Batman week Part 7

For the epic finale of my Batman week marathon, or Bat-a-thon, it's time to end off with the epic conclusion to the Christopher Nolan "Batman Trilogy." The last one came out last summer, July 2012, which was called "The Dark Knight Rises."

After the ending of "The Dark Knight," where Batman is being chased by Gordon’s dogs, everyone was anticipating the sequel. However, no one really knew who the villain was going to be. People were saying that Johnny Depp was going to be the Riddler, Phillip Seymour Hoffman was going to be the Penguin, and there were talks of a third villain, possibly Catwoman. The villains Christopher Nolan decided to go with were Catwoman and Bane. Now that's the way to end off the series.

Before beginning my review, I would just like to say that I saw "The Dark Knight Rises" on opening night, and when I came home, I had heard about the tragedy at the Aurora Theater shooting in Colorado. How sad is that? People come to the theater to see one of the most anticipated superhero films of the summer, and some nut who saw the film decided to come in and shoot innocent bystanders who were watching it? My condolences go out to every family in Colorado that lost someone in the shooting, now onto the review.

Now the premise to this movie would be familiar to Batman fans, if they had read the "Nightfall" story arc from the comics.

Tim Burton wanted to make the film as dark as Nolan did in "The Dark Knight Rises," but obviously couldn't do it after what people had said about "Batman Returns." However, with Nolan toning down the darkness in this film, I feel was appropriate because it's Batman, and it's supposed to be dark and set in a realistic setting, which is possibly why Batman has no superpowers.

Since I believe this movie is the best comic book adaptation ever made, I will be making a long review praising and defending it, as I feel that the movie was unjustly ridiculed and nitpicked at. However, I do hope that all of you enjoy my review.

My main reasoning for liking this film is because of Bane, played by Tom Hardy. I think that he is one of the greatest villains I have ever seen portrayed after a while, and in my personal opinion, I think he was even better than the Joker. Don't get me wrong, Joker is my favorite Batman villain, as for a lot of other people, if not everybody, but I had already seen him done before very well by Jack Nicholson in the '89 Batman. As I had mentioned before, Heath Ledger had escaped the shadow of Nicholson and made a tremendous Joker in his own way, but I understand if anyone prefers the Joker.

My reason as to why I prefer Bane is because Jeep Swenson's portrayal of Bane in "Batman & Robin" was obviously horrendous, so Bane was a fresh approach in this one. Like those who never read any of the comics, I watched the '90s Animated Series, so I was familiar with Bane and Batman's story through that cartoon.

When I saw Bane in this movie, I thought he was a good villain with an objective, a diabolical plot, which he pulled off perfectly in this.

His appearance will definitely give you a scare when you see his presence with that mask he wears and when he does those shifting eyes, you know that something is going to happen. His voice was just dastardly, hands down, which is something that they had changed. Before in the earlier trailers, they had his voice sounding much raspier than Batman's, about a hundred times harder to understand what he was saying, from what I heard. But the finished product on his voice, I thought was perfect for him. They gave Hardy some sort of a filter so that you could hear Bane's voice clearer and really projects his voice.

Nolan made Bane really enjoyable and how he's really soaking up, hamming it, and having fun being the villain. With everything you throw at him is great and he's really intimidating.

I thought it was funny on the plane when the CIA agent wanted to know about Bane by asking, "Tell me about Bane! Why does he wear the mask? A lot of loyalty, for a hired gun!" He doesn't know that Bane is right behind him, that Bane sneaks up behind the agent and replies, "Or perhaps he's wondering why someone would shoot a man, before throwing him out of a plane?" Wanting to know more, the agent asks him, "At least you can talk. Who are you?" and Bane replies, "It doesn't matter who we are, what matters is our plan. No one cared who I was until I put on the mask."

Another reason why he's so great is because he did what Ra's Al Ghul and the Joker almost succeeded on, but Batman stopped before they're plot was just about to be complete: take over Gotham City. He did just that, but I believe that he was a sympathetic guy when he announced that he was going to take over Gotham, but the Police that he had trapped underneath the tunnel were going to be kept alive, supplied with food and everything they needed. Remember, the Batman villains were only concerned about getting Batman out of the way, not the police. I understand if you say that the police would eventually get out of the cave since they were supplied with food, but it all depended on the material they had and how long it would take them to dig their way out of the cave when they used their resources. Bane would eventually fight everyone, he was just prioritizing everything. Every supervillain has their own way of prioritizing who, when and how they are going to fight everyone.

For those who say that the good guys are going up against Bane and his henchmen, who have AK-47s, with sticks and batons, remember that Robin and Batgirl don't have that much in their arsenal of weapons.

In this film, which it couldn't have been complete without Nolan inserting this: Bane breaks Batman's back over his knee, and kept him away for months. That is until he was helped by the people in the well he was thrown in, to recover by snapping his back right back into place. Before Bane broke Batman's back, I loved it when Bane said, "Ah, yes... I was wondering what would break first... Your spirit, or your body?" When he's down in that prison, he asks Bane, "Why didn't you just... kill me?" to which Bane responds, "You don't fear death... You welcome it. Your punishment must be more severe." That is another great Bane line.

Also, it takes time for a back injury to heal, which is why it took him a while to get better. You might be saying, "Well what about the people who are in wheelchairs because of broken backs? Would I have to just snap their backs back into place and they'll be cured?" Listen here nitpickers: what Bane did to Batman wasn't "as" severe as other people's broken backs, so calm down. Don't go, "Bruce gets better in that well?" Just look at it from a medical view and think that the back injury wasn't as severe.

The people in the well told Bruce that only one person was able to get out, and with the "Deshi basara!" chant helping him out was great. Of course, that was played in the trailer, and no one knew what it meant until we saw the film, which the chant meant "Rise."

One point of defense is that when complaining about the jump out of the well, I heard a complaint that Bruce could have just used a chisel and climbed his way out, but this was to keep the suspense, which is what it did perfectly. They asked a professional rock climber about that issue, and they said he could have jumped out of it easily, but I feel it kept the suspense, and when he came out and the bats were flying all around behind him, it was Bruce rising again as Batman.

Remember, Bruce's back was fine. He was just trying to rebuild his spirit. That's why he spent so long in the well. He was trying to mentally get himself back into action. He was thinking that he wasn't worthy and that there was nothing left for him. No villain had beaten Batman the way Bane did. Bane had broken Bruce's spirit, so Bruce had to mentally get himself back together and rise again as the superhero we all know and love. Think of it as similar to Jesus resurrected.

People probably complained that they didn't see anyone do anything when Bane was taking over, but Gotham's citizens must have been planning. It wasn't necessary to show who was planning a way to stop Bane.

Also, people might have complained with how Batman came back and just punched Bane really hard to win, but I thought that it was a well-done battle, and overall, well put together up to his demise. If you were expecting something better, then you should check out another Batman film you like. Remember, this is a war film, so you would only expect what you saw at the end.

With Catwoman, she is played by the gorgeous Anne Hathaway. I had seen Anne Hathaway in the two "Princess Diaries" films, "Ella Enchanted," and Tim Burton's "Alice in Wonderland," but I was familiar with some other films she did that had a PG-13 or R rating. This was the first film that I saw Hathaway casted in where she was doing something more geared towards the teenagers and/or adults.

Hathaway as Catwoman was well done, and she is up there with actresses who played the best Catwoman. She is one of the best Catwoman actresses I have seen, but I would say that she and Michelle Pfeiffer are good in their own respective ways.

Hathaway goes back in forth between the typical damsel in distress and then becoming serious, which was just for show. She plays the different parts in the character and she is having fun with it.

Nolan made Catwoman more of a spy in this movie, which worked great, and I think she was made more like the Catwoman from the comics.

Whenever you see her and Batman together, you know something is going to happen.

I especially liked her goggles in this, where it went to the top of her head, it looked like cat ears, which I thought was a nice touch, hence the reason why she is called, "The Cat Burglar" and not Catwoman.

There is a third villain, who is played by Marion Cotillard, and her character name is Miranda Tate. Around the third act, she reveals herself as Ra's Al Ghul's daughter, Talia. I thought that was a dark and interesting twist, but people probably thought that Ra's Al Ghul was going to be in this because you hear his voice in the trailer. There is a scene where Bruce sees Ra's Al Ghul, but it turns out he was a vision.

Also, I found it surprising that they made her Bane's girlfriend in this, and the child that made it out of the well, leaving Bane behind. Batman had thought, as did everyone else who was watching this, that Bane was the one who made it out of the well, but apparently not. Talia made it out, and Bane tried to fight the people off while she escaped.

Even though she died unexpectedly, and had a wimpy death to some people, I thought it was a nice addition, and no one probably expected that.

The music in this film was excellent, which is a big part as to what makes any film so captivating because without it, it wouldn't be as exciting as it is. However, there are parts in the film that don't have music in them at all, and they are actually done very well. If you remember in "The Dark Knight," when Batman confronts the Joker in the streets, and no music is played, in "The Dark Knight Rises," there is a scene similar to that, which is effective.

I actually liked the plot in this film better than in the last two because I believe it was a fitting closure to the Batman storyline, told by Christopher Nolan. Since the stakes were higher in this film, it made it more interesting.

If you remember from the beginning of the film, eight years has passed since Harvey died. Bruce is seen in retirement looking really old. When he hears that a terrorist named Bane is going to make Gotham City into unbridled anarchy, which is something that the Joker and any super powered villain always tried to do, Bruce sees that Gotham is in serious trouble and whips himself back into shape, which he did a good job of doing. However, he's in serious trouble after Bane breaks his back.

It's very dark and depressing story, but this is how this chapter is supposed to be since every superhero has that moment where their powers are lost or they are momentarily defeated. Remember in "Superman II," when Superman gave up his powers to be with Lois Lane, or in "Spider-Man 2" when Peter decided to not be Spider-Man anymore? A new opponent comes around, who is like a superhuman being, and defeats the hero, so it's all about the fall and rise of that hero. Batman had defeated every villain he has encountered, but Bane was the first villain to beat Batman and break his spirit.

You're probably wondering if the whole film is completely depressing, but no, there are some funny scenes in this. One that you remember from the trailer is when Bane is taking down a football field, and the field is destroyed, but one player is running, which someone can take either as the player running from the destruction or trying to score a touchdown. You might probably be wondering, "He wouldn't know the field is being destroyed because he doesn't turn around until he scores the touchdown." True, but the ground is shaking, so I guess it would be hard not to know.

Like "Batman Begins," "The Dark Knight Rises" is very story-driven, which is what I really liked because you get to know the back-story of both Bane and Talia a lot, which makes it interesting.

