Rss

  • redit
  • delicious
  • stumble
  • youtube

Archives for : flowerspix

Star Trek Into Darkness

Posted by :Chris On : May 19, 2013
0

Category: flowerspix, Movie Reviews

Tags:, , ,

May 18, 2013

Director: J.J. Abrams

Starring: Chris Pine, Zachary Quinto, Zoe Saldana

Release Date: May 16, 2013

To Boldly Go, and Whatnot

J.J. Abrams 2009 venture into the universe of Star Trek was a star-studded success.  It embodied a fresh approach to the franchise, and, for all intents and purposes, made Trek “cool” again.  There was little doubt that the talented directorstar_trek_into_darkness-HD could craft yet another solid entry into the series, but I doubt that anyone would have predicted that Into Darkness would surpass the reboot in just about every way imaginable.

Most notably the movie builds on the mythos of Trek in measurable and significant ways.  At the risk of dropping major spoilers, I’ll simply say that long-time fans of the franchise will feel a strong sense of nostalgia regarding what transpires in this second effort from Abrams.  The characters are all more fully developed this time around, and much of the plot (partially by sheer coincidence, partially, perhaps, not) directly mirrors the concerns and fears that have engulfed our post-9/11 society.  Thus the socio-politcal subtext of the film adds another level of depth.

The action you’d expect is, of course, delivered in abundance, with a few cues having been taken from the previous movie.  If anything is lacking, it comes in a lack of comedic relief; for me, this is actually somewhat welcome, as I found some of the cartoonish aspects of the 2009 offering a tad bit distracting.

Overall, Abrams really does deserve credit: the man has managed to direct two outstanding Trek movies.  Both times he’s managed to retain the spirit of the original(s), and both times he’s managed to inject his own brand of frenetic/contemporary intensity that has reinstated the series in the pop-culture zeitgeist in a way that might otherwise have been impossible.

For me—and you’ll have to forgive my wandering thoughts—one of the only things I could think about as the credits rolled was this: the future of Star Wars (that’s right, Star Wars) is in very, very good hands.  In case you haven’t kept up with current events, Abrams has been named the director of what my fellow nerds never thought would happen: Episode VII; a full-fledged sequel to Return of the Jedi (and the beginning of a new trilogy).  It would seem, then, that Abrams is something of a wonder boy, and that the events of this galaxy—as well as those in a galaxy that existed a long time ago far, far away—are in the best hands we could have hoped for.

redstar294redstar294redstar294redstar294redstarhalf  out of 5

Jurassic Park 3D

Posted by :Chris On : April 14, 2013
1

Category: flowerspix, Movie Reviews

Tags:, , ,

April 14, 2013

Director: Steven Spielberg

Starring: Sam Neill, Jeff Goldblum, Laura Dern

Release Date: June 11, 1993 (original), April 5, 2013 (3D)

When Dinosaurs Ruled the Earth

I was 11 years old when Jurassic Park was released.  I vividly remember going to see it at my local theater.  The place was packed; there had been a lot of buzz about the movie, and—being a preteen dino enthusiast—I begged my parents to take me one Saturday afternoon so I could see what everyone was talking about.  When it was over, something profound had occurred.  It was the first time I recall feeling an overwhelming sense of wonder at what I’d witnessed.  Sure, Star Wars had blown me away as a child, and I absorbed all things Indiana Jones; but there was something about Jurassic Park that completely enveloped me.  jp3eMuch of this, I think, has to do with seeing it on the big screen.  It wasn’t only that, though; it was the seamless effects, the just-plausible-enough-to-be-believable story, and the intense action (too intense, perhaps, for some kids my age, but I ate it up with a spoon) that made it absolutely unforgettable.  Thus my love of cinema was cemented forevermore.

When I learned that the movie was getting the 3D treatment I groaned.  The movie wasn’t designed for three dimensions, and there was absolutely no way that it would make for a convincing transfer (especially when compared to films like Avatar, which were specifically tailored for the medium).  I managed to resist making too much of a snap judgment and ventured out to my local theater to see the thing (with an IMAX treatment, no less) because, hey—it’s Jurassic freakin’ Park.

Imagine my surprise when that long-lost sense of wonderment was instantly rekindled from the very first frame.  When John Williams’ thundering score kicked in, the outside world melted away and I was, for all intents and purposes, a kid again.  But not only that; the movie lends itself nicely to 3D, with wayward tree limbs and cascading rainstorms feeling as if they were strategically placed knowing that the movie would one day be reborn in an even more tangible manner.

