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

[Ace of Knaves]

Maybe they would have. But I'd prefer a fight to look real and kinetic (yea in real fights you can't see everything clearly, amazing that) than to look like they are BLATANTLY fake. Guys falling before being hit says it all really... I'm not imagining things, that DID happen, on more than one occasion in TDK. I'd rather the shakey cam look than the drama class choreography look any day of the week.

 

[El Payaso]

Maybe they would have. But I'd prefer a fight to look real and kinetic (yea in real fights you can't see everything clearly, amazing that) than to look like they are BLATANTLY fake. Guys falling before being hit says it all really... I'm not imagining things, that DID happen, on more than one occasion in TDK. I'd rather the shakey cam look than the drama class choreography look any day of the week.

Again; I guess it's better when you're forced to imagine the perfect fight in your head given that nothing clear is actually happening on screen, than making an actual effort.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

Well apart from the dock scene, I saw everything perfectly. I saw how it was intended to come across. As though you are there actually watching it unfold.

Honestly I dunno how anyone can defend the fight scenes in TDK (well the nightclub scene was pretty cool i admit). But every other scene DIDN'T appear to have a lot of effort put in.

As I've said a million times before, people falling over BEFORE being hit. People standing there WAITING for Batman to hit them. Batman having a very, very, very limited fighting repetoire which include amazing martial arts feats such as elbow, punch, elbow, punch, forearm smash, throw over shoulder, elbow, punch.

Yea, that is how an elite martial artists fights...

Yea, that is some real effort...

And to top it all off, the penthouse fight. Batman throws a guy into another guy who is just about to shoot him. Gun goes off. Who knows where that bullet could of gone? Batman would NEVER do that. They didn't put effort into the thought process there. Their thinking was "You know what would be cool? If Batman throws a guy into another guy who is about to shoot him! It doesn't matter that the room is packed out with civilians!"

 

[El Payaso]

Well apart from the dock scene, I saw everything perfectly. I saw how it was intended to come across. As though you are there actually watching it unfold.

It was more as if you were being punched by Batman all the time. Sure, interesting, but when you've waited 60 minutes to watch Batman in action and then you can't see a thing of him... it's bad.

Honestly I dunno how anyone can defend the fight scenes in TDK (well the nightclub scene was pretty cool i admit). But every other scene DIDN'T appear to have a lot of effort put in.

The mere fact of showing the fight is more effort than gluing short shots together where we can't see a thing.

Now, I wasn't intending to defend TDK fights as much as attack BB fights' editing style.

As I've said a million times before, people falling over BEFORE being hit. People standing there WAITING for Batman to hit them. Batman having a very, very, very limited fighting repetoire which include amazing martial arts feats such as elbow, punch, elbow, punch, forearm smash, throw over shoulder, elbow, punch.

Yea, that is how an elite martial artists fights...

Yea, that is some real effort...

And to top it all off, the penthouse fight. Batman throws a guy into another guy who is just about to shoot him. Gun goes off. Who knows where that bullet could of gone? Batman would NEVER do that. They didn't put effort into the thought process there. Their thinking was "You know what would be cool? If Batman throws a guy into another guy who is about to shoot him! It doesn't matter that the room is packed out with civilians!"

Again, you have the privilege to criticise what you CAN actually see. Who knows what the fights in BB actually were like.

Their thinking has been "You know what would be cool? If we can't see Batman fighting so they have to imagine everything. That's better than what we could do as director, coreographers and actors!"

Now, I never saw this guy who kept falling before being touched, but I'd like to see that. I tend to believe you but it'd be interesting to watch that.

 

[Ace of Knaves]

The best example is when Batman hits Lau with the gun in the Hong Kong sky scraper. I ain't making it up, Lau falls backwards before he ever gets hit.

Now you could say that is the stunt mans fault, not the choreographer or Nolan. But it is so blatant you'd think they'd reshoot that or something.