The run-time of the film didn't feel as long as it did, and went by really fast, but that's probably because I got into it so fast. However, the beginning was slow, but quickly picked up as the film went on. Very few films should have the allotted run-time as "The Dark Knight Rises," but that's something people can debate on. A lot of stuff was happening in this, and new characters were introduced, which would make a person want to get into it, if they would enjoy it and it's the Batman film for them. It's a fitting closure to the Nolan trilogy, and he also co-wrote the screenplay once again with his brother, Jonathan.

The Nolan trilogy are their own distinct genres, since they are crime dramas with Batman, and this a war film, which I think they did a good job on. He set them in a realistic setting, and it looks completely realistic, with the explosions and stuff that he did. In "The Dark Knight," the hospital that Joker blew up was an actual hospital that had ran out of business for a while.

That's what I like about Christopher Nolan, since he made the films with no CGI effects. I think it's a job well done since everything seems to have CGI in it, but there are exceptions to when it's fitting and good in a film.

In the end, if you have seen the film, Batman files away in the Bat-Copter, or Bat-Chopper, whatever you want to call it, maybe Bat-Jet, and it blows up. Before I go further, let me defend one thing here. I heard that Batman would not have made it out as far as he did in time, and the explosion would not have exploded just the Chopper. Listen, it's a time-suspension rule that every film has done, so once again, chillax!

People think that he is dead, and Alfred cries at the funeral saying that he failed the Wayne parents in promising to protect Bruce. The Wayne House is now going to be a museum, Batman is recognized as a hero, but the one thing about Bruce is that he gave Alfred, Lucius, and Gordon a ray of hope inside, which no one else had, that he's possibly still alive. Alfred told Bruce earlier in the film, "Remember when you left Gotham? Before all this, before Batman? You were gone seven years. Seven years I waited, hoping that you wouldn't come back. Every year, I took a holiday. I went to Florence, there's this cafe, on the banks of the Arno. Every fine evening, I'd sit there and order a Fernet Branca. I had this fantasy, that I would look across the tables and I'd see you there, with a wife and maybe a couple of kids. You wouldn't say anything to me, nor me to you. But we'd both know that you'd made it, that you were happy. I never wanted you to come back to Gotham. I always knew there was nothing here for you, except pain and tragedy. And I wanted something more for you than that. I still do." At the end, he goes to Florence, sits in the cafe, orders his Fernet Branca, looks over, nods his head, and sees Bruce and Selina sitting there, finally retired.

Gordon sees that the Bat Signal is repaired, and Lucius finds that the autopilot in the Bat-Jet was fixed. So now they know that Bruce is still alive.

One more thing: you would complain about is that Michael Caine is not in the film as much. Didn't Alfred say that he wasn't going to help Bruce anymore? Remember that part before you complain about Caine being nowhere until the end. Alfred helped out Bruce in the beginning, but once he got the hang of going out to fight crime at night, there was no need for Alfred to keep helping Bruce.

People complain that Alfred wouldn't just up and leave Bruce the way he did. If something were to happen, since Alfred took care of Bruce since he was a boy, Alfred would have come back to Gotham and looked for Bruce. There was nothing about Alfred coming back and helping Bruce get everything he needed to take down Bane. He isn't in the background helping Batman out, but what people need to understand is that Alfred's role, despite being more condensed in this movie, is still phenomenal. He has many key scenes.

My defense to this complaint is that normally with the Hero's Path, the mentor doesn't show up so much, even though I acknowledge Alfred is supposed to be there all the time. The comics and movies are two different entities. Also, it's now Bruce's job to find Alfred. You can't expect Alfred to hold Bruce's hand through everything. One day, he has to learn, despite that Bruce is in his late 30s to early 40s in this movie. I know that it's strange that Alfred would leave him at that old of an age, but Alfred wasn't there for Bruce when he was away from Gotham all those years.

Michael Caine did a great job as a mentor who did give long lectures, but there was some valuable lessons, despite the tone Michael Caine gave Alfred. Also, look at when and for how long Michael Caine was available to shoot his scenes as Alfred. I don't know if he was shooting something else, but just think about that.

Now there is one character that I didn't mention, a young police officer name John Blake, played by Joseph Gordon-Levitt, who in the end reveals that his birth name is Robin. When he quits the force, he discovers the Bat Cave, possibly hinting there will be a Robin spinoff or possibly he'll be the next Batman. Whatever the case might be, Nolan is officially done with the Batman series.

Overall, I believe that "The Dark Knight Rises" is the best Batman film, my all time favorite comic book adaptation, another one of my favorite films, and the best superhero film of all time. Other people would disagree and call it the worst of the trilogy, but they probably over thought and nit-picked it to death. I don't see why they would, it's an amazing movie. Just check your brain at the door, sit down, and enjoy the movie for crying out loud. Stop nitpicking things to death. There is such a thing as "too far," which people have done a lot with the Nolan trilogy.

One person says that in this trilogy, Batman gets outsmarted every single time. This is a modern look at Batman people. He did use his head and he still has his brains, doesn't he? I don't see where Batman gets outsmarted in the trilogy.

I'm sorry for being so defensive and I know everyone is entitled to their own opinion, but still, it's just a movie. I understand if you grew up with a different version of Batman than I did, but you should still accept the movie for making a valiant effort for capturing the comics as best as they could. I know the comics will always superior, and I feel the same way about every novel adaptation that I see on a novel that I read, like Harry Potter or Lord of the Rings.

So, what's next for Batman? Well, I'm hearing rumors of a reboot because they're planing on making a Justice League film, but we'll see. In the mean time, go watch "The Dark Knight Rises," I highly recommend it, and I think you'll enjoy it. I hope you enjoyed my Bat-a-thon, and stay tuned for more of my reviews.

Batman week Part 6

After the success of "Batman Begins," it would probably come as no surprise that Christopher Nolan was planning a sequel. In 2008, he did just that with, at the time, the Best Superhero film ever made, "The Dark Knight." I'll admit that when I saw the trailers to this, I thought it was going to be a horrible remake of the '89 Batman, so I disregarded ever seeing it. However, when I finally did see it, I was wrong. It was "much" better than the '89 Batman, and it was the perfect follow-up to "Batman Begins." I would even go far to say that I consider this film higher on my favorite films list than Tim Burton's "Batman." This is another one of my all time favorite comic book adaptations. A lot of sequels, which people have noticed are pretty common, either repeats the same storyline or they try some new type of story, which fails miserably. "The Dark Knight," which is a crime thriller, did not do either and told the next story, picking up where "Batman Begins" had left off. Nolan made this film after reading the Joker's comic debut in 1940, The Killing Joke, which is the 1988 graphic novel, and the 1996 series The Long Halloween, which retold Two-Face's origin.

It was nice to see the returning cast of Christian Bale, Michael Caine, Gary Oldman, and Morgan Freeman in their respective roles, and they did just as good as they did in Batman Begins, maybe even better. Katie Holmes did not reprise her role as Rachel Dawes, although she was signed on, but turned it down to star in "Mad Money." In March of 2007, the beautiful Maggie Gyllenhaal was in final talks and was casted as Rachel Dawes. Gyllenhaal has described her character as "a damsel in distress to an extent," but says "Nolan sought ways to empower her character." So, "Rachel's really clear about what's important to her and unwilling to compromise her morals, which made a nice change from the many conflicted characters whom she has previously portrayed." Gyllenhaal did just as a good job as Holmes did, a tough and intelligent role that could also be looked at as a role model. Also, you might recall when Rachel tells Bruce that she'll be with him once Batman is no longer around. There is, if I remember correctly, a scene that follows up with that.

Now comes the juicy part, the villains in this film. Cillian Murphy returns briefly in the beginning as Scarecrow, but is tossed aside for the main villain of this film that steals the show: The Joker, played by Heath Ledger. What can I say about this performance? Unlike Jack Nicholson, who plays the role in a very funny type of a way, Ledger played it the exact opposite. This is hands down, one of the scariest performances I have ever seen in a while. I was actually scared of him the entire time he was on screen because he had such a dastardly plan that you knew he was going to go far into taking over Gotham City. When he sits down with the robbers to devise a plan to kill Batman, he knows what he is saying to them and knows that's the only thing to do. In this film, they made him too invincible with interrogating the mob of criminals and escaping the police too easily, but he's still a tremendous performance.

Joker is the main villain that is seen all the time in Batman comics and the shows, so there is no doubt that Joker is everyone's favorite Batman villain. The hype to this film was a little exaggerated for a while. The news was covering on "The Dark Knight" for some time, but more specifically about the drug overdose which caused Ledger's unfortunate and sad passing. Nolan had originally planned that he would reprise Ledger as Joker in the next two or three sequels of his Batman films, but after he passed away, Nolan had to switch gears and find a new villain.

I believe that after Ledger passed away, the internet rumor called "The Joker Curse" had started, where people stated that whoever played the Joker had gone through some sort of problems, like psychological issues or some sort. I had believed that for a while, with everyone saying (if I remember correctly) that Cesar Romero had some psychological issues, Nicholson was in the hospital a week later after suffering a heart attack, Mark Hamill, who did the voice of Joker in the Animated Series, had trouble sleeping, and of course, Ledger's drug overdose. However, I think people were being too over panicked about this, so I brushed it aside after a while.

I got tired of the question (although I was asking this myself) on who the better Joker was, comparing Nicholson and Ledger. Both did an outstanding job in their own respective ways, and that's what made Ledger so great. He was an original Joker, not imitating any of the past actors who played Joker, and not laughing as often.

When you hear Joker tell his different stories as to why he got his scars to one of the mobsters and Rachel, we don't know his back-story and if he's telling the truth. I wouldn't be surprised if Nolan got that idea from the Animated Series’ episode, "Mad Love," which happens to be my personal favorite out of all of them. You have to love the Joker line, "Why so serious?"

The Batman and Joker scenes are just perfect. When you see the two of them together in a scene, you want to see what they do. The interrogation scene, the fight at the party, the car chase, and the end fight, it's all just perfect scenes well-put together.

Sal Maroni, played by Eric Roberts, is the one who takes over Falcone's job, which is another criminal Gordon is after in this one. Bob Hoskins and the man who brought you "The Sopranos" and did the memorable role as Tony Soprano in the sitcom, James Gandolfini, auditioned for this role.

Now the final villain is Harvey Dent aka Two Face, played by Aaron Eckhart, who did a better job than Tommy Lee Jones in "Batman Forever" by a mile. Before Eckhart was casted, Liev Schreiber, Josh Lucas, and Ryan Phillippe wanted to play Harvey Dent, Mark Ruffalo auditioned, and Hugh Jackman was also considered. Nolan chose Eckhart because of "his "extraordinary" ability as an actor, his embodiment of "that kind of chiseled, American hero quality" projected by Robert Redford and his sub textual "edge." Eckhart was also interested in good guys turning evil." We all know that Two-Face is a crime boss, but Nolan put him down as a twisted vigilante because he's Batman's counterpart. Eckhart said that, "[He] is still true to himself. He's a crime fighter; he's not killing good people. He's not a bad guy, not purely." Eckhart thought of Two-Face as Robert Kennedy, as an "idealistic, held a grudge and took on the Mob." He had his hair lightened and styled to make him appear more dashing. Nolan told Eckhart to not make Dent's Two-Face persona "jokey with slurping sounds or ticks."

