REVIEW: Vantage Point

Vantage Point

Year: 2008
Director: Pete Travis
Starring: Dennis Quaid, Matthew Fox, Forest Whitaker, Saïd Taghmaoui, William Hurt
Distributor: Columbia Pictures
MPAA: Rated PG-13

When I first saw the trailer for Vantage Point in theaters early this year, I wasn't interested. I thought the trailer looked mediocre and not something Id spend my money on seeing. Looks like I was right again because the film wasn't well received by critics. The strange thing was that the ratings didn't stop this movie from being successful. The film managed to gross an estimated $150 million worldwide on a simple budget of $40 million. I decided to wait for the DVD to review this film since alot of people said it wasn't that good.

Plot Outline:
President Ashton (William Hurt) is in Spain for a world summit on terrorism. His Secret Service team includes Agent Kent Taylor (Matthew Fox) and Agent Thomas Barnes (Dennis Quaid) who took a bullet for the president in the past. However, the experience has left him shaken and only Taylor's good word keeps him on this assignment. While at the summit, an assassination attempt on the President and a bomb going off causes a big stir. Also in Spain are several other random individuals who would never cross each other's path. American tourist Howard Lewis (Forest Whitaker) and Spanish police officer Enrique (Eduardo Noriega) are about to cross paths in ways they never thought possible until that day.

Plot:
The film's concept sounds very interesting and one that could have worked pretty well if it were nicely executed. The plot is told through a series of flashbacks in someones point of view or as some people like to say, vantage points. This makes the film interesting because it rewinds parts of the film to go with the story. The only problem is that they do this about eight different times and it can get pretty damn aggravating. Not only that, but these flashbacks lack some serious character development. We have no idea who these eight different people are and why they are important to the story. The movie also has a plot hole that really makes the whole film seem kind of useless. The ending also seems rushed and not thought out well. On top of that, the movie also has some minor problems that you can really notice if you pay close attention. I wont name all of them, but one of them is when Agent Barnes is running and shooting at a car. He fires 25 to 30 bullets on a pistol that carries about 12 to 16. Like I said, these are only minor, but their are alot of them. With all of this said, the film can still be somewhat entertaining. We get alot of stuff that blow up and even a car chase.

Cast:
The cast for Vantage Point is another weak aspect of the film. Dennis Quaid plays as Thomas Barnes and he doest give a performance that I would have expected from him. He usually tends to perform well in movies, but hes just so average here. I didn't believe his acting for one bit. Matthew Fox plays as Kent Taylor and I kind of laughed a couple times at his work. He doesn't give a performance that's worth watching and I just found his character to be so dumb and funny when hes suppose to be a serious agent. Forest Whitaker plays as Howard Lewis and he feels pretty wasted here. After his Oscar performance in The Last King of Scotland, I was expecting alot from him here and yet I was disappointed. He seems too calm and worthless in this movie. Saïd Taghmaoui plays as Suarez and he does a decent job here. Nothing too special, but nothing too bad either. We also have William Hurt playing as President Ashton. He too gives a decent performance that's nothing to rave about, but also nothing that's going to bother you.

Picture:
The visual look of Vantage Point is probably the films strongest point. This is a great looking movie. I didn't notice any CGI effects and the films source is an excellent condition with no film grain which shouldn't come as a surprise since the film was released early this year. Colors are lively and pretty to look at. The film has many different scenes where colors truly pop out and look wonderful. Blacks are inky and very strong. Flesh tones are somewhat off at times, but pretty consistent for the most part. Detail is very strong and really impressive. Close up shots and the environment reveal alot of detail. The film is also razor sharp and what a recent DVD should look like.

Sound:
The soundtrack is pretty good and seems to fit the movie. The music is composed by Atli Örvarsson who hasn't done much big budget films in the past. His score seems perfectly fine for the movie and is used pretty effectively. Scenes feature music that tends to go well with the action. The films also got an impressive amount of bass. It ain't up to the level of something like The Incredible Hulk, but its definitely good for a movie like this. Dynamics are full and loud. The explosions sound great and the way it should sound. This ain't demo material, but is definitely enough to satisfy most people.

Conclusion:
Vantage Point had a good concept, but it wasn't executed right. The story starts out interesting, but becomes a hassle to watch. It feels like I'm in Sunday school trying to figure each little thing out instead of watching a great movie. Their are some parts that can be entertaining, but these get overshadowed by its many problems that any smart person would notice if they looked hard enough. The cast is mostly poor with many of them not performing as strong as I would have liked them to. This movie has many talented actors and yet they don't give it their best. The visual look of the film is great and the movie is nicely detailed. The soundtrack works and features some good bass work. If you have to see it no matter what, Id probably give it a rent than. As for everyone else, id skip it.

Grade: D+

REVIEW: Leatherheads

Leatherheads

Year: 2008
Director: George Clooney
Starring: George Clooney, Renée Zellweger, John Krasinski, Jonathan Pryce, Stephen Root
Distributor: Universal Pictures
MPAA: Rated PG-13

Leatherheads was intended to come out in 1993 until former president of production at Universal Pictures, Casey Silver left the studio to become an independent producer. The script and movie was put on hold for awhile until Clooney came on board. When a movie that was suppose to come out 15 years ago ends up coming out now, it only spells trouble. The film only managed to gross an estimated $41 million worldwide on a budget of $58 million. Not only did the film not make its budget back, but it also received mixed reviews from critics. I really wanted to see this film when I first caught sight of the trailer. I thought it looked fun and exciting, but I wasn't able to catch it in theaters.

Plot Outline:
Jimmy "Dodge" Connelly (George Clooney) is the leader of the Duluth Bulldogs, an amateur American football team whose fortunes have gone the way of the black sheep. Losing team members as well as matches, he hatches a plan to recruit war hero and Princeton star Carter "The Bullet" Rutherford (John Krasinski), the nation's biggest and best loved college player. Only thing is, not everyone believes Bullet is quite the golden boy he claims to be. Dispatched to scoop the truth is reporter Lexie Littleton (Renee Zellweger) who ends up falling in love with both Connelly and Rutherford.

