Ain't It Cool News (
Movie News

More reactions to BATMAN BEGINS! This is driving me Batty!

Hey folks, Harry here... I see this tomorrow night... Moriarty has already seen it, but I believe his computer is being sacrificed to the pixel gods upon the pixel pyre. Mori hates his computer, they often times end up wrestling naked in front of his fireplace like Oliver Reed... and thus he loses pieces he's written for you to the great abyss. You'll find more folks losing their minds for this baby below... Enjoy...

I just went to an IMAX screening of Batman Begins and… frickin’ wow.

Wowy wow wow.

This film easily trumps any live-action incarnation we’ve scene of the Dark Knight before, borrowing heavily from both the comics and the Dini and Co. animated series. This is a hard, fast, driving, heartfelt epic that draws you into the character of Bruce Wayne and makes you damn well care. Batman doesn’t play second-fiddle to the villains here like in the other films. It’s his movie and that’s the way it should be.

Much has been said of the film’s “reality” quotient, and I’m here to say it works. Nolan talks about how Batman’s strong because he does push-ups, he gets around because of his gadgets, and by introducing each of them with a plausible explanation, we forget to quibble and go along with it. The technology may be fantastic, but it’s believable. And, unlike the “reality” of something like Daredevil, Nolan doesn’t forget his ideals halfway though and start having Batman wire-jump thirty feet into the air.

The acting all around is top notch. Everyone in the film is quality and they really pull through in their respective roles. Personally, I love Cillian Murphy’s Scarecrow. He adds the slightest extra cadence to each syllable, turning the dialogue into something more than was written. As for the man himself, Christian Bale is far and away the best Batman ever. I was never conscious of watching a movie star take on Batman the way it was with the other films. You watch Bruce Wayne grow and transform and become Batman, and nothing gets between that.

I really don’t want to spoil the best bits, just because you need to see them for yourself. But know that the film works, and on many levels. Three quick highlights: 1) Batman moves in flashes, just the way he should. He takes out one guy and disappears into shadows, leaving the others to collectively shit their pants. It is THAT cool. 2) The fear gas is very well done. You see the effects from multiple perspectives throughout, and none is better than when a certain someone sees the Batman while under the influence. 3) The hints at the end of what’s to come. SO good.

I’ve been following the buzz poo-pooing that’s been going on down in TalkBack, where a few folks have read a draft of the script and have been doing their best to sandbag expectations.


There are one-liners, yes, and just about all of them work fine because the words from the script are acted out and made plausible. A few aren’t as strong, but they’re not of the cringe-worthy variety.

The suit works. It’s practical. It’s plausible. It’s the most “real” Batman we’re going to get. It’s not Sandy Collara’s Dead End (and I say thank God for that). There are a few moments when the mask doesn’t sit just right, but those are ridiculously insignificant nitpicks when the rest of the film works as well as it does.

I’ve got three other nitpicks that really aren’t even problems: 1) Editing. Early in the film, during some of the flashback and training sequences, the editing of certain scenes feels a little clipped and truncated. My friend put it right saying it felt like you were watching an extended trailer for the scene as opposed to the scene itself. It works though—don’t get me wrong—as these scenes really propel the narrative forward. 2) Action scenes. Most of these scenes stay pretty close and tight, in medium shots instead of wides, rendering some of the action a giant blur (granted, the IMAX didn’t help that any). There were a few times I was wishing to see things pulled back and revealed a bit more. Again, it still works. 3) Score. It’s downright brilliant in parts. Only problem I had is there’s no instantly-recognizalbe, hummable main theme. Kinda the way it is with Spider-Man.

You might think this is all hyperbole, but the movie is THAT good. I left the theater buzzing in a way I haven’t in a long time. I mean, Episode III was phenomenal, but leaving that was leaving satisfied in a different way. It was the end of something great and grand. It was completion. Batman Begins is the start of something new, and every step taken has been the right one. I absolutely cannot wait to see what they do next.

Hot damn if this isn’t the best summer we’ve had in a long, long time.


here's babyshoes with his brief reaction...

hi harry,

i just was one of the lucky few who attended wizard world philly and got to see a screening of batman begins. while i'm not going to give a full review with major details, i can say that the movie ABSOLUTELY BLEW ME AND MY TWO FRIENDS AWAY!!! personally, i can say it is the best comic book adaptation to date. there were some minor flaws like the car chase scenes, which were a tad unrealistic compared to the rest of the movie, and when the name of the "secret weapon" is used by the bad guy is said, there is a little cringefactor and some believability issues. But...overall, i was totally not expecting the movie to be this damn good. the villians are well-acted and not over-used and abused and batman is just downright scary and creepy in some scenes, the way he ought to be (emphasis on the scary). dc has really hit on something big here and i can't wait to see it again on the 15th!

