The Dark Knight Rises Review (After 3rd Viewing)

I have now seen the movie three times, and there are some things that I was either confused about or didn't notice.
1) This is probably me not being savvy enough to figure it out on my own, but I didn't realize that they were doing the blood transfusion at the beginning of the movie was to make it look like the doctor was dead.
2) Since Miranda is wearing that outfit in the scene before she reveals herself as Tahlia, why doesn't anyone notice? AND if she helped to pinpoint which truck was carrying the bomb, why didn't Gordon figure it out first...or did he?
3) If Bruce fixed the autopilot in the Bat, did Selina know that and how did they meet back up and decide to move out of the country?
4) How does Bruce get from Pena Dura? All we see is him climbing out of the top of the prison and walking away, and then he's suddenly walking up to Selina on the street. That really bothered me.

One thing that bothered me is what I can't determine to be a character choice for Dagget or an annoying habit of the actor, Ben Mendelsohn. When he talks, he licks his lips in this awkward way when his character is midsentence. It's a little distracting and a lot gross, and I was not a fan of the choice.

The camerawork, casting, music, and special effects of this film were insanely awesome. Besides the awesome plotline (which basically went along with the comic, besides a few differences about Tahlia and Bane and a few other things), the editing and order of events were very well done also. I intend to watch it at least one more time before it goes out of theatres, and I definitely want to own it.

Of course, the most amazing transformation on screen to me was Tom Hardy. His performance as Bane was remarkable considering the types of roles I've seen him play in the past. He is beyond versatile, and an extremely talented actor.

Mobile, or the Port Azalea City of Flags

So, after moving to Mobile to go to USA, I have learned a few things. 
1- IT's GON' RAIN: It is absolutely not over-preparation to keep a raincoat in the house, umbrella in the car, and rainboots in both places. These past few days have been amazing because it hasn't rained, but before that it was EVERY DAY. And, now Isaac is coming to take care of the 3 day dry spell for us. 
2- AIRPORT BLVD SUCKS: When traveling on Airport, it is completely necessary to treat all other drivers like they have no brains, or have never been behind the wheel of a car in their life. No one can drive on that road.... 
3- WE'RE NOT IN T-TOWN ANYMORE: There is about 5 times as much going on in Mobile. In Tuscaloosa, you've got 69 that goes to the movie theatre, Shelton, and some restaurants; 82 McFarland that goes to Midtown, the mall, and some other shops/restaurants. And then of course there's campus. Besides UA campus, Mobile is so much more complicated (i.e. I got lost for 45 minutes looking for Walmart last week). 
4-PRICHARD IS THE ALBERTA OF MOBILE, ONLY WORSE: Since I've been down here, I have heard nothing but terrible things about Prichard. The word is that if you get lost and go to far, you end up there, and you will then want to lock your doors and in some cases pee your pants. I haven't been there yet, so this is all based on other people's opinions. 

I wrote this in speech class last term. It's my heart and soul in an essay, and I've finally decided to post it on here proudly.

Marriage is defined as the “legal or religious ceremony that formalizes the decision of two people to live as a married couple”.  Yet it can also be defined as “the formal union of a man and a woman…”, but why is it that this union should be restricted to heterosexual couples? Isn’t everyone worthy of committing to the one they love? I have many people in my life that I’m close to that are gay, and most of them have been discriminated against in some way. In this speech, I will explain to you why gay marriage should be legalized in all 50 states. First I’ll discuss separation of church and state, how we have overcome other discriminations in the past, and lastly what the majority of today’s society views as “right” and “wrong”.

First of all, when you hear the term “separation of church and state”, what does that mean to you? Because to me it means exactly what it says. So why is same sex marriage illegal in the United States? This is an old law created long before our time, and it could easily be changed. There are so many good people out there who love their same-sex partners as much as any straight married people loves each other, but they are not allowed to make that decision for themselves. Andrew Sullivan, a gay individual says “We do not seek equality in marriage because we despise the institution of marriage, but because we believe in it and cherish it and want to support it”. As far as I see it, the only valid argument against gay marriage is that it goes against the Christian religion. Didn’t our ancestors come to America in search of religious freedom? Does this not include being able to interpret your religion in your own way? Lorraine DeArmitt says "As a straight woman and as a Protestant minister, it takes nothing away from me for people to have rights in a loving relationship”. This is true, what harm is it you if someone else gets married? Is it really necessary to force your morals on other people and deprive them of the happiness of civil union? The most common argument against same-sex marriage is that it isn’t “right”? But what does this mean? Right by the bible? Right for society? Does denying gay men and women the right to get married keep them from loving each other? No. So what difference does it make if they make a legal and emotional commitment to each other? What I consider unfair is not only that gay people can be in love and want to get married and can’t, but that they are deprived of the financial advantages of marriage as well. In today’s society, who’s to say what’s right and wrong? Who has the right to exclude people based on their sexual orientation? The way I see it, not allowing gay couples to get married is just as bad as not allowing women to vote, or counting an African American as 3/5^ths of a person. Everyone deserves the freedom to love who they want to love and do what they want to do. Don’t you think?

Much like the illegality of gay marriage, interracial marriages were illegal until the court case Loving v. Virginia in 1967. Until then, there was a law called the “same-race restriction” which stated “all marriages between a white person and a colored person shall be absolutely void without any decree of divorce or other legal process”. This is oddly similar to the “different-sex restriction” which stated that “any marriage between persons of the same gender is null and void from the beginning”. The “same-race restriction” was shot down after the Supreme Court deemed it an attempt to maintain white supremacy. To me, this is suggestive that the straight community considers themselves superior to gay individuals, which is unacceptable and primitive to our time. We’ve overcome racism and discrimination against women in the past, why not terminate discrimination against homosexuals? “For centuries, marriage was by definition a contract where the wife was the legal property of her husband. And we changed that. For centuries, marriage was by definition between two people of the same race. And we changed that”. So I ask you this: what is the difference between these changes and the topic at hand? Times are different now, things are changing, and everyone deserves to live the life they want to live.

David G. Myers wrote What God Has Joined Together: A Christian Case For Gay Marriage. He says, “the Bible has very little to say about same-sex sexual expression”, in fact “the word homosexuality is never used in scripture”. It apparently wasn’t even a word until the late nineteenth century. The Bible mentions same-sex sexual acts such as rape or promiscuity, but it doesn’t speak against same-sex love or relationships. Most Christians in today’s society learn what they know about the Bible from someone else, not their own interpretation. So what does this say about their opposition to same-sex marriage? Commonweal, a biweekly Catholic magazine, poses the argument that “the purpose of marriage is procreation”. But, is this true anymore? Does every married couple have children? No. Yes, some are unable to and therefore don’t count in this argument, but many choose not to. They get married. Interestingly enough this is a common point against the legalization of gay marriage. Jonathan Cordes, an acquaintance of mine, agrees with this idea. Another opposition he has to gay marriage is the belief that gay couples’ relationships are more temporary than straight couples’. But in this day in age, the divorce rate for heterosexual couples is alarmingly high. In a census report from 2009, it was recorded that only 52% of married couples stay married. So if marriage already virtually has a 50/50 chance of survival, how could gay marriages differ? What does sexual orientation have to do with the longevity of a loving relationship?

In conclusion, I believe gay marriage should be legalized in the United States because it’s unconstitutional to deprive gay couples of civil union and has no negative effect on the Christian population. Homosexual individuals should have the right to commit to their partner and enjoy the advantages of marriage, both emotional and financial. A great man once said “All men are created equal”, and I think they should be treated as such.