Sergio Leone Web Board

Other/Miscellaneous => Off-Topic Discussion => Topic started by: Walton on June 19, 2005, 01:26:14 AM



Title: Batman Begins
Post by: Walton on June 19, 2005, 01:26:14 AM
Ok, just saw it and was pleasantly surprised - I'm not really a fan of super hero movies, but for the most part, I thought BB delivered. It has a well written script that is mercifully free of too many 'Hollywood' moments, and a production design which echoes Blade Runner without too directly ripping it off. As far as this kind of popcorn movie goes, it's worth a look.


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: Two Kinds of ... on June 19, 2005, 09:19:57 PM
I loved it.   One of the two or three best comic book movies ever made.


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: Christopher on June 20, 2005, 08:08:22 AM
I thought Batman Begins was great. I like Tim Burton's Batman movies, but I'd put this one above those.


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: General Sibley on June 28, 2005, 03:43:14 PM
I saw it this weekend and liked it a lot.  But I definitely could have done without all the martial arts chop-socky stuff, that has NOTHING to do with Batman.  Is there such a dearth of imagination out there that every film fight has to be this over-choreographed kung fu garbage?  Jeesh, it was stale when Charlie's Angels was doing it.


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: titoli on October 31, 2006, 03:52:41 PM
I'm not so enthusiastic about it. I think it is too long and the "psychological" stuff is a hindrance. The evil scheme is involuted and some passages do escape me (how can Caine take Batman down from the roof after he's been ko'd?).     I don't like the lead but most of all I miss the archvillain. I also miss the humor and the action scenes are all deją vu. I think is the worst I've seen (but have to see Batman and Robin and Batman Forever.


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: The Firecracker on October 31, 2006, 09:27:27 PM
I also miss the humor and the action scenes are all deją vu.

What action scenes? Due to the awful editing you won't able to see any of the fights. It's a lot of camera movements and you see some arms being thrown but that is about it.

No choreography, they didn't even bother with it.


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: titoli on November 01, 2006, 02:49:04 AM
Well, I meant essentially the chasing on the highway. There's no tension between what you are brought to expect and what really happens, as it happens in the best movies of this genre. But you're right: the action scene are either muddled up by bad lighting (it's true that the scenes must be played at night, but one should be able to tell what happens), editing and screenplay or simple carelessness. Which could be not so bad were the rest brilliantly conceived and executed.
I wonder how people can proclaim this the best Batman ever...


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: Amaze on November 01, 2006, 07:10:30 AM
probably because the last two or three batmans have been complete crap. it's not a classic, but it was a lot better than I had expected it to be.


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: The Firecracker on November 01, 2006, 10:17:43 AM

I wonder how people can proclaim this the best Batman ever...

It has a lot to do with the last two being a big disappointment to the fans. When they saw a change in style they figured "oh it has to be good" regardless if it was or not. The same thing happened with "Revenge of the sith", the movie was a piece of trash but everybody praised it because it took a different route then the first two prequels did (Darker storyline more action). In my opinion it was the worst of the debacle.


P.S. The rivalry between the arch villain and Batman in this film is almost non-existant. Too bad. If the Scarecrow was a prominant figure it might have been a better movie.

Heres to the Heath Ledger who will be playing the "Clown Prince of Crime" in the next film. I'm sure that villainous character will get much more screen time.




(http://www.evilology.net/uploaded/joker2ge1nx.jpg)


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: titoli on November 01, 2006, 11:11:58 AM
Summer 2008? They're aiming at a masterpiece! (or are they still raising funds?)

I don't like him, anyway. Exactly as I don't like the one who plays Batman. Let's hope he's better on the scene of what he looks like. Of course, Nicholson own the turf, so it can get only worse.


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: The Firecracker on November 01, 2006, 12:24:38 PM
Summer 2008? They're aiming at a masterpiece! (or are they still raising funds?)

I don't like him, anyway. Exactly as I don't like the one who plays Batman. Let's hope he's better on the scene of what he looks like. Of course, Nicholson own the turf, so it can get only worse.


Well their aiming for the Frank Miller comics and in that sense Nicholson's Joker doesn't fit the bill. He relied to heavily on bad puns and humor. Miller's interpertation of Joker was much more sinister and insane.


P.S that poster is actually a fake. It was made a year ago on how Ledger MIGHT look like as the Joker.


