*** Official BATMAN BEGINS Discussion Thread

That guy was actually helping you experience the Narrows of Gotham.

I knew the film was being released in IMAX, but I guess I saw it in Smell-o-vision.

Hey hey hey, the TV show is brilliant.

I thought this movie was great and certainly not humorless. I'm not a great fan of the Tim Burton ones and I hated the Schumachers. I had the same small criticisms as most people: the sometimes incomprehensible action scenes and a few silly areas in the script.

My favorite Batman movie is still the 1966 one, because how can you ever beat that ending? Or all those great lines.

Still, Nolan and the entire cast did a fantastic job.

I attended the midnight showing and I saw it again today. Since I've never done anything this crazy before, this is easily the best movie of the year.

A few minor thing I didn't quite like

-How they pronounced Ra's Al Ghoul. The cartoon made it a point that it's pronouced "Raysh" and NOT "Roz" like it's read because of the arabic origin meaning "The Demon's Head". But upon further research, the creator of the Ra's character said he intended it to be pronounced as "Roz". Maybe he was unaware of the proper way to pronounce it?

-I also didn't like the quick action shots. If only Nolan zoomed out a bit, I could have a better idea who Batman was fighting at any given time. I had this problem in the Bourne Supremacy as well, but that was only in some scenes.

Did anyone catch the little cameo of one of Batman's foes that never got billed as a villian in Begins? And no, it's not Zsaz. You can see him in Arkham for about a frame when Batman is running away.

I think Goyer should stop throwing in comedy in his action films and just stick with what he's good at. It didn't quite work in Blade: Trinity and it didn't quite work in Batman Begins.

Is the score available in ANY retail chain? Wal-Mart and Best Buy don't have it.

For only the second time, watching a film or reading a comic book, I felt for a man named Bruce Wayne.

This is a damn good film (full of crappy, out of tone, one liners, and a sorry, forgettable score...but, I'll let it go), with a lot of strong performances, and an incredibly strong character arc x3 - Bruce, Alfred, and Gordon. I'm looking forward to a series of films that see them grow.

I did like the line about calling for backup.

I find superhero movies to be endlessly frustrating unless I conciously stop ovethinking.

I think because I NEVER read comic books as a kid, I never developed a tolerance for the lack of continuity and frequent contradictions in comic book stories.

I have to conciously disassosiate the movies from thier comic books origins, and watch them as their own stories.

I'm to used to novels. I always want to ask "does it follow the book?" With comic book movies I want to ask the same question, until I remember that the answer will basically be "which version of the book?"


With that in mind, I simply can't resist, does this move follow the comic books? As an origin story, does it match that of the comics?

I was going to post your answer before you even posted your question, but it slipped my mind

This is as faithful a Batman character you are going to get in the live action version. There are changes here and there, but nothing as drastic as Burton's Batman which uses guns, and kills people(sometimes having fun doing so).

I read from another forum that Barnes and Noble carried it. But when other members checked, their local B&N didn't carry it.

A neat tidbit I enjoyed:

Prior to viewing the film, I had heard that the Joker left his calling card at the end of the film. I was pleasantly surprised to see that a normal Joker card was used, and not a "cartoon version" of a Joker card. It really ground the film more into reality for me. Yay!

8^B

Easily the best Batman movie, and easily the second best film of the year so far (ROTS is still #1 for me).

I thought Bale did a great job in bringing both sides of the persona to life--both Bruce and Batman, something I thought neither Keaton, Kilmer, nor Clooney could do. For example, Keaton was a good Batman, in my opinion, but not so much a good Bruce Wayne. Bale just nailed it all.

I'm amazed at how good it really was. I was completely spoiler-free, so I didn't have any sort of expectations. Excellent film all the way around, with only a few minor nit-picks that have already been mentioned here (too zoomed-in on some of the action, some of the humor, especially that involving Gordon, etc.) Actually, the last bit with Gordon in the Batmobile reminded me a lot of Anakin in Episode I during the space battle, though not quite as juvenile I suppose. Gary Oldman was just perfectly cast, as was the entire movie for that matter.

Also, I missed the villian cameo James spoke about earlier in this thread...anyone care to reveal that to me? I think I know which frame, but I'm not sure who the character is.

Saw the score at the Virgin Megastore today.

Just got back from the movie and I really liked it a lot...but I have to say, I'm definitely more of a fan of the Tim Burton films. This was...different. Not in a bad way but I guess I just have a fondness for what those movies were and the spirit with which they were made.

Hats off to Goyer for showing the obscure Zsaz, he was definitely one of the scariest villains in the comics.

