Men In Black 3

I remember when the first Men in Black came out, and I saw it on VHS, I enjoyed the hell out of it, and looked forward to the next one which again I saw on video or maybe on TV, but anyway, I wasn’t exactly over enthused by it, it just seemed to lack something, or maybe try and follow the formula of the previous film to closely. Fast forward to now, and the basic story of the film, I’ll get to it later, is something much more interesting and shows the series embracing the more technological side of the science fiction universe that these characters inhabit.

Tommy Lee Jones and Will Smith reprise their roles as the series protagonists, agent’s J and K, picking up where they have left off, with great on screen chemistry, powered forward by zipping, witty dialogue. Whilst due to story reasons, I’ll get to that soon, I promise, Will Smith has more screen time, Jones’ character and portrayal of K is the main motivation for both Smith and the story, giving the character a more vulnerable side to him, than we have seen in the previous two films. Smith is on top comedic form as he interacts with various alien and human characters, especially in the period of the film set in 1969.

Josh Brolin is the main addition to the series, playing a much younger K, in 1969, a performance which hits perfectly, avoiding the potential risk of it becoming nothing more than an impersonation of Jones’ older version. Instead he plays him amusingly, giving the character a more rounded performance, capable of being happy, and showing it. A fact that J frequently points out, and calls him upon. This films villain is probably the most sinister, but also the most entertaining, played by Jermaine Clement, Boris the Animal is first humanoid(loosely speaking) villain that we have seen, and one who is both intentionally funny and unintentionally funny at the same time, sporting a Macho Man Randy Savage look.. A roaring stand off between him and an early version is one of the films witty moments, not featuring J and K.

The basic plot of the film, is that Boris the Animal escapes from Lunar Max (a prison on the jail) and manages to travel back in time and kill K before he can stop him and arrest him. From there on we follow J as he follows Boris back in time to stop him from killing K. The film manages to keep the time travel aspects both simple and easy too understand, as well as using it in clever, complicated ways to give us some new uses for the theoretical technology.

Humour has always been one of the driving forces in the Men in Black series, the first one had some great physical and dialogue based comedic moments, shared equally by J and K, as well as the other supporting characters and villains. The second fell short, because it didn’t have the amount or overall quality and diversity of jokes. Almost all of the humour comes from either J or K. But this third sees some what of a return to the diverse humour of the first, although the first act is at times somber and very foreboding, there are still streaks and promises of what is come. But it truly starts after the jump back into 1969, the clash of cultures between J and a younger K offer up some of the highlights, along with a scene with Andy Warhol and two policemen who take, somewhat of a dislike to J, are probably the comedic highlights of the film.

Men in Black 3 is a return to the form of the first film, bringing back the laughs and adding more a personal stake to the story than the two previous films. The ending of this film, undoubtedly has more emotional weight than the previous two films, and in a way ties the whole series together. I thoroughly enjoyed the film, because I was surprised with how much fun I had with it. Compared with the other films of the summer, this may not be one of the big events, but it’s certainly worth a trip to the summer. Tonally, I imagine it will sit closer to The Avengers than The Dark Knight Rises or Prometheus, and stands up as a classic enjoyable summer blockbuster.

Premier League XI 2012

The idea for this article came from a friend of mine who suggested doing a review of the season, but as I missed parts of the season due to other commitments, it seemed to wiser to do it as best eleven. No doubt some readers will disagree with my choices, but that goes with the territory.

Goalkeeper – Joe Hart

One of the two defensive towers that Manchester City’s has built upon, he rarely has a bad game or even makes mistakes. During some games when City weren’t performing, it would often be Hart that made the difference between the results, pulling off saves that he had no right to make. Commands his area with an authority that the great goalkeepers have. Bound to be City and England’s number one for many, many years.

Right Back - Tony Hibbert

Maybe a strange choice for some, but he offers a reliable and no nonsense style of defending. Always reliable and ever the professional, although sometimes sacrificing the offensive for the defensive, it allows the man in front of him to go forward freely and do the damage whilst knowing that he behind him, Hibbert is their offering him a safety net.

