*** Official BATMAN BEGINS Discussion Thread - Page 22

How's it going Chuck,

Yeah, I know you like good movies and so do I. I just don't think Batman Begins is a good movie and its definitely not a great film. And yes like you, Batman is my favorite fictional character, well at least one of my favorite fictional characters.

I don't post my opinions of this film too often because for many on this forum, Batman Begins seems to be the film that can do no wrong. Needless to say, I find many flaws with the film.


I agree. The Frank Miller of today is like the new Star Wars trilogy, he's cruising on borrowed credit from his previous success. I also read about his upcoming Batman project, it seems Miller will have the Batman take on Al Queda.

I don't think Batman Begins is the worst comic book film, but it is just above mediocre. Having seen it three times I do understand why so many on this forum have taken to it. But Chuck, just as you always find something new to like about the film with each viewing, I have found more things that I don't like about the film with my three viewings of it.

Was in the mood for the final hour of Batman Begins saturday night. Earlier that day I put in the Superbit dvd of Air Force One. Gary Oldman can make anything work. :b

I won't go off again about the Oscars...well just one more. :b Someone tell me again why BB didn't get a Sound nom????! The sound is lean, then big and bad. Clear and natural. Truly a wonderful mix...but no nomination. I just don't get it. Ok-I'm through. Whew. :b

At the risk of further ruining my credibility (as if I have any) I am going to say that Batman Begins is already becoming a modern classic. That used to go against what I would consider a "classic". Traditionally that term for me referred to films that have stood the test of time-overcome trends and even their own genre-and they maintain their grip and effectiveness.

Seeing BB 2 times in the theater and now 2 times at home this movie just gets better, richer, and more meaningful each viewing.

There aren't many films made since 2000 that I can say that about. It's a short list of films that for me just improve the more you see them.

The Fellowship Of The Ring-Extended
Spider-Man 2
Revenge Of The Sith
Batman Begins

Just some very recent films that find a way to still captivate me and improve despite numerous viewings and my familiarity.

One small moment from Batman Begins that I just caught. When Bruce is late for his birthday party, he tells Alfred to entertain them or something and says..."tell them the joke that you know"...Greatness. Sublte, but effective.

Another moment that would make my 2005 WOW! list if I wasn't so lazy to make one: Near the end, Batman and Ducard on the train...Batman says, "I won't kill you-but I don't have to save you" then in one of the coolest moments ever he escapes in a bad ass way with cape extended out of the train. Gives me goose bumps.

Sorry for the love fest. Some films just do it for me and this one does.

Great line. Great for the character too.

Regards,
Dan

Wonderful film!

I recently watched Tim Burton's Batman, which I thought was the greatest thing when it came out, but now it just underscores how great Batman Begins is.

My favorite line is (and I am quoting from memory) "it's not who you are inside, but what you do that counts"... or something like that. Does anyone remember that line exactly?

Can't wait to see it on hd dvd! :-)

Nice list Tim. Take out Sith and replace it with Serenity and it would be even better.

I agree BB rocks. Still can't get over the cast this one had.

Between BB, the Spidey movies, hopefully Superman Returns, and to a lessor degree - the X-Men movies; comic book movies have done all right.

strong sentiment, that brings to mind for me of some of the Sith discussions (and arguments that i still can't embrace) concerning redemption thru grace-as well as some general philosophical points that i think i personally have been using as a crutch for years.

in other words, good intentions don't cut it...

at least that's how i read it.

That's what Bats was throwing back in Rachel's face in the Narrows.

No hurry on the sequel. Get a good-tight screenplay and the other ingredients...1997 to now was a long wait, but well worth it.



I thought that would come from you Lou!

Another positive I thought about last night. Katie Holmes. Not a big fan of hers yet...but really-she was good in her role. Bale is a young guy and I'm not sure who else would have fit that role of love-childhood interest with the similar age as him. Good choice and she's won me over.

Although it was rather cold outside of Wayne Manor for her last moments. :wink:

Re: the philosophy of Batman Begins.

