*** OFFICIAL BATMAN BEGINS THREAD ***

[DragonMasterAlex]

Originally posted by: PaulNEPats

Originally posted by: torpid

Originally posted by: PaulNEPats
***SPOILER***




One thing I don't understand is..

When all those people in Gotham were exposed to the scarecrow's concoction, how did they get cured? That little vial of vaccine that Morgan Freeman gave to Batman couldn't have been enough for the ENTIRE city.

***SPOILER***




It wasn't the whole city, and it was mostly corrupt cops and criminals who were already in the asylum. And people along the rail. Gordon had a second vial that was to be used for mass production. I'm sure in a day or so they could produce a decent amount.

Yeah, but when Katie Holmes breathed in the toxin, Batman was in a mad dash to save her since he said himself, "she doesn't have much time." One day would've taken too long don't you think?

I don't think so. They established earlier (the Scarecrow himself said) that the dose given her was "highly concentrated". It's kind of a nitpick though

Jason

 

[HumblePie]

Okay, I will preface this by stating I haven't read exactly everything so far in this thread. I HAVE been reading the posts on IMDB and a couple posts here and there. I will start out also by saying I loved this film in it's many facets. I will also attempt to explain away many of the "gripes" as I can from misunderstandings people had while watching the film. So this WILL contain spoilers.

*****Spoilers BELOW*****

On BB (Batman Begins) finally gets everything RIGHT. I Had very low expections of this film. I'm a fan of the comics and the animated series which has followed the comic book storyline closer then any previous movie. I also thought the trailers for this movie made the movie look bad and lowered my expectations before going to see it. My low expectations were completely un-founded. BB firmly grounds the Bruce WAYNE in reality. Not Batman. Batman is a costume, Bruce Wayne is the man who wears it to frighten the bad guys. We get to see this from the character development of Bruce Wayne. Not in a linear fashion but through flashbacks (which I'm not usually a fan of flashbacks cause they don't always work but they work here).

Here we see Bruce Wayne as a kid, normal "rich" kid with a loving father. While an only child, he isn't doted upon and his father tries to instill values in him. Sure his Dad is rich now but he wasn't always as Lucius Fox said. Almost went bankrupt trying to set the city straight.

A traumatic event, falling down a well into a cave full of bats scares the crap out of him as a kid. I don't care who you are, something traumatic happens to you as a kid then that will leave a mark. YOU and I may not be really all that scared of bats, but some people are. There are plenty of things people are scared at that others will scoff at. That's just life. Bruce Wayne is scared of bats and it's believable why he is. You fall down a dark hole, break your leg and get swarmed by bats and see how un-frightened you stay.

Which is also another thing about the movie Fear, is a prevelant theme. Fear of the good-guys and the bad guys. Fear as a weapon for BOTH. Also, the conquering of fear.

After the traumatic experience of Bruce from falling down, later he experiences his parents dying. Shot in front of him over a wallet while his Dad was trying to defend his mom. Where the original movie turned this guy into the Joker. I'll never know. It WAS NOT in the comics that the joker killed the Bat's parents. Erase that storyline from your head and you won't be confused.

Bruce then becomes a child who's inhereted a fortune but doesn't want it. He just wants is parents back. He becomes lost on the idea of vengeance and almost goes over the edge himself by almost shooting the man who killed his parents. Luckily, someone else does it for him. Now denied vengeance, which he gave up college even to pursue, he seeks no to abolish himself. He goes to Tibet to learn why criminals are criminals. Becomes one himself.. although technically STEALING from yourself doesn't actually make you a criminal (which was funny showing the boxes he was stealing said property of Wayne Enterprises). He gets thrown in prison and learns to fight for his life.