Centre Back – Vincent Kompany

The second defensive tower in City’s team, like Joe Hart rarely under performs, always giving true captains performances, which seem to inspire the rest of his team. Reads the game very well, like world class defenders can, seeing the danger early and cutting it out before the attack has the chance to gather any momentum or allow the ball into dangerous areas. Easily Manchester City’s best signing, and at around £6million, an absolute bargain.

Centre Back – Fabricio Coloccini

After an initial rough period early in his English career, Coloccini has come back as a true well rounded defender, capable in handling one on one encounters with attackers and of organizing his defence tightly. After this great season, Newcastle will no doubt field offers for him (and many of their other players) after he has finally reached his potential that showed many years ago with Boca Juniors.

Left Back – Ashley Cole

The most consistent left back, not just in the league, but probably the world in the last year, surpassing many of the other left backs that peaked for a few years before sliding back down into mediocrity. His pace is enough to get him out of bad situations, but with his solid defensive abilities and tactical knowledge, a mistake is often a rare occurrence. Offers as much going forward as he does defensively, making him an even rarer commodity, a well-rounded full back.

Right Wing – Antonio Valencia

One of the few consistent performers for Manchester United this season, sometimes criticised for his predictability, preferring to hug the touchline as opposed to following the lead of other wingers and drift inside, he offers his team something difficult and a problem that full backs don’t often come across in the modern day game. A traditional winger, with plenty of pace and good crossing ability, his intricate footwork may not be up to that of Cristiano Ronaldo, but Valencia’s game is all about isolating and defender and beating him with his pace, and getting to the goal line.

Centre Midfield – Yaya Toure

The player of the season. As capable going forward as his is at sitting back, and the man who makes Manchester City tick. Plays best in a more advanced role where he is offered, a frequently takes, the opportunity to run with the ball, often carrying it for long distances before laying it off to a team mate or having an effort on goal himself. Always seems to make the right decision, which shows an intelligent reading of the game, but also that he is willing to give it to the man in the better the position, playing for the team.

Centre Midfield – Luka Modric

The little magician, and probably rightly considered as the only man to be able to replace Paul Scholes, despite the likelihood of him moving to Manchester United diminishing with every passing season. Controls games with an effortless flair, collecting the ball deep and driving Tottenham forward, giving it to the more offensively focused members of the team, although Modric is perfectly capable of scoring and doing damage in the final third, making him one of the most well rounded midfielders in the league. Spurs did well to keep him last summer, fighting off the advances from Chelsea, and as a result constructed probably the most balanced midfield in the Premier League.

Left Wing – David Silva

Responsible for most of City’s early season dominance, tearing through teams with his ridiculously close control and eye for a pass that made even the most organized defence look like amateurs. Despite a slight dip in performance in the middle of the season, mainly due to injury and not being rested, came back strong to play a vital role in the run in. A player, along with Yaya Toure, that City must hold onto in order to realistically hope to retain their title next year.

Forward – Robin Van Persie

An injury free season, probably the first one that he has had since arriving in England, and he demonstrates what he is truly capable of. At times single handed kept Arsenals hope European football alive next season, amongst a team that suffered from injuries and poor performers equally for the first half of the season. The bad news for Arsenal though is that with just one year left on his contract, Van Persie will no doubt be in hot demand, and they will have to step up and offer assurances of investment and trophies in the near future.

Forward – Sergio Aguero

A great first season from a player that has promised so much from his years in Spain with Atletico Madrid, like Carlos Tevez before him, they share the same kind of build and ability, although Aguero seems to want to play football as opposed to Tevez, who seems hell bent on wasting his talent. Deadly with both feet and in the air, and willing to work hard for the team, he is possibly the complete forward, even capable of out muscling some of the bigger players in the league.

Dark Shadows

This is the second in the series of reviews on 2012's summer blockbusters. As a note of warning, whilst I have tried to avoid spoilers, there is always the risk of something I don't consider to be a spoiler, potentially ruining a film for someone else. So be warned.

