Batman Begins (saw it)

Just saw it on DVD.

Well.... umm... yawn.

The fight scenes really bug me... no sense of fluidity. Wham bam sock. Villains are unconscious. No sense of choreography. Reminds me of the battle scenes in "Masters and Commanders": Lots of fuzzy, blurred bodies and shakey cam... and suddenly, it's over, with the good guys still standing, with no sense of what happened and how they won.

Spiderman 2 on the other hand...

... the battles are bloody exciting... like the way the comic book is...
 
I will say batman begins is among if not the best supermovie ever made.

They totaly captured batman as I imagine him when i grew up. The cast, direction, story and music are all great.

They didnt rely on cgi to tell the story. The drama were fine by itself.

And Stabwound!
As for the fighting scenes. I prefer the fight scenes that dont rely on alot of choeagrafy and cg. Watch the movie 40 times in a row and you will se what i mean. ;)

And as for the EIII ROTS bashing. I think that the movie starts weak and then just gets better and better. The final scenes are among the best that has been done in the star wars saga.
 
stabwound said:
Just saw it on DVD.

Well.... umm... yawn.

The fight scenes really bug me... no sense of fluidity. Wham bam sock. Villains are unconscious. No sense of choreography. Reminds me of the battle scenes in "Masters and Commanders": Lots of fuzzy, blurred bodies and shakey cam... and suddenly, it's over, with the good guys still standing, with no sense of what happened and how they won.

Spiderman 2 on the other hand...

... the battles are bloody exciting... like the way the comic book is...
Click to expand...

Ummm...even in tone the comics are completely different, Batman and Spider-Man that is. I think Batman Begins was true to the spirit and tone of its comic origins as was Spider-Man. I wouldn't expect anything visually to be similar between the two, even the fight choreography. I've heard some griping about the choreography, but it hardly ruins the movie or detracts from a superbly told story.

-Robert
 
The story isn't that superb -- they really hacked Ra's Al Ghul and Scarecrow is a one-dimensional character.

I think what people love about this flick is the tone. My favorite part of it was Bale as Bruce Wayne -- they nailed that.
 
they really hacked Ra's Al Ghul
Click to expand...

They did a really good job adapting Ra's to the screen, and did a great job setting up the character. Now if Ra's never appears in a Nolan Batman film again, then it would be a hack job. IMO, the jury's still out on that one.
 
krestofre said:
They did a really good job adapting Ra's to the screen, and did a great job setting up the character. Now if Ra's never appears in a Nolan Batman film again, then it would be a hack job. IMO, the jury's still out on that one.
Click to expand...

IMO, it would have been truer to the comics if Bruce had tried to save Ra's in the first act, but thought Ra's had died. With his Lazarus Pits, Ra's Al Ghul has the fountain of youth and Nolan didn't use it at all. Nolan's bright idea was the old switcheroo, and for the record, Ken Watanabe would have made a cooler Ra's.

I'm such a comic nerd.
 
uhrgl said:
The story isn't that superb -- they really hacked Ra's Al Ghul and Scarecrow is a one-dimensional character.

I think what people love about this flick is the tone. My favorite part of it was Bale as Bruce Wayne -- they nailed that.
Click to expand...

I completely disagree. Yeah they changed Ra's character around a bit, which didn't bother me, and I hardly think the scarecrow was so much as one dimensional as he was introduced. A lot of comic characters are just that, one dimesional. They are bad and that's all there is to them.

The tone of the film is awesome. There's no denying its style. But the story is top notch as well and it's told well. Whether or not its 100% true to the comics is another story, but the writing and development is all there.

-Robert
 
Ought2bCommitted said:
I completely disagree. Yeah they changed Ra's character around a bit, which didn't bother me, and I hardly think the scarecrow was so much as one dimensional as he was introduced. A lot of comic characters are just that, one dimesional. They are bad and that's all there is to them.

The tone of the film is awesome. There's no denying its style. But the story is top notch as well and it's told well. Whether or not its 100% true to the comics is another story, but the writing and development is all there.

-Robert
Click to expand...

