Batman Begins Things Batman Begins got Right/Wrong

[lonzoe]

Yep. Spider-Man 3 was extremely overhyped & many fans along with critics hate it. But it still made $300 millions. It was the marketing that help despite being a so-so movie.

OKAYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYYY. I'm not talking about Spidey 3. I know crappy movies make alot of money. Look at Transformers, War of the Worlds, National Treasure movies, etc.

What are you trying to say there? They made more or something? You're comparing those movies that are quite decades old than BB. Weak comparsion there.

The point I was making is that GREAT movies can make a lot of money. If Baleman Begins was so great then how come that didn't make a lot of money like those movies.

LOL! You're still using the old "making more, mean it better", when that isn't the case there. You never heard of "marketing". BB don't need to make $300 millions to be good. It how the film is. Beside, lot of people weren't sure about a new Batman after the awful Batman & Robin. But now since BB has become popular & show folks that Batman is dark & serious again (along with a good story & such), it going to help the sequel. I'm sure TDK is going to make more.

Whatever.


And you're thinking BB suck because it didn't made more than some others. Not to mention you're comparing BB to few old classics, which is another weak excuse there. Especially when BB hasn't been out that long as those you mention.

No I don't think Bateman Begins sucked because it didn't make more than some others and I already explained that on you second paragraph . I never said BB sucked. I said "It was a DISSAPPOINTMENT as a movie." And that "it was an OKAY movie". As well as "your typical generic, average, dumb, Batman/ Comic Book/Superhero Action-Adventure movie." So there.

I could ask you the same about why 2004 Punisher didn't made a crapload of money if it was so good, or at least to you. And funny you mention the flims that were good & a flop, but fail to point why it didn't make plenty of money either. Again, good movies don't always make crapload of money. Period. Even bad films made more than good movies. More money don't always mean it good. It all on people being curious, the marketing, etc. That why SM3 was successful, because it was hyped. It wasn't because people love it.

I know that. BTW, The Punisher was poorly marketed. Kill Bill was it's competion. You do the math CLOWN.

Doesn't mean BB is a flop. It cost a lot of money to make KK & they almost didn't make their money back, where BB was cheaper & got their money back.

Once again I know that. The point I was making was that KK was a FLOP and it still manage to make more than BB. If BB was that AMAZING, FANTASTIC, PERFECT, BRILLIANT, MINDBLOWING, GROUNDBREAKING, etc.etc. I should've made more then.


Bullcrap. I like you to give us hard proof to back it up. TDK was greenlight, 'cause BB was good & it made money. You forgot DVD wasn't the only thing that made them do TDK. It was how successful BB was in theater & such. Didn't WB plan to greenlit TDK after BB made $200 millions & more in theater before DVD? Stop using your hate to make up excuses & lies.

I heard people bring that up on the SR forums at other websites and saying that "that's amazing that BB was successful because BB made 5 million more than SR in the U.S. and SR made more than BB Worldwide." People were saying it only got greenlit b/c of the DVD sales. That's true because BB was in the Top Ten Selling Dvds List of 2005. Hellboy got greenlit b/c of the dvd sells. The word of mouth excuse was not good enough for BB. It didn't break the B.O. SLUMP that year. Word of mouth was just little word of mouth. People aren't CRAZY over BB like you and Soze are. SO GET OVER IT. CLOWN!

 

[Keyser Soze]

Why do you feel the need to call people clowns whenever they outargue you?

 

[lonzoe]

I thought I told you to not answer my posts anymore. I would say a lot worse than clown but the moderators, who deleted my post for telling you not to answer my posts and get back on topic, would be watching. Kel or Hunter Rider needs to mind their own business.

 

[lonzoe]

Bad

Nolan clearly didn’t know how to balance the film. Was it really any more than a generic superheroe film we’ve seen over and over again? That it got 5 star reviews for being more gritty and complex was laughable.

Contrived final act. Gordon in tumbler. No, just no.

Bruce never really struggled to gain anything. He left Gotham, went to a prison, had a few fights, and then sailed through the training with Ra’s. We never saw how hard Bruce would have trained. Also, all his equipment came to him so easily. Bruce is resourceful, and shouldn’t have had his car, suit and weapons just arrive on his lap. This film made him look relatively dull.

Contrived, sentimental, clichéd, preachy dialogue.

The suit. It’s not as bad as the new one in TDK, but I cannot see why they couldn’t make look aesthetically better, or one that fits for example. Bale looked really clumsy and immobile in it.

The score was distracting.

Katie Holmes. Worse than Uma, no joke.

Bad acting throughout the whole film(Crane, Ra’s, Falcone etc), and yes that includes Bale because he was so dull in the film. He phoned it in.