Now.. all behind the scenes is Raz Al Ghul. Who is this guy? Well here's a big spoiler, he's the man that made Batman, which we see in the movie, and he's over 2000 years old. Which if you read the comics you'll know. This was the only "weak" point to the movie that some people don't get. They don't understand or "relate" to the motives behind the League of Shadows. Many complaints I see on the boards don't understand why someone would destroy a whole city to kill a few criminals, killing innocent with the guilty. AHHH.. but this is where the back story or Mr. Ghul comes in but was left out of the film. He was once a VERY good a noble man from a different and much stricter time. You steal, you lose a hand. Eye for an Eye was his original time frame. Not this namby pamby society of America we now live in where Serial Killers get released on probation after 10 years or less for "good behavior." Now, back in Mr. Ghul's day, if you did the crime you get punished SEVERLY. Not only that, anyone who doesn't try to stop a criminal or plays the "apathy" card for a criminal is a criminal themselves. Sure they didn't do the actual crime, but allowing crime to happen is just as bad to Mr. Ghul as doing it in the first place. The reasoning for the League to Destroy the entire city was A) to set an example for OTHER cities falling into decadence, B) to destroy the criminals, C) make sure no apathetic or criminal "accomplises" get away with not keeping their city clean in the first place. Not to mention the comic book has explained that years of prolong exposure to the Lazarus Pit for Mr. Ghul has shaken his sanity and the fact that humans weren't meant to live that long either.

Which is why I LOVE this Batman movie. You see, the majority of villains Batman fights in the comic books have multiple facets to themselves. They are "evil" just "because" like you get from other stories. Like Batman, most of his arch-enemies started off good or with good intentions and go astray, crossing that line Batman himself comes very close to crossing himself. The part at the end of the movie where Batman says to Ducard, "I am not going to kill you, but I don't have to save you either." is a PERFECT example of how close to the egde Batman really is to being the bad guy. Batman has ZERO problem with yanking a bad guy up by his feet a few stories in the air while he "interrogates" him for info. You think Superman would ever do that? Spiderman? No, he's the Anti-Hero by always flirting with that line of going over the edge himself.

Well in this movie we get to see the psycology behind WHY Bruce Wayne decided to become Batman. We get to see HOW he became it in a believable fashion. We get to see the dichotomy to EVERYTHING. I mean everything, from Gotham in day light and it's hay-day to it's nitty gritty darkness. Everything represented in this movie has a good and bad side. Everything revolves around fear as well. This is seriously a good THINKING movie as how everything relates. The acting, scipting, and directing was superb.


Also, I love how they set up MANY different future arch-enemies for sequels to come. Yah, you guys all saw the "obvious" ones. Like Scarecrow, Ra's Al Ghul, and the Joker with his card. Did anyone not notice the Card King? Beladonna (aka Poison Ivy)? There were a few others andmy friends and I were picking them out cause it was fun to do.

Also, the other major gripe some people had was with the character Rachel. I guess some people have hang ups about Katie Holmes, although it didn't bother me that the character was played by her. Now, some people are wondering why the heck her character was even in the story except for the one scene to slap Bruce in the face to knock some sense into him. She didn't seem like a love interest and was just a "childhood" friend.

AHHH.. but that's because you guys aren't fans of the comics and don't know Rachel's character comes in pivotal LATER. You see, she's Raz Al Ghul's DAUGHTER. Which I'm hoping later movies, that delve into Mr. Ghul's past will bring that to light. Eventually Bruce and Rachel do fall in love and actually DO get married (short lived as the marriage is). Which becomes another reason Bruce in the comics can't bring himself to kill of Mr. Ghul and vice versa. Because the woman inbetween loves them both.

Now the gripes some people had about Batman's voice, or the fighting sequences being to chaotic. Well, those are small matters of opinion that I can't argue against. I liked it all personally, but to the people that say the bad guys had no real "motive" to trying to kill Gotham off are way off base. You can SEE how devoted the bad guys are to being vigilantes by keeping that one guy around in a cage and trying to hae Bruce execute him. Also, by the discussions Liam (Ducard) gives to Bruce about the ways of the League of Shadows. (AKA League of Deamons and Raz Al Ghul in arabic means Head of Deamons).


