signs Nolan doesn't "get it"
He made Flass a fat slob.
I can give you that one. I was also sad to see that Gordon didn't pound the crap out of him. However, I can understand the choice. Flass is a dislikable character in the Year One book, so Nolan took that angle, and made him unlikable physically and socially, by turning him into the personification of greed (Fat and a petty thief that abuses his position). There isn't nearly enough movie time to both introduce Batman in depth, and then go into side stories, like Jim's struggle as the only good cop on the force, at the time. I think they did a good job of that however, when Flass said that everybody was afraid of Jim being a rat.
He put Rachel Dawes in the movie instead of Harvey Dent. wtf?
But Harvey will be in the next film. I believe Rachel is merely used as a movie foil. By now, nobody should ever expect direct use of source material, in a major motion picture. Too many difficulties, including time restraints and common movie themes/vehicles. But Harvey will be present. She wasn't even a DA...only an assistant DA...so the comparison is some what mute. It is obvious that the DA in this movie, was murdered, to introduce Harvey Dent.
He made the action scenes confusing and useless.
I'll give you this one. Most fight scenes with Bruce in the suit, did utilize a lot of cut away shots. However, I think his intention, was to show that Batman is quick and mysterious. There was the whole emphasis on the aspect of a ninja and invisibility. A ninja wouldn't make their presence known, with boisterous, comic bookish battles. So I understand the reasoning, even if I don't like the approach.
He didn't make Batman nearly smart enough. There's little indication that he will become the worlds greatest detective.
The movie is called Batman BEGINS. He wasn't the world's best anything, when he first started out...not even detetcive. Dark Victory (which occurs sometime during year three...after Year One, and The Long Halloween, which itself was a year long story in comic book time) clearly illustrates this, when it is a pre-Robin, Dick Grayson, that figures out, who Hangman is. In fact, Bruce and Alfred had an entnire dialogue on how Batman has to be infalliable, yet isn't, which caused Bruce to get more pissed off, becuase he couldn't solve the case. Also take note, that in Year One, Bruce nearly died on his first outting, after being stabbed by a hooker, and shot by the police. Batman BECOMES the world's greatest detective. He didn't start that way. So I think Batman did just fine in the film.
He made Ras Al Ghul look like the one who gave Batman most of his crimefighting abilities. In other words, it seems Al Ghul spoon feeds Bruce into becoming Batman instead of showing Bruce Wayne combining his world travels to become the greatest crime fighter in the world himself.
I'll agree that there was no mention of Lady Shiva or other martial artists that influenced Bruce, but the idea is there, that he spent the majority of his time, traveling the world, and fighting thugs in prisons, and training. He spent at best, 6 months, to one year, out of the 8 in which Bruce Wayne was "missing", training with Ras. That hardly accounts for making it seem like he gave him all of his training. He merely refined it. It just so happens that much of the emphasis is brought upon Ras. Which I can agree, wasn't the most accurate portrayal...and thus, can be deemd disagreeable.
He burned down Wayne Manor.
That is utterly inconsequential since Bruce rebuilds Wayne manor on the same grounds. Also take note, that Nolan borrowed from Frank Millers interpretations of Batman, without restraint of continuity. So there are themes from The Dark Knight Returns (which is the current and pop culture rendition of Batman) which made there way into this film, including the Tumbler Batmobile, and the destruction of Wayne manner.
Batman still can barely turn his damn head bacause of yet another crappy rubber costume.
While I agree that big cape clips do not match the motif of his suit, the existence of the suit is otherwise, well explained. it's a Kevlar mesh body armor...not a "rubber suit" (in terms of the story, not it's hollywood aesthetic). In the Batman books, we see him in tights, with well defined muscles, even though he is known to wear Kevlar vests, a lead lined mask, combat boots, and has all kinds of circutry wired into both his mask (as shown in the movie) and suit. Frankly, Nolan took the best route for both a suit that works in a film, and actually portaying how Batman would probably look in the books, if his costume were taken more literally. Because in all honesty, Batman wouldn't look like he does, if you put a real human in a cape, cowl, and tights, and threw in even 70% of the stuff that Batman actually has on.
He didn't have the sense to use Elfman's iconic theme. What a waste.
He didn't use it, because this movie is not a part of the previous series, in any way. Why would he use that theme, when this is clearly not related to those films? On this one, i'm not going to reason out...i'm just going to say you are flat out wrong.
His Bat-symbol looks rust-stained crap.
It's all black and raised almost like a silk screen print. Since when has rust, been black?
He gave Batman a love interest in his early years. Batman doesn't care about chicks, especially in his early years.
Umm...Selina Kyle in The Long Halloween, which was basically Year One. He pursued her as Bruce, and sort of did the same while he was Batman and she was Catwoman. In fact, Bruce was steadily dating, just her, for the first half of the book. So yeah...you're just flat wrong again.
and that stuff is just the tip of the iceberg.