Quite simply this is one of the strangest films I have seen in a long time, and this was my reaction after going into the cinema knowing that this was a Tim Burton film, and based off a 1970’s supernatural soap opera. The film tells the story of the Collins family, and primarily Barnabus Collins (played by Johnny Depp), a family that moved to America 200 years before and built the family’s business and wealth on fishing. But when Barnabus becomes intimate with maid, Angelique (Eva Green), a witch, he sets in motion a series of events that will cause the deaths of the people he loves the most, and ultimately is transformed into a vampire by Angelique’s curse.

As with most Burton films, there is a unique look to it that can only be identified as belonging to Tim Burton, some people often find his worlds and characters somewhat over the top and overtly gothic, despite it being an important and trademark part of his filmmaking style. Yet with this film it seems to suit Dark Shadows, and suit it’s 1970’s setting, emphasising certain characters looks, especially the colour that is associated with each character, Barnabus’ character is almost black, while Hoffman (Helena Botham Carter) is mostly dull coloured but for her bright orange hair, Angelique the witch stands out in her bright coloured clothes and almost white hair. The villain of the films, is the most brightly coloured character in the film, a typical turn on conventions by Burton.

Despite being based on TV series (one I haven’t seen), the plot of the film is thin. The main story seems to focus on Barnabus restoring his family business to its former glory whilst dealing with Angelique’s rival firm. This seems like an albeit but fairly standard story, but would have given the film as a whole a solid direction in which to drive in, but instead numerous other storylines are thrown in throughout the film, none of them truly fleshed out. Perhaps it was an attempt to distil the essence of the show into the film, but the very nature of a film prevents that, especially with Dark Shadows run time of 113 minutes.

However erratic the plot, there is always a new fun scene or sequence just around the corner. Some of them ranging from the amusing bizarre to the brutally shocking and the cold blooded. Burtons mixes comic moments backed by seventies classics with brutal actions, mostly performed by Barnabus Collins, shot calmly and with a sharp eye for the final moments between the predator and his prey.

The cast Burton has assembled, helps the film significantly. With lesser performers, the film could have descended into a gothic farce.  For the most, each actor/actress brings their character to life in a realistic way, the outstanding performer is probably Eva Green who mixes Angelique’s vengeful side, and her longing to be loved by Barnabus. David Collins, played by the young Gulliver McGrath is criminally underused, his is one of the stories that is introduced, but never fully developed before it is closed in the climax of the film.

Johnny Depp, a Burton mainstay (this is their eight or ninth collaboration) constructs another memorable character in a way that is uniquely him. He skirts the edges of being the loveable hero, a cold blooded killer and comic relief (a lot of the humour of the film comes from him adapting to a world unlike anything he knows) brilliantly, giving us an interesting new character, a new take on a vampire that differs from that currently seen in modern mainstream films.

It’s often easy to judge how much you enjoyed a film by how long you discuss it with the person you went with to see it. I discussed Dark Shadows with my fiancée for about five minutes, roughly the point at which we reached the car, for the rest of the journey we discussed the trailer for Prometheus, that screened before the film, till we got home. Whether that means the film is not worth thinking about, which I don’t believe is the case, or if simply it didn’t connect with me, as it isn’t the kind of story or film that I normally go and see (this is only the third Burton I have seen since Planet of the Apes (2001), or if I simply found Burtons style of filmmaking and design taking me out of the film, but I have enjoyed many of Burtons early films, which share much of the same artistic vision as this, and his other films.  I would say that is simply a case of the story not being strong enough to hold the audiences attention, or encourage discussion of the ideas and memorable moments in the film.

Finally, a lot of people seem to be saying that Burton should try and cast someone else as his leading man other than Depp. But perhaps it would be more of an idea to embrace more narrative-focused projects. No one has ever doubted , or should Depp’s ability, nor should they doubt Burton’s talent and vision.  So maybe it would be better to experiment with story, rather than cast for Burton.

