Batman Begins Who still likes/thinks Begins is better than TDK?

[Travesty]

I don't really have too much of a problem of Batman becoming a part of the "establishment" I guess. He certainly was more accepted in TDK, as Gordon was allowing more of inner circle Ramierz etc to see him. Even Dent knew enough that turning on Gordon's Bat signal would bring the Dark Knight to the rooftop. Like Travesty said though, I don't want to see him carrying a badge either. I still like that mysterious side to the character. I was mainly disappointed big time by the lack of evolution of the character. The trailers talked alot about "how I see now what I have to become to stop" the Joker, but I never really feel that translated to the screen. Watching the trailers as a mini movie, you hear Batman down and out, then it looks like he turns it up a notch with Freeman saying "now that's more like it Mr. Wayne". I expected some sort of escalation either in violence, detective skills, intimidation, psychology....just...something! Instead Batman is presented as more or less just the "muscle' of the film who never really seems to change any of his approaches as promised by the trailer. I don't even mind that he couldn't beat or outwit the Joker in the interrogation scene, if it meant that at the end of movie he could have demonstrated to the Joker (and have the Joker begrudingly acknowledge in frustration) that Batman had outwitted him. Instead the final scene leaves the Joker laughing (after a 10 minute) lecture and a more or less speechless Batman scurrying to the next scene. Some sort of demonstration of Batman superiority in this scene would have been appreciated. I really didn't mind the rest of the movie, just was greatly disappointed in the presentation of my hero in the film.

Yes! I have to agree with everything in this post, and especially your last sentence.

 

[Ryan]

Thanks for the acknowledgement. When I walked out of Batman Begins, I walked out thinking that I had finally seen my hero where he belonged, front and center. He was no longer regulated to the backdrop of scene stealing A list Hollywood villains. I don't know how anyone could have walked out of Batman Begins without wanting to be Batman or thinking that he was cool again...or maybe...for the first time on film. I left TDK with an entirely different feeling. Confusion. I wasn't sure what to make of it at first. Was it entertaining? Sure. Was I alone in thinking something was missing or lacking? I seemed to be, as thousands came forth to sing the praises of Ledger as the Joker. But where was Batman in this film? What about the hero? Books like the Long Halloween, Year one, and The Dark Knight returns demonstrated that you could have excellent villains, supporting cast, and still have Batman be the focus while be entertained. A part of me had wished that this was only the first chapter in what would culminate in round 2 of Batman vs the Joker in a third Nolan film. With Ledger gone, I'm hoping that closure will come about in some other way during the third film, and that Nolan will not face the same pratfalls that the earlier films had succumbed to.

 

[Doctor Octopus]

I don't share your opinion, Ryan. In fact I think you couldn't be more wrong if you tried.

All the weaknesses in Begins, and there was many, were corrected in The Dark Knight. Batman didn't have to be on the screen as often in TDK, because this was not his origin story like it was in Begins. An origin story that took Bruce Wayne's travelling the world in a quest for knowledge and training, and compacted it all into him being trained in a Himilayan ninja school in the mountains.

Harvey Dent, the Joker, Gordon, Rachel, they all presented conflicts and themes for Bruce Wayne/Batman. And it was wonderfully played out. By the end I was rooting for Batman for making one hell of a sacrifice for the greater good of Gotham. I can't wait to see where Nolan takes that in the next movie.

