Batman Begins: The Thread

Message Bookmarked
Bookmark Removed
Not all messages are displayed: show all messages (1171 of them)
I think that people are glossing over the "Begins" part in the title. The movie's main plot goals are:

- establishing a credible origin for Batman in terms of moral center, skill set and equipment
- establishing Batman's allies within the system
- establishing the origins of Batman's Rogue's Gallery and escalating the criminal core of Gotham to its costumed insanity point

It delivers very well on all three, all the while telling you a complete story but leaving you wishing the second installment was just around the corner AND putting these plot points forward with well-realized characterization.

Also, playing the concept for fun kind of undercuts the inherent trauma of an 8-year-old watching a thug gun down his parents in a dark alley.

The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 20 June 2005 13:22 (eighteen years ago) link

i have seen it twice now and could not love it more

Jams Murphy (ystrickler), Monday, 20 June 2005 13:25 (eighteen years ago) link

same here! it's not without its flaws but the good stuff outweighs the weak stuff for me. believe me, if i like a superhero movie it is doing something right!

latebloomer: We kissy kiss in the rear view (latebloomer), Monday, 20 June 2005 13:34 (eighteen years ago) link

Tom - every fantasy concept ever could be played for chuckles, whether it involve a kid whose childhood trauma inspires him to dress up like a bat & fight crime, or a scarf-wielding time-traveler hopping across the cosmos in a box. That doesn't mean you should always go for the cheap laugh - see one Schumacher / Goldsmith Batfilled clusterfuck for what happens when everything goes BIFF BANG POW. A lot of the Batbuilding scenes in BB (buying the bits of the Batsuit, testing the merchandise, scouting out the Batcave, the Fox / Wayne exchanges re: basejumping and spelunking) definitely acknowledged the dubiousness of the enterprise (which is what "silliness" really means, I'm guessing - "this can't be real, and don't try to pass it off as such!") - I'm guessing the folks that have problems w/ this flick playing things relatively straight probably have ingrained prejudices against superheroes and comic books (or comic booky type things).

David R. (popshots75`), Monday, 20 June 2005 13:34 (eighteen years ago) link

the origin stuff where they figure out the practicalities of the costume stuff, the batmobile, ordering parts from hong kong etc is totally brilliant. LOVE that stuff. so enjoyable.

s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 20 June 2005 13:43 (eighteen years ago) link

And rather amusing seeing Wayne trying to justify why he needs all of the gear! : 'Deep sea diving, wasn't it...?'

I agree that the approach is difficult to pull off, but maybe I'm just feeling something of a residual fondness for the old TV series, which used to be on when i were a kid, so like. The very first Batman movie, from 1966 lest we forget, ought not to be considered a completely invalid approach to the franchise.

Yes, there were a few chuckle-worthy lines and bits (Wayne. "A guy who dresses up as a bat... has to have issues"), but there could have been more without detracting from the overall mood. Yet, it certainly stands as way better than "Batman Forever" and "Batman and Robin", must be said.

And I was certainly never suggesting they play the actual trauma for laughs, though I actually found that the Opera scene rather successfully tread that line between silly and dark.

Tom May (Tom May), Monday, 20 June 2005 13:46 (eighteen years ago) link

it's like a comic book, you know? there's no one definitive approach & the character is malleable enough (yet resistant to TOO much change) that different artists/writers/directors can have very different takes on the character. that's the real strength of the superhero comic book form, i think.

s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 20 June 2005 13:47 (eighteen years ago) link

The very first Batman movie, from 1966 lest we forget, ought not to be considered a completely invalid approach to the franchise.

(i was responding to this. i agree & i really reject the idea that nolan's batman invalidates anything!)

s1ocki (slutsky), Monday, 20 June 2005 13:50 (eighteen years ago) link

In some ways, the Nolan / Goyer version (and, hey, how about kudos for the contributions from the guy behind the Blade franchise?) actually validates the Batman mythos in toto. Granted, I like my Bat to be more serious than goofy (probably a 75/25 split), but I think the balance struck here between those two poles was the right balance.