Call me


Readers Talkback
comments powered by Disqus
    + Expand All
  • June 5, 2005, 11:31 a.m. CST


    by Brock Samson

  • June 5, 2005, 11:32 a.m. CST


    by JBouganim


  • June 5, 2005, 11:33 a.m. CST


    by JBouganim


  • June 5, 2005, 11:34 a.m. CST


    by JBouganim


  • June 5, 2005, 11:36 a.m. CST

    at last

    by silentjay

    Perhaps it is not yet Dark Knight Returns, but the Dark Knight has returned.

  • June 5, 2005, 11:37 a.m. CST


    by mostdwnloadedman

    Batman is put into a internment camp in Japan?

  • June 5, 2005, 11:44 a.m. CST

    Sounds promising.

    by F69

    Ok, two positive reviews but they claim the few major nitpicks they have is with the editing, action scenes and the score? They're some pretty big aspects of the movie. Until Robert Rodriguez and Frank Miller get together to make The Dark Knight Returns then this looks like the best it's going to get.

  • June 5, 2005, 11:47 a.m. CST

    Ebert and Roeper sounded like they wanted to make sweet love to

    by xXMr_BoJaNgLeSXx

    Jesus this movies getting good buzz.

  • June 5, 2005, 11:50 a.m. CST

    Second Reviewer? Is English Your Native Language?

    by hipcheck13

    ...otherwise, sounds like they got Bats right on track. Nice.

  • June 5, 2005, 12:01 p.m. CST

    Sounds like Moriarity needs to learn how to use CTRL-S from time

    by Ted Striker

    Seriously - how can a professional writer NOT hit CTRL-S every 5 minutes or so while writing? It becomes a mindless habit after awhile, and saves many a headache. Some people like to do things the hard way...

  • What a surprise...Not to undercut Nolan's achievement, but take notes Hollywood. Hire talented people to make your movies and and trust them, and you'll end up with great films. Hire hacks like Michael Bay and Joel Shumacher and you get what you deserve.

  • June 5, 2005, 12:17 p.m. CST

    This movie will OWN

    by IAmLegolas

    If there's a midnight showing, I might just have to go to it. CHRISTIAN BALE IS GOD.

  • June 5, 2005, 12:26 p.m. CST

    Nitpicking to death arent we?

    by Lost in Uranus

    "There were some minor flaws like the car chase scenes, which were a tad unrealistic compared to the rest of the movie" This seems to be a trend with the geeks lately. Go watch a movie, sit down and count how many "flaws" a movie has. When in reality these "flaws" are nothing but minor details that dont match to the exact absolute preconceived ideal of what the movie should sound, or look like at any given time. Give me a fucking break. Think you can do better? Then show us assholes. Until then, Imma have to kindly ask the nitpicking haters to STFU. Heres looking forward to June 15. Cheers!

  • June 5, 2005, 12:55 p.m. CST

    Justin Theroux-Joker. Wes Bentley-Robin. Viggo Mortensson-Two Fa

    by Trevor Goodchild

    Would of gone with Lance Henrickson as Al Ghul.

  • June 5, 2005, 12:57 p.m. CST


    by Taylor Made

    Man, ever since pre-productin to reading the draft to hearing these great reviews has only raised my expectations and impatience. I am glad that Nolan changed Goyer's script but still kept the basis of it. All I know is I need to do what I did with Episode III and keep my expectation low. The higher my expectations the less I will be looking for little things that these reviewers have noticed. I mean if you think about it and look back at your favorite movies, there is gonna always be little things that you can pick on. I just hope the reality of this movie doesn't become like Hulk, even though I liked it, and the general, non-comic fan viewer doesn't give it a good word-of-mouth and ruin it's box office as I would like to see a trilogy set up.

  • June 5, 2005, 1:10 p.m. CST


    by performingmonkey

    So this movie is good? Thank fuck for that. At least we'll be getting ONE good flick this summer.

  • June 5, 2005, 1:13 p.m. CST

    This is no HULK, friends...

    by Jon_Snow

    The early reviews of Hulk weren't nearly this good. In fact, some early reviews had the alarm bells ringing that it could BOMB. I see no such signs with Begins.

  • June 5, 2005, 1:14 p.m. CST

    The smear campaign of the last couple of months

    by Dark Knight Lite

    is being proved wrong. One of the more ridiculous bashers said, "wait till the mainstream reviews come in,"and now they are, showing him as the insignificant whiner we all suspected. Hollywood Reporter, Ebert and Roeper, and Empire are coming in with very positive to rave reviews, with only Variety coming in with a negative so far. Variety says the film is too dark and not for kids, which sounds like a clarion call to me, but I guess some moviegoers prefer the nipple batsuit approach. I anxiously await the penguins flying out of "moviemack's" ass, but of course he will dig in and defend his indefensible ravings. Dark Knight out.

  • June 5, 2005, 1:23 p.m. CST

    Add Newsweek to the list

    by Gheorghe Zamfir

    of positive reviews.

