Batman Begins Those who disliked Begins - Why?

[Beelze]

I really like Begins, and I guess it is my favorite comic book movie, but I had some problems with it, listed below...

- The Rachel Dawes character - Not really Katies's acting, which I thought it was good enough. They could've used Harvey Dent instead and it would've worked nicely.
- Bruce not paying homage to his mother.
- There could've been more drama/character development (shown more of his training and travels, and not just throw in Ra's al Ghul at once).

Not to mention the way he's defeated by a girl with a common self-defense device and ends screaming like a school girl.

I actually liked that. I thought it was a bit comical and, since he's not a tough guy at all, fitting.

 

[BatMatt]

I really like Begins, and I guess it is my favorite comic book movie, but I had some problems with it, listed below...

- The Rachel Dawes character - Not really Katies's acting, which I thought it was good enough. They could've used Harvey Dent instead and it would've worked nicely.
- Bruce not paying homage to his mother.
- There could've been more drama/character development (shown more of his training and travels, and not just throw in Ra's al Ghul at once).


I actually liked that. I thought it was a bit comical and, since he's not a tough guy at all, fitting.

If they replaced Dawes with Dent that kiss scene at the end of the movie would have been much more akward

 

[Rexi]

the only problems i had were the hand to hand sequences (forgivable) and "i dont have to save you" (unforgivable). still in my top 5 movies though...

 

[Xothermic]

People keep saying Begins plays as a drama, but I see it as little more than an average action flick. Parents get killed, man trains, takes revenge. It just goes from Point a, point b, to point c. Anyway, the biggest problem I have with the movie is that there is no subtlety whatsoever. Every other scene in Begins the movie tells me that he's Batman instead of showing me. It's like the movie couldn't refrain from beating you over the head with it. Case in point, the final scene with Katie Holmes and the whole 'This Is Your Real Face' tirade. Why couldn't the viewers at home come to the conclusion that the real face was Batman? Why the hell do we have to keep being told? The action scenes were horrendous, and the logic of supporting characters were often limited to fit the theme of the movie. For a supposedly realistic movie in a fantasy setting, it failed. Another case in point, Scarecrow had no depth and no motivation at all. I would agree that as a secondary antagonist, it's OK that we don't know much about why he's doing what he does, but come on man. Again, the movie isn't deep but rather it skirts on the surface level. We never see Batman in his true torment, but we are supposed to believe it, why? That's right because the movie TELLS you or a supporting character TELLS you and that should be that.

No 'wow' factor, no memorable dialogue, and a chore to watch. The movie pretty much summed up my disdain for writers who continue to substitute fun for seriousness, darkness, or whatever the hell that ran rampant in the 90s. I will say that the Batman: The Animated Series origin got it right.

 

[GEDRedemption]

I liked Begins, but I don't think it was the greatest comic book movie ever, like some people do.

For one, it was a little slow in the beginning, bordering on glacial. I thought the Bat-suit should've been more streamlined.

I thought it was a little ironic that Bruce didn't want to take a life, but when he caused a fire that killed at least several people.

I didn't care for Begins take on the death of Bruce Wayne's parents. It just didn't flow right for me. Tim Burton got it better, even if Nolan's depiction fits more with the comic.

Rachel Dawes was a waste of space. Should've made her Rachel Caspian-daughter of the Reaper as a nod to Batman: Year Two, or Talia al Ghul.

Overall I liked the darker tone. But last summer I enjoyed Fantastic Four more. It whizzed alone, while Batman Begins moped a little.

Most people, even Bat fans such as my self consider Spiderman 2 the best comic book movie of all time. People make such a fuss about it because not only is it great, but it's what Batman is supposed to be.

What do you mean streamlined and did you get the idea of glacial from all the ice?

It's not ironic it's just coincidental. He didn't kill those people, but he didn't have to save them.

What didn't flow right about the Wayne's death? The fact that it wasn't in slow motion? A iconic point in the movie is showing the actual spot where it all began. This tragic death of the only thing Bruce cares about in his life, besides Alfred and Rachel is his parents. He's young and seclusive trapped in his youth and his wealth, it coudln't have shown him snapping out of it with a slow mo death of his parents. Just like the fights in Begins, the death of the Wayne's was real and brutal, not stylized.

I really have nothing to say to the Fantastic Four part, I just find that offensive. Tim Story doing a superhero movie about four people living in a house and stop being real and become real goofy. You mean to say you thought the space ship/space station was more entertaining than seeing Ducard learn about Bruce's history as we did for the first time? You'd rather watch the four of those Marvel heros spread shaving cream on each other's hands than to see Bruce fall from police headquarters?