I especially liked the line that Dent said to Bruce, "You either die a hero, or you live long enough to see yourself become the villain." In Dent's case, would you say the latter is the one he did? Because thinking now, I think that he lived long enough to see himself become the villain. Unfortunately, I do have to complain: didn't Nolan rush in making Dent into Two-Face? He's literally Two-Face for maybe the last half-hour of the movie, and then he dies. They should have made him turn into Two-Face, and left it as a cliffhanger for the third movie. Oh well, but he played the split-personality of Two-Face perfectly.

It was especially a strong thing for Dent to say that he was Batman so that he could cover up Bruce. After Batman interrogates Joker and goes after Dent while the others go after Rachel, she dies, and Dent becomes Two-Face after getting half of his face burned with the acid explosion. Joker comes to him in the hospital, and turns Gotham's "White Knight" by bringing him from the higher level to the same level as the Joker. That shows you how powerful of a villain the Joker can be.

The action scenes are much better in this one than in "Batman Begins." Although I liked the action in that one, this one cleaned it up with no more of that up close shaky camera movement. Not only did this involve more vehicles and explosions, but "the hand-to-hand combat were photographed and edited in a more coherent manner" which is a statement from James Rolfe's review that I agree with. When the Tumbler exploded, I didn't mind, but the Bat-Pod looked really neat, and a much better vehicle for Batman.

There are two scenes in this film that I believe pay tribute to the '89 Batman, which you might know the ones I'm mentioning.

People would probably also complain that "Batman Begins" and "The Dark Knight" really have a lot of pretentious, brooding dialogue that they don't care for and are annoyed of, but I didn't pay attention to that.

Gordon is believed to be dead for a while, but comes back and is promoted to Commissioner after Joker kills Gillian B. Leob, played by Colin McFarlane.

Nolan worked with his brother, Jonathan Nolan, on the screenplay, and gave the idea of the Joker's first two appearances from the first issue of Batman in 1940. Nolan also wanted to make this film show more of Batman's detective side, which is a side that wasn't fully developed in "Batman Begins."

With Ledger dead, people were going around talking that possibly Johnny Depp would play the Riddler, Phillip Seymour Hoffman would play the Penguin, and I believe they were talking about putting Catwoman in there as well. But who would be the next villain in the series? And will this one get better, or will be the worst of them all? Tune in next episode! Same Bat Time! Same Bat Channel!

Batman week Part 5

After 8 whole years of Batman not appearing on screen in theaters, along comes one of the greatest directors of all time, Christopher Nolan, to restart the Batman series. In 2005, he did just that with the best Batman film by far at the time, "Batman Begins." People who didn't like this film or thought it was alright, I seriously think nit-picked this film a lot. Now, in all honesty, this was my first Batman film I ever saw the whole way through (the past I had only seen parts of on TV or from the VHS copies we owned), and I actually enjoyed it fully. The best part about it was we saw it in the theater, which was a great experience.

It starts off with a back-story of Bruce as a small child (Gus Lewis) playing with Rachel Dawes (Emma Lockhart). When he falls down a hole and discovers a bat cave, we get a first glimpse at his fear, but he’s saved from that hole. His parents, played by Linus Roache and Sara Stewart, and Bruce go out to an opera house, where Bruce asks to leave because of his fear of bats. Once they leave, he witnesses his parents getting shot by a robber named Joe Chill, played by Richard Brake. The police inform Bruce that they are going to find the man, leaving him to be raised by his butler Alfred Pennyworth, now played by the great Michael Caine. I do say I prefer him as Alfred because he makes him so loveable and the loyal butler that he is, that he pulls this role off well. You have to love him when he always tells Bruce, "Why do we fall, sir? So we can always learn to pick ourselves up again." Whether you like it or not, this whole backstory is necessary here, hence the reason why it is called a "reboot." This is for the new school Batman fans so they can understand how Bruce becomes Batman. 14 years later, Chill is being granted parole in exchange for Carmine Falcone, played by Tom Wilkinson. Bruce (now played by Christian Bale) goes to the trial to kill Chill, but one of Falcone's men instead kill him, while Rachel (now played by Katie Holmes) is ashamed of Bruce taking the law into his own hands. Bruce goes to Tibet, where he is locked up in a prison, until Henri Ducard (Liam Neeson) comes in, breaks him out, and trains him in the art of the League of Shadows, led by Ra's Al Ghul (Ken Watanabe).

This part is really great because you get to see how Bruce learns how to face his fears and why he goes out into the dark to fight crime as opposed to going out during the daytime. It's also powerful when Bruce learns of the true secret behind the group, that he instead burns the temple down, but saves Ducard and leaves him with the local villagers. Bruce goes back to Gotham and he sees that Wayne Enterprises is now being run by William Earle, played by Rutger Hauer. We then meet the weapons expert that Bruce goes to and gets all of his fancy gadgets and everything from: Lucius Fox, played by the great Morgan Freeman, one of the greatest actors of his time. Freeman plays Lucius's role as the friendly person that wants to help Bruce out, since he and Alfred both know about Bruce being Batman. I'm not really familiar with Lucius Fox being one of the main characters of the comics or him making an appearance in the animated series, but he sure knows everything that Bruce wants. With all of these gadgets together, Bruce makes the Bat Cave, building up to the moment we've been waiting for this whole time, him becoming Batman. Though I don't understand why Bale has to speak in that raspy, growling tone. Was he trying to pull off a realistic thought that if he spoke like he normally would, everyone would recognize who he is? How possible is that? But I digress; he is the best Batman ever!

In the role of Sgt. James Gordon, we have another great actor of all time, Gary Oldman, who I have to say is perfect in this role. Unlike Pat Hingle, Gary Oldman does the role of a police officer like he should be doing. He goes out after getting the information from Batman and tries to get the criminals. Even though he may not be successful in doing so himself, Batman is always there to help Gordon out, which is something that Oldman does perfectly as Gordon. I didn't mention this before, but I will now: Katie Holmes is not only hot as Rachel, but she really plays a powerful role in this. Rachel was never a character in the comics or anywhere, she is just a character that Nolan made up for this film. However, Dawes did alright and portrayed a good role model for kids.

Now who could be the villain in this film? Well rumor was going around that the Scarecrow was going to be the main villain, and that he was going to be played by Howard Stern. Guess what? He's in this film, but Cillian Murphy plays Dr. Jonathan Crane aka the Scarecrow. His job is to spray his victims with a gas that will make them see their own personal fears. When Murphy speaks in that low voice, you know that he is planning something, and you can read him easily, which makes him a scary villain. Crane tells Bruce that he is doing work for Ra's Al Ghul, but Bruce refuses to believe him, telling Crane that Ra's Al Ghul is dead. He actually does use his gas on Batman, which makes him see his fear of bats, that he pages Alfred to come and get him. From here, he is given an antidote that is made by Fox. He even uses his gas on Rachel, which causes Batman to save her. He injects her with that same antidote, and gives her two antidotes: one for Gordon and the other for mass production. Scarecrow comes into full form when he appears on a fire-breathing horse, and is coming to get Rachel and the kid she is with, until she zaps him in the face with the taser, and he rides off into the fog. Who knew that Scarecrow could be such a wuss? Here, you can see that Rachel and Bruce have an on-off relationship with one another. She even tells him at one point, "It's not who you are underneath, but what you do that defines you." Later on, Batman rescues her and the kid from the mass damage that Ra's Al Ghul and Scarecrow have done. On the rooftop, Dawes asks him, "Wait! You could die. At least tell me your name." Little did she know that the same advice she gave Bruce would bounce right back at her when Batman turns and says, "It's not who I am underneath, but what I *do* that defines me." Here, she realizes it's Bruce, but before he says another word, he jumps off the rooftop. Now that's a way to keep the suspense.

Who could be the real Ra's Al Ghul? Well a decoy, played by Jay Buozzi, appears briefly, but he is not the real one. Henri Ducard is the real Ra's Al Ghul. Talk about a dark, sudden twist! First, he is such a good mentor and friend to Bruce, next thing you know, he is the central villain in this film. Neeson does a brilliant job as the villain in this film, like he does in every one of his roles. Ra's Al Ghul is known to be a powerful villain, and is one of the main villains that made Bruce become Batman, which is shown in this film. Neeson brings the character to life and he knows how to play Ra's Al Ghul as the villain who is responsible for the creation of Batman, and is one of the villains that Batman always is after. Ra's Al Ghul almost succeeds in taking over Gotham because he comes to Bruce's birthday party, and burns the house down, almost killing Bruce. Then, he goes on a train to spread the toxin-riddled water supply using the Microwave Emitter he stole, and turn the people of Gotham into violent, animal-like people, raising the city into unbridled anarchy. This is just great.

Falcone is a great character in this, especially with the line that he delivers, "Ignorance is bliss, my friend. Don't burden yourself with the secrets of scary people." He turns out to be one of the men that Crane has working for him, and is the one who has been shipping the toxin water-supply. Flass, played by Mark Boone Junior, is Gordon’s corrupt partner, who is a character that you just hate and want Gordon to report and get off the force. Finch, played by Larry Holden, is the district attorney.

The action scenes in here are hard to see because of the up-close shaky cameras, which are annoying, since they can probably make your head spin and you won't know what's going on. However, they are still great. Now, the Tumbler seems to be not appropriate for this film since I believe it didn't look right to be the Batmobile. Though, I have to admit it's funny to see Gordon drive it because it's something you would never expect Batman to do: ask someone else to drive his car. This is a very story-driven Batman film, which is what makes it so enjoyable to watch. Which is why I would consider this one of my all time favorite comic book adaptations. This is an origin story about Batman, and Christopher Nolan treated this film the way it should be. I would even dare to say that it's far more enjoyable to watch than the Tim Burton films. They are "that" good.

In the end, Gordon is promoted to Lieutenant, and he gives Batman a Joker card, which at first I thought was supposed to seg-way into the '89 Batman. Was that what Christopher Nolan was trying to do? Tune in next episode! Same Bat Time! Same Bat Channel!

Batman week Part 4

Well guys, I have finally come to it. A day that I have been hoping wouldn't come this whole week, but unfortunately it has. I have to look at the absolute "worst" comic book adaptation ever made. It is none other than Schumacher's worst of the worse, "Batman & Robin," released in 1997. I am talking about a film that is so bad, that our government is debating on whether or not this should be a new form of capital punishment: subjecting their prisoners to watching this horrendous piece of manure. At first, I was laughing when I watched it, since it pretty much plays as a comedy, and it promoted a line of action figures, but when I was returning the film to the library, I had no idea what I had watched. Even when I saw it as a kid when we got this monstrosity from the library, I don't remember hating or liking it, but I didn't know it was this bad. Remember, I was a kid, so I didn't know any better. Also, I may want to add that I will be going off on this one since this will be the worst one I have reviewed yet. Trust me; there are a lot worse films than this one that will be coming along the way. So please sit tight because this is going to be a long post.

