Change Your Image
Tobias-Von-Pommern
Ratings
Most Recently Rated
Lists
An error has ocurred. Please try againReviews
Kingdom of Heaven (2005)
A philosophical meditation on our relation to God
There is only one true way of watching this movie... Find the Director's Cut!
The extra 45 minutes deepens and expands the characters and their motivations. It is essentially an entirely different movie, that really taps in to the themes of the story, instead of just being a series of historical events and action set-pieces.
The studio really wanted this movie to be the next Gladiator box-office-smash-hit. It's hard to deny that the two movies bear similarities (same director, historical epics,) but Kingdom is much more of a philosophical meditation on our relation to God, than a run-of-the-mill sword and sandals flick. Sure, Gladiator deals with a lot of stoic themes, and it does so brilliantly, but it's a much more action-oriented movie, than the one Ridley would release in 2005. Aaaaand this is where the studio heads started to panic. So, they cut 45 minutes of integral character scenes (ex. A whole subplot of Sibylla realizing that her son is a leper) to try to make the movie more "tight" with less room between the action. They even marketed the movie (find the trailer) as a grandiose action adventure, as if though it was a spiritual follow-up to Gladiator. These poor decisions would reflect themselves upon the critical reception of the movie. Audience attendees felt they had gotten a different movie, than the one they were promised, and the critics main problems with it, can be ascribed to the cutting-room decisions of the execs. These factors have tainted the legacy of a movie, that, in it's 3 hour version, is actually close to a masterpiece.
The story follows Balian, a French blacksmith, who've been flung into despair and darkness, after his child and wife dies. The arrival of his templar father (Godfrey), whom he's never met, brings about a promise of redemption. Go with him to the holy land, and God will help you find your path in life. So that is what Balian does, and he soon realizes that the conflict there, is not as black and white as he may have thought it was. The last thing Godfrey does, before he dies, is knighting his son, making him the proprietor of a small piece of land called Ibelin. During the knighting, Balian is asked by his father to recite an oath:
"Be without fear in the face of your enemies. Be brave and upright that God may love thee. Speak the truth always, even if it leads to your death. Safeguard the helpless and do no wrong; that is your oath to suffice...remember that."
Throughout the complex and religious conflict of the film, Balian's task is to stay true to this oath. He believes that redemption can only be found by being truthful, to be a good person. This is perfectly captured in how his decisions reflect the man he is (and wants to be). He does not kill needlessly, he is generous, with a primary concern of making life better for the inhabitants of his land.
For him, it's a kingdom of conscience or a kingdom of nothing. He is unwilling to compromise his honor for anything, even if it leads to an escalation in the conflict between the Christians and the Muslims, after the English king dies. When Saladin is victorious and marches upon Jerusalem, Balian is there to protect it's people. Days pass with full-blown war, but Balian doesn't crack, he is a fearless, and thereby wins the favor of the people (which he already possessed to a certain degree). He manages to create a truce with Saladin, granting the people of Jerusalem safe passage out of the city.
The core of the themes of the movie, is essentially a question for the viewer: what would you have done after the death of the king, if you were in Balian's shoes? Would you have betrayed Guy de Lusignan (a real dirtbag) and married Sibylla to prevent war? I know that I personally was very frustrated during my first viewings of this movie, since I thought it was obvious. Why not betray Guy, marry the gorgeous Eva Green and have peace between the peoples of the holy land? It took me several viewings to understand, that the dilemma is not as simple as such. We have to remember, that the only thing keeping Balian moving forward, is his promise to God. It helps him navigate the land, and aids in his decision-making, and all of his decisions are made on the basis, of what the most truthful and/or honorable act would be. That is why he would betray his oath, and all he has fought for, by performing a coup d'état. The redemption of his dreams would dissolve, by performing such an act. Even though lots of people died as a result of this, it remains the only option that Balian had.
Balian is a character that possesses a wealth of traits that are desirable, from a biblical standpoint. We see loads of Christians doing horrendous things in the movie, all in the name of God, which induces the viewer with a skepticism on religion. This creative choice allows the theme of religion to become nuanced and explored through the choices of the characters. The conflict is not as simple as good vs. Evil. There are heroes and villains on both sides (but some of the templars are especially despicable).