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: The Firecracker on January 08, 2009, 10:12:12 PM
Saw bits and pieces of this at a friend's house tonight. He was trying to convince me that it is a great movie.
It still isn't. At least not to me.

Scarecrow (the most interesting villain after The Joker) is the biggest flaw.
He's been put on the sidelines for that uninteresting ninja played by Qui-Gon.

How does Batman defeat the sinister scarecrow?
He doesn't.
Scarecrow is vanquished by Katie Holmes with a tazer.
Lame... very lame.

3/10


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: ShortFuse on January 08, 2009, 11:34:00 PM
And in the next film, he if captured by Batman in the first 10 minutes.

Scarcrow is really a pawn for Ra's Al Ghul, the true villian of the film.

It's great that it revived the Batman franchise, but it was easily topped by The Dark Knight.

What I really loved about it, was the origin story. Hence the title.


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: tucumcari bound on January 09, 2009, 02:37:09 AM

I actually prefer this to "The Dark Knight."


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: stanton on January 09, 2009, 05:31:46 AM
The 2nd half was boring. So TDK is the far better film, even if it also has its shortcomings.


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: tucumcari bound on January 09, 2009, 11:38:51 AM
The 2nd half was boring. So TDK is the far better film, even if it also has its shortcomings.

I totally disagree. I think the second part of BB is far better than TDK's. The conclusion of TDK didn't do much for me. After watching it over and over again, the flaws of the film are standing out much more. BB had a far better pay off and that ending was amazing.


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: Groggy on January 09, 2009, 11:46:05 AM
I actually haven't seen this film yet... Probably should to put TDK in perspective.


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: ShortFuse on January 09, 2009, 02:26:58 PM
You have to watch BB before TDK. BB gets the origin story out of the way, and you'll understand some scenes better, like Scarcrow, and the story around Salvatore Maroni and who he is replacing from the previous film.

Also has Katie Holmes as Rachel Dawes, I never though much of her peformance but she had a nice rack. Pay close attention to the scene where Batman rescues her unconcious body. She looked cold.



Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: Groggy on January 09, 2009, 02:50:16 PM
I've seen TDK twice now, so too late for that.


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: tucumcari bound on January 09, 2009, 02:51:46 PM

Groggs,  how can you watch a sequel before the original? I'm not knocking you, I just don't know how someone could do it.


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: moviesceleton on January 09, 2009, 03:02:57 PM
Groggs,  how can you watch a sequel before the original? I'm not knocking you, I just don't know how someone could do it.
I haven't seen this either. But I probably will on Monday. Anyway, I heard that DK wasn't all that direct sequel so I thought it wouldn't matter. I have a feeling that I would have appreciated the characters more had I watched this but DK is still an entertaining movie on its own.


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: Groggy on January 09, 2009, 03:13:31 PM
I had no interest in Batman Begins so I never watched it. I went to see TDK with my brother because it was a Sunday afternoon and my alternative was digging out the septic tank. Pretty simple to me.


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: tucumcari bound on January 09, 2009, 03:17:57 PM
I had no interest in Batman Begins so I never watched it. I went to see TDK with my brother because it was a Sunday afternoon and my alternative was digging out the septic tank. Pretty simple to me.

HAHA, I hear ya. I think you'd enjoy BB though.


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: ShortFuse on January 09, 2009, 03:24:21 PM
Yeah, Nolan's version of Batman is plausable. Which is what I liked.

I even liked it better than the Tim Burton films, where Batman was just a minor character.



Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: tucumcari bound on January 09, 2009, 03:29:03 PM
Yeah, Nolan's version of Batman is plausable. Which is what I liked.

I even liked it better than the Tim Burton films, where Batman was just a minor character.



Well, I think Nolan's plausability goes a bit over board at times because this is a comic book character. How realistic do you want? That's why I love Burton's films. They have some serious moments mixed in with some over the top sequences which fits the comic book nicely. I don't like comparing Burton and Nolan though. They're two totally different takes on the character which is nice.


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: ShortFuse on January 09, 2009, 03:39:14 PM
Some would argue, including Jett from Batman On Film, that Batman Forever is close to the spirit of the comics. I never read the comics, but I do know the stories for Batman Begins and The Dark Knight are based on Frank Miller's Batman Year One, The Long Halloween, and The Killing Joke. The realism can actually be found in the comics, how Bruce Wayne became Batman, and where he got all his gadgets from.

