Batman Begins.........Horrible "reinvention".

Originally posted by bakerboy
Returns was crap. Even more than the first one.

Begins had a great plot. It was intense and it developed the bruce wayne /batman personality very well. They nailed the character in the story.

In total agreement. The character was nailed in each and every way. One thing I liked was how Ra's choose to die and not Batman killing him. Remember " I won't kill you, but I don't have to save you" . Seconds later Ra's closes his eyes and seemingly perishes. Also another thing I liked was Bale's version of the Bat voice. It's unique and better then any other I have ever heard.

Originally posted by bakerboy
Hahahaha, good one in this thread. Dudes batman returns and friends, the first two batman movies were a disgrace for the character. Almost everything was wrong, starting casting michael keaton as bruce wayne, doing jack playing himself in a joker costume, danny devito being an stupid freak, gordon was a stupid cop, batman is a killer, keaton was a terrible fighter and his bruce wayne was a bad copy of clark kent, the movies were boring, batman is a supporting character, etc. Those movies were totally horrible, as bad as the schumacher movies. That was a nightmare franchise only to forget about them.

The only true batman movie was batman begins. The character looked the parts, chris bale was brillaint as both batman and wayne, the supporting cast was superb except katie holmes, the dialogue and the story was great, the action very well directed, etc. And the dark knight looks even better, with both ledger as the joker and eckhart as two face looking very promise.

i think that it would be a better title for this thread." batman begins: they fixed the horrible invention of burton and shumacher."

I could not have said it better myself.Thats EXACTLY what this thread SHOULD say for its title is Batman Begins,They fixed the horrible invention of Burton and Schumacher. 👆 🤘 🤘 🤘 Like myself and a couple others have said,the first Batman movie should have been called The Joker and that other horrible Burton Batman movie should have been called THE PENGUIN AND CATWOMAN.thats the huge problem with the Burton Batman films is that Batman was just a supporting character in them and The villains had the majority of the screentime.The Joker had the majority of the screentime in the first film so much that they never went into detail about the origin story of batman that you never could understand why he dressed up like a bat or fought crime.

Thats why I prefer Batman Forever out of the first three films cause it at least was all about Batman for once and they FINALLY explained his origin story where you understood all that.Not to mention Kilmer at least looked the part and had a muscular build.He wasnt a short runt,half bald,with a receding hairline and a skinny runt .It should have been explained in the first film.I mean that was his origin story for god sakes!!!! 🙄 and Batman Begins wasnt the boring snoozefest that Batman 89 was.as I said before,its okay to have a movie where your just standing around talking practically the whole time with just a few brief actions scenes here and there IF you were making a movie about a courtroom drama scene such as To Kill a Mockingbird,Presumed Innocent or JFK,but thats ludicrise for a comicbook movie,ESPECIALLY Batman.The Burton/Keaton apologists just dont get that though as you know. 🙄

Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
In total agreement. The character was nailed in each and every way. One thing I liked was how Ra's choose to die and not Batman killing him. Remember " I won't kill you, but I don't have to save you" . Seconds later Ra's closes his eyes and seemingly perishes. Also another thing I liked was Bale's version of the Bat voice. It's unique and better then any other I have ever heard.

And Bale's Bat voice is horrible. I think it's hard for him to maintain the accent and sound raspy or something. But he just sounds weird, not menacing to me.

Originally posted by SelinaAndBruce
There is no way Batman would have ever just let someone kill themselves or die. He's tried to save the Joker from jumping off of things or harming himself several times. So that whole thing was stupid anyway.

And Bale's Bat voice is horrible. I think it's hard for him to maintain the accent and sound raspy or something. But he just sounds weird, not menacing to me.

But he did do just that. Besides Ra's welcomed death. Also there is nothing wrong with Bales' Bat voice, he can keep the accent since he has characters with different accents before. Also I don't recall Val Kilmer having a Bat voice and neither did Michael Keaton hardly.

Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
But he did do just that. Besides Ra's welcomed death. Also there is nothing wrong with Bales' Bat voice, he can keep the accent since he has characters with different accents before. Also I don't recall Val Kilmer having a Bat voice and neither did Michael Keaton hardly.

Actually, Keaton DID have a Bat Voice...