  • ...otherwise, it sounds like this one's gold. McCarthy's problem with it seemed like it was about 60% his own baggage -- he was reviewing it as sort of a failed comic book movie, and this just isn't that. I don't think Nolan, for an instant, was trying to make a "comic book movie"; he's trying to insert Batman and these villains into what we'd more or less call "the real world." If that's so, how would someone with no super powers become super-powerful? Why would a man don burlap and call himself a scarecrow? We're talking about that smidgen of a leap that takes us from someone calling himself "Son of Sam" to going ahead and making a costume to go with the persona. At least, that's what I think is the challenge Nolan took on, and it's what, to me, is really exciting: in this world in which I walk around right now, if someone dressed like THAT (and now I'm thinking of the stills of Batman with his cape extended kind of downward, like wings curling down) -- if someone dressed like THAT was dropping down from the sky in my direction, it would genuinely scare the crap out of me. It's disturbing and alien for a person to do something like that -- and I think that, in the best sense, this WILL convey the heart of that Batman mythos with greatest force and integrity. I never believed Burton's Gothem, let alone his Batman or his Joker (and, further down the ladder, his Vicki Vale). His approach was all about style and signifiers rather than getting down into the dirt and making Gothem real -- he'd rather make Gothem art-director-cool. And that was okay, for what it was, but always seemed a little hollow. Nolan's preoccupations with memory and the past make him perfect for this project: we've finally gotten a truly haunted Bruce Wayne. Good deal.

  • June 5, 2005, 1:27 p.m. CST


    by abcdefz1

    Sorry. I Brundleflied "Gotham" and "Gollem," I guess.

  • June 5, 2005, 1:44 p.m. CST


    by themikejonas

    And with that post, you Brundleflied "Gollum" and "Golem." :D

  • June 5, 2005, 1:50 p.m. CST

    Nananananananana Batmaaaaaan!! Nananananananana Batmaaaaaa!!!

    by DerLanghaarige

    Batmaaaaan!! Batmaaaan!! Batmaaaaaan!! I'm so fucking excited! I wanna see this movie!!

  • and everything i've read and seen looks very promising! I just have a problem with the nitpicks of the first reviewer 'cause they are pretty heavy...

  • June 5, 2005, 1:59 p.m. CST


    by abcdefz1

    ...not quite my day, is it? Oh, well. Hopefully my train of thought was fairly clear. +++++ By the way, I double-checked the spelling of your handle. Hopefully I got it right. ;-)

  • June 5, 2005, 2:08 p.m. CST

    Jesus.....this just proves that Hollywood has won. They have fed

    by IndustryKiller

    Now I'm not positive that Batman is going to suck. It may be great. But it just doesn't look good. Every review I've read has taken issue witht he poorly shot and edited action scenes but then say that shitty action scenes are a nitpick. A nitpick?? It's fucking Batman the action scenes need to be amazing. And I'm not really sure what this whole "villains should be firmly int he background" stance is. WHat? You mean like Spider Man 2 in which the only point of having Doc Ock was to be able to make another action figure. One of Spider Mans best villains was wasted in what amounted to a shitty sub plot and you all hailed it as genious. A superhero is only as good as his rogues gallery. I mean look at the most popular heroes. Spider Man, Batman, The X-Men all of them have brilliant villains with deep characterization and the heroes are better for it. In fact many times the villains are just as interesting as the heroes as the case is with Batman and The Joker, thats why they make such great rivals and thats why the first Batman film works. Villains need to be fleshed out. We already know what Bruce Waynes motivation is so why not concentrate a bit mroe on the villain? Superman has a terrible rogues gallery and as a result he is sort of only popular by default of being the original superhero. If Superman came out today everyone would hate him. If they waste Scarecrow and Rhas Al Ghul in favor of the terrible cliche looking Katie Holmes romance plot the movie sucks. Simple as that. I just don't understand why we have different standards for comic book films than we do for other movies. It's like the dont even have to be watchable. Some people actually like Daredevil and the Punisher for Christ sakes. People don't seem to care if the film is bad as far as normal movie standards go as long as they get some of the comic book aspect of it right they will accept it for cheap entertainment value. If anything these films should be held at a higher standard seeing as how we get a Batman movie once in every forever and then don't get another shot at making one for years.

  • June 5, 2005, 2:16 p.m. CST

    Ebert gave his first thumbs up to a batman movie, "Finally they

    by Orionsangels

    "This is one of the best movies of the year" I thought Ebert was on crack, but he was serious

  • June 5, 2005, 2:21 p.m. CST

    Mori Needs An Apple

    by Luvs269er

    Saves my work every FIVE minutes-- even if I DON'T ask it to. Try one sometime. In this day and age, if you're struggling with your computer (no matter what brand it is) you're either broke or joke.

