Dawn of the Planet of the Apes

Okay, I'll admit. I am a diehard Planet of the Apes fan. I know....it's a complete shocker for anyone who follows the site. The original series -- 5 movies -- is fun to watch from beginning to end, even if by the fifth film, things were running on empty. Then there's that Tim Burton remake/reboot version that....I don't know, was just awful. And then there was 2011's Rise of the Planet of the Apes, one of the most pleasant surprises in years for me in big-budget theatrical releases. Which naturally leads up to 2014's Dawn of the Planet of the Apes, currently raking in piles of money and critical acclaim.

It has been 10 years since a virus has torn the world apart, wiping out a majority of mankind across the planet. Little pockets of humanity have managed to survive, working together to do so. But north of San Francisco, the intelligent, genetically-evolved ape, Caesar (Andy Serkis), is leading a community of apes that has moved on with no interference from humanity. It's been so long since the apes have even seen a human they begin to wonder if any have even survived. That wonder is answered when a small group of humans, led by Malcolm (Jason Clarke), walks into the woods in hopes of reaching a nearby dam, a dam that if restarted up could power the life of their colony of survivors waiting in fortified San Francisco. Caesar must now decide what to do. Allow the humans to repair the broken-down dam and refuel their colony? Don't allow them to pass and risk a violent response from the humans who have become increasingly desperate? The ape community hangs in the balance.

Revisiting 'Rise' before jumping into 'Dawn' this weekend, I came away impressed again with where the series/franchise has gone. I can't say enough how surprised I was, how genuinely good 'Rise' was. Naturally, I was psyched for the sequel, to see what was done with the follow-up (Yes, I support sequels as it suits me). Director Matt Reeves takes the helm and does it well. It isn't necessarily what you'd expect from a summer blockbuster. It isn't mindless, stupid action on a grand scale. Yeah, it has action, but the focus and grand scale is more interested in the story and the characters, developing it all so the action actually means something. It's not just random explosions. The action and the story work together seamlessly. This isn't a mindless blockbuster. This is a good movie, and it is most definitely the better for it. 'Dawn' takes the baton and keeps on running, a worthy sequel, one that lays things out nicely for another sequel should they so choose.

What helps set this sequel apart from most inferior sequels is that rehashed idea from the original series that started way back in 1968 with The Planet of the Apes. 'Dawn' creates a story in a new world, a world that has gone most of 10 years without much in the way of human involvement. The roads have been claimed back by nature. The towns -- we see San Francisco as the main human backdrop -- are falling apart, nature, plants, weeds and greenery growing as far as the eye can see. Amongst this world without too much human interference, the Earth is getting back to the basics. In this world, little communities have popped up, including Caesar's ape village up in the Muir Woods National Monument, and the Colony in San Francisco, human survivors banding together. It seems simple to commend a movie for creating a world -- that's what they're supposed to do -- but 'Dawn' works. We're thrust into a dark, gloomy, dreary world where survival comes above all else. Simple as that.

Picking up right where he left off, Andy Serkis again steals the show as Caesar, the highly intelligent ape leader who has even learned to speak (the other apes coming along nicely in that department). At no point watching the apes do you ever really consider you're watching computer-generated images. It just looks real. It looks natural. The visual is key because if it didn't work, you're taken completely out of the movie and that can be impossible to recover from. Beyond the visual though, the best part of the movie is the development of the Caesar character. The revolution of the 1st movie is gone so the apes settle into a new life, Caesar as their leader. We see him struggling with decisions, struggling with leadership, struggling with what to do. He's now got a family to consider too, his wife, Cornelia (Judy Greer), and his son, Blue Eyes (Nick Thurston). The performance is the heart of the movie, Serkis carrying the movie from beginning to end.

So go figure, but there is far more interest here in the apes story than the humans. That's not to say the humans aren't interesting, just not as interesting as the apes. Along with Caesar and his family, we also see Koba (Toby Kebbell), Caesar's fiery friend, a rescue from a science lab, Maurice (Karin Konoval), an already intelligent former circus ape and Caesar's closest friend, and Rocket (Terry Notary), another friend from the ape habitat. As for the humans and along with Clarke, look for Dreyfus (Gary Oldman), the leader of the San Francisco colony, Ellie (Keri Russell), Malcolm's girlfriend, a doctor, Alexander (Kodi Smit-McPhee), Malcolm's son, with Kirk Acevedo, Jon Eyez, and Enrique Murciano as assorted other humans we meet.

The coolest dynamic that develops in 'Dawn' is between Caesar and Malcolm. They're both working to accomplish something, both working against incredibly tough odds to get that done. Their scenes together are pretty perfect, both men/fathers realizing how tough their situations are. They don't complain or pout, instead continuing to chip away and work at getting where they need to be. The ape-human dynamic there gives a different dimension to the already interesting story. And yes, the finale packs in the action, a violent night battle in the abandoned streets of San Francisco. It's got a lot going for it, drama, action, some surprising laughs, a little bit of everything. There's also some nice touches for series fans, including the soundtrack using quick samples of composer Jerry Goldsmith's score from the original 'Planet.'

