well, if you can't express yourself without resorting to the lame "your shit sucks you morons" then perhaps you just shouldn't bother. If you're going to get into a dispute, atleast put some effort into it.

It's tops on my superhero list due in large part to the first half of the movie, the second half was pretty much any other superhero flick out there, albeit with a bit more character.

He has a point with Sin City kicking ass, as it does, though Batman Begins was far more engrossing.

That all said, it is a movie, and people have opinions. Though I do agree about the criticizing others bit - the main reason I hate Rex Reed`s reviews is because he does that - as it was put in his Batman Begins review "Batman Begins is for morons." which is just uncalled for.

Also remember that you seem to be in the minority. Most filmgoers, and critics, loved the movie, that's just the way it is. You watched it, you hated it, now move on with your life instead of bitching about other people liking it.

Yes, because money made is the best way to gauge the quality of a film.

I'm absolutely shocked that this dispute became a dispute about disputing.

My God, I've gone crosseyed.

Yeah, like Cinderella man. Just because it's only brought in $45,159,475 so far, does NOT mean that it sucks.

Chess: I dont have any communication issues. If I said "fuck, shit" doesn't mean I'm stupid. I'm just really surprised that people liked this movie very much. Being a film student and believe me, I have seen LOTS of movies in my life. I have to say that with such caliber, production values and resources and mainly budget the movie could have been much better. This concerns Star Wars Episode III too.

My point is I really hated this movie. I dont remember such monotony in a film especially for a Batman film.

This film makes everything not to see it again. I don't want to see it even if I could do it for free. This film has no appeal to me whatsoever.

I'm sorry, I believed the hype because of "yay" critics like you but deep inside you know that movie was a let down.

I say no more. I would rather watch "Salo" again than this F...:mad2:

Ok then. Are you finished blowing your load, or do you need more tissue?

You have been called out, if you call it that, simply because of the way you expressed your dislike of the film. If you hate it so much, especially since most people enjoyed it, the least you could do is actually go into details about what you disliked about it, in the name of possibly starting worthwhile discussion.

I can't wait to see some of your films.

Now, if you don't want to go into details, then yes, move on with your life. You hated the movie, we all go through it. Every one of use here have hated a movie that most others enjoyed, and wasn't able to undstand why.

As far as comic movies I'd put it BB 2nd right behind Superman which IMO was amazing when it came out. I liked the X-men movies but thought they could and should have done a few things different.

BrentLumkin: Load? Tissue? That was classy but unlike chess buddy, I'm not going to react to your insults. It's all good! :) Thanks to movies like that I learned what NOT to do in superhero films. Please Hollywood, make more movies like that so I could learn all mistakes which should be avoided. PLEASE! Me and Tim Burton are laughing at this crapfest, however, majority may enjoy it. We all have different tastes. I could tear this movie apart and say why movie "sucks" but I won't do it. I don't want to. This film doesnt deserve my negative review.

then perhaps you should stop flame baiting folks.

If you are going to respond to a thread where people are praising a film, and not only respond but respond so immaturely as you did on the last page, you need to back up that type of insane childish rant. It was almost, well, "classy". ;)

But if you don't want to, great, just move on to the next movie. If you are going to continue posting in here though saying it sucked and other such things, you owe it to the readers of this thread to at least explain yourself.

To be honest, I'd love to see someone explain why they didn't like this film. I love seeing the praise for it, but even when I love a film I love to see exact reasons why others did not.

I dont want to lie, I dont want to say movie was good but it has some serious issues.

The film with serious issues is not a good film and that was the only way to put it. In my childish rant.

I have to say that I enjoyed HULK much better then BATMAN BEGINS. I know that you all hated HULK but personally myself I think it was an amazing movie. Great start of a franchise but spoiled an American crowd hunger for "instant mindless action". That's why HULK failed to capture hearts of a movie goer.

They wanted to see a mindless creature smashing shit up and nobody wanted to see a person with inner strugle.

Batman Begins involves bad and poorly developed characters (especially villains), production (batmobile, gotham city and etc), the storyline (won't spoil it), poor musical score and I could go on.

C'mon people. Batman is an American legend of an American Cinema. This is an icon of comic book world which must be treated differently. What Burton did was phenomenal work. I wish Burton could come back and resurrect Batman films.

Batman Returns is a perfect example of the perfect Batman world and I believe it will stay on top and there will be no such classic ever again.

Sad! Very sad!