  • June 5, 2005, 2:53 p.m. CST

    SAW IT

    by Joshr203

    I barely ever post, but I feel that I have to set you haters straight. This movie will kick your ass all over the place. I am a Batman nut, who went in with the highest expectations and they were all met. The problems these reviewers are having are all 100% legit, the action is edited too tightly and the score is great, but there is no recognizable theme, but you know what IT DOESN'T MATTER. Nolan is obviously still mastering the action directing, and BTW the action sequences in the other Batman movies wasn't great either. Anyway, trust me, the action is good, not great, but it doesn't matter because the movie is utterly fantastic. Do not bitch about the villains because they are absolutely VITAL in this film, they reflect the theme and Bruce's journey. Just you wait til Professor Crane asks one of his prominent subjects, "Would you like to see my mask?" Wow, there are so many uber cool moments and each actor nails it out of the park. Also, it does not get bogged down in romance at all, so don't worry. I've seen critic faves like Ep 3 and Cinderella Man and Crash, but this is the best movie of the year. It actually kicks the ass of those other flicks, and I went in with the highest expectations ever. I am giddy counting down the days so I can see it again and I am sitting here with a smile on my face thinking about all you morons picking apart this film before you see it. I'd love to see your faces and your talkbalks after you get a chance to see this thing. This is the best summer movie to come along in years. Btw I'm not a plant, I was at the same screening Moriarty was at on Thurs at the Mann's in LA.

  • June 5, 2005, 2:53 p.m. CST

    "Action scenes. Most of these scenes stay pretty close and tight

    by CuervoJones


  • June 5, 2005, 3:21 p.m. CST

    Cameron to the rescue!

    by Killah_Mate

    God, I hope Alita will have hyperkickass action in wide shots, with clear choreography, so that Hollywood finally bows down to the Master and realizes the age of shaky-blurry action is OVER. The biggest recent victim, I think, was LotR, which had plenty uber fights lost in the camera blur. That piece of music video style that somehow got into serious movies has to go.

  • June 5, 2005, 3:43 p.m. CST

    Marvel v. DC

    by Shaw

    At last DC will reveal itself to Marvel, at last DC will have its revenge. As a Marvel fan, the prospect of having this movie, which by all accounts seems to be great, pitted against the Fantastic Four makes me very nervous about getting more Marvel films the green light. Good work DC.

  • June 5, 2005, 4:09 p.m. CST

    Great news.

    by Devil'sOwn

    In light of what's going on with X3, it'll be nice to have at least one comic adaptation done right.

  • June 5, 2005, 4:19 p.m. CST

    Sam Rockwell as the Joker

    by JizzLemon

    He'd be freakin' perfect, Cripsin Glover would be waaay too over the top. Sam Rockwell would be perfect, he has the cockiness, creepiness, sleaziness and crazyiness to pull it off. He'd be okay as Harvey Dent too. Edward Norton for Harvey Dent. He can bulk up, check out American History X. Not sure he even needs to anyway to play Two-Face

  • June 5, 2005, 4:39 p.m. CST

    Burton Vs Nolan

    by Eh-Nam

    Don't Get Me wrong I am Super hyped up to see this new batman and forever put the last 3 movies out of my mind. But To me Some things Just Don't look good to me. The First Batman had Kim Basinger. The New one has Katie Holmes. We get stuck with Dawson's leftovers. Tims batman had a sweet Suit. Nolans batsuit looks godawfull next to the old one. And the Last problem I have is the car. Tim burton's was pure greatnes. Nolans seems like he got Confused and read a dark night returns and said lets have that. But hell that the car he ends up with at the end of his career as bats not begins with. But one of the truly great things about this new movie is the fact we see him train we feel what he goes thru and Burton did not have this.

  • June 5, 2005, 4:47 p.m. CST

    I for once....

    by Lost in Uranus

    Would like to strongly encourage IndustryKiller to stay home June 15 and rest, or maybe go out and engage in some spiritually- trascending and enlighting, educational and recreational activity that is worthy of his mighty wisdom. Leave those "saturday nights with friends" at the movies for us retards that clearly just want to be "entertained". Never judge a book by its cover until you have actually read it. So whatever may come...Heres to June 15, Cheers!

  • June 5, 2005, 4:59 p.m. CST

    I still say it isn't going to be that great

    by Rupee88

    I hope I'm wrong, but it just seems kinda lame. Maybe I'm spoiled by Sin City, but I think this may disappoint those with reasonably high standards. Still, it will be worth watching and I'm sure I'll at least download the DVD at some point.

  • June 5, 2005, 5:49 p.m. CST

    My one concern with the new Batman trilogy is...

    by AssKing

    Will Tom Cruise let Katie Holmes show her tits in one of the movies?

  • June 5, 2005, 5:50 p.m. CST

    Blew me and my two friends away? Sounds like another orgy flick

    by TheJoker

  • June 5, 2005, 6:03 p.m. CST

    This is going to be awesome....

    by Russman

    the script was freaking cool.

  • June 5, 2005, 6:11 p.m. CST

    I just hope...

    by SaintX99

    That bats pulls out his Bat-Mastercard, because he might need it! The freaking best part of B&R!! Yes, I'm kidding.

  • And let me ask this. Why is a 6 movie franchise like SW a "cash cow" but not only is Batman is on it 7th but we have to go through his whole origins AGAIN and after this one fight the same villains AGAIN and everyone's creaming himself. Bob Kane raped my childhood! That greedy bastard! I wish his name had an "s" in it so I could cleverly replace it with a "$". Anyway, the movie looks good.