You're hedging on Scarecrow, and "a lot of comic characters are just bad" is a blanket statement that doesn't mean much.

I don't think the story is top-notch. If you look at just the plot elements, I don't think it's much different than Burton's Batman -- villain(s) seeks to poison Gotham and the only hope is the mysterious new hero -- except Nolan extended Batman's origin and threw out the villains' origins.
 
I liked it. I liked it as much as Burton's. It's even more faithful to the comic than Burton's.

But no one seems to want to emphasize Batman's detective skills, mostly only his fighting.
 
I'm not hedging on Scarecrow. I didn't find him one dimensional. And yea, a lot of villains are just bad...we don't need to know why or how. It's scarier and more effective that way. I thought Scarecrow's treatment was true to the comic and we really didn't to make the Batman movies all about the villains...again. Really, Burton's original should have been called "Joker".

Seriously, aren't that what a great number superhero movies are about? An evil arch enemy out to destroy the city, the super hero or both? What makes the plot interesting to be used over and over again is the variety of the villains and the test of the heroes.

I thought overall Nolan and co. stayed true to the spirit of the comics and the character and delivered a stunning epic. It's cool to disagree.
 
David Jimerson said:
I liked it. I liked it as much as Burton's. It's even more faithful to the comic than Burton's.

But no one seems to want to emphasize Batman's detective skills, mostly only his fighting.
Click to expand...

Yeah that seems to have disappeared over the years. Most people forget Batman was originally a detective comic.
 
Ought2bCommitted said:
Seriously, aren't that what a great number superhero movies are about? An evil arch enemy out to destroy the city, the super hero or both?
Click to expand...

It is cool to disagree, but discourse is easier when you speak with examples and not generalities.

Begins is a great Batman movie, but I don't think it's as pitch perfect as the first Superman or Spider-man flicks.

The fact that Bruce isn't a detective bothered me too.
 
I don't think it's much different than Burton's Batman -- villain(s) seeks to poison Gotham and the only hope is the mysterious new hero
Click to expand...

I'll agree there.

Rachel Dawes and Vickie Vale are also basically the same. Even what happens to them in the story. Fall in love with Bruce. Meet Bad Guy. Go for a ride in the Batmobile. Find out who Batman really is. Leave.
 
krestofre said:
I'll agree there.

Rachel Dawes and Vickie Vale are also basically the same. Even what happens to them in the story. Fall in love with Bruce. Meet Bad Guy. Go for a ride in the Batmobile. Find out who Batman really is. Leave.
Click to expand...

Yup. But isn't that the romantic foil's role in almost all the comics...Lois Lane in Superman ... Mary Jane in Spider-Man....

I liked the Spider-Man films a lot, but I won't deny they are nearly carbon copies of each other. Their structure is the same and their stories are ultimately about villains out to get Spider-Man...Mary Jane gets in trouble...Spidey comes to the rescue. Doesn't diminish how cool they are or how much fun, but ultimately that's the standard structure for superhero movies...even Superman.
 
I didn't mind the lack of exposition/development on Scarecrow. For me, I didn't care how he became who he was, which really he ultimately becomes the Scarecrow by the end of the film... he exists prior to Bruce coming back to Gotham and his story in BB only really matters in how it affects Batman and moves the plot itself along.

In that respect, really I thought they did enough with him. He gets away and really BB can be seen as the origin of the Scarecrow as well since now we know how he became the Scarecrow.

I didn't mind that Ra was altered for the movie. The Joker was altered for the original Batman too. The changes would only bother me if they for example made the Joker a good guy. I didn't feel the changes re-wrote the character so much as reinterpretted for lack of a better explanation for what I think. Ultimately I think it served their story.
 
Alright

Numerous persons told me I needed to go check this after my take that I usually do not dig Superhero films and I vehemently hat Burtons and the subsequent sequels. I watched this one tonight...........

Wow. I loved it. This was Batman. This felt plausible. What a cast. Great.

4 out of 5 Bat Stars
 
We just saw this last night. Great movie. Too bad it doesn't leave much room to add another film starring Bale. I thought he was the perfect Batman. That gritty, angry, mean streak. Awesome.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top