Plot:
I have to agree with some critics here because I too felt that the story for Leatherheads is a mixed bag. While the story isn't really bad, it just doesn't click. It never stays on one path and ends up adding more ideas. In the end we get a sequence of romantic rivalries filled with dull sexy moments of flirtation. The dialogue tends to drag and feels somewhat corny. I know this was meant to be a screwball type comedy, but even then I think the dialogue drags on. The ending could have also used alittle more work. With this said, Leatherheads can still be fun. I know the concept of it may sound boring and dumb on paper, but its actually refreshing. The story ain't great, but its fun and nicely directed by George Clooney. The movie has some jokes that can be pretty funny and fits in the nature of this film. We also get many football scenes that are exciting and fun to watch. All of this mixed with the great 30's and 40's music can result in some form of entertainment.

Cast:
George Clooney plays as Jimmy 'Dodge' Connelly and hes nicely casted here. Sure hes not giving out Oscar performances, but I found his character to be very enjoyable especially since its Clooney that's playing him. Renée Zellweger plays as Lexie Littleton and she fits in very nicely. Her clothing and style of voice easily matches the films setting. She shows alot of charisma and humor that I found to be pretty refreshing. I did think her dialogue with Clooney was very corny and somewhat childish, but these aren't big issues that will keep you from enjoying this movie. John Krasinski plays as Carter "The Bullet" Rutherford and hes fun here too. I love "The Office" so its very nice to see Jim...I mean Krasinski playing in big roles like this. I thought he did a good job here even though his character kind of felt like Jim Halpert from "The Office". We also have Jonathan Pryce playing as C.C. Frazier and its nice to finally see him away from the Pirate movies. He gives a nice little performance here. Nothing special, but far from bring bad.

Picture:
The visual look of Leatherheads is pretty great. The film doesn't feature any CGI so we don't have to worry about fake looking animations. I did notice some film grain here and their, but Its very minimal. I think its more of the films look considering its a gritty type of football movie. Colors are pretty impressive for the most part. The film has many scenes outdoor or indoor that really show many wonderful colors. Even when their outdoors, the color never fails to amaze me. Flesh tones are alittle off, but look generally good for the most part. Detail is very good, but not good to the level of 21 which was the last film I reviewed. Their are scenes where the characters faces have a good amount of detail on them. Its only when their far away that some shots seem soft.

Sound:
The soundtrack in Leatherheads is nicely made and used very effectively. Composer Randy Newman who also scored the music for Toy Story 2 and Seabiscuit, does a fine job here. His score easily fits the atmosphere of the film and is very impressive. We get a ton of music that I think is mostly from the 30's to the 40's. These all sound very good and keeps the story from being a bore fest. The movie also has some nice bass that seems enough for a movie like this. It isn't as great or loud as the ever so popular "Cloverfield", but I think its enough to satisfy you. Its got plenty of rumbles that are mostly heard when their playing football in the fields. But when you got music like the ones in this movie mixed with some bass, you get a great soundtrack.

Conclusion:
Leatherheads can be pretty fun at times. Sure the story ain't perfect with its bad use of dialogue and somewhat messy plot, but its still enjoyable. I thought the cast was fine with alot of them giving performances that shouldn't disappoint. The visual look of the movie is somewhat gritty and full of lovely colors. The soundtrack is a joy to listen to and seems to fit the movie very nicely. If your into screwball comedies like this then Id definitely give Leatherheads a rent. Its not great, but its worth checking out if your bored.

Grade: C

REVIEW: 21

21

Year: 2008
Director: Robert Luketic
Starring: Jim Sturgess, Kevin Spacey, Kate Bosworth, Laurence Fishburne, Aaron Yoo
Distributor: Columbia Pictures
MPAA: Rated PG-13

21 was released in late March of this year and it was a good success. The film that was made for only $35 million grossed over $155 million worldwide at the box office. It easily passed its budget and went on to become one of the sleeper hits of this year. I personally didn't care much about the movie when it was in theaters. The trailers I saw for the movie looked alright, but nothing that made me jump up in excitement. So I decided that Id just wait for the DVD instead of paying $10 bucks for a movie that I'm not really interested in.

Plot Outline:
Ben Campbell (Jim Sturgess) is a shy, but brilliant MIT student who wants to enroll at Harvard Medical School once he graduates. He only has to come up with $300,000 for tuition. His math professor, Micky Rosa (Kevin Spacey), recognizes his genius for numbers and invites him to join his special "math club," a group of fellow students who make weekly trips to Las Vegas to beat the casinos by counting cards at blackjack. The Vegas lifestyle soon seduces Ben and so does his sexy teammate Jill Taylor (Kate Bosworth). Cautiously watching all of this is Cole Williams (Laurence Fishburne) the casino's security chief who is trying to figure out why the weekly kid never tends to lose a hand.

Plot:
The story is based on the book "Bringing Down the House" by Ben Mezrich. Having not read the book, I cant comment on how close the movie stays faithful the book. The actual story for the movie is somewhat of a mixed bag. The film would have been totally boring if it was just counting cards the whole time so luckily it isn't. The writers tried to add in some type of story so it isn't just counting cards the whole time. This makes the movie less boring and something to actually look forward too, but it doesn't really click. The film ends up being longer than it should be and feels somewhat stretched out. The plot also tends to get repetitive with things happening over again and again. The story is also pretty much straight forward and can be predictable from time to time. I don't think the book had enough material to make a movie out of it. With that said, 21 can still be pretty fun. It has enough suspense to keep you entertained and doesn't go off track. Watching the characters count cards for the first few times is pretty cool. The story also starts off interesting with the main character being introduced to counting cards.

Cast:
The cast for 21 is pretty solid. Jim Sturgess plays as Ben Campbell and he does a pretty good job here. I think he was good for the part and I really enjoyed his work here. I did however think that he was bad at being excited when he won each time. Kevin Spacey plays as Prof. Micky Rosa and he too does a good job here. I enjoyed his performance and thought he was very much suitable for this character even though he doesn't have too much screen time. Kate Bosworth plays as Jill Taylor and shes pretty average here. I didn't think she was giving it her best and I thought she was rather flat at times. I think someone else could have easily replaced her for this role. Laurence Fishburne plays as Cole Williams and hes as great as ever. I thought he fit the shoes for this character and really had me convinced he was this evil guy trying to stop the people who count cards. Just like Spacey, Fishburne doesn't have alot of screen time so basically hes just in the background.

Picture:
The visual look of 21 is really great. You wouldn't expect a card game movie like this to feature any CGI and yet it does. The movie has many close up shots of chips moving and these are all CGI. They look pretty good as far as special effects, but too much CGI is really unnecessary for a movie like this. I couldn't detect any film grain which shouldn't come as a surprise considering the film was just released a couple months ago. Colors look bold and vibrant at times. This isn't a colorful film, but it does contain some nice colors especially when their playing in the casinos. Detail is pretty strong and the movie tends to look really great. Close up shots reveal a whole lot of detail on the cast members. The slot machines and card tables all look nicely detailed.