  • June 5, 2005, 6:14 p.m. CST

    by poirotyomad

    Batman Begins is the 5th live action movie, not the 7th, and when did any Batman movie show you his origins? Maybe you thought that 10 second flashback from Batman 1989 was an "origin."

  • June 5, 2005, 6:27 p.m. CST

    Please, let this movie be good.

    by one9deuce

    How many classic Genre films have we gotten since the mid 90's? One in my estimation. One reason is James Cameron's self imposed exile from feature films, which thank God Almighty is almost over with Battle Angel in 2007. Another reason is Steven Spielberg's move to Dramas. I know that A.I. and Minority Report are in the realm of a Genre film, but they still just feel like Dramas. Will War of the Worlds be great? We'll find out soon enough. I haven't been all that impressed with a lot of the comic book adaptations in recent years. I know a lot of people like the Spider-Man films, and some have been happy with the New Star Wars. But when are we going to get an absolute classic? The great production design, great score (this one seems to really be missing in these new films), iconic characters in a film that truly knocks us on our ass? Will Batman Begins be great? I hope so.

  • June 5, 2005, 6:39 p.m. CST

    Hey, what gives?

    by kintar0

    Where are all the jerks shouting that moviemack and I are required to be "men enough" to admit that we were "wrong" if Batman Begins is really "great" instead of fucking "awful?" I have a hard time imagining that this Batsuit could "work." And I've said it before, but the forced "realism" we're going to get in Batman Begins is what's making it look sucky. Motherfucker dresses up like a bat and scares bad guys in the night. Sounds very realistic...

  • June 5, 2005, 6:51 p.m. CST

    Batman's Venue

    by Shaw

    Looks like Batman got that venue he wanted for his cycle, you know, his dance quintet.

  • June 5, 2005, 7:37 p.m. CST


    by Key_Card

    Can we get one...JUST ONE news post on this site from Harry that doesn't reference jizz, naked men wrestling or anything else that is homoerotic in nature?

  • June 5, 2005, 7:45 p.m. CST

    I've seen it.

    by deadrapeddear

    I saw Batman Begins at a trade screening a week ago. Let me say that if you enjoyed Episode III, you'll probably be able to convince yourself that you enjoyed this movie also. For those truly hoping for a great Batman film, however, be warned: story-wise, Batman Begins is a mess. I avoided the leaked script and all the spoilers before seeing the film. I almost wished I'd read them so that I wouldn't have had such high hopes. The movie starts out well enough, and Nolan succeeds in making Bruce Wayne empathetic. In fact, the first 30 minutes of the movie are good. Cinematography, acting, editing, score, are all amazing. The story, despite some clunky bits and awkward dialogue (ie a laughably on-the-nose conversation between Alfred and Bruce on the plane home), is compelling. Then Bruce returns to Gotham, knowing what he must do, and we get a series of scenes in which he builds his costume, acquires the batmobile, etc. By the time the movie gets back to the action, it's as if the filmmakers have lost sight what made the first 30 minutes compelling. For the next hour or so, the movie mistakes movement for storytelling. Lots of stuff happens, but we just don't care. The visuals, acting, etc. are still stunning, but there's nothing for the audience emotionally. It's not really ABOUT anything. There's nothing at stake that we care about. The movie occasionally stumbles across something compelling, like **SPOILER** the parts where Rachel thinks Bruce is a cad, though it's all an act and he's secretly doing something she would admire **END SPOILER** If the movie had better interwoven Bruce's personal journey into the action, perhaps we would have cared about the action more. As it is, I could having given a flying flip about the Scarecrow/Falcone/al Ghul part of the plot, because it is really irrelevant to Bruce's story. Seeing Batman Begins made me respect Sam Raimi all the more (as flawed as the Spidey movies are), because he understands that the hero's adversary must directly relate to whatever is going on in the hero's journey. (Raimi has said he actually chooses the villain according to what Peter will be facing in his life.) I really really wanted to like Batman Begins. But it's a good two rewrites away from brilliance. And it truly could have been brilliant.

  • Are you sure you saw this movie? I mean Falcone is the reason Joe Chill gets a chance to walk out of prison and the reason Bruce can't get his revenge. He's very responsible for starting Bruce off on his journey. Let's not forget that Ra's is the one who actually trains Bruce.

  • June 5, 2005, 9:06 p.m. CST

    Ebert and Roeper..

    by brinkeguthrie

    "One of the best movies of the year, the best Batman ever...they finally get it right." Well, that's enough for me. I've got my new Batmobile Hot Wheels here on the desk, so let's rock, eh?

  • June 5, 2005, 9:15 p.m. CST

    But where is Moviemack?

    by tango fett

    SHOW YOURSELF AND GRACE US WITH YOUR WISDOM!!!! Of course I am being sarcastic. This movie looks kick ass, although I heard an alarming rumor (probably not true because someone might've mentioned it by now) but I read that, get this, Alfred dies. Probably fake, but yeah.

  • June 5, 2005, 9:18 p.m. CST

    I hope they're right about Bats being scary

    by Terry_1978

    Because he's basically the bad guy in a horror flick, except all the victims are criminals he's hunting, and he takes them out one by one while the rest are freaked out by his presence. I hope Nolan did capture that.