If this wasn’t confirmation enough that the movie had seen a successful transition, all I had to do was glance at the youngsters sitting a few seats down from me.  I’m guessing they’d never seen the film in any iteration, as their reactions—”ooohs” and “aaahs” in equal measure—were proof positive that this a picture perfect example of the magic of cinema.  A side note: I could hardly restrain a snicker as they jolted (nearly) out of their seats when the stray velociraptor popped his head out from behind the control panel.  I did the same thing when I was their age, and it’s a virtual certainty that the experience—and the aforementioned sense of wonderment—will stick with them for a long, long time.

So, in case I haven’t been clear, go see JP 3D.  If you’ve never seen it, then… well… what are you waiting for?  If you’ve seen it at least 500 times since its original release (like me), then trust me when I say that this new iteration is well worth the money.  My hope is that the move will be re-released in another 20 years so the next generation of moviegoers can see what it’s like to be transported to a world where the impossible really does exist.

redstar294redstar294redstar294redstar294redstar294out of 5

Argo

Posted by :Chris On : March 12, 2013
0

Category: flowerspix, View from the Blu (and DVD)

Tags:, , ,

March 11, 2013

When a Movie is a Life-Saver

Argo is incredible.  I often disagree with the films the Academy praises as “Best Picture of the Year,” but here I think the award was much deserved.

If you’re not familiar with the real life events that the movie is based on, let me fill you in.  During an Iranian hostage crisis that saw a large group of American diplomats held in captivity for an extended period of time, six people managed to escape the descent of an angry mob on the U.S. embassy.  They found refuge in the residence of the Canadian ambassador, unsure of when they would be able to break free of the country—and its prolonged turmoil—and return home.  Enter Tony Mendez (Ben of Affleck), a CIA operative who’s been tasked with traveling to Iran under the guise of a film producer who’s location scouting (for a science fiction picture titled Argo) in the country that’s been turned upside down by political upheaval   Once there, Mendez carries out the CIA’s plan to have the six diplomats pose as members of the film crew, a cover that is designed to eventually lead them through a myriad of checkpoints and to the freedom of a Swiss flight out of harm’s way.

Where the film soars in its ability to foster heart-pounding tension.  From the moment Mendez embarks on his mission, I Argo-Movie-Posterfound myself holding my breath for prolonged intervals.  The tension, of course, is taken to the next level in the third act; the result is a brilliantly spun game of cat-and-mouse as the “crew” attempts to navigate the obstacles that could result in their immediate imprisonment and, in all likelihood, death.

There are some expertly choreographed juxtapositions that highlight a variety of themes running throughout the movie, too.  Most notable is a sequence that sees a faux reading the of the script for Argo (with actors in full garb) spliced together with the heated political declarations of the Iranian government.  The “showy” nature of both “casts” is crystal clear, and it feels timely given the long-running military conflict(s) that define the contemporary world stage.

In a word, Argo is superb.  It’s sharply written, brimming with relevant thematic elements, and is relentlessly suspenseful.  It’s the “Best Picture” for a reason.

redstar294redstar294redstar294redstar294redstar294  out of 5

The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

Posted by :Chris On : December 30, 2012
1

Category: flowerspix, Movie Reviews

December 29, 2012

Director: Peter Jackson

Starring: Ian McKellen, Martin Freeman

Release Date: December 14, 2012

More of the Same?

I’ll be honest; though I greatly enjoyed the Lord of the Rings movies upon their release, they never really enveloped me in quite the same way that the original Star Wars or, say, Back to the Future trilogies did.  When the announcement came that The Hobbit would also be receiving the Jackson treatment, I was excited for one specific reason: I absolutely loved the book.  It’s a relatively brief experience, one in which I presumed the now well-known director would be able to spin into one helluva knock-out return to Middle-earth.  Imagine my shock when I learned that the book would not be made into a single film.  In fact, it wouldn’t even be split into two; instead, three was the magic number.  Because of this, my excitement about The Hobbit quickly waned, as it seemed that I was in for an unnecessarily prolonged cash-grab that had the potential to (very) quickly outstay its welcome.