Sound:
The soundtrack in 21 is also very good. The score is composed by newcomer David Sardy and he does a nice job here. His score feels relatively right for a movie like this and its very much used effectively. We also get many other music in the film from various artists. These music all sound great and go well with whats being shown on the screen. I enjoyed listening to each and every one of them. You wouldn't expect a whole lot in terms of bass for a movie like this and yet it surprised me. The film features some good bass work that goes well with the films soundtrack. It isn't as aggressive like the one in Doomsday, but it perfectly fits the films mood. This is a solid soundtrack.

Conclusion:
21 has an interesting concept and one that is pretty cool to see. The film is based on a book that I don't think has enough material to make it into a full length movie. The story although entertaining can be pretty predictable and repetitive. The cast is mostly solid with many of them giving good performances. The visual look of the film is great and features some good amount of detail. The soundtrack is full of various songs from many different people and they all sound wonderful. 21 is worth watching if your into card type movies because it can be fun at times. As for everyone else, Id give it a good rent.

Grade: C

REVIEW: Doomsday

Doomsday

Year: 2008
Director: Neil Marshall
Starring: Rhona Mitra, Bob Hoskins, David O'Hara, Craig Conway, Adrian Lester
Distributor: Rogue Pictures
MPAA: Rated R

When I first saw the trailer for Doomsday, I thought it looked kind of cool. Sure the story seemed un-original and dark, but it still looked like a fun movie. Not only that, but the director of this movie directed The Descent which alot of people said was pretty good. I pretty much enjoy watching low budget movies like this because I think they can be somewhat fun at times. Luckily my friend had seen the movie before me and convinced me to not see it. He thought it was decent, but not worth paying 10 bucks for. So I waited for the inevitable DVD release in which I can give a review for.

Plot Outline:
It's 2035 and a deadly virus has turned Scotland into a massive isolation center populated by crazed tattooed people. When the virus unexpectedly reoccurs in London, female cop Eden Sinclair (Rona Mitra) is recruited by her boss Bill Nelson (Bob Hoskins), to go over the wall into Scotland once her homeland in the hope of finding an antidote. She takes with her a crack team of soldiers to find the one man still inside who might have found the cure. But life behind the wall has changed over the past years and not for the better. Meanwhile, the clock is ticking to save Britain.

Plot:
The story of Doomsday is decent at best. The plot feels like a mix between the Mad Max movies and 28 Days Later. The film doesn't do anything new to set itself apart from many other movies in the same genre. The story sounds interesting on paper and even looks that way at the start of the film, but it really isn't. It tries too hard to accomplish too little. Theirs too much going on with many things happening from one corner to another. We have crazed tattooed people in the first half than it introduces us to medieval type people in the second. It would have been better if the story just stuck to one path instead of throwing more ideas in. The ending also feels a bit weak and could have been better. With that said, the movie can still be somewhat fun. Theirs alot of action and good explosions. I like how the crew made the film so bloody and gory. There are plenty of scenes that show some awesome, but bloody kills. I also found the film to have some character development in the main character even though it really isn't much.

Cast:
The cast of Doomsday is about average. Rhona Mitra plays as Eden Sinclair. I'm not sure if she was right for this role and I think someone else could have easily filled her shoes. She doesn't give a performance that wowed me, but I still thought she was decent as her character. Shes also very damn sexy in this film. I know she always looks good in her movies, but she looks fantastic here. Bob Hoskins plays as Bill Nelson and he does a pretty good job. I don't think he gave it his best like he did in Unleashed, but I think that was just the script and not him. David O'Hara plays as Michael Canaris and he seems flat here. His character is so dull and mostly un-interesting. Craig Conway plays as Sol and he does a decent job here. I think he gave a performance that I thought looked right, but his character is way too over the top. I found it really surprising that his character managed to become the leader of the infected people.

Picture:
The visual look of Doomsday is really good. The film was just released a couple of months ago so its source is in great condition. I didn't notice any film grain and thought the image was pretty smooth from start to finish. Colors seem slightly muted at times, but also very vibrant in a couple scenes. The color black is very strong in the film which shouldn't come as a surprise since most the scenes are at night. The scenes we have in the day are also wonderfully lit and pretty cool to look at. Skin tones seem accurate and tend to have a warm feeling. Detail is surprisingly really good. For a movie that's mostly at night, I wasn't expecting the detail to hold up well, but I was wrong. Close up shots show alot and car explosions look nicely detailed.

Sound:
The soundtrack in Doomsday is also very impressive. The original music is done by Tyler Bates who also did the soundtrack for the 2004 Dawn of the Dead and 300. His score for the film isn't used as much as I would have liked, but it still sounds pretty good. It goes well with the atmosphere of the film. Their are also plenty of other music in the movie. I haven't seen a movie that had this much music in it. There all good and fit nicely with whats going on in the scene. The bass is also great at times. While I wouldn't consider it demo material, but its still packing enough punch to satisfy you. The movie has many action scenes including a car chase near the end and all of this meets the bass. It delivers on being loud and aggressive.

Conclusion:
Doomsday doesn't do anything new to set itself apart from others. It takes the ingredients from films such as Mad Max and 28 Days Later to combine it into one. The story although entertaining at times isn't really good with too many things happening. The cast is decent with most of them giving out performances that are average at best. I still think Rhona Mitra is hot as hell in this movie. The visual look of the film is really good with alot of nice colors and detailed scenes. The soundtrack is lively and is always used. Each scene features music that goes well with whats going on. I wouldn't recommend this movie for those seeking something great. It might be a rental at best just for those fun scenes.

Grade: D+

REVIEW: Jumper

Jumper

Year: 2008
Director: Doug Liman
Starring: Hayden Christensen, Jamie Bell, Rachel Bilson, Samuel L. Jackson, Diane Lane
Distributor: Twentieth Century-Fox Film Corporation
MPAA: Rated PG-13

When Jumper intentionally hit theaters early this year, I wasn't sure if I wanted to see it. It just didn't look like a movie that was going to be any good. The trailers however convinced me other wise. They kept mentioning from the director of The Bourne Identity and Mr. & Mrs. Smith. This kept me kind of interested because I happened to enjoy both of those movies. What ultimately made my decision to not see the movie was its reviews. Despite grossing over $220 million worldwide, Jumper didn't fair well to critics with most of them complaining about its story. So with that in mind, I decided to wait for the DVD and hoped to review it someday.