 

[Travesty]

The best example is when Batman hits Lau with the gun in the Hong Kong sky scraper. I ain't making it up, Lau falls backwards before he ever gets hit.

Now you could say that is the stunt mans fault, not the choreographer or Nolan. But it is so blatant you'd think they'd reshoot that or something.

I agree, and I think it's just as bad as the Goon who gets hit by the bus in the beginning of the movie. He clearly falls way before the bus even comes through the bank. It's just sloppy, IMO.

 

[El Payaso]

Mh, then it's not a fight coreography problem only.

 

[returntovoid]

I HATED all of his ultimatums/death traps(Save either Rachel or Dent, Save the good people or the criminals, I'll burn my HALF and you get to keep yours, I'll blow up a building or take off your mask). All of his ultimatums were un-Joker like, and should have been given to Two-Face, seeing as how everything was a 50/50 chance.

You know tbh, I never thought of it that way. You make a good point that those ultimatums/death traps were along the lines of something that Two-Face in the Batman comic books would do, considering those ultimatums/death traps were all 50/50 chance.

 

[Travesty]

You know tbh, I never thought of it that way. You make a good point that those ultimatums/death traps were along the lines of something that Two-Face in the Batman comic books would do, considering those ultimatums/death traps were all 50/50 chance.

Yeah, it was something that bugged me on my second or third viewing. I remember it just hit me like a ton of bricks, I was like, "wait a minute, everythings a 50/50 chance. Why didn't they give all these to Two-Face, and give something that was more in tune with The Joker". I'm glad someone else noticed this, because for awhile, I didn't think anybody cared. Like I've said in the past, when TDK-honeymoon is over, people will start to realize the many faults of this movie.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

When the honey-moon period was over, people realized The Dark Knight was far less flawed than Batman Begins.

 

[MysterioMenace]

What a novel concept! Let’s have Batman be the main character in a Batman film. Hah! In the span of the caped crusaders big screen history, it’s ironically refreshing to have a Bruce Wayne focused narrative. Batman Begins really stands out as being different from all the other villain-centered films. For that I really can appreciate it.

I don’t really think I have a preference between the two films, but I do think Begins got far more right, especially when concerned with Batman himself. I don’t care how repetitive the Wayne’s death gets, when you’re being called out to publically take your mask off and contemplating ending your vigilante run, you’re internally questioning why you do this to begin with. The lack of a family death flashback scene in Dark Knight, so much as some five-second one, was unacceptable. In fact, you could substitute Dark Knight Batman with pretty much any grim and gritty superhero vigilante and have pretty much the same exact story. The exclusion of Wayne manor, signature tools like the batarang, and his dank and gothic batcave being replaced by the uncharacteristically illuminated atmosphere of his temporary pad really made Batman almost unidentifiable outside of those pointy-ears. I did very much so enjoy the detective bits…but outside of that, Batman just seemed more like some extra with throat cancer who was thrown into some RoboCop-tech pseudo-batsuit. Nolan went from getting Batman the best he’s ever been in live-action to arguably, outside of Schumacher, the worst he’s ever been.

The literal atmosphere in the entire Dark Knight really was just disappointing. I’ve always felt that Gotham City is every bit as much the character as the people that make up its residents, but Nolan threw that to the wayside and gave us bland and boring background. Nothing more! The entire scope of the city was far too clean. By no means am I asking for Burton’s film noir artistry back, which I do love, but the gritty feel of the Narrows wouldn’t have hurt. Fact of the matter is that Dark Knights Gotham City looks like Chicago, not Gotham. It doesn’t even look like they tried.