Batman Begins and The Dark Knight even had realistic villians. The League of Shadows is a secret organization, that goes back centuries, I believe it had a different name in the comics. Ra's Al Ghul is the perfect villian to start out Batman with. The Joker proved to be even more sinister than Ra's, instead of using technology and toxins to tear the city part, he uses the vigilante complex, and in turn created a new villian in Harvey Dent.

One thing that always bothered me, where is Gotham and why hasn't the US Goverment stepped in to remove The Joker? Hmm? If I was governor of New York, I would have called in the National Guard to take out Spider-Man.


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: The Firecracker on January 09, 2009, 07:33:38 PM
the Tim Burton films, where Batman was just a minor character.


That may be so but I don't even want to hang out with Nolan's Batman. He's the least interesting character in the whole show.


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: ShortFuse on January 09, 2009, 07:52:46 PM
He has a misplaced sense of self righteousness.


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: The Firecracker on January 09, 2009, 08:20:14 PM


Also has Katie Holmes as Rachel Dawes, I never though much of her peformance but she had a nice rack.




And she's easier on the eyes than Maggie Gellenhall is. Yeesh!


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: ShortFuse on January 09, 2009, 08:25:54 PM
She made Tom Cruise go straight.


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: noodles_leone on January 24, 2009, 11:10:54 PM
3/10 (1 for Oldman, 1 for Caine and 1 for Freeman)

I like Memento a lot, and i quite like The Prestige. TDK was ok but overrated IMO.

But that one really sucks, doesn't it? I have to say i love most of the supporting cast, and some dialogues were not too bad, but that's about the only good points. Terrible script, inconsistant univers, silly-very-bad karate, and i refuse to speak about "camerawork" (which would imply some work). I know some of you like this movie, so i'd love to understand WHAT they like in it.


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: dave jenkins on January 25, 2009, 05:06:41 AM
I know some of you like this movie, so i'd love to understand WHAT they like in it.
Ra's al Ghul! (but where's the sexy daughter?)


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: Groggy on June 22, 2009, 05:00:26 PM
A full-length review:

Quote
Christopher Nolan's Batman Begins (2005) has been credited, along with its ultra-successful sequel, last year's The Dark Knight, with breathing new life into the played-out and tiresome superhero genre - a genre that has been stretched to the breaking point with film after mediocre film in recent years (two Incredible Hulks, Fantastic 4, Spider-Man, etc.). Personally, I'm not sure that I buy this line of reasoning. To me, despite its pretensions to seriousness, Batman Begins is yet another generic superhero film with the same mixture of overwrought self-importance and unconscious cheesiness that has characterized the genre over the past decade. I'm not the biggest fan of The Dark Knight, or the same year's Iron Man for that matter, but those films are a genuine breath of fresh air compared to this one.

Bruce Wayne (Christian Bale) watches his super-rich parents gunned down by a petty criminal in the streets of Gotham, and grows up wanting revenge. His revenge is denied by agents of Gotham crime boss Carmine Falconi (Tom Wilkinson), whose syndicate controls Gotham with bribes, drugs and guns. Wayne goes on the lam as a criminal and ends up in the monestary of the shadowy Raas a'Ghul (Ken Wantanabe) and his mentor Henri Ducard (who else but Liam Neeson?), who run the League of Shadows, a secret society of vigilantes dedicated to wiping out crime and decadence in the world. Bruce finds out that the League is planning an outright destruction of Gotham, and races back to his home city. With the help of his butler Alfred (Michael Caine) and loyal corporate associate Lucius Fox (Morgan Freeman), Wayne transforms himself to the vigilante Batman, taking on Falconi and Dr. Jonathan Crane (Cillian Murphy), who as "the Scarecrow" is working with Raas al'Ghul to destroy Gotham with a hallucinogenic drug that will cause Gothamites to go mad with fear and destroy each other. Also playing a part are Rachel Dawes (Katie Holmes), Bruce's childhood sweetheart-turned-Assistant D.A. (and later turned-Maggie Gyllenhaal), and Jim Gordon (Gary Oldman), one of the few honest cops left in Gotham, who becomes Batman's primary ally.

