Batman Begins Those who disliked Begins - Why?

[facsmth]

I have to say I have one pretty small gripe with BB... the original movie was released in 1989. This was how we were introduced to Batman. By "we" I mean "me." Prior to that time, I don't think I really knew much about the guy. I saw all four of the Batman movies and to an extent enjoyed each one. (Though I hated how Schumaker chose to reveal how Robin & then Batgirl figured out Batman's secret.)

I understand with all the bad publicity Nolan thought he was doing the right thing by giving the series a brand new start. His film completely lacked the charm of the "Year One" comic.

Spoiler

(Batman doesn't get the crap kicked out him as he does in the comic's fire escape scene. Flass is shown as being this ridiculously fat guy, not the blond marine he was in the comic. He and Gordon don't have their game of one-up-manship.)

The best I can say for Nolan's fight scenes is the fact they aren't as poorly photographed as M. Night Shaymalan's "Unbreakable." I can only wonder how bad the original footage of the fight scenes must have been for him to decide to add the "disorientation" effect. Um... but nothing says "Batman" to me than... well... BACKFIST TO THE FACE!!!!!

I can accept BB as an alternative to the original movies, but not as a replacement. Bryan Singer had made a wise move in his making Superman Returns a pseudo-sequel to the first Superman movies.

The Tumbler is cool and all, but I don't really see this an appropriate vehicle for Batman to have that early in his career. It's just a bit too extreme... especially with it's AWKWARD transition from driving-to-shooting as y2jversion1 mentioned.

Just about the only funny part of the "Tankman Begins" spoof which for whatever reason is included with the deluxe edition of the DVD is where Batman goes into weapon mode to get a stuffed animal in a claw machine. Hehe.

A better idea for a Batman movie? Bring back Clooney & Val Kilmer. Put them both in Batman costumes. Bale apprehends them, asks them why the heck they were impersonating him. Get a cheap laugh. We already know Batman's origin. It doesn't matter if you call his parent's killer "Jack Napier" or "Joe Chill."

 

[Stupify_me]

I have to say I have one pretty small gripe with BB... the original movie was released in 1989. This was how we were introduced to Batman. By "we" I mean "me." Prior to that time, I don't think I really knew much about the guy. I saw all four of the Batman movies and to an extent enjoyed each one. (Though I hated how Schumaker chose to reveal how Robin & then Batgirl figured out Batman's secret.)

I understand with all the bad publicity Nolan thought he was doing the right thing by giving the series a brand new start. His film completely lacked the charm of the "Year One" comic.

Spoiler

(Batman doesn't get the crap kicked out him as he does in the comic's fire escape scene. Flass is shown as being this ridiculously fat guy, not the blond marine he was in the comic. He and Gordon don't have their game of one-up-manship.)

The best I can say for Nolan's fight scenes is the fact they aren't as poorly photographed as M. Night Shaymalan's "Unbreakable." I can only wonder how bad the original footage of the fight scenes must have been for him to decide to add the "disorientation" effect. Um... but nothing says "Batman" to me than... well... BACKFIST TO THE FACE!!!!!

I can accept BB as an alternative to the original movies, but not as a replacement. Bryan Singer had made a wise move in his making Superman Returns a pseudo-sequel to the first Superman movies.

The Tumbler is cool and all, but I don't really see this an appropriate vehicle for Batman to have that early in his career. It's just a bit too extreme... especially with it's AWKWARD transition from driving-to-shooting as y2jversion1 mentioned.

Just about the only funny part of the "Tankman Begins" spoof which for whatever reason is included with the deluxe edition of the DVD is where Batman goes into weapon mode to get a stuffed animal in a claw machine. Hehe.

A better idea for a Batman movie? Bring back Clooney & Val Kilmer. Put them both in Batman costumes. Bale apprehends them, asks them why the heck they were impersonating him. Get a cheap laugh. We already know Batman's origin. It doesn't matter if you call his parent's killer "Jack Napier" or "Joe Chill."

Wow I don't think I could disagree with this any more than I do. BB was much better than any of the previous Batman movies IMO,

What really bothers me is why does every one want this to be Year One on film. Why do some of you want to see the exact same thing you read but with real people. I want a differant story something orginal if I enjoy year one that much I can just go read the damn thing again.

 

[The Kid]

You do remember a movie called Batman and Robin, do you not?

 

[XCharlieX]

If we had it that way, the franchise would still be limping with the same baggage as before = franchise idiocy.