The Avengers

This summer sees the release of a number of highly anticipated blockbusters, three of which are based on comic book characters, one a debateable prequel (I am sure some people will disagree with me on this point, to varying degrees) to a science fiction classic, another is based on a 1960s TV show that aired on the ABC network in America. There are others, I am sure, but these will be the five that I will, in all likely go and see during this summer. Some would look at this and see it as more evidence that Hollywood, especially when it comes to it’s tent pole films is running out of imagination, but only time will tell with that, and which will ultimately come with the release and reception to these films.

The first of these films was The Avengers, but with different titles in certain countries, having seen the previous films that have set up this film, ranging from the tedious in Captain America to the surprisingly good (I went in expecting very little, despite the cast and director) in Thor, I was interested in seeing how they would attack the possibilities for this story.

Co-written and Directed by Joss Whedon, whose Buffy the Vampire Slayer series I was a huge fan of when I was younger, he didn’t seem like the kind of choice that Marvel would have gone for, having made his name almost entirely in television, there were no doubt more conservative choices they could have gone with, especially related to directorial duties.

The cast of the film is largely made up of the actors from the previous films but with a few new additions and one recasting, Mark Ruffalo as Bruce Banner/Hulk, the majority bring the exact same character to this film, as they had in the others. For some this isn’t a problem, Chris Hemsworth and Tom Hiddleston continue on with their superbly complex brotherly relationship, and Ruffalo constructs probably the most human and likeable version of Banner. The others characters just seem to be going through the paces when it comes to their scenes and others simply carry on with the same version, not bringing anything new to their performance.

There will be spoilers from this point, so please don’t carry on if you haven’t seen it, or don’t want to know any details.

The plot, is simple to say they least, Loki (Hiddleston) returns to Earth, to find an object called the Tesseract, a source of seemingly limitless power, in his bid to take over the Earth, with the help of an alien race, the Chitauri, with the Avengers being the only thing possible of standing in the way. During the first two acts we have to go through two or three giant action set pieces as the team work out their differences, until they finally realise that perhaps they should stop Loki before he brings an army of aliens to Earth.

Now this may seem as though, from how I have talked about it so far, that the film isn’t very strong when it comes to story, and it probably isn’t. But where it makes up for it, and this is plainly down to Whedon’s knack for dialogue is in the more subdued moments between the characters, more often than not a simple one to one conversation. Most of these moments feature Hiddleston’s Loki, the first of these moments is soon after Thor arrives (probably the best entrance of the film), another later on with Scarlett Johansson, even some of the less snappy conversations he has are elevated above what they could have been thanks to his portrayal of the character. As mentioned before Hemsworth brings Thor to life in a realistic way (for a demi-god), in a role that in either film could have, in the lesser hands, been nothing more than cocky meathead.

I saw this film in 2D, as I had heard that parts of the film, especially those set in space are very hard to make out, due to 3D making the screen darker (I don’t know the technical details of 3D, I apologize), so can only speak about this version of the film. The photography of the film is good, none of it is bad, but also none of it pops out as being instantly memorable, there is one long shot in the finale that swoops through New York following the different characters, which is fun but doesn’t linger for two long. The visual highlight is probably the first time Thor arrives to capture an already captured Loki around the end of the first act, and the battle between him, Captain America and Iron Man that follows.

One of the biggest let downs of the film is that none of the characters seem to have an emotional journey or arc throughout the film, maybe this is because of the very nature of “team-up” film, you have to spread out the screen time around the cast, making sure that everyone had their moment. But as a result here, no one really goes through any change, or has sort of epiphany or realization that will alter them (this could also be due to the no doubt already written, or in the process of being written sequels to the individual films), and this is a shame when compared to the other comic book team films, most noticeably the X-Men films, although I must admit they chose to focus on certain characters more than others, primarily Wolverine. However, would have pushing one character to the fore, and others into glorified supporting roles worked for the this film, possibly, but also it could have led to it being received as more of Thor 1.5, which in some ways this could have been seen to be, due to Loki serving as the lead villain.

