Batman Begins Those who disliked Begins - Why?

[Stupify_me]

You would rate it above A History of Violence, American Splendor, Ghost World, and Road to Perdition?

I would rate it above American Splendor, Ghost World and Road to Perdition but History of Violence was amazing and beats any comic movie there is it not only a great comic movie its a damn good movie as well.

 

[StorminNorman]

V for Vendetta is the only comic movie I have seen that tops Begins. Begins was a fantastic film, V for Vendetta was near perfection.

 

[Stupify_me]

V for Vendetta is the only comic movie I have seen that tops Begins. Begins was a fantastic film, V for Vendetta was near perfection.

I couldn't stand V then again I didnt like the comic either.

By the way I like your icon

 

[Sandman138]

I would rate it above American Splendor, Ghost World and Road to Perdition but History of Violence was amazing and beats any comic movie there is it not only a great comic movie its a damn good movie as well.

Agreed. It is in my top 5 movies of all time. It's one of the few movie's I've seen that I would call perfect. I would say that American Splendor was definatly better than Begins. I personally like Ghost World more, but could see where somebody wouldn't, and I didn't much care for Road to Perdition, but I think it is arguably the more well structured movie.

 

[Cyrusbales]

Agreed. It is in my top 5 movies of all time. It's one of the few movie's I've seen that I would call perfect.

History of Violence was beter than BB, but I did feel it was kinda silly. William Hurt was great as usual, but the plot twists were always the sollier ones. I loved some of the depreaved humour, and it was weird to see a nomal(in comparison to his other films) cronenberg film, I enjoyed it and when I saw it in the cinema, it was just me and my mate, the whole screen was empty!!!

I wouldn't put it in my top 100, but I'd put it a whole lot above BB!

 

[Sandman138]

History of Violence was beter than BB, but I did feel it was kinda silly. William Hurt was great as usual, but the plot twists were always the sollier ones. I loved some of the depreaved humour, and it was weird to see a nomal(in comparison to his other films) cronenberg film, I enjoyed it and when I saw it in the cinema, it was just me and my mate, the whole screen was empty!!!

I wouldn't put it in my top 100, but I'd put it a whole lot above BB!

It was an allegory. They weren't meant to be plot twists as to raise questions about his nature and thus the nature of America.

 

[Cyrusbales]

It was an allegory. They weren't meant to be plot twists as to raise questions about his nature and thus the nature of America.

It seemed too humourous in hit's plot desciosions, I understand it should be twisty, but it could've twisted in different directions. The latter part of the film seemed a little forced, still entertaining though, the sex scene on the stairs was disturbingly hillarious.

 

[Sandman138]

It seemed too humourous in hit's plot desciosions, I understand it should be twisty, but it could've twisted in different directions. The latter part of the film seemed a little forced, still entertaining though, the sex scene on the stairs was disturbingly hillarious.

I think you missed the point of that sex scene. You are meant to contrast everything that happened in the latter part of the film with everything that happened in the begining of the film. A good deal of the movie is about how the "American Way" and the American Dream" is a false pretense that we carry to kid ourselves out of the fact that we a country of violence. From manifest destiny to Hiroshima to our current War on Terror, we solve our problems through violent outright agression. Though we cover it up with our ideas of morality (Tom wears a cross) and dreams of the white picket fence, when that dream is threatened we revert right back to what we really are, and it is this "history" of violence that is passed down to our next generation (really watch the scene where his son shoots Ed Harris and watch his reactions) despite our attempts to the contrary. Thus, the american fantasy of the cheerleader/homecoming queen getting it on with the quaterback in the first act is contrasted with what is almost rape in the third act. The smart kid beating the bully through his intellect and humor is contrasted with him breaking the kids nose later on. And in the end, no matter how he tries to avoid it, Tom/Joey has to inherit his house, and thus his history: he has to own up to what he is and what he has done. However, his family still pretends that their idyllic dream is the life that their living, even though all of them know it's a sham. And who looks up at the end? Joey? Tom? I say it is Joey, and that look of utter despair is because he knows he can never be Tom, that maybe he never was. What does that say about us?

You call that silly?

 

[Cyrusbales]

I think you missed the point of that sex scene. You are meant to contrast everything that happened in the latter part of the film with everything that happened in the begining of the film. A good deal of the movie is about how the "American Way" and the American Dream" is a false pretense that we carry to kid ourselves out of the fact that we a country of violence. From manifest destiny to Hiroshima to our current War on Terror, we solve our problems through violent outright agression. Though we cover it up with our ideas of morality (Tom wears a cross) and dreams of the white picket fence, when that dream is threatened we revert right back to what we really are, and it is this "history" of violence that is passed down to our next generation (really watch the scene where his son shoots Ed Harris and watch his reactions) despite our attempts to the contrary. Thus, the american fantasy of the cheerleader/homecoming queen getting it on with the quaterback in the first act is contrasted with what is almost rape in the third act. The smart kid beating the bully through his intellect and humor is contrasted with him breaking the kids nose later on. And in the end, no matter how he tries to avoid it, Tom/Joey has to inherit his house, and thus his history: he has to own up to what he is and what he has done. However, his family still pretends that their idyllic dream is the life that their living, even though all of them know it's a sham. And who looks up at the end? Joey? Tom? I say it is Joey, and that look of utter despair is because he knows he can never be Tom, that maybe he never was. What does that say about us?

