http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/thr/reviews/review_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000946415
Like most reviews this rave (and the rave at AICN) really doesn't mean anything but at least it allows one to walk into the theater somewhat less ashamedly.

I have no intention of walking into the theater "ashamedly";) . I've been defending this film's approach to the Batman mythos to anyone who would listen for nearly a year now. The hiring of Nolan, the script by Goyer, and the outstanding casting in this film - especially of Christian Bale as Bruce Wayne/Batman were enough to let me know that this is finally the Batman movie I have always wanted to see. I don't know how big a hit it will be - the plot structure requires patience on the part of the viewer and that could well limit it's box-office appeal - but whether it's an absolute monster or does more modest numbers - "Batman Begins" finally gives us a movie that gets the character and mythos of Batman right - dramatically, thematically, and viscerally - Bat-Tank, Bat-Armor, and all.

I have been against it basically because of the rubber suit AGAIN....Sandy Collera PROVED that a Batman spandex suit can look quite good on celluoid.

I have been against it basically because of the rubber suit AGAIN....Sandy Collera PROVED that a Batman spandex suit can look quite good on celluoid.

Here's Sandy Collora's review of "Batman Begins":


"Well comic fans, I just saw Batman Begins. First off, as most of you know, I’m a huge Bat-squid so I’m definitely not going to start this review like so many others, where people say stuff like, “I wasn’t really sure about this movie...”, because to be blatantly honest, aside from the fact that it’s a Batman movie, given the talent behind this production, how could I NOT go into it thinking it wasn’t going to be fantastic. Granted, I had my issues with the Batsuit and the car, but from what I’ve seen, there’s been nothing but positive feedback regarding everything from the casting to the trailers and previews, and I’m assuming that precedent will follow for reviews of the film as well. Or, at least this one will...

I absolutely LOVED it.

And so will every other Batman fan on the planet, trust me. This film is any hardcore Bat fan’s wet dream come true... It really is the serious, dark, violent, scary, Batman film we’ve always wanted to see, and I’ll give you my reasons why...

Warner Brothers finally made the decision to take the Batman franchise in a drastically different direction than the last two attempts. The hiring of director Christopher Nolan was the first indication of this. “Memento” was exceptional, and I knew Nolan’s dark, gritty, artistic style would do justice to the caped crusader if the powers that be let him do his thing. You can tell they “governed” certain things here and there, I mean c’mon, it’s a 150 million dollar movie, but from what I was told, Nolan pretty much had the freedom to do what he wanted, which firstly became obvious when he basically re-wrote the script. The draft that I read last year, written by David Goyer, is a little different, especially dialogue wise, from the film I just saw.

Nolan simply owns this movie. His choices in tone, palette, composition, pacing, editing, and of course, casting, are impeccable.

The performances are phenomenal. Christian Bale is by far, the best Batman we’ve seen to date. His physicality, presence, and overall demeanor, both as Bruce Wayne and the Dark Knight, really brought the subtleties that embody the true essence of the Batman to life in this movie. I believe he was destined to play this part, since both “American Psycho” and more recently, “Equilibrium”, echoed shadows of both sides of the character he plays in this movie. I remember when those films were released, there were people on the internet saying that Bale would be a great Batman/Bruce Wayne, so I’m pretty sure audiences are going to love his performance. He even does some funky things with his voice as Batman that at first seemed odd, but then you realize he’s doing it to disguise his voice. Heard outside the context of the film, it could be misconstrued as Bale perhaps “trying too hard to be tough”, but it works in the film.

Michael Caine is another real standout. I’m guessing it’s because of the nature of the writing, with it being an origin story, so the character of Alfred plays a much larger and thus much more significant role in the film. It’s great to see Alfred fleshed out a bit in this movie and do things other than drive Bruce around, fetch tea and deliver obvious, lead in dialogue to get Batman to say something funny or clever. The scenes where Bruce and Alfred are trying to figure out how to retro-fit the military body armor and various other gadgets to create the Batman costume, are very well done. It’s almost like seeing the birth of the character, which is very, very cool.

Both Morgan Freeman and Gary Oldman as well, turn in stellar performances as Lucius Fox and James Gordon, respectively. Some of my favorite moments in the film are the exchanges between Freeman and Bale. I wish both of these characters had more screen time, particularly Gordon, but I’m sure the sequels will deliver that.

Liam Neeson, Ken Watanabe, and Cillian Murphy are also very good. I really feel that a big part of why this movie is so good, is the incredible group of actors Nolan has pulled together here... Katie Holmes, I could have taken or left. She wasn’t horrible, but she definitely didn’t measure up to the great performances around her, and for some odd reason, to me, just didn’t seem to “fit” in the movie.