For the villains, I’m sort of mixed. Liam’s Ducard/Ra’s Al Ghul was absolutely brilliant. I think he’s got some of the best dialogue ever written in any Batman film. Despite the alterations, everything seemed character accurate. The villainous scheme seemed very comic Ra’s oriented; you could see him doing something like this. It fit his persona very well. Scarecrow is really just a glorified extra, but I really enjoyed his role and also felt he remained faithful to the spirit of Crane. I know some have issues with how he goes out in Begins, but really he’s not the physical confrontational type. In fact, he’s kind of a pansy nerd, which is accurate. Sure he’s attempted fighting on a few occasions in the books, but it’s more played as a joke than ever really effective. In fact, most Batman villains aren’t the physical fighting type, much like Joker. I nowhere near feel Heath Ledgers Joker was anywhere near the definitive version. I think that’s just an absurdist claim, but I do enjoy his portrayal. I could have used a lot more comic book nuances though, particularly more laughing and gags akin to the pencil trick. But Harvey Dent I really felt was wasted. I think Two-face, aesthetically, was ideally done. The scarring was just incredible! But I really think they rushed his character. In fact, I went into the film with just the natural assumption that he’d be scarred and we’d be left with a cliffhanger on his character, setting up the plot for a third film. I was letdown as I really only viewed him as the only other plot-driving villain left for the second sequel. You’ve got a massive array to chose from when it comes to Bat rogues, but how many really hold the emotional impact while also (at smallest) this City-wide threat that Ra’s, Joker, and Two-Face do that are also able to hold their own?

So really…I don’t think Batman Begins is better than Dark Knight, though it did achieve some things better. I just don’t think Dark Knight is so vastly superior. Not even remotely.

 

[Fresh Prince]

When the honey-moon period was over, people realized The Dark Knight was far less flawed than Batman Begins.

Agreed.

 

[Travesty]

When the honey-moon period was over, people realized The Dark Knight was far less flawed than Batman Begins.

Flawed as in how? Because from what I can tell, it is a MUCH more flawed film, when it concerns the Batman mythos, as compared to Begins.

 

[returntovoid]

What a novel concept! Let’s have Batman be the main character in a Batman film. Hah! In the span of the caped crusaders big screen history, it’s ironically refreshing to have a Bruce Wayne focused narrative. Batman Begins really stands out as being different from all the other villain-centered films. For that I really can appreciate it.

I don’t really think I have a preference between the two films, but I do think Begins got far more right, especially when concerned with Batman himself. I don’t care how repetitive the Wayne’s death gets, when you’re being called out to publically take your mask off and contemplating ending your vigilante run, you’re internally questioning why you do this to begin with. The lack of a family death flashback scene in Dark Knight, so much as some five-second one, was unacceptable. In fact, you could substitute Dark Knight Batman with pretty much any grim and gritty superhero vigilante and have pretty much the same exact story. The exclusion of Wayne manor, signature tools like the batarang, and his dank and gothic batcave being replaced by the uncharacteristically illuminated atmosphere of his temporary pad really made Batman almost unidentifiable outside of those pointy-ears. I did very much so enjoy the detective bits…but outside of that, Batman just seemed more like some extra with throat cancer who was thrown into some RoboCop-tech pseudo-batsuit. Nolan went from getting Batman the best he’s ever been in live-action to arguably, outside of Schumacher, the worst he’s ever been.

The literal atmosphere in the entire Dark Knight really was just disappointing. I’ve always felt that Gotham City is every bit as much the character as the people that make up its residents, but Nolan threw that to the wayside and gave us bland and boring background. Nothing more! The entire scope of the city was far too clean. By no means am I asking for Burton’s film noir artistry back, which I do love, but the gritty feel of the Narrows wouldn’t have hurt. Fact of the matter is that Dark Knights Gotham City looks like Chicago, not Gotham. It doesn’t even look like they tried.

