posted
I haven't gone to see the movie yet (many have in LA and New York, where it's already premiered), and, to be honest, I'm still a little bit shaky about the whole deal, but after looking at recent reviews I'm feeling quite excited.
Some reviewers, like the New Yorker and Time, simply don't like the concept, I notice. They complain about lack of cartoon fun and too much emphasis on sober drama, which makes me ask, do you really want to go back to what these stupid movies used to be? I thought everyone agreed they were terrible! Which is why they're trying it this new, darker, psychological way. I don't care for someone going into a movie with a predetermined idea of the character and then snubbing it when it doesn't conform to their concept.
Others have legitimate complaints, such as the action is being done in a very quick, up close, realistic fashion, a la Bourne Identity, which makes it hard to follow. But frankly, I thought that movie was great, so I guess I'll have to see it. Others don't care for his voice at all. Others don't like Katie Holmes, which is perfectly understandable. Putting lil Katie in amongst all of this acting royalty might not've been such a great idea.
Coolest thing I've read so far? They compare Batman's first appearance to a scene from Alien. There's some monster out in the darkness, but you never actually SEE it. Some shadow reaches out and drags a thug into the night as he utters a short, piercing cry. You only get brief flashes... was that an arm? A leg? And did that thing have horns?
Neato.
[ June 14, 2005, 03:16 PM: Message edited by: Book ]
Posts: 2258 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think with the cast and crew assembled for this one, it will be. Movies with this kind of talent top to bottom generally seem to be either terrific or terrible and the previews don't bode for terrible.
Then again, I was very excited about Hitchhiker's, too...
Posts: 3846 | Registered: Apr 2004
| IP: Logged |
I guess for that movie you could claim that the weak spot was the director. Nolan certainly seems to have barrelfulls of talent.
Posts: 2258 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I can't wait. I'm actually looking forward to it more than I did Star Wars. Going to see it Thurs. I'll let you know what I think then.
I thought Chris Nolan did a good job with Memento. His dark approach is just what Batman (dark knight) needs. If I want a cartoon, I'll watch Teen Titans.
Posts: 555 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also, from what I understand, it's a very, very adult movie. Not only does it deal with heavily adult and morally abstract issues, such as grief, rage, and the difference between justice and revenge, but if Batman is scary, then the Scarecrow is plain terrifying. The first half is very psychological, the second half is action packed but frequently disturbing.
Whereas I think this is the perfect take for Batman (I mean, we ARE talking about a story that begins with a young child seeing his parents murdered before his eyes - essentially Harry Potter gone nuts), it might not be too okay for kiddos. Although I went to go see Batman Returns when I was seven, and I turned out okay.
...sort've.
EDIT: Here is the review I tend to trust the most... It's fairly mainstream, doesn't tend to have that superhero bias that Ebert does, is open to the overall concept of the movie, and, from what I understand, the reviewer usually doesn't like superhero films at all.
Posts: 2258 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Some of the Batman movies were okay. Michelle Pfeiffer played a great catwoman, Michael Keaton was a great batman, and mixed in there were some good villains and good movies. It only fell apart in the most recent movies. I get more angry when they screw up good villains (Mr. Freeze), than when they screw up Batman himself.
That being said, I'm going into Batman Begins with an open mind. IF they screw up Ra's Al Ghul I will be annoyed, but I can get over it. If they change too much, and leave all the fun stuff out for the darker side of Batman, I will also be annoyed.
Posts: 21898 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Can someone give me a crash course on Ra's Al Ghul? I don't really know much about this villain. I think the only times I've seen him were 1 episode of the animated series and the small appearance in Kingdom Come (which may have been his successor or something, actually).
quote:Originally posted by Enigmatic: Can someone give me a crash course on Ra's Al Ghul? I don't really know much about this villain. I think the only times I've seen him were 1 episode of the animated series and the small appearance in Kingdom Come (which may have been his successor or something, actually).
What, in short, is his deal?
--Enigmatic
Well, in the animated series, he was a guy who has been alive for 600+ years through the use of Lazarus Pits that rejuvenate the body. His dream was to jumpstart humanity (by killing most of them) and brining peace to the Earth (or something like that).
He had a daughter named Talia with whom Batman had brief affairs with. Ra's wanted for Batman to marry Talia and take over his operations when he died, but Batman turned him down...
Yep...