The cinematography is in a word, brilliant.

It was definitely interesting to see choices made for the color palette of the film that were so incongruent to the subject matter. The usual cooler, drab, grays and blues of Gotham city gave way to beautiful, golden, warm earth tones that brought a different, and more realistic look to the film.

This movie, much like the Dark Knight himself, is very pragmatic. Almost too much so... It’s so reality based and everything about Batman is explained in so much detail, that there’s really nothing left to the imagination of the viewer. This serves the film on many levels, but I feel might hinder it as well for people who like their brand of superhero flick with a little bit of the unknown, or X-factor, if you will.

Chances are, that most, if not all of you who are reading this, know Batman’s origin and why he becomes who he is and does what he does. The general moviegoing public does not. Though it would have been nice to see this movie start with Batman already existing and chasing down one of his arch villains, that’s not what the name of this movie implies. However, I think it was smart for Warner Brothers to make an origin movie; it’s going to set up the sequels quite nicely and give the audience the knowledge and background on the character that was previously known only to the fans and readers of the comics only. Following in what was called by a WB executive, “The Spiderman Model”, WB wants to use this movie to set up two more sequels, which from what I’ve heard, are going to be more action oriented.

If you watch this film for what it’s intended to be, which judging just by the title alone, is kind of a set up for more sequels to follow, very much like the first Spider-Man movie, you’ll really dig it. It does everything a good movie should do; it develops very interesting and believable characters, puts them in life threatening and life changing predicaments and ends leaving you wanting more.

What’s going to be really interesting to see, is if kids and people who are generally not hardcore Batman fans are going to be able to sit through the first hour of this movie without being... Bored. I certainly wasn’t, because I have an interest in this character and his story, but for the average person who’s going into Batman Begins expecting a non stop action movie, I’m afraid what they’re going to get, albeit engaging and very well done, is something quite different. Don’t get me wrong; the action sequences in this film are amazing, especially the stuff with the car. There’s just not as much of it as you would expect in a superhero flick, because Batman doesn’t show up until halfway through the movie. The film is more of an intellectual, psychological character study, and a brilliant one at that.

I’m not sure if it was because I was watching Christian Bale, or the fact that I really love the Patrick Bateman character from “American Psycho”, but parts of this movie, particularly when Bruce Wayne is out in public, feel very derivative to me. It certainly doesn’t affect the movie one way or the other, but I just thought it was something worth mentioning since some other people I know that have also seen the movie, said the exact same thing.

Anything about this movie I have an issue with, is basically either an artistic choice or just fanboy nitpicking. Yeah, I would’ve liked to have seen a more traditional, Year One style Batsuit, since this is basically the Year One story, and Bale definitely has the build for it, but it doesn’t really matter. The suit works. The whole movie works. It works on all the levels it’s supposed to, and I think it’s a bold, and in my opinion, a pretty successful attempt at building the proverbial bridge between art and commercialism... It’s aiming to please both the hardcore fans as well as the masses, so it has it’s work cut out for it, but I sincerely and wholeheartedly hope it succeeds in spades, because simply put, It’s a great movie and the filmmakers deserve it.

Till next week, peace, love, and an endless river of chocolate...

SC"

But if there's a figure model, I'm still gonna paint the damn suit gray, like it's supposed to be! So there!

... Black cowl? Or blue? ;)

Groucho Reviews: http://www.grouchoreviews.com/index.php?module=Movie_Reviews&func=display&id=2239 (http://www.grouchoreviews.com/index.php?module=Movie_Reviews&func=display&id=2239)

Empire Magazine: http://www.empireonline.co.uk/site/incinemas/ReviewInFull.asp?FID=9770 (http://www.empireonline.co.uk/site/incinemas/ReviewInFull.asp?FID=9770)

Ebert and Roeper are reviewing it this weekend as well. Doesn't air here until late tomorrow night.

Saw Ebert and Roeper. It's the first Batman movie Ebert's given a thumb up to. He said they finally got it right.

Black cowl is okay. It's just when EVERYTHING is black that it annoys me.

I gotta agree with John P. It makes more sense that a vigilante prowling the streets at night would dress in all black, but visually it's very boring. Even if the bodysuit is a very dark gray, at least it gives it a little contrast.

I gotta agree with John P. It makes more sense that a vigilante prowling the streets at night would dress in all black, but visually it's very boring. Even if the bodysuit is a very dark gray, at least it gives it a little contrast.