TDK>>>>>>>Begins

 

[Dark Guardian]

Thanks for the acknowledgement. When I walked out of Batman Begins, I walked out thinking that I had finally seen my hero where he belonged, front and center. He was no longer regulated to the backdrop of scene stealing A list Hollywood villains. I don't know how anyone could have walked out of Batman Begins without wanting to be Batman or thinking that he was cool again...or maybe...for the first time on film. I left TDK with an entirely different feeling. Confusion. I wasn't sure what to make of it at first. Was it entertaining? Sure. Was I alone in thinking something was missing or lacking? I seemed to be, as thousands came forth to sing the praises of Ledger as the Joker. But where was Batman in this film? What about the hero? Books like the Long Halloween, Year one, and The Dark Knight returns demonstrated that you could have excellent villains, supporting cast, and still have Batman be the focus while be entertained. A part of me had wished that this was only the first chapter in what would culminate in round 2 of Batman vs the Joker in a third Nolan film. With Ledger gone, I'm hoping that closure will come about in some other way during the third film, and that Nolan will not face the same pratfalls that the earlier films had succumbed to.

Exactly how I feel. Especially about the confusion and wondering if you're the only one. Its like I was saying earlier to The Joker, there are so many people who looked around at all the people screaming "TDK IS TEH AWESOME!" and were a little worried/scared to speak up and say, "Wait a minute guys... this really isn't that amazing." I feel you completely there. I loved Begins so much, watching this felt way too much like taking a step back from what had been accomplished.

 

[Ryan]

Thanks again Dark Guardian. As for Doctor Octopus, I can't be wrong because this is a thread about opnion. What I wrote is my opnion. While you may not share mine, I am entitled to it. I wasn't saying that Batman had to have more screen time (although it would make sense since it is a Batman movie....I"ve yet to see Spidey play second fiddle in a film), I just think what time he had in the movie could have had more impact. For all I know, Batman might have had as much screen time as the Joker, Dent etc. I took my father to see this movie (he's not a fanboy or anythhing like that) just a casual moviegoer. While he really enjoyed the film, he remarked "its funny because you don't see that much of Batman in the film." Again, he might have had equal screen time, but it just didn't feel like his pressence was as equal or impactful as the Joker. I don't want my Batman being a martyr, I want him saving the day and showing his toughness and resolve and superiority over evil. Again, just my opnion.

 

[Travesty]

I left TDK with an entirely different feeling. Confusion. I wasn't sure what to make of it at first. Was it entertaining? Sure. Was I alone in thinking something was missing or lacking? I seemed to be, as thousands came forth to sing the praises of Ledger as the Joker.

Yeah, I had the exact same feeling too. It even took me a few months to write an honest fan review, because everybody was on cloud-nine, and I didn't want to get attacked so quickly. Being the biggest Bat-fan of my friends, I remember a lot of buddies calling me/texting me after the midnight show, and they all showed a great deal of enthusiasm towards the film, while I kinda had to lie to them, just so I wouldn't hear the 'ol, "well, you're just to obsessed with Batman, and you'll never be happy with any Batman movie unless you make it" shtick. Because I have criticized other Bat-flicks, but it was in jest, but I still enjoyed the films I watched. While watching Bat-flicks like Forever, sure, they got some things wrong with the villains, but atleast it felt like a Batman movie to me. When watching TDK, I was shocked that Batman was in the movie, but it didn't feel like Batman to me. Begins nailed the presentation right on the friggin head, and got all the emotions and atmosphere perfectly. Nolan was going for a more "realistic" approach, and it worked great with Begins, but he went a little to far with it in TDK. The atmosphere was wrong, the emotions were EVERYWHERE, and the pacing was horrendous. People say begins had sooo many things wrong with it like some of the acting, dialogue, and the theme. While some of those were fixed in TDK, I still thought some of the acting was horrible, the dialogue was improved, and the theme was more subtle, but it sacrificed the atmosphere, iconic shots, and pacing.