Plot Outline:
David Rice (Hayden Christensen) is a young man who quite literally gets away from his grim family life by teleporting to another place with the power of his mind. Years later, David is using his powers to raid bank vaults, seduce girls in London and sit a top the pyramids. He soon discovers that he is not the only one bestowed with this unique gift, and all is not well in the world of jumpers. After jumping back to Michigan to get reacquainted with his long lost love Millie Harris (Rachel Bilson), David makes the acquaintance of experienced jumper Griffin (Jamie Bell). Griffin tells him of a secret between jumpers and a shadowy group that seeks to destroy them such as Roland (Samuel L. Jackson) who view jumpers as a threat to all mankind, and make it their mission to eliminate them.

Plot:
The movie is based on Steven Gould's novel with the same name. The movie pretty much follows the novel at the start of the movie, but goes off in another direction half way through. The plot has an interesting concept that would have made for a killer trilogy, but it completely fails to deliver. We don't get answers to many of the questions the film leaves you with such as the connection between the jumpers and the people who are trying to kill them. Also the story with David's mother. Not only that, but the film tries to hide all of this with its special effects which are great by the way. The characters also feel somewhat plastic and pretty dull. Theirs hardly any character development which often results in no chemistry between the main characters. I think the studio should have sticked with the script by David S. Goyer which followed the novel really closely instead of going with another script which replaced parts of the novel with action scenes. With that said, Jumper is still pretty entertaining. Its cool to see the main character David jumping all over the world in the blink of an eye.

Cast:
Hayden Christensen plays as David Rice and he gives an almost emotionless performance. His acting just wasn't convincing me and I know he can do better if he tries like he did in Episode III. Jamie Bell plays as Griffin and hes probably the only one in the film that I thought gave a very good performance. Hes witty and relaxed the way he should be. I remember him playing in Peter Jackson's King Kong which he had a decent role in. Its nice to see him somewhere in the lead this time. Rachel Bilson plays as Millie Harris and I kind of liked her in this role. She doesn't have much chemistry with Christensen, but I still liked that she was somewhat sophisticated. Samuel L. Jackson plays as Roland and he kind of surprised me. Honestly, when I first saw the trailer for Jumper, I just thinking "what the hell is Jackson doing in a movie like this". Than I saw the movie and thought he wasn't that bad in it. He doesn't really make for a good villain, but I still thought he gave a pretty good performance in his role.

Picture:
The visual effects for Jumper are simply great. The movie was just released early this year so the films source is in excellent shape. I didn't notice any film grain and the image was clean through out the movie. Colors are pretty eye popping and very stylized. Their are some scenes where it seems like its somewhat oversaturated, but it looks vibrant for the most part. The film has many scenes where it shows its wonderful colors and this is mostly when David is seen in different locations. Flesh tones look pretty accurate with maybe some scenes alittle off. Detail is very clear and sharp. Environments look highly detailed and show alot of clarity. Close up shots show alot on the characters faces. The movie also contains many CGI footage that looks great. Animations look real and similar to those found in real life. This is a great looking movie that will end up being demo material.

Sound:
The soundtrack in Jumper is very lively. The movie is scored by composer John Powell who also composed other hits such as X-Men: The Last Stand and The Bourne Ultimatum. The movies score is almost non-existent and hardly feels like its been used enough. The only real time we get to listen to it is during the end credits. Even with that, Jumper still features other music from various artists. All these music sound great and seems to go well with the films style. Bass is cranked up high and loud. Jumper has many scenes that use its bass to the limit. You can hear the rumble when someone jumps to another place. Dynamics hold up really well and show some aggressive use for the films rocking bass. This is easily reference material and something Id use to demo off my surround sound.

Conclusion:
Jumper has an interesting concept that could have easily been made into a great film, but its under developed script brings it down a notch. The story although somewhat entertaining feels sloppy and a bit rushed. We get left with many questions that don't get answers too. The cast is average at best with most of them giving out decent performances. The visual effects for the movie are simply great and awesome to look at. The soundtrack is rocking with some strong bass and good music. This movie might be worth checking out if your bored and looking for some fun. Just make sure to have an open mind and not pay too much attention to its story. Here's hoping the sequel which they made it obvious near the end turns out better.

Grade: C-

REVIEW: The Dark Knight

The Dark Knight

Year: 2008
Director: Christopher Nolan
Starring: Christian Bale, Heath Ledger, Aaron Eckhart, Maggie Gyllenhaal, Michael Caine
Distributor: Warner Bros. Pictures
MPAA: Rated PG-13

So when it was announced that the sequel to Begins was in the works with director Christopher Nolan returning, fans were stoked. When Warner Bros. finally announced the name of the sequel to Begins, fans around the world were confused. They were angry that Batman wasn't in the title and it was the first Batman film to not have the Batman name in the title. Than came the biggest shocker of all, the casting of Heath Ledger as the Joker. Fans were frustrated as to why the producers went with Ledger instead of someone like Crispin Glover or Paul Bettany. People just didn't think the Australian actor could pull off someone as evil as the Joker. After a couple movie trailers later, people stopped complaining about everything and The Dark Knight ended up being one of the most anticipated titles of 2008.

Plot Outline:
Batman a.k.a Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) and Liutenant Gordon (Gary Oldman) with the help of the new District Attorney Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhart) have smashed crime to the point where they are beginning to run scared. Bruce is beginning to think that soon he may be able to hang up the cape and cowl for good and reunite with Rachel Dawes (Maggie Gyllenhaal). However, the mob has one last resort up it's sleeve and it's a proposal by a criminal known only to the citizens of Gotham as the Joker (Heath Ledger). The Joker, however, has an agenda entirely of his own and soon begins to cause terror on a massed scale which has even Batman lost for ideas.