It is here (and here only) that I find the slightest of faults with the film.

First, what we do is important, but what we do, I think, is an indication of who we really are. I think the spiritual and the physical are important. I don't rate either one above the other. But I do think that our actions define what we are underneath.

Second, the more I watch BB, the more I have a problem with him "not saving" Ducard. In my mind, a true hero is one who saves others, who uses his powers to help those who cannot help themselves. So, not only is Batman's dialogue about not saving him anti-heroic, but I also think that it really goes against Batman's character in the comic books. Batman always values life and, I think, would rather see Ducard in Arkham than let him die when he could save him.

Anyway, I don't want to make too much of this, but I do find myself becoming more critical of these two lines of dialogue in an otherwise perfect film.

I don't know Chris. Ducard was going to destroy Gotham. That alone is madness and Batman had to think of the greater good. If Ducard lives...he would resurface. All villains do in film

his cavilier attitude to the destruction caused in the police car chase was a weak point of the film for me.
it's smoothed a little bit by the later confrontation with Alfred- but not fully to my satisfaction. i think a line of dialouge from Bruce was neccesary there to fully enunciate what value system he was operating under to justify that
i.e. "odds are any cops i took out were corrupt anyway..." or "Rachael is more important to Gotham than a handful of corrupt cops" etc

anything to better justify the behavior from Waynes p.o.v.. as smartly as Wayne is written, that failure to explore and elucidate that aspect of his value system is a weakness in the script, imo.

And nothing in the film realy says he does or does not die. We do not see his body.

The Batman does not kill. The Batman does save lives. The Batman is also a cold mathematician.

He did not kill the cops in the chase, and knew he wouldn't. Being young, he was also a bit reckless; but the odds were the cops would not be killed, being seatbelted for a high speed pursuit. He knew this, and responded accordingly. With non-lethal deterrents.

Ducard is a different matter, and one we discussed at length when the film was released. I find it a bit disingenuous that Batman is being held to a standard not even Superman was held to in his films, nor Spidey in his. I also feel that it was internally consistent with the Bruce Wayne of the film, and the Batman in the comics.

An exhausted Batman, wet behind the ears and facing his first major crisis, did not risk his own death (with his knowledge and ability to help the big picture in Gotham) to save a mentor, a man who has cheated death time and again, and man with his own skills. If Batman had risked his life to save Ducard, he might have succeeded. And continued the fight outside, with Gotham in chaos around him. He might have failed, and they both would have died, with Gotham in chaos around them. In both cases, he would have been unable to help the city he swore to save. Mathematically, he chose to leave Ducard to his own devices (after saving him once, when Bruce initiated the attack) to save Gotham.

It's cold. It's "big picture". It's Batman. Especially a young Batman.

Superman let the three supervillains "die" at the end of Superman 2. Spidey let GG and Ock die at the end of his movies. And they have powers and are beacons of light.

Have I overanalyzed? Yup. That's the point. But I think some folks are holding BB to a more stringent standard than even the pinnacles of the genre. At least in terms of character honesty.

It also seems people forget this is Batman Begins, as if he's got everything figured out already.

"It's not who you are underneath, it's what you do that defines you."

Our fount of wisdom: Rachel. She says this first to Bruce after the restaurant "swim."

Nolan and David Goyer worked out the film's plot (part 2 of the trilogy of films Nolan wants to do), Nolan's brother is currently at work on the script and WB is expecting this one to go before cameras next year with a summer 2008 release tentatively set.

Even as Nolan directs "The Prestige" (also for WB), he and the studio have had several meetings about the upcoming Bat-sequel. The main subjects being the many candidates for the roles of Joker and Harvey Dent.

While I do consider myself a huge 'Star Wars' geek (I loved ROTS), "Batman Begins" was easily the best movie I saw last summer. It was the Batman flick I've always wanted to see. Admittedly, I was never a big fan of any of the previous four movies. 'Begins' simply got it right from the opening frames to the closing credits.

