You can't just call this an action-adventure-comic hero movie. It's just too intensely made and beautifully shot.

Rating: 9/10 (27 July 2012)

The Dark Knight Rises (2012)
The reviews are pretty consistent out there--this is a solid, worthy, spectacular third act for Nolan and Bale. And Caine and Freeman. The plot has a few big twists that work even if sometimes we didn't need to be surprised out of nowhere so many times. Most of all is the kinetic joyride through all kinds of action scenes, and a lot of strong dialog (very strong, for a comic hero movie, at least).
Amazingly, the movie is preposterous in the best ways. It fulfills its intentions of being a believable but archly excessive future. The effects are naturally state of the art. Gotham, the city, is more clearly New York City than ever, which might disappoint some (it's less of a fictional metaphor to the point that we wonder why they don't just call it Manhattan, which of course they can't). The legend that goes back before Batman, and to his training with a secret order, is filled in with good details. Bits of warmth and humor pop up now and then and work. In all, it is a full blooded echo of the first two movies in the director's approach to the character of Batman.
I saw it in an IMAX theater, which is worth talking about. For one thing, about half the movie was full screen IMAX projection (from a film projector, no digital) and the sharpness and scale were amazing. Amazing. It was almost too much to take in, and so in awe and appreciation I watched even the simple shots, like floating over the city, with wonder. I recommend it without hesitation.
Furthermore, for this half of the movie you really will get the full cinematography envisioned and executed by Nolan and his cameraman Wally Pfister (who has shot all of Nolan's films going back to "Memento" as well as "Moneyball," which is one reason that movie succeeded so well). The way the film is formatted in the IMAX sections, there is a lot of information (and action) above and below the normal area used in a widescreen movie. So in the theater you see it all. The problem is going to be on DVD you will not! You'll see the normal theatrical version released and now showing in normal (non-IMAX) theaters. This is good enough, no doubt, and the plot and editing are identical (as far as I've read), but the visual impact as well as the amount of visual information is decidedly different. An interesting problem.
You already know whether you like Batman movies, the recent ones. It's a no-brainer to see this one if you do. If you haven't see any of Nolan's versions, this is a great place to start. However, it might not hurt to begin with "Batman Begins" and move to "The Dark Knight" and then get this one in order. The things you will miss without the background are not critical, but they're helpful.
The rating is for the extra yards everyone went to make this an IMAX experience. It's beyond the beyond. But the film has some weaknesses, including some reworked ideas and moods, and maybe a little doubt about Hathaway as Catwoman, as much as I liked the idea. Still, it's a significant movie even for those who don't buy into the Batman aura. Try it. I dare you not to enjoy it. It's a wild ride.