I respect the tradition of the "origin story" in the superhero genre, so I dont have a complaint about retelling, only with the amount of time devoted to a rehash that adds nothing new.

I disagree with those who give the film kudos for "explaining" the characters better. Characters develop through action and behavior; if you need a scene to "explain" a character, it means you aren't telling the story well. Even worse is the attempt to explain a character's motivations; th eone moment that explains why he hates something or fears something and so on. That's just hack writing that masquerades as good craft in mainstream films because it's designed to make sure nobody is even the slightest bit confused about anything ever. Heaven forbid we watch a film and wonder for even one second, "Why is he doing that?" No, we need to be told beforehand just so everything fits into place perfectly and we haven't even the slightest misgiving.

The surest way to ruin a mystery is to solve it, right?

"Joker only kills Batman's parents in the Burton version. In the comics, it is a regular, old run-of-the mill mugger named Joe Chill that kills them." --William

Thanks, William. At least now I know my aging memory isn't failing me. But I wonder if there aren't more people watching the film who remember Burton's version of the parents' death than read the comic book version? This new entry is supposed to be a continuation in the Warner Bros. movie series of Batman adventures, so I have to wonder if greater consistency wasn't in order. Otherwise, it distracts the viewer, the last thing a filmmaker wants to do.

John

John,

Actually, "Batman Begins" is a complete break from all previous "Batman" movies and TV shows. Therefore, it has nothing to do with Burton's version of having The Joker kill Bruce Wayne's parents.

Eddie

Little offtopic, but slightly relavent in relation to the quick edits in the fights.... but in Troy did anyone else appreciate the Hector and Achilles fight? Not only was it shot wide enough to see what was going on, I thought it showed the mechanics of a duel very well.

The reasoning behind "telling the origin story" over and over, is, believe it or not guys, we (that know the backgrounds of these characters) are the geeks! We're viewed that way in Hollywood. Even though, we're their biggest slice of the pie when it comes to these types of films, they want these films to be able to be seen by the "average Joe" walking in off the street that knows nothing about "Batman", "Superman", "Spiderman", or the "X-Men". That's why they do the same things in just about ANY movie or book that's in a series. They don't want the reader (or movie goer) that picks up somewhere in the middle or the end of a book or movie series to be lost. Which, in my opinion, is LAME! If you want to see a movie, or read a book, you start from the beginning, you don't walk into a movie half way through! So why would you care about the people that are going to be confused by starting a "series" in the middle? The answer is money. ARGH! :@ But, I digress.


Eddie,

I liked your review on "Tae Guk Gi". It looks pretty interesting, but doesn't quite look like my cup 'o tea. I'd like to check it out though. I hope they have it at one of the rental stores. I used to be a pretty big fan of the 'War' genre. Now days, I have less interest.

Will,

I don't see how this film adds anything at all to the origin story. The origin has been told and retold a thousand times. What's the point of spending so much time on it if you're just going to do the same thing everyone else has done? So this time he falls down a well instead of having a bat fly into a room. As J.R. Jones wrote, the main problem with the movie is just that the script is such a hack job.

I agree with you about the Batmobile, though. When I saw stills of it, I couldn't believe how ridiculous it looked. In the context of the movie, it seemed entirely appropriate and the extended chase scene was the best (the only good) action scene in the movie.

As for Batman's voice, I liked the scene where he very angrily interrogated Gordon's corrupt partner - I thought "the Batman" really came to life in that scene. The rest of the time, it sounded like he just forgot his inhaler.

I am still waiting for someone to really capture Bruce Wayne's psychosis. The guy is a freaking nut job, after all. That's what makes the lunatic villains he fights so interesting and appropriate; he's only a half-step removed from all of them.

But, hey, I was always rooting for Superman to take down Batman in Miller's "Dark Knight." :)

I finally got out to see another film after seeing Star Wars 3 three times and I wish I spent my money seeing it a fourth time. Though I know nothing about comics or characters in them, decided to see this one. The casting was good escept Holmes who needed a bullet in her from the moment she was on the screen. Eddie was being kind in his review. I would have given it a 5. But it is still the best Batman movie. My friend made me watch all of them after seeing BB because I never saw a Batman movie. WOW how did they ever make money?the Spiderman series and the X-men series blow this series out of the water.

Yet your name has "warner" (as in Warner Bros.) in it. :)

I actually thought the movie was fantastic. The only quibble for me was the editing. I can only forgive Nolan once for this because this is his first action piece. I just hope he doesn't go the same route in the sequel (if he's going to direct that too). I give "Batman Begins" an 8.5/10.

"My friend made me watch all of them after seeing BB because I never saw a Batman movie. WOW how did they ever make money?the Spiderman series and the X-men series blow this series out of the water."

What kind of a friend makes you watch Batman & Robin? :p