The only thing I'll say was better in Fantastic Four than Batman Begins was the taking over of the companies. Doom killing a guy for them axing him rather than Lucious asking if he "got the memo" It was funny. But not as action packed I'll give you that, but you know, Spiderman 1, did better at that plot device better than F4. Goblin shooting the balcony and throwing a pumpkin bomb, Doom doing the same thing only in a wet parking garage.

 

[GEDRedemption]

People keep saying Begins plays as a drama, but I see it as little more than an average action flick. Parents get killed, man trains, takes revenge. It just goes from Point a, point b, to point c. Anyway, the biggest problem I have with the movie is that there is no subtlety whatsoever. Every other scene in Begins the movie tells me that he's Batman instead of showing me. It's like the movie couldn't refrain from beating you over the head with it. Case in point, the final scene with Katie Holmes and the whole 'This Is Your Real Face' tirade. Why couldn't the viewers at home come to the conclusion that the real face was Batman? Why the hell do we have to keep being told? The action scenes were horrendous, and the logic of supporting characters were often limited to fit the theme of the movie. For a supposedly realistic movie in a fantasy setting, it failed. Another case in point, Scarecrow had no depth and no motivation at all. I would agree that as a secondary antagonist, it's OK that we don't know much about why he's doing what he does, but come on man. Again, the movie isn't deep but rather it skirts on the surface level. We never see Batman in his true torment, but we are supposed to believe it, why? That's right because the movie TELLS you or a supporting character TELLS you and that should be that.

No 'wow' factor, no memorable dialogue, and a chore to watch. The movie pretty much summed up my disdain for writers who continue to substitute fun for seriousness, darkness, or whatever the hell that ran rampant in the 90s. I will say that the Batman: The Animated Series origin got it right.

Bruce showed torment, he just showed rage more. Bruce wanted to kill Joe Chill, he felt responsible for his parent's death, young Bruce shows this as well as Bruce on the ice. I agree it's not as indepth as Spiderman 2. Spiderman 2 hit that dead on. With Peter's struggling through life and his responsibilities ganging up on him. The torment, the talk with Uncle Ben was all perfect. It showed the motivation for Peter's life choices. Batman Begins merely showed the reason for his "duty". It did it fine, but explaining duty is alot easier than explaining inner conflict. I agree with you, but Begins still had it.

As for Scarecrow, you're right they didn't dive to deeply into him. But his motivation was there...he's crazy and enjoys the reversal. It shouldh have been explained. As for why he did what he did, he was being paid to do so. He messed with the paitients of Arkam for his own enjoyment, he tried to help bring down Gotham becuase he was being paid to do so.

Two more things. As for the viewers keep being told, it was only talked about once, and it was for Bruce's benifit to hear as well as the audience's. It's mistaken quite often that Batman is the secret identity, but it's actually Bruce Wayne, it's a big deal with the charecter. Showing that this billionare Bruce Wayne is nothing more than a crusader against crime. Of course there's no real depth to that, it's just an idea really. It'd be nice to see that aspect of his life explored more. There was a JLA comic that did touch on this, where it shows Bruce not becoming Batman but still having his parents die in front of him. He would go crazy if some crime was being commited and he nearly got killed for it without his training. It shows that Bruce died that nite as well and all that was left was his rage against evil. And two, you're absolutly right, no memorable dialouge. I agree with you there. The only thing I quote is a funny line or two. "Nice coat" "Just some nut" "I'll look into it"

 

[GEDRedemption]

I really like Begins, and I guess it is my favorite comic book movie, but I had some problems with it, listed below...

- The Rachel Dawes character - Not really Katies's acting, which I thought it was good enough. They could've used Harvey Dent instead and it would've worked nicely.
- Bruce not paying homage to his mother.
- There could've been more drama/character development (shown more of his training and travels, and not just throw in Ra's al Ghul at once).

I agree with the comment about his mother, but if we would have had Harvey in the first movie it would have taken away from the relationship between Batman and Gordon.

 

[Xothermic]

Bruce showed torment, he just showed rage more. Bruce wanted to kill Joe Chill, he felt responsible for his parent's death, young Bruce shows this as well as Bruce on the ice. I agree it's not as indepth as Spiderman 2. Spiderman 2 hit that dead on. With Peter's struggling through life and his responsibilities ganging up on him. The torment, the talk with Uncle Ben was all perfect. It showed the motivation for Peter's life choices. Batman Begins merely showed the reason for his "duty". It did it fine, but explaining duty is alot easier than explaining inner conflict. I agree with you, but Begins still had it.