This is a THINKING movie. If you don't like character development then this movie isn't for you. Sorry pre-adolecents if you didn't get it and went in expecting one of the craptacular movies along the previous lines. This movie isn't for you. This movie is very true to the roots of Batman and the psycology of a what makes hima vigilante.

 

[EKKC]

did anyone pay attention to that little scene of James Gordon's family? If he had a baby girl?? *BATGIRL*???!!!

unlike some crappy Alicia Silverstone batgirl whos not related to Gordon

*to clarify, alicia silverstone = hot, just wasnt a good batgirl

 

[EKKC]

*spoilers, maybe?*

AHHH.. but that's because you guys aren't fans of the comics and don't know Rachel's character comes in pivotal LATER. You see, she's Raz Al Ghul's DAUGHTER. Which I'm hoping later movies, that delve into Mr. Ghul's past will bring that to light. Eventually Bruce and Rachel do fall in love and actually DO get married (short lived as the marriage is). Which becomes another reason Bruce in the comics can't bring himself to kill of Mr. Ghul and vice versa. Because the woman inbetween loves them both.

where did you get that Rachel is Ra's daughter? i'm sure if there is a sequel, Katie Holmes wont be in it. As her character said (like Peter Parker told Mary jane in Spiderman1) that they can't be together as long as he's batman and behind a mask. or that the mask is bruce wayne, whatever it was she said. so that opens up a new love interest / female character in the next movie...

 

[HumblePie]

where did you get that Rachel is Ra's daughter?

Comic books. Note in the movie, they never get into who Rachel is. Why is the ONLY child seen playing with Bruce when he was young? How does Raz come to know Bruce and his family? Why is she working as a DA persecuting criminals? Otherwise following her dad's footsteps without actually chopping off heads. If you read the comics, or heck, even watch the animated series, you'd know Rachel is Raz's daughter. The reason we don't get that bit of info in the movie is Bruce Wayne doesn't know either until after they get married. She is the glue that bonds Bruce to Raz and vice versa. There is more character by-play and such involved though and I would love to see it come out on the screen if done right.

 

[EKKC]

i havent read comics in the past 8 years. i used to read batman but those stories are now blurry to me except the Azrael-batman / Bane storylines.

but i might remember wrong but in the late 1990s animated series Ras Al Ghul's daughter i thought was named Tanya or something?

 

[HumblePie]

Could be right about the name. Been awhile for me too. The casting of her looks, her position, her relative closeness to batman all screamed Raz's daughter to me. If she IS Raz's daughter, the reason she made that comment at the end is because she doesn't agree with her father's methods of persecuting criminals. She see's Batman as almost a possible extention of what her father does. Sure he doesn't kill and meet ut justice swiftly and over the top, but he's still a vigilante. Raz's daughter set out to prove she could persecute criminals as a DA... but she still grew up as Raz's daughter and see's Batman as her father might have been before he turned over the top. Which was part of the attraction/disattraction she has for Bruce. She loves the man, not the cape, BUT she also attracted to the cape since it reminds her of her father in some ways and not the man because he reminds her of her father in ways. It's a dichotomy in the comic books. Which is a major theme of Batman. Everything has a good and bad side, including the hero.

 

[NFS4]

After reading all of the later comments in this thread, I think that I have to go see the movie and give it a second chance.

The reason why a lot of you people like it so much is b/c you guys read the comics and are like uber geeks with the mythology and backstory of EVERY FRIGGIN' CHARACTER in the universe. It's like those LOTR nutjobs

I liked the original Batman b/c it was accessible and it was a great flick that anyone could jump in and enjoy without having to have access to a vast library of Batman comics/villans/backstory. With me not knowing who all of these characters were, or the true origins of certain characters, it was hard for me to get THAT involved with the movie at a personal level.

With the 1989 Batman, it was VERY easy to get sucked in and is a great movie b/c of it if you ask me. It is accessible on man levels for a wide spectrum of people.

