It's about damn time. It took over 3 months for me to get my copy from the Library into my grubby hands and even longer in doing everything I could to avoid spoilers. A year it would seem. So, was it worth all the time of dodging spoilers and waiting impatiently in line for The Dark Knight Rises? Um, honestly, I don't know. It looks great and it feels like part of the Trilogy (even if Christian Bale and Batman aren't in it all that much). But the movie for me was uneven when it came to pacing, especially the first hour or so, which took too long in its setup. First off, the run time was just ridiculously long. I get that with this being the swan song for Christopher Nolan, that he would want to pack as much stuff into this one as humanely possible, because this was it. There is a reason why they say 'less is more' for a reason. Someone clearly wasn't listening to the wise man that said it.

As for Bane, the character has always fascinated me as a comic book reader, even if I haven't followed his exploits in years. But his mythology was something I was very aware of and was really curious if Nolan would in fact incorporate Bane 'breaking the Batman's back' into the script. They did, but it was underplayed to my liking. But the one thing I didn't like when publicity photos started coming out as well as watching the movie, was his look. Sorry, I just did not like it then or now. Yes, I get that Nolan wanted to tone down Bane's original look to keep it somewhat grounded in "reality", even if this is a Superhero flick. Had they stuck with the original version, it would have stuck out like a sore thumb in the world that Nolan created and would have been "comic booky" for sure. Hell, just take a look at his appearance in Batman & Robin and you will see what I mean.

Those were the 'bad' parts of the film. The good stuff was the final hour for sure. But I liked the small details of the previous 2 films being addressed. It was more fan service for me that I got off on. As for characters, I did like Anne Hathaway as Selina Kyle, aka Catwoman, more than I thought I would. But it was the addition of Joseph Gordon-Levitt as John Blake, who would later become 'Robin', which I had no idea was even a possibility in Dark Knight Rises. I guess avoiding spoilers did pay-off after all, huh?

Like I said, there are good things and bad things about this one. But I still think they get enough things right to warrant at least a Rental. I will say this, Dark Knight Rises had a huge mountain to climb, especially after Heath Ledger's performance in The Dark Knight. Even Batman Begins looms large by comparison as well. So, this installment is definitely the weakest of the three, but at least it didn't destroy what the first two films brought.

Don't listen to me because these super hero movies need a huge leap of faith to buy into.

Since I'm not all that vested into them, I had my attention on the stupid vocalizing issues with Batman and Bane. It was all I could do not to laugh out loud. Sorry to any fans. Some of the scenario's just seemed ridiculous. How did Bruce Wayne do this and why did Bane do that. blah, blah, blah.

Ignore my rants. 

Oh, I can rant, but the wife says I sound like an old man.

Shut Up ****.... am Not!!!!

Not really drawn to watch this movie again but I was giddy to see Burn Gorman as one of the sleazy bad guys.



He just oozes creepy, doesn't he?  He's cast in everything, I actually remember watching the San Diego Comic-Con coverage last year and Guillermo Del Toro mentioning Burn was in "Pacific Rim" and the interviewer (John Barrowman) going "he was in my show too!"

Also amazed that they could get Juno Temple and Christian Bale in the same shot because he's well over six feet, isn't he, and she's the size of a postcard.