Damn, it's late and I dont have time to get into details...just some random thoughts :)

I remember when Anne Heche "came out" it was around the same time as Ivan Reitman's movie "Six Days and Seven Nights" was to be released. Well Reitman also produced Howard Stern's movie "Private Parts" and at the time of Heche's "coming out" Stern was talking on his show about how Reitman was worried that Heche's publicity would screw with "Six days and Seven Nights" because it was supposed to be a romantic movie. He was concerned that people wouldn't buy Heche and Harrison Ford as lovers with all her new press. So I guess I can see studios having worries like this.

well, if you want to get into it in a discussion, i'll go at it.

What burton did with the city was his fatal flaw. he made the city larger than batman. In this film, Nolan made it so that the city, while huge in scale, felt a direct reaction to Batman being present. In his attempt to rid crime on the streets he created more. The human aspect of it came through in Batman's background. We get to see his training and the beginning of how Batmans career. This wasn't about showing the established Batman who has a place in the american eye. It's to show how he started out and the mistakes he made.

It's a constant flow. Does the city have these monsters because of batman or is the city better off with him keeping them in check. Leads to a perfect Joker story where that whole question comes into play. It was done well in Joker: Killing joke. Were Joker goes out to show that any person put in a given situation would result in the same insane criminal as joker. It also took pieces of Batman: Year one and converted them very well on the screen.

Burtons film lacked a lot of that.

Jackskeleton: Thanks for transitioning from BATMAN RETURNS to BATMAN. In fact, you have excluded Batman Returns completely. I was not talking about BATMAN at all.
I dont think it's a good excuse for BATMAN BEGINS to "prepare" us for The Joker film. You didn't know that Joker will appear in the second film if not for "teaser" thing. If they WB folks show us who'll be next in the movie, then they can make tons of money? WRONG!

It's not even just that Jack. The Burton films were more about the city, as well as the Joker, than they were about Batman. The same thing can be said, even to a larger degree, about the Schumacher flicks.

The problem with all of the Batman films before this one is that they weren't ever really about the main character. Batman Begins went to the core of the story, leading to the city and the villains revolving around Batman, not the other way around as it was for the previous Batman flicks. In the other films, you never really knew where Batman came from, what his point is, and so on, and that hurt the films overall (well, a lot of other factors hurt the Schumacher flicks).

Batman Begins was the proper way to restart this franchise, we've seen the inside of the character's head, we've seen into his psyche. Since we will not need to see as much of the backstory of Batman himself, it will be interesting to see how the future Batfilms are presented. I'm looking forward to that more than anything else.

I would say you have difficulty expressing yourself effectively. Calling people who liked this film "stupid" will not endear you to anyone. You have the right to disagree, but you can do it without name calling and making vague blanket statements ("Fighting scenes were just a joke. The whole storyline..."). You claim to be a student; has anyone taught you how to communicate with other people? You know, how to talk to people, not at them. If not, there's some books on the subject at your local library. Go check them out.

Batman Begins is not a perfect film. No film is. But its pros outweigh its cons, IMO. It had plenty of action (the prison fight, the training sequences, the escape from Ra's Al Ghul, Batman vs. Falcone's goons, Batman vs. Scarecrow #1, Batman vs. Scarecrow #2, Batman's escape from the police, Batman vs. Ducard, the whole last act of the film), nice amounts of humor (Scarecrow's exit was humorous, Alfred and Lucius kept things light for the majority of their screentime, Gordon's reactions to this crazy new Bat-guy, etc.), and it had a compelling dramatic arc (not only for Bruce Wayne, but for Gordon, and Dawes as well [Holmes's adequate performance notwithstanding). I really enjoyed the look of Gotham City (a city you can imagine being real, unlike Burton's version, which did look cool nonetheless), the cinematography was top notch, and the production values high. Were the fight scenes a little disjointed? Yes, but it didn't really take away from my enjoyment of the film. The fights were harder, dirtier than we're used to seeing in your standard comic book movie. I believe that was the intention. A minor gripe for an otherwise excellent film.

Some of the action was confusing (some, not all, or even the majority), Katie Holmes's performance didn't match those of her costars, the microwave emitter was a little hokey, and there wasn't one villain to root against (it was a whole conglomerate!). Still, individually or taken together these items are not enough to sink the film. Some stellar groundwork was laid in this installment and I hope it pays off in the sequel (much like with Spider-man and Spider-man 2).

