Batman Begins

The only fact proven by your words are that you are an idiot, not me!

That's all I have to say here. This argument is rapidly falling below my personal standards of intelligent discourse.

My words are merely poking fun at your words, my friend.

__________________
Everything I do, I do to make my second stepdad proud.

Thanks for the great review, it captured the essence of the movie.

__________________
Health is the greatest gift, contentment the greatest wealth, faithfulness the best relationship.
Buddha

ok anyone who says Batman and Robin or Batman forever was a good or enjoyable movie or anything positive about it deserves to be burned in hell


l8r

You betcha!!!

__________________
Hey Pepe, would you say I have a plethora of presents?


Toga, toga, toga......


Was it over when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbour?

No, the actual Batman and Robin film should go to Hell first, followed by the actual Batman Forever film. As for anybody who thinks they were fun and enjoyable, well they just deserve a good whipping.


Here is my pic for the Joker in the next flick. The one and only......George Mcfly.

I just finished reading Frank Miller's Batman: Year One, and I must say, I'm glad they didn't go with that story for the film.

__________________
TOP 100 | "Don't let the bastards grind you down!"

This is agreeably the best commic book adaptation to date, but it goes too into the story and changes a character (Katie Holmes) which somewhat ruins the movie. I thought this movie was dark, but nowhere close to as good as Sin City at the directing style. The beginning of this movie was like rewatching the trailer, which should not happen. The dumb twist with was obvious. However, that said, the Batman guy was pretty good at his role, and Michael Caine was amazing. The movie was very long for a comic book adaptation trying to become an Epic, which should not have happened. Maybe if the Joker was in it, it could have achieved such a status, but the villans were horrible. The whole movie was a development, like the title suggests, but this is where the faults lie. B+

i loved the movie. im still purely attached to burtons batman and batman returns. but this film is purely excellent. ive been a batfan for ages and i have enjoyed seeing it all three times ive attended. cant wait for it on DVD and the special editions of the older movies. Also for those who did not like batman forever (i thought it was mediocre) its coming out as a directors cut DVD in october along with a directors cut of the three other movies. then youll get to see how batman forever was originally supposed to be portrayed because the scenes on the ones out right now were not done in order and had a lot of bad editing in them. also tons of footage is missing including how two face broke out of arkham assylum.

LOL with Pike, and this guy is stupid ^^, the bad guys were excellent

__________________
"I realize that everyone is entitled to their opinion and they have every right to express it, but some people are just stupid."-- OG-

The bad guys, being Scarecrow and Ra's Al-Ghul, lasted for about 20 minutes of the movie. It was like Dr. Doom in fantastic 4 but Scarecrow became nothing and Ra's, well I don't want to ruin anything, but really, these guys weren't comparable to Jack's Joker.

You're right, they weren't; that's the entire idea. In recent Batman films, the villains had become the main attraction. But the character of Bruce Wayne is plenty compelling on its own. You can't do an origin story and not focus almost exclusively on the protagonist. Not to mention that Wayne is still getting the hang of things, and thus more polished villains would probably, you know, win.

I think Nolan handled it the right way for about 246 different reasons. I agree with the logic of your complaints, but actually think the things you're talking about are what made the movie so fantastic. Nicholson was entertaining and all, but he completely overshadowed Batman and wasn't an interesting character; just an amusing one.

Also, not to quibble, but I can't help but notice that you will criticize a film very heavily, yet still give it a B, as if that were anything but a fairly positive rating. I don't know if you're using a different sort of grading system than the rest of us, but around here, a B is an above-average grade.

The villains were horrible? What movie did you see? Cillian Murphy was great as The Scarecrow, and this film wasn't about the villains anyway, it was a Batman origin story, and it was crafted with expertise, clarity, and conviction. Liam Neeson as Ras Al Ghul was fantastic. Please explain how they were horrible. Really most of the above claims are totally groundless. Watching the beginning was like watching the trailer? Again, not seeing how this statement makes any sense. So, the movie was a development (??), like it was supposed to be, but that is where it's faults lie? This makes the least sense of all. It nailed what it was trying to do, and that makes it a failure? Sorry, but this post just looks like yet another person claiming they didn't like a film because it didn;t fit into the little, tiny, boring box they had built for it before seeing it.


