Batman Begins Those who disliked Begins - Why?

[Mentok]

My dislike for BEGINS is pretty well documented here.

I wont get into it all again I will just say that it failed to live up to expectations. I want to like it but I dont, however I dont hate it as much as I did... I even got the DVD last week (It was in the bargain bin though).

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

I'm not being sarcastic Mentok, so don't take it that way. But, are you Batman fan? Or more of a casual Bat fan?

Facsmth, I gotta wonder.....would you have preferred a Jim Gordon film? I mean, YEAR ONE was pretty much a Jim Gordon comic with Batman being the supporting character.

I don't think that's what I would have wanted.

I did enjoy Daredevil DC but I still think Begins was much better it isn't even close for me. Begins told a story a pretty powerfull one and really pulled you in. The Dardecil story was very lacking though.

Yeah, I was surprised at how solid the Director's Cut was. But, really.....the DC film isn't it. The released one is, and that's kinda what hurt the chances for the sequel I think.

And, honestly...I hope Affleck, and his mother****ing Red Sox, go to hell. I just hate that team, and town, so much. Bane of my existence. The name to my pain.

 

[Mentok]

I'm not being sarcastic Mentok, so don't take it that way. But, are you Batman fan? Or more of a casual Bat fan?

A Batman fan since I was a kid when I read my brothers copy of DKR and scared the crap out of myself.

 

[Sandman138]

Uh dude.There is no evidence that Batman killed anybody in that lodge.Its not like in batman 89 when he busted into the jokers hideout and obviously killed several goons of the jokers dropping a bomb in front of them.Come on,when he first lit the lodge and made it catch on fire,everybody was running to get out.Bruce was the last one to get out because he stopped to help get his mentor out.He got out so obviously everybody else had to as well. You liked Burtons take better on the death of Bruce waynes parents than Nolans? your definetely one of those burtonites phaseer mentioned. Burtons take was not loyal to the comic at all.

I dont think it is the greatest comicbook movie either by the way.Superman still holds that honor for me.But its better than most though.

Just watched it again tonight and you clearly see at least four ninjas get blown sky high.

 

[Stupify_me]

Just watched it again tonight and you clearly see at least four ninjas get blown sky high.

Watched that scene and still don't see any evidence that any one is actually killed.

 

[Sandman138]

Watched that scene and still don't see any evidence that any one is actually killed.

Well, if the film was realistic, there is no way they survived that. If the explosion didn't kill them, the impact would have left them imobile inside a burning building. They're dead.

 

[XCharlieX]

Thats an interesting scene because to spare the life of that guy in captivity and get out of there, he needed a diversion, and that diversion needed to be major.

 

[E-Mack]

I wonder what happened to the guy. After Bruce set the distraction, that dude was left to himself, lol.

 

[XCharlieX]

I remember him being pulled away. Thats all they show... looks like the ones who cut out first survived.

 

[Sandman138]

K, it's been a while since I saw the movie. I rented it tonight to see what it was I missed, because just about everybody I talk to loves this movie more than life itself. However, after watching this movie again, I just cannot get behind it. It does do a lot of things right: the production design, most of the cast, the cinematography, most of the score... but the script is horrid. Honestly, I remembered really liking the first half of the movie... but this time I felt insulted. First of all, this plays out like Lost Horizon. Bruce (Conway) finds a mysterious temple in the mountains of Tibet (Shangri-La) run by the Asian Ra's (Chang) and the white wise-man who obviously runs the show (High Lama)... and this is realistic? This is a valid and real world explanation for Bruce becoming a super Ninja?

Such a cultural cliche, though disappointing, is forgivable. However, treating your audience as if they were idiots is not. Every scene they banged FEAR over my head with all the subtlety of a jackhammer.

"To turn fear against those who prey on the fearful", "To manipulate the fears in others you must first master your own.", "All creatures feel fear.", "Bruce, it's okay. Don't be afraid." (this one actually makes sense as him trying to comfort his son, but it's preceded by so many fear lines that it just grates on my nerves) "And you always fear what you don't understand." etc.

Another great example of Goyer's estimation of my intelligence:

"The ship was carrying a prototype weapon. It's a microwave emitter. It's designed for desert warfare, but it... it looks like somebody turned it on. It uses focused microwaves to vaporize the enemy's water supply."

and just a few scenes later Earl asks Fox to tell him about the thing that was stolen to which the response is:

"It's a microwave emitter. It was designed to vaporize an enemy's water supply."

Notice that the vocabulary doesn't really change. This happens a lot in the film:

Batman: "The monorail follows the water mains to the central hub beneath Wayne Tower. If the machine gets to the station it'll cause a chain reaction that'll vaporize the city's water supply."