First off, I want to start out by saying Val Kilmer did not return for this one because he was off shooting "The Saint," and instead was replaced by George Clooney, who you might remember from that hit Television sitcom, "ER." Interesting choice...NOT! His Batman was so horrible, that it was just a pain to see him play it, but as Bruce Wayne, he did well. Chris O'Donnell reprised his role as Robin, but in this one, they made him into a whiney pain that you just want to punch dead in the face. All he does is complaining. "You just can't stand it! Maybe she wanted me instead of you. I mean, this is your idea of friendship, isn't it, Bruce? It's your house, it's your rules, it's your way to the highway! It's Batman and Robin, not Robin and Batman, and I'm sick of it!" "I want a Robin signal in the sky, I'm sick of being in your shadow"....SHUT UP!! He contributes nothing to this film, and the only good thing he does is save Batman from the frozen handcuffs in the Rocket Ship. However, when they go sky-surfing down onto the houses to land safely, Robin yells "COWABUNGA!" That was superfluous. Just like the last film, the Bat-Nipples and Bat-@$$es are shown again. How much do you want to bet that this gave Saturday Night Live the idea to start the "Ambiguously Gay Duo" cartoon? I wouldn't be the least bit surprised.  The major issue with this film is that its camp value is WAY more than the 60s show, if you can believe that. I would also like to point out that if you are not a fan of one-liners, this film is full of them, but they are all horrible. For instance, the first lines are Robin telling Batman, "I want a car. Chicks dig the car" to which Batman responds, "This is why Superman works alone." WHY DID YOU JUST SAY THAT, THAT MAKES NO SENSE! WHY WOULD YOU EVEN BRING UP SUPERMAN WHEN THERE IS NO MENTION OF HIM IN THE PAST THREE!? SO YOU DECIDE TO MENTION HIM HERE!? WHY SCHUMACHER, WHY!?

Now let's talk about how horrible the villains were done here. Once again, just like "Batman Returns," there are three villains. First off is Dr. Victor Fries aka Mr. Freeze, played by none other than Austrian bodybuilder and former California governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger. This has got to be the worst role he has ever done. Granted, a lot of the roles that he has done may have been bad, but at least they are enjoyable to watch just because of how laughably bad they are. Here, it's not even funny to begin with, but a pain to sit through. Now, Batman fans will tell people who are not familiar with Batman so much that Mr. Freeze is a villain who has been stripped of all emotion. He is a scientist who only can survive in the cold after his laboratory boss pulled the plug on his experiment to use a freeze ray on his wife, Nora, (played by Vendela Kirsebom Thomessen) who was in cryo-stasis. As a result, she was frozen and shattered, causing him to go insane. The only feelings he has are love for his wife and hate for all humanity. And what does Schumacher have him doing here? MAKING ICE PUNS THAT WILL MAKE YOUR EARS BLEED! HAVING HIS MINIONS SINGING CHRISTMAS CAROLS! THEY MADE HIM LOOK LIKE THE BEST THING THAT EVER HAPPENED TO HIM WAS THAT HE GOT FROZEN AND HIS WIFE ALMOST DIED! ARE YOU SAYING THAT MR. FREEZE WAS DOING DRUGS WHICH IS CAUSING HIM TO FEEL EVERY EMOTION!? YOU TOOK THIS GREAT SUPERVILLAIN AND MADE HIM INTO A COMIC FOIL, SCHUMACHER! SHAME ON YOU!!!!!

Next up we have Dr. Pamela Isley aka Poison Ivy, played by Uma Thurman, who would later go on to do Kill Bill Vol. 1 and 2, which is a "major" step up compared to this. Now Poison Ivy has her own type of plant life biology, because she uses this poisonous gas to attack Batman. Yes, you can see that in the comics and the Animated Series. At one point, she actually uses one of her plants as a whip, which she never does anywhere else. She uses her plants to attack people, but never as a whip. And her plants don't eat her!! That doesn't work!!!!! And to top it off, you make her yell "Curses?" WHAT IS THAT SCHUMACHER, DID YOU NEVER BOTHER TO LOOK THIS OVER BEFORE SHOOTING IT!? Now her origin is that she was a science experiment by a scientist, but in here, the scientist, Dr. Jason Woodrue, played by John Glover, is over-the-top. She spots him testing on a man, he finds out she saw it, and pushes her into some chemicals, transforming her into Poison Ivy. NOT CORRECT!! Also, if this was supposed to be geared towards kids more, than why did you make her act like a prostitute? Especially with her blowing that poisonous kiss onto people. Oh, I forgot to mention, SHE DOESN'T BLOW THAT GAS ONTO PEOPLE AS A KISS!!! Yes, she has her own plant-life to make men fall in love with her, but she doesn't blow the kisses onto them, the plants spray the gas. She hates men, but she goes after those men that can't resist her, but Batman is able to do that. She is obsessed with Batman, but doesn't love him. Why do you have her talking to herself and getting obsessed with Mr. Freeze? Is he the perfect pawn for you to take over Gotham? Also, is he really that gullible to believe her when she tells him Batman and Robin pulled the plug on his wife? Poison Ivy and Mr. Freeze don't work with one another. Poison Ivy cares more for her plant life. Also, call her a hypocrite when she says, "I'm a lover, not a fighter."

Finally we have the films biggest flaw: Bane played by Jeep Swenson. As I mentioned before, Poison Ivy saw that her boss was experimenting on Bane, by turning him into some sort of luchador and auctioning him off to foreign leaders. Was there a war going on that was caused by this film? I wouldn't be the least bit surprised. Now Bane in the comics is one of the smartest villains ever. For Batman fans that have read the Nightfall series, they know that Bane is the villain who breaks Batman's back over his knee. In this one, he is nothing but a drone. He doesn't even do anything. All he does is walk around with Poison Ivy speaking only in grunts. Want me to be more specific? Picture if they made Hulk stupid. And who defeats him? Batman's sidekicks, not Batman! Uma Thurman may have been the worst performance, but this is the most butchered character I have ever seen.

There is one scene that I would like to share with everyone that is just flawed from start to finish. First off, Batman is making a public appearance in front of the Mayor, WHICH BATMAN NEVER DOES AT ALL!!! Yes, he did that a lot in the 60s series, but that was for the camp value. At least they didn't make him go out during daytime or else that would have "really" killed him off. So as the scene goes on, Poison Ivy comes along to spread those poisonous kisses on all the men. She makes sure she gets Batman and Robin, and they start betting over her. They start from two million and go all the way up to seven million. This is the part that has scarred all the Batman fans ever since they saw it in this putrid adaptation...The Batman Credit Card. WHY SCHUMACHER, WHY!? HOW COULD YOU!? YOU HAD THE AUDACITY TO GIVE ONE OF THE GREATEST SUPERHEROES EVER A CREDIT CARD!? Look at the Nostalgia Critic's reaction to it when watching his review of Batman & Robin. Notice that he and I share the same feelings. Then, in comes Mr. Freeze, who starts his whole ice jokes.

Now let's talk about the latest addition to the Batman family: Batgirl. Alicia Silverstone plays Barbara Wilson, Alfred's niece...wait, what? Barbara is made into Alfred's niece in this one? Schumacher did you do your homework before making this? Her name is Barbara Gordon, Commissioner Gordon’s daughter, not Alfred's niece! As far as any Batman fan would know, WE DON'T KNOW ANYONE IN ALFRED'S FAMILY!!!! And if you haven't read the comics, which I'm sure you haven't, you would have known that Barbara is a redhead, not a blonde! In the comics, Barbara Gordon is a rebel who is very much a troublemaker, and likes to get into fights and stop criminals. She goes out to fight crime, is a high-spirited likeable character, and is very adventurous, but an innocent character, not snobby. In here, she doesn't want to get into any adventure and isn't likeable at all. At first she is looking around commenting on Wayne Manor, then goes to call them rich snobs, before discovering the Bat Cave and acting like a little kid in a candy store. Oh, and might I add that she is apparently from England who went to a top Computer school, and comes to Wayne Manor for vacation, AND SHE DOESN'T HAVE A STINKING ACCENT!? Were you afraid to offend the British if you just tried? Everyone can do a British accent, it's not that hard! Also, why would she go out at night doing motorcycle races off the edge of a bridge? That makes no sense at all! Apparently Alfred prepared a suit for her when she discovered the Bat Cave, which looks nothing like the suit in the comics or any other adaptation because her mask is similar to Robin's mask. Also, is it that hard for Batman and Robin to recognize her with just that small mask on? May I ask that she made her own suit instead of having to go to the Bat Cave to get it prepared!? At the end, when Bruce tells Barbara that she is going back to school, she instead insists on staying at Wayne Manor to fight crime. Ok, when Batgirl first started off, she was rarely seen. Yes, she became a permanent partner, but she never lived with them. Also, when it comes to fighting crime or going back to school, Schumacher was telling kids to jepordize their education by dropping out to go fight crime.

I would like to finish off with talking about Alfred. In this film, Alfred is dying from some sort of a disease that he shared with Nora Fries. Unlike Nora, Alfred was luckily in an earlier stage, which Mr. Freeze was able to find a cure for. Mr. Freeze was researching a cure for the other stages, especially the one his wife was in. Before I go on, how come Mr. Freeze wants to take over the world? I understand he steals the jewel in the beginning of the movie to power up his ice suit and also wants to use those jewels to power up a freeze ray gun, but why take over the world? The other villains in all the other Batman films said they wanted to take over Gotham, which worked well. Especially when it was just fine in "Batman Forever," but the world? Why? Just stick to Gotham City, that's what every other villain did!! And how does it work that Mr. Freeze can freeze the whole world? Ok, getting back to this, Poison Ivy pulls the plug on Nora, which she tricks Mr. Freeze into believing Batman and Robin did it, to which he replies, "First Gotham city, then the world!" After Batgirl plays a recording that Poison Ivy confessed she pulled Nora's plug, he helps them by giving them the antidote for Alfred's stage of the disease. Of course, a man that dresses like a bat goes out and fights crime every night, but if the butler is dying, there's the real drama. Before I wrap this up, which I really want to do, you're probably wondering if Bruce had a girlfriend in this. Yes, as a matter of fact he does, but she doesn't play a big role in this, unlike the past ones. In here, we have Elle Macpherson playing Julie Madison, who is just looked over for a good majority of the film.

