Batman Begins

[Walton]

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.

[Two Kinds of ...]

I loved it.   One of the two or three best comic book movies ever made.

[Christopher]

I thought Batman Begins was great. I like Tim Burton's Batman movies, but I'd put this one above those.

[General Sibley]

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.

[titoli]

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 dejà vu. I think is the worst I've seen (but have to see Batman and Robin and Batman Forever.

[The Firecracker]

I also miss the humor and the action scenes are all dejà 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.

[titoli]

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...

[Amaze]

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.

[The Firecracker]

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.

[titoli]

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.

[The Firecracker]

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.

[The Firecracker]

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

[ShortFuse]

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.

[tucumcari bound]

I actually prefer this to "The Dark Knight."

[stanton]

The 2nd half was boring. So TDK is the far better film, even if it also has its shortcomings.