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

[AVEITWITHJAMON]

Batman Begins is an awesome movie that is so re-watchable even today, TDK is simply a better movie which is just as if not more re-watchable. They are both stunning movies and IMO the 2 best out there.

 

[CJ]

I don't think Begins is better than TDK, but it's still a great movie. I wish they filmed Begins like they filmed TDK. Both Gothams look like entirely different cities and makes it difficult to see the two movies as existing within the same contiunity.

Also, I'd rather it have focused on Scarecrow as the main villain, once Bruce returned to Gotham. Ras isn't very iconic. Fear toxin is also a great concept. I wish they didn't make Crane so wimpy though. And why did he constantly take his mask off? So irritating.

 

[ultrasuperduckman]

I liked Maggie better than Katie. But if Katie had come back then I think it would have felt a tad more like a sequel and maybe more emotional when she got pwned.

 

[Naked Shia]

I recently watched both films in an afternoon. I thought a lot of streets seemed the same during the chase scenes in both film. Therefore i felt a sentiment of unity. It's one city.

BB is a great great movie, and it's even bigger now that it's theprologue of TDK. Nolan really created a living universe, which is why both films are so great.

 

[El Payaso]

Also, I'd rather it have focused on Scarecrow as the main villain, once Bruce returned to Gotham. Ras isn't very iconic. Fear toxin is also a great concept. I wish they didn't make Crane so wimpy though. And why did he constantly take his mask off? So irritating.

I have always been a fan of Scarecrow but I agree, it was completely misused in BB. I didn't like what Murphy did at all and it's not like he was constantly taking the mask off but he barely had it on. The mask ended up being a mere reference. The final scene with him at his best on a flame-throwing horse claiming the victory of fear, and being beaten by Rachel and a tazer 5 seconds later (with Scarecrow screaming like a schoolgirl) was a major embarrassment.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Gotham in TDK is the same as the Gotham in BB. It's just that we see more of it. Remember that Gotham is huge, and in BB we only saw a fraction of it. We also saw more daylight and sunset shots of Gotham in TDK, that might've been why it felt different.

 

[Travesty]

I have always been a fan of Scarecrow but I agree, it was completely misused in BB. I didn't like what Murphy did at all and it's not like he was constantly taking the mask off but he barely had it on. The mask ended up being a mere reference. The final scene with him at his best on a flame-throwing horse claiming the victory of fear, and being beaten by Rachel and a tazer 5 seconds later (with Scarecrow screaming like a schoolgirl) was a major embarrassment.

I'll have to agree with that.

As far as villains go for both films, I liked the way Ra's was presented. Sure, his final fight scene wasn't that impressive, but neither was Joker or Two-Faces final "fight" scenes in TDK. I thought they could have used Scarecrow better in BB, but I also think they could have utilized Joker better in TDK. Sure, he had some good scenes here and there, but overall, it didn't feel like a good interpretation of the character to me, much like Scarecrow in BB. As for Two-Face: I loved him. I think it's the best version we have seen of him, comics including. The only thing I hated about it, is how they killed him off in the end. It's like Nolan loves killing off the villains that he does the better job with.

So, as far as villains go, I think TDK did a better job with Two-Face, but as far as the story/pacing/atmosphere, I have to give it to BB by a land slide.

 

[The Joker]

but I also think they could have utilized Joker better in TDK.

How?

 

[Travesty]

How?

The way he was written into the story was fine, much like Scarecrow in BB, but they just didn't give them a good interpretation. Scarecrow always had his mask off, and we didn't get to see him in all of his Scarecrow glory. Joker had to many death traps that should have been given to Two-Face, seeing as how they we're mostly a 50/50 shot of success. Also, it didn't really feel like Joker to me. Aesthetically, I had no problem with the way he looked, but I wanted more laughter, more Joker-gags, Joker-toxin, etc etc.