That's not how Ra's is handled in the movie, as I understand. There is no Talia, and Ra's isn't 600 years old..
But he still looks pretty cool (can't beat Ken Watanabe).
Posts: 450 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
In the movie, he's rumored to be 600 or whatever, or at the very least unkillable.
I always explain him as "The Keyser Soze of the Batman world." Vast corporation, borderline-mythic, rich, brilliant, utterly ruthless, etc.
Posts: 2258 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Is Jonathan Crane's Scarecrow costume just a Scarecrow mask and a suit? Cause if it is I will be very dissapointed Posts: 163 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Could someone direct me to a site that describes, clearly and succinctly the world of Batman? I've just gotten back from the movie and am intensely curious.
Posts: 4655 | Registered: Jan 2002
| IP: Logged |
posted
That was a movie that really requires seeing twice. They pack SO much into 2+ hours, sometimes the film moves very quickly. I'd like to see it again to catch more details.
I loved it. It was definitely something I would advise any movie fan to see, because it's NOT just a superhero or a comic book movie. It's very adult, and the evolution of Batman is handled with depth, attention, and care. You really care about the character, and you really understand how twisted he has become, and rather than fearing him, like so many do, you pity him. As he says at one point in the film, "I don't have the luxury of friends," and you believe him. There's one shot I remember very well: Bruce Wayne in full Batman regalia minus the cowl, turned away from the camera with his head bowed, sitting next to his sleeping childhood friend. The camera simply holds that shot and pulls back, and you begin to understand Wayne's intense loneliness and alienation.
The first half is all exposition. "Who I Am and How I Came to Be," as Frank Miller so expertly wrote, and we watch out of character-driven fascination as we wonder how a man who seems to have everything becomes a wandering, self-destructive lost soul wandering the muddy hells of the earth. We see him grow from a man who lacks purpose into a man whose life is given a slow clarity, and he begins to take control of his life and differentiate between revenge and justice, good and evil, rage and determination, and himself from the rest of the world.
The second half grabs you, holds you, and simply will not let go. From there on in it's action packed and every single scene counts. Nolan sets up so much sometimes it's breathtaking, from establishing the intense corruption of Gotham to the sinister plot being slowly hatched to what Bruce does, how he does it, and why he does it. Nolan makes the most of his time, and each scene with a character adds more to their depth and persona. For example, Cillian Murphy as Doctor Crane aka the Scarecrow is given probably 10 or so minutes of screentime, maybe more, maybe less. But his character, played with such creepy, calm, and intensely malicious amusement simply burns itself into your mind. Michael Caine and Katie Holmes become Bruce's conscience, and I found lil Katie to be suprisingly bearable. Oldman as Gordon is immediately likeable, as is Morgan Freeman. Liam Neeson again plays the father/tutor role, which he should probably have trademarked, but he brings a focused savagery to the part that makes him much more different, much more real. All of these people play second fiddle to Bale as Bruce Wayne, but they still carry much resonance. Lucas could've learned a thing or two. He had three movies and still left his primary characters muddy and half-hearted.
Batman is terrifying. His first appearance is monstrous. You never truly see him until the end. Until then, he's a ghost, a shadow that leaps out of nowhere and drags criminals into the darkness. Even when he pummels five thugs, it's done with such blazing speed and riotous confusion that it's impossible to catch a glimpse of him. Bale's voice is demonic. His most memorable scene is when he drags a crooked cop up fifteen stories and hangs him upside down, interrogating him. The cop knows nothing, and says "I swear to God!" Batman seizes his hair, pulls his head close, and bellows "Swear to ME!"
It's not all sober and angsty torture, however. Alfred and Bruce's relationship and verbal sparring often bring much humor to the role, as do Freeman and Oldman, who are clearly enjoying themselves. And there's enough edge-of-your-seat action (the Batmobile chase and climax) to put the "fantasy" into what Bale called "believable fantasy," which was the goal of the movie.
It was a lot of fun, and it wasn't stupid fun, either. At the heart of the idea of Batman, like all noir, lies moral amiguity, which this movie brings out in spades. Bruce's constant questions about what a good man's options are in a city gone to hell form the central core of the movie. He is torn between his parents and his rage, his city and himself. It's intersting to watch.
And the action is cool, too.