Fantastic movie. THIS is Batman, and THIS is the Batman movie they should have made 16 years ago. Then again, if putting up with what we had for four seriously flawed movies (Tim Burton didn't do Batman, and Schumacher didn't do a thing) allows more like this to be made, I'm all for it.

It was damn near perfect. The characters were done fantastically, including some nice little asides that really fleshed them out. I loved Lucius' line about how he didn't expect Bruce to track what he said, he just wanted him to know how much work it was. The Batmobile, while an unusual design, worked perfectly for this movie. Katie Holmes' character was actually well done I thought, having the right degree of depth and yet distance that the story needed.

My only serious gripe about the movie was Batman killing(?) Ra's (fantastic reveal by the way, I never saw it coming at all, I just assumed Ken Wantananbe survived somehow) by failure to act. The comic books make it abundantly clear that Batman will never allow someone to die by his actions, directly or indirectly. Even if a thug charges him, Batman dodges, and the crok goes off the roof of a building, Batman will rescue them. In this case, his having Gordon take down the railroad as well as his fight with Ra's makes him on some level responsible for the situation that led to Ra's demise, even if not the exact event.

Besides that, why do they always feel the need to kill the villain? Ra's has some great stories they could go with; they never even touched on Talia or the Lazarus Pits, it seems a shame to remove him from the story this early on. Sure you don't want the movies to get repetitive, and their limited time (2-3 hours every 2-3 years) means you can't afford to have the long continuous story lines of a comic book or even the animated series, but still seems dumb to slam the door on things.

Other then that one nitpick though, absolutely incredible movie. Truly fantastic. I can't wait to see it again.

Well I buckled and went to the late show tonight. There will be hell to pay at work today.

Awesome flick. I loved the way the action scenes were done. His ninja quick strikes worked great. Perhaps the only time Nolan could have pulled out a bit was when Bats was fighting the other ninjas.

Amazing how this film could make me feel for the young Bruce in the scant screen time he had when other films could not do so for another young character over a much longer time period.

I am still shaking my head at the cast. Wow. Wow. Wow. Freeman had the best lines.

First great movie of the summer, here is hoping WOTW and FF4 can keep the fun times rolling.

Exactly. The film's critics seem to bemoan the fact that there wasn't a clearly coreographed, fully lit, wide shot fight with Batman. They don't seem to get that that's not how Batman works; if he tried to fight guys with machine guns like that, he'd get chewed up. It's always been my dream to see a horror film with Batman as the villain, like "Usual Suspects" only with Batman instead of Keyser Scoze as terrifying presence. From the moment the first guy gets sucked suddenly into the darkness, I was hooked. It was the PERFECT representation of Batman for me. Amen. This film had as much humor as it could bear without losing its focus on a fairly grim subject matter. All of the one-linears had the audience roaring in my screening. I thought they were some of the best placed bits of humor in a while. I thought Gordon was utilized perfectly. Even though he didn't have a huge amount of screentime, every moment was perfectly utilized. For instance, when Batman visits him at home, it says so much about the nature of his character; what a warm yet working-class environment in the midst of an urban nightmare. Me too! I also just liked the idea of Batman soaring effortlessly over his city, only in a more dynamic way that Superman's unburdened flight. He is literally EVERYWHERE in the slums of Gotham. I agree. The Rachel subplot was still the weak link of the film, but never did it detract like the other Batman girls, and at several points (including that one) added to things a good deal as well. Not only that, but the first one to give him justification and make him human. Spider-man and Superman have that built into their origins, but Batman didn't have that until now. By the time he took to the streets, I never once questioned why he was doing it. I thought it was another great way the film adapted the spirit of the character rather than the literals. Inserting the Lazarus Pits into this story would have been ridiculous, but by making Ras A'Gul a title instead it makes him in effect immortal. Indeed, like the first time I read the newest Harry Potter book, it seems at first glance far too long, but while I'm in the middle of it I don't want it to ever end. Same here. So much promise, if the sequels keep the same feel and the same world of Gotham. This should go without saying, but while we saw the train crash, we never saw him get disemboweled. That door is always still open.

Was I the only one who teared up a bit when Alfred took Bruce down the elevator when the mansion was burning and Bruce reiterated "You still haven't given up on me, Alfred?" and Alfred reiterated, "Never." Considering how much Bruce has had ripped away from him over his life, having a relationship that loving and that pure damn near made me weep.

Let me go ahead and echo the praise on BB. For me, this moved right to the top of my most enjoyed movies of the year and is easily my favorite Batman movie. Here's hoping whoever they bring in (hopefully Nolan and Goyer) for the next one will keep the same tone as this one.