To me, it just felt like a watered down Joker with attitude. I don't mind the attitude, but damn, I want it to feel like Joker. Some of you liked it, I wasn't all that impressed. Sure, Heath a did wonderful job of slipping into the character, but just because he did a good job acting, doesn't mean I liked the way the character was portrayed. See, I think Heath did a better job with acting then Nicholson, but Nicholsons interpretation was spot on. Just like how people hated the interpretation of Joker in the cartoon The Batman, I felt the same way with TDK. Yes, it's a different version, and they do some Joker things, but overall, it doesn't feel like The Joker to me. Get it?

Sorry if you're having a hard time understanding me, but I'm at work, and I have to type fast when my boss is walking around, so I apologize if my thoughts aren't fleshed out properly.

 

[The Joker]

I understand what you're saying. And I agree to some extent. I would also have liked to have seen some of the Joker toys like acid squirting flower, or lethal hand buzzer used. But then it could be construed as just rehashing what Jack Nicholson's Joker did.

I think they displayed Joker's sick comedic humour differently in TDK, but enough that it still felt like the Joker to me. Stuff like the magic trick with the pencil, leaving victims with his Joker make up and cut smile on their faces, dressing up as a nurse, the video of him terrorizing the fake Batman, his (S)Laughter is the best medicine truck, the bunch of grenades tied to a purple string on his coat etc.

Plus all the cracking one liners and wit Heath's Joker displayed also added to it.

 

[-Arya-]

I have to agree with Travesty to a certain extent. I would have just liked a that overtly exaggerated tone of The Joker to be more present in TDK.

 

[CConn]

your kidding right?

Not in the least.

Far too many fans view Batman Forever as a film made in the same vain as Batman Begins or The Dark Knight. A serious, modern interpretation of Batman. And of course, it fails horribly as a serious, modern interpretation of Batman, because it's nothing of the sort.

What Batman Forever is a terrific encapsulation of late-Silver Age Batman comics that not only perfectly captured the campiness and inherent absurdity of that era, but also actually managed to couple that camp with a rather compelling subplot that was unfortunately edited beyond recognition by WB.

That's what makes Batman Forever such good Batman film, and so much fun in general; it's written and directed and acted by very talented people who set out to make a campy action movie. Y'know, I know most of us here are young guys who's only introduction to Batman was the gritty stories of the 80s and beyond, which makes it kind of hard to appreciate an interpretation such as Batman Forever... but I've never been one to subscribe to one preferred interpretation of Batman.

The Dark Knight's gritty, urban avenger is great, sure. I love Batman 89's fusion of classic Noir crime fighter, '80s vigilante. But I also love all of those stories from the 60s and 70s were Batman was the world's greatest detective and went around like Hercule Poirot and solved mysteries in broad daylight involving criminals who were more childish then they were psychotic. That's fun stuff...that actually represents a rather large portion of Batman's history.

 

[Batman137]

am i the only one who finds begins darker/grittier??

 

[Naked Shia]

Not in the least.

Far too many fans view Batman Forever as a film made in the same vain as Batman Begins or The Dark Knight. A serious, modern interpretation of Batman. And of course, it fails horribly as a serious, modern interpretation of Batman, because it's nothing of the sort.

What Batman Forever is a terrific encapsulation of late-Silver Age Batman comics that not only perfectly captured the campiness and inherent absurdity of that era, but also actually managed to couple that camp with a rather compelling subplot that was unfortunately edited beyond recognition by WB.

That's what makes Batman Forever such good Batman film, and so much fun in general; it's written and directed and acted by very talented people who set out to make a campy action movie. Y'know, I know most of us here are young guys who's only introduction to Batman was the gritty stories of the 80s and beyond, which makes it kind of hard to appreciate an interpretation such as Batman Forever... but I've never been one to subscribe to one preferred interpretation of Batman.

The Dark Knight's gritty, urban avenger is great, sure. I love Batman 89's fusion of classic Noir crime fighter, '80s vigilante. But I also love all of those stories from the 60s and 70s were Batman was the world's greatest detective and went around like Hercule Poirot and solved mysteries in broad daylight involving criminals who were more childish then they were psychotic. That's fun stuff...that actually represents a rather large portion of Batman's history.

I feel th same. And Batman and robin is a great hommage to the Adam west era. I love all batman movies for different reasons, BB and TDK being my favourites.

 

[Travesty]

am i the only one who finds begins darker/grittier??