EDIT: And although, yes, the Scarecrow begins as a perverse psychologist who enjoys experimenting upon his patients, he is made terrifying not by a simple costume, a strategy other Batman films have relied on, but by well-acted and well-written characterization. And, if you're really that worried about it, later in the film he rides a horse (a la Long Halloween) wearing a strait jacket like a long, billowing coat, along with the mask. He's a pretty creepy guy.
Posts: 2258 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
While I really liked Spiderman, it lacked the depth that Batman Begins has, which drew me much deeper into this movie and will definitely make it one I will own.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I like Spider-man and Batman as heroes precisely because of the similarities in motivation combined with almost completely different way both respond (with the one obvious similarity that both fight crime).
Spider-man captured a lot of the emotional depth of the Spider-man myth. If Batman Begins really surpasses that, I'll be thrilled.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Spider-man lacked the depth I'll agree, fugu...but I liked Spider-Man (1&2) better than BB (barely) probably because I can imagine myself in Peter's place much more easily than I can in Bruce's place.
After all, the latter requires imagining your parents being brutally gunned down in front of you.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Of course, Spider-man requires imagining your father figure was killed by a criminal you let get away
I do see your point, and the second spider man movie added a fair bit of depth to the arc. If the next batman movie adds to Begins as well as the second spider man added to the first, it'll be amazing.
Posts: 15770 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Yes, but Spider-Man requires you imagine that happened unintentionally due to a careless, selfish mistake you made-that I can imagine.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think the comparisons are interesting between the two: Batman is motivated largely by unearned guilt plus anger/desire for vengeance, in response to which he spends enormous time acquiring the skills he needs to conduct his work.
Spider-man is far more culpable in the death of his ur-father, but that culpability arises precisely because he already had the skills needed but didn't use them. If he was not-yet-bitten Peter Parker in that hallway, he'd have no blame for what happened later.
Both seek redemption by acting out again and again what they wish they could/should have done when their loved one died.
There's a fascinating thesis or dissertation in there somewhere.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Batman Begins was like a cross between Batman and the Shadow. But I thought the movie had good depth and dramatic appeal. It is about time they made a Batman movie that was not all campy and tongue-in-cheek. There was a fair amount of action. I really liked the batmobile!
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
so - you can imagine being responsible for the death of your father figure after getting powers from a genetically altered spider biting you -
but you can't imagine getting your wealthy parents killed and inheriting a fortune 'cause you're 8 years old and some stuffy old opera's creeping you out?
hmm. come to think of it they made the origins a tad bit more similar. in the comics the reasoning behind Bruce's guilt over his parents death was not nearly so clear, and told and retold again and again - latest telling in a collection of Batman Comics called Broken City - the storyline what came after Hush, if anyone heard of that one. Brian Azzarello.
and there seems to be a misconception here about superhero comics since, oh, around 1978.
superhero comics essentially have silly premises, yes. there's a certain need for a suspension of disbelief. but before you go cracking off about how silly these comic books are about strange alien heroes from other planets fighting crime or billionaire playboys getting off on beating the daylights out of homicidal clowns, consider this.
you're posting on a website essentially dedicated to a writer of fantasy and science fiction, who calls us to - each time we read his books - assume that a boy could be put in such a position as to commit Xenocide - or that the seventh son of a seventh son would have such miraculous powers that he could essentially bring about a messianic age for his nation and avert bloody wars.
suspension of disbelief. please don't laugh about the works of these writers who believe so much in their craft before you at least stop by your newsstand and take a look, and read these serial stories. Just as books were published serially back in the 1800s, take a look at these ongoing stories and see that the themes and the stories do mean something.
And all of this psychological reasoning from Batman Begins? it's been done for 20 some years in the so called "funny pages."
geez. sorry for the long rant, folks.
and doubly sorry for being a jerk.
Posts: 2 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
ok. ignoring my previous rant - it seemed to me, that at least by the end of the movie, if not before - being Batman for Bruce stopped being about revenge, stopped being about apologizing for what happened to his parents - and started to be about honoring his mother and father and what they did for his city, what they gave to him and all of Gotham.
Posts: 2 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm pretty sure it's not that Rakeesh can't believe it as a story element, but rather that it's too painful to actually imagine it happening to him.
In other words - it's not about suspension of disbelief but emotional trauma.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm...stunned. Those previously have summed up some of the greatness but their words, despite being the greatest description I've read of the movie so far, fall so short.