And, yeah, s1ocki OTM re: the strength of comic characters (and "pulp" characters in general) being their malleability and adaptability. It's not dissimilar from how Shakespeare's plays can "survive" being performed in different costumes / settings (thinking more of stagings of plays circa WWII or in a corporate setting more than the Baz Lur. Romeo), or adapted to fit a certain story (cf. Ten Things...). (Hey, look at me going for the canonical comparison point to validate funny books! I'm such a goof.)

David R. (popshots75`), Monday, 20 June 2005 14:05 (eighteen years ago) link

PS Ned: you are completely, totally, utterly wrong about the death scene. XOXOXO.

I WUV YOU TOO.

I R pleased that you lurv the film, but I am also not surprised either. ;-)

Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 20 June 2005 14:08 (eighteen years ago) link

Saw it last night with the family, and LOVE IT. Unfortunately long and loud car chase aside, I don't have too many nits to pick. It vaulted the Exes and the Spiders and is right up there with the Incredibles as best superhero movie. (Accusations of damning with faint praise may follow, I don't give a fuck.) After the movie, over dinner, the family and I were agreeing that a QUIET Nolan Batman movie would be the scariest-best thing ever, not that it'll ever happen in Blockbusterville.

Rock Hardy (Rock Hardy), Monday, 20 June 2005 14:22 (eighteen years ago) link

Tom Wilkinson is by far the best thing about this movie.

DavidM, Monday, 20 June 2005 14:24 (eighteen years ago) link

it's very good. although I got a little restless at times but that always happens. the drug was the perfect plot device to make these costumes a thousand times scarier; batman's scary-ass black painted screaming face was terrifying. also, maybe one of the best things about the movie: a limited amount of time showing batman. really you only see him from head-to-toe in costume maybe twice.

kyle (akmonday), Monday, 20 June 2005 14:40 (eighteen years ago) link

The monster batman looked like an Uruk-Hai. There really were quite a lot of things in this that made me involuntarily grin like a mong for entire scenes at a time.


Somebody told me/I read somewhere that somebody was rumoured to be playing the Joker in the next one, but I can't remember who it was - anybody heard anything?

M Annoyman (Ferg), Monday, 20 June 2005 14:56 (eighteen years ago) link

i can't believe they'd try to invalidate the first burton like that.

kyle (akmonday), Monday, 20 June 2005 14:57 (eighteen years ago) link

Haha!

The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 20 June 2005 14:58 (eighteen years ago) link

Somebody told me/I read somewhere that somebody was rumoured to be playing the Joker in the next one, but I can't remember who it was - anybody heard anything?

Mark Hammill, astonishingly.

Huey (Huey), Monday, 20 June 2005 15:01 (eighteen years ago) link

It wouldn't invalidate a damn thing if Nolan & Co. did a Joker story. Addled adherence to continuity's already fisted the comic version of the Bat - fuck that sort of stick-in-muddiness in the flicks!

David R. (popshots75`), Monday, 20 June 2005 15:20 (eighteen years ago) link

Re: the Burton Batflick - "I can't believe they'd try to invalidate Adam West like that."

David R. (popshots75`), Monday, 20 June 2005 15:21 (eighteen years ago) link

Addled adherence to continuity's already fisted the comic version of the Bat

The goggles, they do nothing (because they weren't on Batman's ass)

The Ghost of QUE???? (Dan Perry), Monday, 20 June 2005 15:25 (eighteen years ago) link

We need the Robin buttplumbing pic!

David R. (popshots75`), Monday, 20 June 2005 15:26 (eighteen years ago) link

Mark Hammill, astonishingly.

That was it! Imagine!

M Annoyman (Ferg), Monday, 20 June 2005 15:32 (eighteen years ago) link

(Here you go, Daver.)

Hammill does the voice on the animated series and has kind of become the definitive Joker voice because of that. I kind of can't imagine him prancing around in a real-life Joker outfit, though.

