THE RIGHT STUFF (Philip Kaufman, Warner Bros., 1983)

Like the astronauts that eventually formed the Mercury Seven, men picked for their overall excellence in every area, THE RIGHT STUFF (Philip Kaufman, Warner Bros., 1983) excels in every aspect of filmmaking. The story for the film is incredible and the narrative of the script good. The casting of the actors is remarkable, especially John Glenn (Ed Harris) and the the performances of each actor is quite good. The films overall direction is good, the cinematography is great. Technically the film probably couldn't have been made better than it was. The most remarkable aspect of the film and the one I find most fascinating is its inclusion of Chuck Yeager as a central piece in the narrative. How a film hasn't been done about this man mystifies me. The film tells the tale of seven men who had "the right stuff" to become our first astronauts. But rather than be a fluff piece, stylizing the actors as super human, it instead chose to show them as men. Men with families, men with faults and character flaws. Men that didn't always get along and who often were more about themselves than the greater good of the group. The toll taken on these men and their families was immense, from the constant public and media scrutiny to the very real possibility that death loomed with each mission. The film took care to show the families of the men and even delve into their problems a bit. Eventually we see the men coming together and forming a bond, a group that will only ever include those seven men. The film also provides a great balance of levity to offset the serious nature of the work being done by these astronauts. And great work abounds throughout the rest of the production. The direction chosen by Kaufman of which way to take the narrative and the inclusion of Yeager as a primary focus were good choices. Through excellent production design we are treated to an excellent portrait of American life from the post war years through the mid sixties. We also get to see extensive use of authentic airplanes whether it was actual planes, models or special effects. It all looked very authentic and very well done. Making the film look amazing was the sole purpose of cinematographer Caleb Deschanel. The film contains great aerial photography, very reminiscent of a film like WINGS (William Wellman, Paramount, 1927). Deschanel comes up with unique and innovative ways to show his action such as through reflections in sunglasses and other inanimate objects. The film is full of wide open vistas and great panoramic shots, creating a metaphor for space being the next great American frontier. After seeing Deschanel's name I had to read more on him. I knew he was a famous father, but it seems every time he DP's a film he gets nominated for an Oscar. What a talented man. And talented doesn't even begin to describe Chuck Yeager. A great film has the power to leave you thirsting for more knowledge about a topic, and Sam Shepard's portrayal of Yeager is such a case. Shepard gives a mysterious performance as Yeager. Daring to push the envelope every time and showing us ever so subtly that deeply felt slight when he was not selected to even proceed to the testing for the Mercury Seven. I had to read more on Yeager after seeing Shepard play him and all I can say is. Wow. What an American. Like I said before, how come no one has made a film about him mystifies me. Incredible man. Incredible group of men. Incredible story and remarkable film.

THE DARK KNIGHT RISES (Christopher Nolan, Warner Bros., 2012)