For the villains, I’m sort of mixed. Liam’s Ducard/Ra’s Al Ghul was absolutely brilliant. I think he’s got some of the best dialogue ever written in any Batman film. Despite the alterations, everything seemed character accurate. The villainous scheme seemed very comic Ra’s oriented; you could see him doing something like this. It fit his persona very well. Scarecrow is really just a glorified extra, but I really enjoyed his role and also felt he remained faithful to the spirit of Crane. I know some have issues with how he goes out in Begins, but really he’s not the physical confrontational type. In fact, he’s kind of a pansy nerd, which is accurate. Sure he’s attempted fighting on a few occasions in the books, but it’s more played as a joke than ever really effective. In fact, most Batman villains aren’t the physical fighting type, much like Joker. I nowhere near feel Heath Ledgers Joker was anywhere near the definitive version. I think that’s just an absurdist claim, but I do enjoy his portrayal. I could have used a lot more comic book nuances though, particularly more laughing and gags akin to the pencil trick. But Harvey Dent I really felt was wasted. I think Two-face, aesthetically, was ideally done. The scarring was just incredible! But I really think they rushed his character. In fact, I went into the film with just the natural assumption that he’d be scarred and we’d be left with a cliffhanger on his character, setting up the plot for a third film. I was letdown as I really only viewed him as the only other plot-driving villain left for the second sequel. You’ve got a massive array to chose from when it comes to Bat rogues, but how many really hold the emotional impact while also (at smallest) this City-wide threat that Ra’s, Joker, and Two-Face do that are also able to hold their own?

So really…I don’t think Batman Begins is better than Dark Knight, though it did achieve some things better. I just don’t think Dark Knight is so vastly superior. Not even remotely.

You have written yet another well thought out post, MM.

I couldn't agree more except I actually preferred Batman Begins over The Dark Knight.

 

[Travesty]

I'm still for BB.

Though, I do love the trailers for TDK more.

Best. Trailers. Ever.

As far as trailers go, yes I agree, but as far as teasers trailers are concerned, I thought Begins had a better one. Although, I think TDK had a MUCH better marketing team, with the amazing/fun virals, to the official pics they released, to the Mike Engel broadcasts, etc etc. Those were some fun times.

 

[Aesop Rocks]

I love BB, I really do. It's such a wonderful film. I really don't have any complaints about the film, where-as TDK, I have a pretty nice list.

My favorite part about BB is probably his fully suited night out as Batman. I love that scene so much.

I really do love the villain choice for this film, IMO, Scarecrow was the perfect "starter" villain. Any other villain would have been to extreme for me, the "knows the material but doesn't read it too much" movie-goer. I mean really, in a sense, I love how they made the villains come out to be not just what they do to spite Batman but they have a higher agenda, like Crane and Ra's Al Ghul being discovered to be the same side, together to take down Gotham. I was happy with Cillian Murphy playing Crane, I know a few people who hated it but, like I said before, I'm the "knows who is who but that's it" movie-goer, I didn't care for the casting of who played who as long as they played it well. In BB, IMO. It was casted brilliantly. But sadly, like everyone else, at first I was mad, angry and almost betrayed when I first read that Heath Ledger was casted as The Joker in TDK. I was "Nothing will beat Jack's Joker" but, after seeing the early makeup concept picture, everything changed.

For me, BB is my favorite DC and probably my second favorite comic book film.

 

[bane]

I love BB, I really do. It's such a wonderful film. I really don't have any complaints about the film, where-as TDK, I have a pretty nice list.

My favorite part about BB is probably his fully suited night out as Batman. I love that scene so much.

I really do love the villain choice for this film, IMO, Scarecrow was the perfect "starter" villain. Any other villain would have been to extreme for me, the "knows the material but doesn't read it too much" movie-goer. I mean really, in a sense, I love how they made the villains come out to be not just what they do to spite Batman but they have a higher agenda, like Crane and Ra's Al Ghul being discovered to be the same side, together to take down Gotham. I was happy with Cillian Murphy playing Crane, I know a few people who hated it but, like I said before, I'm the "knows who is who but that's it" movie-goer, I didn't care for the casting of who played who as long as they played it well. In BB, IMO. It was casted brilliantly. But sadly, like everyone else, at first I was mad, angry and almost betrayed when I first read that Heath Ledger was casted as The Joker in TDK. I was "Nothing will beat Jack's Joker" but, after seeing the early makeup concept picture, everything changed.

For me, BB is my favorite DC and probably my second favorite comic book film.

