The Dark Knight Rises (Spoiler-free Review)

As I’m not the world’s hugest Batman fan – I’m bit more of Spider-man fan myself – I’m not sure what tempted me to see the third of Christopher Nolan’s Batman trilogy in Imax at 8:20 on a Friday morning. It was, perhaps, the novelty value of seeing a film that early in the morning and besides I wasn’t obsessed enough to see the 5am – yes, 5am, showing of the film.

Anyway, so it’s down to the business of this review. How does the third cog of the franchise stand up compared to the critically acclaimed ‘The Dark Knight’?

Well in my opinion it is the strongest of the three films, surpassing the OK ‘Batman Begins’ and the slightly over-rated ‘The Dark Knight’ to become the highlight of the trilogy.

And, I’m happy to say, it’s a vast improvement over the lacklustre ‘The Avengers’ film of a month or so ago.

‘The Dark Knight Rises’ is set eight years after the events of its predecessor and sees Gotham Batman-less and Bruce Wayne a recluse. But when a cunning cat burglar breaks into his safe and a mask-wearing mercenary turns up on the scene intent on destroying Gotham as finalising his leader’s ambitions, a series of events is set in motion that brings the Batman back to save Gotham from destruction on a scale even grander than that of the Joker’s doing in ‘The Dark Knight’.

Much has been said about the film about the difficulties of hearing the voice of Bane, the main villain for this piece, but I have to say either they were wrong or work has been done on it. That said, there are many moments in the piece where he is impossible to understand but that’s not just confined to him. Gary Oldman as Commissioner Gordon and Christian Bale as Batman, who are both excellent in the film, equally are difficult to hear in parts of the film.

Plot wise I feel the film was stronger than the second. Though lacking the cunning tricks and set-ups of the Joker, especially in the boat scene, the plotting of elements that form the main plot and the neat ties with the first films in the trilogy are much more satisfying than in the previous film and the two-and-a-three-quarter running time flies by. That’s not to say there aren’t some less than satisfying sections, such as the sign posting of the elements of the conclusion, a disappointing end to one character’s arc and some plot elements lifted from ‘Spider-man 2’ but there are some cracking, tense scenes that really get your hands sweaty and several twists as the plot unfurls, and the action never seemed to stop with the plot being mostly continuously interesting.

Much will be said about the ending and I’ll leave it at that but I think it’s expected, but enjoyable and ties things up nicely.

Christian Bale as Batman is on par with the other films but gets to play a different side to him in this. In fact you’ll be surprised by how little Batman is actually on the screen with Bruce Wayne getting much more screen time allowing his character to grow. Alfred, his butler, is played with a large amount of Cockney matched only by a large amount of tears and, though he is absent for much of the film, does bring a large level of emotion and feeling to the film. Gary Oldman as Commissioner Gordon doesn’t have a massive amount to do in the film but does get to be involved with several action scenes, and it’s nice to see some cameo returns for previous characters.

Tom Hardy was great as Bane and held the screen as much as Heath Ledger did in the first film and was just as exciting a villain. His voice, when you could understand it, was suitable and there was some nice backstory filled out for his character. His costume was distinctive and his fighting scenes well done and he was a credible threat. But it was Anne Hathaway as Selina Kyle who I enjoyed more as a villain, and not because her costume was particularly sexy. Her progression from the film was enjoyable as her character changes as she gets more involved with the plotting.

Joseph Gordon-Levitt was a welcome addition to the cast as John Blake, carrying a lot of the film himself and feeling like he’s always been part of the series, and Morgan Freeman was enjoyable as Lucius Fox, once more employing some great technology.

Musically I wouldn’t say the film was any great shakes. The use of heavy bass at key points symbolised the power of Bane well but the music never really stood out to me. The CGI, for what little there seemed to be, was convincing and the portrayal of Gotham, especially during the final third, was impressive and put across the feeling of a city in trouble very well.

The cinematography was as excellent as the last film with a great scene of scale and drama but, even though there was more of it in this film, I didn’t get the same buzz of involvement from the IMAX shots as I did in the previous one, but I’m not sure why.

Overall ‘The Dark Knight Rises’ had a lot to live up to following ‘The Dark Knight’ but it achieves and surpasses it. The plot was tight and interesting; the interweaving of the villains well done; and the level of threat credible. The balance between locations and the feel of a more ensemble affair made the movie and though the twist ending wasn’t unobvious and the conclusion did amble into sentimentality – but I did enjoy this – and the music not particular over-whelming, this was a triumph for the cast and crew, rounding off and tying up the trilogy nicely, offering a realistic take on a comic book, whilst also offering a future strand if the story is continued rather than rebooted.

After my personal disappointment with ‘The Avengers’ and the so-so ‘The Amazing Spider-man’ this was a comic book film to enjoy even for someone with no particular interest in comic books.

9/10