BATMAN BEGINS discussion (No Spoilers) - Page 10

Most new films are released on DVD in about five months, regardless of their box office performance. How is that a prediction or in any way indictative of BATMAN BEGINS' potential failure? Given the state of video piracy and marketing costs, I'm sure the studios would sell the DVD in the lobby of the theater on your way out if they could.

I'm sure you'll be gone from these boards long before BATMAN BEGINS is out of theaters. Perhaps before it's even in theaters at the rate you're going.

Man this thread got derailed.

Jon_Snow. Jesus. You need to temper your expectations. Just because one reviewer says something like that, doesn't make it so, and a again, why argue with people who have seen it when you haven't seen it yourself? Chill.

Anim8r, gone. Thank God. What an ass. Why is there this need to pit movies against each other? I don't get it.

God, as someone who is hyped for WOTW this guy is an embarassment.
Batman Begins will do just fine, thank you, probably better then fine. I am one of those who is a little skeptical of how big a hit it will be, but it will do 200 Mill easy, probably end up in the 250-300 Million zone.
And WOTW will probably be out in DVD at the same time as "Batman", give or take a couple of weeks.
Piece of advice, pal: Don't talk about stuff you know nothing about.

who cares, I think we've all been watching movies to know that just because a movie doesn't make as much money as the next one doesn't mean it's a better movie. God, I hope you don't pick your music with that way of thinking. "You know what Faith No More was a good band, but Linkin park sells a lot more C.D.'s, I'll think I'll listen to them". Seems silly doesn't it?

Haven't seen the movie. Hope it's good.

For what it's worth, Greg Rucka - probably my favorite comic book writer / favorite Batman writer (with the possible exception of Frank) / an opinion I respect (not that I don't respect other opinions / someone I see as a straight shooter, considers it the best Batman adaptation and a "great" film...

http://www.hwforums.com/2151/messages/2625.html

Again, for what it's worth. Had Rucka come out against this, I would have been worried. Now I trust that it will be good.

Yay! I just wont free tix to Batman B. early screening from Joblo! Heheh. Hope it rules.

Lucky sumbitch!

Can I be your guest?

Sounds like you've already decided.

The need to torpedo any review in this thread that isn't dripping with fanboy semen is oh, so Internet.

Ouch. That hurt....

Is your username and sig from a role playing game you're in or something?

He got it from one of the books in the Song of Ice and Fire series.

I loved the way you reviewed the film on the site. I now have to sit back and wait almost a whole month before this is released here. I'm so jealous, everybody - ALL OF YOU - who get to see this before me can kiss my ass... well, not really but whoever decided that the Swedish audience could wait a month or so is officially on my shit list.

"I'm mad as hell, and I'm not gonna take it any more."

as part of their marketing campaign for Batman Begins Warner Brothers brought in a full-size and fully functional replica of the new Batmobile for public viewing. the vehicle was driven around downtown earlier this week and is now parked in the Eaton Centre. i took some digital photographs and posted them over at http://www.hinjang.com/bb/

Like others, I saw the movie on Thursday. Just to get back to the "which comic book adapations do you rank higher than BATMAN BEGINS?" question:

SUPERMAN THE MOVIE
SPIDER-MAN 2
X-MEN 2
AMERICAN SPLENDOR

I agree with most of the mixed reviews I've read so far, here and elsewhere. The first half works wonderfully, especially as a Schumacher pallet-cleanser. It's epic yet grounded, serious yet entertaining. Bruce's coming of age was fascinating to me. Basically, as soon Bruce becomes Batman, the thing starts falling apart. And once the third act kicks in, it almost becomes laughable, reeking of Goyer's stink. Good thing the movie ends on such a strong, crowd-pleasing note, I guess.

I hopefully Nolan will really get things right in the second film, as Raimi and Singer did with theirs.

The first half works wonderfully
In many ways I think it could be compared to the first X-Men (only better because Nolan has a lot more visual flair than Singer) or the first Spidey (only not quite as good): an excellent start that lays the ground for an even better sequel.