 

[bane]

Yeah, I had the exact same feeling too. It even took me a few months to write an honest fan review, because everybody was on cloud-nine, and I didn't want to get attacked so quickly. Being the biggest Bat-fan of my friends, I remember a lot of buddies calling me/texting me after the midnight show, and they all showed a great deal of enthusiasm towards the film, while I kinda had to lie to them, just so I wouldn't hear the 'ol, "well, you're just to obsessed with Batman, and you'll never be happy with any Batman movie unless you make it" shtick. Because I have criticized other Bat-flicks, but it was in jest, but I still enjoyed the films I watched. While watching Bat-flicks like Forever, sure, they got some things wrong with the villains, but atleast it felt like a Batman movie to me. When watching TDK, I was shocked that Batman was in the movie, but it didn't feel like Batman to me. Begins nailed the presentation right on the friggin head, and got all the emotions and atmosphere perfectly. Nolan was going for a more "realistic" approach, and it worked great with Begins, but he went a little to far with it in TDK. The atmosphere was wrong, the emotions were EVERYWHERE, and the pacing was horrendous. People say begins had sooo many things wrong with it like some of the acting, dialogue, and the theme. While some of those were fixed in TDK, I still thought some of the acting was horrible, the dialogue was improved, and the theme was more subtle, but it sacrificed the atmosphere, iconic shots, and pacing.

The last thing TDK was missing were iconic shots and atmosphere, in fact TDK should have won all best cinematography awards last year.

 

[Travesty]

The last thing TDK was missing were iconic shots and atmosphere, in fact TDK should have won all best cinematography awards last year.

I'm talking about Batman-atmosphere(bat-mapshere), and iconic shots that reflect what we know and love about Batman. You know, like using Bat-arangs, dropping down with his cape spread, sitting on top of a gargoyle, etc etc.

Yes, there is atmosphere in every movie, but that doesn't mean it reflects the character correctly. Would you like to see Lord of the Rings shot in New York? Even if they got New York's atmosphere correctly, it doesn't really fit the characters of the story. Get it?

 

[bane]

Yeah these are so un-iconic and bad shots that don't fit the character of batman...

Spoiler

and this shot is just too Great to miss out

And there's no such thing as a "bat-mapshere", through all the previous movies there were hardly any moments with Batman sitting on top of a gargoyle or etc.
If you're referring that you wanted to see something like the gothic noir Gotham that Burton introduced, sorry but Nolan's Gotham is as good if not better than Burton's one.

 

[Travesty]

And there's no such thing as a "bat-mapshere", through all the previous movies there were hardly any moments with Batman sitting on top of a gargoyle or etc.

I know there's no such thing as "bat-masphere", I just made it up. You're making it out like all the other Bat-flicks didn't do anything to the character until TDK came along.

If you're referring that you wanted to see something like the gothic noir Gotham that Burton introduced, sorry but Nolan's Gotham is as good if not better than Burton's one.

No, I wanted to see Gotham the way it was in Begins, and from what I'm told, Nolan was a part that movie. Again, we're comparing Begins to TDK, not B89, Returns, Forever. Why does it always come to this?

And about those pics, no, I don't find those that iconic to the character. Yeah, the Bat-signal is cool, but that's just one of the few. I never said there was nothing iconic in the movie, just little to none for me. If you felt TDK defines your Batman for you, then by all means.

*On a side not: Can you please shrink those pics down, or put them in a spoiler tags.

 

[bane]

I know there's no such thing as "bat-masphere", I just made it up. You're making it out that all the other Bat-flicks didn't do anything to the character until TDK came along.


No, I wanted to see Gotham the way it was in Begins, and from what I'm told, Nolan was a part that movie. Again, we're comparing Begins to TDK, not B89, Returns, Forever. Why does it always come to this?

And about those pics, no, I don't find those that iconic to the character. Yeah, the Bat-signal is cool, but that's just one of the few. I never said there was nothing iconic in the movie, just little to none for me. If you felt TDK defines your Batman for you, then by all means.

*On a side not: Can you please shrink those pics down, or put them in a spoiler tags.

Gotham is the same, sure some of the buildings are changed and the narrows and arkham are not seen, but the monorail is there, as is Wayne Tower.
Yes Gotham seems bigger, but that was Nolan's intention.For BB Nolan was inspired by "Blade Runner" and for TDK he was by "Heat", that's why the hue/tint was changed...So basicly Gotham is the same.

