Well Bat-boys and Bat-girls, it's finally here. After years of internet speculation, months of binging on promotional material, and more than a few movie tickets bought as a shameless excuse to watch the new trailers, The Dark Knight Rises is here. Christopher Nolan's genre redefining take on the Batman mythos glides into theatres aloft on the praise of audiences and critics alike, but faces the infamous foe that is the finale. So, have Nolan and company stuck the landing, or is the burden of expectation too great to bear? Is The Dark Knight Rises the "Return of the King" or a super disaster of Spider-Man 3 proportions?

The answer is… it's "Jedi". "Rises"is to The Dark Knight saga what Return of the Jedi was to "Star Wars." Wait, wait! Douse the torches and sheath your pitchforks; there are no fuzzy teddy bears or toy tie-ins to be found here, the comparison is meant as a compliment. As many of us had hoped, Bruce Wayne's journey as the caped crusader Batman comes to a definitive, satisfying end, synthesizing the character study that was Batman Begins with the greater thematic aspirations of The Dark Knight into a package that feels whole and complete. Some will find a few niggling questions remain unanswered and criticize the door being left ever so slightly ajar for someone else to pick up the franchise mantle, but it's clear that Nolan but it's clear that Nolan has stretched this comic book adaptation/myth making exercise to its absolute limit.

But just like "Jedi" however,the payments made to satisfying the grander narrative are at the expense of the final instalment itself. The huge shift in scope and ambition between parts I and II created a gulf for the trilogy as a whole that "Rises" spends most of its first act filling in. There's a lot of catch up to play when returning to Gotham eight years after Batman shouldered the blame for Harvey Dent's crimes at the end of The Dark Knight, and everyone's out of their element. As Commissioner Gordon (Gary Oldman) struggles to maintain a lie that cleaned up Gotham's streets, Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) retreats further into solitude in his rebuilt Xanadu of Wayne Manor, having retired from nights of jumping off of rooftops to nurse a broken heart and a lack of purpose.

With great speed, a bevy of new players enter to shake up the peace. There's Miranda Tate (Marion Cotillar), an alluring CEO looking to save the world by getting into bed with Wayne industries, John Blake (Joseph Gordon-Levitt), a rookie cop who understands Bruce better than anyone, and Selina Kyle (Anne Hathaway), a jewel thief looking for a fresh start with a new identity. But the real catalyst for Batman's return is a new threat, the hulking beast Bane (Tom Hardy), who rasps and wheezes like Vader through an analgesic mask, and has designs for Gotham nothing short of total annihilation.

An exhilarating and beautiful opening plane hijacking (as in, one plane lassoing another midair) launches things spectacularly, but early signs of turbulence come about from the half a dozen plot lines frantically racing towards their required destinations. The instances of contrivance and convenience that detracted from The Dark Knight pale in comparison to the happenstance on display here, and numerous scenes feel like nothing more than setup without the memorable quips and sardonic humour the first two scripts had at beck and call.

With "Rises," Nolan has completed the transition from superhero movie to all out epic, one describing a modern day apocalypse of dizzying magnitude. People talking about the film's awards potential could point to its "and the kitchen sink" approach to weaving in every contemporary boogeyman Oscar voters like to reward, from domestic terrorism and Wall st., to civil uprising and weapon proliferation. It doesn't meditate on these ideas too throughly, but keeps their presence a constant as the heroes and villains scramble toward a powerful finale, amping up the sense of dread and despair as Bruce Wayne faces his most agonizing trials yet.

But that's where the film finds its most focussed and satisfying through line, in closing out Bruce Wayne's story by exploring his dependence on his secret identity. It's fitting that the film comes out the same week as the remake of Hara-Kiri: Death of a Samurai, because that's how Bruce functions without the cape and cowl, as a warrior looking for a good death in a world that doesn't want him. With doting butler Alfred (Michael Caine) begging him to hang up the costume for good, Bruce's choice to fight evil physically instead of economically and socially comes into question. Through the endless plot turns, character moments and set pieces, one question comes to centre the film and the franchise as a whole: can Bruce Wayne overcome his inner demons and return to a world he gave up on, or is he destined to go down fighting as the Batman?

And it's a Christopher Nolan movie, which means thrilling action sequences (save for a criminally stupid continuity error during a motorcycle chase), gorgeous cinematography from Wally Pfister, and one haymaker of a late game twist that makes up for Bane's intimidating but not always engaging presence. And just as Nolan was the first to really understand Batman, Anne Hathaway's spot-on Catwoman is the sultry, badass addition such a solemn affair desperately needed. Having cleared the bar for our expectations so soundly in its first two instalments, it's no surprise that by the final chapter, The Dark Knight Rises ends Nolan's legend feeling all gassed out. But taken as a part of the greater narrative, its a rousing finish, an operatic swan song that's been earned. To hopefully use this tired old phrase one last time, The Dark Knight Rises may not quite be the finale the Dark Knight Saga deserved, but it's certainly the one it needed.