I'm really looking forward to the next two movies and I think Nolan was the perfect guy to take on the mantle of the Bat.

Batman, Superman, Spidey, or even a Jedi Knight cannot save everyone. There will be losses. But like Ducard's fate...his fate was sealed by Ducard's actions, not the lack of action from Batman. Surely, Ducard or any other villain knows there are risks. Ducard was/is one of the most interesting I've seen in awhile and no doubt he probably felt invincible.

In fact, it was Bruce's "weakness"...compassion for Gotham that ultimately decided Ducard's fate.

I want to say one more thing about the mix. During the latter half of the film, I swear it felt like my pants were flapping the bass was so deep and mean. Loved it. :b Did I mention I have a new SVS sub?

I thought it was pretty clear that Batman can only save those that want to be saved. Ducard violently opposed any such repeated efforts on Batman's part.

When Ducard reinforced his stance on the train, Batman left him to decide his own fate.

I used to love Batman('89). Now after watching Batman Begins. Its so hard to watch it now. While, I respect it for what it is and for what it did. Its little things that ruin it for me. My biggest beef is that in Batman they used the same 3 street lots for Gotham. Whereas BB uses actual city footage for most of the movie. So it feels like a real city. And while I enjoy Burtons surreal looks of scenery in his movie. I find for me that it doesn't work for Batman anymore.

'Batman' (1989) was there to honour the original comics. 'Batman Begins' (2005) is there to honour the legend.

It's quite possible to like and value them next to each other, though differently.


Cees

I'm in agreement with todd. One of my biggest problems with Tim Burton's two 'Batman' movies was that Gotham never really felt like a city, it always felt like a set, especially in "Batman Returns".

I do greatly admire what Burton was able to do with the first two movies (I enjoy 'Returns' more than the first one in spite of it feeling a bit claustrophobic), but 'Begins' had an epic scale to it that none of the previous four films had.

Echoing what Cees said, 'Begins' very much honors the legend of the Dark Knight.

Batman '89 was never a favorite. Neither was Burton actually, which I found little more than interesting (until Corpse Bride, awesome stuff).

However, I have only recently discovered Elfman's terrific score, been listening to it daily. When I do revisit the movie, which I have not seen in several years, and from which I remember next to nothing, I trust I will actually enjoy it, probably more for the AV feast than anything.

I believe there is now a decent DVD out?

--
H

With Begins, I was able for the first time to connect with Batman. While I enjoyed the '89 version and initially enjoyed Batman Forever...I didn't connect like this.

Right there with ya, Tim (I just got mine last week)! I was wondering what to watch tonight, but after your review (lots o' bass), I think I know... Am I the only one, or does the "bass-bug" hit everyone who gets a new sub (ie. "I wonder what I am going to watch tonight?.... No, not that one - not enough bass...")

You know you have it bad when you listen to an entire Bass Mechanic CD or put the Monsters Inc. sock explosion scene on A-B repeat.

There are many great bass moments in BBegins for sure. War of the Worlds has them too...but BB has some serious woofage when the Tank gets it going. Pant leg flapping...nearly had testicular movement (the involuntary variety)

Would that be the upward or downward variety of movement?

Some interesting take on the "I'm not going to kill you, but I don't have to save you." line.

I felt that it was a direct rebuttal of his former master, from when Ducard/Ras wanted Bruce Wayne to kill the man in the name of "justice" to complete his training/journey. By not killing Ducard, Batman was elevating himself above Ducard and additionally showing him that killing criminals in the name of "justice" was not the best way to deal with personal loss.

With that one line, Bruce/Batman shows he's come of age, risen above his previous circumstances, and doesn't need "selfish revenge" for himself to deal with his loss (of parents). In other words, a great moment for Bruce/Batman, and the beginning (i.e. Batman Begins) of his "calling" on behalf of Gotham.

That's fine, except, no one is taking issue with the first proposition (which is what your post addresses), only the second one .

--
H