his character, which further illustrates how badly done the characters were in this movie. Actually, I was really excited in the beginning because it started off with an amazing bang. Jack fights with a pirate who's masquerading as Sparrow, and their fight scene is beautifully choreographed and actually someone reminiscent of the Jack/Will sword fight in the first one. Then Jack is captured and brought before the king of England. Their scene together is great, especially Jack's escape attempt when he's almost more focused on getting a bite of cupcake than getting away. (That is classic Jack, so you can see why I had a good feeling about the movie.) Then he's tearing through the streets in a carriage filmed with flaming coal, which was pretty sweet, and I'm still thinking, "This movie is going to be great." And then he hooks up with Blackbeard, and it's all downhill from there. The remainder of the plot is meandering and boring, especially when added to the flat characters. There are extra plot points (like the whole mermaid thing, and especially the mermaid/preacher romance) that could have been left out entirely or at least done much, much better. Then the ending makes no sense at all. What a travesty.

On top of all that, the score was underwhelming. I had listened to the previews on iTunes before seeing the movie, and it seemed very guitar heavy (like they were going for a more modern South American/Caribbean feel) and didn't quite work. In the context of the movie it was passable, but it didn't stand out and it wasn't nearly as memorable as the first three scores. Like the stories, the music is getting tired too.

There were some pretty awesome special effects. I already mentioned the fiery coal carriage careening through the streets. The other awesome thing was that Blackbeard keeps all the ships that he has defeated in bottles in a cabinet on his ship. The bottles were full of thunder and lighting and crashing waves, and ***spoiler alert*** even Cotton's parrot appeared in the bottle with the trapped Black Pearl. Because of this whole bottle thing, a definite sequel is implied. It could be good, based on the hints, but then the whole search for the Fountain of Youth hinted at in At World's End sounded good too. So we'll see.

Rating: 2.5

Inception (2010, U.S.)

I don't even know what to say about this one. I had to make a conscious effort to relax my brow at the end of the film because I was doing some intense thinking the entire time. It is one of the most confusing things I have ever watched. There were essentially four stories nested within each other, plus side plots as flashbacks and goodness knows what else.

The basic premise is that a team is going to make a lot of money by placing an idea into a man's head. To do this, they have to approach him in a dream within a dream, thereby penetrating his subconscious as much as possible. The lead, played by DiCaprio, is slightly broken—mentally because he's gone into the dream world one too many times and emotionally because of what happened to his wife. He's a great actor, and he's complimented by a lot of other great actors. Joseph Gordon Levitt is a personal favorite of mine, and the rest of the cast was strong.

Two of the most important parts of science fiction are the world building and convincing science, and both were wonderful. It's one of those things that has to be seen, not explained, however. In fact, I probably need to see it again so I can remind myself what happened.

There were a couple of inconsistencies, but if you like a good thinker, this is definitely one for you.

Rating: 4.0

It's Complicated (2009, U.S.)

Jake and Jane, a couple that's been divorced for a decade really reunites at their son's graduation, despite the fact that the man is remarried to a younger woman. Surprisingly, the affair goes on. Meanwhile, Jane also finds herself attracted to Adam, an architect who's remodeling her kitchen and is very passionate about his work.

This has to be the most unique romantic comedy of all time, and it was absolutely hilarious. Not only were Baldwin and Streep funny, but the rest of the cast, especially the daughter's husband Harley (John Krasinski), was funny too.

It has a kind of amusing suspense as you wait to see whether the children will find out, whether Jake or Adam will find out about each other, and ultimately who Jane will pick.

I loved the ending, and I loved having a romantic comedy that said you don't need a man to be happy. What an interesting breath of fresh air.

Rating: 4.0

Sherlock Holmes (2009, U.S.)

I loved this movie. I don't know much about Sherlock Holmes, so I don't know how true this was to the original characters. But it was wonderful on its own. Above all, it was absolutely laugh-out-loud funny. There was also an excellent mystery that had all the appearance of being rooted in fantasy but having a perfectly realistic explanation.

There was great chemistry between the cast. Robert Downey Jr. has never been my favorite, but he was great, especially with Jude Law as his sidekick. And Rachel McAdams is one of the most underrated actresses of all time. Usually her performance is really subtle, but here she was so over the top, exactly what the role called for.