Plot:
The story for The Dark Knight is simply astonishing. I raved about Christopher Nolan's directing in Begins, but I think he does an even better job here. The plot is engaging and yet exciting at the same time. The story had me interested through out the movie and it really delivered. It picks up right after Begins as we get introduced to new villains and new faces that are fun to see. The action is more intense and bigger this time around. I still love director Nolan's attention to detail and its present here too. You can see he really based the characters off the comics and stayed faithful to their comic counter parts. If I had to nitpick on certain things, Its that we don't get an origin to the Joker. Their are a few scenes where we get some background info on him, but nothing really detailed. The movies length is also what I found to be a slight problem. Now, I'm not the person who hates long movies because I think we get what our money's worth. With that said, I think The Dark Knight could have been a little shorter. The movie is about two hours and thirty mins and yet it feels like three. I think some small parts could have been cut or shortened. This is the same thing that happened with King Kong which was a great movie, but was long. These are my small nitpicks on what is still a fantastic movie.

Cast:
The cast for the film is one of the best I have seen in some time. Christian Bale reprises his role as Batman/Bruce Wayne and he gives a good performance. While I still think Keaton gave the better Batman, Bale easily comes close. His character is alot more relaxed this time around and more charismatic. We have the late Heath Ledger playing as The Joker and he gives a sensational performance. Ledger is easily the star of the movie and its really sad he couldn't be here today to see his work on the big screen. Hes Joker performance easily outshines Jack Nicholson's Joker in the first Batman film. Hes more sadistic and more insane than any other Joker we have seen in the past. Aaron Eckhart plays as Two-Face/Harvey Dent and he too gives a good performance. I enjoyed him as Harvey Dent and liked him as Two-Face. He seems like a nice guy as Dent, but serious as Two-Face. Replacing Katie Holmes as Rachel Dawes is Maggie Gyllenhaal. I personally think Holmes was better and simply because I'm not a big fan of Gyllenhaal. Maybe its because I hate recasts that I didn't enjoy Gyllenhaal's work here.

Picture:
The visual look of The Dark Knight is superb. Begins wasn't too dark or too light compared to the previous Batman films. Director Christopher Nolan takes a more different route this time around making the film alittle more darker which isn't a bad thing because I liked the Burton films for this. Just like with Begins, their isn't a whole lot of CGI since Nolan doesn't like them. However, their is more CGI in this film than in Begins and they all look great. Having just been released, The Dark Knight benefits from a pristine source. Their wasn't any film grain and the image looked really smooth. Colors look pretty vibrant and great for the most part. Theirs more day light scenes now compared to what was in Begins and all of these look great. Blacks are thick and very inky. Skin tones are spot on perfect and have a warm feeling to them. Detail is truly remarkable with alot of things looking very crisp. One of the best looking movies to come out this year.

Sound:
The soundtrack for The Dark Knight is amazingly thunderous. Composer James Newton Howard who scored Batman Begins returns once again to score this film. He uses the same score from the last one, but makes improvements. The new score sounds more lively and thrilling. I still think this easily rivals the one Danny Elfman made for the Tim Burton versions. Howard also constructs other orchestral music that not only adds to the tension of the film, but also makes the scene better. Now the most impressive part about the films soundtrack is simply the bass. Batman Begins had a very strong bass that easily satisfied me, but The Dark Knight takes that to a whole new level. The bass was rocking the theater and its easily one of the best I have heard. The sequel contains much more action scenes that really showcase its bass. Dynamics easily hold up and are really full. It never fails and delivers punch to punch. This will be my new demo disc when it comes to DVD.

Conclusion:
The Dark Knight is every bit as great as Batman Begins and more. Not that many sequels these days can live up to its original in terms of story and quality, but that's not the case here. Christopher Nolan has directed a film that's easily become the best Batman film to date and almost a master piece. The story is mesmerizing and exciting. It will keep you on the edge of your seat and keep you interested until the movie is finished. The cast is great with the late Heath Ledger giving a performance that's worth an admission alone. Hes work here couldn't have been done by any actor other than him and I'm glad he went out with a bang. The visual look of the movie is marvelous with everything being as crystal clean as it could be. The soundtrack is thunderous and will definitely put your surround sound to the test. I don't have to think twice about recommending this movie. Its easily the one of the best movies to come out this year.

Grade: A-

REVIEW: Batman Begins

Batman Begins

Year: 2005
Director: Christopher Nolan
Starring: Christian Bale, Liam Neeson, Cillian Murphy, Katie Holmes, Michael Caine
Distributor: Warner Bros. Pictures
MPAA: Rated PG-13

After the disaster that was Batman & Robin, Warner Bros. really had no choice, but to reboot the series. Their was no way that they can continue from that and expect sales when the last film turned out to be a flop. Director Darren Aronofsky who directed other great movies such as Pi and Requiem for a Dream was slated to direct a new reboot of Batman. He was going to direct it based on the graphic novel "Batman: Year One". However, the guys at Warner Bros. put a stop on the production because they thought the script strayed far from the source material. Then the studio executives were impressed by director Nolan for his work on Memento and asked him to direct the new Batman film. Nolan agreed and set out to make the best Batman film ever.

Plot Outline:
Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) travels the world starting fights with thugs and petty criminals to shadow over his guilt over the death of his parents, Thomas Wayne (Linus Roache) and Martha Wayne (Sara Stewart). He is greeted by the mysterious Henri Ducard (Liam Neeson), who promises that he and legendary warrior Ra's Al Ghul (Ken Watanabe) can teach him to turn fear against those who prey on the fearful. Bruce takes him up on his offer and learns to become a warrior of justice. But when he is asked by his mentor, Ducard, to kill a prisoner, he refuses...claiming that his compassion is the only thing that separates he and his enemies. Bruce is nearly killed as a result, only to survive and return to Gotham and become the hero he was born to be.

Plot:
Christopher Nolan takes over directing duties from Joel Schumacher who directed the last Batman film. Not only does Nolan do a better job directing, but his attention to detail is simply phenomenal. The plot is great and actually has a story that's meaningful. We get an origin to Batman that explains how the dark knight came to be. These are told in a series of flashbacks. Theirs plenty of action and entertainment that shouldn't disappoint fans. The villains we get here aren't really popular like the Joker or Mr. Freeze was, but they are still great. Even though the movie isn't the Year One script that Aronofsky was going to direct, but it still has some elements of that script kind of like easter eggs if you will. Nolan also does a great job really listening to fans of the comics. The movie isn't 100% accurate compared to the comics, but Nolan gets closer to them than any of the previous directors have. Begins is also much darker than the last two Batman films. It isn't dark to the level of Burton's Batman films were, but its definitely darker than Schumacher's versions. Gotham City feels like present day New York which isn't a bad thing since I was getting tired of Gotham being this small old city.