See, that's what I'm saying though. The movie just skirts on everything and gives you the cherry on top without the ice cream and cone. To fit everything into a 2-hour movie, everything in the movie had to be limited. Bruce's torment was shown for what? 5 minutes. I think I take offense to people who say this movie had depth and it just wasn't there. Okay, Bruce's parents were killed and he wants to kill Joe Chill. And? And he becomes Batman to help prevent crime in Gotham? Why? Where's the depth at? Again, everyone sees some genius at work while I just see a limited action movie. Do we ever see Bruce Wayne really transform into Batman or did the filmmakers tell us that Bruce Wayne is Batman? We see Bruce's parents get killed, he fights crime, and now we all know that 'Batman is his real face?' If we already knew, why the dialogue at the end? For the people who didn't know, why couldn't they have figured it out themselves? I know why. Because the movie never presented it like that until the end.

As for Scarecrow, you're right they didn't dive to deeply into him. But his motivation was there...he's crazy and enjoys the reversal. It shouldh have been explained. As for why he did what he did, he was being paid to do so. He messed with the paitients of Arkam for his own enjoyment, he tried to help bring down Gotham becuase he was being paid to do so.

I apologize. I haven't seen the movie in a year, I didn't know Scarecrow was being paid. You're right. Again, that's not a big thing to me because Scarecrow was merely a supporting antagonist. I will admit Ra al Ghul's motivation as an antagonist was great.

Two more things. As for the viewers keep being told, it was only talked about once, and it was for Bruce's benifit to hear as well as the audience's. It's mistaken quite often that Batman is the secret identity, but it's actually Bruce Wayne, it's a big deal with the charecter. Showing that this billionare Bruce Wayne is nothing more than a crusader against crime. Of course there's no real depth to that, it's just an idea really. It'd be nice to see that aspect of his life explored more. There was a JLA comic that did touch on this, where it shows Bruce not becoming Batman but still having his parents die in front of him. He would go crazy if some crime was being commited and he nearly got killed for it without his training. It shows that Bruce died that nite as well and all that was left was his rage against evil. And two, you're absolutly right, no memorable dialouge. I agree with you there. The only thing I quote is a funny line or two. "Nice coat" "Just some nut" "I'll look into it"

See, that JLA comic had more depth than the actual comic itself. If the movie actually showed anything similar to that, I would've liked it.

 

[GEDRedemption]

There was a bit more into discovering his transformation than JUST that, he couldn't stand it at his college, I forget which one, Princeton maybe? There was the car scene about him looking past his own pain. His explanation to Ras about wanting to defend those who are fearful. Alfred mentioning what Bruce is going to do with his future. etc etc etc. Again not all that much, but it's there and subtle.

 

[Phaser]

See, that's what I'm saying though. The movie just skirts on everything and gives you the cherry on top without the ice cream and cone. To fit everything into a 2-hour movie, everything in the movie had to be limited. Bruce's torment was shown for what? 5 minutes.

I think Bruce's torment was shown for a lot more than 5 minutes. The "nightmare" he has in the beginning of the film. All those flashbacks of bats and his father getting shot that are repeated throughout the film. When Bruce comes back from Princeton, you can he's still very much haunted by the event and is obsessed with it. You see the pain he's sufferring from on his face when Ra's tells him about confronting his guilt during the entire sequence on the ice lake and the chat he has with Ducard after it. Practically speaking, almost the entire first half was dedicated to what you are accusing of being "only 5 minutes". Heck, there are instances even in the second half, such as when the older board member tells Bruce "the apple has fallen very far from the tree, Mr. Wayne" after his kicks everyone out of the party - even though he did it to save his guests' lives, there is an obviously depressive gloom in Wayne's expression that suggests he was nevetheless hurt by the comment (perhaps even feeling remorse for his rowdy actions) about being a disgrace to his family.

I think I take offense to people who say this movie had depth and it just wasn't there.

I think I take offense to people who say this movie had no depth when it was there all along.

Okay, Bruce's parents were killed and he wants to kill Joe Chill. And? And he becomes Batman to help prevent crime in Gotham? Why?

Why? Did you even watch the same movie? There are so many reasons that drive Bruce to become Batman, it's overwhelming. First of all, ridding the city from the evil that created the Joe Chill who murdered his parents - that, essentially speaking, was Bruce's motivation that provokes his fight for justice. Secondly, it's the part of upholding his parents' philanthropic legacy as the guardian angel of Gotham. Time and again in the film we hear of what Thomas Wayne did for the welfare of Gotham, but as the city kept sinking into cesspool of crime and corruption, conventional means would have helped Bruce to accomplish nothing. And last but not least, in Bruce's fight against injustice, he wanted to "turn fear against those who prey on the fearful". Obviously Bruce wanted to use fear as a weapon just like Falcone did, only for a completely different purpose.