As a Batman film, nothing beats BB for me, but as a timeless more entertaning and more convoluted movie nothing beats TDK for me, there just raw power i get from TDK that just can't be managed from any other super hero movie.Well expect from the first Superman, apart from the campy scenes which were just left there for a comic relief, IMO.

Edit:Crane always seemed to my as this unappreciated nerd who wanted to take revenge on all who didn't understand him through fear, so by my definition Murphy fitted very good with the image they were trying to represent.

 

[Punisher Rising]

I recently watched both BB and TDK together for the first time ever and had a great time. I love both movies, but I think BB is just a smidge better than TDK. Better atmosphere, I LOVE the cold and dark Gotham in this movie and wish it'd return for the third film, and the action for me was more thrilling and the portrayal of Bruce/Batman was a little better all in all. Both are amazing films, though.

 

[El Payaso]

Edit:Crane always seemed to my as this unappreciated nerd who wanted to take revenge on all who didn't understand him through fear, so by my definition Murphy fitted very good with the image they were trying to represent.

The problem with gis Scarecrow (other than the acting itself) is that, being a physical threat for the hero or not, he should be a worthy character. Okay, Lex Luthor can't beat Superman by himself, but he should be a threat or else he's just a worthless villiain. Having the entire movie for making Crane the Scarecrow just to be beaten by a girl was too much of a flop, and worse, with comedic (so to speak) elements in it.

 

[bane]

The problem with gis Scarecrow (other than the acting itself) is that, being a physical threat for the hero or not, he should be a worthy character. Okay, Lex Luthor can't beat Superman by himself, but he should be a threat or else he's just a worthless villiain. Having the entire movie for making Crane the Scarecrow just to be beaten by a girl was too much of a flop, and worse, with comedic (so to speak) elements in it.

I think Rachel zapping Scarecrow was a lame excuse for Batman not capturing him and Nolan bringing him for TDK, so for me no harm was done.Don't compare Lex with Crane, Lex can beat him in a blink of an eye...Crane can be treatfull only when his enemie is exposed to his fear gas, you can't expect physical threat from Scarecrow, he's a wuss.

 

[El Payaso]

I think Rachel zapping Scarecrow was a lame excuse for Batman not capturing him and Nolan bringing him for TDK, so for me no harm was done.

Well, as you said it was just a "lame" excuse to bring him back. Now, after seeing what happened when he was brought back, it's all a lame excuse for a lame cameo. Harm has been done.

It would have been so much better if he was shown on the horse, in his glory and then just dissapeared. The way he was beaten by Rachel felt to me like another bad joke in the movie.

Don't compare Lex with Crane, Lex can beat him in a blink of an eye...Crane can be treatfull only when his enemie is exposed to his fear gas,

Lex can beat Superman but only when having Kryptonite aroundd also, not by himself.

you can't expect physical threat from Scarecrow, he's a wuss.

I have seen it in comics though. Now if your villiain is going to be such a wuss that an average girl can beat him then it's simply not a worthy character.

 

[NotSoLongAgo]

Lets just leave it at this: Begins shouldn't be compared to TDK because although technically they're the in the same series, IMO they are two entirely different movies just with the factors of characters and the actors being what makes them similar. I still much prefer Begins now becoming more under-rated because TDK had a different approach on the Joker which I think sucks.

 

[Two-Face]

Great first post.

 

[Tacit Ronin]

Yes. Nobody can deny that BB and TDK are two vastly different films in terms of tone, story structure, production design, and cinematography. Unlike say, Spidy 1 and 2. They look and feel identical to each other.

 

[david icke]

Yes. Nobody can deny that BB and TDK are two vastly different films in terms of tone, story structure, production design, and cinematography. Unlike say, Spidy 1 and 2. They look and feel identical to each other.

Honestly, just for the cinematography, I think spider-man2 looks different to Spidey1, the colours look different, and they use a wider frame. I don't know if they used a different cinematographer, but it always looked different in that regard to me.