Balian is the one who successfully finds a golden road, down the middle. He wishes that all religions, would be allowed entrance to Jerusalem. He does not take sides, but instead respects the Muslims, and their claim. He proposes a peaceful co-existence, while the other templars are greedy and vengeful, only thinking about themselves. So, who would God (if he exists) favor in this conflict?
This reading of the movie was entirely lost upon the audiences in 2005. I see it as an attempt from Ridley's side, to counter the Islamophobic discourse in the west, post 9/11. Showing that a war from a 1000 years ago, still reflects the world we live in today.
The Batman (2022)
A Dark and Inspired Character Study of Batman
After years of anticipation, we've finally gotten a new solo-Batman film.
A decade has passed since Nolan concluded his trilogy with "The Dark Knight Rises," which put an end to Christian Bale's portrayal of the caped crusader. Since then, Batman has been utilized by Warner Bros, as a key figure in their cinematic DC universe (or that was the plan). By now, we should've gotten two Justice League movies from Zack Snyder, and 2018 would've been the year where Ben Affleck's original Batman film would've released. Many of the original plans for the DCEU did not come to fruition. The panicked executives at Warner are the only ones we can point our fingers at, since they chose to not trust their director (Snyder) and instead tried to replicate the marvel-formula, resulting in an even worse product (Josstice League.)
Though it seems by now, as if though Warner learned their lesson: intervening in a director's vision, does not have a positive impact on the final product. I believe that it was the success of "Joker" that made them realize that. Afterwards, James Gunn was brought in to make his own Suicide Squad movie, where he would have almost complete artistic responsibility, leading the movie to become a fine addition to the DCEU.
The same goes for THIS movie... THE BATMAN.
Directed and co-written by Matt Reeves, who brought his own unique craft, to this iteration.
He had almost completely free reigns, in how he wanted to portray the characters and the universe of Batman. Not having to consider how it would fit into the bigger DCEU, Reeves was instead tasked with creating his own independent Bat-Verse.
Reeves is no stranger to genre movies. Having previously directed the highly acclaimed "Dawn" and "War" entries in the latest Apes trilogy, which are big blockbusters, but certainly of a different kind, Reeves was from the get-go a worthy contender. Characters are often of a secondary importance in most big-budget studio movies, but that is where Reeves differ. Throughout his movies, no matter how large in scale, he always manages to ground the action and spectacle in intimate character studies. It is the moral conflict and inner emotions of the characters that take center stage, and Reeves is a master at crafting compelling characters. The degree of sympathy I had for Caesar (the leading Ape,) a CGI talking ape, is unparalleled, and I certainly found him more interesting, than the average blockbuster protagonist.
With this style and a proclivity towards darker movies, I believe Warner made a smart movie in hiring him for The Batman, which excels in its' characters and tone.
From the very first frame, as Ave Maria begins to fill the audiospace, we, as an audience, gets the impression that this is a different kind of DC film, unlike the ones we're used to (except for Joker perhaps). A POV-shot reveals a family of unidentifiable characters. A peep into their private world. Even though it isn't the eyes of Batman we're looking through, this use of subjective perspective informs what kind of journey, we've just begun.
The film itself is gorgeous, shot by DOP Greig Fraser, who elevates the material from comic book movie to something I would simply define as art. Every single frame is well-thought-out. Gotham is gritty and unpolished, which brings a high level of realism. But it's also gothic and beautiful to look at, and as a viewer, you are immediately there, soaking up all the atmosphere. And my god... the framing and lighting on the batsuit is the most cinematic display of the suit, I've ever seen in any live-action adaptation.
Aside from the opening shot, "The Batman" is a heavily POV-centered story from the perspective of Bruce Wayne AKA Batman. The viewer is not merely perceiving the events unfold, but perceiving them themselves, as much as the medium of film can allow. Reeves utilizes every possible trick to create this impression, whether it is by placing cameras on Bruce's motorcycle, or leaving the camera with Bruce, while the panic and terror of the funeral scene builds. First from outside the building, leading to confusion within, until the rover crashes the funeral, and all mayhem is loose. Throughout the movie, we build our relationship with Bruce this way, by perceiving everything, as he himself perceives it.