I mean, why exactly does Bruce become Batman is made painfully obvious through the following lines of dialogue in the film:

"People need dramatic examples to shake them out of apathy and I can't do that as Bruce Wayne. As a man, I am flesh and blood, I can be ignored, I can be destroyed but as a symbol...as a symbol I can be incorruptible, I can be everlasting..."

You claim that the film doesn't have enough depth, yet the above points I have made are only a part of the painstaking detail which the Bruce Wayne character has been written with. If one honestly tries, you can see so many great little moments and subtle touches in the film, it's hard to keep count.

Where's the depth at? Again, everyone sees some genius at work while I just see a limited action movie.

You're either not looking hard enough or you can't look. There is no further explaination.

Do we ever see Bruce Wayne really transform into Batman or did the filmmakers tell us that Bruce Wayne is Batman?

The scene in the cave where he confronts his worst fear - the bats. That's the final turning point in his "transformation" into Batman.

We see Bruce's parents get killed, he fights crime, and now we all know that 'Batman is his real face?' If we already knew, why the dialogue at the end? For the people who didn't know, why couldn't they have figured it out themselves? I know why. Because the movie never presented it like that until the end.

The dialogue at the end was to show Rachel's observation of how much Bruce had changed as a person ever since he left Gotham all those years ago. When she says "this is your mask", it's obviously referring to Bruce not being a normal individual anymore, what with his obsessive personality now channelling his dark alter ego.

 

[Superwoman Prime]

People keep saying Begins plays as a drama, but I see it as little more than an average action flick.

Average action movies don't spend so much of the movie being introspective about the main character. In Batman Begin's case, that WAS the case. It is about Bruce's internal struggle about what to do with his feelings of resentment and rage towards life itself. That is definitely a drama. Is there enough action to constitute it as an action movie? Yes. But overall, this is very much a drama, IMO.

 

[ReptileOrion]

I think Bruce's torment was shown for a lot more than 5 minutes. The "nightmare" he has in the beginning of the film. All those flashbacks of bats and his father getting shot that are repeated throughout the film. When Bruce comes back from Princeton, you can he's still very much haunted by the event and is obsessed with it. You see the pain he's sufferring from on his face when Ra's tells him about confronting his guilt during the entire sequence on the ice lake and the chat he has with Ducard after it. Practically speaking, almost the entire first half was dedicated to what you are accusing of being "only 5 minutes". Heck, there are instances even in the second half, such as when the older board member tells Bruce "the apple has fallen very far from the tree, Mr. Wayne" after his kicks everyone out of the party - even though he did it to save his guests' lives, there is an obviously depressive gloom in Wayne's expression that suggests he was nevetheless hurt by the comment (perhaps even feeling remorse for his rowdy actions) about being a disgrace to his family.



I think I take offense to people who say this movie had no depth when it was there all along.



Why? Did you even watch the same movie? There are so many reasons that drive Bruce to become Batman, it's overwhelming. First of all, ridding the city from the evil that created the Joe Chill who murdered his parents - that, essentially speaking, was Bruce's motivation that provokes his fight for justice. Secondly, it's the part of upholding his parents' philanthropic legacy as the guardian angel of Gotham. Time and again in the film we hear of what Thomas Wayne did for the welfare of Gotham, but as the city kept sinking into cesspool of crime and corruption, conventional means would have helped Bruce to accomplish nothing. And last but not least, in Bruce's fight against injustice, he wanted to "turn fear against those who prey on the fearful". Obviously Bruce wanted to use fear as a weapon just like Falcone did, only for a completely different purpose.

I mean, why exactly does Bruce become Batman is made painfully obvious through the following lines of dialogue in the film:

"People need dramatic examples to shake them out of apathy and I can't do that as Bruce Wayne. As a man, I am flesh and blood, I can be ignored, I can be destroyed but as a symbol...as a symbol I can be incorruptible, I can be everlasting..."

You claim that the film doesn't have enough depth, yet the above points I have made are only a part of the painstaking detail which the Bruce Wayne character has been written with. If one honestly tries, you can see so many great little moments and subtle touches in the film, it's hard to keep count.



You're either not looking hard enough or you can't look. There is no further explaination.



The scene in the cave where he confronts his worst fear - the bats. That's the final turning point in his "transformation" into Batman.



The dialogue at the end was to show Rachel's observation of how much Bruce had changed as a person ever since he left Gotham all those years ago. When she says "this is your mask", it's obviously referring to Bruce not being a normal individual anymore, what with his obsessive personality now channelling his dark alter ego.

Great post . You had an answer for all of the points and I totally agree with you.

From the Batman movies that we have had in the past how can someone not like Begins?