Cast:
The cast of Begins is great and easily outdoes the cast in the previous Batman films. Christian Bale plays as Batman/Bruce Wayne and he gives a great performance. He takes both these characters really seriously and really looks like he wants to please the audience. While I still prefer Michael Keaton as Batman, I think Bale was an excellent replacement. Liam Neeson plays as Henri Ducard and I really enjoyed his work here. I couldn't imagine him as being the bad guy in the film and yet he surprised me. He too looked pretty serious in his role. Cillian Murphy plays as Scarecrow/Dr. Jonathan Crane and he too gives a great performance. I really liked Murphy in Red Eye and he does another fine job here. Katie Holmes plays as Rachel Dawes and I liked her in this movie. I did think she was alittle dull in the beginning, but she proved to be better as the movie went on. I also think she looked great next to Bale. We also have Michael Caine playing as Alfred Pennyworth. He plays a much more lively Alfred compared to Michael Gough, but I think I liked Gough more as Alfred.

Picture:
The visual look of Batman Begins is mostly in the middle with Burton's films on top and Schumacher's on the bottom. Its dark, but not creepy dark. Their isn't a whole lot of CGI used in the film since director Nolan doesn't like them. The movie was just released in 2005 so it comes to no surprise that the film's source is an great shape. I didn't detect any film grain and the image seemed very clean. Colors look wonderfully striking. Sure the movie is shot alot at night, but some of the early scenes are focused in the mountains. These early scenes in the mountains have a nice blue overcast setting to them. Blacks are nice and inky like they should be. Detail is pretty great and noticeable. Environments look very sharp. Since their are no film grain, this results in a clean yet detailed image.

Sound:
The soundtrack in Begins is just as great as the film. Composer James Newton Howard composes a fantastic score that easily rivals the one Elfman created for the first two Batman films. I didn't really enjoy Elliot Goldenthal's score that he composed for Schumacher's Batman films. Even though they were very lively, I always thought they sounded alittle too cartoon-ish. Howard's score goes perfectly with Nolan's directing and easily matches the story. It doesn't sound anything like the previous scores. I'm glad we got a new score for this Batman film since it was a reboot. Bass is very impressive and loud. Their were many scenes where the bass just completely blew me away. Dynamics are strong and aggressive. My surround sound was literally rocking. This is easily my new demo disc to show off.

Conclusion:
Batman Begins is a great film and honestly the best Batman film to date. Christopher Nolan has done a fantastic job here and he really saved this series from dieing. His attention to detail is great and he really sounds like he loves the Batman series. The story is interesting and worth watching. The cast does a great job with everyone giving out some of the best performances I have seen in awhile. The visual look of the movie is dark, but not too dark. Its detailed and free of grain. The soundtrack is bombastic with the film having an impressive score. I can easily recommend this to fans of Batman and for those who want a really great movie. This is the Batman movie we have been waiting for.

Grade: B+

REVIEW: Batman & Robin

Batman & Robin

Year: 1997
Director: Joel Schumacher
Starring: George Clooney, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Chris O'Donnell, Uma Thurman, Alicia Silverstone
Distributor: Warner Bros. Pictures
MPAA: Rated PG-13

After Batman Forever managed to make $336 million worldwide, Warner Bros. wanted to continue milking this franchise until it went sour. Director Joel Schumacher who directed the last movie came back as director of this movie. The only real surprise was that Val Kilmer who was cast as Batman in Forever didn't want to return so the studio went with someone else. This was a huge mistake because just like me, alot of people hate recasts. The studio even went with high paid celebrities for some of its cast. So with all of this, what was the mistake you ask? Easy, the movie as a whole. It was criticized by fans around the world and even some critics as one of the worst Batman films ever. The movie only ended up making $238 million worldwide which is a disappointment considering it was a big franchise.

Plot Outline:
Bruce Wayne (George Clooney) a.k.a Batman and Dick Grayson (Chris O'Donnell) a.k.a Robin are facing Mr. Freeze (Arnold Schwarzenegger), a college professor whose research to find a cure for his wife has gone terribly wrong making his body adapt to the cold. Meanwhile, Pamela Isley (Uma Thurman) becomes another victim of mutation after her colleague professor tried to kill her. She transforms into Poison Ivy, a nature beauty whose kisses are venomous. Mr. Freeze and Poison Ivy team up to take down Batman and Robin. There's also Barbara (Alicia Silverstone), the niece of butler Alfred (Michael Gough), who discovers the batcave and becomes Batgirl.

Plot:
The story of Batman & Robin is simply pathetic. It isn't creative and feels like it should belong in a 30 min TV show. It just doesn't go anywhere and feels like its been done before with other movies. The characters are dull and not even interesting. Not only that, but the series also has gotten so much brighter. When I mean brighter, I mean more gayer. This is suppose to be a Batman film meaning at least some darkness towards the film and yet the producers treated it like some Saturday afternoon cartoon. The movie also has plot holes and completely stays away from the comics. We get nipples on his costume, the characters in the movie aren't portrayed like they are in the comics and many more. I appreciate that the studio added Batgirl and more villains this time, but whats the point of that if their acting and parts in the script aren't good? I cant even tell you how many cheesy lines there are in the movie. Its really bad and overshadows everything. It makes the movie too funny and pretty stupid. I lost count on how many times I laughed my ass off when someone said something. I think Schumacher did a terrible job directing this film, nothing feels right. If I have to say one positive thing about this movie its that it is somewhat mildly entertaining if you looking for some mindless action.

Cast:
The cast is also a mess. George Clooney replaces Kilmer as Batman/Bruce Wayne and doesn't do a good job. I was getting use to Kilmer and instead they give me someone else so damn fast. Clooney doesn't even convince me hes Batman. His voice sounds way to similar to his Wayne side instead of sounding alittle different. and hes just not that serious enough. Arnold Schwarzenegger plays as Mr. Freeze and man is he wrongfully cast in this part. His lines make him so damn funny in this film. He is suppose to be the bad guy of this movie and he doesn't do anything to prove this. Chris O'Donnell returns from the last movie as Robin/Dick Grayson and he just gets annoying. He also seems like hes trying too hard and acts like he deserves more screen time. Uma Thurman plays as Poison Ivy/Pamela Isley and she cannot act for shit in this movie. Shes just terrible and really un-convincing. We also have Alicia Silverstone playing as Batgirl/Barbara and she seems way to eccentric for this part. I never took her seriously.

