Flaws from "bad" comic book movies that appear in "respected" comic book movies.

[The PhantaZm]

3. While they may have been there, they were different. Gordon now plays an important part of the story and is no longer an old, fat, doddering fool. The mob is shown as controlling the city completely, not just as a small raiding force. For some reason you can't see the differences. Maybe that's why you don't enjoy the film, eh?

Ha! Gordon didn't do jack **** in the movie besides tinker with an apparently user friendly tank. I couldn't believe how wasted the character was. How many lines did he have?? He said and did nothing substantial. I know at this point in bats history hes not the commisioner yet but atleast give the guy some kind of story arc. They never really explain why he is so accepting of batmans presence. They just say hes a good cop so ofcourse hes gonna embrace a mysterious vigilantes that dresses in a giant bat suit.

The only reason bb gets away with such poor character development is because the filmakers figure that everybody already knows who gordon is and the role he plays in the bat mythos so the audience can just fill in the blanks. Thats the mentality.

4. Personal opinion. Bale played his role perfectly, even with the mask hampering his performance. He was still a frightening force of justice. But with only a mouth left exposed, I highly doubt he could deliver a performance that was anything other than lukewarm. Sure, his voice is an important part, but it's just not the same without body language.

I wasn't knocking bales performance, emotionless is exactly what he should be. I have more of a problem with the script but Bale could make a fine batman if he would just setlle on an official bat-voice.

 

[Flexo]

Ha! Gordon didn't do jack **** in the movie besides tinker with an apparently user friendly tank. I couldn't believe how wasted the character was. How many lines did he have?? He said and did nothing substantial. I know at this point in bats history hes not the commisioner yet but atleast give the guy some kind of story arc. They never really explain why he is so accepting of batmans presence. They just say hes a good cop so ofcourse hes gonna embrace a mysterious vigilantes that dresses in a giant bat suit.

The only reason bb gets away with such poor character development is because the filmakers figure that everybody already knows who gordon is and the role he plays in the bat mythos so the audience can just fill in the blanks. Thats the mentality.

While his part may have been small, it was an improvement over the other films. I also believe that he will be better utilized in the sequels. (But he did do a bit more than you give him credit for. If nothing else, he did get in a nifty little speech about escalation.)

His motives weren't crystal clear, but don't you hate it when movies treat the audience like they're too dumb to read between the lines? Gordon was going with his instincts in the film, and Batman was finally providing results.

 

[Mr. Magoo]

Gordon had a story arc - he was a stand-in for everyone else in the city who wished that things would get better but was afraid to do anything to change them. "What chance does Gotham have when the good people sit aside and do nothing?" By the end of the movie, Batman had given him confidence in his own beliefs, and his own move up in power to lieutenant was supposed to symbolize the sea change that Batman had brought to Gotham. The good people weren't vulnerable anymore, and had been given the courage and power to stand up for themselves. I think he'll have more busywork in the sequels, as in he'll have much more influence on the plot itself, but I think his role was plenty large in Begins. What more did we really need to see of him?

 

[The Batman]

A comic film that has plot elements from a previous installment

SR is derided for taking elements of STM, while no one says anything about the fact that BB takes many plot details from previous bat flicks