I've basically only skimmed over the thread, not wanting to read any spoilers, but considering how everyone appears to hail the first half of the film, its characterization and true emotional involvement, while agreeing the final act is its ruin, it seems the movie has to fall substantially to be placed beneath the first Spiderman or derisory X-Men movie. Neither of those franchises, in their first outings at least, attained a veritable affecting level of feeling.


I don't know, a 'Batman walks into a bar' scene like in the French Connection could be kind of fun.

Has any comic done Batman as a private dick? In an elseworlds or something?

Full Circle, Prey, and I believe some of the Zero Hour post Knightfall stories had similar scenes.


He's always had the detective side. From the animated series to the comics (great take on it in THE LONG HALLOWEEN) to the Adam West series (ok, it was silly, but he still had the bat-computer) to his first appearance in Detective Comics.

I disagree, in Loeb's writing everyone seems to be lacking in the common sense department, to make the story stretch out over a dozen issues Batman has to be dumbed down extensively.

Fanboys have to live in a state of constanly being hyped up about something. They move from One Big Thing to the next.

Which is fine, but it does get annoyning when they trash anybody who disagrees with them about a movie.

So the consensus of reviews is that the first half of Batman Begins is great,but it goes downhill in the second half?

I'd say the consensus thus far (outside of the Chud critics that is) is that Begins is fantastic... 86% and counting on Rottentomatoes.com. Will probably end up in the 90's...

And yes, many critics are calling it perhaps the best comic adaptation ever... not my words (I haven't seen it yet) but theirs....

It's pulling in 50% (and 5/10) from RT's Cream of the Crop. Not saying their reviews are more authoritative, but it's hard to maintain the myth of critical consensus when the most widely-read reviewers are very lukewarm.

Once again, WHO is calling this the best comic adaptation ever? I see one blurb on RT who claims it is "the best studio film so far this year and candidate for The Best Comic Book Movie Ever" (Andy Klein, LA Citybeat). That's one guy. Shall we proclaim it the Best Comic Book Movie Ever on the plausible endorsement of one website reviewer?

I seem to remember around the time the script leaked that every time a news bulletin about this film broke, the writer just HAD to add his (mostly unwelcome and unrelated) two cents about "how stupid the big twist at the end was." It's very possible that Devin just didn't want to like this film (which seems to be what happened with Star Wars Episode III) and is now desperately lashing out at everyone in a desperate attempt to convince others to see things his way. It's really rather irritating, and a bit sad.

Oh and if you find that a tad bitter... Devin and Co. led me to spend money on HGTTG. They deserve worse than I can give.

Is it that your personal identities are so weak that you feel this threatened by someone not liking something? Not liking something you haven't even seen, mind you.

I liked fanboys better when they automatically hated everything that came out.

So how did you guys do that tag-team review (Solid, BTW)?

You're gonna love this

http://chud.com/reviews/3347

HGTTG?

Ebert is giving it 4 stars, and says it's one of the best comic book movies ever made. Can't get much more "Cream of the Crop" than ol' Roger.

Yeah, I expect the tomato rating to be in the high 80's, and the Cream of the Crop rating to be fresh in the end.

He does? Where? Jesus, do I need the special decoder ring to see this hidden "best comic movie" message sprinkled through all the reviewers' columns?

I'm glad he liked it, though.

I saw it at a preview last night. Overall I liked it quite a bit, although it does have problems, particularly in the third act.

To me, the thing that made it work was the acting. Bale especially. He really does play an angry Batman, right down to body language, and that works well with the material. Yeah his Batman voice is a bit variable, but that's the only quibble I had with his performance.

With the exception of Holmes, I think all of the supporting actors rise above their material. Caine is the only character that really appears to be written with more than two dimensions. I'd really like to see more of Cillian Murphy as the Scarecrow, too bad he went out in such a whimper. Katie Holmes isn't bad, but she doesn't rise above the script. She's more effective as a young idealist and Bruce's conscience than she is as any kind of love interest.

