Batman Begins Best Origin Movie ever ?

[RustyCage]

For me, the biggest aspect that keeps me returning to Begins with excitement is that Begins got what made Batman as a character so awesome to behold. TDK and TDKR had fleeting moments of it, but didn't accomplish it to the nearly same degree.

[Excelsior.]

"Swear to me" was the defining moment of Bale's Batman that officially surpassed any Keaton moment

Quite disagree. Keaton has far higher quantity and quality of iconic "that's Batman damn it!" moments than Cristian Bale. Especially the scene in Batman returns where he broods impatiently for the Batsignal to hit, and once it does, Bruce finally shows a spark of life as he gets ready to mow down baddies.



Nothing in Bale's movies come close to this. Nothing in Nolan's films scream Batman more.

as well as any moment from Downey in Iron Man.

Batman and Iron man are entirely different animals with "defining" moments being uniquely their own. However, I thought Iron man films (and Avengers) had more scenes that crystalised who Iron Man was than Bale's Batman.

Pepper was less interesting and less proactive than Rachel to the overall plot.

Pepper was actually an active participant in the third act and was crucial in defeating Obidiah Stane. Where was Rachel when Bats was beating the hell out of Ras? Oh right. She was on a rooftop.

She was also inherently more interesting that Rachel because she actually felt like a palpable love interest to this rich, famous genius who can get any peace of ass anytime he wants. You can actually see the qualities she has that would explain why Tony Stark would be interested in her. Whereas Rachel was there solely to manufacture a love interest. That was her purpose. Batman had fine and compelling origin stories without her. She wasn't integral to him as Pepper is to Stark. The obligated kiss scene at the end was even more impossibly manufactured than her character.

As far as Bruce's development goes, he had numerous guidances in various ways, including Alfred, Ras and Rachel.

And Pepper alone measures up to all of them? Pepper alone facilitates just as much growth as the lot of them together? What a character!

It wasn't just one person doing or saying one thing, it was a lot more layered and textured.

And it wasn't one person contributing to Tony's growth either. Rhodes, Stane and most importantly, Yensen, helped him (or hurt him in Stane's case) grow. I originally brought up Pepper only to compare her to Rachel.

Stane was a very generic, cliched and unmemorable villain.

And Iron Man was a formulaic superhero film. The difference maker is execution. Jeff Bridges, like the film itself, was able to rise past it's bland script to deliver a charming baddie.

He just had no impact as a main baddie.

He has as much impact as any origin movie villain did, save perhaps Lex Luthor.

It would be like revealing Skudd in Blade 2 to not only be a traitor, but also the mastermind behind the whole "Reaper strain" storyline.

I barely remember this film. Can't say anything here.

Ras was far more interesting and intimidating.

Agreed. But the other parts tip Iron Man over for me.

[RustyCage]

Originally Posted by Excelsior.

So much to this. My favorite Keaton moment.

When that happened for the first time, it was like, YUP, BATMAN'S BACK. Tim Burton had really established a phenomenon.

[BatLobsterRises]

That's a great iconic moment.

Still though, Bale had so many moments throughout all three films where he was out and about covertly doing Batman "stuff" as Bruce Wayne and that nailed a completely different aspect of the character.

Burton's take on Batman was that Bruce Wayne is someone that would need a Bat-suit to intimidate somebody. It was more compensatory and all about the duality. Nolan's take was that Bruce Wayne is this badass ninja who just uses a symbol to inspire fear/hope. Bruce and Batman were one and the same.

Part of Nolan's whole approach for Batman Begins was to not do things that necessarily "screamed" Batman. It toned down everything. It was more of a gentle whisper that gave you chills when it was over.

[RustyCage]

I honestly just deeply love both approaches. Nolan's writing is more sophisticated, but there's nothing wrong with either approach to portraying the character.

I feel there were moments in Nolan's films that did scream Batman, personally. Lots of them.

The major difference seemed to be "What is Bruce Wayne when he's not Batman?"

The lonely, empty, swimming in intense thoughts, waiting for the signal to come alive version works just as beautifully as the public facade coupled with the 'maskless' Bruce who is really just Batman at home/with friends.

I feel like the next film should try to combine them somehow.

[BatLobsterRises]

Oh, I agree. To be clear, I think there a lot of moments that screamed Batman in the Nolan movies overall. But I always got the sense that the overall the approach was to have these moments kind of creep up on you rather than hit you head on...if that makes any sense. Particularly in Begins. One example is the gliding shot in Arkham. Still frame it and it's a beautiful iconic Batman image, but in the film it's blink and you miss it. That's sort of what I mean. But I would say the moment where Bruce Wayne gets swarmed by the bats in the cave is Nolan's equivalent of the Keaton/signal moment. Both are simple, chill inducing scenes of Bruce Wayne just standing stoically, filled with purpose.

And yeah, I think the key for a writer or director to unlock their take on Batman is answering the question of "who is Bruce Wayne?" A lot of the tone, aesthetics and overall style can flow out of that. And certainly the casting too.

[RustyCage]

Excellent comparison with the bat swarm scene. Damn man, damn.

[Squaremaster316]

Originally Posted by Excelsior.