This is unmistakeable a popcorn film, it doesn’t ask you to deal with too many ideas or to think about how it is a reflection of our world or is even as well made as some of the top echelon of the genre, such as both Batman Begins, The Dark Knight, Spiderman 1 and 2, Superman: The Movie or one of it’s predecessors Thor. This could obviously be the film, and Whedon knowing what this film as sticking to it, but with a film that everyone knew was going to make money, and it already has, it’s a shame that it didn’t take more risks, in terms of story, the characters (some of them) or the ideas and messages that would have elevated this beyond what it is.

Ultimately, I enjoyed it for what it was. If you go and see it, don’t go in expecting great things, and you may enjoy yourself, and even be surprised at what you see. But what do I know; I’m a DC guy.

Passing the Cowl

Come this August we will see Christian Bale’s last performance as Batman and Bruce Wayne, and the speculation will be begin as to who will be the next man to don the cowl. Not only will the task of bringing the character himself to life in a new and interesting way, but they will also be following an actor who has arguable given us one of the definitive portrayals of the characters numerous different personalities in believable and engaging performance.

When looking at the role of Batman you have to consider, it could be argued that it can be broken down into three separate personalities or aspects to the character. These being, Batman, Bruce Wayne as only Alfred sees and the Bruce Wayne that the rest of the world sees and judges. For the sake of ease of reading, I will refer to the private Bruce Wayne, purely as Bruce, and the other public Bruce Wayne as Wayne.

Briefly going through these different aspects of the overall character, the Batman part of the character is self explanatory in what is generally expected. Next comes the Bruce character, the one which is arguably the true Bruce Wayne, and which he keeps secret only showing it to Alfred, as it gives us an insight to pain that he feels over the loss of his parents, and often shows us the extent of the burden of being Batman has taken upon him. This was one of the main strengths and stand out part of Bale’s performance. Finally, is the Wayne aspect, which is often used as a distraction by Bruce, to keep people from suspecting him, and for comic relief moments, as he is often portrayed as being arrogant and sometimes oblivious to the wider world.

As mentioned by David S Goyer in an interview for Batman Begins, it was easy to find an actor to play either Batman or Bruce Wayne, but very difficult to find many that could play both, which was why Bale was cast, a decision that was well received by almost everyone. So once again, the creative team will once again have to embark on a search for someone who can provide the physique of the character, but also show a wide enough range to make him believable.

When considering the kind of casting you would need for Batman, it would be easy to just merely claim that it should go with an unknown actor and end the argument. As unlike some comic book roles, Batman can easily attract the best actors around, both because of the weight and stature of the character, but also because of the instant boost it can give to a career. Looking back at the last four men to play Batman, Michael Keaton, Val Kilmer, George Clooney and Bale, neither of them were unknowns, all of them were well known, with a solid body of work, maybe not necessarily in genres that normally preside being cast as Batman. I am referring mainly on how people reacted when Keaton was cast, after doing a number of comedies, something none of the other three have done many of.

Now I would like to mention a name of who in my humble opinion should be considered by the next creative team. Ryan Gosling. Now depending on what direction the next creative team want to go, in terms of story, be it a reboot, and picking up when Batman is established (there really is no need to go and do another origin film, Batman Begins has that taken care of), or if they change their minds of a reboot, and pick up after the end of The Dark Knight Rises, if it’s still possible, then Gosling physically can pull of each possible direction.

In terms of acting ability, Gosling is more than capable of portraying three different aspects of the character. The three roles that demonstrated this were Drive, The Ides of March and Half Nelson. In regards to Drive, a character who spoke very sparsely, only when it was absolutely necessary, and who demonstrated a violent physicality, which would he need for the fistycuffs that crop up in any Batman film. In Half Nelson, we saw a vulnerable and flawed man, who at times couldn’t control an addiction that had a control over him, and could ruin him. Finally, in The Ides of March, we saw the more arrogant and uncaring man who at times, I felt, thought himself better than those around him, something that the Wayne character possesses, and needs to keep his relevancy.