  • June 5, 2005, 9:22 p.m. CST

    Oski ...

    by deadrapeddear

    *** BIGTIME SPOILERS BELOW*** To answer your question: Personally, I didn't care whether or not Batman got Falcone, because the only thing Falcone really did to him was prevent him from killing Chill. I didn't want him to kill Chill anyway. That wouldn't have been heroic. As an audience member, I sympathized with Rachel's views on that (as the filmmakers clearly intended). As for Ra's, I liked him in the first 30 minutes. And when he reappers, he remains benign. He doesn't betray Bruce in such a way that I really cared one way or another about him. And he didn't threaten anything or anyone I cared about, either. Yeah, I know he threatened Gotham, but the movie never makes us care about what happens to Gotham. I care about Rachel and Bruce, not "Gotham." Hey, I'm just reporting the reaction I had to the movie. I should have mentioned above that everyone else in the theater was buzzing afterwards, though they seemed a tad bored during certain parts of the film. My friends all liked it too. It just didn't work for me, though.

  • June 5, 2005, 9:40 p.m. CST

    not 5th or 7th...but 6th

    by Bouncy X

    if you wanna be really picky, this is actually the 6th live action movie for mr batman. they made a theatrical movie of the original 60's show with the amazing title of Batman:The Movie. as for katie showing her tits cuz of cruise, if he let nicole and mimi show theirs, i'm sure katie will and if she doesnt, just watch The Gift's end sequence over and over.

  • June 5, 2005, 9:46 p.m. CST

    Is Harry trying to imply...

    by LeckoManiac

    that he has a vagina...I don't know it seems like it to me...but on a lighter note...thank heavens for this will be awesome

  • June 5, 2005, 9:55 p.m. CST

    The JOKER is....

    by zerep

    BRUCE SPENCE...the "Train Man" from the Matrix Revolutions. He is one creepy looking dude. Either Bruce or Daniel Day-Lewis, both awesome and character drive actors.

  • June 5, 2005, 10 p.m. CST

    A Tad Bored?

    by Saluki

    Hey, thanks for giving us your view deadrapeddear, but... How in the HELL can one tell if an audience is "bored" while watching a movie? Aren't you, and the rest of the audience, um... WATCHING the MOVIE? The only verbal boredom I can think of is excessive sighing and snoring. Wish I could give my views on why Falcone is a worthy opponent, but that would just be going off the comic. I'll have to wait for the 15th just like the rest of these CHUMPS and FREAKS around here.

  • June 5, 2005, 11:05 p.m. CST

    Can I just say something?

    by Ribbons

    PLEASE don't draw and quarter me now, but...okay, here goes: so "the one-liners 'work,' or are strong, for the most part." Okay. Why is it that screenwriters like Goyer (you know what kind I mean) always feel the need to inject one-liners into the story in the first place? To amuse...who? Themselves, when they're writing them? I fucking hate them.

  • June 5, 2005, 11:07 p.m. CST

    Then again...

    by Ribbons

    I hope it'll be nothing as bad as throwing someone off a building and then when someone else says "Hey, where's Mendoza?" Batman goes "He had a flight to catch." Ugh.

  • June 5, 2005, 11:24 p.m. CST

    "Don't be afraid to use your nails, boys"

    by AshesOfDonnie

  • June 5, 2005, 11:46 p.m. CST

    I'm Cheetman

    by IAmJack'sUserID

  • June 6, 2005, 12:24 a.m. CST

    That's why Sam Rockwell could never be the Joker, the Joker

    by iamnicksaicnsn

    He's not some bum off the street. He's pure psychopathic insanity. Glover would be a fine choice. They'd have to reign him in, but a competent director shouldn't have a problem with that. Let's just get a better fucking writer this time, Goyer is ass. Even though I throughly enjoyed Blade 1, the dialogue was definitely not great, that movie was made by the actors and director.

  • June 6, 2005, 12:31 a.m. CST

    Well I'm very optimistic about this one

    by Thirteen 13

    It seems they are actually taking Batman back to where its supposed to be, rather than the overcolored, techno/dayglo, MTV style caped crusader mess, that Joel Schumacher turned it into with the last two Batman movies. And as far as that Star Wars fan who seemed a bit burnt by the earlier reference to the Star Wars movies and ranted about 7 Batman movies, and not getting it right and doing it over. Well your correct. They are doing it over and bringing Batman back to where it belongs. Good luck on getting George Lucas trying to get the childrens movies which are the first two prequels back to what they are supposed to be, and then fixing the dents in number three.

  • June 6, 2005, 12:47 a.m. CST

    curiosity wants to see

    by Bouncy X

    but all 6 star wars are children's movies

  • June 6, 2005, 1:06 a.m. CST

    on the comic book front

    by Bouncy X

    since AICN hasn't posted this yet and this is a comic book seems brett ratner is indeed the new director for X3. apparently he was considered for the first one as well, i didnt know that. anyway i dont know if him directing is good or bad but i can't wait to see what readers here have to bitch about, i mean discuss. ;)

  • June 6, 2005, 1:11 a.m. CST

    The 2

    by Darth Maui

    Funny thing is, when Burton's first Batman came out everyone was saying, "Finally Batman being done the way it was intended. Serious and not all campy and stuff like that 60's TV show."