 

[Superwoman Prime]

What really bothers me is why does every one want this to be Year One on film. Why do some of you want to see the exact same thing you read but with real people. I want a differant story something orginal if I enjoy year one that much I can just go read the damn thing again.

That statement reflects my opinion exactly. The movies need to be original, and only draw on the comics as a baseline. Movies should never be carbon-copies of a comic book. Never.

 

[XCharlieX]

I agree.

I just find it funny how folks always start out a rant by saying: "Im aware of ______________" , but then say something foolish. If you know and understand, then you wouldnt have that pov imo.

 

[facsmth]

What really bothers me is why does every one want this to be Year One on film. Why do some of you want to see the exact same thing you read but with real people. I want a differant story something orginal if I enjoy year one that much I can just go read the damn thing again.

I do get what you're saying. But I just lament that Nolan couldn't have produced a Batman movie which is on par with the two Raimi Spiderman movies. My favorite part of those DVDs is watching the pop-up trivia portion while watching the movie so you could see which comic inspired which scene.

Raimi managed to create two movies that, while original, also paid a great deal of respect to the comics.

Spoiler

In the comic, Peter is publically unmasked & humiliated by Doc Ock because he'd had a cold. Nobody is willing to believe he's Spiderman. In the SM2, Peter's public unmasking works the completely different way. He isn't humiliated, he's given respect.

And a-for-a-death-which-really-isn't-his-fault, in Spiderman 1 we get Norman Osborne. Too bad they have to overplay Harry's finding out about his father's death & yet not know the true circumstances. Another AFADWRIHF would be

Spoiler

Daredevil's cane being used to impale Elecktra's dad. Even though it was Bullseye who threw it, it's DD's cane.

Excuse me, but I like the part of the comic where for years none of the villains ever died. They'd just be sent to Arkham for awhile. That's the beef I have with all the Batman movies including BB:

Spoiler

only Riddler & Mr. Freeze survive thier encounter with Batman.

You do remember a movie called Batman and Robin, do you not?

I do. Mr. Freeze was done very well. (Although the joke about the cure for Alfred & the slippers & the hockey game was a tad grating.) So was Poison Ivy. Too bad Bane was made into an idiot rather than a master-mind. I assume we all know what made Bane in the comics so famous? He was the Bill Goldberg of the DCU.

 

[Stupify_me]

I do get what you're saying. But I just lament that Nolan couldn't have produced a Batman movie which is on par with the two Raimi Spiderman movies. My favorite part of those DVDs is watching the pop-up trivia portion while watching the movie so you could see which comic inspired which scene.

Raimi managed to create two movies that, while original, also paid a great deal of respect to the comics.

Spoiler

In the comic, Peter is publically unmasked & humiliated by Doc Ock because he'd had a cold. Nobody is willing to believe he's Spiderman. In the SM2, Peter's public unmasking works the completely different way. He isn't humiliated, he's given respect.

And a-for-a-death-which-really-isn't-his-fault, in Spiderman 1 we get Norman Osborne. Too bad they have to overplay Harry's finding out about his father's death & yet not know the true circumstances. Another AFADWRIHF would be

Spoiler

Daredevil's cane being used to impale Elecktra's dad. Even though it was Bullseye who threw it, it's DD's cane.

Excuse me, but I like the part of the comic where for years none of the villains ever died. They'd just be sent to Arkham for awhile. That's the beef I have with all the Batman movies including BB:

Spoiler

only Riddler & Mr. Freeze survive thier encounter with Batman.

I do. Mr. Freeze was done very well. (Although the joke about the cure for Alfred & the slippers & the hockey game was a tad grating.) So was Poison Ivy. Too bad Bane was made into an idiot rather than a master-mind. I assume we all know what made Bane in the comics so famous? He was the Bill Goldberg of the DCU.

I enjoyed spiderman 1 I couldn't stand Spiderman 2 but I still think that BB was the greatest comic movie ever. BB paid plenty of respect to the comics just like spiderman there were things that were right there in the comics and just like spidermant they did things that were not in the comics.

 

[Rexi]

I do get what you're saying. But I just lament that Nolan couldn't have produced a Batman movie which is on par with the two Raimi Spiderman movies. My favorite part of those DVDs is watching the pop-up trivia portion while watching the movie so you could see which comic inspired which scene.

Raimi managed to create two movies that, while original, also paid a great deal of respect to the comics.

