Batman Begins....

[lopresmb]

I loved the movie, which was amazingly better than either "forever" and or "and robin." I loved Alfred, Gordon, and the portrayal of Gotham. But,

In my mind, the only really good batman on the screen was Batman, the Animated Series (which is available on DVD now). That was some good stuff.

But back to the topic at hand, yes, I do believe that this was my favorite Batman motion picture to date.

 

[Artful Dodger]

I bought it and think it's very good (as a movie and Batman fan).

iGary
I loved the other Batman movies.

I think the others had more color which may have given some extra "pizzazz" that this one doesn't have. It's nice to see the beginning of a super-hero in any movie really.

 

[GoCubsGo]

WATCH IT!!! I saw it twice in theaters and have already watched the DVD. It's not earth-shatteringly amazing, but it's entertaining.

I am with you. I saw it twice in the regular theater and then once in IMAX! It was just pure bliss! I saw the IMAX one after being grossly disappointed about war of the worlds.
I just picked up the DVD at Wal Mart today---about 10 min ago and I am going to watch it after I pick up something for supper at the store. I am so excited!

I am a hard core Superman fan, Batman is my second love.

 

[Lacero]

My only complaint, was how bruce talked as batman. But beyond that...everything was cool in my book.

I didn't have an issue with his voice. Obvously, he can't speak in his regular voice around Rachel or Jim Gordon. I guess he could raise the pitch in his voice, but that would make him sound like a sissy.

The voice as Batman was believable enough for me. Maybe he should have went with those devices those smokers put to their throats. That would be funny.

Gonna watch the old 1989 Batman to hear how Michael Keaton spoke in his costume around his reporter friend.

 

[dmw007]

Bought and watched it last night- good movie!

 

[dmw007]

I am with you. I saw it twice in the regular theater and then once in IMAX! It was just pure bliss! I saw the IMAX one after being grossly disappointed about war of the worlds.
I just picked up the DVD at Wal Mart today---about 10 min ago and I am going to watch it after I pick up something for supper at the store. I am so excited!

I am a hard core Superman fan, Batman is my second love.

Batman Begins on IMAX- sounds pretty awesome!

 

[Verto]

Batman Begins is THE best Batman, with Batman (1989) coming in a close second - in some aspects, even tied or superior. Batman Returns would have been great, had The Penguin (a) either actually represented the actual villain or (b) been removed entirely from the plot, with Catwoman boosted in importance to become the main villain. Batman Forever had some good elements, but was ultimately ruined by the crappiness that was Jim Carey as The Riddler, and Tommy Lee Jones as Two-Face: neither bore any resemblance to their characters, save for their costumes. The plot was idiotic. The best part of this movie is Batman crashing through the glass ceiling of the party. Batman and Robin....the only redeeming value is Gough as Alfred. George Clooney could have been a good Bruce Wayne/Batman if he'd been given good direction, we'll never know.

According to the commentary in the Batman Anthology set, Batman (1989) was supposed to represent Batman of the '30s, Batman Returns was the '40s, Batman Forever was the '50s (with the introduction of Robin, the less realistic, more colorful look); Batman and Robin was the campy '60s.

Schumacher also allegedly apologizes for the crappiness of Batman and Robin, taking full responsibility for how terrible it was. I haven't yet gotten to that one's commentary, but I eagerly look forward to it.

 

[ColoJohnBoy]

This thread surprised me, iGary. I've spoken with literally dozens of people who've seen 'Batman Begins' and the worst review from any of them was "It should've been longer". I rented it last night for my fella and I, watching it tonight, so I'll just have to see. Excepting the Katie Holmes factor, I'm betting I'll like it - Christian Bale is just too tasty.

 

[XNine]

I simply loved this movie. The 1989 Batman was my favorite until this one, and there was just something about it that did it for me. Story, action, atmosphere - I loved it all. Christopher Nolan did an amazing job directing I thought and I can't wait for the sequel.

Sorry that you didn't like it iGary, but that's what keeps the world interesting - people with different opinions.

Word. This movie was BAD AAAAAAAAAAASS! Seriously? How could anyone not like this movie? It makes me feel like there's a certain sense of bad taste! The whole story behind how he BECAME Batman, where he got his gadgets (and to those of you who don't like the 2nd half of the film because of "gadgets".... IT'S A STAPLE OF BATMAN! GET OVER IT!) The action, the attitude. It was perfect. Bow if this director can direct two more of these, and cut it off, it will all come together perfectly.

There's jsut one thing I didn't like. Katie Holmes' smile. I just want to kick her teeth in!

