« restaurant review: sea salt | Main | spawning of obsession »
March 01, 2006
movie review: batman begins
Yes you really read this right -- I am only now catching up to some of the finest movies of 2005. Thanks to Irene and Jarvis who graciously lent us their copy.
I was really looking forward to watching this movie. Like many others around my age, I eagerly awaited the Batman movie that was made in 1989. While we grew up on the Adam West Bopp Kazam Pow Batman television series and enjoyed it for what it was, something never quite added up. The first thing in my head was, "Is Batman supposed to have a gut?" Then when I really got into Batman from a comic book and graphic novel perspective around high school, and I saw that it was nothing like the television series. When Batman (1989) finally came out, I dragged Jake out and we went to see it. There was no way it could match up to the hype that was generated for it, and a lot of reviews made note of that. At the same time, to a high school kid, this was pure candy. I picked up the VHS tape as soon as it came out and watched it over and over again. Watched the fight scenes to see whether Michael Keaton could really hold his own (sadly, no). Watched my favorite lines of dialogue (Who are you?!? I'm Batman. Excuse me, have you ever danced with the devil in the pale moonlight?) over and over.
And then I watched in horror as the Batman movie franchise first got weirder (Batman Returns) then devolved into outright camp (Batman Forever). I never even gave George Clooney's Batman a chance (in Batman and Robin) because of the negative buzz.
And now, Christopher Nolan and Christian Bale were able to put together what many were calling the definitive comic-book movie, *and* the definitive Batman movie. That's a pretty tall order, considering that comic books have been made into better and better movies as of late. Spider-Man really hit all the right notes, as did X-Men. Did I think Batman Begins matched up? Oh yes. However, a note of caution, I am fairly big Batman fan (not geek-level, but close). I've read the best Batman graphic novels of all time (Dark Knight Returns, Year One, Long Halloween) and can quote backstory for him. At one time, I actually owned a hardcover compendium of Batman comics and for some stupid reason which doesn't make sense to me even now, I GAVE IT AWAY. (probably when I was trying to convince myself that I was growing up and had no need/interest in comics anymore).
I watched it with Jenn which made for an interesting contrast because she didn't watch it through the same eyes I did. She knew Batman was Bruce Wayne, and that was about it. For the first half of the movie, which featured Bruce more than it did Bats, Jenn just couldn't get into the movie. "What's with all this backstory?" is a paraphrase of what she said. She eventually fell asleep and finished the movie the next day, which I'm guessing a lot of non-fans would be in the same category.
This movie does take a while to get started in a traditional sense. Unlike Nolan's Memento, or the 1989 version of Batman, the story here is told in straightforward, linear fashion, with the occasional flashback to Bruce Wayne's childhood, and once to him around his college years. But it really nailed all the key points of the storied Batman origin, with only minor revisions. Characters were pulled from a lot of different stories, which showed that the writer (David Goyer) really knew Batman and had a knowledge of the characters that have come through the Batman comic universe. Christian Bale, Michael Caine, and Gary Oldman all seemed dead on as Bruce Wayne, Alfred, and Jim Gordon, respectively. It took me a while to get used to Michael Caine as Alfred, seeing as in the comics he's bald with a pencil mustache and has a much slimmer build than Caine does, but Caine got the chemistry perfect between Bale and him. The one misstep I felt was the casting of Tom Wilkinson as Carmine Falcone. This guy is supposed to be an Italian mob guy, the Mafia Don. Instead we get an Irish accent (I think) -- not quite what I was expecting. Maybe Nolan didn't want a stereotypical Soprano-like mobster, but it took a little to get used to.
Many people also made note of the explanatory nature of the movie. They took great care to ground the movie in a form of logic, in the sense that all of the devices in Batman's arsenal (the Batmobile, the utility belt, the batarangs) all made sense. Even the cape became something useful, instead of a standard dashing superhero accessory that had no function except to flutter in the wind. I have to give extra points to Goyer and Nolan for coming up with that one. Everyone takes the cape for granted but its a big part of the Batman costume and many artist over the years have depicted in myriad ways that make Batman look alternately graceful, menacing, and mysterious. (Then again, some draw the cape in ways that would cause Batman to trip all over it if it were actually true to size). The only story to feature something similar was Batman: Year Two, with the then not-yet-famous Todd McFarlane drawing. He had Batman with a huge cape looking like he was flying, without any grappling lines and such. But it was never explained, so I still think the writers here deserve the credit for coming up with the whole memory cloth - cape as glider/air brake angle.
From a fight scene perspective, I wasn't expecting much, given how high the bar has been set in recent years with the new generation of martial arts movies (Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon, The Matrix, etc.) But the choice here for the style of filming the fight scenes surprised and delighted me. The first Batman fight scene setpiece, with Batman taking down Carmine Falcone at the docks, took the viewpoint of the criminals that were trying to fight Batman. From the first guy, who was abruptly grabbed and disappeared into a boxcar, to the big fight scene, where they showed flash clips of this whirling black-garbed figure, a punch here, a spinkick there, someone who you can't really see but is basically whaling on your ass. They took pains to actually depict how Bruce Wayne fought as himself and how he learned to fight as Batman. The new addition to his backstory of being taught ninjitsu by Ra's Al Ghul, while not canon, does connect the dots of how Batman is able to sneak around and take nearly anyone by surprise. It was a shame that they had to keep this movie at a PG-13 level, otherwise, I'm sure the story would have let Batman make use of some of the cooler weapons in his arsenal, such as the Bat shaped throwing stars that appeared throughout.
While the aforementioned pacing is fairly slow in the beginning, the movie does pick up, and by the time it reached the explosive (literally) ending, I actually let out a breath that I didn't know I was holding. That's how good this movie was.
This movie gets a solid A in my book.
Postscript: I can't believe I forgot to mention this, because there was something that did bother me about this movie. The script made a bad habit of having characters recite lines back to other characters that were said to them previously. I actually noticed this during my first time watching and I noticed that this happened at least 3 times. Sure, it makes for a good comeuppance moment, but really, in real life, who remembers the exact thing that was said to them and then gets a moment in which to throw that back at someone? It happens every now and then, but 3 times in the same movie? To me, that's a bit of lazy screenwriting. Sorry David Goyer, that's my only beef about this script, otherwise it was terrific.
Posted by spoof747 at March 1, 2006 03:06 PM