A more than worthy sequel, one that hopefully propels the series forward into another entry!

Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (2014): ***/****

JFK

On November 22, 1963, President John F. Kennedy was traveling by motorcade in Dallas when he was shot and killed by Lee Harvey Oswald. Or so some think at least. One of the most tragic events in U.S. history, Kennedy's assassination has sparked hundreds and thousands of theories. Was Oswald working alone? Was it a government conspiracy to kill Kennedy? Maybe no one will ever know for sure, but the conspiracy theories abound. Enter stage right, 1991's JFK.

The district attorney in New Orleans, Jim Garrison (Kevin Costner) is stunned like so many Americans when news of President Kennedy's death hits the airwaves. He watches with morbid curiosity and a desire for answers as Lee Harvey Oswald (Gary Oldman) is arrested for the murder and summarily shot by Jack Ruby two days later. Several years pass, but by 1966, Garrison is bothered more and more by the details of the assassination. With help from his staff, Garrison begins to do his own investigation, and the results are startling. What exactly happened in the days and months leading up to Nov. 22, 1963? More importantly, what happened after? The more they find out, the more Garrison smells a government cover-up.

From director Oliver Stone, this is quite the ambitious project. For starters, because it involves such a touchy subject as the JFK assassination, everyone has at least somewhat of an opinion on the subject. More than just viewer opinions, the amount of info, theories and evidence involving the assassination is endless. Type in 'JFK Conspiracy' at Google, and see how many results you get. So walking through a virtual filming minefield, Stone takes on a gargantuan task. The end result is a thought-provoking, somewhat meandering (at 206 minutes) story that throws a lot at the viewer, but if you pay attention, it's not a difficult movie to keep up with.

The goal from the beginning is simple; Stone intends to put that bug in your head that the lone shooter theory -- Oswald shooting Kennedy -- just isn't the way it happened. Recent studies show that some 60% of Americans believe there was a conspiracy involving the shooting. Stone has always had an aggressive shooting style, but it's a positive here. The entire movie is basically one interview after another -- quick cuts, fast editing, flashbacks galore -- as one piece of evidence piles up one on top of the other through Garrison and Co.'s investigation. The story is based on the true-to-life efforts of Garrison and his staff (with some tweaks here and there), but it plays like All the President's Men or any number of other films detailing an investigative report.

Ready to be impressed? This is one doozy of a cast, starting with Costner who delivers a likable, human performance as the D.A. driven to obsession to find out the truth. The subplot with his family (including wife Sissy Spacek) is one of the few weak points the movie has. Seeing him only in flashback, Oldman is frighteningly good as Oswald, and a dead ringer physically to boot. Garrison's investigative staff includes Jay O. Sanders, Laurie Metcalf, Wayne Knight, Michael Rooker and Gary Grubbs. Don't go anywhere. I'm not to the halfway point yet. There's also Ed Asner, Jack Lemmon, Brian Doyle-Murray (as Jack Ruby), Walther Matthau, John Candy, Tommy Lee Jones, Donald Sutherland, Kevin Bacon, Joe Pesci, and Tomas Milian. Some are nothing more than a scene or two cameo, but their presence alone legitimizes their scenes. Jones, Sutherland, Bacon and Pesci are the most memorable of the group.

Presenting all sorts of what ifs and could bes, the movie builds to a courtroom scene where Garrison puts someone on trial for conspiring to kill JFK. The scene is a gem, capping off all we've heard, sene and learned through their investigation. Costner is highly effective in this scene, both pointing out the flaws in the lone shooter theory (later referenced famously in Seinfeld with the Magic Loogie, watch HERE) but also addressing the jury for what they should do. It shows one man's frustration at what he believes the government has been up to, doing something for extraordinary amounts of money rather than what's good for the country. The whole movie is enjoyable and extremely polished, but the court scene (about 35 minutes at the end) is the best thing going.

So did Oswald shoot Kennedy? Were there other shooters? We'll probably never know. But I have to give Stone's film credit. Say what you want about your own thoughts on the assassination, but Stone cleanly lays out the potential for at least one possibility. Maybe Oswald was a patsy, one man set up by larger forces at work. It's something you will have to think about yourself, but as a director, Stone does an admirable job at least making us question what really happened.

JFK (1991): ***/****

The Dark Knight Rises

Considering the quality of both Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, was there pressure for director Christopher Nolan to deliver an epic close-out film for his Batman trilogy? Reviews were somewhat mixed as Nolan's final Batman movie hit theaters last weekend, and the tragic shootings in Colorado will almost certainly hang over the film (to a point at least). If there was ever a case of ignoring reviews (other people's that is, I assume you'd take mine as the God honest truth), this is it. Not a surprise, but 2012's The Dark Knight Rises is a great film, one that gives the trilogy the send-off it deserves.