Random Train Operator: "The pressure's moving along the mains,
blowing the pipes. If that pressure reaches us the water supply right across the whole city is gonna blow!"

I don't know who has such a short attention span that they need things repeated as many times as they are in this movie, but they have my pity. As for myself, I get no joy out of not only being spoon-fed, but being spoon-fed the same information over and over again.

Almost all the dialogue is contrived, so Neeson ends up sounding like Qui-Gon Jin again (and it's never a good sign when your writing is Lucas caliber), Wilkinson is some kind of Joe Pesci wannabe, Loeb is just a walking cliche and the list goes on. All of them are basically doing the best with what they had, but it's just about impossible to deliver most of Ducard's lines believably. Michael Cane delivers the best performance in the movie, part of this is because he has the best lines to deliver, Murphy and Oldman also do fantastic jobs (when Oldman isn't forced to spout pointless one liners) but don't get nearly enough screentime because there had to be three villains in this movie for some reason (even though as somebody pointed out, this being a movie so obviously about fear, the Scarecrow was the only villain that they needed) and we had to have all that exposition about why he needs a cape and the military applications of a mini-tank that can somehow jump onto an old Church rooftop and not crash through it (looked cool, but when they spend so much time making sure that everything has a "real world" explanation, that just shatters everything). Finally, for a film about Batman BEGINNING, there's not much of a learning curve. As Millennium Movies pointed out, he doesn't get his but kicked, and while every fan complaint about Batman doing something out of character is explained away as it being his first year, the film never shows a progression of mistake and consequence. The closest it comes to this is either Alfred chastising Bruce for reckless driving, or getting lit on fire. In the first case there is some drama in Alfred's frustration, but it's not much of a consequence, in the second, he's leaping out into the rain about two seconds later and it's more or less over. Both of these events are where the film gets really interesting and they're over before they can really begin. They go by so fast it feels like you blink and you miss it. It's fun to see Batman beat up some goons, but it's more fun to see him actually challenged. I didn't see enough of that in this film.

Still, I'm psyched for The Dark Knight, because everything outside the script for this movie was fantastic. It's just that the script had me cringing. Now that the Nolan brothers are writing the next one, I'm fully on board.

 

[Sandman138]

This spoonfeeding was Nolans sure way to make CERTAIN that everyone knew that thought went into the film. He flaunted it like he was supposed to, and it worked and felt natural in the given context of the films scenes imo. Its funny when someone does what therye supposed to, theres folks still there to give them a hard time.

I'm sorry, and I really don't mean offense to you, but that is a complete load. A good film lets the audience be active and read into the story, allowing for a certian amount of ambiguity and multiple layers. For example, A History of Violence is an allegory for how the American Dream and all of our morals are built on violence, and how for all of our flaunting our great ideals, when we feel threatened the first thing we revert to is that same violence. Furthermore it touched on how we pass that heritage onto our youth. However, the film never comes out and says it, it's there waiting for you if you're willing to read into it. Alien on one layer is all about the horror of rape; being violated and forced to carry your tormentor's seed inside of you (you ever notice how phallic the alien's heads are? Not a coincidence) but it never comes right out and says it. Movies, just like literature, are meant to have sub-text. If there's no substance between the lines, if there's nothing to read into, then as an audience member I feel cheated.

 

[Sandman138]

edit: double post

 

[E-Mack]

Great post Sandman.

I find it important to give films you like a year or so before watching it again, gives you a better sense of what to critique. I remember the first time I saw BB, I was literally in shock because it was the day Batman truly came on film for me. And the next 2 times I did see it in the theatre, I was just going in basically excited to watch it again. No problems even came to me at the time, simply because they did so many things right.

I've since given it time to let everything sink in, and your problems with the script are definitely apparent. The dialogue did feel spoonfed, at times it felt like a mature take of the Superfriends show, where every action had to be preceded by an explanation of why they're doing it; "That's right Robin, due to Joker's clever escape from prison, it means we will have to (insert action here) and make sure that (insert villain plot) doesn't come to pass!" Looking back it now, it is a bit eye-rolling seeing just how poorly the dialogue was written.

Nolan was smart in hiring Goyer to the project. No doubt he does have knowledge in the mythos that he can provide to Nolan. However, it was not smart letting him write the entire script. That's simply not his strong point.

TDK is something that is worth looking out for though. It's what should've been done in the first place. Nolan/Goyer write the treatment, and Nolan (in this case, Jonathan) pens the script based on that story. Knowing that the production and cast will surely be up to par with BB, TDK is the film I'm most excited for.

 

[El Payaso]

Several Goyer's dialoges were weak, no doubt; repetitive, over-explanatory, uter obvious.

But that proves how magnificent the actors were, because their performances didn't make it feel as terrible as they were. Weaker actors and those problems would have been lots bigger.