Obviously, there is a chance that Gosling would have no interest in the role at all, and I am by no means saying that he is only one capable of playing Batman. There may be some young actor out there, who after one or two great films will be propelled to the top of the list, or an actor everyone knows will suddenly show a jump in ability, and catapult himself into contention.

Finally, like Bale, having Gosling as the next Batman, would really help the new creative team to build a great cast around their leading man, like Christopher Nolan has done with his Dark Knight trilogy, bringing in the best actors possible to bring the world to life, and give characters a weight and presence to them.

Whatever happens, it’s unlikely that we will find out who will don the cowl for a good three to four years, and even then, that could be wishful thinking. But if I had my way, it would be Ryan Gosling, pulling it on and disappearing into Gotham City.

The Invisible Man? - Christopher Priest

Go to most science-fiction/fantasy sections in bookstores in this country and you will see some of the giants of that genre: Pratchett, Dick, Martin, Wells and Tolkien. The list is endless. But most stores will be lacking one man who belongs in any debate about the greats of this genre. Christopher Priest. For such a prolific and skilled writer, this is inexcusable in my view.

As mentioned his work is often absent from large amount of bookstores and it's place are works of less intelligence and narrative craft. However it is by no means impossible to find Mr Priests novels in bookstores, as they often found more easily in smaller independent stores (at least this from my experience, but even if you are lucky enough to walk into one that does then you are usually met with two of Mr Priests more recent novels, The Separation and The Prestige (the book which Christopher Nolan’s 2006 film was based upon). Now this is by no means a negative, do not think about that for one second, both are genuine masterpieces in my eyes, and both should be regular staples in any science fiction section.

The Prestige for anyone who hasn’t read the novel or seen the film is about two feuding magicians in Victorian England. It would be a fair assumption that more people will have seen the film than read the novel. The book offers much more ambiguous characters, not having the rules of film narratives to consider of having a clear (as much as it is possible with these characters) protagonist and antagonist, which was something Nolan commented on regarding his and his brothers adaptation.

The story of the book while similar in principle, varies significantly in places from the plot that was used for the film, while all the major twists remain in place, and pack just as much punch as they do in the film, the novel spans a much greater time frame and really gives us a chance to see the intricacies of each character and the long and twisted story they share.

The other previously mentioned book is The Separation, a World War Two novel unlike any other you are likely read. Asked to sum up in one word, the first that comes to mind is: Complex. It tells the story of two twins during the war, and the roles they play in the conflict, it is told through a kind of diary structure, although it is told at times from different points of view. The way to understand what I am no doubt struggling to explain is to read the novel and experience for yourself an intelligently structured puzzle box of a story that throws up many surprises even to the last sentence.

My reasoning for writing what appears like microscopic reviews of these novels is to now show what many readers of this genre are missing. As infrequently these novels are found in shops, it is even rarer to find some of his other works, some that in this person’s views are stronger than the two that I have just briefly written about. I could talk about all of his novels, but will instead just keep to what are in my opinion Mr Priests two most fascinating and captivating books: The Affirmation and Fugue for a Darkening Island.

Fugue is a disaster story, but it doesn’t have any form of environmental or other worldly event as its disaster. Instead, the disaster an invasion by a very large group of people from Africa of London, and then later the rest of England, after their continent is essentially written off and is slowly becoming completely unliveable. At first, the refugees are at a controllable level, but as more boats arrive, the situation quickly gets out of control and parts of the country is over run.

The story follows the life of one man during several different time periods, leading up to and during the invasion as he tries to at first live his life despite everything going on, and then to protect his family and survive as best he can in this new horrifying version of England.

The basic story of this book, and how a country is invaded by another race, and forced to change it’s ways to take them in and bargain with them is a relevant now as it is today, in most developed countries around the world, and could allude to a number of races as the invading force, or it may not even be referring to any kind of racial issues.