The playboy act was a bit out of left-field and unjustified

The narrows kid. Pointless. Plus that kid was clearly from the Hamptons and had been pushed into acting by his parents, not a kid in poverty. Was his t-shirt from Gap?

Good

The premise was near perfect, for which Goyer can be congratulated. I loved how Bruce trains with Ra’s and then comes back to Gotham and goes right at the heart of crime. It shows Bruce had a real plan, and not just go out and beat up a load of junkies. By premise, I do not mean the content. Good premise, bad content. Everything was there, the excecution was just plain lazy.

The design of the Narrows.

The scene where Batman confronts Crane and gets set on fire. Cool.

The tumbler chase scene. Would have been better if he jettisoned Holmes out the top on charges of bad acting though.

Flass and Batman interrogation scene.

The ones in bold totally in agreement with. The movie was a MISSOPPOTUNITY and a DISAPPOINTMENT, IMO.

 

[Keyser Soze]

I thought I told you to not answer my posts anymore. I would say a lot worse than clown but the moderators, who deleted my post for telling you not to answer my posts and get back on topic, would be watching. Kel or Hunter Rider needs to mind their own business.

Why are you angry? I'm not angry. Perhaps the mods aren't "minding their own business", because you can't handle people disagreeing with you, and fly off the handle. Why should I stop replying to your posts? Am I not allowed to point out where you are clearly wrong?

Though the funny thing is, I don't even need to tell you. I can use your own posts to show how you contradict yourself:

And I know that just because a movie flops doesn't mean the movie sucks look at Blade Runner, Wizard of Oz, Heat, Shawshank Redemption, etc. all flopped and all great movies..

The point I was making is that GREAT movies can make a lot of money. If Baleman Begins was so great then how come that didn't make a lot of money like those movies.

So.....there are plenty of great movies that didn't make loads of money, but "Batman Begins" clearly isn't great because it didn't make loads of money? Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight, good luck making sense of that....

 

[lonzoe]

Things BB got WRONG

Rubber suit. You have an actor who will train and push himself will far to get Batman's body. Bale puts 20-25 lbs of muscle only for Nolan and co. to give him a 15lb. rubber suit. It was already a BAD idea. Tell me soomething if you were tryimg to make a Batman movie that would distance itself from the others why have Batman's suit be made and look like the same material as the others. No wonder people were confused and thought it was a prequel/sequel even after BB was over. I think the rubber suit thing worked for the Burton films and the Burton films only because that's the way he sees Batman. Schumacher just botched it up with nipples and butts. He should've used different material as well. Tights probably could've work in his OTT vision of Batman. Plus you're limited in rubber. Proof the fight scenes in BB. Quick edits and camera tricks to make Batman appear fast eventhough he isn't. That was a dumb choice to use rubber IMO. After what Schumacher did with it. I would be trying as hard as possible not to use rubber and make something that we never seen before in any Batman/ comic book movie. Something that would seperate it from the other's and let people KNOW that's this is not your daddy's Batman. This is something COMPLETELY NEW.

Bruce Wayne was not smart. The scene where he says "I'm suppose to get all that"proves my point that Nolan didn't give damn. That scene alone made me give up with this movie. Lucius makes his gadgets and they fall on Wayne's lap. he just takes it right in front of Lucius' face and makes STUPID excuses as to why he needs it. Instead being of SECRETIVE about it. Just tell Lucius you're batman if that excuse is the best you can come up with. He should've went in disguise with Alfred to get rid of the technology that the company wants to destroy. Act like they're there to take it and turn it into scrap. Then Wayne would do adjustments to it so nobody would recognise it and to make it better than it was before. He also told Lucius Q to make an antidote for the fear toxin. Instead of making it himself. Wayne kept relying on him to do everything. The only reason Bale knew how Ras Al Ducard would use the toxin was because his father told him how the monorail worked on the monorail scene with his parents as a kid as well as the scene where he first meets Q and told Wayne how he helped his father build the monorail. So he didn't figure that out himself he knew it already. Ra's also gave him some hints before he burned his house down.All he build was a cheap looking Batarang that could only damage a light bulb.B/c what else did he use the batarang for. He only used it on that scene and only to hit FREAKING lightbulb.He airbrushed his Batsuit and put in lights in his cave. That's it. COME ON! Frank did more work than he did building his traps in his apartment and car in TP (2004).

Lucius Q knowing Batman's identity. The way he acts with Wayne telling him "Don't take me for an idiot". Than wayne makes some stupid excuse to why he needs the gadgets for. Him and Wayne play these stupid mind games like I know what you're really doing but I pretend I don't and buy your stupid excuses and help you on your crusade anyway. Those scenes alone just come off like WTF moments for a lot of reasons.