4 out of 5

The Dark Knight Rises

Directed by Christopher Nolan

2012, USA

Potter fans rejoice? That's the question on the mind of many a fan of J.K. Rowling's landmark series, now that the megahit franchise has released its celluloid conclusion almost four years after the final book, The Deathly Hallows, was released in 2007. Ten years, eight films and $6 billion dollars later, Harry Potter has proven to be one of the most scrutinized and lucrative franchises in cinema history and that the entirety of the wizarding epic was translated into film is truly an achievement. But it’s a bittersweet farewell for some as this marks the end of one of the most entertaining fantasy franchises of all time. Just look at the burgeoning fraternity of young adult fiction books moved to the screen as would-be franchise openers, only to sputter and flop where Potter succeeded and you’ll know that there’s something truly special about Rowling’s masterpiece.

Harry-Potter-And-The-Deathly-Hallows-Part-2

It's tempting, then, to use the release of the final film, Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part II, as an excuse to conflate feelings about the individual product with the emotions that come with seeing a ten-year phenomenon take its final bows. When Harry Potter and the dark lord Voldemort face off in their climactic final battle, is the narrative thrust coming from the two hours you've spent in the theatre that night or the 15+ hours spent watching the preceding films and the many months spent waiting between each part? To look at DHPII in a vacuum, I’m inclined to rate it about as highly as I have all the previous entries, faithful to the source material, but only good, never great films, which is admittedly a little disappointing.

After the enjoyable yet uneven blend of gritty chase scenes and ponderous table-setting that was Part I, anyone who's read the book will know that what's left is all gold. For a 130 minute film, Part II is quick on its feet, opening with a hasty recap before getting starting right where Part I left off, with bank heists and dragon hijackings crammed into just the first 30 minutes. It's less than an hour before the stage is set for a good old-fashioned "hold the castle" battle royale at Hogwarts and I might be alone here but there's something oddly cathartic about seeing the series' most iconic set blasted apart by all manner of magical spells and creatures. Even with the Potter equivalent of Helm's Deep raging outside, the film still finds time for its heroes Harry, Ron and Hermione to move through a greatest hits tour of the school's hidden rooms and secret chambers in search of the horcruxes that keep Voldemort alive.

The relentless pacing will likely irk purists more than usual and if the subtitle didn't make it clear enough, this is absolutely the second half of a whole picture. Characters have a habit of appearing without introduction and accepting the Potter universe's internal logic is mandatory; you have to trust that the plot points raised out of the blue in this chapter were established in earlier ones or you’re going to be left behind. It's breathlessly efficient, as the absence of the quidditch, homework and teen angst filler that bogged down previous entries lends greater propulsion to the welcomely bleak plot. Still, director David Yates' expedience has a tendency to undercut the emotion generated by the staggering body count that piles up, a concession that may upset fans but aids in keeping the film focussed on its real stars, the kids.

Well, the former kids I suppose. Part of the genius of Harry Potter has always been how well it used the fantasy setting to conceal its identity as a coming of age story and the growth of the reader/viewer along with the characters is a chief reason why the series has enjoyed its enduring popularity. After eight movies, the three leads, Radcliffe, Watson and Grint, have come to inhabit their respective roles with a maturity and confidence that has only grown with each film. The real heavy lifting was done by Rowling in creating the characters to begin with, but the actors and their personas have become so intertwined that by finally becoming adults on screen, the actors may have earned a chance to escape the stigma of being known as just the “Harry Potter kids”.

To focus on these three though would be giving short shrift to the rest of Part II’s impeccable cast. Many of the bigger names are relegated to cameos (Gary Oldman literally has less than three lines), but their presence invokes the grandeur and richness of the lore. One exception, sadly, is Alan Rickman as the turncoat Severus Snape, who apparently decided to make up for his lack of screentime in Part I by acting twice as hard in Part II, and the slight hamming sticks out when the rest of the cast is doing their damndest to give the material the appropriate weight. The signature look of the franchise remains intact and the visual effects continue to be a highlight, though seams are understandably present during some of the more grandiose shots. Those looking to invest in the extra dimension will have a fine enough time, as action sequences are numerous enough to distract from the way the 3D gives static shots an awkward staged look.

So if we ignore the baggage inherent to being the final part of the biggest film franchise ever, where does that leave Deathly Hallows Part II? Well, as someone who has read the source material, I’m forced to stick to the old mantra of “it’s good, but not as good as the books”. In terms of filmmaking it’s among the best of the franchise and should satisfy fans of the books and films alike but to compare it to Rowling’s original work is folly, as is so often the case when adapting books to film. But, as said before, it’s hard not to look at this final film without reflecting on the series as a whole. The journey of The Boy Wizard has been an entertaining one, but Harry Potter the film franchise has had an incredible journey all of its own. The whimsical Columbus years were followed by the darker Cuaron and Newell entries, before finally coming of age under Yates, a transition true to the books but incredibly rare in cinema. Though the films didn’t necessarily become better with each year, they matured with each entry, turning into something organic and altogether unheard of, a film franchise that grew up along with its audience.

4 out of 5