Regarding the humor...it worked for me. The overall tone of the movie was quite dark and somber - as it should be - and those one-liners worked to lighten the mood without disrupting the flow of the film.

It was cut out.
Not the Talia scenes or the Lazarus, but the expansion of the Ra's Al Ghul story. This might be spoilers for any potential sequels, so be warned....there was no Lazarus pit. In its place, Ra's Al Ghul's "presence"(or soul, if you prefer) is transfered after he dies. Ra's is a mortal man, so whenever he dies, whether of old age or murder, his soul gets trasfered to another host. I guess this goes on forever and another way to stay immortal.

And regarding the villian cameo....I doubt anyone will get it. The only people who will notice it are the same people that noticed Colossus in X-men 1. It's that quick a scene, but not that obscure. I actually missed it the first time, had a friend tell me about it and ALMOST missed it the second time. When Batman is escaping Arkham, the first inmate looking through the peephole has a long nose and a monocle.

Just thought I'd add a bit to my questions about Bats letting Ra's die. It seems very similar to Azrael-Batman in Knightfall letting Alastor fall into the chemicals and die, something that horrified Robin, Bruce Wayne, and everyone else. It wasn't murder, but it was definitely death via inaction, just like Ra's in this one. Assuming, of course, that Ra's is dead. I realize we didn't see him truly die, and the wreck itself was survivable, but that explosion is kinda bad for one's longevity.

And is Ra's a title, or was it a ruse and Liam Neeson was Ra's all along? I took it as a subterfuge maneuver, and Ken was just there as a visible head while Liam was the real power and force. Ken was just there to do what he did, die and make it look like Ra's was gone, while the real one escaped.

Oh, and in regards to the crowd, my theater was packed - in fact the usher made me and my companion move over to free up an empty seat between us and the next couple - and very enthusiastic. The crowd was in stitches during the one liners, particularly Alfred's reaction to Bruce wanting to take on an alternate identity to protect those close to him, namely himself. The crowd was silent during the right moments, and when Batman dominated the energy in the audotorium was electric. At the end the vast majority of the theater applaused for over two minutes, a rare feat in our multiplex society.

the train derailment in the film really threw me, because i was sure i had read in the script that the train goes off the tracks and plunges into the water- and as many fans probably know, Batmans villians down thru the years have frequently met an inconclusive fate by falling into water.

that we didn't see Ra's lifeless body after the wreck, was much appreciated as it doesn't box them into a corner for future stories.

yes. deception and diversion are points that Ducard/Ras frequently stresses, so it seems fairly obvious to me that the League operates with a false figurehead for security purposes.

Best Batman movie since Mask of the Phantasm and better than both of the Burton films.
I do have problems with the car, the suit and a few other minor things, but I loved it overall.
I thought it was darker then the Burton movies and with the whole city poisoned with the fear toxin, it added a horror element to it, which I loved.

and Gordon got quite a bit of screen time, which is always nice.

I thought it was a great movie, and this is THE Batman movie much like Superman: The Movie is THE Superman movie. However, I understand how Batman fights--but I don't WANT to feel like Batman is beating ME up. I want to SEE who Batman is beating up. Every single fight scene was inadequately staged and shot. The previous best incarnation of Batman--the animated series--never used jerky shaky and obscure movements. It's unnecessary, honestly. I don't need it to be fully lit, but I would like a wide-shot or two BEFORE we dive right back into Batman's elbow and some thug's knee. So that way I get SOME sense of orientation. There's stylistic choice and there's blatant confusion to the point where all I know is that Batman hit somebody, I guess. Which then makes the fights totally extraneous.

I still believe the movie was a GREAT setup for future installments in a series, and I'll definitely be seeing it again very soon.

Not only is Christian Bale now the ONLY person who can ever play Batman as far as I'm concerned, but Michael Caine is also THE definitive Alfred.

Anyone hope that they cast Mark hamill for the joker ?

He did the voice for the animated series and in my opinion would be perfect !!!!

Ive seen Batman Begins twice now ( The 12 midnight show and again tonight )

With every frame that goes by in the running time it erases the first 4 films from my memory .

Im going to go see it again later this week on IMAX !!

I cant wait till October 25th !!! (Tenative DVD release date )

I thought the movie clearly laid out what was going on, how many baddies there were and who disappeared when. Just because I didn't clearly see HOW they got taken down, doesn't mean it was uncomprehensible narratively. But then, I LIKED feeling like Batman was beating ME up. It made it a very visceral experience. Agreed.

