Batman Begins

Batman Begins is a terribly clever piece of work. For movie lovers, or people who are more into film, it muddies the waters with awesome acting aces (Tom Wilkinson is a god, Michael Caine is a god, Cillian Murphy is a god, Liam Neeson is a god, Gary Oldman is less of a god here than usual, and Rutger Hauer's godliness didn't get a chance to shine through), topped off with some great cinematography, a terrific score, and Nolan's deft hand. I mean, I have my complaints about the direction, of course, because to shoot 150 million hand-to-hand battles in a comic book movie like in a Steven Seagal movie (meaning a short montage of close-ups) is kind of yuck. But still ok. The problem is that all of the positive factors listed above are just tinsel on top of a supremely idiotic script about a battle between (absolute) good and (absolute) evil. Really all the positive characters here are dehumanized by perfection, and the negative ones (except one) have no other side whatsoever. It's not fair, and it blows the proclaimed darkness completely out of the water. That's like writing that LoTR is a noir film. It's classic American blockbuster hypocrisy, meaning there’s no lack of monorails falling on a town of people whose lives no one cares all while Batman’s coming up on police cars even though he has plenty of space next to him to see if they’ll move. And move they shall, but Batman Begins can’t dodge a mediocre rating from me. Sorry. (21/07/2005)

No gothic buildings, spinning shots of newspaper headlines, jokes, positive emotions, digital eye-candy effects or a catchy soundtrack. Batman Begins is no fairy-tale fantasy. It’s Insomnia with Batman – a bleak drama about a real person set against the backdrop of the real world. What makes the film unique is the gravitas of the lead and supporting characters and their incorporation into the dramatically dense, emotionally engaging and intelligently told story. Everything in the film is physically palpable, the psychology of the characters is well developed, and the characterization of Bruce Wayne is literally a dissection of the development of his personality, a clarification of the reasons for which he became who he is. As a true character actor, Christian Bale redefines the cult of his character’s name. His Batman is not an exemplary hero. Rather, he is extraordinarily angry and enjoys the superficial vices that his wealth affords him. The bombastic cast is not without purpose and elevates the film to the level of a spectacular celebration of the comic-book genre. The action is great, though not quite as great as in Spider-Man. But does that really matter? It’s pains me not to give it five stars, but as an eternal idealist, I would have liked more plot innovation in the second half, which is rather guided by comic-book rules. The first half, however, is worthy of six stars. (24/06/2005)

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)

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)

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)