Claims of critics and fanboys to the contrary, Batman Begins really isn't THAT much different than most superhero films. Despite Nolan's pretensions of creating a darker and more realistic world for the bat to play in, the movie is just as goofy. Semi-realistic villains like Falconi and Crane are left hanging for yet another all-seeing, all-power evil secret society (because who could get enough of them?), whose plot for world domination (or at least Gotham's destruction) seems like the scheme of a particularly lame Bond villain. Characters are only sketchily introduced, and the film has the typical throat-clearing backstory that is both rushed and poorly done. The script is full of clunkily-written pseudo-profundities (along with some just plain cheesy dialogue) that inevitably ring false, when they aren't outright laughable (Falconi's "Don't burden yourself with the secrets of scary people" line may be the worst non-Garbage Day! dialogue in any film); they smack of self-important posturing that can be found in pretty much any film of this genre. All in all, Batman Begins has little to offer that can't be found in pretty much any other superhero film; it's musings on morality and fear are remarkably simplistic and beaten into the audience so often that even the densest three year old would get it.

Technically, the film is pretty good. Nolan's direction is generally solid; he shows a knack for visual style, and handles the film's action scenes reasonably well (though the film lacks a stand-up-and-cheer set-piece like, say, the convoy ambush in The Dark Knight). The movie looks good, for what its worth; it's mostly the script and story that lets the proceedings down. The score by Hans Zimmer and James Newton Howard is repetitive and bland assembly-line junk, with lots of insistent strings and trilling brass that could be culled from any number of action flicks you could care to name.

The cast is a big disappointment; a lot of talent is assembled and mostly wasted. Christian Bale's Bruce Wayne is bland, stiff and boring (let's not even mention the ludicrous Batman voice); I'm becoming more convinced with each film of his I watch that his great performance in Empire of the Sun was a fluke, as he's scarcely given a worthwhile performance since reaching puberty. Katie Holmes is mostly annoying and makes one pine for Maggie Gyllenhaal. Tom Wilkinson, Ken Wantanabe and Cillian Murphy are given thankless roles as secondary bad guys who are poorly introduced and have little to do. Gary Oldman does what he can, but in this installment Gordon is mostly a humorous role. Michael Caine provides wheezy comic relief, and Morgan Freeman's role is virtually superfluous (say what you will about the Burton-Schumaker Batmans, they at least economized their characters). It's Liam Neeson who gives the best performance; he's played the mentor guy in pretty much every film of the last ten years, from The Phantom Menace to Kingdom of Heaven to The Chronicles of Narnia, but he's good at it by now - though he doesn't quite make the transition to evil that the script requires of him. The Dark Knight would do a much better job with its ensemble cast; Oldman, Aaron Eckhardt, and yes, Heath Ledger would all give fine performances far beyond any of the acting on display here.

On the whole, Batman Begins was rather disappointing and has little to offer that the Spider-Man and Fantastic 4 films didn't already bring to the table. Fortunately, Nolan and Company would get a lot more right the second time around, creating a solid, well-written and -acted superhero film distinctly different from the cookie-cutter superhero formula.

Rating: 5/10 - Mediocre


http://nothingiswrittenfilm.blogspot.com/2009/06/batman-begins.html (http://nothingiswrittenfilm.blogspot.com/2009/06/batman-begins.html)


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: Amaze on June 22, 2009, 06:06:42 PM
I still haven't seen the dark knight!   :o
someone slap me


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: Groggy on June 24, 2009, 07:17:42 AM
Came across these articles in my morning travails. There are at least three Batman threads and I'm not sure which to post in, so...

http://blogs.coventrytelegraph.net/thegeekfiles/2009/06/christian-bale-says-batman-3-m.html (http://blogs.coventrytelegraph.net/thegeekfiles/2009/06/christian-bale-says-batman-3-m.html)

http://blogs.coventrytelegraph.net/thegeekfiles/2009/06/batman-3-nolan-may-not-return.html (http://blogs.coventrytelegraph.net/thegeekfiles/2009/06/batman-3-nolan-may-not-return.html)

I can't say it would break my heart, but some of you might care.


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: moviesceleton on June 24, 2009, 10:02:27 AM
A lot of respect for Nolan if he's got the balls to stay away from a third Batman movie O0 But another movie is practically a given because of the success of The Dark Knight and its rather open end.


Title: Re: Batman Begins
Post by: Groggy on June 24, 2009, 04:08:24 PM
A lot of respect for Nolan if he's got the balls to stay away from a third Batman movie O0 But another movie is practically a given because of the success of The Dark Knight and its rather open end.

That's my train of thought too, but I can't say I'd be crying my eyes out.