The casting, directing, writing and production design were all perfect. With the same elements in place, the sequels can only get better. Simply the best comic book adaptation created.
The critics who pan the film were expecting a non-stop, brainless action movie with phoney characters and stand up bits. That's not Batman. What Nolan and company served up is.
One overly condescending review a read slammed the third act re-emergence of Ducard/Ra's. I couldn't disagree more. I, like a lot of you, thought it was an excellent twist that added to the film's climax.
Let's hope they start pre-production of the sequels soon.

Fun discussion.

I do understand the concern over Batman letting Ra's die. This is a young Batman, not fully formed, exhausted, with a city in distress. In later years, I bet he would have "saved" Ra's. But now, he's content to leave him in same jam as Ra's left him in his home. Ra's just doesn't have someone who loves him to save him...or does he I don't expect that to be the end of Ra's at all. He's too perfect a foil for Batman. He knows who he is, knows his abilities, but doesn't know his heart.

Back to the action.
I was too. Perfectly shot. Almost all the fights put the criminal as the center of the fight, not Batman. It's a bit of a departure from standard action shooting, but it works for Batman especially well. Like Adam, it makes perfect sense that he'd fight like that, and it makes him more imposing to the viewer (who only sees criminals disappearing in a flurry of brutal shots). Batman fought Ra's. He dealt with the other criminals. Big difference. Again, like Adam, I like that we are kept at an arm's distance from Batman. It wouldn't work for Superman or Spider-Man. But it really works for Batman.

This is a DVD I *REALLY* want. And I want commentaries, and deleted concepts, and featurettes, and interviews, and...

Folks will laugh, but I think
Warning Spoiler! Click to show would be a great Joker. They'd never cast him, but...

Take care,
Chuck

Saw it last night with only a 1/2 full crowd which suprised me. I left a hour early and ended up walking right in, no lines or anything.

Man this movie was LOUD. I cant remember seeing a film in the theater I go to, that had this type of volume. It made the Scarecrow scnes work very well as My G/F and her son jumped a few times during some of the hallucinating scenes.

Crane is the best bat villian weve seen.By far! Finally a villian whos actually dangerous and scary!

The hallucinating scenes were fantastic. I loved the people of Gotham looking up and seeing a demon floating over them.

The other highlight for me was the chase trying to get Rachel to the cave. Excellent.

The Miller influences are still there. The fall in the beginning, the bats taking out the SWAT team and the ending as well, were all right of of Y1.

Rachel didnt bother me at all (Maybe a bit in her last scene)

But I liked alot of the little things they did as well - Bruce coming back to Lucious when he realized he needed "to glide", Alfred talking to Bruce about covering his bruises, the suprise of Wayne Manor burning down, the batcave and its entrance.


Its hard for me to place this film. I think its better than X2 but maybe not as great as Spiderman2.

Cant wait to see it again.

So many great comments here! Just some nearly-random thoughts on the film after my first viewing:

--LOVED the scene where Batman finds the stuffed animals; you have to be watching closely, but when Crane and goons arrive, Batman sinks into the shadows on the right side of the screen

--I loved the score, but I also bought it a day before seeing the movie. I'm glad the composers didn't try to top or replicate Elfman's iconic score. The score for BB mirrors the movie perfectly: it's about fear, anger, sadness and power.

--Suit and batmobile worked just fine for me. Never been a fan of tights for live action.

--Estatic over the dock scene and when Batman saves Rachel on the el. Especially the "over the shoulder" shot where Batman quickly pummels the goon into submission.

--The scene with Falcone and Bruce was dynamite. Hope they used the character (and Wilkinson) more in future movies.

--The much mentioned doubleslap. You're all right; it was a defining moment and helped give the Dawes character more weight.

--hated the "hand in hand" scene with Bruce and Rachel at the end. Felt forced and too much aimed at please a demographic.

--Wished the fights would have been shot a bit further away and edited better. Nolan conveyed the brutality really well, but the fights (especially the fight between Batman and Ducard on the train) were confusing.

--I, too, was moved to tears by the death of the Waynes and Bruce's grief.

--Loved how Nolan managed to cast someone with fairly similar features as Thomas Wayne; when Bruce is told he looks like his father, it worked.

--Thought it was great storytelling that the city ends up in immediately worse shape than when Batman first arrived. I get the long-term good, but a lot of property destruction as well as the escpaped inmates do not bode well for Gotham.

--The print I saw last night had some audio problems and some scenes had some VERY rough jumps or cuts. I look forward to seeing it at a different theater.