Spoiler

In the comic, Peter is publically unmasked & humiliated by Doc Ock because he'd had a cold. Nobody is willing to believe he's Spiderman. In the SM2, Peter's public unmasking works the completely different way. He isn't humiliated, he's given respect.

And a-for-a-death-which-really-isn't-his-fault, in Spiderman 1 we get Norman Osborne. Too bad they have to overplay Harry's finding out about his father's death & yet not know the true circumstances. Another AFADWRIHF would be

Spoiler

Daredevil's cane being used to impale Elecktra's dad. Even though it was Bullseye who threw it, it's DD's cane.

Excuse me, but I like the part of the comic where for years none of the villains ever died. They'd just be sent to Arkham for awhile. That's the beef I have with all the Batman movies including BB:

Spoiler

only Riddler & Mr. Freeze survive thier encounter with Batman.

I do. Mr. Freeze was done very well. (Although the joke about the cure for Alfred & the slippers & the hockey game was a tad grating.) So was Poison Ivy. Too bad Bane was made into an idiot rather than a master-mind. I assume we all know what made Bane in the comics so famous? He was the Bill Goldberg of the DCU.

raimi's spider-man movies i found cliche'd and the only substance to them is the awe factor of watching spider-man move. Batman & Robin was complete trash that i question your IQ for enjoying. BB was treated with much more rspect to the comics than any other comic book film other than sin-city.

 

[Stupify_me]

raimi's spider-man movies i found cliche'd and the only substance to them is the awe factor of watching spider-man move. Batman & Robin was complete trash that i question your IQ for enjoying. BB was treated with much more rspect to the comics than any other comic book film other than sin-city.

Well said. Though I can understand enjoying BandR as a guilty pleasure of sorts, but to actually think it did justice to Batman is just sad. B&R is probably the worst comic movie ever made if not then it is damn close.

 

[El Payaso]

raimi's spider-man movies i found cliche'd and the only substance to them is the awe factor of watching spider-man move. Batman & Robin was complete trash that i question your IQ for enjoying. BB was treated with much more rspect to the comics than any other comic book film

Very well said.

 

[Anita18]

I'm not really adding anything new but....

Batman: Who are you working for?
Kasnian Agent: [subtitled] You can't understand a word I'm saying and I wouldn't tell you anything if you could.
Batman: [subtitled] I can... and you will.

That's so kickass. Where's it from? Ahhh, my badass Bats.

Anyhow, I was reading this paper on BB and its relation to film noir, and I came upon the blogs of some people (mostly economists) that hated BB because of the whole economics bit that wasn't logical to them. Which goes to prove...I don't think you should take fictional movies quite so seriously. Reminds me of my plastic-surgeon aunt - you can't watch beauty pageants with her since she's always mentioning where the contestants need work done...

 

[Stupify_me]

I'm not really adding anything new but....


That's so kickass. Where's it from? Ahhh, my badass Bats.

Anyhow, I was reading this paper on BB and its relation to film noir, and I came upon the blogs of some people (mostly economists) that hated BB because of the whole economics bit that wasn't logical to them. Which goes to prove...I don't think you should take fictional movies quite so seriously. Reminds me of my plastic-surgeon aunt - you can't watch beauty pageants with her since she's always mentioning where the contestants need work done...

It's from Justice League Unlimited the show that use to be on cartoon network. You can go to Imdb.com and look the show up they have all kinds of quotes on there.

 

[fabman]

@ facsmth: the fact you enjoyed batman & robin says ev'rything: damn newbie... go back to ya marvel boards

 

[millennium movies]

God im so sick of people using the same tired excuse of "well there was B&R". Jesus, folks, so just because B&R was the "worst" didn't mean BB is the best we can get. You need to look at this film and see it has flaws. It is entertaining, it is cool to see Batman being a dark knight again, but by no means is it perfect. I found Batman to be far more enjoyable from an entertaining point and theatrical view.

Batman Begins is supposed to be his first year. Yet somehow in the movie he never get's his but really kicked to make him actualy reconsider his moves and plan. The film feels like two separate entries. The first part was much more enjoyable than the later part.

Considering this is his first year and Nolan want's realism, its odd that this newbie vigilante jumps off from 100+ stories rooftops and "flies" without any problem. Im pretty shure if you used a parachute at that same level in a city between blocks and lots of heavy winds you would most likely get sent to the pavement faster then anything else. I felt also that Nolan didn't leave any sense of mystery for us to figure out, everything was spoonfed to us. IMO when you do something, there's only a certain amount of times it can work before being overused and tiring. By that im refering to his realism factor.