Thankfully, The Hobbit isn’t nearly as tedious as it could have been.  From time to time, the feeling that things are being stretched a little thin is tangible, but, for the most part, it’s a stirring, gripping adventure.  The movie also does a nice job of connecting itself to its predecessors (or should I say forebearers?), and the introduction of the principal players is both whimsical and wrought with a sense of impending danger—something that adds needed weight to stakes that we, as an audience, know will ultimately be resolved (this, I think, is the primary curse of prequel feature films).

Any other criticisms that I have come in the form of many of the movie’s more intense moments and how they’re worked out.  My memory is hazy regarding the film’s source material, but many pages were clearly taken out of the LotR playbook when it seems “all hope is lost,” and though this sort of reminiscence will certainly bring a smile to the faces of fans, it would have been nice to see the movie do something a little more aggressive to try and separate itself from the original series.

It’s clear, however, that Jackson still loves Middle-earth and its inhabitants, and it’s a virtual certainty that the remaining films will be welcome excursions.  Here’s hoping that part two of this particular adventure will be both tightly wrought and surprising in equal measure.

  out of 5

Django Unchained

Posted by :Chris On : December 27, 2012
0

Category: flowerspix, Movie Reviews

Tags:, , , , ,

December 26, 2012

Director: Quentin Tarantino

Starring: Jamie Foxx, Christoph Waltz, Leonardo DiCaprio

Release Date: December 25, 2012

Quentin Strikes Again

Tarantino’s most recent offering, Inglorious Basterds, made a statement that his previous works—in many ways—did not: namely, that the man has matured as a filmmaker.  Though there’s no doubt that the likes of Reservoir Dogs, Pulp Fiction and the like are modern classics of popular culture, they didn’t necessarily demonstrate a more refined sense of…well…responsibility.  With Django Unchained, the writer/director has crafted a piece of storytelling that’s both violent and poignant; here, though, the violence isn’t glorified in quite the same way it has been in the past.

The year is 1858—”Two Years Before the Civil War” as the opening titles tell us—and the slavery-plantation infrastructure is at the height of its dominance in the southern U.S.  Also woven into this backdrop is the prominence of bounty hunters; individuals contracted by U.S. Marshals to apprehend—dead or alive—outlaws who quickly ventured out of their respective jurisdictions.  One such mercenary is the German-born Dr. King Schultz (Waltz).  He possesses a refined viciousness, but he makes no bones about his contempt for slavery.  In an attempt to locate a trio of bandits that have changed names and relocated to another part of the country, Schultz enlists the help of Django (Foxx), a slave who has seen the gang in person and can identify them on sight.  We quickly learn that there’s more to Django than meets the eye.  The man was separated from his wive via the slave trade some time prior, and will do anything and everything to free her.  Thus the two enter into a partnership which sees them carving a path of carnage through each of the slave states between Texas and Tennessee.

It’s a relatively straightforward tale of love and revenge (really, are Tarantino movies ever anything else?), and blood is spilled by the gallon every time a bullet is sent flying through an unsuspecting foe.  As previously mentioned, however, there’s the pressing message that violence begets violence; an especially brutal scene sees a runaway slave get ripped apart by a pack of ravenous dogs.  As the grisly scenario plays out, Schultz shies away in disgust, visibly shaken by the spectacle.  In fact, he’s haunted by this for the remainder of the film, and it greatly influences his actions near the climax.  This, I think, is where Django works best; though nauseating, it’s clear that Tarantino and company were determined to foster an accurate sense of how horrific the atrocities of slavery really were.  And when it comes to airbrushing history, it’s clear that Tarantino absolutely refuses to tone things down.

The stylistic flair that’s defined virtually every Tarantino outing is present here too, and it distinguishes the film in much the same way.  Unusual—and humorous—music is cued at just the right moment, and the dialogue is every bit as crisp as you’d expect.

The acting is spectacular as well.  Of particular note is the portrayal of Calvin Candie (DiCaprio).  Candie is the owner of “Candie Land,” one of the most feared plantations in the country, and the final destination of our protagonists as they work through their bounties in an effort to reunite Django with his betrothed.  Candie is a ruthless slave owner who has an incendiary desire to inflict suffering on the residents of his property, and there’s a subdued brand of rage that DiCaprio is able to bring to the role.  Waltz and Foxx are, of course, formidable actors, but DiCaprio steals the show in the latter half of the movie, and, like Waltz in Basterds, he becomes the villain that we love to hate.  Samuel L. Jackson is also memorable as Steven, the right-hand man (and long time slave) of Candie.