It has been eight years since Batman (Christian Bale) has taken the fall for Harvey Dent's murderous rampage, and Gotham City is better than ever. Crime has almost completely disappeared, and the city has experienced a rebirth of sorts. Hiding away at Wayne Manor, Batman/Bruce Wayne is wasting away, a recluse who hasn't appeared publicly for years. But when things seem just right -- even perfect -- for Gotham, a new terror arises, a madman in the form of mysterious and masked Bane (Tom Hardy), a criminal who vows to rock the foundation, destroying the city to rubble. Having questioned if everything/anything he ever did as Batman accomplished anything, Bruce must now decide what's best for Gotham. Let the city save itself? Or is the only thing stopping Bane the return of Batman?

First off, I have to say how impressed I was both with this final movie, but the trilogy on the whole. I rewatched the first two movies over the last week-plus before checking out 'Rises' and can very much recommend doing the same if you can. There's a continuity, a comfort level that permeates through an extended viewing of sorts. What can I say that I haven't in the other Batman reviews? Christopher Nolan is an immense talent, and I hope he continues to direct movies of this superb quality. The best description I can come up with to describe my enjoyment is hopefully simple to understand. You watch these movies -- 'Rises' especially -- and you just have that feeling you're watching what a movie should be. Not what it could be. SHOULD. Immensely entertaining, well-acted and well-written, an epic scale but also a connection on the personal level, spot-on soundtrack/musical score. Batman Begins started the ball rolling, The Dark Knight perfected the formula, and The Dark Knight Rises continues to use that formula.

What struck me most watching this newest arrival was the quality of drama here with kudos to a script from Nolan and Jonathan Nolan. I almost took it for granted, but over three movies, you honestly come to like/hate these characters, but if nothing else you get to know them. As pure drama, this is the best of the three films. It is by far the most personal of the three. Bale delivers his finest performance as the tortured Bruce Wayne, questioning what his actions accomplished while hiding away at Wayne Manor. This is an individual with inner demons that threaten to tear him apart. Buzz started circulating in the weeks prior to its release that Batman would die in this final installment (no finale spoilers here), and the darkness of the story reflects that. Batman has become the true tragic hero; an individual who genuinely wanted to do right but through his own fault, society, greed, and so many other things is forced to change, adapt and improvise. A credit to Bale for doing such a fine job with a character that could have easily been phoned in.

Using that as a jumping off point, Bale isn't on-screen for seemingly long stretches of the 164-minute movie. While Batman is the obvious key and focal point, this is also a story about the people of Gotham City. Michael Caine returns as Alfred, Bruce's butler, and hits every single note he can in a pitch-perfect performance. Three key scenes are the heart of the movie -- two with Bruce and Alfred, one with Alfred on his own -- and they are heartbreaking to watch. Didn't think you'd hear that in a Batman review, did you? Caine is so good I hope he gets some Oscar consideration for Best Supporting Actor. Gary Oldman rises to the occasion late as Commissioner Gordon, also questioning the actions he's taken and Morgan Freeman is solid as always as Wayne Enterprises engineering genius Lucius Fox. One other smaller new addition is Matthew Modine as one of Gordon's fellow high-ranking police officers.

Then there's the rest of the cast, Nolan seemingly trying to put together Inception 2: The Reckoning. Tom Hardy has some epic shoes to fill, following Heath Ledger's performance as The Joker, and he's quite capable of that. It's not fair to compare the part to the Joker, but there is similarities. Hardy's Bane is all business, all chaos, all anarchy. He's a bear of a man, like a caged but highly intelligent animal. Joseph Gordon-Levitt is a scene-stealer as John Blake, a Gotham police officer who grows increasingly frustrated with the limitations of his badge. Marion Cotillard plays Miriam Tate, a rich philanthropist trying to work with Wayne Enterprises to create a powerful sustainable energy force. Anne Hathaway holds her own as well, putting in a memorable turn as Selina Kyle, a master thief dubbed 'the Cat' but never actually dubbed Catwoman. SEMI SPOILERS ABOUT CASTING In the surprise department, look for Liam Neeson and Cillian Murphy briefly reprising their roles from the previous Batman entries. END OF SPOILERS A great cast though from top to bottom. 

Some reviews pointed to the rather twisty-turny early portions of the story as a detriment to the end result, and I go both ways here. Through the first hour, we're not always sure of what's going on or even where the story is heading. Characters and some background are introduced and dealt with, but it's all laying the groundwork. When the knock-out punch does come, all I can say...brace yourself. The final 45-60 minutes threw me for a loop, but in a good way. It is everything epic you would hope a final showdown to be; in this case, Bane turning Gotham City into a city cut off from the rest of the world and threatening to destroy it all, killing 12 million people in the process. If you struggle with the early pacing, stick with it. The pay-off in the end is incredibly worth it in so many ways.