I also feel the same way about Spiderman and Spiderman II (and a lesser extend X-Men and X-Men 2). They were accessible movies that still managed to entertain on many levels. Spiderman gave the backstory of Peter Parker without going completely pyscho on the details.

I went to see Batman Begins b/c I wanted to be entertained. I was entertained when I saw Batman. I was entertained when I saw Spiderman. I was entertained when I saw X-Men. I was on the outside looking in when I watched Batman Begins.

 

[HumblePie]

Batman Begins goes into alot of WHY Batman is Batman. I thought it was VERY believable, more then any previous Batman.

Sure, I can look back and see on the first Tim Burton venture into Batman, that is was decent enough. I liked it too. simple backstory, bruce wayne's parents are mugged and killed and he goes off the deepend to fight crime. Fighting crime he accidentally hurts the guy who killed his parents by dropping him in a vat of acid who now goes off the deep end moreso to do in batman and gotham.

A few jokes, 1 liners, Kim Bassinger, Some giant Balloon, the tallest tower in the world, a few punches here and there... and the end. All very nice, simple, and easily digestable by the masses with enough oozing amounts of "style." Not bad, not great, but certainly better then the 3 that followed which tried to go over the top with style and left anything resembling a plot somewhere flushed down a toilet.

In the first Batman, we see nothing of HOW he became batman, just sort of the WHY he became it. Which was losely believable. It's considered a weak motive but at least it was a sorta believable motive.

This time around we get a REAL motive of why batman is batman. We also learn the steps he took down he twisted hole to the depths he sunk. He was about to KILL someone if Falcone hadn't done it first. Deprived of vegeance and having no other guidance in life he wanders about trying to figure out WHY his parents were killed. He tries to learn what might drive a criminal to kill for money. He becomes a criminal and and learns to survive. He then gets trained to become a fighter by an organization that has been fighting for a very long time.

So now we have a much more beleivable WHY and a definate HOW. We the psyology that makes this man a double personality. We see how he's not exactly a nice guy as he dangles the bad cop by his ankles off a building and DEMANDS answers all the while looking insane enough himself to just let go if he doesn't get the answers he wants. THAT is Batman in the comics. He is NOT exactly nice. He won't kill a bad guy, but neither will he go out of his way to save them and if he's trying to stop them.. excessive force except death is all legal ways to get the job done.

Yes, more depth about WHY the League of Shadows is what they are would be nice. Same with Raz Al Ghul's character. Then again, that is what sequels are for. They can't put everything in a movie or even one story or it gets way too convoluted. Do you really think the backstory of an organization that is thousands of years old and of their leader who is also the original founder stil alive could be crammed in that 2 and a half hour movie? No.. so when they say things at face value, you just have to take them. When they said the League tolerates no form of criminal activity and tolerates NO ONE who tolerates criminals, just accept it as fact. You may not have a true motive behind WHY the league is willing to kill a whole city to make a point and why they did it before..you just have to accept that fact for now. If future batman movies are released along this calibre, I'm sure you'll get all the background motivation you seek for the villains.

 

[PingSpike]

Watched this yesterday. I gotta say, I believe it subplanted the original "Batman" as my favorite batman movie. I give it a 9.0/10. There were a couple very minor elements that didn't make sense and I hated that shakey camera work fight scenes that have become the new fight scene fad in hollywood now that matrix ripoff fights are played out. (Tip hollywood: remember fight scenes before the matrix? Do those again you assbags, there wasn't anything wrong with them. It makes many people physically ill when watching that shakey crap and I can't see sh|t thats going on. And if I can't see whats going on, you might as well just show a black screen with punching sound effects and then cut to a shot of batman standing over his defeated foe...BECAUSE ITS THE SAME DAMN RESULT AND DOESN'T MAKE PEOPLE PUKE.)

My feelings pretty much echo bridgen's, aside from the my obvious disagreement on the fight scenes. These weren't as bad as the completely ruined Borne Supremecy's ones but they were annoying. Thankfully they were short and there were few of them, so I can forgive them SOMEWHAT.