There exists an inherent drawback to making a film trilogy. Unless you have the entire three story arc devised before starting the total narrative lags by the third film. Freshness and a need to top previous achievements take root as issues in the crafting of the third film. And when you set the bar as high as Christopher Nolan did with the first two films of his Dark Knight trilogy then it becomes exceedingly difficult when making the final film. Yet with THE DARK KNIGHT RISES (Christopher Nolan, Warner Bros., 2012) Nolan puts forth another remarkable film, finishing a trilogy unrivaled within the genre it resides. The narrative for this film is strong enough that it can stand alone while at the same time it achieves full closure for the trilogy. Granted there are a few instances in which having viewed the previous films is necessary to follow the narrative but Nolan and Jonathon Nolan do a remarkable job of achieving the job they set out to accomplish. By the end of THE DARK KNIGHT RISES, Bruce Wayne has completed his journey as our protagonist. He has grown as a man, put aside the hurt and pain that led him down his path to becoming Batman and yet retained enough of himself that he appears able to live out the balance of his life happily. His alternative persona of Batman is no longer needed, by Gotham or by Bruce. This is not to say that there aren't issues with the narrative. The narrative to this film takes an almost unbearably long time to get going. The film itself is entirely too long but I have a feeling that third films in trilogies end up that way so that all the loose ends are tied up neatly. I also needed to watch the film multiple times to have key things explained, a sure sign of an incomplete narrative. (although my questions were ALL explained watching the second time). And while I liked that they brought Ra's al Ghul around for the third film, completing that circle in the trilogy, I didn't care for the reveal of Miranda Tate (Marion Cotillard) as his daughter. Let me clarify. I didn't mind her becoming the villain I took exception with the way she was revealed. The acting for this film wasn't exceptional like that in the first two films. This sentiment can be summed up tidily in the character of Bane (Tom Hardy). While not a bad choice for a villain, the mask covering his face eliminated a good percentage of any acting Hardy might do. There was no emotional weight to the Bane character except when he throws the young Miranda up to escape their prison (the only time we see his face). Now I could easily denigrate this as poor acting but I think another avenue is possible. Is it possible that Nolan knew there was no way this villain could compare to Heath Ledger's Joker? And with that knowledge did he forgo trying? The choice of Bane and his mask simplified the task and prevented any comparisons to Ledger, rightly so. No one would compare favorably so why try? Still, the Bane villain felt like it fell short. The film does not fall short technically as Nolan and his team are just absolutely at the top of the game. Every aspect of the film is strong, from Wally Pfister's cinematography to the editing of Lee Smith; from the score provided by Hans Zimmer to the absolute amazing effects work accomplished throughout the film and the trilogy by Chris Corbould and Paul Franklin. And Christopher Nolan is so talented, so accomplished as to be ridiculous. I've said it once I'll say it until someone changes my mind but Christopher Nolan is the best director working today (sorry to my favorite director, PTA -who can reclaim glory with THE MASTER). My only fault with their work is there is nothing as mind blowing, as awesome as the semi tractor sequence from THE DARK KNIGHT nor is the narrative as strong and compelling as BATMAN BEGINS. There have been arguments put forth that the film mirrors many of the current issues our contemporary society are facing and with all films this is true. Film is a reflection of life, particularly good film. THE DARK KNIGHT RISES is no exception. The narrative has a reflection of last years 99% movement but I also detect a foreshadowing to large scale civil unrest. Let's hope that stays in the movie! I'd like to discuss the Batman character a little. The film shows a vulnerability to Batman that hasn't existed in the previous films. Bane almost kills Batman and it is only Bane's sadistic tendencies which prevent him from doing so. Batman also is duped and falls for Catwoman (gorgeously played by Anne Hathaway) showing a need to no longer be alone. This need is also expressed in his relationship with John Blake (Joseph Gordon-Levitt). This vulnerability to Batman shows depth and allows for Bruce to grow as a person. This vulnerability brings Batman back to the Bruce Wayne character of BATMAN BEGINS. And allows for the journey of our hero protagonist to be completed. In looking at THE DARK KNIGHT RISES it would be rather easy to denigrate the film as the weakest of Nolan's trilogy. It lacks the dazzling array of technical masterwork of THE DARK KNIGHT and falls short of the emotional weight and psychological underpinnings of BATMAN BEGINS. But this sells this film short and that in itself is wrong. This film is a great film. It's merits stand alone and it also serves as a nice bookend to a fully satisfying trilogy. I feel that the first film was Christian Bale's, the second film was Heath Ledger's and the third? Well this film belongs to Christopher Nolan, as the end to a great trilogy. Thank you sir!

THE DARK KNIGHT (Christopher Nolan, Warner Bros., 2008)