Whew, it's a good thing I'm done with this piece of garbage now. As you have noticed, this is not the Batman film fans wanted and were ashamed to see him sink to this level. Believe it or not, Schumacher actually came out and apologized for this film. He said, and I quote, "If there is anybody who's watching this, that...let's say loved "Batman Forever," and went into "Batman & Robin" with great anticipation, if I have disappointed them in anyway, then I really want to apologize because it wasn't my intention. My intention was to just entertain them." Thanks to this film, Batman was never seen on the big screen for almost a decade. On the side they were planning Batman Triumphant; I believe one that was based on "Batman Year One" and a Batman vs. Superman film. These ideas were scrapped mainly due to the negative criticism given to "Batman & Robin." However, one director would come around and clean the slate to revamp the series, which is what it needs. Who will that director be? Tune in next episode! Same Bat-Time! Same Bat-Channel!

Batman week Part 3

After Tim Burton went from director to producer for the third Batman film, Joel Schumacher came in and directed the third installment, "Batman Forever," released in 1995. Michael Keaton left after being dissatisfied with how the new direction went. Who did he get to play the role of Bruce Wayne/Batman? None other than: Val Kilmer. He's not the best actor who portrayed Batman, but that's all up for debate. His Bruce Wayne was actually done well, but his Batman was probably much better though. Also, they added Dick Grayson, played by Chris O'Donnell, to this one, who as Batman fans know, was the first partner of Batman's, Robin. However, his performance has him throwing a bad attitude about everything. Sure he complains, but it is a major change since the 60s show. Grayson's parents, played by Larry A. Lee and Glory Fioramonti, are circus performers (in this movie) who die at the hands of Two-Face, and he wants revenge. Not only that, there is a more detailed flashback as to how Bruce Wayne became Batman. This film decided to go mainstream and made it more for kids than adults. However, not being a horrible Batman film, it still has its own share of flaws. First off is the Bat-Nipples and Bat-@$$ on the suit. If this was supposed to be child-friendly, why put that on the Batman suit? Kids don't want to see that. Second are those awful one-liners. In the beginning of the film after Batman suits up and leaves to go fight crime, Alfred asks him, "Can I persuade you to take a sandwich with you, sir?" to which Batman responds, "I'll get drive-thru." That doesn't make any sense, but I guess that was in there to be comedic and have kids laugh at that. I guess the point they were trying to make here is that Batman never goes through drive-thrus, so they were probably satirizing his character.

Now the villains in this film are Harvey Dent aka Two-Face, played by Tommy Lee Jones (interesting choice), and Edward Nygma aka The Riddler, played by Jim Carrey. What I find weird is that the film didn't follow up on Harvey Dent becoming Two-Face properly, which James Rolfe says there was "just a passing mention that he was burned by acid." This is not a good role that Tommy Lee Jones played, because he is just a goofball with silly makeup on. Two-Face is supposed to be a split-personality, much like with Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde, but Jones doesn't play the character like that. All he does is flip a coin and laugh around a lot, which is not what Two-Face does. I hate to say it, but I think Schumacher should have done his research before he made the film.

Now The Riddler is the primary villain, since he is given a lot more back-story than Two-Face, since we see how he became The Riddler. After the success of "Ace Ventura: Pet Detective," "The Mask," and "Dumb and Dumber," I find it no surprise that Schumacher decided to go with Jim Carrey as The Riddler, since he is a big child star, and also my second favorite comedian of all time. For fans of the 60s Batman series, they can see that Carrey's Riddler is much similar to Gorshin's Riddler, but if you just look at the performance fully, it's just Jim Carrey being Jim Carrey. Since he completely takes over the performance every single time the two villains are taking over Gotham, it's no surprise since he is the main focus. I especially like it when Bruce solves every single one of Riddler's riddles, since he has always been able to do that and is smart enough to. The end result is that all of the riddles were a number for an alphabet letter, which ended up being Mr. E, as in mystery or a synonym being enigma. Yes, the end result was Mr. Edward Nygma. However, the Riddler grabbing himself at one point is really disturbing, like what they did with the Batsuit, and also when he yells "Joygasm!" How about when The Riddler acts like a game show host near the end and he introduces Robin? He says, "Batman's one and only partner. This acrobat-turned orphan likes Saturday morning cartoons and one day dreams being... [whispers] ... bare naked with a girl!" Once again, if they wanted to be more child-friendly, then they should have thought those things over before shooting the film. Some of the funny scenes that take place with Two-Face and Riddler are one, when Riddler just tells Two-Face, "Kill the Bat! Sounds like a plan?" and all Two-Face does, obviously, is just chuckle along with him. Another one is at a party where Bruce and Nygma are at, and Two-Face makes an entrance, which signals Bruce to go suit up to stop him. When Batman makes an entrance, Nygma says, "You're entrance was good, his was better. The difference: showmanship!" Now that is classic Jim Carrey. Another funny Jim Carrey line is when Batman is in the Night-Wing, and Robin is in the Bat-Boat, Two-Face and Riddler are trying to shoot them down. When Robin is hit by Two-Face, Riddler yells, "YOU SUNK MY BATTLESHIP!" and Two-Face replies, "Who...me?" which I have to admit, is pretty funny.

Not only does The Riddler steal the show, but when watching this film, the color Green is all over. Talk about a film that you can watch on St. Patrick's Day. Lasers, all kinds of weird contraptions, everything is full of flashy neon lights. This one was brighter and more comical, probably to bring a comic book to life quite literally, which is eye candy. Speaking of eye candy, Two-Face's henchmen are Sugar, the "good" assistant, played by Drew Barrymore, and Spice, the "bad" assistant, played by Debi Mazar. But they are not the ones you want. The love interest is who you want, right? Well, Schumacher did deliver in this one, because the love interest is Dr. Chase Meridian, played by the sultry Nicole Kidman. Her character is pretty shallow, especially with that scene where she signals Batman onto the rooftop. She tries to seduce him, and he asks her that by saying, "You trying to get under my cape?" and she responds, "A girl can't live by psychoses alone." Well what can be the response to that? How about a stupid one-liner once again? "It's the car, right? Chicks love the car." Why are these one-liners done so wrong? Sure a kid would laugh at it without having to understand one-liners, but adults watching this will cringe at how horrible they are.

Later on, Batman grows more acceptable to having a partner, but I do have to say, I didn't like the conversation between Bruce and Dick on what Dick's name would be. He suggests Batboy or Nightwing (which is what Dick Grayson later becomes in the comics once he leaves Robin behind) and Bruce says, "How about Dick Grayson, college student?" and Dick replies, "Screw you!" That was uncalled for, but it's not something to really ramble on about. One of the things that this film did well on, which I give it credit for, is paying tribute to the 60s show. One is when Robin says, "Holy rusted metal Batman!" and the ending where they show Batman and Robin running up to the screen. Also, when Batman has to discover a way out of a death trap, it does have a nostalgic factor to when the 60s show left on a cliffhanger. Overall, it's a pretty entertaining film, not good, but not bad as well, and it's the Batman film that studios wanted: safe and marketable. Although I do have to say I don't like how Robin just tags along with Batman. Remember, Robin is Batman's partner, not sidekick. Seeing it as a kid, I thought it was entertaining, but now that I have re-watched it as an adult, I don't think it holds up very well today. I would probably consider this average, which is just an ok flick.

Although this film was met with mixed reviews, and may have been more positively received, Schumacher was signed on to do a sequel. How will this sequel turn out? Will those who liked "Batman Forever" like the sequel? Or will they be in for the biggest disappointment that Batman fans ever had? Tune in next episode! Same Bat Time! Same Bat Channel!

Batman week Part 2

After the success of the 1989 Batman, it was followed by a highly anticipated sequel. In 1992, Tim Burton delivered with "Batman Returns," where he was given free range to do what he wanted. End result, according to James Rolfe: "stylish and artistic, but unfortunately it alienated mainstream audiences." Michael Keaton returns as Batman, no doubt, but the movie doesn't focus on him a lot in this film. Now, there is more of a focus on the villains, and this time, there are three.

First off, we have a corrupt businessman named Max Shreck (possibly named after the actor who portrayed Nosferatu in the 1922 F.W. Murnau film, which is the oldest existing film of Dracula), played by one of the most awkward actors, Christopher Walken. How come comedians or anyone else don't bring up his role in this film? He did an awesome job here. You got to love it when he delivers lines like, "Bruce, shame on you! You think you can go fifteen rounds with Muhammed Shreck?"

Second, there is Oswald Cobblepot aka The Penguin, played by Danny DeVito. He said, when he was interviewed on "Inside the Actors Studio," he went to Sea World in San Diego, went into the habitat with all of the Penguins, and recorded their sounds, but rehearsed on his own and lived with his image of Oswald. Burton had a strong image of the character. He drew the pictures of the Penguin, and one of the things he gave DeVito was his painting of DeVito as the Penguin with a caption, "My name is Jimmy, but they call me the hideous Penguin boy." He credits Tim Burton as an artist, a very genuine guy who created the character of Oswald. When DeVito got the role, he said, "If I'm ever going to do an opera, this is going to be it." DeVito did a lot of practice alone in rooms where he lived in that moment, and stayed away from the script, working in the inside-out. His performance is a little bit exaggerated, but the character is pulled off well. The thing with the Penguin is that he is just a confused and sad misfit, who you feel sympathy for, because he wants to be accepted into society. Remember, in the beginning of the film, his parents didn't like the way he looked at birth, so they put him in a cage and tossed him over the bridge, where he went underground and lived with the Penguins. Even after he finds out his parents are gone, he still forgives them. This comes as a lesson to everyone that you shouldn't mistreat someone because they are different from you. They are still people, and you should respect them like you would to everyone else. With Max Shreck and The Penguin, you got to love it when both of them are on screen. Two sociopathic villains together plotting to take over Gotham, now there are the moments Batman fans would love to see.

Finally, (I saved the best for last) there is Selina Kyle aka Catwoman, played by one of the hottest actress in the business, Michelle Pfeiffer. Originally, Annette Bening was supposed to be play Catwoman, but she became pregnant. One of the strangest scenes is when she becomes Catwoman. Shreck pushes her out the window of his business complex, she falls down onto the snow, a bunch of cats come up and start chewing away at her fingers, and she blinks her eyes a few times (which is scary because her eyes are rolled to the back of her head). Once she regains consciousness, she goes back to her apartment, destroys it, makes her costume, and goes on a rampage through department stores. She prances around, does a lot of flips, blows a bunch of things up, but unlike any of the other Batman villains, she also fights criminals. It is good to say that she does a lot of her screen time fighting Batman, which is necessary because Catwoman is one of the female villains that had a relationship with Batman. Believe it or not, Michelle Pfeiffer was in her kickboxing phase because she was taking it as a new form of exercise, so that's how she trained for the combat scenes. She also had to train with a whip master. One of her best lines is when she cartwheels into a scene with Batman and Penguin and says, "Meow!" Now that is hot!