Batman giving one of his gadgets to a KID. Only for him to show his friends that Batman does exist. Scenes like that belong in Spiderman and Superman not Batman. That just proved that Bale's Batman is not a brutal Batman and is no different than Adam West's Batman. Batman would never give a kid a gadget especially akid does'nt know what it is.That gadget looked important as well. But not important enough to Batman where he can give it to a FREAKING kid. What's the kid going to do with that. What if Batman needs that gadget later. "Oh crap I need that but I gave it to that kid so his friends would believe that I'm real." "Oh Lucius. Do you have another one of those gatdget's that allows me see in DARK places b/c a kid stole it from me thanks." "Sorry,but that's a prototype Mr.Wayne so you're SOL."
That scene with the kid should've been deleted. Did anyone find that odd that the kid seem like he was immune to the fear toxin ? Because he acted like a typical scared little boy. And not a boy who's scared out of his mind to the point of insanity or death.

The movie should've ended when he caught Falcone. It turned to a TYPICAL Batman/Superhero/Comic Book movie when the silly MICROWAVE EMMITTER showed up. The movie should've been 2hrs of Bruce's origins and then for batman to show up the last ten minutes to fight Falcone and his mob. His origins was sloppily told in the movie IMO. Just because you finally told Batman 's origins doesn't mean you told it GOOD. NOLAN! Nolan and co. got scared of the "Batman wasn't in it enough!" comments like the other films went through and he had to please the comic book/superhero movie crowd. And since Batman actually BEGAN at the end of the actual film it probably should've ended with the scene where he was standing with the bats and embracing it. Then the next movie begins with Batman fighting his first crime. Just some ideas.

Speaking of bats. Why the heck is batman scared of bats. That would make him more of a wuss. If he was scared of bats it should've been in a psychological way. Like those bats are his dark side and inner demons kind of fear not like he's actually afraid of bats. Weak excuse for him to dress up as a bat,Nolan.That scene where he found the cave again as an older Wayne and embraces his fear of bats. Should've started as he was walking around the outside of the mansion to find out where to put his H.Q. at and then he falls into a hole like he did when he was a kid an into the cave and comes against his fear of bats and then embracing it. Instead of Wayne looking for the cave. I also thought he overcame his fear of bats. When Potatosack man gassed him. He was seeing bats again. Nolan doesn't get the FEAR stuff.IMO. We also never see Batman overcome the fear toxin that he went through for two days. Only for Q to have an antidote to cure him of the toxin. Should've went more into that scene. Showing Wayne suffering and trying to fight it while finding an antidote and not be KNOCKED OUT for two days and be saved by Q. PLEASE.

More flaws later. I'll take a break for the rest of the day.

 

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

Calling people "CLOWNS" when you get angry, is a very immature thing to do.

 

[Immortalfire]

Kel or Hunter Rider needs to mind their own business.

Patrolling the forums IS minding their business. You seriously need to calm down, and lay off the name calling to those that don't agree with you.

 

[Hunter Rider]

One more tantrum lonzoe and you can take some time off.

 

[Morg]

One more tantrum lonzoe and you can take some time off.

Drats, I sooo wanted to be the one

 

[Mladen]

No, I didn't say that. I was a Marvel guy, but the excellence of "Batman Begins" got me back into DC. After seeing "Begins", I decided to give "The Long Halloween" a try, and it was one of the best comic stories I've ever read. And from there I got "The Killing Joke" and "Dark Victory", and more from there, and I was totally converted.

so it opened your eyes then
thats fair enough,
just checking you weren't gonna switch back the moment there's a good marvel movie, ykno?

 

[Keyser Soze]

so it opened your eyes then
thats fair enough,
just checking you weren't gonna switch back the moment there's a good marvel movie, ykno?

I highly doubt it.

 

[Damiean Dark]

Its fine becoming a DC fan after watching a batman movie but is it Batman or the entre DC universe you like? I love bats but also as primarily a marvel fan its not just the xmen,dardevil and spidey i love its the entire universe from galactus to cloak and dagger it is IMO far more interesting then DC.

 

[Angeloz]

I must admit I loved the scenes between Bruce and Lucius. I liked it from the don't ask, don't tell perspective. But instead of it having gay implications it was something else entirely. Plus it was amusing they way they did the scenes (the actors) they were perfectly done or near perfect. Including the way it was written. It may be a cliche but I liked how Morgan delivered the, "You wouldn't be interested in that," line (or whatever he said exactly - I've only seen it 3 times). Plus I loved the, "Does it come in black?" line. As well as his excuse about going to parties with weaponised hallucinogens. Even though it's bull I just loved the image of people doing such a thing. It appeals to my black humour.

Angeloz

 

[Damiean Dark]

Freeman was the best actor in the movie IMO his easy delivery was perfect if only the rest of the cast upped their game as much as Freeman did...