As I mentioned, this is a movie that has it all. The finale packs the biggest action punch, but an earlier motorcycle chase through the city following a Bane robbery is also highly memorable, as is Bane's takeover of the city with an abundance of explosives taking out bridges and even a quasi-NFL game. The dialogue is spot-on too, especially the scenes with Bale and Caine. On pure drama, it's hard to beat Bane's backstory (quick though it is), but also how Batman deals with solving the identical problem the mysteriously masked villain had to figure out. And then there's the ending. Should it come as a surprise that it is basically the perfect way to close out the trilogy? Hans Zimmer's musical score is solid throughout, but it's at its best in the final montage as everything is wrapped up. Two different twists make the ending a little surprising, but mostly? It's an appropriate dramatic and emotional ending for all involved.

Well, here we are. I'm sorry to see this trilogy go. As far as superhero movies go (and I struggle limiting these to just superhero movies), they've set the bar as high as they can. All other future efforts will be compared to these films, and I can't think of a better compliment to a director, cast and crew for turning out such a quality finished product. A classic on par with The Dark Knight, if not a slightly, tiny bit better.

The Dark Knight Rises <---trailer (2012): ****/****

The Dark Knight

Why are people so excited for this weekend's The Dark Knight Rises? Because Batman Begins was good, and 2008's The Dark Knight was great, setting the bar about as high as a movie can possibly go. The rare sequel that improves on the original, it is everything you would hope for in a superhero movie and much, much more. Just a little more timely reviewing today, and I hope to see 'Rises' Sunday so expect a review soon.

Helping clean up Gotham City and all its crime, the very mention of the name 'Batman' sends shivers up the spines of Gotham's criminal underworld. But for all Batman (Christian Bale) has done, he's never fought a criminal quite like this one, the Joker (Heath Ledger), a deranged murderer who wears faded, unkempt make-up and favors knives. The Joker has offered his services to the all the different heads of the criminal underworld, offering to kill the Batman and make their lives infinitely easier. The Caped Crusader might finally have some help though in Gotham's hierarchy as crusading district attorney Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhart) vows to help Batman however he can. With a nut like the Joker around, nothing happens as expected.  

It's hard -- and probably not very fair -- to compare this second Batman movie from director Christopher Nolan to its predecessor. 'Begins' is an above average, highly enjoyable movie on its own, but it is merely one that opens the door for all that Nolan had planned with this sequel. 'Begins' introduces the Batman lore, the characters, the situations, laying the groundwork. 'Knight' takes the jumping off point and sprints with it. Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard's score is again booming and epic and just right. Almost the entire film was filmed in Chicago, and the movie looks AMAZING. Talk about a director utilizing his locations, Nolan knocks that one out of the park. It's the little things that start things rolling, and the movie never looks back.

But what really sets Nolan's movies apart from even the high quality superhero movies -- The Avengers, Iron Man, Captain America -- is the inherent darkness involved with the characters and story. There is no camp quality to the proceedings, no tongue in cheek humor. This is a cutthroat world where anyone and everyone is potentially dead in a flash. The word that comes to mind watching this movie was 'brutal.' More on this later, but much of that comes from the performance of Heath Ledger. His Joker is a villain described by Michael Caine's Alfred as someone "who wants to watch the world burn." There is no rhyme or reason to the Joker's brutality. He encourages murder (and handles a couple of his own), mayhem and chaos and doesn't care who gets caught up in the maelstrom that ensues. As a fan of a darker, graphic novel look at a "comic book" world, that darkness and brutality appeals to me in movies. Nolan commits to that deep-seeded darkness and never lets up.

Now onto Heath Ledger as the Joker. This movie was in the news prior to its release (more in the news at least) because Ledger died six months before the film's release. Before it had even been seen, buzz was generated about Ledger's amazingly memorable performance as the Joker, and when audiences finally saw this movie in the summer of 2008, they weren't disappointed. In a performance that won him a Best Supporting Actor Oscar, Ledger delivers a performance that is terrifying, supremely dark, oddly charming and unlike any other villainous role ever. It's his voice, his speech, his peculiar mannerisms, his maniacal laughing, the distinctly iconic look with the faded, dreary make-up and purple suit, all these specific things that make this such a memorable and ultimately tragic performance.

Because Ledger's part was rightly given so much attention upon release, the rest of the cast doesn't always get the recognition they deserve. Other than developing that overly deep "I'm BATMAN!" voice since 'Begins,' Bale tweaks the character for the positive. He begins to question what he's taken upon his shoulder. He begins to doubt if he can actually win in the end, especially with a counter like the Joker. Eckhart too is a scene-stealer as Harvey Dent, the crusading district attorney who takes a no-nonsense approach to everything about his job. An idealist who wants the best, he's also a frustrated realist kept in check to a point by the system. Caine again is perfect as Alfred, Morgan Freeman returns as Wayne Enterprises resident genius Lucius Fox, and Gary Oldman gets much more to do as Lt. Gordon. Even Cillian Murphy makes a one-scene appearance as the Scarecrow. Additions include Maggie Gyllenhaal as Rachel Dawes (an improvement over Katie Holmes), Eric Roberts as Maroni, a powerful Gotham mobster, and Nestor Carbonell as the mayor of Gotham.