This is the greatest movie I have ever seen. No hyperbole. It is the greatest movie I have ever seen.
I'm going back tomorrow (bought my tickets as I exited) and the only reason I didn't turn around for the 10:30 was that I have a summative tomorrow.
Light scene spoilers:
* * * * * * * * * *
Top Three Images: 1. The bat crawling out of Scarecrow's mouth. 2. Fire breathing horse. 3. The card.
Worst Three Images: 1. Only about five seconds of fire breathing horse. 2. Only about five seconds of Ken Watanabe. 3. ...That's all I've got. I even thought Katie Holmes (sp?) was great.
Posts: 254 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hmm... I'd say the real difference between Bats and Spidey is the ages at which the traumas occurred and HOW they occurred.
Spider-man: indirectly responsible for the death of his uncle, which occurred at, say, the age of 17, and not before his eyes.
Batman: parents graphically gunned down before his eyes at the age of 8 by a totally random thug (that's the original version).
Spider-man acts, I think, mostly out of guilt and the sense of responsibility his uncle gave him. Batman acts partially out of guilt, partially out of responsiblity from his father, but MOSTLY out of sheer rage. The utter randomness of his trauma gave him far more confusion and anger, I think, than Spider-man. Certain quotes spring to mind, mostly from Frank Miller:
"I have waited since the walk. That night. And the man with frightened, hollow eyes and a voice like glass being crushed... since all sense left my life." (Year One)
"The war... it did not begin THEN... no... it was... two years later... when her necklace caught on his wrist... when he shoved his pistol to her jaw and pulled the trigger... and everything my mother was struck the pavements as a bloody wad... that night began thirty years of hunting thieves and murderers..." (DKR)
"My parents taught me a different lesson... lying on the street, shaking in deep shock- dying for no reason at all -- they showed me that the world only makes sense when you force it to..." (DKR)
Clearly, Begins taps into this existential rage that powers Batman, but it did it in a somewhat watered down fashion. (No soliloquies on loved one's brains splattering on the pavements - thankfully (?) they both took it in the chest, and it's relatively bloodless - though we're to assume it isn't) Spider-man's guilt and purpose comes from the death of his unlce. Batman, however, is also driven by the chaos of the world itself, and (in Begins) seeks to restore harmony. It's the meaningless death of his parents that truly wounds him, I believe. He becomes a man obsessively organized and single-mindedly driven in reaction to this chaos. In Begins, however, he feels unable to make a difference and attempts to join that chaos in a sort of self-destruction and a sort of search for purpose. We only see his utter determination later.
At least, that's how it functions in the comics, and it may be coloring my interpretation of Begins.
Posts: 2258 | Registered: Aug 2003
| IP: Logged |
Holy awsome movie, Batman! This movie rocked so very mcuh. May be my favorite movie of the year, depends how much I like Serenity.
Finally a live action Batman movie that was done right. I was afriad that I'd have to stick with the animated Batman movies for the Bat goodness.
I completly agree with others on the first scene with Batman in all his terror. It was like a horror movie and Batman was the monster. All the actors did great and hopefully this means the next Batman movie will actually have the same cast. That thought boggles my mind. Although the villans didn't get that big of screen time, they were still better than basically all of the original villans from the live action movies.
I loved how dark this movie was. Perfect for Gotham.
The restaurant scene with Bruce and the Gangster was great. "There's a judge over there and two police officers over there, and if I shoot you now, nothing will happen to me." Or something like that. and "My boss has been gone for four days, and in this town it normally means it's time to start looking for him down stream."
I can't wait to see this movie again.
Posts: 142 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Why did Bruce Wayne's parents decide to sneak out the back door of the concert hall, anyway? Rich people are supposed be smart enough to avoid situations where they would likely be mugged.
Posts: 3742 | Registered: Dec 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm going to see the IMAX of it on saturday night. And from you all have said, it sounds like it'll be well worth it. Posts: 145 | Registered: Jan 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Show starts in two hours. I printed out the tickets already, and bunbun will pick me up in an hour.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Awesome. I haven't processed it enough to decide if I like it better than Spider-man yet. It did some things much better, but not others.
Awesome movie though. I'm glad another superhero movie has gotten it right.
SPOILER: I would like to see one Batman movie where someone doesn't find out his secret identity. Just one.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dagonee: Awesome. I haven't processed it enough to decide if I like it better than Spider-man yet. It did some things much better, but not others.
