Wow. Holy crap, what an awesome movie. The best Batman movie, by far. I'm still stunned at the shear perfection.

So, like....what's y'all thoughts?

I liked Batman Forever better.

<.<

First of all... because it must be said: old news.

Just had to get that out of the way, sorry.

But yeah, Batman Begins is sheer awesome. Like, incredibly awesome. It blows all other superhero movies out of the water.
I can't beleive how well they did. I went in there expecting... well I don't even remember now, but certainly not what I got.

I hope they don't screw it up in the sequals.

You obviously forgot about how awesome X-Men 1 was.

Batman Begins was incredibly great, I enjoyed it more than X-Men's. Awesome soundtrack, too. Probably the best movie of last year too. I wonder how the sequels will turn out, though.

I really enjoyed both X-Men 1 and Batman Begins, but the latter seemed to have a little more substance to it.

I really like Batman Begins.

Oh yeah I know this is hella old news, I just hadn't seen it until tonight. I love how it went back and told about Bruce's training and stuff, that just added so much depth. This movie was like a freakin novel.

X-men was... ok. Coulda been a lot better. If it wasn't for wolverine it would've sucked a big one. As with all the x-men movies, watch it for wolvy, try and forget how bad the rest of the movie is.

I loved Batman Begins. They better keep it up with the new movies, otherwise there's going to be a lot of pissed off fans for teasing us with a good movie, only to back to sucking

I just watched it again this weekend and was reminded how much it ruled. I watched Equilibrium last night... sweet flick.

I seem to be the odd one out here, but Batman Begins was for me the most boring Batman movie ever. I would have left the cinema halfway through, but my friend had paid for my ticket.

Freaking boring, insane amounts of dialogue and way too serious in approach. I liked Batman old style much better. With pompous cartoonish scenery and Uma Thurman in a crazy outfit.

You place Batman & Robin above Batman Begins?
You are a weird person.

No, you're just another Wolverine fanboy.

The inclusion of his character was necessary to the completeness of the film but was not the only 'redeeming feature'. If Wolverine weren't there, yes the film would have 'sucked' because it wouldn't really be about the core X-Men. Similarly so if Professor X, Storm, or Cyclops did not appear. That is, the film did not suck in terms of filming/writing/development in every scene not including Wolverine, as you seem to be suggesting...

Actually I'm not.
I've never read a wolverine comic or anything. I have read some x-men.
I just happened to hate the acting, the plot, and everything about the movie.
Your right though, wolverine wasn't really the one good thing. Xavier and Magneto were quite good too.
The rest of them... meh.

Oh, and yeah the film did not suck in terms of filming/writing/development in every scene not including Wolverine. The ones with him in it weren't that good either.

I reserve my right to say it was an average movie. Because it was. Don't go calling me a wolverine fanboy just because your an x-men fanboy.

Random essay on my opinion because you all care:

The appeal of Batman Begins is its 'realness'. It tries to take a more plausible approach on comic book heroes and thereby better appeal to our generally cynical, skeptical, and empirical modern society. Instead of Batman swooping in to save the day and deflecting all hopes of intervention by most criminals, the Batman of Batman Begins has to start from the ground up and you see his poor first attempts and the harships he undergoes to become the hero you see in later appearances in the Gotham universe.

Personally, if I am going to see a film about comic book superheroes, I expect it to be, to some extent, over-the-top. It's interesting in its own right to see entities with certain abilities/powers battle it out without the constraints of reality: we go to the cinemas ostensibly to *escape* the rules of reality and society, not to have them subtly imposed on us even more (despite how much this may actually happen...). With a film like Batman Beyond, these rules are pretty blatant. The Scarecrow's 'power' is explained in some whiffs of science. It seems that writers expect audiences to be a bit more mature and discerning when it comes to the willful suspension of disbelief because we live so often in fantasy nowadays that it can be difficult to make the distinction between fanciful film and the real world.

I could enjoy a film like Electra which may have had a relatively insipid plot in that it wasn't something "unique" or compelling but still had some cool ideas, powers, fight scenes, etc. That's what I'd read a comic book for when I was younger, and that's still why I'd see a comic-based film. I think this "realism-shift", in addition to trying to appeal to an aging original target market (kids who read comics who have now grown up), is trying to draw new audiences in with more plausible trappings. I don't think, however, that the appeal of films like Batman should lie in the idea that "whoa, this could happen!", it more lies in the messages that the films/comics convey and the general entertainment factor of seeing otherwise unbelievable feats with your own eyes.