Character development was awesome, good acting all around. Great take on the story. A twist I actually didn't see coming. Great transition and evolution of batman and his equipment...although it moved kind of fast considering it all took place over such a short time period. Follows the animated series batman I know and love. Batman gets in a fight, gets his ass handed to him...goes back to the drawing board and finds a way to outmatch his enemy. I loved the whole fear and bouncing back from failure elements that were weaved into his character. Bruce Wayne got the tar beaten out of him a lot in this film, just like in the animated series. This movie just filled in so much about Batman's character, and thats why I really loved it.

I loved the original, and Keaton was a great batman...but I think Bale fits the role better. For one thing, keaton wasn't anywhere near jacked enough to be batman. Batman is pretty much the epinome of strength and agility, an amazing athlete. Lets face it, Keaton just wasn't big enough, most of his muscles came from his molded suit. Bale's voice seemed fine to me, although I can understand some complaints about that.

The batsuit was better since batman actually had the ability to move his head. The car made sense as its a early bat vehicle although I thought the rooftop chase was a bit over the top and the amount of destruction was uncharacteristic of batman. But hey, its early on in his career and he has some bugs to work out.

OH YES:
As has been mentioned, the entire city wasn't infected. Had the train reached the central water supply it would have spread throughout the city...thanks to Batman and gordons efforts only that one island and a small section of the city unneath the railway was infected. WAYNE ENTERPRISES MADE THE ANTECDOTES. Possibly the police/city used Gordons sample to make a portion, but Bruce Wayne told Fox when he was at Wayne's birthday party to sneak back into work and manufactor as much of that crap as he could. It wasn't explained whether the police/city or Wayne Enterprises actually made the antecdote, and both seem possible...but I would say Wayne enterprises which has a history of helping gotham city and probably had the necessary resources to do so, got the job done in record time. I suspect that scene was cut and would be in the DVD, since there was a setup for it.

 

[loup garou]

Originally posted by: NFS4
After reading all of the later comments in this thread, I think that I have to go see the movie and give it a second chance.

The reason why a lot of you people like it so much is b/c you guys read the comics and are like uber geeks with the mythology and backstory of EVERY FRIGGIN' CHARACTER in the universe. It's like those LOTR nutjobs

I've never read the comics, either. I still loved it (loved the first one too). I just really enjoyed the darker, grittier more emotional spin they put on Batman in this one.

Put the original out of your mind and go watch it again. I sure will be seeing it again.

Oh, and don't get me started on LOTR...snoooooore...BORING!

 

[HumblePie]

Ohh... after reading more and more of the posts people that "don't" like it have the seem to fall into 1 of 4 catagories.

1) Not a Batman "comic" fan but loved the first and second movie... maybe tolerated the 3rd and 4th. These people took the first 2 movies as being BATMAN. They are not. They are elements of Batman, but they are bad film adaptations of the original comic novels by Frank Miller. As such they are pissed that THIS movie "changes" the story line. It does not. It is the ORIGINAL story line (well the beginnings about batman not the fight with scarecrow) of how batman started. His parents were NOT killed by the Joker. Repeat that phrase over and over again until you understand it.

2) Just not a fan of comics at all. To these people I say, if you don't like comic book movies at all and never will no matter what.. THEN WHY THE HELL DO YOU KEEP GOING TO WATCH THEM!!! Good gawd, the sheer stupidity of some people... look I don't like playing sports genre video games or even watching sports as a spectator on TV except in RARE circumstances. As such I do not watch every single type of sport show on television and the complain at how bad they are and how much I hate them. I know what I like and what I don't. I watch what I do and avoid what I don't. It's really that simple.

3) Are not into character driven movies. Many people are, lets face it, popcorn flick goers. Nothing wrong with that. They are the kind that find dialog, character development, plot twists, and other things which normally define good story telling as boring. They went in expecting to see a punch fest from a guy in tights and get instead a character development and boredom for an hour. I can't say much to these people.