The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 20 June 2005 15:33 (eighteen years ago) link

Far and away the best Batman movie. I have only the most minor of quibbles with it (and those were mostly w/the most "conventional" action movie elements - Neeson's unnecesssary long explanation at Wayne Manor, the fight scene on the monorail). Totally involving right off the bat (big ups for the no credits), great acting, great script, a fully realized visual world - I couldn't help thinking this was THE perfect encapsulation of the character. Hits so many high notes its unbelievable - the hallucinogen effects, tons of great noir tropes and dialogue, emphasis on believability"(or if not outright believability than at least a consistent internal logic). Seeing the Spiderman movie on endless re-runs this weekend I was struck by how much unbelievably shittier those films looked, not to mention how much worse the acting and scripts were. This is far and away the best "superhero" comic movie of recent years, its only real competition being the X-Men films.

Shakey Mo Collier, Monday, 20 June 2005 16:08 (eighteen years ago) link

spiderman tries to look like a comic book, though, colorwise, and on those terms it succeeds well (like the burton batman films, really). batman tries something totally different; to kind of insert some comic book elements into an action thriller, and it succeeds well also

kyle (akmonday), Monday, 20 June 2005 16:11 (eighteen years ago) link

I know the respective characters are served best by different approaches, but the Spiderman movie really didn't work for me. All that awful CGI, terrible Green Goblin outfit, Macy Gray, etc. It seems very clumsy and obvious to me, without ever delivering any real emotional impact. I hated it so much I haven't bothered with the second one... to me there wasn't enough of the alienation/teenage pathos, McGuire totally miscast, papered over with garishness and one liners. Really the only scene I liked was the last one with Osborn at the gravesite.

(also, both myself and the folks I went with wanted to see the Batman Begins movie again almost immediately - Spiderman I *did* see several times in rapid succession and each time I thought it got worse).

Shakey Mo Collier, Monday, 20 June 2005 16:21 (eighteen years ago) link

Spiderman 2 is an order of magnitude better than Spiderman.

The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 20 June 2005 16:22 (eighteen years ago) link

Has anyone cross-referenced this movie w/Batman:Year One comics? It seemed very faithful in parts, there were certain sequences I remember verbatim (summoning the bats, the joker card at the end, etc.) but apparently I don't have these comics anymore, so I couldn't go back to them for reference when I got home.

Shakey Mo Collier, Monday, 20 June 2005 16:22 (eighteen years ago) link

I know this is really pedantic, but did it bother anyone else that little Bruce Wayne looked nothing like young Christian Bale? (As evidenced from Empire of the Sun)I know it's hard to find convincing child actors, but this bugged me for some reason.

jocelyn (Jocelyn), Monday, 20 June 2005 18:41 (eighteen years ago) link

Hahaha my wife kept saying "WOW HE LOOKS JUST LIKE CHRISTIAN BALE IN 'EMPIRE OF THE SUN' WOW WOW"!

The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 20 June 2005 18:43 (eighteen years ago) link

Has anyone cross-referenced this movie w/Batman:Year One comics?

Read upthread. ;-)

Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 20 June 2005 18:45 (eighteen years ago) link

I thought the kid's resemblance was pretty good. Re: "Batman Year One," they HAD to have it open and propped up everytime Gary Oldman sat down in the makeup chair.

Rock Hardy (Rock Hardy), Monday, 20 June 2005 18:47 (eighteen years ago) link

Gary Oldman always amazes me with his ability to look not-like-himself in every movie. I'm not sure what he really looks like, anymore.

jocelyn (Jocelyn), Monday, 20 June 2005 18:49 (eighteen years ago) link

http://conspiration.ca/alien/alien_head.jpg

Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 20 June 2005 18:51 (eighteen years ago) link

The Falcone angle is quite a bit different, Flass in the comic is like a 6'4" Swede-American; the film borrows quite a few things from B:YO, and if it does not keep with the actual details (Joker was poisoning the water supply in the book, and w/o any overt exposition about mask esalation (mascalation?)), it is faithful to the tone.

jocelyn, he looks like Jim Gordon!