Like any classic, something has to set a movie apart from the average. The Chicago locations help that cause, especially an epic action sequence on La Salle Street and Lower Wacker Drive as Batman -- on a Bat-cycle of sorts -- does battle with the Joker who at different points has an automatic machine gun, bazooka and out of control semi trucks as weapons. There are the smaller but equally memorable moments, especially the Joker's infamous "pencil disappearing trick." The finale is the best though as the Joker's chaotic plan is revealed in all its cynical, brutal qualities. The final scene propels this 2008 movie into the trilogy wrap-up, Oldman's Lt. (now Commissioner as we all know him) Gordon delivering a monologue that is perfect in its simple, straightforward, forthrightness. Is that even a word? Eh. The movie is great, one all other superhero movies must measure themselves against. As for me, I'm counting down the hours until The Dark Knight Rises.

The Dark Knight <---trailer (2008): ****/****

Batman Begins

Here at Just Hit Play, I try to be timely if nothing else. So with the huge-mega-ultra-gigantic-Titanic-epic summer blockbuster (<----intended seriously, not sarcasm) The Dark Knight Rises due in theaters this Friday, we're doing a little movie recapping, starting with 2005's Batman Begins, director Christopher Nolan's first venture into the Batman series. This weekend's film will no doubt be a huge success, but that's only because Nolan set the bar so high with his first two entries, and this first one? Still a goodie.

Years since his parents were murdered in a robbery, Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) is still searching for answers; some kind of resolution for his feelings of guilt, fear and desire for vengeance. After traveling the world and even training with a mysterious warrior, Ducard (Liam Neeson), at an isolated monastery in the Himalayas. Returning to impoverished, crime-torn Gotham City, Bruce creates a crime-fighting identity -- Batman -- to help combat the city's problems, using everything from Wayne Enterprises (his deceased father's company) to aid the cause. His impact is immediate, but other more sinister personalities await, including Dr. Crane (Cillian Murphy) who intends to cripple Gotham like nothing the city's seen before.

The superhero franchise reboot is nothing new recently. Over the last 15 years, Superman, Spiderman and Batman have gotten reboots with a long list of other superheroes getting their own chance at a franchise -- some more successful than others. What sets 'Begin' (and The Dark Knight) apart is a straightforward authentic feel. There is no tongue in cheek, campy angle to the superhero proceedings. That's not a bad thing in the least. Nolan takes what Batman fans know -- Alfred the butler, the Batmobile, the Bat cave, Detective Gordon -- and keeps it on the straight and narrow. The score from Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard is epic without being overdoing it -- listen to the main theme HERE -- and the scale of the story has that epic quality without losing focus on the personal aspect; the characters. Simple you would think, but it's always surprising how many movies forget about that aspect.

What has made these movies so popular though -- for me at least -- is they are dark, dark and DARK. Like I mentioned, many people know Batman through the campy 1960s TV show or even the 1990s franchise ventures which we won't address right now....maybe ever. Unfortunately, the Batman comics are cynical and did I mention, dark? The TV shows and movies never took advantage of that aspect until here. Gotham City has been polluted by crime, poverty and corruption throughout the government (Tom Wilkinson is great in a small part as mobster Carmine Falcone), the city literally being torn apart. In general, Nolan (who also co-wrote the script) doesn't seem interested in any obvious laughs or tongue-in-cheek quality. Bad guys and good guys in a city in squalor. This would obviously get ratcheted up a notch in The Dark Knight, but 'Begins' certainly gets the ball rolling.

Having worked in film and TV since the late 1980s, Christian Bale had been at least a somewhat recognizable name for years. Not surprisingly, this put on the A-list of movie stars. Playing instantly recognizable superheroes tends to do that, huh? I like Bale as an actor, but he makes Bruce Wayne/Batman a likable character from the start. A superhero is one thing, but a tortured superhero? That's money in the bank. He has no super powers -- just a mansion and secret cave full of badass gadgets -- and must rely on his own skills as a fighter when trouble arises. Because of his past though, Bruce blames himself for his parents' death and feels he must do something to right that wrong. Without the humor of Robert Downey Jr. in Iron Man, Bale does a great job at putting a new, entertaining spin on a character that just about everyone knows.

Now on the other hand, if you're not a Bale fan, this cast almost certainly has something else to offer you. If there is a better casting job than Michael Caine as Alfred, Bruce's butler at Wayne Manor, I can't think of him. Caine is a professional, and even with his supporting part manages to dominate his scenes, making it look easy in the process. Same goes for Morgan Freeman as Lucius Fox, Wayne Enterprise's resident technological genius. Gary Oldman is limited by screentime as Jim Gordon, one of Gotham's few clean cops, but not surprisingly makes it worthwhile. Neeson as Ducard is a gem in the casting department, Murphy sinister and creepy as Dr. Crane/Scarecrow, and Ken Watanabe as mysterious ninja Ra's Al Ghul is only around for a little. Rutger Hauer plays Earle, the CEO of Wayne Enterprises in Bruce's absence, Katie Holmes is Rachel, Bruce's long-time but secret love and an assistant D.A., and Linus Roache plays Thomas Wayne, Bruce's brilliant, philanthropic father in a few quick flashback scenes.