I haven't seen too many films lately where the scenery or special effects really stood out, but this was definitely one. Victorian London popped off the screen like it was filmed 150 years ago and yesterday all at once.

Hans Zimmer = brilliant composer. Enough said.

Loved it!

Rating: 4.5

Kung Fu Panda (2008, U.S.)

Po, a panda voiced by Jack Black, is chosen as the Dragon Warrior (the protector or the village), even though he's overweight, has no skill at martial arts, and is completely hopeless.

For a kids' film, it was pretty good. There was actually quite a bit of laugh-out-loud parts, and the voice talent was undoubtedly good. It also had a sweet message about being able to do whatever you put your mind to. Good movie for kids.

Rating: 3.5

Madagascar: Escape 2 Africa (2008, U.S.)

This is going to be short and sweet. Of all the Pixar-esque films in the worlds, I have to say that DreamWorks Animation takes the cake with the Madagascar movies. Luckily, they didn't wear out the material in this sequel—there was old mixed with new in the perfect quantities. The voice talent is incredible. They are absolutely hilarious. They were written by adults for children and are good for children but also have jokes for adults. The scores are composed by the brilliant Hans Zimmer.

Oh yeah, and those penguins!

This is what we call laugh-out-loud funny.

Rating: 4.0

Angels & Demons (2009, U.S.)

Even though I thought The Da Vinci Code was terrible (couldn't hold a candle to the book!), I decided to tempt fate and the movie gods and watch Angels & Demons. (It's really hard to say no to Ewan McGregor!)

Here's what I think. Like the first installment (that used to be a sequel but is now a prequel... weird), it took quite a few liberties. Mostly it was over-simplified to better fit a film format. However, there was strangely less suspense than in the book, even though they had a great opportunity to make it really come alive. A huge plot point involves a terrorist killing a cardinal every hour, and yet somehow they have time between locating each body to change clothes, do research in the Vatican archives, drive around in traffic, have some drawn out conversations, and then make it to the next murder scene with two minutes to spare. It was completely unbelievable it this respect.

Acting. Tom Hanks was okay. I felt like he didn't capture Langdon at all in the first film, and this was barely an improvement. His female sidekick, the brilliant scientist, was barely there. The strongest performances came from Stellan Skarsgård (the commander of the Vatican police) and Armin Mueller-Stahl (Dean of the College of Cardinals). They weren't major characters, but they were important and played their parts well. Ewan McGregor absolutely stole the show. Surprise, surprise. He was impassioned and calm-headed and pious and worldly at all the right times and in all the right amounts. Brilliant. The one thing that was lacking in his performance was a perfect accent. Usually his accents are passable, but he just sounded like a more toned-down Scot than the Irishman he was supposed to be. Details, details.

The mis en scène was pretty awesome, considering a large percentage of it was probably reproduction. Having been to Vatican City myself, I was pretty impressed with their recreation of the Sistine Chapel and St. Peter's Square. If I didn't know the Vatican would never allow film crews in there, I would believe it was the real thing. Other locations, such as the Castel and Ponte Sant'Angelo and the Fontana dei Quattro Fiumi (absolutely breathtaking in life) could also have been the real thing. Maybe they were. All I know is that I want to rewind time and relive those days I spent strolling around Rome. (Only this time, not in the summer with half of the U.S. and Japan there!)

Away from personal notes. I was impressed with the score from the first notes. I kept thinking that the style of the composition and the quality of performance sounded familiar. Turns out it was composed by Hans Zimmer (one of my all-time favorites) and the violin solos were performed by Jamie Bell (whose performance on the Defiance score is one of the most beautiful things I've ever heard). It had the right mix of suspense and beauty at the right times and did wonders for the film. The only thing that stuck out was when Cardinal Strauss tells Langdon that "of course" God sent him to Rome—and the score becomes suddenly ominous for a few bars. Very odd.

Overall, I can see how people who haven't read the book would love this movie. I thought it was okay, and I didn't want to tear my eyes out after watching it like I did with the first one. So there you have it.

Rating: 3.0

Batman Begins (2005, U.S.)

I saw this film once at a party at my apartment junior year of college, but there was a lot going on and I didn't really see most of it. That might be because the first 45 minutes or so are kind of a drag. Really, that was my main complaint with this one. If the first 45 minutes were squashed into 10, the whole thing would be better. (Unlike The Dark Knight, which was even longer but never felt that way.)