As with all of Christopher Priest’s work, there are several meanings and metaphors within each novel. As I didn’t live through time period, I would hate to mumble out what I believe a major message in the work, only to be completely wrong as I lacked any detailed knowledge of the period, which caused me to misinterpret a parts of the work.

The Affirmation tells the story of Peter Sinclair, a man who after a catastrophic series of events retreats to a friends cottage, and eventually writes a biography of himself, but which is slowly invaded by another reality, and a totally different other world. This small blurb, unfortunately doesn’t even begin to hint at the levels of depth that the novel has. As with all his work, Christopher Priests work has to be experienced first hand.

This novel, above all others is probably his best work, and is in my opinion the quintessential Christopher Priest novel. Nearly every mark of his literary skill and story telling ability appears in this book at one point or another, in later stories he may have taken certain narrative tools and fine tuned them, but none offer such an insight into the worlds that Mr Priest creates in any one novel that The Affirmation does.

This may seem like an article written by a publisher as a way of getting readers to go and buy an author’s books. I write this for no other reason that to talk about a great writer that at times isn’t given the recognition that one of such talent deserves. Very rarely now do we get writers in this genre that offer plots as complex and compelling, along with a literary flair that is lacking in many of the genre’s other writers.

So why aren’t more of Mr Priests novels in book stores, is it that only one of his books have been adapted into a films or television shows, unlike many of the other writers I mentioned earlier. At face value this may seem like an unrelated factor, but consider how many films have been made from Phillip K Dick’s books, Sky frequently use Terry Pratchett’s books for festive specials and we all know how successful Tolkien’s works have been received in the last decade, and how it has spawned an entire industry in and of itself.

So if you are looking for your next book, be it online or in a book shop, consider this article for a second when you are thinking over the choices. Yes you may have to wait a few days to order the book, but isn’t it worth to know that you are going to experience something new and exciting, and that you are reading something from one of not just science-fictions greatest writers, but from one of the greatest writers of the last fifty years.

Completing The Circle: The Dark Knight Rises

About two weeks ago the first trailer for The Dark Knight Rises arrived in theatres (if you went to see Harry Potter and The Deathly Hallows) and online through the film’s bare facebook page. Before I was even aware it was out there, and friend of mine asked me what I thought of it, at the time I was somewhere where I had no chance of seeing it. For the next day I thought about what could possibly be on it, I didn’t want to ask and have it tainted for me. I wanted to go press play, knowing absolutely nothing about what I was about to see.

Before I go any further, there are no spoilers what so ever in this piece of writing for The Dark Knight Rises, as I don’t know any, and don’t want to know any.

The trailer is obviously very heavy on the end of a journey theme. One of the final images of the trailer is of the cloud filled bat symbol descending onto the dark city of Gotham. There are two ways to look at this, if you were to read into this imagery, and take it as being at all relevant to the overall plot.

Firstly, there is the, Batman will die at the end of the film way of thinking. Secondly, you could go that it is Batman saving onto the city and finally earning the trust of all its law-abiding citizens and it’s officials. Both at this time are perfectly plausible from a story point of view, more so the later as it would directly continue the story on from The Dark Knight where Batman sacrificed himself for the good of city, regarding Harvey Dent’s post accident business.

As Christopher Nolan has alluded to “bringing the story full circle”, then maybe this is the scenario we could see playing out in the story. Bruce Wayne finally achieving what he set out to do all those years ago when he returned from his seven-year absence. To become something that the people of Gotham could have faith in, and look up to, knowing that he is there to protect them from any danger. The trailer uses some dialogue from Batman Begins where Ra’s Al Ghul talks about what Bruce could be capable of, “making himself more than a man, and by doing that becoming a legend.

I am aware that the term Legend can be used in many different ways when referring to any kind of person, fictional or real. While the use of the line The Dark Knight Legend in the trailer could be seen as a way of merely stating that this is the end of this particular story, what I believe will probably be known as The Dark Knight trilogy, and the hyping the last instalment of a franchise always helps to get people into the cinema (look at The Pirates of the Caribbean and The Lord of the Rings numbers), it could also mean that by the time the credits roll Bruce Wayne may be dead.