 

[Angeloz]

Freeman was the best actor in the movie IMO his easy delivery was perfect if only the rest of the cast upped their game as much as Freeman did...

I thought he stole the scenes he was in usually. Particularly when him and Bruce first meet. That said I thought the rest of the actors were quite solid. The only one that was questionable was Katie Holmes; mainly because she didn't look the part for me. Too young looking.

Angeloz

 

[Mladen]

Freeman was the best actor in the movie IMO his easy delivery was perfect if only the rest of the cast upped their game as much as Freeman did...

Morgan Freeman is overrated.
He plays himself in films very well, thats about it. the only thing that changes is his job between films, but otherwise all of his performances are absolutely interchangeable.

 

[Angeloz]

Morgan Freeman is overrated.
He plays himself in films very well, thats about it. the only thing that changes is his job between films, but otherwise all of his performances are absolutely interchangeable.

I don't care. I liked his character and performance a lot in this film. That's all that counts to me.

Angeloz

 

[Joe Von Zombie]

Morgan Freeman is overrated.
He plays himself in films very well, thats about it. the only thing that changes is his job between films, but otherwise all of his performances are absolutely interchangeable.

The same could be said about Jack Nicholson (which is why I'm not a fan of his Joker) and Micheal Caine.

 

[Keyser Soze]

There are a lot of actors (and a lot of great actors, at that) who essentially just play themselves in most of their films. But that's not always a bad thing, as the persona of a Jack Nicholson or a Morgan Freeman is often more compelling and watchable than a character a writer could invent.

 

[Nightwing1977]

One more tantrum lonzoe and you can take some time off.

You were saying, lonzoe? You apparently never read the rules when you sign up, so you better listen this time. And learn how to respect other's opinions, even if you disagree with it by not calling us "names".

And btw, Wars of the World & Transformers both were horrible film. All action & no story, even thought I'm a TF fan when the cartoon first came out. You need a good combo of action & story for a movie those 2 lack. That where BB got it right. I do think it need more action, but seeing as BB is call that for a reason I can deal with it. I think we will get more & better action in TDK.

 

[Joe Von Zombie]

There are a lot of actors (and a lot of great actors, at that) who essentially just play themselves in most of their films. But that's not always a bad thing, as the persona of a Jack Nicholson or a Morgan Freeman is often more compelling and watchable than a character a writer could invent.

Im not saying its a bad thing, I just wasnt a fan when it came to The Joker.

 

[Mladen]

The same could be said about Jack Nicholson (which is why I'm not a fan of his Joker) and Micheal Caine.

not really. About Schmidt is an entirely different role to Joker which is entirely different to his role in As Good As it Gets which again is totally different to his character in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest. You can't swap them easily.

Sure he's no Cate Blanchette in terms of versatility, but he actually DOES do different roles (specifically, roles which serve different plot functions). Michael Caine is similar to a lesser extent.

Is there a movie Morgan Freeman has been in where he's not a wise fatherly mentor figure with good advice?

 

[Mr. Socko]

Its fine becoming a DC fan after watching a batman movie but is it Batman or the entre DC universe you like? I love bats but also as primarily a marvel fan its not just the xmen,dardevil and spidey i love its the entire universe from galactus to cloak and dagger it is IMO far more interesting then DC.

Overall I prefer the Marvel universe to DC, but ironically, Batman is my favorite superhero.

The same could be said about Jack Nicholson (which is why I'm not a fan of his Joker) and Micheal Caine.

I loved Nicholson's Joker and Caine was great as Alfred. I honestly could care less about their previous roles when watching their Batman movies.

You were saying, lonzoe? You apparently never read the rules when you sign up, so you better listen this time. And learn how to respect other's opinions, even if you disagree with it by not calling us "names".

And btw, Wars of the World & Transformers both were horrible film. All action & no story, even thought I'm a TF fan when the cartoon first came out. You need a good combo of action & story for a movie those 2 lack. That where BB got it right. I do think it need more action, but seeing as BB is call that for a reason I can deal with it. I think we will get more & better action in TDK.

I thought War of the Worlds was pretty good. Not a Spielberg classic, but it wasn't bad at all. And I think you may be confusing War of the World's with something like ID4 when you say "all action and no story." Worlds did not have the greatest story, was rather straight forward but certainly wasn't a mindless action movie either.

 

[Infinity9999x]

The point I was making is that GREAT movies can make a lot of money. If Baleman Begins was so great then how come that didn't make a lot of money like those movies.

That's extremely flawed logic. Citizen Kane, a film that many film historians say is one of the greatest, if not the greatest film of all time, was nearly a box office flop. It made just enough to cover the production cost, but not enough to make a profit.

So seeing that the greatest film made did horrible at the box office should tell you right there that being a good film does not necessarily mean a good box office.