I also believe that there are certain limits of just how much you want to put the viewer in the character's POV/shoes. Like the very often critiqued fighting scenes. There's just some stuff that works for some movies but for others it does not. We go pay for the movie to SEE Bats in action, not to see a "POV" from criminals that just ruins the whole skills show-off.

The film seemed to lack intensity for the action scenes as well. By intensity i mean some sort of sense of danger, risk. A sort of "edge of your seat" factor. Perhaps it has to do with Nolan's inexperience with action.

Some scenes felt a little too theatral to me. Like the league of shadows fight scene in the temple. The music seemed just too excited and didn't match the very short underused sword fight that could have been. I would have loved to see something in the style of Zorro or the Die Another Day swordfight. Something with an edge to it and some great sound effects to make you feel as if the swords are hitting only a few paces away.

The other scene was the Batmobile chase scene. Again , same problem with the music. You got already enough stuff going on here that it just seemed to much. The music should have been a different pace and a little lower and have the sound effects be the center piece here. The footage seemed to choppy, very video clip like.

Im one of those people that would actualy want to see an R rated Batman film. I want to be actualy intimidated and get goosebumps when Batman shows up or creeps up on someone. I want to see that tension factor. Reading that Nolan wants to make it darker, i truly hope he will create a very good and creepy atmosphere everytime Batman or Joker are on screen. Make it mysterious, intense and exciting.

Thats all i can think off right now as those have been recuring issues for me. I think this has been long enough.

 

[fabman]

oh, i forgot you are that one who was involved in batman duality, a masterpiece

 

[millennium movies]

That's Eric Smigiel's film. I did his posters and logos from pictures he sent me. Besides give the kid a break, he's doing something at least. As long as he's having fun and learning his craft. Either way, kinda silly comparison if you ask me, two different mediums. Not to mention that one had a huge budget and professional crew to pull it off.

 

[fabman]

cm on, just jokin' (that movie is crap anyway)...

 

[millennium movies]

HEy you got a right to your opinion, no doubt about it. Its not the best but i admire his effort and progress, i wish i had that energy and creativity level. When i was 16 i only wished i would do a film. Now i still haven't done one yet and its years later. What do you think of Begins, do you see any of my points or you totally disagree?

 

[The Kid]

I view Daredevil DC as being better than Batman Begins. gasp, shock, omg. Well that's how it was...I just enjoyed it much more. Besides the awful playground fight and some of the mtv pop music in the soundtrack, I thought it deserved a sequel more than Begins. though both should get sequels, I believe if the DC was released in theaters, more would have seen it than the butchered theatrical cut and a sequel would have no problem being greenlit.

Really I don't want to sit here and try to convince people that daredevil > batman anyway. But, well... i've watched both films and what can I say but I honestly liked the Daredevil DC more. The whole thing feels like a comic come to life, the relationship with his father i thought was better handled, oh and for whatever reason it just seemed more realistic and I liked ben Urich more than gordan in begins, he was more involved... the dark brooding daredevil taking a shower with scars on his back, the pulling out of a tooth after a night of battle, the whole struggle with vengence and not becoming a villain, visible fight scenes... jesus, it's all I think begins should have been...

I only ask that someone watch daredevil DC and maybe give it a chance... and I hope Nolan watches it too because that's how I'd like his next batman to be done. Farrel would have made a great joker. "You're good baby, but Me... I'm Magic."

 

[Stupify_me]

I view Daredevil DC as being better than Batman Begins. gasp, shock, omg. Well that's how it was...I just enjoyed it much more. Besides the awful playground fight and some of the mtv pop music in the soundtrack, I thought it deserved a sequel more than Begins. though both should get sequels, I believe if the DC was released in theaters, more would have seen it than the butchered theatrical cut and a sequel would have no problem being greenlit.

Really I don't want to sit here and try to convince people that daredevil > batman anyway. But, well... i've watched both films and what can I say but I honestly liked the Daredevil DC more. The whole thing feels like a comic come to life, the relationship with his father i thought was better handled, oh and for whatever reason it just seemed more realistic and I liked ben Urich more than gordan in begins, he was more involved... the dark brooding daredevil taking a shower with scars on his back, the pulling out of a tooth after a night of battle, the whole struggle with vengence and not becoming a villain, visible fight scenes... jesus, it's all I think begins should have been...

