Batman Begins

Eight years after the ultimate flop, Batman & Robin, comes an episode that rivals the early Burton films. Great atmosphere, cinematography and visual effects. I'm not a big fan of Christian Bale, but he's lost next to Gary Oldman and Michael Caine. You can see that the hiatus has been beneficial and the bar has been set pretty high again. (26/02/2010)

Nolan's trilogy logically begins with Batman’s origin, which had been neglected to such an extent up until then. Today the situation is a bit different, but it was not a bad move then. Batman needed a revival and audiences needed to forget the last film of the last series, Batman & Robin. Nolan relied on good actors and a realistic style within reason. This was yet another contribution to the great family of DC films and helped bridge a decade when the style of the genre was changing fundamentally. (04/05/2022)

Christopher Nolan created a trilogy that redefined all established norms of superhero films at the time. Personally, I hold Batman in the highest regard among comic book characters; his origin story is incredibly fascinating to me. That’s why I was thrilled that someone took on this intriguing project and made the most of the opportunity. The first film introduces us to the beginnings of this eccentric billionaire, explaining why he decided to become a masked guardian of Gotham with the goal of making life difficult for criminals. It also reveals that his early days of monitoring all the nefarious activities were far from simple and were fraught with challenges; it took him quite some time to master everything. Nolan prides himself on his unique approach to the material, striving to minimize the inclusion of grandiose action full of explosions and CGI mess, which suits me immensely. On the other hand, the film emphasizes every dialogue (especially Alfred and Bruce, showcasing perfectionism in every aspect), with a script polished to the last detail, allowing you to fully enjoy the conversations of all the characters. I wouldn’t replace Christian Bale with anyone; no one has portrayed such a human Batman before, and I assert that this portrayal suits him best. I also appreciate the inclusion of various villains (Scarecrow, Ra's al Ghul) and, of course, the now-legendary Jim Gordon played by Gary Oldman. The ending set the stage for the second film, and we all know how Heath Ledger claimed the sequel for himself. I give the first film 90%. (12/09/2019)

The raw atmosphere of Gotham is portrayed perfectly and better than ever in Nolan's first Batman film. Thank goodness it was Christopher Nolan who took on the new Bat-saga, and he really did it in his own excellent way, showing us that Batman can be taken seriously and his fate and mission can be identified with. Though Batman Begins is mass-market entertainment, as it should be, it doesn't lack rather well-developed characters (in the old Batman you would have a hard time looking for some more complex psychological connections), the overall atmosphere is more than decent, and in the end really a bit apocalyptic :)), which is only to the benefit of the whole thing. I was a skeptic at the time, thinking that Chris Nolan couldn't top his first Batman. Everyone probably knows all too well how horribly wrong I was. P.S.: The cast is fanatically fantastic. :) (08/01/2010)

Visual wizard Burton created a legend, master of the film narrative Christopher Nolan found motivation for it. That's how simple the prequel to Batman, the comic book legend that took deep roots on the film screen, works. Strange fools tried to build on the first two classic films, but the result is the fact that Nolan saves the extinguishing legend, and it must be said that he saves the faith in a big way. His sober, realistic, dark and psychological ride impacts the viewer especially in the first half of the director's well-known aces: superbly sorted narration, suggestiveness, carefully sculpted acting performances (e.g., the episodic scene in the opera is a masterpiece!). The second, much more action-packed half, in which the symbol is already created and it is time for battle, is not as dazzling, because where Burton pulled out heavy visual calibers, Nolan is a little clumsy after all (especially the action scenes suffer from too much confusion). But: Batman comes out victorious in the closing stages and his director with him. Simply because, beneath the mainstream of the remediated comic cliché of the struggle of good against evil, there is a well-regulated underflow that has depth. It's the psychology of a hero, an anatomy of fear and evil that wants to do dubious good. The tool of the lower stream is both the magnificent rhythmization of the shots and the gradation of inconspicuous tension, as well as the excellent acting performance. Christian Bale is truly the best man in the black mask, Michael Caine is truly irresistible with his dry cynicism, Liam Neeson is "just" persuasive and Gary Oldman is unrecognizable... The very awkward Katie Holmes is unfortunate, but she gets lost in the mix. I wouldn't open the question of whether Nolan had surpassed Burton at all. His Batman is different. It has a completely unique atmosphere and a completely unique style. He prefers to look in the face over wild gunfights. That's a good thing, but after all, it brings a certain and understandable inner contradiction to the film, the bearer of which is the somewhat torn direction. Among comic books, however, Batman confirms the position of a true nobleman, and Nolan confirms that "ex-independents" manage to do the impossible – to film intelligent and non-prefabricated spectacles for Hollywood. ___ after the second viewing, I am clearly itching to give it full stars. All of my objections apply, but not that much, and the film improves upon a second viewing... (20/07/2005)