 

[Ibn]

I wonder what happened to the guy. After Bruce set the distraction, that dude was left to himself, lol.

 

[Beelze]

Seeing as so many people didn't get what was really happening at the end and why (even though it was a clear as day to me), maybe they should've "spoonfed", as you call it, people even more. And the dialogue wasn't terrible. People need to watch truly terrible films to see what kind of dialogue is actually terrible. I recommend, say, Troll 2. In how many ways can you vary a brief explanation of the microwave emitter, and what good would one really achieve in doing so? What that guy and Fox said was short and to the point, using normal everyday words. They wouldn't spend time diving into the intricate matter of explain it scientifically or using rarely-heard synonyms to describe it. And about the dialogue in general, how often do you expect people in real life to say really cool, exciting, or insightful things, and not come off corny or pretentious... or even say such things at all? Real life, that's where the crappy "writing" is. And once again with the complaints about the fear theme... I just don't feel the same way about it as many others. "The sublety of a jackhammer", so what? It certainly didn't ruin my experience. The only line with "fear" that I thought came off a bit iffy was "I seek the means to fight injustice, to turn fear against those who prey on the fearful". It's a pretty cool line in itself, but it sticks out too much in the movie. All this said, there are things I dislike as well, but I've already went over those things in this thread. You, Sandman, don't need to see everything as "insults" to your intellect. Still, like you, I believe the script for the next one will be better.

 

[El Payaso]

Real life, that's where the crappy "writing" is.

I hope you don't mind me quoting you on this.

 

[casketmouth]

Just watched it again tonight and you clearly see at least four ninjas get blown sky high.

so what if he killed a few ninjaz. People always die in war. Sometimes un intentionally...SO WHAT!!!!! Batman has never intentionally killed as BATMAN!!! Everyone makes mistakes and yes he values life but he will eliminate you if it serves the purpose to keep a million others alive. Some people died in an explosion unplanned, and so what!!!! he didn't time where exactly where that thing was gonna land and cause that kinda kaboom, but what was done was done. Even if he planned it to land there. he had to stop the explosives altogether. He did and that's that. Some bodies go flying SO WHAT!!!! he still has his moral standings and all that.

 

[casketmouth]

Seeing as so many people didn't get what was really happening at the end and why (even though it was a clear as day to me), maybe they should've "spoonfed", as you call it, people even more. And the dialogue wasn't terrible. People need to watch truly terrible films to see what kind of dialogue is actually terrible. I recommend, say, Troll 2. In how many ways can you vary a brief explanation of the microwave emitter, and what good would one really achieve in doing so? What that guy and Fox said was short and to the point, using normal everyday words. They wouldn't spend time diving into the intricate matter of explain it scientifically or using rarely-heard synonyms to describe it. And about the dialogue in general, how often do you expect people in real life to say really cool, exciting, or insightful things, and not come off corny or pretentious... or even say such things at all? Real life, that's where the crappy "writing" is. And once again with the complaints about the fear theme... I just don't feel the same way about it as many others. "The sublety of a jackhammer", so what? It certainly didn't ruin my experience. The only line with "fear" that I thought came off a bit iffy was "I seek the means to fight injustice, to turn fear against those who prey on the fearful". It's a pretty cool line in itself, but it sticks out too much in the movie. All this said, there are things I dislike as well, but I've already went over those things in this thread. You, Sandman, don't need to see everything as "insults" to your intellect. Still, like you, I believe the script for the next one will be better.

The World didn't think the film was crappy so everyone else...bye!!!

 

[deathfromabove]

no though the fedora is a key element, other factors to make it noir are absent.

i cant tell if you are messing around or not with this fedora business.

but fedoras have nothing at all to do with noir of any kind (film noir or otherwise.)

thats just plain silly.

 

[deathfromabove]

Several Goyer's dialoges were weak, no doubt; repetitive, over-explanatory, uter obvious.

But that proves how magnificent the actors were, because their performances didn't make it feel as terrible as they were. Weaker actors and those problems would have been lots bigger.

parts of the script were weak but like payaso said all the actors overcame these shortcomings perfectly.

and on a side note payaso, im glad to see you finally came around to begins. i remember when the movie first came out we argued quite a bit about how good it was.

 

[drunkhomer]

i loved the movie, and i think its the best superhero movie and i can only think of 3 things i didnt like...

-casting of katie holmes
-shaky fight scenes where you cant really even see how they are fighting
-the old man telling to evacuate the building.....

other then that....movie rocks

 

[jeemer]

I've only read half this thread so far, but I wanted to say a couple of things.

When I left out of the theater after watching FF, there was a little kid running around in circles saying "Flame On," and I didn't see that type of enthusiasm when I left Begins or Superman Returns for that matter.