Leeeeee (Leee), Monday, 20 June 2005 18:51 (eighteen years ago) link

See this film on IMAX. See this film on IMAX

Jeff-PTTL (Jeff), Monday, 20 June 2005 19:32 (eighteen years ago) link

I must agree with that assessment.

Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 20 June 2005 19:33 (eighteen years ago) link

"Flass in the comic is like a 6'4" Swede-American"

ahhh - that's right, that was nagging at my brain. Cuz movie's Flass = comics' Harvey Bullock.

Shakey Mo Collier, Monday, 20 June 2005 19:38 (eighteen years ago) link

Newsflash: Rex Reed is catty! Also, we're morons.

David R. (popshots75`), Monday, 20 June 2005 20:11 (eighteen years ago) link

"young sidekick-cum-roommate-cum-jailbait Robin"

Iamsomature (Jocelyn), Monday, 20 June 2005 20:14 (eighteen years ago) link

"This movie goes to elaborate means to actually provide a few of the answers we’ve all been waiting for. Nothing about the relationship between Batman and his adoring young sidekick-cum-roommate-cum-jailbait Robin... "

in other words, Rex Reed is gay and he's angry that this movie didn't provide any wanking material.

x-x-x-post godDAMMIT!

Shakey Mo Collier, Monday, 20 June 2005 20:15 (eighteen years ago) link

Wow. Rex Reed is a gigantic mouth-breathing idiot.

(xpost: Judging by what my straight female and gay male frineds have been saying, Christian Bale sans shirt = primo wanking material.)

The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 20 June 2005 20:16 (eighteen years ago) link

hmm that's true - maybe Rex just needs a "bottom" to identify with.

Shakey Mo Collier, Monday, 20 June 2005 20:18 (eighteen years ago) link

Translation: Rex Reed is a chickenhawk.

The Ghost of Dan Perry (Dan Perry), Monday, 20 June 2005 20:19 (eighteen years ago) link

Catty or jealous?

Ned Raggett (Ned), Monday, 20 June 2005 21:06 (eighteen years ago) link

mark hammill played some kind of archvillian in the short-lived "flash" tv series. does anyone else remember the short-lived "flash" tv series?

Amateur(ist) (Amateur(ist)), Monday, 20 June 2005 21:07 (eighteen years ago) link

the 100lbs claim does seem a bit dubious, but the blogger is not taking into account that Bale was coming back from already being quite a bit *underweight* for his role in the Machinist when he undertook this "regimen".

That Rex Reed review reads like he was almost watching a completely different movie from the one I saw.

(I remember the Flash TV series - it sucked, but Mark Hammill had a wacky two-toned costume... shit, I forget who he was, off to IMDB).

Shakey Mo Collier, Monday, 20 June 2005 21:09 (eighteen years ago) link

Ah yes, the Trickster. Sub-Riddler character.

Shakey Mo Collier, Monday, 20 June 2005 21:11 (eighteen years ago) link

Robert Crumb was awesome in this movie.

Semaphore Burns (nordicskilla), Monday, 20 June 2005 21:11 (eighteen years ago) link

Christian Bale, Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman have signed to star in a
second "Batman" movie, but love interest Katie Holmes has been dropped.
Movie bosses are thrilled with the response to "Batman Begins" -- it took
$46.9 million in its first weekend at the US box office -- and have
snapped up the film's stars for a sequel.

Bale as Batman was the first to put pen to paper, followed by Caine as
butler Alfred and Freeman as Bruce Wayne's business associate Lucius Fox.

But Holmes won't reprise her role as district attorney Rachel Dawes --
reportedly because Warner Bros. is angry her engagement to Tom Cruise has
stolen media attention away from the movie.

A source tells Page Six, "Everyone is in agreement that the movie's
strength is with Christian Bale, Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman."

Adding of Holmes, "She won't be in the sequel ... the next romantic
interest will be a much stronger actress.

"Warner is happy that people are now focusing on who'll be playing the
Joker rather than Katie and Tom."

Shakey Mo Collier, Monday, 20 June 2005 22:38 (eighteen years ago) link


You must be logged in to post. Please either login here, or if you are not registered, you may register here.