Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves

Directed by: Kevin Reynolds

Written by: Pen Densham and John Watson










When trying to decide where to start again with this blog, I decided that it would be best to start with something "older." This movie is not old in the literal sense, but it is very old in my mind. Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves is one of the first movies I can recall seeing in the theater, and when it popped up as an option for streaming, I figured it would be worth re-visiting and might prove to be a good film to help me back into the saddle of blogging here.

To start: I can't believe my parents took me as a child to see this movie. It's not at all like the cartoon Robin Hood I would have been familiar with going into it. It's dark. It's violent. (Nowadays we'd probably call it a "gritty re-imagining.")

It's also very long. The word "bloated" comes to mind. I kept checking to see how much more time was left, not because I was bored but because the pacing of the story was so inconsistent.

This movie has all the right pieces, but is so hit-or-miss that it never quite settles in to all the pieces working together. Although there are many great actors in here, there are issues with the acting being very ham. (Would it be cliche here to point out Kevin Costner's Mid-Western accent not quite working? Why have Sean Connery arrive for one scene and about three lines?) Although there are many great action scenes, there are issues with those scenes being reduced to camera tricks. (How many times did the movie jump to a "point of view from the flying arrow"?) Although the story should be compelling, there are issues with some of the drama being forced. (What exactly were we supposed to feel when Will Scarlett reveals his parentage? Why did the Scots come and go so quickly?)

I was caught up in this movie at times. Alan Rickman snivels and sneers like a master. Morgan Freeman awkwardly pulls off his part as Azeem. Moments of tension, such as the hanging at the wedding, were convincingly dramatic.

This movie screams 1991. And, despite its weaknesses, it holds up as a proto-typical big 1991 film.

The Dark Knight Rises

Directed by: Christopher Nolan

Written by: Jonathan Nolan, Christopher Nolan (screenplay); Christopher Nolan, David S. Goyer (story)









There's been plenty already said about this movie all over the internet, and there's really not a whole lot I can add to it in any meaningful way.  That being said, I'll limit my comments here to my own impressions and leave the larger debate for others.

I'm happy that this film pretty clearly ends the Bruce Wayne arc of Christopher Nolan's version of Batman.  Obviously (if you've seen it), there's plenty of wiggle room for more Batman films in the future, but this film ends much of what began in "Batman Begins."  The three films created their own cohesive unit, apart from anything that came before (and potentially anything else the studio tries to tag on).  There were also enough references, both major (the League of Shadows) and minor (Cillian Murphey's brief appearance in each movie) that the movies felt like they belonged together rather than forced together.

I look forward to seeing all three movies - "Batman Begins," "The Dark Knight," and "The Dark Knight Rises" - together to see how Batman evolves from the beginning of the trilogy to the end.  The different films show how he progresses so that, even though he's different at the beginning than at the end, it doesn't feel inconsistent or arbitrary.  Rather, the events in the films have forced him to evolve.

I was pleasantly surprised by Anne Hathaway's performance.  When her part was announced, I had serious doubts.  Instead, her role was one of the most rich and complex characters in the entire series, and she pulled it off in a subtle but convincing way.  I also enjoyed the way that the whole "Hey!  It's Catwoman!" thing wasn't rubbed in the audiences face.  In fact, it was the opposite.  I don't recall the name Catwoman ever being mentioned, and her costume was sleek without being obnoxious.  She was definitely one of the highlights of the film.

"The Dark Knight Rises" was not a perfect film.  It was long, and - worse - felt long.  There were a few plot twists which theoretically added to the drama, but really only managed to complicate things and make them unnecessarily longer.  (For example: The threat of a nuclear explosion in an urban area has enough drama in and of itself.  Why did they need to add the element of "there are three identical trucks and we don't know which truck the bomb is on" except to add a couple of extra scenes?)

Last, but not least: I heard Tom Hardy just fine.  I'm not sure what everyone else was complaining about.

Unforgiven

Directed by: Clint Eastwood

Written by: David Webb Peoples

Hands down, one of the best westerns of all time. No further comment.