The trailer throughout doesn’t hold much joy for both Bruce Wayne and Jim Gordon, who is the character we see the most of. Gordon lays in pain and talks to a mysterious man for majority of the trailer, by what Gordon says and the way in which it is edited, we are led to believe it is Bruce Wayne, as he talks about the Batman coming back. No doubt, if this is an actual scene from the film, then Bruce more than likely has told Gordon who he is. The image of Gordon, who has suffered throughout the series, despite being the genuinely good man is a shock, and no doubt that was the point of using this for the trailer.

As I mentioned earlier, Gordon has suffered throughout the series, no more so than in the finale of The Dark Knight when his family’s future is decided on the flip of a coin by Harvey Dent. However, the state he is in on that hospital bed, is something else entirely. It’s more akin to severe beating or someone involved in a vehicle accident. By using a bit of comment sense, it wouldn’t be far to imagine that Gordon has had a run in with Bane, having to deal with him without Batman.

But the most shocking image of the trailer is saved for the last one or two seconds. It shows Batman staggering backwards, exhausted as Bane pounds into view up a flight of stairs, from our point of view, full of energy. It’s clear to see that this shot was chosen for a specific reason, it puts the idea of Batman dying as a very real possibility. However, knowing Christopher Nolan’s history with his Batman films, and their trailers, this shot could not even be from the last act of the film. Neither the trailers for Batman Begins or The Dark Knight had imagery from the finales in them. By finales I mean the siege of the Narrows or the Monorail fight in Begins or the skyscraper siege and coin toss sequence in Knight. This is however my assumption, and me going off what we have seen previously.

It is here I must admit to their being maybe a slight whiff of a spoiler, by my own fault I came across three set photos from the shoot in Pittsburgh.

If you don’t want to know anything, like myself then please jump to the next paragraph. Which features two pictures of Batman and Bane in a different location, fighting again, and which could make be the finale, if you take into consideration the contents of the third. Which feature neither Batman nor Bane, but certainly gives one or two clues away. Nothing though that any fan of Batman with a decent amount of knowledge of the characters history and the full cast list wouldn’t be able to put together if they had some spare time on their hands. Without knowing anything, I did think it was one way for them to link some characters together, and it seems at least going from this picture that I could be right.

Something to take into account when considering what the death of Batman would mean. Would the citizens of Gotham stand up and defend themselves and each other, making the city a better place, riding itself of crime and corruption. As much as we would all like to believe a city would do that, it would be unlikely. Gotham would quite possibly regress to what it was, but with the more dangerous criminals also in the mix. Christopher Nolan at times, especially with his Batman films encourages us to think about the possibilities after the film ends, the Joker card a prime example. How would Gotham fair with Batman gone, if the Joker were to escape or one of the other rogues emerged. The possibilities go are endless.

With the news that Warner Bros. will reboot the Batman franchise after this film coming out earlier in the year it is hard to say what the Nolan’s and David Goyer have in store for us this time next year. We don’t even know what kind of reboot they mean, it could be route that Marvel have taken with Spiderman, and starting a fresh with a knew cast and crew, or they could be just be passing the creative responsibility onto a new team, albeit with Christopher Nolan and Emma Thomas serving as producers. This character especially in this version continuity has proven very popular, and it would be a strange decision for everyone involved to merely step away from it. Batman is one of the few comic book characters that has always been able to attract the big names, both in front of and behind the camera, and given the success of the first two, and it’s a safe bet to say the third, then attracting another talented team would not be difficult.

The one fear is that Warner Bros are rebooting Batman so as to one day put together their own team-up movie with the Justice League, as a way of rivalling Marvels The Avengers. Why they would want to do this, I have never understood, a good Batman film will always do better that these kind of films in both financial and critical terms.

Will we see Batman die next summer and become a legend that the people of Gotham look up to when they are lost or their city is in danger? Or will we see Batman finally become Gotham’s protector, accepted by all.

We’ll have to wait to next July to find out.