Otherwise, I have only good things to say about it. Some of my favorite actors, a collaboration of two of my favorite composers, and my favorite bad guy from the "Batman" TV series I watched as a kid—the Scarecrow. I say he was my favorite... He scared me to death, but then isn't that what bad guys are supposed to do? Not to mention, Cillian Murphy is on the top of my all time creepiest actors list. Don't get me wrong, I love him. He is absolutely fantastic. But even the movies I've seen him in where he played a good guy, like Cold Mountain or The Wind that Shakes the Barley, he still gave me the creeps. Probably because the first thing I ever saw him in was either 28 Days Later or Red Eye. Now that was some perfect casting.

Christian Bale is also a very strong actor. I've been watching more and more of his work recently, and I don't think I've seen anything that I haven't liked. If only he wasn't paired with an awful actress like Katie Holmes... Maggie Gyllenhaal was a great replacement there.

The last thing I'll say is about the visuals of the film. They're great. The way that they created Gotham was amazing, exactly as I've always imagined it—dark and dirty, but with some unexpected beauty here and there. Perfect playground for Batman. In fact, I think that's the one thing that was better in this film that in Dark Knight. The mood of the city, a very "Gotham" feeling. Good stuff.

Rating: 4.0

Pirates of the Caribbean (2003, U.S.)

I was skimming through the enormous list of movies I've seen, and it was five years ago today that I first saw The Curse of the Black Pearl. Following the path started by Heath Ledger, there was another thing that led me on the journey to becoming a cinephile. Love it. (When it first came out, I saw it 8 times "in the theater"—5 in the regular theater, 1 at the dollar theater, and 2 at the Georgia Tech theater.)

This might have been when I started the print version of my movie journal. I fell in love with Johnny Depp, I fell in love with Orlando Bloom, and I fell in love with Klaus Badelt / Hans Zimmer (because apparently one takes a lot of cues from his mentor).

Anyway, of course it got the highest rating possible! Happy Anniversary, Pirates.

Rating: 5.0

The Dark Knight (2008, U.S.)

I have never been too into the whole comic book genre, but I have seen several of them and have generally enjoyed them. I have seen the 1989 Batman as well as parts of Batman Begins, and I enjoyed them well enough. However, the most beloved Batman to me was the animated series from 1992, which I can remember watching with my brother. That, and Mask of the Phantasm. If you asked me when I was a kid who the best of all the superheroes was, I would have said Batman, hands down. So I'm not sure why I never got really into the live action films... I think that might change now. (Or at least when I have time to watch more.)

Of course, even if I wasn't already into Batman, I would have seen this movie. Because I adored Heath Ledger. First, he was the one who really got me into movies in the beginning, at the rather late age of 18. When I started my DVD collection back then (which now numbers nearly 200), the first five films consisted of four Heath Ledger movies. I now own 8 of his films, and I have seen 5 more, plus the TV series Roar. So nearly everything he's ever done. He was a brilliant, brilliant actor.

And he was brilliant in this. I can't tell you how chilling and spot on his performance was. Of course it's inevitable that it will be compared to Jack Nicholson's, and I have to say that I think Ledger's was better. To be fair, though, they were quite different portrayals—although Nicholson's was typical Nicholson (formulaic) and Ledger's was typical Ledger (original and brilliant). He was just incredible, and I can't really verbalize it any better, so I won't try.

Of course the rest of the cast was stellar as well. I won't bother listing them all—just look at the first 7 people listed in the credits. I will say that the portrayal of Two-Face was particularly well done.

Plot was complex and often hard to follow, although a lot of that could be because the sound was off in the theater, and the score was much louder than the dialogue. It definitely needs a second viewing to iron out all the details in my head, but I loved the complexity. I also need a second viewing to judge the score when it's not blaring in my ears—something tells me I won't be disappointed, because how can a Hans Zimmer/James Newton Howard joint venture go wrong?

I'm glad there's really anything else I want to see this summer, because that just means I can go see The Dark Knight again (and maybe again!) when it's on the $5 Club.

This was another tough one to rate, because I don't know if I "really liked" it or "loved" it. But then there is Heath, and I know I loved him.

Rating: 4.5