Spoiler

BB

TDK

BB

TDK

 

[Comics N' Toons]

There were elements of TDK i liked better than Begins, but overall, Begins was better.
B'89 is still the best!

 

[Travesty]

Joker didn't win. He didn't corrupt Gotham, he didn't destroy hope.

But if Batman is redeemed, then that means The Joker did win. You can't be a helpful, cop killing, protector, that the citizens should look up to. So either Batman is a villain or The Joker wins.

 

[Ryan]

To BATS N' HORNETS, I actually enjoyed Batman Forever more then B89. I'm sure I"ll get alot of hate mail because of that too.

 

[Travesty]

To BATS N' HORNETS, I actually enjoyed Batman Forever more then B89. I'm sure I"ll get alot of hate mail because of that too.

I actually like Forever. Yeah, there were somethings wrong with it, but its a fun movie. B89 did a lot of things wrong as well, so that's just your opinion. Nothing wrong there, just what you like.

 

[Ryan]

This has been a really great thread. Thanks to all involved! Especially those that agree with me! Just kidding.....thanks to everyone.

 

[The Joker]

But if Batman is redeemed, then that means The Joker did win. You can't be a helpful, cop killing, protector, that the citizens should look up to. So either Batman is a villain or The Joker wins.

Holy quoting of old posts, Batman. Didn't you get enough last time, Travesty?

Batman doesn't have to be redeemed to do what he does. He operates outside the law anyway. He and Gordon will still meet up and be partners. And since Gordon is Commissoner now, that will help alot.

The citizens of Gotham never held him in high esteem at the best of times. At most, there was a small minority that thought he was a help. I don't know what makes you think it's going to radically change how he works.

 

[Eggyman]

I think Travesty needs to watch The Dark Knight, like, right to the end, where the credits move and stuff.

The whole point of Batman taking the blame was so Joker DIDN'T win. Alfred burning the letter from Rachel is a symbolic equivalent of what Bats and Gordon decide to do with the truth about Harvey. They are keeping the truth from Gotham to save its spirit, just as Alfred is keeping the truth from Bruce to save his spirit.

Joker didn't win. Why? Because he was trying to break Gotham's spirit, which he failed at because Bats and Gordon kept the truth away from public knowledge. What they don't know doesn't hurt them...

 

[Travesty]

Holy quoting of old posts, Batman. Didn't you get enough last time, Travesty?

I just thought of this, and I remember you talking about it in this thread. Hehe, it just happened to be you, I'm not really looking for an argument here, as it's just a question/discussion.

Batman doesn't have to be redeemed to do what he does. He operates outside the law anyway. He and Gordon will still meet up and be partners. And since Gordon is Commissoner now, that will help alot.

The citizens of Gotham never held him in high esteem at the best of times. At most, there was a small minority that thought he was a help. I don't know what makes you think it's going to radically change how he works.

I'm not saying it will be a change from how he works, but my point is, now nobody can ever like Batman in Gotham, and if they do, then The Joker wins. If people side with Batman, they're siding with a cop killing villain. So even if Batman does good for Gotham(which I know he will), then he can NEVER be accredited for ANY of it. Yeah, Gotham's spirits where "saved", and Dent was made the hero, just to ensure "hope", but at what expense? Now, the only working hero in Gotham, can't be a shining hope for their citizens, cause he's a cop killer. Yeah, he's their "Dark Knight", but Dark Knight or not, he's still a villain. If he's redeemed, the people of Gotham are siding with a cop killer. Gotham doesn't have a hero anymore, even if he is pulling the strings in the background, he can never be a shining hope ever again. So, how are they going to implement the Bat-signal? Which was my original question: Batman is either a villain or hero(The Joker wins). Gotham's spirits or not, if he is redeemed, The Joker won.