I've heard that there are shots in the film where the lighting makes the suit look dark gray - don't know if that's bogus info or not. But once again - the all-black armor is explained organically and logically in the script for "Batman Begins". For those of you who haven't seen Sandy Collora's Alex Ross influenced suit that he designed for his short film "Batman: Dead End" - here's a link to some photos. I agree that it looks fantastic:

http://www.collorastudios.com/projects/bde/bdemain.htm

I've heardFor those of you who haven't seen Sandy Collora's Alex Ross influenced suit that he designed for his short film "Batman: Dead End" - here's a link to some photos.I saw about 10 minutes of this film at a local "collectibles" swap meet last year. One of the bootleg DVD vendors was running it at his booth. I'd heard of fan films but, never having seen one, I assumed they were just footage of a bunch of sci-fi convention geeks running around in low-budget costumes re-enacting some p.o.s. storyline written by some fanboy. This film changed my opinion of fan films. Sure, none of the actors will be receiving any Oscars, but they were far better than most of the late-Friday/Saturday night crap you get on cable TV, and this film looks like it had a bigger budget than any Roger Corman film ever made.

Well, to be fair - when your "movie" is only 5 minutes long, consists essentially of one fight scene with no story-line and negligible dialogue - then whatever budget you do have goes a long way. I admire what Sandy did - he obviously "gets" the iconic nature of Batman and the look and feel of the film is great - but I've gotten sort of tickled on some of the BB discussion groups where "Batman: Dead End" has been declared as "the greatest Batman movie ever made" and proclaimed the "actor" wearing the suit as delivering the "definitive" performance as Batman. It ain't that easy, folks.


Apparently, Variety has published the first negative review. You have to subscribe to link to it (I don't) but reportedly one of the quotes from the review is "a cartoon character shouldn't have that much depth".

Apparently, Variety has published the first negative review. You have to subscribe to link to it (I don't) but reportedly one of the quotes from the review is "a cartoon character shouldn't have that much depth".

:freak:!
Somebody hasn't read a comic book in about 30 years.

Apparently, Variety has published the first negative review. You have to subscribe to link to it (I don't) but reportedly one of the quotes from the review is "a cartoon character shouldn't have that much depth".
t's more Bruce Wayne than caped crusader in "Batman Begins," a telling of the legendary character's formative experiences that gives precedence to psychology over super-heroics. Lavishly produced Warner Bros. release will ride heavy promotion and want-see to big openings worldwide, but is too dark and talky to appeal to kids and won't inspire much repeat viewing....

That's the only freebie Variey is willing to give.

The negative aspects pointed out are probably positives to the hardcore comics fans.

Box office predictions are troubling; the trades usually have a good sense of the business but are not infallible.

Anyhoo, I'm pretty confident we're not talkin' Ang Lee Hulk ponderous (which I enjoyed nonetheless).

Well, to be fair - when your "movie" is only 5 minutes long, consists essentially of one fight scene with no story-line and negligible dialogue - then whatever budget you do have goes a long way.I didn't realize it was that short. Sounds like I almost saw the whole thing.

...I've gotten sort of tickled on some of the BB discussion groups where "Batman: Dead End" has been declared as "the greatest Batman movie ever made" and proclaimed the "actor" wearing the suit as delivering the "definitive" performance as Batman.Sounds like some people don't get out much! :p I didn't think it was the greatest thing I'd ever seen; I guess I was just surprised at how good it was considering it's a fan film.

I didn't realize it was that short. Sounds like I almost saw the whole thing.

Sounds like some people don't get out much! :p I didn't think it was the greatest thing I'd ever seen; I guess I was just surprised at how good it was considering it's a fan film.

Oh, it's great! ... for what it is. Yeah, it ends mid-fight between Batman and The Predators.

How many of you have seen the "Worlds Finest" trailer? And the really cool (if a little over-done) "Grayson" trailer.

I would love to see all of these done as full-blown flicks.

Saw Ebert and Roeper. It's the first Batman movie Ebert's given a thumb up to. He said they finally got it right.

Just watched it. Two thumbs way up. To say that they liked the movie would be an understatement. "Best movie of the year." "Does for Batman what Spider-Man II did for Spider-Man."

I would say the critic from SFX likes it too:

http://www.futurenet.com/sfx/features/default.asp?pagetypeid=2&articleid=36164&subsectionid=1201 (http://www.futurenet.com/sfx/features/default.asp?pagetypeid=2&articleid=36164&subsectionid=1201)

The press kit they sent out consisted of a can of black spray paint with a batman logo.

At least Bale has muscle. When I saw pipe cleaner arms Keaton, it was a WTF moment.

At least Bale has muscle. When I saw pipe cleaner arms Keaton, it was a WTF moment.
I think what Burton was trying to emphasize was Batman's "ordinary human being" nature. Sounds simple, but when you see Keaton doing this I believe it is meant to drive home the "This is just a guy -- he's crazy!" aspect of things. Both approaches are workable.

