By this time, Van Halen had been in existence for close to 25 years, and were a big name in the industry for going on 20 years. After all of the madness, upheaval, and gargantuan amounts of monies already made, they didn’t need to make this album. And yet, they did. Furthermore, after going through two big-name lead singers, they decided to leaf through the second-tier of late 80 and early 90’s pop-metal-dom for their next front man, reaching out to Malden, Massachusetts finest – one Gary Cherone, who fronted Extreme through their run at or near the top of the charts. And so, in early 1998, Van Halen III was unleashed upon the public. It was also the absolute longest platter ever in VH history, and obvious that it should have been an Eddie solo project rather than another Van Halen record.
One problem is that, as a whole, the sound is even more mature and less fiery than what was heard on Balance, as if Eddie and Alex realize they are getting even older and do not dare compete with the young guns of rock anymore. Which, on the one hand, is a good thing, since at the time Nu-Metal was taking hold, but on the other hand, none of this really rocks with any sort of reckless abandon whatsoever. The most you get is a very measured professionalism, backed by Cherone’s odd vocal tracks. To add, most of these tracks are long, with some interesting, but ultimately not that impressive passages, to the point where you are left thinking to yourself, maybe Eddie is over-complicating himself out of a decent album. I got that feeling from a lot of tracks here. So, this is about Eddie the Artist, which over the years got the short end of the stick next to the front men of Van Halen, but now all of the sudden you are supposed to pay homage to him on this record…but what is weird is that he makes it difficult to do just that very thing here.
There are some odd asides, like “Once”, which reaches out into the trip-hop genre for inspiration, but fumbles its way back into the band’s normal wheelhouse eventually. And “Primary”, which features Eddie playing a sitar solo. “How Many Say I” is quite odd – a really oft-kilter piano ballad with Eddie on vocals for once – which should be a spot where you want to sympathize with your friendly old pal, but for some reason, the interaction comes off as slightly creepy and vaguely remote, as if you never really knew him after all these years…. Meanwhile, the rockers loaded at the start of the album, which normally pull people in, are missing the crunch, hooks, and fire of past works. I know these tracks are OK, but they are missing that key something, which separates even halfway decent VH from run-of-the-mill stuff, and it doesn’t have much to do with the lead singer. It has everything to do with the simple fact that the album never needed to be made in the first place.
Everything about this, right down to choice of producer – Mike Post, whose normal wheelhouse was cutting theme songs for TV show dramas – seemed wrong, yet the maestro insisted on one more go-round in a last-ditch attempt to prove the nay-sayers wrong. Eddie even cut the majority of bass tracks himself, rendering Michael Anthony useless for the most part. Does that make VH III the worst album in their catalog? In a sense, it does. Not because the group itself is awful in a technical sense, but the emotional void is too deep to ignore. With nothing to really play for – except to satisfy their own egos – what is the motivation here, really?
[SPOILERS] I walked out of the theatre unsure of what to make of this. I enjoyed it but I wasn't blown away like I was after some former Batman films.
It does feel different than any Batman movie we've had before which is overall a good thing in this world of recycled superhero movies. I had read some criticisms of Nolan's trilogy that Batman did not partake in enough detective work, but that aspect of the character is back, largely thanks to The Riddler being the main antagonist, who may I add, until he tries to make Bruce explode and then floods the city, does almost nothing evil in this. His only targets are the corrupt.
Colin Farrell as The Penguin steals some scenes but it looks like he will have a bigger role than he got in this in the sequel/HBO TV series. When he yelled something like "no one steals my money" it made my hairs rise - Very convincing. The ending seems to also hint to The Joker being in the follow up. This is an issue I have with the Superman films. There are countless villains in the comics, yet we get the same couple portrayed movie after movie.
While he was fine as Batman, I didn't love Robert Pattinson in either role. He doesn't have the look and some of the acting wasn't spot on in my opinion as Bruce. Where in the past Bruce has been a playboy or more confident and a different personality altogether, there was little difference between Bruce/Batman. The Bruce/Alfred relationship was weird. He didn't seem respected by Bruce. The "You're not my father" line is something a child would say. It didn't fit. And Alfred got what he deserved for opening mail addressed to someone else. Just joking.
The ending felt a bit anticlimactic just because The Riddler was already in prison. You don't want cookie-cutter movies, but generally the main villain being fought or captured is the climax where here it wasn't.
The action scenes were fairly good. The car chase with the b-tec batmobile was one of the highlights. The villains must have never learnt to take head shots though. Batman gets shot a load of times but his armoured suit protects his torso. If they aimed higher it would be a short film.
I was pleased that we didn't have 30 minutes of origin story. That was a fear of mine going in but there is little to no time wasted explaining this with us seeing Batman in his second year of 'The Gotham Project'. One odd part for me was after Batman is nearly blown up and escapes from the GPC, the next time he is with a bunch of cops it's like nothing happened. Was a scene cut? Did I miss something explaining this? If not, this is a huge plothole.
The "no killing rule" version of Batman is back, yet he pounds criminals' heads in multiple times. If by some miracle they weren't dead, they would definitely be a vegetable for the rest of their life. This is the issue I have with people who have had a problem with his portrayal in films like Dawn of Justice. Maybe he doesn't shoot them with bullets, but he always kills people in the films with the way he fights. Lastly, it has been mentioned and I think the 'woke' aspect/lack of equality is a minor issue and one that wasn't needed.
They're some of my quick thoughts. An enjoyable movie and one I've looked forward to seeing for years, but it just lacked something for me. 3.5-4/5.