Awesome movie though. I'm glad another superhero movie has gotten it right.
SPOILER: I would like to see one Batman movie where someone doesn't find out his secret identity. Just one.
SPOILER
-
-
I'll agree with you up to a point. That part of the original live action movies was horrendus, and it started off completly illogical:
Alfred: "Oh, Master Wayne. I decided to let this woman reporter know your secret identity. Is that okay with you?
In Batman Begins there wasn't away around Fox or Reis learning who he was, and there was enough sense with Holmes' character. Bruce hated how she thought of him and there was a chance he could die, well sort of anyway I guess, and so he wanted her to know. But, if in the next movie a new love intrest comes and she finds out,I will be peeved. They should just keep Holme's, unless they bring in Catwoman, but even Catwoman shouldn't find out who he is.
Posts: 142 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
"If he was not-yet-bitten Peter Parker in that hallway, he'd have no blame for what happened later." I think he would still have the blame. IIRC, Ben was at the spot he was killed to pick up Peter. Regardless of whether Peter could have stopped it or not, Ben would have gotten killed because he went to the spot of his death for Peter.
Posts: 853 | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I was referring to the comic book version, which has a burglary instead of a car-jacking. Even so, without the spider bite, Peter's blame is the same as Bruce's - which is to say, none. Even if they are in some way the cause of the incident because they caused the victim to be there, no blame actually attaches.
quote:In Batman Begins there wasn't away around Fox or Reis learning who he was, and there was enough sense with Holmes' character. Bruce hated how she thought of him and there was a chance he could die, well sort of anyway I guess, and so he wanted her to know. But, if in the next movie a new love intrest comes and she finds out,I will be peeved. They should just keep Holme's, unless they bring in Catwoman, but even Catwoman shouldn't find out who he is.
One thing I liked is that we got to see some of the cost Bruce bears by maintaining his playboy disguise - something absolutely missing from the previous films. Letting him off the hook too soon takes that out of play.
As for Lucius, one of the best things about their relationship was Lucius not knowing and getting exasperated with Bruce's irresponsibility. I'm sure they could have come up with a way to get Bruce the gear without Lucius figuring it out.
Posts: 26071 | Registered: Oct 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I really loved this movie! and yes by my name I am a bit of a fanboy here
** spoiler** * * * I really enjoyed how Bruce went from seeing criminals as just bad people to him 'becoming' one and seeing how it can happen. I did like that Lucius was getting exasperated with Bruce's irresponsibility but then I was happy that Lucius was not an idiot and that he figured out what the true purpose of Bruce's hang gliding/spelunking trips were all about. I've always like the Lucius Fox character and I was happy to see that they treated him as a brillant man (Morgan Freeman is EXACTLY who I have always pictured as Lucius)
Posts: 1918 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I did indeed end up seeing it the day I said, "Maybe later today!" I liked it a lot.
SPOILER:
I thought it was funny when Scarecrow, Crane, was riding around on the horse. You know Crane....Crane from Sleepy Hollow. Headless horseman. I just made that connection, and I loved it.
Posts: 6026 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know, if I had to list my favorite genres of movies, I'd say:
Noir Dramatic Thriller Fantasy Comic Book Action/Adventure/Epic
I guess you can see why I like this movie. Also, after checkin out Nolan on imdb, I read that his favorite flicks are:
2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), The Black Hole (1979), Blade Runner (1982), Chinatown (1974), The Hitcher (1986), Lawrence of Arabia (1962), On Her Majesty's Secret Service (1969), Star Wars (1977), The Man Who Would Be King (1975) and Topkapi (1964), as well as anything by Stanley Kubrick.
Dude! Chinatown? Blade runner? Lawrence of Arabia? The Man Who Would Be King?!?! I thought I was the only one who even knew that movie EXISTED! There's nothing better than seeing Michael freakin' Caine and Sean freakin' Connery getting up to all sorts of rougish high jinks while serving Her Majesty's empire in 19th Century India.
"No one's crossed those mountains since Alexander the Great!" "Who's that?" "Why, he was the leader of the Grecian empire..." "Well, if a Greek can do it, we can do it."
posted
A lot of the people on this board love "The Man Who Would Be King." I remember a conversation about it around four years ago.
Posts: 37449 | Registered: May 1999
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Grumble]](graemlins/grumble.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