Even though none of the other Batman films excelled at action, this one just takes the cake. There are so many action scenes in this one that it is the grand champion of the Batman film with the most action, until maybe the Christopher Nolan films come around, but that's for another time. Fans complained in this one that Batman killed criminals, when he never does that, but that's not true. According to Batman comic readers, Batman killed criminals all the time in the earlier comics, and in the first film, he bashed one of the criminals head into a bell and threw him down the cathedral.

One of the funniest scenes is when the Penguin has taken control of the Batmobile and says some stuff over the intercom to Batman, and he records it. Then, when the Penguin gives his public speech, Batman plays what the Penguin said to him in the Batmobile over the loud speakers, repeating it over and over. The icing on that cake is when Bruce does a record scratch, which could mean that he was trying to have a Penguin rap with that recording. Everyone throws vegetables at him, which you might question where they got it from, but just like from my review on the 1989 Batman when I questioned about Joker knowing Batman was a bad shot and shot the Night-Wing down with one shot, it's supposed to be comedic, so why not, just enjoy it for being funny. The one scene that I thought was completely random is when Shreck is helping the Penguin run for Mayor, and one of the guys (if I remember correctly) said something to the Penguin as some sort of joke, they both laugh about it, and then the Penguin bites the guy's nose. Why did he do that? That was superfluous. It's times like this where the film just goes overboard. One part of the movie that actually is funny is near the end when Max Shreck asks, "Bruce Wayne, why are you dressed up as Batman?" Catwoman says the funniest line in the movie: "Because he 'is' Batman, you moron."

The thing about this film is that it's too dark, weird, silly, and has an exceptionally depressing storyline. While the first Batman, according to Doug Walker, "ended on a triumphant note, Batman Returns' ending was more bittersweet, and felt people feeling kind of empty." Still, it was a big hit, but it wasn't the mega blockbuster hit that Warner Bros. wanted. The first Batman film was made more for adults, but for kids as well, but this one was not for kids at all. McDonald's was ready to do a promotion with their Happy Meals, like they always have done, but canceled it because Batman Returns was too dark and violent. Even though there are moments in this film that I think make it better than the first, the '89 Batman is still the superior film. People might have liked it when it came out, but watching it now, it doesn't hold up as well like the first one does. Guys, just take a look at it this way: It's a Tim Burton movie, it's his trademark style with a strong mood, but hands down, it's not his best work nor the best Batman movie (obviously). Unlike the first film, which I highly recommended, this one I don't really recommend. Remember, it's not bad, so go watch it if you're a Batman fan.

Since this wasn't the film that Warner Bros. was expecting, for the third film, gone was the darkness, gone was the demented corkiness, and gone were Tim Burton and Michael Keaton. However, Burton stayed on as Producer for the third installment. But who is the man that will be the new director? Will he give Warner Bros. the Batman film they all wanted? What will he do with this one? Treat it like it was in the comics and in the Burton films, or change the mood into being more suitable for kids? Tune in next episode. Same Bat time! Same Bat channel!

Batman Week part 1

For this week, since it's always interesting to talk about one of the greatest superheroes from the DC Universe, I would like to make a marathon, or more, a Bat-a-thon, like James Rolfe called it. If you haven't guessed it by now, I will be reviewing all of the Batman films. Now, I will not be talking about the 40s serial, or the 60s live action series or film. All I will do is touch briefly on the 60s live action serial. It starred Adam West as Batman, Burt Ward as Robin, Alan Napier as the butler Alfred, Neil Hamilton as Commissioner Jim Gordon, Yvonne Craig as Barbara Gordon aka Batgirl, and a wide array of villains. The most notable ones are Cesar Romero as Joker, Frank Gorshin as Riddler (season 2 Riddler was played by John Astin), Burgess Meredith as Penguin, Julie Newmar as Catwoman for the first 2 seasons, Eartha Kitt for Season 3, Lee Meriwether for the film, David Wayne as Mad Hatter, Vincent Price as Egghead, and Mr. Freeze who was portrayed by George Sanders in his first appearance, Otto Preminger in his second appearance, and Eli Wallach in his final appearance. Since I've never watched the 60s serial or film, I will instead jump to 1989, when director Tim Burton made "Batman."

Steve Englehart and Julie Hickson were the writers before Sam Hamm wrote the first screenplay. In the starring role of Bruce Wayne aka Batman, the cape crusader, we have Michael Keaton. A lot of A-list actors were considered the offer for the role, but Keaton won it anyway. Since this was '89, and the Internet didn't exist, people were actually petitioning to not have Keaton play Batman. All of this petitioning was going on over the film that he did called "Mr. Mom." The year before "Batman," he also did "Beetlejuice" and nobody thought that Michael Keaton would be able to play a serious role, like Batman. However, he did an amazing job. The smirk that he did is something only he can pull off. As Bruce, you can easily know what he's thinking by his curious look and mannerisms. Before the film starts, we get a look into the past of Bruce Wayne as a child, played by Charles Roskilly, when his parents (played by David Baxt and Sharon Holm) get murdered in front of his own eyes by a criminal named Jack Napier, played by Hugo Blick. As the years go on, we can still feel Bruce's pain throughout the movie, which is a trait of his that Keaton also pulls off really well. A great example of his performance is when he tries to tell Vicki Vale that he's Batman but he just can't seem to get the words out. As Alfred Pennyworth, the Wayne butler is Michael Gough, who does an outstanding job pulling off this role because he is really believable. Pat Hingle is Commissioner Gordon, another actor who does a great job playing his role. Though I do have to admit that I find it strange having Billy Dee Williams portray Harvey Dent, but I can't complain, any role that Billy Dee Williams plays always has a coolness factor to it. Vicki Vale is the love interest, played by Kim Bassinger, who sure knows how to scream a whole lot in this one, doesn't she? She's a typical damsel in distress, but was kind and insightful, and also cunning and quick. She was supportive, but also had her limits, which made her a realistic love interest.

All of this aside, the man who steals the show is Jack Nicholson as the Joker. He embodies this role so well that whenever someone mentions Nicholson, they immediately remember his role as the Joker. The man is known to playing such crazy roles, that it is hard not to keep your eyes off of him every time he is on screen. With the Joker, there is no exception, he knows how to bring the crazy, hilarious side of the Joker in his role, and that also is a treat. You just laugh every time he says one of his lines, which is something very common with the Joker. How can you not laugh at a Batman villain with a permanent smile on his face? What he wants to do, besides raise chaos and make Gotham City into anarchy, is get back at Batman for dropping him in acid, which turned him into the Joker. He also delivers the line, "Have you ever danced with the devil in the pale moonlight?" a quote that has been made famous in this film, besides the ever popular, "I'm Batman!" Another famous Joker line in this film is, "Never rub another man's rhubarb!" Probably the funniest Joker scene is when Vicki Vale asks him, "What do you want?" and Joker isn't expecting that question, so he thinks for a moment, and replies, “My face on the one dollar bill.” Now that's funny. The hero-villain relationship is done well in this. Batman wants to get at Joker for killing his parents, and Joker wants to kill Batman for stealing all of his attention and foiling his plans. Throughout the film, they both are trying to find out who each other are. Bruce has to discover that the Joker is the man who killed his parents, and the Joker has to figure out that Bruce is Batman. Every possible encounter of theirs is used here: Batman and Jack Napier, Bruce Wayne and Joker, and finally Batman and Joker. Now that's epic.

Danny Elfman did the score for the film, which is just one of the most memorable Batman tracks ever. One of my favorite internet reviewers, James Rolfe, said that it will always be the Batman theme to him. The music in this film is important, but there are also a couple of songs by "The Artist Formerly Known as Prince," or Prince, as I and many others like to call him: "Partyman" and "Trust." People like to say that these songs make the film outdated, like the ridiculous Prince music video, "The Bat Dance." However, it still holds up because some of the cinematography still looks great today. One of the strangest moments I have to say is when Batman is in the Night-Wing, and Joker is standing in the middle with his arms wide open, asking Batman to shoot him. Batman shoots at Joker with everything that he has, but somehow misses. Then Joker pulls out a large gun from his pants, fires one shot, and he is able to shoot Batman down. What happened? I guess that you shouldn't take this film seriously, just enjoy it for the surreal atmosphere, unique style and look at the certain things that don't make sense as comedic.

Overall, even though the film looks outdated with the Prince songs or anything else that people can look at in the film, it still holds up very well today, so go and watch it. You'll love it, I promise you. I consider this one of my favorite comic book adaptations. Stay tuned tomorrow for the next Batman film review for the week-long Bat-a-thon. Same Bat-Time, Same Bat-Channel!

Star Wars Reviews

Hello everyone! For my first blog, I would like to talk about my favorite franchise of all time, which is the first I have ever seen, and a very beloved franchise: Star Wars. To make a reference to internet reviewer, James Rolfe, he said that "Star Wars pays tribute to the movies of the past. The Flash Gordon serials are the prime example, right from the opening title scroll. Even Cloud City was from Flash Gordon, and all the wipe transitions. And the whole idea of the serial was that it happened in Episodes. It was all part of one large story. In the 30s and 40s, when you would go to the theaters to see a movie, you might see an episode of Flash Gordon. Unless you went to the movies all the time, you would probably see a few episodes, but no matter what, you would get into it. Metropolis was the first science fiction film, and one of the famous, to create a separate reality, a world run by technology. The robot in Metropolis bears a resemblance to C3PO. The Walkers are much like Martian Warhunters from the H.G. Wells novel, War of the Worlds. Also, from The Wizard of Oz, I can't help but think C3PO is the Tin Man, and Chewbacca is The Cowardly Lion. The way they meet all of these different characters as they along their journey, it's classic. The Jawas are like the Munchkins, the hologram of the Emperor is like the hologram of The Wizard, Yoda and Obi-Wan disapper when they die, so does the Wicked Witch, when Luke and Han disguise themselves as the Storm Troopers is like when Scarecrow, Tin Man, and the Lion disguise themselves as the Witch's soldiers. From the Hidden Fortress, they tell the story from the point of view of two humble characters, the same way as R2D2 and C3PO. We have samurais, where in Star Wars we have Jedis. We can't help but make the connection between swords and lightsabers. The severing of arms is also something you see in Samaurai films. It also pays tribute to Western films, like the bar scene from Mos Eisley is straight out of any given Western films. When Luke's family is murdered and his house is burned is straight out from The Searchers. A lot of references from Horror Films are also in there, like casting Peter Cushing and David Prowse is no coincidence. In "Frankenstein and the Monster from Hell," Cushing, who often played Dr. Van Helsing, was Dr. Frankenstein, and Prowse was the monster. Christopher Lee, who starred alongside Cushing in Hammer's Dracula Series as Dracula, is now Count Dooku. Even Darth Vader rising from the slab is straight out of Frankenstein, and you can't help but feel Vader's cape is exactly like Dracula's cape. The title's are inspired from B-Movies. The characters are all famous archetypes, like Luke is the classic hero, Obi-Wan is the classic mentor, much like Frodo and Gandalf from Lord of the Rings, or King Arthur and Merlin from Sword in the Stone. Star Wars takes old ideas and turns them into something new shows how ingenious it really is. All ideas in general come from somewhere, and it pays tribute to all these old movies, literature, folklore, mythology, and ultimately, reflects our culture. It perfectly blends science fiction and fantasy. Also, it's interesting to note how history repeats itself. Lucas said he based the Emperor off of historical figures from Julius Caesar to Adolf Hitler. He said it starts off as a democracy, which turns into a dictatorship, and the rebels turn it back into a democracy again. So there will always be rebels, it's like a cycle. Also, Anakin is like a tragic hero, his son Luke starts to follow in the same footsteps, which is once again like a cycle. It takes classic science fiction, Japanese culture, Western culture, Biblical references, and retells them all at the same time. It's every epic story ever told rolled into one. Star Wars is more than just movies, it's everything. It's the force that binds us." Now...onto the review. This script I want to give credit to a YouTube reviewer that I used to work with when I had an account on YouTube, reviewreviewer1. He made the script, and I edited it to make it flow right. I will admit that I did add a few things while I posted the script on this blog. Without much further delay, here is my review:

