A splendid, if disturbing take on redemption and capitalism

Rating: 7/10 (21 July 2012)

Having reviewed the first two Batman movies by Christopher Nolan -- the first movie given thumbs down by me for being lame and the second above average in spite of the larded secondary villain character -- I came away impressed with the hulking British actor Tom Hardy's interpretation of Bane, which is on par with Heath Ledger's immortal portrayal of The Joker.
For Tom Hardy's performance, in spite of certainly notable (and annoying that recollect the first movie's amateurish flaws) clichés courtesy of Chris's, Jonathan's and David Goyer's story contribution, he merits the Oscar nomination for Best Supporting Actor. Bane's dialogue imbued with diamond-sharp intellect in criminology meshed with anarchist philosophy and combined with the brute physical strength makes a fascinating, albeit dangerous lunatic gifted with genius, character that has been redefined in the third and supposedly final Batman movie, which differs from the standard comic book villain.
As usual, Lee Smith returns as the sole editor of the movie. Despite my complaint about his editing skill in action scenes in the previous Batman movies, the movie shows a marked improvement in editing, albeit at a slightly slow and measured pace that gives way to character development for necessary exposition, especially the touchingly introspective interaction between the protagonist Bruce Wayne and his loyal butler.
I noticed certain annoying clichés that Chris could not overcome, especially the "character turns head and the other character disappears" scene and Deus Ex Machina towards the ending. If it is the king of clichés I abhor, it is Deus Ex Machina scenery, which induces an irritated groan in me, because it's so predicable. (I predicted the return of a certain character, prophecy fulfilled; I must be an excellent armchair psychic, who foretold the happenings mentally in certain movies I saw. I was vindicated time and again. Recent movies are so darned shallow trying to overestimate the 'idiocracy' audience's intelligence these days.) The movie is the longest of the trilogy, and I think certain scenes could be trimmed, because the pacing feels a bit leaden, with too much exposition and not enough lean meat. Catwoman character is a bare essence to the movie's plot, as a tepid secondary character. The twists towards the ending would be a nice surprise, but by the time the twist is revealed towards the ending, I felt so jaded there is a discernible pang of apathy in me as a moviegoer.
Chris and his screen writing team piled on exposition, violence, and twists; sometimes too much lead to the feeling of absurd excess. There is a simple philosophy on minimalism, "less is more." I think Chris could try going by this advice and not lard his subsequent films with clichés and cheesy scenes.
The movie is worth seeing only for the villain character Bane in his dispensing the political philosophy that oddly parallels Occupy Wall Street (whether this is intended to satirize the movement or merely a coincidence is unknown; Occupy Wall Street movement transpired in the fall of 2011, when principal photography concluded with a completed screenplay turned in earlier that year), not to mention the subliminal reference to the unnecessarily horrible French Revolution that occurred in July 1789.
Incidentally, in my interpretation of The Dark Knight Rises' central theme on the polarizing duality of capitalism and anarchy, the French Revolution is a precursor to Communism (i.e. Socialism/Marxism) by way of Jacobin faction, the fanatically leftist faction that joyously reveled in the Great Terror with mass executions of the innocent people, the monarchy and the ordinary people who might be construed as counter-revolutionary.
Yes, I know the American and European history, including the European revolution of 1848. Clever historical analogy noted, Chris and Jon.
Chris is certainly one of the better, if not the best film director working in the mainstream, commercial film. At least his contribution stands out from the dreary products put out by Hollywood hacks comprising MTV directors, cocaine-snorting egocentric producers, and brain-dead studio executives insisting on horrible remakes and foul comedies.
For the admission price, the first ten minutes is worth seeing for its splendidly planned action and thrilling character development of the prodigiously intelligent & efficiently brutish villain. Bane character as envisioned by the team Nolan & Goyer is an even match with The Joker as the most clever and cunning villain. The first ten minutes of action and exposition highlight the creative brilliance of the Nolan brothers in constructing insane action and introductionary characterization to blow the audience's mind.
I wish the movie is not so darned clichéd and obvious, especially the weird and confusing ending (I cannot say without major spoilers). Let's hope the movie is the finale with a neutron bang, and let's leave it at that. (Please, don't make a movie with Batman's lame and goofy sidekick as the protagonist.)
*** out of 4