You call that silly?

It's silly becuase the initial focus of the film is on the violence, and it's humourous/cool nature. This isn't what the film is about, but it seems this way. The idea of the american dream is ironicby definition anyway. The idea of a dream/fantasy being quashed has been dealt with in much better ways, for example Brazil, which ends with the notion of, does it matter if it's real or not? Is authernticity truly that important?

The depth of HOV is more than a lot of films out there, as with most of cronenberg's work, but it is still limited, the iconography and symoblism, subtle metaphors etc, are not necessarily so subtle, and the film does have a farcicle nature. To show the abhorrent nature of the voilence and previous life, it should have treated violence in a different way, unlike the comedic manner it chose to so. It detracted away from the point, that for me, was silly.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

So yeah, it came off to me that you're saying BB was the first comic book film to actually focus on its main character mostly, which I find highly disagreeable.

That's the thing. Batman Begins only focuses on the main character. Whatever focus is given to other characters barely counts, I think.

I did say it "may" be an original thing, to have such a high amount f focus on the character....and "if not, it's got to be a rare thing". And, I think what I say holds up. Not every superhero film gives such a high amount of focus on the character the way it was in BB. I think Hellboy may in fact be up there as well, b/c Hellboy got a hell of good amount of focus if I can recall.

Neither did Superman with Lex.

Lex got a few minutes of time for his story (admittedly more than Ra's and Crane), but it was still clear as day 90% of the film was focused on Clark/Superman.

But, still.....I think there was enough of Lex Luthor once Superman himself took off. The first hour and half or so is really all about Clark becoming Superman and even about Krypton and such.

But, I'm pointing out how Lex did get a good chunk of screentime, rightfully so though. But, I'd argue that once Lex gets in the picture......the film shifts focus to and from both characters.

Honestly, I don't see what the whole problem here is though...not a big deal....

You would rate it above A History of Violence, American Splendor, Ghost World, and Road to Perdition?

I think I would.

But, I think we're all looking at Batman Begins as a genre film. Those comic book films don't exactly fit the bill as the "by the book superhero comic" genre. But, hell....those are some fantastic films. But, I think whenever the debate of "greatest comic book film ever" comes up, it's usually about Superhero films, b/c those films just don't feel like they fall in the same category as a Superman film or a Spider-man film.

Different things. I'd wonder if Constantine would even count as well.

Surely by appeasing to the jokers whim with the filmmaking technique and narrative style, that adds a greater level of sophistication to the movie? A level that BB lacks. I'm not saying it's the only way to tell the story, but having the joker being the centre makes a great deal of sense, he steals the spotlight from Batman, who doesn't want it, and the film(a type of media), acts as the media does within the film, by focusing on the Joker.

I think Batman Begins had alot of sopistication to it. The themes and tones are there, and it works.

I think your getting the wrong picture about the Joker though. Essentially, he just wants to kill alot of people while making it funny to him. His obsession with Batman is more about they're roles in the crazy world they live....and less about the media.

Really the media thing feels so corny, I'd rather they focus on other aspect of they're relationship rather than that "popular" thing.

It's a very clever film making method, utilising the the actual fact that it's a film, within the context of the narrative. These subtle ideas are often lost upon many, who fail to realise them.

I think it would be a mistake b/c the more interesting character is Batman. Batman is the main character, I say the majority of the focus should be on him. The Joker is his villian...he's there to add to the Batman, not take away. Handing the film over to the Joker can easily be seen as a cop out, and not a "sophisticated film making method", by focusing on the clown......which would be easier than finding the balance it needs.

 

[Cyrusbales]

where's the sophistication of BB? It works on about 1 level, has no wider context, no social comment, please go on?

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

In how it handles subjects of guilt, vengenance and justice, fear, acceptance, birthright.

I think there was a social comment in how Ra's al Ghul's death was handled, with him being a terrorist.....and how it's wrong/right.......and there was that little comment on arms manufacture being wrong as well as armored uniforms not being worth the money to save a solider's life.

I think in the context of what it is, a comic book superhero film, and still keeping in terms of the source material...it's pretty sophisticated for a "funny book" movie, I think. It might not be DKR or be V for Vendetta.....but I don't that disqualifies how the film handled it's themes.

 

[Stupify_me]

Agreed. It is in my top 5 movies of all time. It's one of the few movie's I've seen that I would call perfect. I would say that American Splendor was definatly better than Begins. I personally like Ghost World more, but could see where somebody wouldn't, and I didn't much care for Road to Perdition, but I think it is arguably the more well structured movie.

I loved so much about Begins and history of Violence when it comes to American Splendor I just hated it I really didn't like the bleending of commentary from the writer and the cutting back to the real world plus the story sort of bores the hell out of me. I thought Begins was beautifully done and to me it is the second greatest comic movie made second only to HOV.

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

Well, really....those 3 are such different films, such different genres...I can see how people can take sides. All of them are based around the comic genre......yet are so different.

I kinda like it being that way, it shows how the comic book genre can really be so diverse.