4) The last people that didn't like it closed their eyes, missed a couple lines, remember a few scenes out of sequence, and didn't understand something pivitol. I laughed my head off when someone thought Bruce Wayne actually shot the guy who murdered his parents and because of that wound up in a Chinese prison. WTF is that person smoking? Why would killing a criminal in the US get you sent to a Chinese prison? I think someone stepped out for a piss break and forgot there were story elements in the middle and instead just chose to mash it all together in their head and then proclaim it doesn't make sense. Which it WOULDN'T anymore.

Now, I can understant people that have a few geniune gripes. Like the posters above who mentioned they hated how the fighting scenes were done. I LIKED how they were done because that would be how Batman would fight. He's a NINJA. He attacks from the shadows. Uses distraction and mis-direction to fight. Sure he could probably beat most normal bad guys up 1 on 1 in a fair fight but that rarely happens. As such, if the bad guys have guns and you DO NOT, you use whatever advantage you have available.

I can't quite understand the hang up people have of Katie Holmes. She's cute, does a serviceable job, and isn't your stereotypically big breasted blonde beaut. Sure she has played in some bad roles before but not everyone has a perfect agent.

I can understand people's gripe about the lack of some development to the villains of the story. That's one of my smaller gripes BUT I make allowances because the movie was set up for sequels which seem to pertain to describing the villains in great detail. So now I have something to look forward too.

 

[brigden]

HumblePie, your post was very well thought out and your opinions on the film are appreciated. It's nice to see another Bat-fan who "got" the film.

However, I disagree with your statements about Wayne:

BB firmly grounds the Bruce WAYNE in reality. Not Batman. Batman is a costume, Bruce Wayne is the man who wears it to frighten the bad guys.

After Wayne returned from training he ceased to exist. He gave up a normal existance to devote his life to fighting crime and injustice. The life of Bruce Wayne, millionaire playboy, was a mask. The Batman was his true identity.

This sentiment is even echoed by Alfred in several issues.

 

[dfi]

Originally posted by: EKKC
i havent read comics in the past 8 years. i used to read batman but those stories are now blurry to me except the Azrael-batman / Bane storylines.

but i might remember wrong but in the late 1990s animated series Ras Al Ghul's daughter i thought was named Tanya or something?

Talia.

 

[Fox5]

Batman has ZERO problem with yanking a bad guy up by his feet a few stories in the air while he "interrogates" him for info. You think Superman would ever do that? Spiderman? No, he's the Anti-Hero by always flirting with that line of going over the edge himself.

Eh, they both have, especially spiderman.

Yah, you guys all saw the "obvious" ones. Like Scarecrow, Ra's Al Ghul, and the Joker with his card. Did anyone not notice the Card King? Beladonna (aka Poison Ivy)? There were a few others andmy friends and I were picking them out cause it was fun to do.

Nope, I missed them. Wanna detail?

AHHH.. but that's because you guys aren't fans of the comics and don't know Rachel's character comes in pivotal LATER. You see, she's Raz Al Ghul's DAUGHTER. Which I'm hoping later movies, that delve into Mr. Ghul's past will bring that to light. Eventually Bruce and Rachel do fall in love and actually DO get married (short lived as the marriage is). Which becomes another reason Bruce in the comics can't bring himself to kill of Mr. Ghul and vice versa. Because the woman inbetween loves them both.

Why does she oppose his goal then and why would he let harm come to her?(you know, the whole killing the city thing, plus she seemed to care a lot more about people than her father)

 

[Excelsior]

Originally posted by: NFS4
After reading all of the later comments in this thread, I think that I have to go see the movie and give it a second chance.

The reason why a lot of you people like it so much is b/c you guys read the comics and are like uber geeks with the mythology and backstory of EVERY FRIGGIN' CHARACTER in the universe. It's like those LOTR nutjobs

I liked the original Batman b/c it was accessible and it was a great flick that anyone could jump in and enjoy without having to have access to a vast library of Batman comics/villans/backstory. With me not knowing who all of these characters were, or the true origins of certain characters, it was hard for me to get THAT involved with the movie at a personal level.