  • June 6, 2005, 1:11 a.m. CST

    Batamn vs the Rapist from hell!!!

    by MOOMBA is HERE

    Yes in the sequel to batman begins, Batman should fight the Rapist from Hell! Oh my gOd!!! In the movie the rapist from Hell rape sRobin, Alfred and aCommisioner Gordon which pisses off batman because it is usually HE who does all the raping in Gotham City. After much tracking down and lubing up, The reapist from Hell is finally cornered by Batman who says... Batam: Hey, Rapist from hell! Prepare to be injected with BatLove Rocket Missle! Rapist from Hell: FUCCCK!!! (Batman injects Rapist from hell with his Bat-PEnis! It is also black latex like his body) The End.

  • June 6, 2005, 2:07 a.m. CST

    Oh dear - this thing isn't even as good as Batman Forever..

    by DannyParker

    ..and Bale isn't a patch on Val Kilmer.Time to close the coffin lid on this 'franchise'.

  • June 6, 2005, 2:32 a.m. CST

    Bouncy X

    by Xwatcher

    Go to the TOP STORY on the home page "wanna know who's....directing x3" is the title. All the complaining is in the Talkback there about Rat.

  • June 6, 2005, 2:47 a.m. CST


    by Fortunesfool

    An excitable review from someone who thought episode 3 was a good film.....WARNING!

  • June 6, 2005, 2:56 a.m. CST

    very strong movie, liked it a lot except for my one nitpick - to

    by Trader Groucho 2

    she was great in pieces of april, but it kinda felt felt like everyone else was in this great dark comic book action movie and she was in an episode of dawson's creek. mentioned pieces of april to point out the girl has chops and can deliver. just wish she'd made stronger choices here. imho.

  • June 6, 2005, 3:12 a.m. CST

    Saluki - how to tell when an audience is bored

    by Trader Groucho 2

    I saw What Lies Beneath in an evening showing outside of Los Angeles and 45 minutes in, eveyone in the theater was talking about how slow the film was. Loudly. Conversations back and forth across multiple rows amongst complete strangers. Another way to tell - a lot of people get up and just leave. I've seen that happen more than once too.

  • June 6, 2005, 3:25 a.m. CST

    I fucking love Batman.

    by Thayden Ozma

    And though I've been hopefully apprehensive of this film, I have yet to see anything to indicate that it's going to be anything but a class act attempt to bring the true (IMO) Batman to the big screen. Whether or not Nolan and Bale succeed or not, one thing is certain and that is for once the industry is trying to please us bunch of cynical wanna-be professional critics. I know that'll never be enough for some people, but I for one appreciate the thought, and it's obvious in the shots that I've seen that they're doing their best. Movies are a team effort and sometimes a movie with the biggest hearted crew can turn out the worst film, it's all about where the chips fall when it's all said and done. Regardless of how I feel after I leave the theater post Batman Begins I will salute the effort made by Nolan because his heart is in the right place at least. -Az

  • June 6, 2005, 7:10 a.m. CST

    by William Cutting

  • June 6, 2005, 7:11 a.m. CST

    the next joker....?

    by William Cutting this is pretty certain folks

  • June 6, 2005, 7:12 a.m. CST

    Sorry...but Batman rules.

    by Lost in Uranus

    Sure the last 2 movies were fucking boring (IMOHO) but Im really lookin fwd to this one. And as far as EP3 well...I liked it a lot as a matter of fact. Maybe cause my expecations were low. But it turned out to be a really good "Star Wars" movie. Anyhow, some advice for the whiny bitches on Batty: Seriously assholes, dont go fucking watch this movie, dont even fucking download it. Dont rent the DVD or VHS and certainly dont catch it on basic cable or PPV. Your perception, and consequential appraisal of its (qualities?) flaws have been firmly preconceived, even without having watched it. So save yourselves the TIME and MONEY and go to a strip bar or fucking donate both to charity. Id hate to hear you bitch about this movie AFTER youve seen it. May God have mercy on us.

  • June 6, 2005, 8:03 a.m. CST

    Is it a requirement for posters here?

    by Thayden Ozma

    Do you have to choose a side? I like Star Wars, Batman and LotR, is that ok? And on the topic of whether or not you should feel guilty for enjoying a big-budget Summer movie. I do measurements and math for a living every day and yeah when I go to the movies sometimes I do want to turn my brain off. I'm sure as hell not going to apologize to the likes of you for enjoying visual spectacle in an entertainment forum that's primarily based on the visual and audiatory senses. Some people will do anything to gain even the most miniscule sense of betterment over others. In reality you have the problem, or else you'd be doing something else besides worrying about the things you don't like. Go to hell. Can I say it more simply? -az

  • June 6, 2005, 9:21 a.m. CST


    by Malx

    Someone had to say it. Although I'm actually looking forward to this movie.