 

[Xothermic]

I think Bruce's torment was shown for a lot more than 5 minutes. The "nightmare" he has in the beginning of the film. All those flashbacks of bats and his father getting shot that are repeated throughout the film. When Bruce comes back from Princeton, you can he's still very much haunted by the event and is obsessed with it. You see the pain he's sufferring from on his face when Ra's tells him about confronting his guilt during the entire sequence on the ice lake and the chat he has with Ducard after it. Practically speaking, almost the entire first half was dedicated to what you are accusing of being "only 5 minutes". Heck, there are instances even in the second half, such as when the older board member tells Bruce "the apple has fallen very far from the tree, Mr. Wayne" after his kicks everyone out of the party - even though he did it to save his guests' lives, there is an obviously depressive gloom in Wayne's expression that suggests he was nevetheless hurt by the comment (perhaps even feeling remorse for his rowdy actions) about being a disgrace to his family.



I think I take offense to people who say this movie had no depth when it was there all along.



Why? Did you even watch the same movie? There are so many reasons that drive Bruce to become Batman, it's overwhelming. First of all, ridding the city from the evil that created the Joe Chill who murdered his parents - that, essentially speaking, was Bruce's motivation that provokes his fight for justice. Secondly, it's the part of upholding his parents' philanthropic legacy as the guardian angel of Gotham. Time and again in the film we hear of what Thomas Wayne did for the welfare of Gotham, but as the city kept sinking into cesspool of crime and corruption, conventional means would have helped Bruce to accomplish nothing. And last but not least, in Bruce's fight against injustice, he wanted to "turn fear against those who prey on the fearful". Obviously Bruce wanted to use fear as a weapon just like Falcone did, only for a completely different purpose.

I mean, why exactly does Bruce become Batman is made painfully obvious through the following lines of dialogue in the film:

"People need dramatic examples to shake them out of apathy and I can't do that as Bruce Wayne. As a man, I am flesh and blood, I can be ignored, I can be destroyed but as a symbol...as a symbol I can be incorruptible, I can be everlasting..."

You claim that the film doesn't have enough depth, yet the above points I have made are only a part of the painstaking detail which the Bruce Wayne character has been written with. If one honestly tries, you can see so many great little moments and subtle touches in the film, it's hard to keep count.



You're either not looking hard enough or you can't look. There is no further explaination.



The scene in the cave where he confronts his worst fear - the bats. That's the final turning point in his "transformation" into Batman.



The dialogue at the end was to show Rachel's observation of how much Bruce had changed as a person ever since he left Gotham all those years ago. When she says "this is your mask", it's obviously referring to Bruce not being a normal individual anymore, what with his obsessive personality now channelling his dark alter ego.

It's painfully obvious I don't remember much about the movie. I just remembered I disliked it. You're probably right and I need to re-watch it. You're counter reply is correct, I suppose.

 

[DarKush]

Most people, even Bat fans such as my self consider Spiderman 2 the best comic book movie of all time. People make such a fuss about it because not only is it great, but it's what Batman is supposed to be.

What do you mean streamlined and did you get the idea of glacial from all the ice?

It's not ironic it's just coincidental. He didn't kill those people, but he didn't have to save them.

What didn't flow right about the Wayne's death? The fact that it wasn't in slow motion? A iconic point in the movie is showing the actual spot where it all began. This tragic death of the only thing Bruce cares about in his life, besides Alfred and Rachel is his parents. He's young and seclusive trapped in his youth and his wealth, it coudln't have shown him snapping out of it with a slow mo death of his parents. Just like the fights in Begins, the death of the Wayne's was real and brutal, not stylized.

I really have nothing to say to the Fantastic Four part, I just find that offensive. Tim Story doing a superhero movie about four people living in a house and stop being real and become real goofy. You mean to say you thought the space ship/space station was more entertaining than seeing Ducard learn about Bruce's history as we did for the first time? You'd rather watch the four of those Marvel heros spread shaving cream on each other's hands than to see Bruce fall from police headquarters?

The only thing I'll say was better in Fantastic Four than Batman Begins was the taking over of the companies. Doom killing a guy for them axing him rather than Lucious asking if he "got the memo" It was funny. But not as action packed I'll give you that, but you know, Spiderman 1, did better at that plot device better than F4. Goblin shooting the balcony and throwing a pumpkin bomb, Doom doing the same thing only in a wet parking garage.

Thanks for reminding me of another thing I didn't like about Begins. The idea that Batman would just let Ras Al'Ghul die didn't sit right with me. I think Batman would do all that he could to preserve life if he was able to.

To answer some of your questions...