With the 1989 Batman, it was VERY easy to get sucked in and is a great movie b/c of it if you ask me. It is accessible on man levels for a wide spectrum of people.

I also feel the same way about Spiderman and Spiderman II (and a lesser extend X-Men and X-Men 2). They were accessible movies that still managed to entertain on many levels. Spiderman gave the backstory of Peter Parker without going completely pyscho on the details.

I went to see Batman Begins b/c I wanted to be entertained. I was entertained when I saw Batman. I was entertained when I saw Spiderman. I was entertained when I saw X-Men. I was on the outside looking in when I watched Batman Begins.

Yeah, I can see where you are coming from.

However, I still think that a lot of the reason you got sucked in to the original is because of age. Movies I saw at a young age seem to stick with me..they have a strong affect on me. But, you still make valid points about not knowing the full story ( I didn't either when going to see Begins...infact, I probably didn't know more than you). I still found it very enjoyable though. Good point about Parker's backstory too though.

 

[Fritzo]

Originally posted by: NFS4
After reading all of the later comments in this thread, I think that I have to go see the movie and give it a second chance.

The reason why a lot of you people like it so much is b/c you guys read the comics and are like uber geeks with the mythology and backstory of EVERY FRIGGIN' CHARACTER in the universe. It's like those LOTR nutjobs

I liked the original Batman b/c it was accessible and it was a great flick that anyone could jump in and enjoy without having to have access to a vast library of Batman comics/villans/backstory. With me not knowing who all of these characters were, or the true origins of certain characters, it was hard for me to get THAT involved with the movie at a personal level.

With the 1989 Batman, it was VERY easy to get sucked in and is a great movie b/c of it if you ask me. It is accessible on man levels for a wide spectrum of people.

I also feel the same way about Spiderman and Spiderman II (and a lesser extend X-Men and X-Men 2). They were accessible movies that still managed to entertain on many levels. Spiderman gave the backstory of Peter Parker without going completely pyscho on the details.

I went to see Batman Begins b/c I wanted to be entertained. I was entertained when I saw Batman. I was entertained when I saw Spiderman. I was entertained when I saw X-Men. I was on the outside looking in when I watched Batman Begins.

I never read the comics (well, I had a few when I was a young teen, but that was it). I liked it because it was based on realistic situations and realistic equipment was used. They also had logical explainations for every aspect of the story (including why there are so many super criminals in Gotham). And the clincher??? IN THIS MOVIE, BATMAN WAS ABLE TO MOVE HIS HEAD FROM SIDE TO SIDE!!!!

 

[Qwest]

on a somewhat related note, it kinda pissed me off how they let Spiderman shoot webbing naturally in the movies.
doesnt he create those shooters himself with cartridges? i rem half the fun would be when he ran out in mid-air, he would always make a wise-ass remark.

hence why he presses his middle and ring finger down, he's pressing a button for the shooters.

 

[xospec1alk]

Originally posted by: Qwest
on a somewhat related note, it kinda pissed me off how they let Spiderman shoot webbing naturally in the movies.
doesnt he create those shooters himself with cartridges? i rem half the fun would be when he ran out in mid-air, he would always make a wise-ass remark.

hence why he presses his middle and ring finger down, he's pressing a button for the shooters.

true

 

[Adul]

Originally posted by: NFS4
Just got back from seeing it with my dad.

**Note, Batman (1989) is my favorite movie of all time...PERIOD. End of discussion**

That being said, I thought this movie was decent but left me wanting mostly. It just didn't "click" with me the way the original did when I saw it at age 9. This one seemed sorta meh and the fast cutting fight scenes were enough to drive my batty. Bale had the whole cocky, I'm mad at the world attitude going on, but he just can't top Keaton.

And the baddies in this movie? Puhlease. They can't even come close to touching Jack in the original.

