Harry Potter and the Order of the Phoenix

Interesting to note about the books: as the series progressed, the publisher simply stopped editing Rowling’s text. That’s why the books got bigger and bigger with each entry. (That, and they realized they could charge more for heavier tomes.) That presents a problem if you’re adapting them into movies. Sprawling texts are problematic but viable in print, whereas including everything, kitchen sink and all, won’t work for a movie. Thus, some parts have to be left out, and you start to see that effect at this stage of the series. Some characters and subplots—or at least plot elements—are eliminated noticeably here, for the sake of avoiding a four-hour film. Those excisions don’t necessarily hurt the story—arguably, it improves the tale’s overall flow—but fans of the series will recognize the absences. Still, this outing provides an experience consistent with the rest of the series, and as we established in the earlier reviews, this enterprise achieved its goals, if little more. Meaning: a satisfying experience for almost all viewers. Presto cinemo! 

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban

I was probably too harsh when I reviewed the first two movies in this series. Of course, that was some twenty years ago, and I was much younger then, and must have had some sort of bee in my bonnet. Ironically, now that I’m old I find it easier to be forgiving toward a film intended for children. That’s not to say I think this is a masterpiece, by any means. There still are some issues with the presentation here, particularly around certain characters being too predictably themselves, which is to say, too one dimensional—but that really traces back to the source material (the books). The plain fact is, this flick serves its purpose, which is to bring to life a much loved story with as much fidelity as fans could possibly expect. It’s watchable and does its job. Maybe not a work of wizardry, but hardly cause for damnation, either. 

Darkest Hour

It's hard to believe that Winston Churchill, of all people, was ever so wracked with doubt. The presence of such a questionable dramatic element suggests this film is less biography and more a movie with a message. No doubt, in our uncertain age, it is elevating to be reminded that courage can be found--indeed, sometimes springs forth from--the bleakest of circumstances. That example is aided considerably by Gary Oldman's lead performance; the veteran actor so thoroughly inhabits his role that he is almost unrecognizable. It's good work, to be sure, and the result is mostly engrossing and entertaining, but you can't ever really put aside the idea that you're watching hagiography, not biography or history. That awareness may temper your viewing experience to slightly less than what it should be--but that's still more than good enough to win the moment, or the hour (or two).

Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy

See, here’s the thing about spies: if they’re doing their jobs right, you’re not supposed to know what they’re up to. Seems that the spies in this movie are on that ball--for a good stretch of the flick’s running time, I couldn’t tell what was going on. Despite that handicap, and almost in spite of itself, the film does eventually grow into an engrossing viewing experience. By the end, when Oldman’s George Smiley has worked through the problem, you care about how it all plays out. This is clearly not everyone’s kind of film, but if you’ve got a thing for the spy genre and a high tolerance for opacity, you might enjoy this one.

The Dark Knight Rises

A satisfying conclusion to Nolan's trilogy. Much more of a sequel to Batman Begins than its immediate predecessor--though that film has its impact here, too--this installment focuses strongly on the emotional life of its key characters, with heartening results when all is said and done. Even so, this is still a big, sweeping epic action hero movie, and it delivers the spectacle as well. One sour note: either I'm losing my hearing, or the sound mix was really poor (either in the theater or in the digital film; I couldn't particularly tell); either way, I could not hear far too much of the dialogue in the action sequences. There's also some muddle to the plot, especially early on, but a lot of that becomes clearer when you step back and look at the big picture. And this is, indeed, a big picture--and even worth the inflated ticket price of today's theater experience.

The Book of Eli

When the surprise twist comes at the end, it is--given all that has gone before it--utterly preposterous, almost to the point of dishonesty on the part of the filmmakers. That flaw almost ruins an otherwise entertaining bit of post-apocalyptic hoo-hah. The presence of two old pros--Denzel Washington and Gary Oldman, who are incapable of giving a bad performance--goes a long way towards redeeming the storytelling misdeeds. In sum, it's uneven, but worth a look if you have the time and indulgence.

The Dark Knight

Holy shit. This is what you'd have if William Blake had drawn comic books: not just an action hero story, but a true vision of Hell--a realistic vision of Hell, an all-too-possible vision of Hell. The mayhem in Gotham City is what happens when the "terrorists" stop having rational motivations; when it's all about madness & randomness, when the violent act is the only end in and of itself. No wonder this movie has affected so many people (to the tune of so many millions of dollars). I too was blown away, not so much by this film as a piece of moviemaking; more so for the deep waters in which it treads. There's so much here that you can almost forget the amazing performance by Heath Ledger (if not for the publicity, you simply wouldn't know it was him under that make-up) and forgive the few minor faults. I wouldn't necessarily call it a masterpiece, but this is truly a film worth seeing. Posted .

Lost in Space

Not truly awful--Gary Oldman is always good for a few nice moments--but not really necessary.