 

[QCassidy352]

I simply loved this movie. The 1989 Batman was my favorite until this one, and there was just something about it that did it for me. Story, action, atmosphere - I loved it all. Christopher Nolan did an amazing job directing I thought and I can't wait for the sequel.

Sorry that you didn't like it iGary, but that's what keeps the world interesting - people with different opinions.

Agreed 100%. This is by far and away the best batman movie, even better than the first 1, which was a classic.

 

[slb]

According to the commentary in the Batman Anthology set, Batman (1989) was supposed to represent Batman of the '30s, Batman Returns was the '40s, Batman Forever was the '50s (with the introduction of Robin, the less realistic, more colorful look); Batman and Robin was the campy '60s.

Interesting, which DVD is this from, so I can pop it in?

 

[LethalWolfe]

Personally I enjoyed "Batman" and "Batman Returns" more than "Batman Begins." Part of it has to do w/how much I like the aesthetic Tim Burton creates. Burton's Batman also had more leeway in terms of reality because it was supposed to be a more "fantastic" world, not as "reality" based as "Batman Begins." As "introduction" movies go Spider-Man was much better, IMO.

I enjoyed "Begins" even though it had a some stumbles.
1. Namely, the overuse of "fear." Yes, we all get the under and over tones of fear in the movie. We don't need it talked about every five minutes.
2. Yes, we get the idea that Bruce Wayne's dad was a freakin' saint. We don't need that pounded into our heads either.
3. The whole drugs/teddy bear/Scarecrow/crime boss/water supply plot is just flat out convoluted and stupid. If there was a Rube Goldberg award for plots this would certainly be a contender.
4. Gordon sure mastered the batmobile pretty fast didn't he?
5. By the end of the movie we all know what the evil plot is so why do we have the old guy at the water station repeating it all back to us?
6. Good thing the microwave emitter thingy only effected water outisde the human body.

Bale's "Batman voice" was too forced, IMO. I prefer Keaton's more subtle approach. And if Bale couldn't naturally do a good voice they should have tweaked it in post.

All in all I liked "Batman Begins", but it feels like a good movie that too many people f**ked with and they ended up w/half they movie they started with in the end. Hopefully the next one won't have as many cooks in the kitchen and we'll get a leaner, better Batman.


Lethal

 

[savar]

Batman fans tend to agree this is the best Batman movie ever. I'll also agree. As a movie, it's also very good. Full of special effects and action, and even so, I would not characterize the movie as an action movie.

The Offical Batman Begins thread

I'm not a huge Batman fan, but I thought it was the best by far. It was well worth watching. A waste of two hours? If you feel that strongly about it, your boyfriend probably should have known better.

By the way, anybody interested in drugs ought to get a kick out of the evil plot.

 

[Xtremehkr]

It was pretty good, all considered. The caliber of actors was first class.

Cilian Murphey is no Jack Nicholson though. His scene where he mimics Jack in introducing "The Batman" was kind of weak.

The whole chase scene was really bad too. If the rest of the movie hadn't been as decent as it is, it would have ruined it.

 

[~Shard~]

It was pretty good, all considered. The caliber of actors was first class.

Cilian Murphey is no Jack Nicholson though. His scene where he mimics Jack in introducing "The Batman" was kind of weak.

The whole chase scene was really bad too. If the rest of the movie hadn't been as decent as it is, it would have ruined it.

Along these lines, I wonder if The Joker will indeed be the official villain in the next movie, and if so, who will play him. I know this discussion has already taken place in the other thread, but Jack Nicholson was soooo good, I think it will be a difficult act to better his performance.

 

[Xtremehkr]

Along these lines, I wonder if The Joker will indeed be the official villain in the next movie, and if so, who will play him. I know this discussion has already taken place in the other thread, but Jack Nicholson was soooo good, I think it will be a difficult act to better his performance.

No kidding, Jack has set the standard for all Jokers to come. No one I know of know comes to mind for that role.

 

[GoCubsGo]

Along these lines, I wonder if The Joker will indeed be the official villain in the next movie, and if so, who will play him. I know this discussion has already taken place in the other thread, but Jack Nicholson was soooo good, I think it will be a difficult act to better his performance.

I completely agree. It is going to be real hard to top Jack Nicholson as a Joker.

Batman 1989 Keaton was my favorite and I actually enjoyed Batman Returns. Batman and Robin appealed to me on a level that I am female and I love Chris O'Donnel. Otherwise, who cares. I did find that Katie Holmes was good in Batman Begins. Since her most memorable moments for me in the past were her as Joey in Dawson's Creek and her in Disturbing Behavior, it is nice to see this other side. And I didn't know who the batman character was before Batman...which I regret because he is a great Actor.