If I have any criticisms of the movie it comes in the form of the revenge bits.  Though completely expected, there’s an early perception that Django and Schultz are both burdened by the sense that so much killing will result in a continually growing burden that will eventually accumulate into something entirely crushing.  Having these characters attempt to hash this out would have been a welcome addition; in my mind, it would have been something that separated the film from all of Tarantino’s previous movies.  It would have demonstrated an even deeper sense of maturity than any of us would have expected.  In many ways, I kept waiting for Tarantino to transcend—for lack of a better word—himself.  This never truly happens, and it’s a tad bit disappointing.

That said, Django Unchained delivers in virtually every way.  It’s well-written, brilliantly directed, engrossing, and, (perhaps) most importantly, laced with moments of welcome seriousness.

out of 5

UWHARRIE – The Full Movie

Posted by :Chris On : December 1, 2012
0

Category: flowerspix, Ramblings

After months of intense labor, UWHARRIE has finally been completed.

The video will be free for some time, so be sure to watch it, share it and comment on it.  Also, after watching it, please visit IMDb and RottenTomatoes to rate the film.

Thank you so much for your support, and enjoy!



Uwharrie (2012) on IMDb

Lincoln

Posted by :Chris On : November 17, 2012
0

Category: flowerspix, Movie Reviews

Tags:, , ,

November 17, 2012

Director: Steven Spielberg

Starring: Daniel Day-Lewis, Tommy Lee Jones, Sally Field

Release Date: November 16, 2012

The Man, The Myth, The Legend

Abraham Lincoln is my favorite President, as I suspect he is for many others.  After all, the guy managed (with plenty of help, of course) to abolish slavery and reunite a severely fractured nation.  As easy as it to “like” so much of the man, for many he’s a controversial figure—one who undoubtedly abused his power and consciously shirked the parameters outlined in the Constitution.  These aspects of his persona undoubtedly presented Spielberg (and screenwriters Tony Kushner and Doris Kearns Goodwin) with a dilemma.  Should they have taken the “popular” route, choosing to glorify the man or take a more “dirtied” look at his legacy and its wide-reaching implications?

The answer, I’d say, is that the crew opted for a moderate approach.  Without a doubt, Lincoln casts the former President in a positive,  ”grandfatherly” light more often than it does a dastardly dictatorial one, but it chooses not to ignore some of the man’s contemporary critics.  This, I think, is important.

Among other things, the choice to portray Lincoln as a tangible human being—and not a flawless idol who never second-guessed the weighty decisions he grappled with—makes him relatable.  Most often these moments come in his interactions with Mrs. Lincoln (Sally Field), as she attempts to reconcile the untimely death of their son, Willy, while facing the reality that their eldest is hellbent on joining the ranks of the Union Army (and, by all accounts, also meeting an early end).  It’s striking, too, to see the man lie; an act that is borderline heretical if mentioned in the same sentence with “Honest Abe”.  For example, when the movie sees the House of Representatives poised to vote on the 13th Amendment, it’s brought to the representatives’ attention that Mr. Lincoln has, in fact, delayed a “peace delegation” from the Confederate States that seek to the end the conflict, sending everyone in attendance into an unmitigated frenzy.  Before the votes can be cast, the decision is made that word from the President must clarify this one way or another.  Several breathless pages are sent to the White House, where Lincoln, without batting an eye, pens a note that says he has no knowledge of such intentions by the Confederacy.  This, of course, is a bold-faced lie, and only one of the pages—a man who has been hired to try and round-up the votes necessary to pass the Amendment—is willing to deliver the message.

The rest, as they say, is history.

The point of all this isn’t to point out the man’s shortcomings.  Instead, it’s designed to emphasize that none of his decisions were arrived at lightly; that he wrestled with them (often angrily) and ultimately decided to commit an impeachable offense because he saw it as the morally appropriate thing to do.

How historically accurate the movie’s portrayal of Lincoln’s true motivations are depends on which biographer you talk to.  Either way, the sense that Abraham’s essence has somehow been captured is ever-present, and thanks to the spirited performances of Day-Lewis, Field and Jones the wiry, larger-than-life figure who only posed or a handful of photographs is bought to life for all of us in one of the most human ways imaginable.

  out of 5

Halloween II (1981)

Posted by :Chris On : October 11, 2012
0

Category: Blast from the Past, flowerspix

Tags:, ,

October 10, 2012

You Knew a Sequel was Inevitable, Right?