But by far, the WORST offense in the whole movie was when he first said "I'm Batman!" It was so horrible I wanted to puke my brains out.

That being said, I still like Batman and Batman Returns way better than this new flick

I would disagree with you of course

I like this one best. Followed by batman.

 

[DPmaster]

Saw this movie last night and thought it was great. It had a feel that was so different from every other comic book hero movie I've ever seen. It had a more serious tone to it...sort of like a comic book noir feel to it. I guess it can be attributed to the director - Christopher Nolan (directed Memento and Insomnia) and his vision of Batman. You can tell he made this movie with the comic books in mind.

There are many scenes that pay homage to the comics such as how Nolan has Batman in the kneeling hunched-over pose he's so well known for. The fight scenes are so up close as to imitate the action panels in most comic books. Batman is willing to do what he needs to do in order to stop the bad guys...Bale does a very good job portraying this.

This movie was more focused on Bruce Wayne and Batman as opposed to the other films. The past films were really about the villains rather than Batman. I think that's why I really liked this movie...because it was about Bruce Wayne / Batman rather than the villains.

I loved the 1989 rendition of Batman (watched it as a kid) and I still think it's one of the best comic book hero movies ever. Batman Returns was good...not great but still good. You can tell there was the "Burton" factor with these movies.

The last two Batman films were just horrid. I don't know how any one could greenlight those movies with Joel "It Needs More Neon" Schumacher at the helm. His "vision" helped kill the franchise.

Just some random info but Schumacher was actually on the list to direct this film. Now that would have been wonderful :roll:

I went into this movie not expecting much (after the last two movies, expectations weren't too high) but this movie was great. People actually clapped at the end of this movie! And this was on a Monday night!

 

[pmoa]

Originally posted by: The Boss

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: Excelsior
Amazing Goose, amazing.

..and to think I thought that it would be a pile

I don't know... Christian Bale owns. No way he would play in a pile of crap movie Seriously, most talented actor of my generation.

kevin spacey???

 

[Qwest]

Originally posted by: pmoa

Originally posted by: The Boss

Originally posted by: Goosemaster

Originally posted by: Excelsior
Amazing Goose, amazing.

..and to think I thought that it would be a pile

I don't know... Christian Bale owns. No way he would play in a pile of crap movie Seriously, most talented actor of my generation.

kevin spacey???

AKA the next Lex Luthor.

 

[Attrox]

Originally posted by: NFS4
After reading all of the later comments in this thread, I think that I have to go see the movie and give it a second chance.

The reason why a lot of you people like it so much is b/c you guys read the comics and are like uber geeks with the mythology and backstory of EVERY FRIGGIN' CHARACTER in the universe. It's like those LOTR nutjobs

I liked the original Batman b/c it was accessible and it was a great flick that anyone could jump in and enjoy without having to have access to a vast library of Batman comics/villans/backstory. With me not knowing who all of these characters were, or the true origins of certain characters, it was hard for me to get THAT involved with the movie at a personal level.

With the 1989 Batman, it was VERY easy to get sucked in and is a great movie b/c of it if you ask me. It is accessible on man levels for a wide spectrum of people.

I also feel the same way about Spiderman and Spiderman II (and a lesser extend X-Men and X-Men 2). They were accessible movies that still managed to entertain on many levels. Spiderman gave the backstory of Peter Parker without going completely pyscho on the details.

I went to see Batman Begins b/c I wanted to be entertained. I was entertained when I saw Batman. I was entertained when I saw Spiderman. I was entertained when I saw X-Men. I was on the outside looking in when I watched Batman Begins.

The title of the movie is "Batman Begins", so this is all about how Bruce Wayne become Batman. Sure you will have Batman fighting the villains, but it's not all about that. So again, this is not a mindless action flick. Even if you don't know the root/background story of Batman you will enjoy this movie because it will tell you about that. You will get dissapointed if you expect just an action movie about Batman fighting some villains.

 

[kwjake]

Originally posted by: dug777
i think i'll wait for the DVD