It is a Batman movie though so there is some just assumed badass-ness (real word?) because of the character. The action scenes are brutal and don't feel forced, quick cut without being an indecipherable blur. Fans of Batman will no doubt get a kick out of seeing the reveal of the Bat Signal, of the Batmobile zipping through Gotham, all those little things that help make a good character great. 'Begins' sets the bar pretty high, but not quite high enough. As good as it is, it merely set the stage for The Dark Knight, an instant classic. Just the same, it's a great place to start. And don't forget about that last scene before the credits, featuring a perfect lead-in to the sequel. Superhero origin stories can be tricky, but this one knocks it out of the park.

Batman Begins <---trailer (2005): *** 1/2 /****

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy (2011)

I love reading, always have and hope I always will. So when I saw a trailer this past summer for a spy movie based off a book from English novelist John Le Carre, I wanted to check out the book before seeing the movie. I can't tell you how much I struggled through the book, forcing myself to finish it because if a movie was made, the source novel has to be good, right? Thankfully, 2011's Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy was infinitely more enjoyable than its source novel.

When a mission is badly botched in Budapest, Control (John Hurt) and his right hand man, George Smiley (Gary Oldman), are forcefully pushed out the door at MI6. A new power system rises to the top, and most of a year later with Control dead, Smiley is approached with an important mission. More and more intelligence points to a high-up official in British intelligence being a mole working deep, deep undercover for Russia. The suspects have been narrowed down to four key individuals, but none of them seem any more likely to be the mole than the others. With the help of a younger but very capable agent, Peter Guillam (Benedict Cumberbatch), Smiley is tasked with exposing the mole. Can they do it in time?

Le Carre's book is something else. Countless characters, seemingly endless passages of dialogue on top of dialogue, and a non-linear story that I for one had trouble keeping up with. I hate calling a book dull or boring because it sounds very high school, but I struggled to maintain an interest in the very slowly developing story. Even when things were revealed, I had to re-read and double check just to make sure I'd read right. It defines a low-key, subtle spy story with little sense of urgency. Thankfully the movie streamlines the characters, the dialogue and the story, all the while remaining true to Le Carre's novel. It certainly isn't a movie for everyone, and it has its flaws, but 'Tinker' is quite the thinking man's spy movie.

Let's start with the tone and look of the movie. Like the novel, it is incredibly low-key, almost comatose in its development. For a story revolving around a high-level mole, no one seems particularly worried. The story utilizes flashbacks and bounces around constantly, throwing new characters in and out of scenes as needed. You know, just know, they're somehow related, and for the most part they do fit together in the end. It is a self-assured movie, and will probably lose some viewers with its leisurely pacing. The look of the movie is incredible from the sets and costumes to the camera work. The spies all wear suits and ties, constantly smoke cigarettes, and always have some liquor close by. This was the Cold War fought by gentlemen, not the gung-ho, shoot 'em up James Bond and Jason Bournes. These spies did their best when not seen by their opposition, slinking in and out as quickly as they arrived.

My biggest motivation for finishing the book was the cast assembled in director Tomas Alfredson's spy drama. I'll begin with Gary Oldman as George Smiley, a part that has already started to earn the actor some Oscar buzz for Best Actor. Like its story, Oldman is understated beyond belief as Smiley, a veteran agent with years of experience under his belt. He's experienced more than most can dream of, and the wear and tear shows. Pushed out of a job he was damn good at, his Smiley holds some earned resentment at the government and superiors that turned their back on him. Above all else, he is a professional though. He's a dogged investigator, able to piece together clues and information as needed, always thinking how the pieces fit together. I love Oldman as an actor -- playing good or bad guy -- but it's great seeing him truly acting, not just hamming it up. Great lead performance.

That's saying something considering the rest of the cast. The treacherous suspects include Alleline (Toby Jones), Haydon (Colin Firth), Esterhase (David Dencik), and Bland (Ciaran Hinds), both Jones and Firth making the best impressions. Cumberbath too holds his own at Oldman's side, an agent with a possible secret of his own, and Hurt is Hurt, legitimizing his small part because he's John Hurt. One of my new favorite actors, Mark Strong, has a solid supporting part as Prideaux, an agent who's stumbled into a botched mission and must pay the consequences. Another favorite of mine, Tom Hardy plays Ricki, a "scalphunter," an agent usually relegated to the more sinister missions, this time trying to move up a level with some info he stumbled into. Kathy Burke and Stephen Graham have key parts as former Intelligence members Smiley investigates. Not a false performance in the bunch, an ensemble working perfectly together. Not showy at all, just professionals doing what they do, seemingly effortlessly.