It was bound to happen.  After the success of the original film, a sequel to Halloween was a virtual certainty.  Three years later, the blood-thirsty masses were finally treated to what they’d been clamoring for–the return of Michael Myers.

Halloween II isn’t your typical follow-up, though.  It takes place only minutes after the first movie has concluded, with Laurie Strode (Curtis) being carted off to Haddonfield Memorial Hospital to receive treatment for her wounds.  Michael, of course, has vanished, and Dr. Loomis continues his mad dash around town in a vain attempt to put down the deranged mass murderer once and for all.

Most of the action takes place in the hospital where Laurie is being kept, and the layout of the place makes it, in essence, a labyrinth of darkened hallways that disorient viewers.  This, of course, is the point, because it’s entirely possible that Michael will pop out from anywhere at any second, ratcheting up the tension to admirable heights.

There are a few other quirks about Halloween II that stand out as particularly unusual, especially the lead characters’ constant puzzlement over the fact that Michael was shot six times at point blank range and lived to tell the tale.  In most modern horror movies, it’s a foregone conclusion that the baddie is an indestructible monster who can be hindered but never truly eliminated.  Since this is one of the first films to transform what would otherwise be an entirely human villain into a Terminator-esque menace to society, I suppose the filmmakers thought it prudent to mention this more than once—as if doing so would cause the audience to say, “Yeah, that’s true–how the heck is he still alive!?”  In a way, this strategy does have its intended effect, but viewers are ever given a satisfying explanation as to why Michael can be stabbed, shot, burned and (essentially) be no worse for the wear.  There are a few tidbits thrown into the story regarding Druids, pagan rituals and the like, but, again, this does little to sate the curiosity regarding Michael’s seemingly invincible persona.

Aside from a handful of quibbles that are admittedly minor, Halloween II is a solid stand alone horror film.  I got the feeling that director Rick Rosenthal was doing everything he could to mimic Carpenter’s style, and there’s not necessarily anything wrong with that.  In fact, the same iconic first-person perspective shots, cheap scares, “slow burns” are all present, and, much to my surprise, almost all of these strategies work just as well as they did the first time around.

It’s rare that a sequel succeeds in bottling some of the magic that made its forerunner a hit, but Halloween II manages the task (and handily, I might add).

Oh, before I forget, here are some memorably creepy scenes to keep an eye out for: Michael walking through a plate glass door without missing a step; the “bled” nurse and the pool of blood; and, of course, the finale, which sees Laurie shoot Michael in both eyes just before blowing him up.

Well played, Mr. Myers.  Well played indeed.

  out of 5

Halloween (1978)

Posted by :Chris On : October 9, 2012
0

Category: Blast from the Past, flowerspix

Tags:, ,

October 9, 2012

The Night He Came Home

by Chris Flowers

It’s that time of year again, when candy clatters around the inside of plastic pumpkins and horror movies descend on cable television like zombies assaulting an isolated farmhouse in the hopes of scoring some freshly scooped brains for dinner.  In honor of the shifting season and my favorite month of the year, I’ve determined that there’s no better way to honor All Hallow’s Eve than by review each and every Halloween movie.  There are 8 if you discount the Rob Zombie debacles—which I do—so, over the course of the next several weeks, reviews of each will follow in steady succession.

So, without further ado, let’s dig into entry #1: Halloween.

If you’re new to the Michael Myers universe, allow me to let you in on a little secret—this is the movie that started it all.  Many credit the original Halloween as being the father of the modern slasher flick, but, as I’ve stated in previous reviews, it is my contention that said honor falls squarely in the lap of Hitchcock’s Psycho.  Nevertheless, Halloween helped usher in the contemporary horror film, which is defined by cheap scares, brutal violence, and, for lack of a better term, a “robotic” killer.

Here, the killer’s name is Michael.  At the beginning of the movie, director John Carpenter introduces us to our antagonist by smartly utilizing a first-person perspective.  We don’t know that the killer is only a boy until after we’re allowed to see him murder his teenage sister (who’s prone to fornication and late night hair brushing, something that we’ll later learn is a staple of the modern horror flick) with an oversized kitchen knife.  Fast forward a decade or so.  Michael has spent his time since committing his crime in a maximum security mental institution under the watchful eye of Dr. Sam Loomis, a brooding psychiatrist who believes to be the now full-grown adult to be the full embodiment of true evil.  Late one night, Michael manages to escape his confines, secure an awesomely wood-paneled station wagon, and return to his hometown to finish what he started; specifically, to “off” Laurie Strode, his baby sister and the last surviving member of his family.