Here's his Bat Voice:
Keaton's Bat Voice

Here's his Wayne Voice:
Wayne Voice

Kilmer and Keaton had Batman voices in comparison to Clooney's "car salesman Batman" voice.

Yup I can understand people's criticisms of how Keaton looked though it never affected my enjoyment of the movies but I definitely think he had a better Bat voice. It sounded menacing but also confident. Bale's sounds like he is trying so hard. Like that guy who really isn't tough so he just yells a lot.

Originally posted by Bat Dude
Actually, Keaton DID have a Bat Voice...

Here's his Bat Voice:
Keaton's Bat Voice

Here's his Wayne Voice:
Wayne Voice

I know what it sounds like.

[quickquote=10756950](auto quote)[/quickquote

Kilmer sounded the same as he aways does..

Originally posted by SpaceMonkey
Kilmer and Keaton had Batman voices in comparison to Clooney's "car salesman Batman" voice.

yeah Kilmer and Keaton had Batman voices where Clooney did not at all,which is why I say he was an even worse choice for the role than Keaton was.

Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
I know what it sounds like.

[quickquote=10756950](auto quote)[/quickquote

Kilmer sounded the same as he aways does..

That would be an accurate statement if you were talking about Clooney, but Kilmer? thats wayyyyyyyyy off target.Like Space Monkey said,Keaton AND Kilmer had Batman voices,Clooney on the other hand,sounded the same as he always does.

Originally posted by Mr Parker
That would be an accurate statement if you were talking about Clooney, but Kilmer? thats wayyyyyyyyy off target.Like Space Monkey said,Keaton AND Kilmer had Batman voices,Clooney on the other hand,sounded the same as he always does.

I don't think it is though. I've heard Val Kilmer talk. In my opinion he talks the exact same way as he always does.

Okay but I dont think your listening close enough though.I got that movie on tape and he definetely sounds different as Batman than he does as Bruce Wayne in his voice.Clooney on the other hand though, like i said,is a different story.

Originally posted by Mr Parker
Okay but I dont think your listening close enough though.I got that movie on tape and he definetely sounds different as Batman than he does as Bruce Wayne in his voice.Clooney on the other hand though, like i said,is a different story.

Yeah, his voice a little different when he was Batman:

I don't have any clips to prove it this time, but I re-watched a few scenes on my VHS of Forever, and recognized a SLIGHT difference...

It isn't like Keaton's "Regular Everyday Normal Guy" Bruce Wayne -> "Complete Badass" Batman, it was more like "Regular Everyday Normal Guy" Bruce Wayne -> "Regular Everyday Normal Guy with a deeper voice" Batman...

Agreed with the OP for the most part. Begins sucked. Only reason I'm gonna see Dark Knight is because I believe the Joker will save it from sucking completely. I hope to god they fix the shitty blurred/sped up fight scenes in this one to.

Keaton and Kilmer did different voices , yes. In this way, i liked their work with the voices. Clooney was exactly the same playing batman and Wayne, same with the voice. Bale did a great job with the voice, i dont know what is the problem with his voice.

Originally posted by Mr Parker
Okay but I dont think your listening close enough though.I got that movie on tape and he definetely sounds different as Batman than he does as Bruce Wayne in his voice.Clooney on the other hand though, like i said,is a different story.

However I am listening veryclose. I watch the Batman movies every other day and last night I watched Batman Foever. Kilmer talkes the exact same way throughout the whole film. Not only that I also have a couple other Val Kilmer movies on DVD and played several scenes, guess what Kilmer sounds the same. I stand by what I said, my opinion, but Kilmer has no Bat voice.

Originally posted by bakerboy
Keaton and Kilmer did different voices , yes. In this way, i liked their work with the voices. Clooney was exactly the same playing batman and Wayne, same with the voice. Bale did a great job with the voice, i dont know what is the problem with his voice.

yeah they did different voices and I also liked their work in their voices.Like you said,Clooney was exactly the same as wayne and batman though in his voice.Yeah Bale was great with his voice also.It was really unique. 👆