Glacial. I was referring more to the plodding pace of the first half of the film. Though I was trying to be a little poetic in my language.

Streamlined. The Batsuit-esp. around the neck looked a little too bulky for me. I liked the suits in Batman 89 and Batman Returns much better. I just wished that Nolan could've taken out the yellow in the crest of one of the older suits and used that for his movie.

Thomas Wayne's death. I only saw the movie once, but from what I can remember, it was done with very little build up or dramatic impact. Also, the guy playing Joe Chill didn't do anything for me either. I loved the "Devil in the Pale Moonlight" thing from 89. Now that was chilling (pun intended)

Fantastic Four. I can't do anything about you being offended. I had a better time watching FF. That's just me. What I liked about FF. Let me see...

It had more of a sense of humor. I liked the Thing/Torch scenes. Jessica Alba in her unmentionables demolished any scene that Katie Holmes was in. Thing's pathos. Torch trying to cash in on their powers. Torch's tower jump. I also enjoyed how the team came together to foil Doom.

I thought Doom was the weakest part of the movie. I know Julian McMahon can do a better job and hopefully he will in FF2. I didn't care for the Norman Osborn-like reason for his pyscho turn. I think it would've been just as cool and plausible to live him as a Latverian royal. Perhaps a jetsetting one like the British or Monaco royals. It wouldn't have altered the storyline all that much and been more true to the source material.

I liked Ducard/Ras and Scarecrow better than Doom. I also thought Begins had a very strong cast. It was a good movie, but it wasn't all that much enjoyable until the Batmobile started rumbling and tearing through Gotham.

 

[Hades]

Honestly, after visiting the other boards here, that's sorta actually enjoyable.

You go into the Superman boards and say you like SR, you get called an idiot. You go into the Spider-Man comics boards and say you like JMS, you get called an idiot. The BB boards are - at least - one place where some positivity still remains. Not that it's right to try to snuff out someone's opinion, mind you.

Do that many people really hate the movie? I thought it was pretty good. Though, it felt somewhat pointless.

 

[Galactical]

K, I'll give it a go. (*Puts on thermal suit*) My problems with begins are basically

-the editing + fight coreography. nothing impressive about them to me.

-Ra's and friends learning bruce wayne's secret. That means there are people who know who he is and can expose him. Bruce somehow does not acknowledge this at the end.

-The narrrows kid. Is he robin? What a coincidence that he meets rachael dawes... it's very corny, and forced.

-The microwave water cooker thing. Besides it making no sense. Why not just poison the water supply instead of the elaborate water vaporizer plot?

-Someone already mentioned this but yes, for a man who's not an executioner he sure does try to execute a lot of people.

-Bale. I've seen him do better. It's still decent, but I hope he's better in the next one.

-The sub-plot with the jerk of a guy trying to take over the wayne company. why's he being such a jerk? It's good for a laugh about getting memos at least but really a seems out of nowhere.

-I thought batmans supposed to be knowledgable about chemistry and such but that's not how he's portrayed here.

-I think it truly gets to the point where the fear theme is being bashed over our heads in almost every scene. It feels too self-aware and forced upon itself rather than natural.

-The humor falls flat in places. I remember a lot of the bumbling cop stuff just not being funny and a few unfunny oneliners. Caine's good. the scarecrow was the best at humor in the entire film to me because he's so well acted. It's a shame he was disposed of so quickly and embarassingly. Shame...

-I still don't quite understand how no one questions what bruce was doing while dead.

-The end is a strange beast to tackle. Why's batman trusting gordon to drive a tank he's never experienced driving to do the very important mission of destroying the tracks? Just do it yourself, and problem solved. It's much easier than trying to fight through ra's pawns and then ra's himself. What are they going to do, carry the microwave device to the hub? I have to also say that hub guy was annoying.

-Another thought. the film goes through his batman beginning process step by step showing us where he gets all his toys except for that bat-calling device. This was unexplained as if selected to be the one thing we didn't recieve any detail on about batman's gadgets. Why?

-like i've said before, the key to any noir is a fedora. There's not one fedora I saw in batman begins. This must be rectified in the sequel.

-With all the advancements we have today, why is the suit still difficult for bale to move well in? Let's give the man something a more comfy and unrestricting in the next.

-Rachael Dawes. I actually like her character and thought she served the story well, and was well enough acted. One thing I believe wasn't handled at all well was her romance with bruce. We never see them as much more than a brother/sister paring until she tells us that she loved him. I preferred she stay a sister to the batman, fighting for justice without the cape and cowl as another supporter of his father's dream. What's interesting is she finally sees bruce for who he truly is, a follower of her own ideals for gotham and suddenly rejects him, claiming she loved a different man we never saw her interact with in the film unless it's the boy from the beginning. Another interesting part with rachael was her gassing by the scarecrow. I've read and agreed that instead of causing damage and potential lost lives by driving rachael through the streets of gotham, it'd have been best to call alfred to meet gordan somewhere with the antidote.