Well I love The Original film, “Star Wars IV: A New Hope,” released in 1977. It was made by George Lucas after he ensured a deal which would give him full ownership, complete creative control, and final cut privilege with studio interference through his connections, education, and friendship with Alan Ladd Junior. He was the studio executive of Lucasfilm, became the soul storywriter, screenwriter, director, and executive producer. He supervised ILM, the model designer, prop and costume designers, which doubted demanding reworks. He worked with ILM day by day, chose the kind of sound, and supervised their music with detail. With casting direction, he chose the editors, and although the actors tried to take away his credit on the acting, the reports of the THX-138 actors and the Prequel actors, the self-admitted laziness of the original trilogy actors, Lucas being a control freak, great at casting show, which is not true, and the great direction on "American Graffiti" shows this. People who never believe in the Originals try to break him down by taking credit and disappointed fans just jump on the bandwagon. Also, Kurtz is the only one who arrogantly elevates himself as the creative mind while admitting Lucas was a control freak. So this film, although utilizing great technicians, musicians, lighters, actors, and a great producer is almost entirely Lucas, his wonderful great vision and the purest example of him.

The film went through many rewrites, improving everything and went through hard work and extra money in production, and only slightly suffered from some rewrites and edits, one made for gimmick the first 20 minutes.

It unfolds a detailed plan to defeat the Empire involving elaborate back stories, and a complex adventure with many different plans and trickery on the Death Star.

The film utilizes old elements like an evil technology Empire, genocide, using magic and things like disguises, being stranded, a seemingly normal person chasing after a destiny, yet at things like making the force also guide us, yet it controls us, and making it the all power of the galaxy.  Things like the Death Star, jumping into a garbage can, dangers of the sand people, using magic to create sounds, light sabers, escaping soldiers with a ship, having one character access the whole base and having to deactivate tracer beams, things like being captured by slave traders and Leia tricking them. It has cool twists like them being captured by the Death Star and them tracking the base. Also, the way it has Luke utilize his powers, Han saving them, and everyone except a few die in the battle is great. Also R2 walking away, Obi Wan saving him, the Jedi mind trick, the force training, R2 and C3PO tricking the storm troopers, them hiding as smugglers, the Jabba subplot was great and well developed in the special edition, them using C3PO to escape the can, jumping over the trench, and Obi Wan’s dramatic death were all great. Also, the story is mostly subtle. However, I will say it is very predictable and black and white, which feels part of the genre but still. Second, the film suffers from really spending a lot of time setting up the characters and the back stories having fewer stories. Don`t get me wrong, it has a lot of complex thick multi-layered stories, just not as much as the other films. Also, they establish the suppression of the Empire, clearly through their cruel actions, support of fear and destruction, and make the stakes clear.

However, like how people complain in the Prequel Trilogy (PT) that the separatists motivations were unclear when they just wanted to exploit people. Here it is clear they want to suppress and force their views on them. But, I am sad they cut out the scene where they mention that they started to nationalize the commerce guild, which I thought established a mire detail what the Empire rules, like showing how citizens viewed it. Also, how people joined the rebellion, and it has a real eerie suspense in how it showed how afraid people were with how the line of things can change. It also shows how interested Luke was in the rebellion. Yes, it is a bit political, but it is in the beginning like with Alien, Aliens, The Bourne Trilogy and Predator. Also, I love the crosscutting in the film and this would have made the opening build up even better.

This in my opinion was one of the worst editing decisions ever. This film could have been a bit extra long while still not making it thick and adding multiple layers and elements to the plot, making it more intellectual and sophisticated, but no.

The ending by the way suffered from slight problems in that common. Those other pilots that survived certainly deserve a medal also, well…that is about it.

Also there were some potholes like: Why did Leia go to the rebel base listed of transmitting the plans? Why did they have to kill Luke’s aunt and uncle? Also, why didn’t Obi-Wan try to escape with them??????

So it has very complex, thick, multilayered plots. They are very well intertwined, creative, clever, and also intellectual and exciting. Also the character sweep up, the back stories are brilliant, and it is a good combination of old and new. The plot holes are few and far between, not very fatal. The predictability is completely acceptable, and although it could have been even better, that means this plot could have been a 10 instead of a 9.5. So, it is great but I do think the editing was flawed.

Then, we have the wide array of great characters. Luke is very brave, supportive, loyal, determined, kind, witty, and believes in achieving greater goals, but doesn`t truly know who he is at first. He believes in principles, is very friendly, and supportive yet also very whiney (yeah people complain about it with Anakin, but he is whiney): “But I was going to go to toshi station to pick up some power converters,” “oh Biggs is right I am never going to get out of here” and rude “what a piece of junk.” Well, it often is justified and he isn’t mean, so like with Anakin, I really like him. He is a classic archetype, but he’s very friendliness and confused of who he is, and his loyalty makes him stand out. There was no problem though with why he at first wanted to go to the academy, meaning just a great job, and then all of the sudden, he wants to fight evil. In those deleted scenes, they establish he wants to go to the academy to join the rebellion, which would make his pain all the more painful and create more tension.

Also, his parents getting killed are supposed to show that hiding doesn’t work, which they tried to do. To hide from destiny is an interesting conflict. Also his deleted scene made it all the more clearer Owen could do without him. It showed how he missed his friends, and that they were leaving.

I know this probably makes me sound real whiney, but also that scene, which set up his relationship with Biggs, makes their reunion in the special edition all the greater. It would make for a motive and a dramatic death.

Then, we have Biggs. He is a very loyal, brave, supportive friend who would have profited from those deleted scenes.

So, the plot characters and structures are great, but if Lucas ever completely credits this with those scenes, it could be even more intellectual, sophisticated, multilayer, multiply perspective and more logical and dramatic.

Then, we have Owen, who is bossy, strict, yet supportive, kind, and a bit cold, but overall, friendly.
He is very original.

Beru is understanding, kind, friendly, sweet, and very hardworking, a loyal wife and mother. She is a very deep mother character.

Also, you might have noted I referenced them as parents often, but if they took care of him, supported him, and raised him, they are his parents.

Okay...then we have Leia, who is very responsible, brave, strong willed, self-confident, kind, supportive, sometimes a bit aggressive, arrogant, and very self-reliant. Her self-reliance, arrogance, and strong-willingness make her stand out.

Han Solo is brave and selfish but also a bit caring, witty, complaining, strong willed, and skeptical.

Chewbacca is a bit grumpy yet very kind and loyal.

C3PO is skeptical, cowardly, complaining, soft, grumpy, and bumbling, yet kind, loyal, and caring.

R2D2 is very stubborn, strong, wild, quite brave, and helpful.

Obi Wan is a brave, wise, philosophical, selfless, kind, intelligent, witty, warm mentor. His wittiness and warmness make him stand out. He also has a complex back-story of training an evil apprentice and surviving genocide.

Governor Tarkin is a real liar, suppressive, cruel, cold, aggressive, arrogant, and witty.

Darth Vader is very angry, vengeful, arrogant, aggressive, power-hungry, sadistic, and has a complex back-story of having been consumed by evil.

Luke and Leia really understand one another. Leia sees there is good in Han, and he looks at her spunkiness. Luke admires Obi Wan, who is loyal too, but annoyed by Owen and Beru, is annoyed by Han but cares for him, and Obi Wan is very skeptical of Vader’s evil.

Vader and Tarkin have mutual respect for each other.

Also, Luke becomes more spiritual, Han selfless, and Leia appreciative.

The film conveys how we can have a greater destiny, how running from evil is pointless, of how heroness is very important, how spirituality can be a great mentor, and how evil must be fought.

The characters demonstrate these themes and have a bit more in the plot.

Okay the dialogue is very well written, sharp, and to the point.

Now…romance. Although Lucas can sometimes use help, we should not forget he solely wrote IV where it started with witty lines like: “I don`t know who you are or where you are from but from now on you listen to me, got it.”

The pace is very built-up, but the deleted scenes could have helped at more plot build up.

Then, the actors are all fantastic. Mark Hamil really plays the charm, innocence, and kindness. Well sure, this isn’t one of the greatest of share but it was very good. Also, Alec Guinness is very witty and wise, Peter Cushing confident, David Prowse and James Earl Jones very intense and menacing, I thought Harrison Ford was very intense and funny, Carrie Fisher played the arrogance and kindness well, Peter Mayhew, who plays Chewbacca, is very real, Anthony Daniels, who plays C3PO, is very intense, Shelagh Fraser, who plays Beru, and Phil Brown, who plays Owen, are charming and natural.

The worlds are detailed, creative, and elaborate, and so are the vehicles and creatures.

The action is very complex, exciting, and big. The effects are amazing, detailed, colorful, and realistic. The sets are very detailed, the set design elaborate, the costumes detailed are elaborate, the props real and grimy, the location beautiful, the puppets and models almost all hold up well, the cinematography is colorful and very harmonious, the direction creative and smooth, the editing very, very, very, very, very, very exciting, the sound very creative, the music emotional, intense building, sweet endearing, exciting with the action, the exciting opening, the haunting epicness themes, the Tatooine future dreams song, and the funny Jawa themes all being excellent, and the geography is great.

So, the film is an outstanding masterpiece and truly brilliant but it could have profited greatly from another special edition which will edit in scenes not again, redo sound and visual effects. Also the film was a lot of fun but not very dark and dramatic compared to the others.