Reeves wanted to make the story centered around the detective aspect of the character of Batman, which none of the other iterations ever really did. It's a murder mystery, and Batman needs to use his wits and skills to solve it (not solely brute strength.) This allows for a deep dive into the psyche of the bat, his thought processes, and as the story unfolds: a gateway into his unsolved trauma. There is a clear reason for this asocial protagonist to do what he does. I believe Pattinson described his motivation perfectly, in the way he puts himself out there, in the center of danger, allowing him to recreate the night of his parents' demise. Punishing the criminals, as if though they were the ones, who took them away from him.
Pattinsons' Bruce Wayne is unlike anything we've ever seen before. Usually, the face of Bruce is utilized as a façade by himself, to distance himself from the Batman. Coming across as arrogant and carefree, but in this portrayal, Bruce has yet to become the billionaire playboy, that we're accustomed to. He is a lone wolf, isolated, still trying to figure out what he needs to be. His trauma is unresolved, and looms like a great shadow over his existence. He is consumed by the vengeance, that he himself believes is rightfully his.
He does not feel comfortable in his own skin and is therefore dressed as a drifter whenever he is out in the public, to prevent anyone from recognizing him. It is the suit that makes him feel the most comfortable, in the way it symbolizes his one true goal of Vengeance, and the anonymity it grants him.
The score by Michael Giacchino perfectly captures the duality of the character, in the track called "The Batman." It opens with a sense of mystery, with a hint of eeriness, while the dramatic theme builds, only to dissolve into a slower pace... It becomes emotional, as the strings incorporate the inner grief of Bruce Wayne, channeling his upbringing and years of despair as a child without parents. The things that have led him to become who he is, when we first meet him in the film. Now the track soars and becomes much more hopeful, while still retaining its' emotional brilliance. He has a goal and a purpose, which makes him keep going, despite his flaws and failures. As the theme returns, (which is present throughout the film) we once again feel the determinedness and dedication which the cowl symbolizes. The pace quickens... The once broken boy, has put the pieces back together, only to form something new. Something terrible and awe-inspiring. Something that fills the hearts of the criminals with terror. Something that runs entirely on willpower, that has dedicated its' life to the city, that took everything away from him.
But sooner or later, Batman must face the fact that his aggressiveness and need for retribution, prohibits him from becoming what Gotham really needs. It's not just about locking criminals away... Another will soon take his place. It's about something more. Batman needs to become a symbol of hope, to make a real change in the city. Throughout the movie, Bruce is frustrated, feeling like he isn't making a difference. He's still in an early stage of his crime-fighting career. He stumbles, he falls, but he never backs down. When Riddler's plan is unleashed, and the flood swoops in on the stadium, that is when this realization occurs to Batman. He willingly sacrifices himself, to save the civilians, and in doing so, he becomes something more than vengeance... A hope for a better future.
I've seen a lot of people freaking out about The Batman 2 not being greenlit just yet. With everything going on at Warner Bros Discovery currently (Batgirl cancellation & and reshoots throughout the upcoming slate of films,) I get the panic. But remember; they've recently said that they're actively working on the Penguin spin-off show. It would make zero sense, to go forward with this project, if they did not see a future for Pattinsons Batman. Furthermore, I don't believe Matt Reeves has finished the script yet, and it is custom to do so before the studio greenlits the production. All I'm saying is, don't worry to much... Batman 2 will get here, but it'll take some time. They're not rushing, and that is only a good sign.
I'm sure Reeves will surprise us, with whatever he comes up with next, but I certainly have a few hopes for the future of Reeves' Batverse. My biggest wish is to see Mads Mikkelsen play Mr. Freeze, and how they would incorporate him into this grounded take on Gotham, without it becoming too fantastical. I liked the deleted scene with Joker (Barry Keoghan), but I don't think he should take center stage, as the antagonist. Keep him locked away, in a Hannibal Lector-esque type of role. That is original, and gives rich opportunity to explore their past, while their philosophical views clash with one another.
Let us explore some more of the less known villains, like Scarface, Mad Hatter or Deathstroke... I would even be up for some Killer Croc action if Reeves could see him serving a purpose in the overall storyline. But first and foremost, I hope the sequel will continue to explore the psyche of Bruce Wayne, pushing him towards desperation, making him come close to doubt everything he stands for. Only to allow him to find a different meaning in the end, that serves his purpose. A motivation that he had not yet realized, was central to his entire Gotham project, as Batman.