Qapla'

SSB

The initial Batman movie with Michael Keaton was good for what it was back in 1989. Primarliy because it changed the general public's perception of who and what Batman is. Comics afficianados have regarded the character seriously for some great time - it was finally time for the rest of the world to realize that Batman was more than just that campy sixties tv series.

The '89 Batman and it's sequels were all flawed but, in most cases, those flaws were easily overlooked by Batfans ( Schumacher's Batman & Robin was the last straw, however ).

So, it is finally time to have a definitive movie about The Batman. Batman Begins looks to be just that movie.

- GJS

I'm still bummed about the less than classy appearance of the car - but, the positives far outweigh the negatives. I'm very hyped. It takes more than unbridled action to make a good Batman story - I think they're finally on the right track.

The initial Batman movie with Michael Keaton was good for what it was back in 1989. Primarliy because it changed the general public's perception of who and what Batman is. Comics afficianados have regarded the character seriously for some great time - it was finally time for the rest of the world to realize that Batman was more than just that campy sixties tv series.

The '89 Batman and it's sequels were all flawed but, in most cases, those flaws were easily overlooked by Batfans ( Schumacher's Batman & Robin was the last straw, however ).

So, it is finally time to have a definitive movie about The Batman. Batman Begins looks to be just that movie.

- GJS

I'm still bummed about the less than classy appearance of the car - but, the positives far outweigh the negatives. I'm very hyped. It takes more than unbridled action to make a good Batman story - I think they're finally on the right track.


Interestingly - the two "negative" reviews I have read - from "Time" and "The New Yorker" - express nostalgia for the "Burtonian" approach - there's no real criticism of scripting ,direction, acting, music etc. - it's all pretty much the opinion that the film is too serious and too realistic for a superhero movie. Interesting.

I've seen the movie, and my feelings are mixed.

On the one hand, it's very intelligently made. Following the mindless excesses of the Schumacher films, Nolan and Goyer have gone out of their way to ground the Batman mythos in reality. At the same time I found the serious, straight-forward, almost prosaic tone to be a bit, well, dull. Ditto the cinematography and production design which, while effective in terms of conveying an epic scope, are oddly lacking in character or personality (Frank Miller's Dark Knight this is not).

I'll be anxious to hear what the rest of you think, but I was expecting to have more fun. I mean, if you can't have fun at a superhero movie what's the point?

I will try to see it on opening night with my superhero-lovin' daughter who turns 6 years-old that very day (don't worry - she's pretty sophisticated about this stuff). HBO is currently running a very well produced 15 minute "First Look" at Batman Begins for anyone who is interested.

I saw that HBO special and am now stoked. I think I can deal w/some dullness to cinematography as long as it doesn't put you to sleep. It's not that bad is it, Carson? Just somewhat lacking from you you expected, maybe?

It's not that bad is it, Carson?

It's not bad at all, it just takes itself very seriously (to a fault, IMO). Of course, given previous efforts, the straight-forward approach may strike just the right note for BatFans. We'll find out soon enough.

For what it's worth, I've always found the "why" aspect of the Bruce Wayne/ Batman equation to be more interesting than the "how." "Batman Begins" spends a great deal of time (roughly half the movie) explaining how and by what means Bruce Wayne goes about the process of becomming the Caped Crusader. No doubt many viewers will find this engrossing. I didn't, but that's just me.

Someone mentioned the Time review, which I haven't read but which I gather waxes nostolgic for the manic, Grand Guignol stylings of the Tim Burton movies. I'm not a big fan of Burton's BatFilms (I've never forgiven him for allowing the Joker to steal the story away from Batman in the first film), but having seen Nolan's take on the character I can understand how certain viewers might miss the unhinged over-the-topness Burton brought to the party.

Apparently, early reviews have been so good that they've already cast the part of The Joker in the sequel. I know I've seen this guy somehere before. Just can't place him.:p

http://i6.photobucket.com/albums/y218/DeadWinterSkies/joker2.jpg

CONRAD!

- GJS

I'm not a big fan of Burton's BatFilms Not much of a fan of any of his films. (Yes, including B'geuse)

Not much of a fan of any of his films. (Yes, including B'geuse)

He peaked with Pee Wee's Big Adventure, IMHO.

Seriously.

Gotta give props to "Ed Wood" - probably Burton's most "personal" film. "Pee Wee's Big Adventure" gets played quite regularly at our house. Fun for the kids - and Mom and Dad too!

Apparently, early reviews have been so good that they've already cast the part of The Joker in the sequel.