They say this movie is "real" yet it's so rehearsed, it's anything but. How can you expect to take a BATMAN movie serious with dialogue like this?
HOMELESS MAN: "Nice Coat."
BATMAN: "Nice Coat."
THOMAS WAYNE: "Don't be afraid Bruce."
RA'S/DUCARD (Whoever): "Don't be afraid Bruce."
THOMAS WAYNE: "Why do we fall?..."
ALFRED: "Why do we fall?..."
RA'S/DUCARD: "Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons."
BRUCE WAYNE: "Theatricality and deception are powerful weapons."
and the winner, for worst line goes to...
RACHEL DAWES: "It's not who you are underneath, but what you do that defines you."
BATMAN" "It's not who I am underneath..." You get the point.
Oh and in any world “real” or fantasy, BATMAN wouldn’t kill cops.
Also, in the "real" world, a guy with no superpowers taking out 10 or 15 thugs out faster than NEO, THE FLASH, SPIDER-MAN and SUPERMAN combined, getting set on fire and surviving a 7 story fall out of a window and waking up a week later like nothing happened? "Kids, don't try this at home." I thought it was "Why do we fall? So we can learn to pick ourselves back up." Not "Why do fall? So our butler's can come pick us up." Even Bruce Lee didn't move that fast, and even if he did the directors made sure it looked "REAL." Plus, “Batman lives in the real world?” Boy, somebody needs a “reality” check. Anybody who can say this with a straight face must have fallen into a vat of chemicals.
YES, it has more characters that are actually from the comics than any other BATMAN movie. YES, Joe Chill killed Bruce Wayne's parents; and YES I agree. This movie is totally overrated. Usually the reasons I hear who argue that this movie is the best have superficial reasons such as "Oh, Bale's cowl was great, he didn't have to turn to move his head." Or "Wow, Bale looks like Bruce Wayne." B.F.D. then of course there's the always ludicrous, "Well, you just don't like it because you're not a BATMAN fan." To all of you who say that to me I say, "F@#k you." If you ever saw how many comic books, especially BATMAN you wouldn't be so quick to contradict me. So because I'm not a FRANK MILLER BATMAN fan I don't know anything about BATMAN? Well, unlike you BATMAN BEGINS fanatics I prefer a BATMAN as he should be "a self made man", not as some DIRTY HARRY, DARTH VADER, SAM KINISON (coming off all quiet one minute and screaming at the top of your lungs the next), SHANNON DOHERTY (acting like some superficial, pugilist) AZRAEL (it's the suit and gadgets that make me a hero) wannabe.
In TIM BURTON'S masterpiece, the opening is so much more compelling and it opens at night. In BATMAN BEGINS...AND BEGINS...AND BEGINS...AND BEGINS. it's the first BATMAN movie I saw that opens during the day.
The BATMAN I know is as I said a "self made man", a "self made man" doesn't get everything he needs to fight crime conveniently handed to him. Plus, it's kind of contradicting in itself that THOMAS WAYNE who set out to fight crime and violence has MILITARY APPLICATIONS.
I can think of a thousand reasons to hate this movie, literally. Where as BATMAN BEGINS fanatics can't even think of a reason as to why they love it, they just say they do. I want to know what it was they loved so much about the movie. Was it the incessant talking? The choppy editing in the most compelling scenes? Such as when Bruce's parents die, and when BATMAN finally springs into action and we never see a second of those fantastic fighting skills that Bruce Wayne has "trained" for? Was it the ridiculous BAT-TANK chase scene which for some reason is "killing" cops (Way to preserve law & Order by the Bats) and they're making stupid jokes? Was it the guys in the Water Tower acting like f@#king idiots stating the obvious (if anything in this movie could vaguely be construed as "acting"😉? Was it Rachel Dawes driving up to a bunch of homeless people telling us what we already know? What is this THE F#%KING WONDER YEARS? I'm not stupid, I don't need an explanation of what's already in front of my face. What I want to know is the most obvious "If Rachel has a car, why does she take the train? So Batman can save her?", "What decade is this? When did they start having stun guns, sports cars, cell phones and color TV 7yrs after the GREAT DEPRESSION?". Another questions even BATMAN BEGINS fans ask is "If you have a device that sucks the water out of things, wouldn't that kill people anyway?" Of course the give some arcane explanation from that weaslly little guy about how the device microwaves an enemies water supply, but isn't water, water? Or for that matter "If you have a device that sucks the water out of things, why bother dumping toxins into it?",
I'm sure all the characters are equally interesting, in fact I know from the comics, but Nolan and Goyer are so busy filling Bale's ego that you don't have a chance to appreciate them. If this is a movie for BATMAN fans, then why do we need a 1hr. explanation as to the how and why of BRUCE WAYNE becoming BATMAN. People complained that "Oh, the villains got too much screen time.", of course these so called BATMAN BEGINS fans seem to be missing the point. As Burton explained "Batman works better when he's in the shadows, he's dark, mysterious and reclusive, so he's not gonna be eating up screen time and dancing around the Batcave." I for one don't want to see BATMAN sinking into brooding self pity for 1hr. if you are still p.o.ed about what happened to your parents 20 years ago and want somebody to listen to your problems tell a shrink; not a crime boss; not an audience; not your Zsa Zsa Gabor of a girlfriend; a shrink. Another thing that bugs me, is the whole scene from when Bruce comes back from "Princeton" to the part where he throws the gun in the river. Not only because of the obvious eat more screen time, so Bruce Wayne can selfishly see the guy who killed his parents get his. But it takes away from the whole idea that he is "obsessed", he would've started becoming BATMAN rather than coming back all, "Oh woe is me, I have a big house, lots of money, killer good looks and a million dollar company. There's nothing to live for. Hey Rachel, I’m damaged goods, want to make out in my parent’s bed?"
I can go on and on. I definitely wanted to express my opinions on how undermined I thought Ra's Al Ghul/Henri Ducard whoever the f@#k Liam Neeson was supposed to be and my favorite villain SCARECROW was reduced to a petty thug who throws a potato sack over his head, jumps out and screams "Boo!" (Ooh, that would scare the s@#t out of me, if I were still in training pants. I guess they didn't have money for a silk stocking in their 135 billion dollar budget). Anyway, I'm tired and unlike all the actors in BATMAN BEGINS I'm not getting paid billions of dollars to talk...and talk...and talk...and talk. So good Knight, or in the case of BATMAN BEGINS, good-bye.