Overally i enjoyed the acting and details of batman's origin. Where i think the film comes up short however is the action, uneeded humor, and the messy confusion of the climax.

I look forward to a better sequel as i did with Spider-man, and we all know how incredible the second on was. Thank you for your time.

 

[Rexi]

Thanks for reminding me of another thing I didn't like about Begins. The idea that Batman would just let Ras Al'Ghul die didn't sit right with me. I think Batman would do all that he could to preserve life if he was able to.

To answer some of your questions...

Glacial. I was referring more to the plodding pace of the first half of the film. Though I was trying to be a little poetic in my language.

Streamlined. The Batsuit-esp. around the neck looked a little too bulky for me. I liked the suits in Batman 89 and Batman Returns much better. I just wished that Nolan could've taken out the yellow in the crest of one of the older suits and used that for his movie.

Thomas Wayne's death. I only saw the movie once, but from what I can remember, it was done with very little build up or dramatic impact. Also, the guy playing Joe Chill didn't do anything for me either. I loved the "Devil in the Pale Moonlight" thing from 89. Now that was chilling (pun intended)

Fantastic Four. I can't do anything about you being offended. I had a better time watching FF. That's just me. What I liked about FF. Let me see...

It had more of a sense of humor. I liked the Thing/Torch scenes. Jessica Alba in her unmentionables demolished any scene that Katie Holmes was in. Thing's pathos. Torch trying to cash in on their powers. Torch's tower jump. I also enjoyed how the team came together to foil Doom.

I thought Doom was the weakest part of the movie. I know Julian McMahon can do a better job and hopefully he will in FF2. I didn't care for the Norman Osborn-like reason for his pyscho turn. I think it would've been just as cool and plausible to live him as a Latverian royal. Perhaps a jetsetting one like the British or Monaco royals. It wouldn't have altered the storyline all that much and been more true to the source material.

I liked Ducard/Ras and Scarecrow better than Doom. I also thought Begins had a very strong cast. It was a good movie, but it wasn't all that much enjoyable until the Batmobile started rumbling and tearing through Gotham.

the burton suits are ANYTHING but streamlined. those cowls were way bulkier, batman's head was way out proportion with the suit on and in begins batman is so agile that the burton suit would be really out of place. also the yellow bat symbol doesnt fit the stealth batman in BB.

 

[Phaser]

K, I'll give it a go. (*Puts on thermal suit*) My problems with begins are basically

-Ra's and friends learning bruce wayne's secret. That means there are people who know who he is and can expose him. Bruce somehow does not acknowledge this at the end.

Um, did you even read the comics? Ra's had known Bruce's secret even before he became Batman's enemy.

-The microwave water cooker thing. Besides it making no sense. Why not just poison the water supply instead of the elaborate water vaporizer plot?

So do a lot of things in movies. Basically if you want everything in a film to be totally realistic, then say goodbye to summer blockbusters and say hello to documentaries (...and people are saying Begins was too boring).

-Someone already mentioned this but yes, for a man who's not an executioner he sure does try to execute a lot of people.

When exactly? If you're talking about the monastery, he himself was in much greater danger than anyone else. The explosions were obviously meant as a distraction that got out of hand. The only way for Bruce to be properly called an executioner is to outright kill people without remorse like Burton's Batman did in Batman Returns.

-I thought batmans supposed to be knowledgable about chemistry and such but that's not how he's portrayed here.

If you mean the scene when he's talking to Morgan Freeman's character and says "am I meant to understand any of that?", he immediately switched to playboy mode as soon as he saw Fox coming in. Remember when he says to Alfred, "some kind of hallucinogen, weaponized and in aerosol form" - shows he does have an idea of what he's talking about.

-I still don't quite understand how no one questions what bruce was doing while dead.

...eh?

-The end is a strange beast to tackle. Why's batman trusting gordon to drive a tank he's never experienced driving to do the very important mission of destroying the tracks? Just do it yourself, and problem solved. It's much easier than trying to fight through ra's pawns and then ra's himself. What are they going to do, carry the microwave device to the hub? I have to also say that hub guy was annoying.

Read this.

-Another thought. the film goes through his batman beginning process step by step showing us where he gets all his toys except for that bat-calling device. This was unexplained as if selected to be the one thing we didn't recieve any detail on about batman's gadgets. Why?

...and people complained that Begins had too much exposition.