Then we have the 1980 sequel, “Star Wars V: The Empire Strikes Back,” where Lucas used the talent of Lawrence Kasdan and Kershner for adding great dialogue, acting, and direction, but people try to make it seem like they made the film. Well, not only that, but in comparison to the prequels…okay well first of all the first film completely makes this a coincidence. Second, well…if you mean they made the story, now the plot and stories tone, pace, character relationships and arcs, themes, messages, and action all came from Lucas. They were hired when this was mostly done to work it out. Lucas made the substance as storywriter and the cast worked it out in detail with dialogue, atmosphere, most minor characters traits, detailed settings, and Kershner directed and created the acting for this.

Moreover, Lucas served as a studio executive, who can really have a lot of control, executive producer, a very involved writer but more of VSO. He actually co-wrote the screenplay, directed the second unit, and co-directed the film like he would with Return of the Jedi.

This is based on his production and script knowledge as heard on the DVD commentary.

Empire Stirkes Back adds extra layers of complexity to the plot with Luke missing, clever hiding tricks, betrayal by Lando, detailed training of Luke, hyper drives malfunctioning, has even more rich environments with Dagobah being very mystical and mysterious, Hoth having cool snow monster, added city being very detailed, elaborate, and rich, the meteor sequence were awesome, the action this time involves even more creativity like walkers and asteroids. The film has even more intense atmosphere, the music with the imperial March, snow planet theme, force training, awesome deep spiritual romance theme, and intense ending improved.

The characters are even more kind, sweet, and very natural around each Hothe. Leia shows more of her kind and vulnerable side, Luke is even more unconfident and we explore his flaws, Leia’s love for Han, and Han's braveness. Lando perfectly resembles Han from the first film and leads to great twists and a lot more ambiguity. Yoda is very complex. He is wise yet critical, arrogant, funny, playful, and clever. Lando is a bit selfish and disloyal but learns to do what is right. So yeah, the acting, the imagination, the moral ambiguity, the even deep character development and arcs, and complex well developed story are all great. The tone is a lot darker.

Also Bib was awesome. He was greedy and self-confident, cruel, a business man, very strong and a nonsense guy.

The acting of Billy Dee Williams, who plays Lando, is great, but to quickly reference internet reviewer Plinket, not every black actor who also plays cool roles need to be a Playboy typecasting isn`t a rule. Mark Hamil is even more intense, Vader showed more of his loving, panning, strong, determine, and cruel side. All the new imperial soldiers have distinct personalities one being skeptical and clumsy, the other fearful. The whole cliffhanger is great, the dialogue is funny and often enthralling like, “stop that. My hand is dirty” and, “I happen to like nice men. I am nice” and “you should wear girl’s clothes all the time.” The film also has the famous, "I am your father" line. All of Yoda’s wise talk, but part of the romance, and a lot of Yoda did come from Lucas and just started the romance in IV. The lighting adds to the mood, the camera work and editing are fluent, the effects even more detailed, the sets and costumes, props, and cinematography wonderful. Harrison Ford is even stronger, Fisher is more warming, and Frank Oz and Anthony Daniels rock.

The geography is even more complex.

Then we have “Episode VI: Return of the Jedi,” released in 1983, which is my personal favorite of the franchise. Lucas again wrote the story, executive produced, supervised and co-wrote the screenplay, co-directed and directed the second unit, brought Kasdan in again but having the new producer, Howard Kazanjian, and a new director who was great with actors and the camera, Richard Marquand, who also became great at effects. I love how detailed and integrate the whole part is. I mean that was flawless and so well set up. The whole trap thing is brilliant and the whole plan on Endor and Luke turning himself in added to the tension.

The space battle builds well. Luke having to face Vader worked well and the Ewoks could defeat the empire case. They use the environment to hide, turn the speed of the speeder and size of the walkers against them, and the shot in between the parts of the suits and slingers always work. It brilliantly shows mind defeats powers.

They made the characters even more serious, showed Luke as a Jedi, Han as truly selfless, Leia as a very motherly but supportive figure, and the film has many themes regarding redemption, and Vader is the best in the film too. The theme about bravery and team work, the true powers of spirituality and love are perfect. I agree the turn to the Dark Side was flawed, but the whole Jabba the Hut part and the seriousness of the characters are even better then in Empire Strikes Back.

Also, I did have a problem with how little they showed of the destruction of the star destroyers and not enough of the fighters. The Death Star was used in a very different way and it couldn’t have been done differently because nothing beats the Death Star.

Also, the twist of Vader turning good was even better than “I am your father.”

Also, Leia helping Han, and Han comforting her were very genuine and kind. The dialogue is just way better than the first 2 before and the philosophical conversation is the most intellectual.

Also, with the speeder chases, the detailed space battle, and the even more emotional and exciting music, the best geography, and they dwarf the sequences in the first 2 films. Also the film has a lot of cutesy moments but also some of the darkest. They have the cruel part on the sail barge, and then Yoda dies. Luke is left all alone, has to kill his father, Leia is faced with Luke being her brother, Luke is always serious, and also Vader dies. He almost turns to the dark side and the rebels and his friends almost all died.

Also the emperor is one of the best villains. He is sadistic, all knowing, self-confident, witty, cruel, power-hungry, and mean-spirited. Jabba was cruel, and sadistic, abusive, selfish, and grotesque.

Mark Hamil was indeed perfect, but also Ian McDiarmid and James Earl Jones are wonderful, Carrie Fisher did do her parts with the Ewoks, and it ended well. I don`t get it regarding Harrison Ford to be honest. He was very anxious regarding the first 2, and hesitant in the third, but eventually did agree to return, and he is still witty and sarcastic. He just acts a lot more fatherly, like as Indiana Jones. He just becomes a more supportive and kind person. Sebastian Shaw appeared briefly at the end as the ghost of Anakin Skywalker along with Obi-Wan and Yoda, but just to note for those who have not seen the Special Edition DVDs yet, Shaw is replaced by Hayden Christensen.

Before we start the Prequel Trilogy, I just want to note that I like all six Star Wars films equally as one giant epic film. I don't see the hate for the Prequels, although I do agree the Original Trilogy is far superior, but I am not a Prequel hater. For more information, please read my review of the Prequel Trilogy.

Then, in 1999, we have “Episode I: The Phantom Menace,” in which Lucas did the same for as IV. I thought it was awesome, also telling Palpatine take over in detail, showing Anakin became a Jedi, Obi Wan, a night Palpatine, first scheme and the return of the Sith. Also Anakin was a very complex character. He was kind, selfless, brave, idealistic, optimistic, a dreamer, very attention asking boy, brave, also very venerable. Padme was responsible and caring, supportive, tolerant, nice, a strategist, shy, and her shyness and Anakin's ideas, optimism, her tolerance, and responsibility are all very original. Qui Gon is so original, a wise master who is stubborn, unorthodox, self-reliant, brave, kind, selfless, fatherly, but can be arrogant and cold, but alas fair, and Obi Wan is orthodox, unconfident, colder, but still brave, witty, and selfless.

Obi Wan learned how to follow his heart, Qui Gon to rely on others, Anakin to let go, and Padme, who was also a pacifist, to fight for her people. Anakin admires Qui Gon and Obi Wan, and Obi Wan likes but distrusts him, Qui Gon and Padme struggle a bit, but they respect each other, Palpatine is more manipulative and a liar, Panaka is loyal, brave, but skeptical, Mace Windu is skeptical, yet also wise and a leader, but a bit harsh.

The geography is the best.

I liked seeing the Jedi temple. Yeah, they live in a building. Oh, they are normal people. This is the biggest disappointment since then…not in the Original Trilogy (OT), and Luke using a light saber instead of bending air, PT then the OT???

Seeing the Jedi Council in action was great. Also, the dialogue was witty and deep, and the film had good themes about corruption, manipulation takes over, cooperate corruption, letting go and fighting for what you believe in.

The acting is great. It is so complex. The cinematography, direction, geography, props, sets, and costumes are amazing, and the music is so mysterious. The sound is great.

Also, the motivations of the trade federation were unexplained and my problem was more with Obi Wan’s character then the acting because he is just to kind-less. Liam Neeson was great, Ewan McGregor ok, Ian McDiarmid great, Natalie Portman wonderful, Samuel L. Jackson great, Jake Lloyd ok, Ray Park as Darth Maul was a great villain, Ahmed Best was hilarious as Jar Jar Binks, and Brian Blessed played great as Boss Nass. Pernilla August was very worried and caring as Anakin’s mother, Shmi Skywalker, and Andy Secombe was dastardly as Watto. Keira Knightley as Sabé, Amidala’s decoy, did a spectacular job, and looks an awful lot like Portman.

“Episode II: Attack of the Clones,” released in 2002, had Jonathan Hales co-write the screenplay. II told 5 different plots and 3 different stories setting up Palpatine's power, the Clone Wars, the storm troopers, and Padme leaving, and the return of the Sith. It sets up Anakin’s fall, the romance, Anakin’s relationship with Palpatine, and Obi Wan showed Yoda that he can train a Jedi.

The dialogue I thought was deep and intellectual. Ian McDiarmid, Samuel L. Jackson, Christopher Lee, Ewan McGregor, Natalie Portman, Hayden Christensen, Temuera Morrison and Anthony Daniels were all stellar intense, deep, and fluent.

The action was so complex, the effects detailed, the cinematography colorful, the music emotional, the sound intense, the editing added to the intensity, the camera work was haunting, and the themes about taking over the war vs. negotiations, also the power of genetic manipulating over fear and war were all furthered.

Anakin became more depressed and annoyed, Padme gets a back-story, and along with Anakin, switches gears of growing up, and love for nature, Jango and Dooku, as I commented on, the film is just a blast. The geography is awesome.

“Episode III: Revenge of the Sith,” released in 2005, was again done by just Lucas.

III has a very complex plot, although the second most complex. It's very dark, has a great climax, and has mostly the same great characters, wonderful action, effects, cinematography, geography, props and sets. It completes the themes greatly and has great dialogue. Anakin turns evil over frustration, fear, power-hungry, and arrogance, Grievous is cunning, sadistic, arrogant, clever, and obnoxious, and the drama is great. I think Natalie Portman, Ian McDiarmid, Matthew Wood (who plays Grievous), Ewan McGregor, and Hayden Christensen are wonderful, but Samuel L. Jackson a bit flawed.

Also, I wanted to defend one exchange. The part on the balcony when Padme says she is beautiful because of her love, Anakin tries to out-love her, and she turns it into a joke, acting like she would be seen by him as beautiful cause of her love. That is just cute flirting and how he says it isn`t what he meant but she acknowledges it is probably true.

"The Clone Wars," released in 2008, was great, having great action pace and great voice acting for Obi Wan, Ahsoka and Anakin. The clones and the plot is great, and it has good themes, but it is very obvious, predictable, lacks good music, and I am sorry, but Anakin isn`t as developed as in the others.

I hope you liked my very first post, stay tuned for more of my reviews. One last thing: "May the force be with you....always."