 

[~Shard~]

I completely agree. It is going to be real hard to top Jack Nicholson as a Joker.

Batman 1989 Keaton was my favorite and I actually enjoyed Batman Returns. Batman and Robin appealed to me on a level that I am female and I love Chris O'Donnel. Otherwise, who cares. I did find that Katie Holmes was good in Batman Begins. Since her most memorable moments for me in the past were her as Joey in Dawson's Creek and her in Disturbing Behavior, it is nice to see this other side. And I didn't know who the batman character was before Batman...which I regret because he is a great Actor.

Yeah, I didn't mind Batman Returns either. At first I didn't care for it compared to the 1989 version, (although I did like it better in the sole aspect that is was an even darker Burton film that the first), but then compared to the Schumacher debacles, it wasn't that bad after all! It's all relative, I guess...

And if you've never seen Bale before, you should check out American Psycho.

 

[Verto]

Cilian Murphey is no Jack Nicholson though. His scene where he mimics Jack in introducing "The Batman" was kind of weak.

I never got the impression that he was mimicking Jack Nicholson at all

 

[~Shard~]

I never got the impression that he was mimicking Jack Nicholson at all

Yah, I don't think this was really the intent either. Doesn't really matter though I guess...

 

[Verto]

Along these lines, I wonder if The Joker will indeed be the official villain in the next movie, and if so, who will play him. I know this discussion has already taken place in the other thread, but Jack Nicholson was soooo good, I think it will be a difficult act to better his performance.

I've heard the rumors that it is a direct link to Begins' immediate sequel, I'm more inclined to believe (or rather, hope) that it was put in merely as a homage to Batman (1989), a nod to Tim Burton, rather than to signify that The Joker would be his next villain. Besides, at the end of Batman Begins, "The Joker" is still Jack Napier, no where near his status at the beginning of Batman (1989). This could either be overlooked in Nolan's retake of the franchise, or mean that Napier will either play a minor role in the movie, or his character not be featured at all(keeping in line with the opinion that the card was just a Tim Burton homage).

 

[~Shard~]

I've heard the rumors that it is a direct link to Begins' immediate sequel, I'm more inclined to believe (or rather, hope) that it was put in merely as a homage to Batman (1989), a nod to Tim Burton, rather than to signify that The Joker would be his next villain. Besides, at the end of Batman Begins, "The Joker" is still Jack Napier, no where near his status at the beginning of Batman (1989). This could either be overlooked in Nolan's retake of the franchise, or mean that Napier will either play a minor role in the movie, or his character not be featured at all(keeping in line with the opinion that the card was just a Tim Burton homage).

I like this concept. That somewhere out there in Gotham, you know The Joker is out there, just like Scarecrow is still out there, but they are "in the background" and won't necessarily be featured in the next movie as the main villain. Guess we'll see...

 

[gwuMACaddict]

saw it for the first time tonight, borrowed my bro's dvd copy...

i enoyed it... started out a little slowly, but thats the way a lot of franchise movies are- have to build the character, etc. and with this, the movie had to make us forget all about val kilmer and george cloony...

anytime you get christian bale, michael caine, and morgan freeman together- its going to be a good flick...

the bad guy plot was a little odd... but whatever... four out of five stars for me...

the ending made me wanting more, and thats what counts i guess

 

[~Shard~]

I agree, but I liked the aspect that the bad guys weren't in the limelight for the whole movie, and weren't featured heavily "just because they're the villains" - I like how there was considerable time spent on Bruce Wayne's "inner villains" as well, and on the overall story. It was nice not having the villains involved in every single scene and being the sole focus of Batman throughout the movie.

 

[Verto]

I like this concept. That somewhere out there in Gotham, you know The Joker is out there, just like Scarecrow is still out there, but they are "in the background" and won't necessarily be featured in the next movie as the main villain. Guess we'll see...

Yeah, it creates a lot of potential for the future: The Scarecrow - no longer Dr. Crane who also happens to put on a mask for fun, but now demented into the full persona; Ra's Al Ghul, a character with which immortality is a constant theme, and all of Arkham Asylum emptied into the Narrows - let's not forget that this is where Batman Begins...ends. This whole section of town overrun by Arkham psychos - Zsasz, who has a history with The Penguin, is even featured in Batman Begins.

I for one would love to see The Penguin, Two Face, Riddler, Mr. Freeze and Bane (!) all put onto the big screen as they should have been, not the horrible messes we saw in Batman 2-5, but at the same time I wouldn't mind seeing some new villains featured, like Scarecrow and Ra's were.