What follows is a slow burn that ultimately leads to Michael slaughtering a smattering of unruly teens up and down the street he once inhabited.  More important than “what” happens, though, is “how” it happens.  As previously indicated, everything about Halloween has come to define “horror” as we know it, and the mechanical pursuit of his sister—played by a young Jamie Lee Curtis—helped vault the actress into stardom.  The final thirty minutes are especially nerve-racking, and everything that plays out is a little too realistic to be written off as sheer scary-movie-fancy.  This, among a myriad of other elements, helps give Halloween the staying power that it’s enjoyed for thirty-plus years.

If you consider yourself a student of horror and have never seen Halloween you’re doing yourself a grave (hardy har har) disservice.  In other words, go buy it.  Immediately.  And revel in one of the great slasher flicks of our time.

  out of 5

The Dark Knight Rises

Posted by :Chris On : July 20, 2012
0

Category: flowerspix, Movie Reviews

Tags:, , , ,

July 20, 2012

Director: Christopher Nolan

Starring: Christian Bale, Tom Hardy, Anne Hathaway

Release Date: July 20, 2012

The Conclusion We Deserve

by Chris Flowers

The unprecedented fervor surrounding the release of the final Batman film of Christopher Nolan’s highly acclaimed trilogy is something we probably should have seen coming.  Fans of the films are rabid about the movies getting their just dues, and it’s become the (unfortunate) habit of many a fanboy to go ballistic on anyone who is a naysayer.  That said, these people are devotees of the series for a reason: each of the two previous offerings have been nothing short of fantastic, and there was no reason to believe that the third—and final—installment, The Dark Knight Rises, would be any different.

The question that’s on everyone’s mind, of course, is if it really does meet (and ultimately exceed) the impossibly high standards set by its predecessors.  The answer is a resounding “yes.”  The Dark Knight Rises is incredibly ambitious and incredibly satisfying; it’s also the best film of the trilogy.

Allow me to explain why.

In both Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, Gotham was in peril.  Madmen assailed the city’s citizens for varying reasons—some more concrete than others—while a troubled hero in Bruce Wayne sought to use his resources (namely access to incredibly advantageous weaponry and a whole slew of kick-assery he obtained while a brief member of the League of Shadows) to disarm those would see the town destroyed.  While his character has always been interesting, Bruce Wayne hasn’t been a truly engrossing dramatic figure.  That all changes with The Dark Knight Rises.

Here, we see Bruce/Batman’s tragedy and redemption come around full circle.  At the start of the movie, Wayne is a man crippled by the exploits he’s undertaken as the caped crusader.  He’s a recluse who’s holed up in Wayne Manor.  As we’re allowed to see him move beyond exchanging witty barbs with his longtime butler (and caretaker) Alfred Pennyworth, the emotional pay-dirt finally emerges, and the character—in the words of the late Ra’s Al Ghul—becomes more than just a man.  He becomes the embodiment of grief; here, it’s clear that there’s a tangible psychological block that’s eating Bruce from the inside out.  The first hour of Rises is devoted to mining this pain, and it makes Bale’s portrayal of Bruce more accessible than ever.

Then there’s the action, which hits its stride about halfway through the production.  Once it gets going, it’s relentless and, for lack of a better word, harrowing.  Everything that’s happening in the streets of Gotham has weight behind it, as the city faces a challenge unlike anything that’s come before.

I feel like I’m on the verge of spilling the beans about some major plot points, so I’ll wind things down by saying that the supporting cast—Tom Hardy as Bane and Anne Hathaway as Selina Kyle—are all splendid.  They each bring something crucial to their characters, and not a moment of screen time is wasted.

I don’t need to tell you this, but if you haven’t already purchased your ticket for Nolan’s epic conclusion to what will go down as one of the best trilogies in movie history, then you need to get on the ball.  After all, this is one of those rare occurrences in cinema—the emergence of a truly great movie that actually lives up to every ounce of hype.

Nicely done, Mr. Nolan.  You deserve the Oscar nods that are surely coming your way.

out of 5