The posted image is fan art, and was not produced by WB.

The posted image is fan art, and was not produced by WB.

You mean Conrad Veidt isn't going to be in the sequel!!?? But he was so convincing in "The Man Who Laughs" (1928). I really think they oughta' give him a shot. ;)

Holy Bat-Fraud, I didn't recognize him. Great casting, that.

He peaked with Pee Wee's Big Adventure, IMHO.

Seriously.

Holy crap! I didn't realise he did that one. Well, you're right, I did like that film... "Oh really? We're they hosin' him down?!"

I really enjoyed seeing Rob Coleman and Bob Justman in a Batman movie. Justman driving the batmobile was pretty good. He did well teaming up with Batman to fight crime. Better than pounding the streets in LA. I'll have to complement him on how youthful he looks next time I see him. :D

This is funny stuff: http://www.jaypinkerton.com/batman/index.html

Just got back from seeing it. These are really just a few impressions as I am still digesting the movie. WARNING: A FEW SPOILERS AHEAD:

This is absolutely the first film in which I have been actually moved by the death of Bruce's parents and by his reaction to it. Having him fall into the well on that very day - and then attending "Die Fleidermause" that night rather than an outdated Tyrone Power movie made in 1942, becoming disturbed by it's imagery and wanting to leave because it frightens him - and thereby feeling ultimately responsible for his parent's death is such an improvement over the short-hand storytelling of the past. It makes much more emotional and psychological sense and really grounds the movie thematically - giving Bruce a much more cogent reason to become Batman than he has had in the comics or the movies heretofore.

As much as I've studied and read up on this film, I was still surprised at the scaryness of some of it's imagery. Although I took my young daughter - ( and she handled it well) parents and siblings should think pretty hard about taking anyone under 10 years old to this movie. The movie is also bloodily violent in sections - it pulls no punches in that regard. The "hallucinations" in the film are pretty harrowing - and I think the filmmakers missed one possible opportunity to play on Batman's classic comic book iconography - when Crane has been given his own drug and is under questioning by Batman - I wish that apparition had had glowing white eyes!

And damn Batman is a badass in this movie. You really do believe not only that he could kick all those bad guy's asses, but that he really really wants to! Bale absolutely gets into both roles to a degree that we haven't seen before. Think Eastwood's Dirty Harry crossed with Connery's James Bond at his most charming for the Batman/Wayne dichotomy - at least the public Wayne.

That's all for now. Gotta' get my daughter to bed. But I will say, as much as I've tried to defend this film's approach over the past few months - it absolutely met my expectations on almost every level, and exceeded my expectations on some others. Oh yeah - when the lights went up, almost everybody in the theater applauded. Don't see that very often. Of course, I'm sure most of them were predisposed - like myself.

Thanks, Zorro -- I'm looking forward to catching this one ASAP -- and that's a pretty good endorsement!

Qapla'

SSB

I liked it.
It relies heavily on Batman:Year One. Many things the same, such as the same disguises as a street person, the evolution of the costume, the relationship with Gordon,who has a baby daughter, ( if thats Barbara, then Batgirl won't be around for 20 years). The 'vehicle' which is never called the batmobile, is similar to the one from The Dark Knight Returns.

It's not often the origin of a major comic book character brought to the silver screen can not only include the basic premise, but also add a TON of heretofore previously untold explanations for so many things. One cool thing about these explanations is that many of them could be incorporated into the comic book mythos without contradicting it. The freshness of the perspective this movie took made it incredibly entertaining. The only thing I still can't figure out is how that dang Batmobile can turn. Its wheels seem to be very limited in the way they can turn. The quick cuts made it difficult to actually see the car turning much. (That's a very minor point though!)

I saw some behind the scenes video of the 'Tumbler' chase, and it kind of hops around corners. The front geometry must be wacky. In the movie they edit around it.
I hated the look of it before, but it fits into the logic of the movie.

Interestingly - the two "negative" reviews I have read - from "Time" and "The New Yorker" - express nostalgia for the "Burtonian" approach - there's no real criticism of scripting ,direction, acting, music etc. - it's all pretty much the opinion that the film is too serious and too realistic for a superhero movie. Interesting.Sounds to me like these reviewers have never read a comic book in their lives (just like Tim Burton). :drunk:

They think the Sunday Funnies are comic books.

How come nobody said Shane Rimmer was in this? Woulda seen it a helluva lot sooner if I'd known that!

Okay, woulda seen it sooner anyway but my arthritic foot was acting up again lately. Saw Batman & Land of the Dead today, WotW soon. Still, two good movies and Shane Rimmer was pretty cool.