I only ask that someone watch daredevil DC and maybe give it a chance... and I hope Nolan watches it too because that's how I'd like his next batman to be done. Farrel would have made a great joker. "You're good baby, but Me... I'm Magic."

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.

 

[XCharlieX]

Batman Begins is supposed to be his first year. Yet somehow in the movie he never get's his but really kicked to make him actualy reconsider his moves and plan. The film feels like two separate entries. The first part was much more enjoyable than the later part.

Why doesnt he get his butt kicked? Because he was trained by the best of the best. The artform taught there is miles ahead of what anyone on the street knows. This shouldve been elementary while watching the film.

And about 2 separate entries, i wonder what about the second half was so inferior to the first. It flowed wonderfully as far as im concerned.

Considering this is his first year and Nolan want's realism, its odd that this newbie vigilante jumps off from 100+ stories rooftops and "flies" without any problem. Im pretty shure if you used a parachute at that same level in a city between blocks and lots of heavy winds you would most likely get sent to the pavement faster then anything else.

But with a prototype tech glider such as that, that can shift accordingly, its a small tab the viewers have to pay for Nolan making everythign else virtually real. This does not mean "Oh give up! flood it all with fantasy!" just because of this.

I felt also that Nolan didn't leave any sense of mystery for us to figure out, everything was spoonfed to us. IMO when you do something, there's only a certain amount of times it can work before being overused and tiring. By that im refering to his realism factor.

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.

Some scenes felt a little too theatral to me. Like the league of shadows fight scene in the temple. The music seemed just too excited and didn't match the very short underused sword fight that could have been...Something with an edge to it

An edge? Did we see the same film? Edge? lol

 

[millennium movies]

Well then how come cops still get shot and killed in missions? Or soldiers on fields die? They all had lots of training of different types of scenarios, fighting techniques, target shooting. It doesn't matter what training you get even if your Batman, stuff still can happen, he isn't Superman therefor i expect him to make human errors and learn from it. That would have been a necessity for this film considering its his first year.

It would have also made more sense for the second part of the movie to have him rise from his mistakes. He seemed like a real pro, as if he's been Batman for years. That was my problem with the second part, no room for errors and moments of risk.

For the realism factor, just because you try making the movie realistic, doesn't mean you have to do it for every single little detail, this is a movie about a comic book, there is supposed to be a little fantasy about it. Otherwise you would of had a Batman in real life since a long time. He would get killed if he were real today. So the "realism" factor isn't so real after all. Someone could try, but there's very little chances he would succeed. Like i said above, experts such as cops, military get killed, imagine a simple man on his own. Money can't solve every conflict or danger (gadgets).

I dont like a movie where im being told everything, i mean whats the point, might as well fast forward the film in that case since i dont need to pay attention to details and such. He should take a hint from other filmakers.

Yes, an edge, something that other films by Spielberg, Mann, even Bay can pull off. If oscar movies can have a sense of edge to them, why cant a "realism" based Batman film?

 

[XCharlieX]

Well then how come cops still get shot and killed in missions? Or soldiers on fields die? They all had lots of training of different types of scenarios, fighting techniques, target shooting. It doesn't matter what training you get even if your Batman, stuff still can happen

Its interesting. Folks are willing to point this out about a great film, yet when someone mentions batman should perhaps die or finish his mission in 2 or 3 films, people dont want to hear it. I agree he cant last forever and sooner or later the plausibility will be strained, but it wasnt in Begins as far as im concerned.

Also note that the cult he learned this from existed for thousands of years in stealth. They have innovative ways of surviving. This is a simple plot point that some refuse to get. Thats not the films fault.

Maybe you didnt like it but many caught onto what they were doing.. just dont be surprised if The Dark Knight is successful as well due to this.

 

[millennium movies]

That still doesn't excuse that he wont even take a scratch. So he was set on fire, ok, but i wanted something like a first test try, before he even puts on the suit. It was in the YO comic and would have made his "reveal" so much better IMO.

Hey, i HOPE as hell it will be successful and that it will be on a higher level than BB. I enjoyed this first outing, but it has its flaws and by no means is the perfect one. I see the second one having a shot at that, i assume the next one can go nothing but up. I still got reservations about Ledger, hope he proves me wrong, and i want him to get lost in the role, i want to forget who is playing him.