There are two standout action sequences, the warehouse and Batmobile chase, and a good one involving the final Ducard training fight with a shifting environment. The rest are mainly just a blur of too tightly shot and edited fight scenes. The climax definitely suffers from big action movie / blockbuster cliche's. The final confrontation between Ra's and Batman lacks the impact it should have due to the too tight shooting, it's not a confrontation it's just a blur.

Overall, I think it's a good film, but it needed a better main villain and climax to be a great action adventure film. It does work as a character study though.

What i didnt like:

[spoiler]
- The close up fights sequences. We can't see anything. I do not agree that it's filmed that on purpose to show how Batman fights are tights and stuff. Yeah, on the dock it was filmed that way to show how fast he was and stuffs, but in the prison, it wasn't batman fightin it was Bruce and it was still filmed the same way.

- Batman's over the top voice. Tho, one scene kinda worked.

- Some of the Scarecow visual effects are a bit cheap.

- Alot of lame jokes that no on laughed at, and feels out of places.

- Gordon was cool then became generic sidekick.

- Katie is not strong enough, and a bit young.

- And why did Bat have to kill so many people during the car chase?
[/spoiler]

I'd prefer to see more Batcuve learning. It would've been cool to see Batman beginner become more experienced towards the movie. A full movie on his original and becoming. So they could remove the big finale and save it for something smaller.

I loved the post-ending tho

Hey i think the original BatKeanton never spoke? Or only two words.

Fanboys have always been manic depressives. Either a film is going to the greatest thing since "Citizen Kane" or it's a piece of shit. Nothing in between with a lot of them.
But I find it incredible that they invest such strong emotional feelings about a film that Very Few of them have seen.

Wow, guys, have'nt you picked it up that Devin loves to annoy the fanboys?
And I have to admit that the fanboys make such beautiful targets a lot of time.
IMHO Devin overdoes it to the point where I think at times he is doing shtick.
But every geek page needs somebody like Devin ,otherwise you have AICN.
I disagree with Devin a lot, but the guy serves a useful purpose on a geek oreinted site like this as Devil's advocate.

I don't play Devil's Advocate.

Every single one of Devin's problems with this film are perfectly valid. It's a flawed movie, though the flaws come perhaps from trying too hard rather than not trying enough. I liked it a lot, and could let a lot of the clunkier stuff pass.

Your mileage may vary as to how they effect your viewing, but nothing Devin said in his review is misplaced.

I don't see how it's possible to read Devin's review and come away thinking he's pulling this from the air. You can disagree (once you see the movie, logically), but I think it's clear his beefs are coming from a place of Devin-logic, and not Devin-assholery.

Indeed. Devin IS a provocateur, to be sure, but this is just a review, not nerdbait. He substantiates his every point, and they've been debated at length with other people who felt somewhat differently than he did. I don't see how people could write off his review as some attempt to rile up fanboys.

His comments on the board, maybe. The review, no.

Once, just once, it would be nice to have a discussion thread that focuses on a movie, and not on Devin's review of the movie.

He should write one under a different name just to see what kind of reaction it generates.

Davin E. Frachy.

Got a chance to see it last night, my thoughts.

Acting: the acting was tremendous throughout. All the actors seemed perfectly suited for their characters, thus making all the characters extremely believable. The one exception to this was Katie Holmes, who was just ok in her role....just didn't seem as perfect a casting job as everything else.

Directing: Christopher Nolan continues to impress me with everything he does. The cinematography was terrific, the costumes and scenery looked good. I really liked the style he took with this. The movie was very dark like the first two, but kept an even more creepier, fantastical element then some of the earlier ones.

I really liked the rudiemtary nature of Batman's "gear", it was great to see how he came to develop all his weapons and costume. My one complaint is one that others in this thread have made, the action/fighting scenes were really close up and very jumpy in their cuts. You rarely saw Batman actually fighting, just lots of flash and then people going down. Perhaps to convey Batman's stealth nature, but it was a little too much at some points.

