Perhaps the BEST B1G Forum anywhere, here at College Football Fan Site, CFB51!!!

Over the past two weekends we rewatched the whole Dark Knight trilogy (Christian Bale, Christopher Nolan dir., etc.)  I think this was perhaps just the second time I saw The Dark Knight Rises, maybe having only seen it once in the theater.  I kind of remember this being my initial reaction, but now, all these years later, it's even more clear that this trilogy finale had glaring problems.  It's still a fun watch and overall a well-done movie.  The actors all do a pretty good job with what they've got to work with.  However, Bane's whole nefarious plan made zero sense, and was dumb AF, and that kind of drags the whole thing down.  Especially when watching it right on the heels of the first two, when the comparison is fresh.  Bane's motivation also seemed to be mostly just a rehashed version of what the Joker set out to do in the second film, prove that people really suck and all that.  Only the Joker did it better, and the concept wasn't tired and played out by that point.  I appreciate that Bane purported to be some type of cleansing agent, ridding the world of corruption, while masquerading as a Marxist asshole, while the Joker, in contrast, was an anarchist with nihilist tendencies.  But the point they tried to make while setting about their business was the same, and......meh.  Already seen it, and the Joker did it better.

I've heard that Christopher Nolan had lost interest in the franchise at that point and didn't really want to make that film, but was contractually obligated to.  If true.....it kinda shows.  I've also read that a big reason for not killing the Joker in the second movie was because the plan was to bring him back to be a part of the third movie, though that wasn't possible since Heath Ledger died prior to the second movie's release.  If so, maybe some of the scripting for the third movie was already done and they wound up using elements of it in making the third movie.  That would explain why some of the same stuff was getting rehashed, albeit in a clunkier manner....because this was originally the Joker's next move.  

All that said, it's still not a bad film, and I'd take it over much of what gets produced today.  

Conversely, the first movie, Batman Begins, is a better movie than I remember giving it credit for.  Not as good as the second movie, which was the clear high-point for me.  But still a very solid effort that stands very well on its own.  

Hellz yeah.  When I was a kid I loved all those fantastically terrible Van Damme and Segal movies, and anything that went in that bin.  Bloodsport is probably the most notable of the Van Damme flicks.  I don't go out of my way to watch them, but if they're ever on, I don't look away. 

The actor who played Chong Li was 42 when Bloodsport came out, and plausibly no older than 41 when it filmed, since most movies take quite a while in post-production and distribution red tape.  His working name is Bolo Yeung, but his birth name is Yueng Sze.  A much earlier role for him was in Bruce Lee's Enter The Dragon, where he played a character named Bolo.  My friends used to joke when we were kids that if you were in a film with Bruce Lee, then you'd change your name too, to whatever he called you in the film.  This appears to have not been far from the truth, though not out of hero-worship as we joked.  But he did assume the name of his Enter character.  He was in some other Van Damme movies too. 

If, like me, you have a fondness for the cheese that is the old Van Damme catalog of bro-movies, you'd probably like the 2016 Amazon series Jean-Claude Van Johnson, where Van Damme plays a fictionalized version of himself where he was really always a gubment spook posing as a cheesy action film star.  I thought it was pretty funny, and he certainly had no problem making fun of himself.....his age, or the cheese of his career. 

My eldest and I watched Bloodsport last night,

This nails it.

6:40