Think of it like this: Someone molests a child and goes to jail for it. When he gets out, he is released into society, and has to let people know he's a molester. Do you let him watch your kids when your away, just cause he was rehabilitated in jail? I highly doubt it. I'm not worried about how Batman will work, I'm just saying he can never be redeemed.

 

[Eggyman]

I understand your point, but Gothamites do not let Batman do what he does. He never asked for permission. He just does it. I never liked my math teacher, but she did right by me even so.

He doesn't need to be redeemed. He does not need Gotham's support to do what he does.

 

[The Joker]

I understand your point, but Gothamites do not let Batman do what he does. He never asked for permission. He just does it. I never liked my math teacher, but she did right by me even so.

He doesn't need to be redeemed. He does not need Gotham's support to do what he does.

Swift and to the point, Eggy

Anyway, it's not like Batman has not been accused of murder before. Look at the great animated movie, Mask of the Phantasm. All the gangster murders were pinned on Batman, and the Phantasm was never caught or even exposed as the real murderer.

 

[Doc Samson]

I agree that Bale was alot better in BB than TDK, but then you have to ask yourself, IF there's going to be a spot-on interpretation of Batman, shouldn't it be the one movie in his film history that's almost entirely about him? Bale was given more to do and a had more time to do it, so naturally, it should be better.

But TDK & BB are also two very different films altogether. To me, BB is the best superhero movie ever, while I think TDK is one of the best thrillers that just so happens to be dressed up as a superhero movie.

From the plot to the action sequences to the characters themselves, nothing about TDK is really a traditional superhero movie, and that's what made it so compelling. BB, especially after the first hour, follows a pretty standard comic flick template, but at a much higher degree of success than any I've seen previously. SO really, it depends on what you prefer, but to really compare them is a pretty difficult task, because besides the essential facts of who the characters are, the two films couldn't be any more different...

 

[Eggyman]

Swift and to the point, Eggy

Anyway, it's not like Batman has not been accused of murder before. Look at the great animated movie, Mask of the Phantasm. All the gangster murders were pinned on Batman, and the Phantasm was never caught or even exposed as the real murderer.

Nice example.

There was a couple of instances in TDK where this very subject was addressed: When Alfred says, 'He's not being the hero. He's being something moar!' Also, at the end, where Bats is talking to Gordon and Bats says how he can be what Gotham needs him to be. I saw a massive amount of growth for Batman in The Dark Knight. He understands that he doesn't need to be a shining light of good to do good, just how he realised you don't have to be completely corrupted by evil to do bad things.

 

[The Joker]

Nice example.

There was a couple of instances in TDK where this very subject was addressed: When Alfred says, 'He's not being the hero. He's being something moar!' Also, at the end, where Bats is talking to Gordon and Bats says how he can be what Gotham needs him to be. I saw a massive amount of growth for Batman in The Dark Knight. He understands that he doesn't need to be a shining light of good to do good, just how he realised you don't have to be completely corrupted by evil to do bad things.

Exactly!

That's what I mentioned before in this debate. The Joker, Dent, Rachel, Gordon etc, they all served the Bruce Wayne/Batman character in this movie in his growth. Batman didn't have to be on screen as frequently as he was in Begins, because this was not an origin story.

 

[Ryan]

For me, when I pay to buy a Batman comic, I expect to have him in it. If I pay for a Batman movie, I want to see him in. I have never subscribed to the Hollywood premise where the villains make the film. I have no problems with filmakers trying something different by trying to add depth to a film ala No Country for Old Men. However, as a fan of Batman, I wish that people had walked out of the theatre saying "hey, remember that one scene when Batman did this..." as much as people seem to remember all the Joker moments. I'm not sure where this idea is coming from that Batman had to have as much screen time as Batman Begins. For all I know, Batman might have actually been on screen more in TDK. He may have more screen time then the Joker for all I know. I didn't run counter. What I am saying is, for me, when Batman was on screen I wish had more impactful scenes. Not scenes that are felt via transference through other characters. Again, just my opnion.