Overall, easily the best Batman movie, and one of the best films I've seen in the theater in a long time.

Nah, you only need a little reading comprehension.

I kid. Okay, so he doesn't explicitly say it in the review, but come on, he gave it 4 stars. How many comic book movies has he given 4 stars? Right there, BB qualifies as "one of the best" in his eyes. Wouldn't you agree?

I read the script, and saw the thing at an employee screening for the AMC 24 Neshaminy theatre, thanks very much.

Anything more to add?

Yeah... if you work in a theatre, why are you bitter at Devin for having to pay to see Hitchhiker's?

Oh and Lucius Fox's contribution to the solution was a nice little way of showing that BATMAN IS HUMAN AND NOT A PERFECT HERO BY ANY MEANS.

Batman's character, TO HIS CORE, is a *REACTOR* to events around him.

WHY DID HE PUT ON THE CAPE AND COWL IN THE FIRST PLACE? In REACTION to his parents' death. The act of crimefighting is in and of itself a reaction to people in the City of Gotham who cannot function insociety. Their chaotic actions are rebuffed by a Champion of Order (Batman) but to do this he MUST react to their moves and plan his countermoves. After all, he cannot know to wear re-breathers before he arrests that scraggly college professor, until that professor becomes the Scarecrow and makes Batman taste his Fear Gas. Batman must make mistakes, and be beaten before he can become better. he must, like any great chess player, anticipate the counter moves of his enemy. That's way almost every great Batman villain origin story has a three act premise:

1. Batman attacks the baddie as he always does before being swept aside by the baddie's "gift/curse" (Riddler's puzzles; Freeze's ice gun; Mad Hatter's mind control; KGBeast's complete badassery).

2. Batman engages the baddie again, and fights him to a standstill. The baddie escapes, but not before Batman notices something which could be exploited into a critical weakness.

3. Batman prepares a trap. When he engages the anatagonist he is ready and able to exploit the weakness.

Pathos is generated based on:

1. Watching the Batman's (and Gotham's) growth in overcoming a new agent of chaos.

2. Emphathizing with an antagonist whose cause sometimes seems superficially just (Freeze, Hatter, Ivy, Al-Ghul, Two-Face), be beaten by true, divine, justice.

This movie employs a Batman who grows and learns while employing every resource in doing so, matched against an adversary who only wants TO MAKE THE WORLD A BETTER PLACE. It succeeds wildly, and fits right into the canon of great Batman given to use since 1939.

All of this went over Devin's head. This is why Devin's review angers me: not because I feel threatened that he didn't like it. But that someone who so clearly does not understand WHAT MAKES BATMAN WORK is given a place of prominence to show off how wrong he is.

Threatened? Puh-leeeze.

Oh I COULD HAVE SEEN IT FOR FREE. But I believed in that one enough to BUY TICKETS ANYWAY. I read every bulletin. Every piece of news. Watched every trailer.

I WANTED TO GIVE IT MY MONEY.

And I got hosed.

The action in this thing was embarrassing. There was a scene in which batman pummels about 8 guys and all you see is him running in circles and then the clatter of feet. Every action scene felt like it couldn't wait to end or cut to something else. Shaky cam's bigger, less competent brother came out to shoot this one and it's just headache inducing to watch. In most of batman's action sequences, all you can really make out is shadows and it drags the movie down big time.

I will echo that everything else is great. Really great, but this is a comic book movie that requires combat action that should be clear and exciting. This movie's fights scenes are neither and despite it's great characterization, it suffers greatly from its poorly planned filmed combat.

At times, I wish I could sit next to a film director so I can slap him for making such great decisions one moment and then piss poor ones the next. Shaky cam should be banned from film making I'd say to ol chris or at least learn how to use it.

This will be so much better than the last two. The samurai bits in the trailer looked awesome.

I was just wondering was there a thread where people talked about the actual movie? I miss the pre-release, post-release threads.

`missed it. I appreciate it.