The movie isn't perfect though, but I did enjoy it considerably more than Le Carre's novel. Problems persist though. We learn little to nothing about the suspects so even when the mole is revealed, it makes little impact. A throwaway line explains the reasoning in a weak wrap-up. I would have liked some reasoning, some background on these men, allowing us to connect emotionally in some way whether it be hatred, respect, whatever. The story drifts at time -- like the novel -- in an 127-minute movie. Still, it's almost a must-see movie because it is so rare to see a movie of this quality, especially among the spy genre. The ending especially is a winner, a montage set to French song La Mer, later Americanized by Bobby Darin's Beyond the Sea. Style and acting to spare, just know what you're about to watch.

Tinker Tailor Soldier Spy <---trailer (2011): ***/****

The Professional

Two years ago, the first Jean-Pierre Melville movie I saw was his classic Le Samourai.  Starring Alain Delon, it was a very stylish look at the life of a hit-man who meticulously went about his business as the police desperately tried to track him down.  I didn't love the movie, but I certainly liked it enough to give some other Melville crime thrillers a chance.  But then I kept seeing references to Le Samourai coming up, some major and some more minor, but it was hard to miss them.  Over 40 years later, this Melville flick is still making its impact felt on countless action movies in terms of style and story.  One of the few to even come close to measuring up is 1994's The Professional.

In past reviews, I've written about some of my favorite character actors from the era of classic Hollywood between the 1930s and 1960s (even into the decade of the character actor, the 1970s).  When I think of current actors who can pull off supporting roles perfectly in movies now being released in theaters, it's harder to think of many.  One exception is Jean Reno, a veteran of Hollywood and European movies.  He's the type of actor who legitimizes a movie just by being there.  When given a rare chance at a starring role like the one in The Professional, Reno doesn't miss, swinging for the fences and hitting a home run with this very Melville-like character.

Working for a mid-level mafioso (Danny Aiello) in New York City, a man known only as Leon (Reno) is one of the best "cleaners" around.  For a price of $5,000 a person, Leon will kill any man, but he refuses to kill a woman or a child. He leads a simple life when he isn't on the job until one day his routine is shaken.  In the apartment building he lives in, Leon's next door neighbors are gunned down by a rogue D.E.A. agent, Stansfield (Gary Oldman).  The only survivor is 12-year old daughter, Mathilda (Natalie Portman), who hides out and convinces Leon to let her live with him. Leon doesn't know what to do other than the fact that he can't just put her on the streets. Mathilda has an offer for him, teach her to be a cleaner like him.  Leon isn't so sure it is a good idea though, knowing that Stansfield is eventually going to track her down looking to finish the job he started.

Like Melville did in Le Samourai with Delon's main character, director Luc Besson builds up Leon, his main character, without much in the way of describing his background, instead just showing his daily routine and hearing a few quick snippets of his principles. A middle-aged man living by himself almost like a monk, Leon constantly drinks milk and nothing else -- especially hard liquor or beer -- while caring for his small house plant.  He sleeps sitting up in his chair for quick catnaps, never resting for too long.  Leon can't read or write well, and he watches old movies at small NYC theaters in the morning hours.  As deadly capable as he is, Leon is also a vulnerable, somewhat innocent, even naive individual.  He trusts Aiello's word to a fault, letting him hold onto the money he earns.  All these little things add up to this great character that is hard not to like, even considering his career.  Even then, he's a bit of a righteous killer, taking out the worst society has to offer.

Reno is clearly channeling Delon's Samourai character, and I mean that as a compliment.  Usually relegated to key supporting roles in movies like Ronin, Godzilla, Mission: Impossible, and quite a few other movies, Reno makes Leon into this ultra-cool, killing machine.  The visual alone of his retro glasses and black overcoat quickly became an iconic image associated with the movie and wisely used on DVD boxes.  It can be a difficult challenge making a hired killer a sympathetic character, but Reno's Leon is as human as they come.  For her sake and his, he contemplates killing Portman's Mathilda to put her out of her misery, even putting a gun to her head as she sleeps.  He has countless opportunities to leave her or kick her out, only to realize he should and will do the right thing.  Call it a father-daughter, brother-sister relationship, but he starts to look out for her like family, like a guardian angel doing his damnedest to protect her.

In the news recently for her performance in The Black Swan, Portman is as well known for her parts in the Star War movies and V for Vendetta as this performance in The Professional.  More impressive? This was her first feature film role, and it's clearly an example of the talent she's working with.  Her chemistry with Reno is flawless and instantly believable.  She should have won awards for one scene alone when she stands outside Leon's apartment crying after walking past her dead family, pleading in a whisper for him to open the door.  The 13-year old Portman is a revelation here, and any fans of hers should see this movie. And for an off his rocker, eccentric DEA agent, who better than Oldman (one of the greatest villainous actors of all-time)?  His part is hamming it up and over the top, a necessary counter to Leon's quiet, smooth demeanor.