SO watch that movie again. Really, Did you want the same film again? Also, Jack's Joker wasn't that good, and was way over the top, he tried to steal every scene (succeeding most of the time) therefore ruining what was supposed to be a Batman film, not Joker film. At this point in time, I can watch Burton's film for the production design only, as they trash almost every character. It's funny, you complain about a minor difference in characer in Batman Begins, with Rachel, who is a totally unimportant part of the Batman mythos, yet praise The Joker from the first film, which totally destroys the Joker as a character, rewriting his origin, AND rewritting Batman's origin to fit around the Joker charatcer. So which is it? If you dislike changes in the mythos, Burton's batman is the clear big offender, yet you cite Batman Begins as being the offender, when it actually tried to tell the story as it was originally portrayed in the comic.

Also, comparing Sin City and Batman Begins? Of course this was going to happen, but it seems like you are comparing the production design of Sin City (which is sick, btw) to Nolan's direction in Batman, which was top notch as well, but it's apples and oranges. Of course the comic style slick design of Sin City is unmatched in comic films, but the direction is great in both. What were some of the direction problems you noticed in Batman Begins? They were little to none IMO.

__________________

This is true, I do agree because I think Nolan did a great job directing, and I agree with your comment that Bruce was the main character, which was great, specifically for a development film. I gave it a B because it was good for it's genre and it held together throughout. I was just pointing out some things that I noticed. The biggest complaint I had on this film is Katie Holms should not have been in it. That's it, other than that, other things are just my personal opinions on taste, not really criticizing the movie, but just pointing out how I saw it. My grading on the film is based not on my opinion but on how it compares amongst others. I do understand, however, that people will disagree with me and that's why it is an opinion, no more no less.

Well responding to this, the beginning of the film was cut down sufficiently, which is why it felt like a trailer. If you don't agree, don't, but i'm just pointing out that it was a lot of small scenes, not large ones. I was also saying that at points it failed at working the development of Batman, it was not horrible at this and I haven't watched this movie for awhile to make specific comments, but I do know it could have been a bit better paced in that sense. (Check out the first Godfather for good character development and change). Last but not least, I'm someone that put this movie into a tiny, boring box, well lets think about how you are questioning my semantics and then you make a comment like that. Now when people go to see a movie they have expectations. If someone goes into a movie that is claimed to be the movie that will save hollywood this summer, you're expecting a lot, this could have been why I was somewhat disappointed, but really I'm just critiquing the movie, I'm not bashing it if you think that's what I am doing. I did give it a B+ because it was not a horrible movie, and in fact it was good. I just thought that people who read these threads are knowledgable of what is to come and I want to give them some pointers and opinions on how I viewed the flick.

Well, you have absorbed the first volley of counter-posts on MoFo like a true vet, and for that I commend you. It's a tough gig at first, but the site is well worth it. You make some good points, and please realize, I AM just disagreeing with you (as you stated) and am not attacking you personally, as that would be lame.

Still, can you honestly compare The Godfather to Batman Begins. The Godfather is seminal, and almost a perfect film. It IS perfect to some, although I don't count myself amoung that crowd. Compare it to something like Spiderman II or X2, and you see how Nolan almost totally broke the mold. I say almost, because the film did slip a bit in the final act, content and editing wise, but I think they are small quibbles, considering. I guess I liked the small scene nature of the film, as it gave us a closer look at Bruce/Batman that had been absent from the over-blown Batfilms of the past, IMO.

Anyhoo

Welcome to MoFo

You roll with the punches quite well....

My other half commented after seeing this that we should buy it when it comes out on DVD. I of course agreed and she went on to suggest that we could collect the other Batman movies. I agreed partially, advising that I would not let the stinking pieces of excrement the were Batman forever and Batman and Robin touch my shelves. She stated that we should have them for the sake of completism. Do any of you venerable movie folk have any truly poor films of the shelf for this reason?

Hey man, I respect you too and I know you're not attacking me and I welcome criticism. I was not comparing this movie to Godfather either, I was pointing out the similar movie structure character wise. I was just stating that Nolan could have developed Bruce a bit better, maybe by eliminating Katie Homles, but who knows. Thanks though for the welcome and I'm looking forward to more reviews down the road.

Yes, Matrix Reloaded/Matrix Revolutions(this one wasn't too bad, no rave scene) - - Jurrassic Park 3 - Godfather 3(Even though has the greatest line out of all of them) - hmm I'm gonna say Chronicles of Riddick even though Pitch Black wasn't amazing, I just like those low budget films and supporting them, Chronicles was a gift too. I don't know, it ranges more in my cd collection, but really those Batman movies, for the sake of arguement, are not unwatchable, like some movies are, and even though they are for the purpose of making hollywood money, if your spouse wants them, just get them, can't be too expensive, check ebay for used ones.

Now, here is our common ground. I think the tweak I would make to the film would be getting rid of Miss Holmes... Casting her in a film with Caine, Freeman and Bale....not the best idea...