I know I do, but that's due to the atmosphere that was presented. I liked the rustic looking mansion and The Narrows. I also liked how it was shot at night time, as apposed to being lit up, even in the night shots.

 

[CConn]

I feel th same. And Batman and robin is a great hommage to the Adam west era. I love all batman movies for different reasons, BB and TDK being my favourites.

That's very true.

Although, with B&R, I end up thinking, "If I wanted to watch Adam West's Batman...I'd watch Adam West's Batman." But yeah, B&R was another example of talented people making an intentionally campy and parodist film.

 

[El Payaso]

That's very true.

Although, with B&R, I end up thinking, "If I wanted to watch Adam West's Batman...I'd watch Adam West's Batman." But yeah, B&R was another example of talented people making an intentionally campy and parodist film.

It was far more a toy commercial than a Adam West series update. Most of the people involved were talented but they showed no talent actually. Not Schumacher, Schwarzenegger, Clooney or Thurman certainly.

 

[CConn]

No, Clooney actually turned in a perfectly fine performance in the few serious scenes he was given with Alfred. Everyone else was never even given a chance to give a strong performance simply due to the material.

But yes, WB did debase the film into simply a marketing tool.

 

[El Payaso]

No, Clooney actually turned in a perfectly fine performance in the few serious scenes he was given with Alfred.

I have to agree with this. Too bad he got all those other scenes also. t:

Everyone else was never even given a chance to give a strong performance simply due to the material.

But they were given the chance to say No, thanks. Come on, if Keaton did it...

 

[CConn]

That's a separate matter entirely.

Of course everyone involved was horribly foolish to get involved with B&R. Except for Clooney of course. It could be a gay snuff film, if you ever get the chance to play Batman, you better take it.

 

[TheRookie311]

Ok, I know I'm gonna get this massive wave of TDK hyperfans attacking me, but I honestly want to know how many people here honestly like Batman Begins better than The Dark Knight and why?

My reasons are as follows:

- Story
While I love a good twisty turney suspense film as much as the next guy, I don't like it when a movie like that takes over my Batman flick. And when watching TDK, I get that distinct impression too often. Its like Batman Begins got mashed up with The Departed. The Joker's 'put them in two seperate buildings and tell people where they are so they can watch them die' scheme felt like something from that movie, rather than a Joker scheme. There are other examples.

Batman Begins on the other hand has a very strong storyline that doesn't seem like it should have ended halfway in the middle (when Rachel died in TDK, it really felt like the movie should have stopped there). It wasn't confusing, it was in fact a very logical progression of events and the characters all seemed very much a part of the process.

- Lack of actual Batmanness
Batmanness n: the attribute of acting like the Batman known universally.
Yes I made that up, but I think you get my point.
Tell me honestly, can you really imagine the comic book Batman listening to The Joker tell him those two addresses and just take it on faith that he's telling the truth about them? Whenever I try to picture say, Kevin Conroy's Batman of the Animated Series, in that situation, I cannot see Batman doing that. Gordon would ask, which one are you going after and he'd say "Rachel. She's at [insert the first address]." Gordon would call after him, "What makes you say that?" and Batman would yell back as he's getting on the Batpod, "Its the Joker, it can't be that easy!"

Another case in point, the end hostage scene.
Again, I put Kevin Conroy's awesome Batman in that situation, and what springs to mind is not "You're the one pointing the gun Harvey, so point it at the people responsible." but "You're the one pointing the gun Harvey. Not the Joker. Its your choice now. You told me 'You can't give in.' So why are you?" or something to that effect. Batman seemed altogether too weak and without inspiration in that scene, like he wasn't even really trying.

Batman Begins on the other hand, never has a moment where you turn to the person next to you and say "That...doesn't really seem like something Batman would do..." Instead we get awesome scenes like Arkham Asylum, from start to finish which screams Batman all the way.