Starting his Dark Knight Trilogy with the exceptional BATMAN BEGINS (Nolan, 2005) might make things exceedingly difficult when crafting the next film in the trilogy. But with THE DARK KNIGHT (Christopher Nolan, Warner Bros., 2008) amazingly shows audiences that he even better as a filmmaker, providing us with a film that is superlative in almost every regard as well as one that contains one of the signature acting performances ever seen on screen. BATMAN BEGINS belongs to Christian Bale and quite simply THE DARK KNIGHT is a good film that becomes extraordinary due to one Heath Ledger. Like other popular trilogies this second film to the Dark Knight trilogy is the darkest of the three films. The film isn't just dark it is opaque. Literally there is not one ray of light that shines from this film. Every character is ambiguous. Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) falters, Batman rages. Harvey (Aaron Eckhart) succumbs to anger and emotion. Commissioner Gordon (Gary Oldman) to guilt. Even The Joker (Heath Ledger) is ambiguous in intent. By the end of the film the only female character of note, Rachel Dawes (Maggie Gyllenhaal) has been killed and Batman is on the run, wanted for the crimes committed by Harvey Dent. It doesn't end there. The themes and tones to the film are dark as well. The film has many themes among them apathy, anarchy, the decay of our society, criminality and an evasion of responsibility. The tone of the film is dark in every regard from colors to lighting. The darkness of the film is caught perfectly in the scene where The Joker is interrogated by Gordon. When the camera is on The Joker's face he is engulfed in blackness. And who resides in that blackness but Batman, hidden and waiting to strike. Here is the films hero, hiding, lurking in darkness. Bathed in the dark he cannot be seen and this symbolizes what is wrong with Gotham. The dichotomy between the films hero and darkness is bold. I have lauded Christopher Nolan endlessly before and I shall do so again yet there exists in THE DARK KNIGHT a similar dichotomy to the entire film and it is only after having viewed the film over and again that I see this. Nolan is at his absolute best here technically as the staging, the cinematography and the sound are amazing. At the same time though the writing is faltering, the narrative is bloated, one of the films characters becomes utterly unwatchable and Batman becomes too potent, too powerful. All of this can be viewed in one particular sequence of the film, my favorite sequence actually and I will discuss this fully. But first the good and the bad. In my opinion Nolan cements himself as the best director working today with the scene staging, choreography of action and his partnership with Wally Pfister in creating brilliant cinematography in the film. The scene in which they flip the semi tractor is incredible (more on this later). The cinematography actually gets better than the previous film, although the added benefit of IMAX helps. His use of sound is brilliant. I tell everyone this but watch the film, particularly the scenes with Ledger. Nolan puts in this low pitched whine that usually builds through the scene. This sound serves to unnerve the audience and signifies and accompanies rising tensions. Just a simple sound that does so much. Finally Nolan allowed Heath Ledger the freedom to become one of cinema's enduring characters. To be able to get a performer to do his job so fully, to allow that performer so much freedom signifies a director, to me. Unlike Harvey's two headed coin, there is a flip side to all that Nolan does well in the film. Maybe because other aspects were focused on the writing suffers. Cheap and hammy dialogue is sprinkled throughout and the characters are never reined back from their descent into darkness. His use of sound is epic at times but he made an error with Batman's voice. He also errs in allowing Batman to become too powerful and have too many techno toys. How quickly did Bruce Wayne construct the sonar device? And such a powerful device yet Lucius (Morgan Freeman) can walk right in and use it? And what of reconstructing the bullet? Bruce Wayne is rich yes, but his ability to garner anything he needs immediately stretches the believability of the character established in BATMAN BEGINS. Also destroying what was created in BATMAN BEGINS is the character of Rachel Dawes. I don't have a problem with her story arc. I have no issue with her dying or with her being in the middle of a love triangle with Harvey and Bruce. What I do have issue with is her character being allowed to become whiny and bitchy, not the strong character she was in the first film. Rachel is marginalized in this film, to the point that when she does die, you actually are happy to see her go. That's how annoying she was allowed to become. All of the good and bad can be summed up in viewing one sequence and this is the sequence when they transport Harvey in the armored car. As Harvey turns himself in as Batman, the worst part of the Rachel character emerges. She whines to Alfred (Michael Caine) about what Bruce is doing and then quickly appears at the jail to berate Harvey. From the second the armored car leaves the precinct the action is constantly on the rise to its culmination, brilliantly staged throughout. The action is non stop yet overly long; yet the moment when they flip the semi tractor is my favorite in the trilogy. While these amazing visuals are going on the dialogue is awful. The cop in the armored car with Gordon is entirely unnecessary. The film is bloated by unnecessary shots like the guy picking his teeth and the kids shooting cars only to see them explode as Batman cruises by. Endlessly chasing The Joker. And you quite simply cannot write about this film without discussing Heath Ledger and what he did in the role as The Joker. Deservedly winning the Academy Award for Best Supporting Actor, we all know the tragedy that befell Ledger. We have all seen this role and how he owned it. Rather than delve into how I feel The Joker reflects society I instead will list my three favorite moments. Number one, when he busts out of prison stealing a cop car, hanging his head out the rear window as he drives. Two, dressed as a nurse he visits Harvey. His drawn out "hi" is amazing. In fact his entire explanation to Harvey as well as explaining his actions is tremendous. And when he exits the hospital blowing it up, stopping to get hand sanitizer in the process? Finally when he is in the jail, clapping for the newly appointed Commissioner Gordon. The look on his face is pure malice and evil intent. As I said earlier, this film belongs to Ledger and The Joker. The film has weaknesses which I didn't find in BATMAN BEGINS and I think those weaknesses are masked quite like The Joker masks himself. This film is Heath Ledger's through and through. And what a good film.