Batman Begins

Not formulaic?

Really? How does it compare to Spider-man 2 (my current benchmark for a good superhero flick)?

Sadly it looks as though they've totally messed up the Fantastic Four.

I much preferred it to Spider-man 2 but I was always much more a fan of the Bat than Spidey.

I think the Fantastic 4 trailers look very encouraging. What makes you think they've blown it?

Adam West didn't have nipples !

It strikes me they're wasting too much time on the origin (which is about the least interesting thing about them). Doom's armour seems to be organic, rather than something he chooses. Just little things in the trailer really. The Thing looks far too small.

I'm a big fan of the comic and from the trailers I've see it just doesn't quite strike me as right.

quote:

Originally posted by Berlin Fritz:
Adam West didn't have nipples !

Yes he did. You just didn't see them as you were too busy looking at his beer gut and skinny legs.

PS neither does this Batman. He's one mean mofo.

Fair comments Tam. I'm not an expert although Fantastic 4 were the Marvel comics I read most when I was a kid, but not recently. I thought the characters all looked very much like I remembered them and frankly I was glad to see what looks like a load of colour in there.

Bleedin Racist



Fritz Von Ancient Mariner

And listens like a three years' child:
The Mariner hath his will.

Because for me Batman was the 2nd-rate superhero after Superman (extensive 1960s comic-book conditioning - Spiderman way down after Supergirl-Wonderwoman-Kid Flash-Green Lantern), I am quite happy if visual version is a bit like old comic-books - e.g. 1965 or so film/any brightly-coloured interpretation since.

Dark Batman films are a bit of a pain - old 8-bit computer-game 'Batman The Caped Crusader' seemed better than 16-bit versions. Possibly to many special FX do not really add to nice simple fantasy fun (bit like digital music bands being infinitely worse than analogue-era ones).

Following the recommendations here I look forward to watching both Spiderman films & current Batman on TV in a couple of years.

Michael Caine seemed to act well in that Woody Allen 'Hannah And Her Three Sisters', and usually I enjoy Mr Caine 'acting' as himself, but I look forward to his role as cultured Alfred.

I saw some of the making of the movie documentary and was surprised with the actor who plays Barman's arrogance at stating he plays the definitive Batman.

I would like him to explain himself to West/Keaton/Clooney and Kilmer.

Saw it last night..... Excellent!!

Go see it.

quote:

Originally posted by Yeldarb:
I saw some of the making of the movie documentary and was surprised with the actor who plays Barman's arrogance at stating he plays the definitive Batman.

I would like him to explain himself to West/Keaton/Clooney and Kilmer.

I haven't seen that interview but I know he's a very intense type and takes his work very seriously. I'd agree with him. His Batman makes all the rest look like amateurs.

I saw it on Friday and very much enjoyed it.Certainly far better than Batman Forever and Batman and Robin and Batman Returns. I am still a fan of Tim Burton's first Batman film and this one was quite different, much faster paced and more action, but the acting was no where near as good as Keaton and Nicholson which was one of the reasons I loved the first film.

The only downside I thought about Batman Begins was there was just too much stuff in there, I feel as if they could have taken the one of the bad guys out and played it a bit slower.

Well Tomk, I guess I'll have to go and see it.

quote:

Originally posted by Two-Sheds:
I saw it on Friday and very much enjoyed it.Certainly far better than Batman Forever and Batman and Robin and Batman Returns. I am still a fan of Tim Burton's first Batman film and this one was quite different, much faster paced and more action, but the acting was no where near as good as Keaton and Nicholson which was one of the reasons I loved the first film.

The only downside I thought about Batman Begins was there was just too much stuff in there, I feel as if they could have taken the one of the bad guys out and played it a bit slower.

I found Michael Keaton completely unconvincing as Batman (far too small and insignificant to begin with, and he looked as though he could barely carry, never mind move in the suit), and Jack Nicholson obviously regarded it as an excuse to exercise his overacting genes. The effects were poor even by the standards of the time, the whole thing was so studio bound it wasn't true and Gotham City looked like it had been airbrushed on a glass panel just behind them. A load of Prince music in the background was just icing on the cake. Surprisingly this didn't stop me really enjoying it because I'm such a fan I was delighted to see it on screen.

However for me Batman Begins was the real thing. Gritty and believable (as much as such a film can be) and I just can't agree with your comments about the acting. I thought the main cast was just superb. Bale has a physical presence and charisma Keaton can only dream of and conveyed the anger, frustration and guilt that motivates Bruce Wayne in a scary way. Michael Caine was superb and Gary Oldman fantastic in a rare good guy role.

Were you a fan of Batman before you saw the original movie?

I was a fan of Batman before the films. As a kid I loved the TV series with Adam West (I know it's a totally different kettle of fish). I liked the Tim Burton film when it originally came out and loved Nicholson's overacting in the role of the Joker.

As for Keaton, behind the suit you I didn't really notice his smaller stature and from all the films I liked the difference in how he potrayed Batman and Bruce Wayne. As Wayne he was unsure of himself and clumsy, but when he was behind the mask he was sure of himself and had purpose. Since I've never read the comics I don't know if this is true of the original comic strip, but I liked it.

Don't get me wrong I liked the new film and I'll see again at some stage and will quite likely buy it on DVD, but I'm also a fan of Tim Burton's film and to be honest I'm not quite sure which one I prefer.

quote:

Since I've never read the comics

I think that's key here. I grew up reading DC comics from the very early 60s onwards. Superman was my main obsession but Batman was close behind. Bruce Wayne was the "millionaire playboy" as Bale portrays him and Batman was a physically imposing specimen that Keaton could never have been, under a rubber suit or not. I think Bob Kane would regard Batman Begins as being much closer to his original vision than any other version of Batman except perhaps the animated series from the early 90s (check that if you want to see Batman done true to the original) which until yesterday I regarded as the best Batman ever.

Incidentally back in the early 90s my elder son and I used to watch the animated series together on Saturday morning TV. At that time I used to work out a bit and one morning Andrew (then 3 or 4) walked in as I was finishing my 50 morning push ups. He waited until I was finished and said witheringly "Bruce Wayne can do that with one arm." Talk about being deflated!

Still the more fans there are, for whatever reason, of whatever version, the more likely we are to see another great movie or two!

I agree with some when I say that Batman Begins is the best of the franchise, imo of course. However, I think that the original Batman is still fantastic and gives the new one a run for its money. The seperation is the difference in the two films. Michael Keaton did a tremendous job acting, but unfortunately for him he just doesn't possess the physicality that Bale has. Bale is the definitive Batman. The first one was a bit slower and allowed things to develop. The new film, if I were to be picky, maybe attempts to do too much, in so far as laying out Wayne's childhood and establishing motivation while exploring Wayne's present struggles against evil...Begins runs at approx 2 1/2 hours. A fine film for anyone with patience and a decent bladder. Apparently everyone in my locale has evolved with the pop-tart 90 minute bucket of shite feature that so pervades the cinema these days.

BTW, Oldman, Freeman, Niason, and Caine all give great performances. I found myself somewhat annoyed with Holmes, but that was probably more because of the screenplay of her character.

And comparing this to the last film, Batman and Robin, I think it's pretty safe to say that Shumacker should never be at the helm of a film again.

quote:

Originally posted by Yeldarb:


I would like him to explain himself to West/Keaton/Clooney and Kilmer.

Well to Keaton anyhow (debatable; Great Bruce, OK Bat)

I'm a better Batman than the rest and I haven't even played the part!



Stephen

quote:

I'm a better Batman than the rest

Stephen,

Would that be Kaiser Bill's?



Brad