-The Joker
I will never say that Heath Ledger did a bad job. His acting was amazing. He embodied the character that he was told to portray.
But that character is not the Joker to me. It just isn't, it can't be. I don't even care about the permawhite/makeup debate. Its not just one thing, its the whole character that I look at and go... "That should be... Elseworlds or something." It just is not The Joker. The Joker is not grungy, the Joker is not dirty. The Joker does not look like he just swam through a dirty river and then rolled in trash.
I could have accepted many of the pieces that made up Nolan's version of the Joker. I could have accepted the scars, I could even have accepted the make up. But all together, these things just make me look at that and go, I do not see The Joker.

Batman Begins features Ra's Al Ghul as its title villain and despite never once mentioning The Lazerus Pits I absolutely loved this interpertration of the character. He's next to perfect so far in my opinion and the essence of the character is transfered right out of the comic.

-Gotham
Gotham City does not feel the same in The Dark Knight. All the buildings have changed, none of the locations are the same. While this usually wouldn't faze me, put together with all the other things, it really sticks out to me that The Dark Knight does not feel like it takes place in the same city we see in Begins. It irks me that the Wayne Enterprises building is gone (despite the huge amount of effort Batman put into saving it in the last film, and for those of you who say "No! Its right there in behind Batman and the Joker when they duke it out!" Sorry guys, watch that scene again, its lit similarly but the building is completely different.) It irks me that the monorail is visible only in the background, and it irks me that the streets and buildings are all different. We don't see the Gotham we got to know in Begins, not even a little bit.

Those are my main reasons for still liking Batman Begins over the Dark Knight. What are yours?

I get why you don't like it as much (sounds like maybe or mostly because it isn't exactly like the comic. But, consider a few things. You mentioned batman didn't question the joker about the two locations. In the comics and other portrayals hes dealt with the joker a lot. This was his first meeting with the joker. Secondly he was acting on emotion because of rachel. Very real from a human response standpoint (and batman is human).

The Grungy Joker well hes not completely grungy but again it adds to the realism. A psycho genius killer criminal fits that bill. Of course makeup for reality. Its just a matter of, since its not a comic and your watching live actors play as if batman was a real live situation how would it actually happen.

Some of the the othe stuff I can't say much against and I really like both movies, I might even like the first one better, but I actually think batman gains realism more so than at any other time in tdk, remember its not supposed to portray a comic book, it follows the comic book but it is a movie.. How cool would that movie have been if there was no comic book, if they just came up with an idea and script for a couple of movies and this was the first ever time you heard about batman. (i don't mean it would be cool to not have the comics) but you get the idea.

 

[lzzy]

There are one or two things in TDK that make me grate my teeth, every time. The SWAT guy driving with Gordon during the Joker chase is one. "Ok thats not good... THATS not good!" Bad, hammy acting.
Two, during aforementioned chase, is all the 'huh?' gags. The kids playing guns and the guy picking his teeth as the Batpod drives past. One of them shouldn't have made the final cut.

 

[lzzy]

Double post.

 

[El Payaso]

There are one or two things in TDK that make me grate my teeth, every time. The SWAT guy driving with Gordon during the Joker chase is one. "Ok thats not good... THATS not good!" Bad, hammy acting.
Two, during aforementioned chase, is all the 'huh?' gags. The kids playing guns and the guy picking his teeth as the Batpod drives past. One of them shouldn't have made the final cut.

While I agree I have to say a couple of things.

Yes, the Swat guy was bad and you can get through it without the gun boys. But at least the gun boys were done quickly; less than 2 seconds and that's it, so it didn't drag the joke unnecessarily, killing it in the process (something that Raimi should understand urgently). That said, any B Begins' bad humorous moment is easly worse than any TDK bad humorous moment.

 

[lzzy]

While I agree I have to say a couple of things.

Yes, the Swat guy was bad and you can get through it without the gun boys. But at least the gun boys were done quickly; less than 2 seconds and that's it, so it didn't drag the joke unnecessarily, killing it in the process (something that Raimi should understand urgently). That said, any B Begins' bad humorous moment is easly worse than any TDK bad humorous moment.

No, I agree. It was fine by itself, just the guy picking his teeth seemed unnecessary to me, as though Nolan thought that people didn't get the last one. I recall (dimly) similar gags in BB. I could be wrong, relying on memory here.
The SWAT guy has no excuses, he was bad!