As the viewer, our introduction to Leon is about as well-handled as possible.  His hit attempt on a well-guarded mafioso is action at its tense best, guards being picked off one-by-one by this unseen, fast moving killer.  Before we know anything about Leon, we know he's an expert at what he does with few if any rivals.  For the most part, that's all the action until the end when SPOILER ALERT Stansfield finally tracks down Mathilda with Leon holding off countless SWAT team members and DEA agents.  Big, loud and chaotic, the finale is a spectacle to behold.  The ending itself isn't necessarily a happy ending, but it's an appropriate one, and a moving one at that.  A great movie overall.

The Professional <---trailer (1994): ****/****   

The Book of Eli

Apocalypse movies have been all the rage of late, and why not? Maybe people like to see a picture of what the world we live in is heading for -- possibly that is -- but there's clearly a formula developing as to how to make apocalyptic movies. There's been a recent string of these movies including 2012 and The Road, and most recently The Book of Eli which opened in theaters yesterday.

A combination of Mad Max, The Road and Fahrenheit 451, The Book of Eli appeals to me in the same way many westerns do. The setting is the west in the U.S. some 30 years after 'the flash,' some cataclysmic incident where the ozone layer was torn open and the Earth began to burn. It wasn't a world destroyer though as many people survived, some forming into smaller groups and building communities and towns that dot the country. During the incident -- it's never spelled out although religion is hinted at for being a cause -- a revolution resulted where books, all books, burned. Now a quarter century later the world tries to build up again.

One of those people who survived the blast is Eli (Denzel Washington), a man in his late 30s, maybe early 40s who travels across the country, all the while heading west. In his possession is a leather-bound King James Bible, possibly the last one in existence with all the book burnings. He protects it closely, ready to dispatch anyone who tries to take it from him as he crosses the bleak, vacant stretches of land. One day, he walks into a small town run by a man known only as Carnegie (Gary Oldman) who rules the area because he controls the all-important water supply. In trying to gain as much power as possible, Carnegie has been looking for years for a copy of the Bible and through a young woman, Solara (Mila Kunis), working in his bar finds out that Eli has one. Carnegie wants it and will spare nothing or no one to get it, but Eli has no plans of giving it up easily.

Making their first movie in nine years, the Hughes brothers, Albert and Allen, turn in a strong movie in their return to the big screen. Working with cinematographer/director of photography Don Burgess, the twin brother directing combo create an intensely visual movie full of washed out colors -- almost like sepia -- that give everything a tired, beaten down by the world look. As Eli treks cross-country, it feels like the viewer is in this desert wasteland with him. The desert presents all sorts of dangers like hijackers (Eli's handling of an ambush is a great introductory sequence, one of the better recent action scenes) and an almost complete lack of water.

The action scenes are inspired as Eli equipped with a razor-sharp machete, pistol and pump-action shotgun deals with hijackers, thugs, and Carnegie's men. Unlike many action movies, these scenes are shown in one continuous shot without a cut. So instead of a flurry of quick-cut individual shots, we get one fast yet clear shot of Eli dispatching his attackers. As if those weren't cool enough, there's also a gunfight straight out of the old west as Eli turns to his pistol to get him out of a sticky situation with Carnegie and his demands.

This builds and builds to a phenomenal final 30 minutes. The first 90 are strong and highly enjoyable on their own, but the last half hour takes it to another level. There's one major twist -- think Sixth Sense -- that is hinted at throughout the movie but is handled so well it would be hard to pick up on an initial viewing. I didn't see it coming at all and am still coming around with it. But on a bigger level (no twist involved) it's a very emotional ending, surprisingly so since this movie is being marketed as an action flick, that goes back to what all apocalypse movies have...there will always be a remnant, a group to carry on where others have fallen. This ending features a great cameo from Malcolm McDowell, quite a departure from his Clockwork Orange part.

Starring as a man of few words on a mission, Denzel Washington is phenomenal as Eli. With little in the way of dialogue and even less background, Washington brings Eli to life, a character you find yourself rooting for because somehow you know he is in the right and doing something incredibly worthwhile. When Eli does speak, Washington shows off the old acting chops, especially when he explains how the book came into his possession. An actor more than a movie star, it's always nice to see Washington get to do some heavy-duty fight scenes too. Oldman gets back to his bad guy roots as Carnegie, and Kunis continues a string of movies where she's shown she is more than just shrill Jackie Burkhart. Also worth looking out for is Ray Stevenson as Redridge, Carnegie's right hand man, Jennifer Beals as Claudia, Solara's blind mother, Tom Waits as a suspicious storekeeper, and Frances de la Tour and Michael Gambon as an old married couple Eli meets on the road.

Not overly religious and not quite a straight action movie, The Book of Eli has a little bit of everything for the audience. Great casting, especially Washington and Oldman, help boost this apocalyptic story into something more than just its spare parts. As for the twist, it is one of those revelations that make you want to go back and watch the movie again, see if you can spot all the clues as they're presented. In this movie's case, I look forward to seeing it again because it certainly fooled me the first time around.

The Book of Eli <----trailer (2010): *** 1/2 /****