Personally I wish that little kids couldn't get in to see batman, it should be too dark and gritty. I know that the studios would be against it because they think they'd lose money - but I'd be willing to be if they made it gritty as hell and it was a 15, or even an 18 (in the uk) then they'd make a lot more money than they thought. No one's had the balls to do that with a real superhero movie, and the batman source material is dark and gritty enough to deserve it. God I'd kill to see the whole knightfall arc handled properly on film.

For those saying that the last scene with wayne and dawes didn't fit - didn't warner insist that this scene was added on, and they had to go back to shoot it? I'm sure I read that somewhere, and that nolan wasn't pleased with it.

Additionally, I think it's funny that some people are complaining about the fight choreography. Fair enough, it's really quickly cut and close up, and nolan had the argument about how in this first film he wanted the viewer to see batman as the criminal would, quick flashes in the shadows. Now, I expect this to change in the sequel, but would you REALLY prefer B89/BR style fights? Think back. Do you really want him sticking his hand up to stop a fight, or struggling to peform a kick due to the rigid neck in the suit?


One final point for the person who said why use a microwave emitter and not just poison the water supply... aside from the fact that it is a movie, after all, if the water supply was poisoned then a few people would be affected at first, then those nearby them would call an ambulance 'all he did was have a drink of tap water' - it wouldn't take long to pinpoint what was causing these reactions in people and to put out a warning not to drink tap water. Also, it's not very likely that everyone in the city will drink the tap water within a few minutes of each other. With the microwave emitter, the plan was that within 10-15 minutes, the whole city would be overrun, with *everyone* affected.

 

[casketmouth]

I've only read half this thread so far, but I wanted to say a couple of things.



Personally I wish that little kids couldn't get in to see batman, it should be too dark and gritty. I know that the studios would be against it because they think they'd lose money - but I'd be willing to be if they made it gritty as hell and it was a 15, or even an 18 (in the uk) then they'd make a lot more money than they thought. No one's had the balls to do that with a real superhero movie, and the batman source material is dark and gritty enough to deserve it. God I'd kill to see the whole knightfall arc handled properly on film.

For those saying that the last scene with wayne and dawes didn't fit - didn't warner insist that this scene was added on, and they had to go back to shoot it? I'm sure I read that somewhere, and that nolan wasn't pleased with it.

Additionally, I think it's funny that some people are complaining about the fight choreography. Fair enough, it's really quickly cut and close up, and nolan had the argument about how in this first film he wanted the viewer to see batman as the criminal would, quick flashes in the shadows. Now, I expect this to change in the sequel, but would you REALLY prefer B89/BR style fights? Think back. Do you really want him sticking his hand up to stop a fight, or struggling to peform a kick due to the rigid neck in the suit?


One final point for the person who said why use a microwave emitter and not just poison the water supply... aside from the fact that it is a movie, after all, if the water supply was poisoned then a few people would be affected at first, then those nearby them would call an ambulance 'all he did was have a drink of tap water' - it wouldn't take long to pinpoint what was causing these reactions in people and to put out a warning not to drink tap water. Also, it's not very likely that everyone in the city will drink the tap water within a few minutes of each other. With the microwave emitter, the plan was that within 10-15 minutes, the whole city would be overrun, with *everyone* affected.

The scene with rachel in the end could have been left out and not really changed but it's one of those things that many go through. That child hood female buddy who you always wonder what would have come of you and her if ya'll hit it off. Well they answered Bruce and rachel's question and the answer was 'nothing' would come of it. Bruce is in love with batman and that kiss and all that was great because it showed that Bruce didn't kiss her, but she kissed him also showing that he has no room for distractions on his great journey to fix the city. It worked so well the way he just blew her off in the end when it came to romance. Everyone hated Holmes, but she was more essential to the growth of 'The Dark Knight' than any other Bat romance.

Vickie was good but whatever and so was chase meridian who just had Batman confused and off his game. Catwoman's just always been a bad idea to me, even tho' the movie 'Returns' did her justice. But she is un essentual.

Yea the fights could have been clearer but they work in so many ways because Nolan made us all remember the movies important aspects and not the flashy parts. The greatest thing about begins is the Dialogue to me. The character development is unmatched in ANY of the comicbook movies.

 

[deathfromabove]

alot of people complain about the microwave emitter and the science behind it is ridiculous i admit.

but does anyone else think this was a sly nod to the history of silly sci fi gadgets and farfetched scenarios and setpieces in the batman mythos?

as in its purposely ridiculous.

i mean the rest of the movie is so smart and deliberate it seems odd that the filmakers would let that slip.

im not trying to win the marvel no prize here and im not trying to make excuses. i just honestly think this might be the case.