Don't go calling me an X-Men fanboy based on my defense of a film style!

You certainly have the right to say anything you like, as you have the right to reserve that right. It's just not advisable (and often viewed as ignorant) to say, "I think X. Because X is." Which implies that you believe X to be true not only for yourself, but imposing that idea on everyone.

Sorry if I rubbed you the wrong way by mistakenly calling you a Wolverine fanboy. When I used to read comics as a kid, I would just get tired of people saying, "Wolverine is awesome because he's a badass. Because I choose to like Wolverine out of all the X-Men and because none of the X-Men are like him, the rest of the X-Men suck." Okay... the X-Men represent power through diversity. You like one character type from this group, but since your capacity for admiration is so small... you think the rest of the characters are lame not only in comparison but also on their own? yeesh...

As you can see, that sort of mentality pisses me off to this day, so my name-calling was a knee-jerk reaction.

Hehe, yeah my reaction was knee-jerk too, because of the fanboy comment.
I was a bit worried about my response to that. And decided if you flamed back (let's face it, I basically flamed) I'd try to end it there.
But I guess in this case you were the bigger man.

My problem with the movie was not the characters, but the actors, well, the acting (I've seen some of them do better), the dialogue especially.

I may have appreciated it more if I got into the comics, but I never really read comics as a child (I was a wierd kid, I prefered books -without- pictures).
So whenever I go to see a superhero type movie, I'm not there comparing it to the comics, or admiring a child-hood hero. I'm there to judge it as it presents itself to me.
And x-men, while not a bad movie, wasn't that good to me. It was... flat.

But as you have already said, you have the right to like or dislike a movie for any reason you want, as do I.








So yeah... Batman Begins:

The only part that struck me as kinda lame was the scene where he's driving to get away, bashing through the road walls and stuff.

Firstly because the wall breaking looked sub-par. And secondly because the police should have found him in minutes.

Officer "Looks like theres a giant hole in this road wall which leads to a big path of destruction through the woods captain"
Captain "Damn, guess we lost him then"

:psykokwak:

I understand the approach to Batman Begins. It's just not working for me. I was bored. Period.

I thought it was a pretty lame movie.

It was an awesome movie, even without the batman elements. Actually I thought the batman elements brought it down slightly.

I liked the guy from 28 Days Later as the bad guy.

I liked the first two Batman movies better, but I have a Burton fetish and I enjoy Michael Keaton more than any man should.
But this one's a damn close third.
So... who do you think should play the Joker?

-Woah, I just had a revelation: Mr. Freeze, as played by... John Malkovich. Discuss.

Oh GOD YES!

Begins is one of my favorite movies.

Watch more movies.

Make smarter comments.

OH BURNINATED

Die.

Well it's definitely one of my favorite movies, but I'll admit I need to see alot more movies before I make an educated list of favorites.

And Malkovich for freeze? Hah, I like it. But not alot of people can outdo Schwarzenegger at that role. I say....bring Arnold back!

*cuts*

yes awesome movie, I think I liked them better than Burton's (like Burton alot) but I didn't like how screwed up Batman Returns, was I mean come on the Penguin is suposed to be a highbrow villan who stays above the law, not a disgusting perv. living in the sewers.


But as for best batman movie ever.....I think I liked "Mask of the Phantasm" more than any of the live action, but Batman Begins was awesome.

Batman Begins was glorious. Acting was wonderful, plot was good, the mood of the film, the tone, was superb, and that's really what leaves the lasting impression. It was so sexy... Mmmm. I should buy the DVD soon.

/me wacks numenor with a hard salami.

Whoa, hey, we have DEFINITELY not consumed enough alcohol for that sort of thing!

pure gold...

Mark Hammil = best Joker ever.

My thoughts exactly. The movie was all-around gold. I would strongly suggest you buy the DVD, the extras are quite good.

(this will probably be banned soon, so I intend to abuse it is much as possible while I still can)

It was okay. The ruined the Batmobile.

But it was a early version of the Batmobile.

Additionally, his "batcave" was just a cave.

It had to start somewhere.

but it has BATS.

Also, don't ignore Bruce and Alfred's comments at the end about "reinforcing under the south wing"... where the cave is.