Anyways, I don't know what's so hard about figuring out how the bat-calling device works. A friend of mine, who has no knowledge whatsoever about Batman or the comics was easily able to summarize it when I asked him if what he thought of the gadget by saying that it was a very clever touch in the film, that every animal responds to a very specific frequency and that Bruce might have figured out the one for calling bats. Simple.

-like i've said before, the key to any noir is a fedora. There's not one fedora I saw in batman begins. This must be rectified in the sequel.

When exactly did some stupid hat become more important than essentials like protagonist characterization for a film to define itself as noir? Oh and Memento is also appropriately billed as film-noir through and through by critics and there were no fedoras in that film either. I mean, come on, it's such an insignificant point.

-With all the advancements we have today, why is the suit still difficult for bale to move well in? Let's give the man something a more comfy and unrestricting in the next.

He was able to move perfectly in the suit. The only thing restricting his movement a bit was the cowl. I had even posted pics to the effect in another argument that clearly showed Batman being able to lift his leg a lot higher than his head during the fight with the ninjas. You can clearly see his agility in the suit in the scene where he runs from Gordon on the rooftops.

 

[Galactical]

you don't like fedoras? That's blasphemy. They're a major part of the batman mythos.

cool. Classy. The Fedora.

 

[Mauser9910]

I still don't like BB.

 

[Beelze]

To add to the previous response to these points...

-Ra's and friends learning bruce wayne's secret. That means there are people who know who he is and can expose him. Bruce somehow does not acknowledge this at the end.

They probably wouldn't act without Ra's orders, and would thus not seek to reveal Bruce's alter-ego. And how would they do that efficiently anyway? Who would believe them? They would basically have to explain the past that they've shared with Bruce, but who would admit to being a member of the League of Shadows just like that? I guess he could fear their vengeance, but it's not like it can't be dealt with in a sequel.

-The narrrows kid. Is he robin? What a coincidence that he meets rachael dawes... it's very corny, and forced.

Well, he lived in the narrows, she was in the narrows. Coincidence, yes, but not an impossibility. Had they thrown in the "Nice coat" bum again, in the same scene, then yeah, that WOULD have been corny and forced. In fact, you would have done better to complain about the "Nice coat" bum! Shame on you!

-The microwave water cooker thing. Besides it making no sense. Why not just poison the water supply instead of the elaborate water vaporizer plot?

My take on it was that the plan was relatively cheap, as well as not leaving a lasting effect on the environment. Perhaps the fear gas was cheap to produce and, well, the microwave emitter hardly cost anything. Plus, it'd be a good weapon to save for future use, as well.

-The sub-plot with the jerk of a guy trying to take over the wayne company. why's he being such a jerk? It's good for a laugh about getting memos at least but really a seems out of nowhere.

It shows us that Wayne Enterprises hasn't just been standing still during Bruce's absence. Really, I don't know what's so bad about it. Not only did Bruce start fighting crime in Gotham, but he also reclaimed his father's company.

-I still don't quite understand how no one questions what bruce was doing while dead.

Well, he didn't go out and see that many people, you know, and to just throw in a few random scenes where people wonder how his travels/vacation were/was would be rather cheap. Probably someone did wonder, but that wouldn't immediately make them think that he's Batman, especially not when he acts like he does.

 

[Isildur´s Heir]

Batman Begins is a great movie, but not nearly the masterpiece everyone say it is...

There are many problems with it, but i´ll give you just one...BATMAN

 

[JTStarkiller]

I thought it was a little ironic that Bruce didn't want to take a life, but when he caused a fire that killed at least several people.

I'm really sick of this criticism. Ra's clearly states to Bruce that there is "no turning back." Not only is he saving himself, he is attempting to save Gotham from destruction, which the decoy Ra's explained to him only moments before.

You can debate the ending with Ra's on the train as a little hypocrytical or out-of-character, but not the scene at Ra's house.

 

[El Payaso]

-The humor falls flat in places.

I forgot about this one.

The humor was crap. And I mean real s**t.

 

[DarKush]

I'm really sick of this criticism. Ra's clearly states to Bruce that there is "no turning back." Not only is he saving himself, he is attempting to save Gotham from destruction, which the decoy Ra's explained to him only moments before.

You can debate the ending with Ra's on the train as a little hypocrytical or out-of-character, but not the scene at Ra's house.

How is Bruce exactly trying to save Gotham when he refuses to kill the guy? From what I remember it seemed like Bruce was trying to haul ass.

And he didn't seem all that concerned about helping anyone, except Ducard while he was escaping.

I think it is a valid criticism. There was no other way to escape without starting a fire? And then there is no remorse or anything from Bruce about the inadvertent death and destruction he caused?