You bring up good points...

Yeah, Batman Begins has its share of flaws that lower its awesomeness, but all in all I'd say that Begins was the most complete package so far...

A blend of Batman 89 and Batman Begins would be the end all be all of Batman movies...

And from the scenes I've seen of TDK, I have to say, that's what it's looking like, to me, at least...

"Also, in the "real" world, a guy with no superpowers taking out 10 or 15 thugs out faster than NEO, THE FLASH, SPIDER-MAN and SUPERMAN combined... Boy, somebody needs a “reality” check."

Could it be the person who just suggested that NEO, THE FlASH, SPIDER-MAN, and SUPERMAN existed in the real world? I mean really, I know what your saying. Batman obviously doesn't exist in the real world, but if you are really going to question the plausibility of a comic book movie you're probab

"This movie is totally overrated. Usually the reasons I hear who argue that this movie is the best have superficial reasons such as "Oh, Bale's cowl was great, he didn't have to turn to move his head." Or "Wow, Bale looks like Bruce Wayne.""

Yes, it is overrated, but i've never heard anyone say those are the reasons they liked it. Most people i've talked to like it for its neo-noir style, photography, darker, grittier Gotham, strong acting, and most of all the fact that it is a mainstream big-budget action movie that isn't driven by special effects and action, but by its ideas. It's not great, but it does a lot of things no other comic book movies have and it mostly succeeds. You have to give credit where credit is due.

"In TIM BURTON'S masterpiece, the opening is so much more compelling and it opens at night. In BATMAN BEGINS...AND BEGINS...AND BEGINS...AND BEGINS. it's the first BATMAN movie I saw that opens during the day."

but this isn't a superficial reason for hating it? what does it matter when the movie starts? how does that reflect in any way the quality of the film?

Here's the disclaimer: I'm not a fan of Batman, and thus don't know as much about the original Batman comic and can therefore not speak to how true Batman Begins is to the original script. However, as a fan of film in general I can say that Batman Begins is compelling in its own right regardless of the source material. It is completely compelling in regards to its drama, its characterizations, its style and its ideas. It sounds like you already had an idea of what you thought Batman should be and no director should be allowed to portray him as anything else. In adapting from source material a director should be allowed the artistic freedom to change aspects in order to make a compelling film. Nolan has, and for the most part, he has succeeded.