Picture:
The visual look of this film is kind of a mixed bag. I say mixed bag because the previous Batman films were dark and interesting yet this one is very colorful. I know Batman Forever was alittle bright, but this one just over does it. Their are also alot of CGI used in the film. The previous movies had some too, but Batman & Robin has a ton. Their are just way too many scenes that have alot of CGI in them and they look pretty ugly like they weren't finished or something. With that said, the films source is an excellent shape resulting in a clean image. Colors are very vibrant and eye popping. This film has many scenes that really use a ton of color and all are flashy. This makes the film stand out compared to the other ones. Detail is pretty great. Since this has a clean film source, you can really appreciate the level of detail here. Environments and costumes really show alot of clarity and sharpness to them.

Sound:
The soundtrack in Batman & Robin is very lively. Its even more engaging than the soundtrack in Forever. Elliot Goldenthal who composed the last film returns and scores this film. Its mostly the same one that we heard in Forever, but maybe more enhanced. He also does some other orchestral work that pretty much goes well with his score. Its used in just about every scene and can kind of get annoying at times by taking the seriousness of the movie. Just like I said with Forever, this is a pretty good score, but I liked Elfman's music alot more. Bass is on the great side with the movie boasting some great bass work which shouldn't come as a surprise considering theirs more action this time around. Its more impressive than the one found on Forever and definitely delivers. Dynamics are solid with most of the dialogue being said through the front speakers.

Conclusion:
Batman & Robin is a major disappointment when compared to the others. Its probably the worst superhero movie I have seen yet. The story is a mess and doesn't have a whole lot going for it. It just stays away from the comics and adds problems to everything in the film. The cast is terrible and their wasn't one person I found that gave a good performance. Everyone felt miscast and out of place. The visual look of the film is campy and bright with lots of colors. While it certainly doesn't look like a Batman film, the movie still manages to look great as a disc. The soundtrack is more lively than the film before and is filled with music in every scene. I don't suggest you watch unless your into mindless action and popcorn flicks, but even then Id recommend watching something else. Warner Bros. definitely fucked up on this film.

Grade: D-

REVIEW: Batman Forever

Batman Forever

Year: 1995
Director: Joel Schumacher
Starring: Val Kilmer, Tommy Lee Jones, Jim Carrey, Nicole Kidman, Chris O'Donnell
Distributor: Warner Bros. Pictures
MPAA: Rated PG-13

After some viewers found Burton's Batman Returns to be too dark, the people at Warner Bros. made the decision to lighten the series up so they can make it accessible to more audiences. Director Tim Burton didn't like this and wanted to step down as director, but instead serve as producer of the film. Warner Bros. then hired director Joel Schumacher to take over directing duties for this film. Actor Michael Keaton who played the crime fighting dark knight in the first two Batman films didn't like the way Schumacher was taking this franchise and ended up dropping out. This resulted in a whole new cast and a whole new Batman. While this new change definitely made it more appealing to people considering it made more money than Batman Returns, but it also created new problems.

Plot Outline:
Bruce Wayne (Val Kilmer) a.k.a Batman confronts a dastardly duo. Formerly District Attorney Harvey Dent (Tommy Lee Jones), incorrectly believes Batman caused the courtroom accident which left him disfigured on one side turning him into Two-Face. Edward Nygma (Jim Carrey), a former employee of millionaire Bruce Wayne, is out to get revenge on Wayne for turning down his brain draining product thus turning him into The Riddler. While sexy psychologist Chase Meridian (Nicole Kidman) tries to analyze and seduce both Bruce Wayne and Batman, The Riddler teams up with Two-Face to bring down Batman and drain the minds of Gotham City with his device. Batman gets the much needed help in the form of a circus performer named Dick Grayson (Chris O'Donnell) who's out for vengeance after being orphaned by Two-Face.

Plot:
The movie actually has a plot that's meaningful compared to Burton's two previous Batman films. We even get some kind of origin to Batman in a form of flashbacks. With that said, the movie also has some plot holes. There are problems with the characters and settings that fans of the comics will easily find out. Sure Burton's version wasn't perfect either, but I think it was alot closer than what Schumacher did with this film. Theirs even more cheesy lines in this film than the ones before. The movie is also much more family oriented. Gone are the dark and creepy mood that Burton created. Now, I personally loved what Burton did with the first two films and thought it really made a darker version of the caped crusader. Schumacher takes the easy light hearted way and I'm not sure this is a good thing since Batman is a dark character. While we do get two different villains this time and even the introduction to Robin, but not even these really bring alot to the table. I know this is Schumacher's first take on the Batman series and that I shouldn't complain too much, but theirs just many little things that make it look like they weren't even paying too much attention to the comics.

Cast:
Val Kilmer plays Batman/Bruce Wayne and he replaces Michael Keaton from the first two films. His take on Wayne just isn't good enough even though he does a decent Batman. I think I liked Keaton alot more compared to Kilmer. Kilmer is a good actor, but I don't think this role was right for him. Tommy Lee Jones plays as Two-Face/Harvey Dent and he just doesn't belong in this film. Jones is a fine actor, but again, I don't think this is a role that's catered towards him. Jim Carrey plays as The Riddler/Edward Nygma. I think Carrey was a great choice to be playing as The Riddler. I do however think his dialogue at times can be too funny. Nicole Kidman plays as Dr. Chase Meridian and shes smoking hot in this movie. I think she does a pretty good job in her role, but nothing too special. We also have Chris O'Donnell playing as Robin/Dick Grayson. Now I think O'Donnell looks like a pretty good choice to be playing this character, but his acting in this movie isn't really top notch and pretty dull at times.

Picture:
The visual look of Batman Forever is much different than the previous films. This is a much lighter and color friendly version of Batman compared to Burton's versions. The films source is pretty clean and in much better shape than the previous Batman films. Film grain is minimal here. Theirs also more CGI in this movie than the ones before. Its spread out nicely and not really distracting. It also looks pretty good for its time. Colors are brighter this time around and Gotham City is all lit up. Maybe alittle too lit up because at times it looks like the city has neon lights glowing which is kind of a problem considering this is the mean streets of Gotham City. The black color is pretty average and not really inky the way I would have liked it to be. Detail is pretty great and it really shows. Its not too impressive, but it makes this movie look pretty cool.