I like this more reality-based Batman (note I didn't say realistic). Batman isn't a quippy fun superhero. He's a man on a mission to kick some criminal ass and to show Gotham that things can be better. He's Gotham's beacon of hope, their light in the darkness, and as such anyone expecting a dumb action movie was sorely mistaken. This is what Batman is supposed to be. Now that we have the origin out of the way (and by the way, the big selling point for this film is that we see the steps Bruce takes from childhood orphan to raging adolescent to industrious adult, not just get a quickie summary of it), we can move onto the meat of the action in subsequent films. And there will be subsequent films.

Is Batman Begins the best film ever? No. Is it the best Batman film to date? You bet it is. And this is coming from a guy who worships the ground Tim Burton walks on. Batman Returns was my fave Bat-flick . . . until now.

Superhero film rankings:

1. Spider-man 2
2. Superman: The Movie
3. X2: X-Men United
4. Spider-man
5. Batman Begins
6. Batman Returns
7. Superman II
8. The Crow
9. Unbreakable
10. Blade


ETA:

Huh?

L8r

Even though it is one, I don't even view Batman Begins as a "comic book movie" per se.

Very well said RogueScribner, I agree with much of what you said, except for your listing of the movies, heh. I haven't left the theater with such a feeling of satisfaction in a very long time.

Brent: How do you see this movie? Based on true events? :lol:

Rogue: Thanks for your smart remarks about library and stuff but it's hard and I mean, REALLY hard to take an advise from a person who has Spider Man 2 as # 1 superhero movie. Communicate this!

Brent, well, I've only seen BB once so far, and I'm wary of ranking it too high right off the bat. It could jump to #3 after I see it again. ;)

Also, The Hulk was flawed. It wasn't a terrible film, but it sure left me disappointed when I left the theater. I wasn't looking for mindless action; it would be foolish of me to expect that from the likes of Ang Lee. But I was expecting a good movie and The Hulk had too many problems for me to ignore (especially in the last act). This isn't a Hulk thread, so I'll reserve further discussion for another time and place.

The Hulk didn't tank because people get didn't their action fix (there was plenty of action in the movie). It tanked because one the one hand it wanted to be taken serious while on the other it was throwing smelly cheese at us from all sides. It did not work as a whole and word of mouth quickly spread. I won't rule out seeing a sequel, but I hope it's reigned in a little.

*sigh*

L8r

I don't know if this was brought up already, because I won't read all 500+ posts in this thread, but I found the following interesting:
Bruce Wayne, Thomas Wayne, Sgt. Gordon, The Scarecrow, and Carmine Falcone are all played by Brits using American accents. Martha Wayne is played by a Scot.

:whofart: :frankie:

Yeah! Yuk, yuk, yuk.

I can see that it's not going to be possible to get into an actual discussion of this film with you.

I almost view Batman Begins as some sort of psychological thriller/horror film. It's way deeper, freaky, and more "real" than most comic book movies. It, of course, had it's cheesy moments and goofy jokes, but that is to be expected, and for the most part it all worked for me.

The Hulk could have been something like Batman Begins, but they layered that cheese on way too thick, to the point that it just flat out became laughable...in a bad way.

My only problem with Batman Begins is that I felt that Nolan was trying to get all of the backstory out of the way as fast as possible, which is understandable. I know many say that it went on for far too long, but I would have liked to have seen just a tad bit more time dedicated to that. I'm hoping for some pretty cool deleted scenes on the DVD, or possibly an extended cut even.

Even with that small complaint, I don't really knock any points off for the flick. It's easily my favorite film of the year so far, if not technically the "best".

I'll say one more thing, and I think it means a lot to this movie. I don't know about everyone else, but as I sat there and watched it in the theater, I could really tell that those involved, especially the screenwriters and director, really cared about the source material. That can go a hell of a long way for any film that is based on something else.

I'm going to try to go watch this at an IMAX theater at the Georgia Mall on Saturday. I really hope I can make that happen. :)

Well regardless if it was a Joker set up or not, it still sets the stage that Gothom is actually worse off with batmans sort of justice as a whole jail was released, he created the scarecrow as more than just a mad doctor. That's the subtle message Goyer and Nolan were saying in this film. Who is creating the problem for this realistic city.

The main issue indeed with the other films was that Gothom was such a comic book cartoony city. Huge statues, bright colors everywhere. Larger than life items that made it scream cartoon more than anything else. Gothom is a city and in begins it was brought to life as one.