Quite disagree. Keaton has far higher quantity and quality of iconic "that's Batman damn it!" moments than Cristian Bale. Especially the scene in Batman returns where he broods impatiently for the Batsignal to hit, and once it does, Bruce finally shows a spark of life as he gets ready to mow down baddies.

A contrived, forced, ridiculously manufactured scene with a ton of logic implausibilities; the epitome of style over substance.

[CConn]

No, it's the epitome of expressionism, an extremely well respected and revered style of storytelling.

In which, substance has little to do with plausibility. To paraphrase Ingmar Bergman, it's more important for people to feel the story emotionally rather than understanding it on an intellectual basis.

[Excelsior.]

Originally Posted by squaremaster316

a contrived, forced, ridiculously manufactured scene with a ton of logic implausibilities; the epitome of style over substance.

1/10

[Anno_Domini]

Originally Posted by Squaremaster316

A contrived, forced, ridiculously manufactured scene with a ton of logic implausibilities; the epitome of style over substance.

Kinda like...

Spoiler!!! Click to Read!:

It's nothing new for Batman. It's just a moment that puts chills down someone's spine with such an intense scene that chooses to go over logic.

Sometimes, style over substance isn't a bad thing.

[BatLobsterRises]

That is one of MessenjahMatt's best pieces. So damn good!

[RustyCage]

The best Batman scenes require no explanation. Visuals convey everything.

This is part of what frustrated me about the bit where Catwoman vanishes while Batman isn't looking. There was a great opportunity there for silent expression..

[The Joker]

Originally Posted by Anno_Domini

Kinda like...

Spoiler!!! Click to Read!:

Oh well played, Anno

[CConn]

It disappoints me in general that visual filmmaking is so under-appreciated these days. Whether it be Burton, Nolan or anyone else. Terrible.

[TheDevilIsMe]

I would give my vote to 'Batman Begins' out of all of those listed, quite easily.

Iron Man and Superman are stellar, as well.

[Squaremaster316]

Originally Posted by CConn

No, it's the epitome of expressionism, an extremely well respected and revered style of storytelling.

In which, substance has little to do with plausibility. To paraphrase Ingmar Bergman, it's more important for people to feel the story emotionally rather than understanding it on an intellectual basis.

Yes, just sitting in a room by himself like some ridiculous caricature of Rodin's "The Thinker" instead of, say, training, reading, watching the news, working on the batmobile, researching, patroling the city streets, you know, SOMETHING PROACTIVE, while two implausible bat signals attached to his roof shine a light directly into his room. So staged, so artificial. Scenes like this are one of the many reasons why Burton is regarded more and more as a hack director every day.

[CConn]

Originally Posted by Squaremaster316

Yes, just sitting in a room by himself like some ridiculous caricature of Rodin's "The Thinker" instead of, say, training, reading, watching the news, working on the batmobile, researching, patroling the city streets, you know, SOMETHING PROACTIVE, while two implausible bat signals attached to his roof shine a light directly into his room. So staged, so artificial. Scenes like this are one of the many reasons why Burton is regarded more and more as a hack director every day.

Not a single word of that makes any rational sense.

[Anno_Domini]

Originally Posted by Squaremaster316

Yes, just sitting in a room by himself like some ridiculous caricature of Rodin's "The Thinker" instead of, say, training, reading, watching the news, working on the batmobile, researching, patroling the city streets, you know, SOMETHING PROACTIVE, while two implausible bat signals attached to his roof shine a light directly into his room. So staged, so artificial. Scenes like this are one of the many reasons why Burton is regarded more and more as a hack director every day.

Just passed right on over when I said style over substance can work, eh?

Anywho...you're trying way too hard to make a point.

[CConn]

But its not even a matter of style v. substance.

It's a matter of overt v. covert. Literal v. metaphorical.

[RustyCage]

Originally Posted by CConn

But its not even a matter of style v. substance.

It's a matter of overt v. covert. Literal v. metaphorical.

^ This.

There's plenty of substance to expressionism. It just isn't traditional or mathematical substance. It's more about the poetry of a thing.

Neither approach is necessarily negative. I'd like to see both used more in tandem in future Bat-films.

[CConn]

Exactly. And if someone came out and said, I don't like Burton's use of expressionist technique because if X, Y, and Z, even if I disagreed, I'd still respect the hell out of that person for actually understanding and critquing the method.

But no, when people criticize it, they aren't even able to show a basic comprehension of that type of storytelling.

[Gotham's Knight]

Originally Posted by Excelsior.

Quite disagree. Keaton has far higher quantity and quality of iconic "that's Batman damn it!" moments than Cristian Bale. Especially the scene in Batman returns where he broods impatiently for the Batsignal to hit, and once it does, Bruce finally shows a spark of life as he gets ready to mow down baddies.



Nothing in Bale's movies come close to this. Nothing in Nolan's films scream Batman more.

This part always bothered me, to be honest. Correct me if I'm wrong but didn't Bruce have a collection of giant mirrors outside that reflected the Batsignal into the room? It just seemed a little too ridiculous for me. I think the shot is beautiful and the best part of that entire movie but the actual logic of it weak (if I am remembering it correctly).

[CConn]

The scene wasn't supposed to be logical.

[the last son]

That scene is brilliant