Sound:
The soundtrack in Batman Forever is pretty good, but fails in comparison to the previous films. Danny Elfman who composed a wonderful score for the previous Burton Batman films, doesn't return here. Instead we get another different score by Elliot Goldenthal who also did the 1995 Michael Mann hit film "Heat". While he does a pretty good job here and composes a score that seems to work with the movies mood, I think Elfman did the better job. His music really went well with Burton's art direction, but since Burton isn't directing this time, I guess its alright. We also get other music and some by Seal. These sound pretty good and Ill always Kiss from a Rose, but I don't think they fit with the Batman universe. The movies got some good bass that's worth listening too. There are alot of action scenes and the bass follows through.

Conclusion:
Batman Forever doesn't come close to how great the previous films were. I enjoyed Burton's darker version of Batman compared to Schumacher's version. That being sad, the story this time around is better than the ones before and actually seems to make sense even though parts of the film don't really stay true to the comics. The cast is average at best with only Jim Carrey giving a performance that's actually worth watching. Everyone seems misplaced and pretty dull. The visual look of the film is brighter and more colorful this time. The soundtrack is pretty good and seems to fit the mood of the film. While, I wouldn't recommend this to hardcore Batman fans, this is still a pretty entertaining film none the less. Its an action packed popcorn flick that's worth checking out if your into this type of stuff.

Grade: C-

REVIEW: Batman Returns

Batman Returns

Year: 1992
Director: Tim Burton
Starring: Michael Keaton, Danny DeVito, Michelle Pfeiffer, Christopher Walken, Michael Gough
Distributor: Warner Bros. Pictures
MPAA: Rated PG-13

After the huge success of Tim Burton's Batman, Warner Bros. easily wanted to continue the franchise. Batman was considered one of the studio's biggest film ever made so it was obvious they weren't going to stop with one film. It was kind of a surprise because the guys at Warner Bros. weren't really expecting Batman to make so much money. Not even Tim Burton or Michael Keaton was signed on for sequels. Luckily the people at Warner Bros. did everything to bring back Burton and Keaton even if that meant a big increase in Keaton's salary. The sequel was highly anticipated and the studio wanted to keep everything under wraps. Not even Danny DeVito was allowed to tell his family about his Penguin makeup.

Plot Outline:
Millionaire playboy Bruce Wayne (Michael Keaton) a.k.a. Batman faces two new threats to Gotham City when eccentric businessman Max Schreck (Christopher Walken) is blackmailed into helping The Penguin (Danny DeVito) emerge from underground and take control of Gotham City. Meanwhile, Max's mousy secretary Selina Kyle (Michelle Pheiffer) finds out too much and he murders her. She comes back as leather wearing, whip cracking Catwoman, setting out to avenge her death, meanwhile falling in love with both Bruce and Batman. Can Batman defeat these villains, when he is in love with one and the other is thought to be a misunderstood hero?

Plot:
Director Tim Burton returns to the world of Batman and sets out to make this film even darker than the one before. Not only does he do this, but he also creates a Batman movie that we probably wouldn't have gotten if it were a different director. The art direction is just amazing and Burton truly makes you feel like your sucked into this world. Not only that, but I think this film has the best Batman costume ever. The plot kind of suffers from not having a good idea. The villains here don't have a plan that's cleaver and smart like the Joker had in the first film. Just like the first film, the story here contains plot holes. Now when I say this, I mean the plot doesn't stay too faithful to the comics. Certain things and characters are altered and given significant changes. While I'm a fan of the comic and I usually hate it when Hollywood changes things related to the originals, I found the changes here to not really bother me. Sure the Penguin doesn't look like the one in the comics, but so what. This is Burton's telling of this comic book hero and he still manages to make a Batman film that's dark and gritty unlike anything you have seen in the comics.

Cast:
The cast of the film is pretty great and easily is on par with the first film. Michael Keaton returns as Batman/Bruce Wayne and he gives a much better performance here than he did in the first film. I still liked him as Wayne and still love him as Batman. Theirs just something about him that makes him the perfect choice to be playing Batman. Danny DeVito plays as Oswald Cobblepot/Penguin and he too gives a good performance. Burton's version of the Penguin is really nasty looking and DeVito does him really good. His voice and certain look makes him perfect for Burton's version of this character. Michelle Pfeiffer plays as Catwoman/Selina Kyle and she gives a wonderful performance. I absolutely loved her in this role. She gave me a believable performance that I just couldn't resist. Christopher Walken plays as Max Shreck and hes as good as ever. I always seem to enjoy Walken performances and its no different here. Hes funny and sophisticated work here brings alot to this movie.

Picture:
The visual look for the film not only is on par with the first film, but goes even deeper. I really liked how the first film was dark because Batman is a dark character, but Burton makes this film even darker. This ain't your normal Batman that you read about in the comics. The movies source is in better shape than the first film which shouldn't come as a surprise seeing how this one was released three years later. Theirs some film grain here and there, but its alittle bit cleaned up compared to the first film. Theirs also alittle more CGI in this film and it holds up pretty well. Colors still have that washed up feel to it and it makes the streets of Gotham feel so dirty. Blacks are spot on perfect and really dark. Detail is much better this time around with alot of close up shots looking even better. You can see alot of little things on Batman's costume. There are some soft shots here and there like the first film, but it isn't alot. This is still a good looking film for its time.

Sound:
The film features a stunning soundtrack. Composer Danny Elfman returns to score this film and he does a fantastic job at it. That same score he made for the first film is back and it sounds even better. He also has some other orchestral music that is used in the film and this too sounds great. His work here is simply perfect and really gives this film more value. His talent with Burton's dark vision makes this film nearly perfect in the sound department. The movie also features some great bass work. I was kind of let down with the bass in the first film, but that's definitely not the case here. There are many scenes in this film that require alot of bass to go with it and it certainly does. The bass is much more louder and sounds much more full. I'm surprised that a movie this old can really have good bass. I definitely enjoyed the soundtrack here more than I did in the first film. Its just that much better.

Conclusion:
Batman Returns is a good film that's easily in my opinion, a worthy sequel to the original. Sure the plot isn't as creative as it was in the first Batman film and that it contains plot holes, but that doesn't change the fact that this film is every bit entertaining as the one before. The cast is great with many of them giving good performances. I still believe Keaton makes the best Batman ever. The visual look of the movie is much more darker this time, but its also much more cleaner than the original. The soundtrack is wonderful and I absolutely loved it. I'm glad Tim Burton stuck around for the sequel because if it weren't for him, we wouldn't have a Batman film this dark and gritty. I can recommend this to fans of the first film and to those seeking a dark, but fun film. Its not as great as the original, but its still full of entertainment.

Grade: B-