  • June 6, 2005, 9:49 a.m. CST

    Which existential philosopher...

    by Childe Roland

    ...coined the concept that "Hell is other people?" Was it Sartre or Camus? Doesn't really matter, except that he was right. And nowhere are you exposed to more of what truly comprises most people... their personalities... in a purer form than in the anonymously empowering forum of the online talkback. It's interesting, because it seems to support the idea that our physicalities are incidental and that what we are is really just a kinetic miasma of ideas and feelings... most of which aren't worth the time it takes to read them and respond. So I don't think any of us have far to go to get to hell, Thayden. Thanks for making it a bit warmer, though. As for this film,I can't help but get a little more excited every time I hear a new person talking about how good they thought it was. And most of them seem to have fixated on different highlights and criticisms, meaning that there is predictable variance and subjectivity in their assessments but they have all arrived at essentially the same conclusion. I hope that these are reviewers whose basic grip on reality can be trusted (unlike a lot of the folks who spent the entire day seeing Episode III back-to-back when it opened and then touted this as proof of its quality even though they had planned to see it multiple times regardless). A good Batman film is exactly what I need to get the Sithy taste out of my mouth after sitting through that disappointment twice.

  • June 6, 2005, 10:18 a.m. CST


    by lead_sharp

    live action Batman movie btw. What? no one remembers the shark repelent Bat spray? I am going to see this movie. I will make my opinions based on the three things I (like many others here) have to base them on; the comic fan, the movie fan and the Batman fan. As a movie fan so far I'm thinking this looks good, even impressive. My Batman fan is less then impressed, in the stills at least the costume is truely awful I really have tried to like it but I can't. It LOOKS cumbersome and over technical and while I know that something like this (a rubber muscle suit of armour) was needed it could have been so much better designed. BUT if it works in the film I will be a happy bunny. The car I am softening up to, but againI have to wonder why something SO cumbersome was designed. I can't help feeling that this is TOO real (gods I wish there was an italics button on this bloody site!) and that we are having too much spoon fed to us. Rather than having Morgan Freeman in a secondery role presenting the Batsuit, in a 'Here's your suit isn't it screemingly obvious.' kind of way, how about Bruce Wayne going through Wayne tech inventories and projects and finding the stealth material and we the audience can work the rest out for ourselves? If Lucsus Fox doesn't figure out who Batman is in this movie he's a fucking moron. And now I come to my inner comic fan and to be honest I've only just realised how much of a shit I give about this movie as a comic fan. None. The comics are and always will be better and while the movie may be a fun diversion and the chance to see Batman in live action glory, it won't and never can touch the comic. End of rant.

  • June 6, 2005, 10:22 a.m. CST


    by Nizzuts

    This movie looks like crap. I like Christian Bale, and Michael Caine, but this movie looks average at best. I like the idea of exploring the Dark Knights past some more. I hope I am wrong and this movie rocks, because it looks like X3 will be pretty lame as well as Superman Returns (to shit).

  • June 6, 2005, 10:35 a.m. CST

    Hey guys..

    by Thalya

    I was at the same showing as these two reviewers (I didn't write up the movie because I had to get some sleep and was busy all yesterday), and I had to say their reviews are pretty much spot-on. The action and some of the dialogue was a little blurred and confusing, but it's forgiveable, especially since Bats is supposed to take out baddies like that. This movie is great, easily the movie of the summer. No camp whatsoever, refreshingly so. Christian Bale surprised me with his young Bruce Wayne/Batman. What I particularly loved is how everything builds piece by piece, working out growing pains along the way until at the very end all the pieces click into place (see the rooftop scene) and what you're left with is nothing but the iconography of Batman's world, only this time you get the substance underneath the style as well. With the foundation laid so well here, I can only dream of what they can accomplish with the next one; I imagine we might be seeing Harvey Dent, but that's just my take. // P.S. For where I stand on other movies, I happened to like RotS very much, but I think that's mainly due to the story itself and John Williams' score was doing serious heavy lifting to support alot of the other aspects. And I'm modestly hopeful about Fantastic Four being a fun time at the movies too.

  • June 6, 2005, 10:53 a.m. CST

    Haters and such

    by Aves

    Haters really slay me. "If you liked ROTS you could probably convince yourself to like this movie too?" Please, the only reason you whiny,no-life,still living in your Mom's basement selves hated Episode 3 is because George Lucas rejected your ideas on the script you spent five weeks straight while writing underneath your Yoda nightlight while snuggling into your Darth Vader bedsheets. ROTS had made over 300 million in 17 days, and you know why that is? PEOPLE LIKE IT!!! IT'S A GOOD MOVIE!!! PEOPLE, AND NOT JUST PATHETIC CARDBOARD CUT OUT OF PRINCESS LEIA LOVING FANBOYS, ARE SEEING IT REPEATEDLY. Now I can't speak to the greatness of Batman Begins because I have yet to see it, but what I have seen and what I have heard are giving me hope that this will finally be a good Batman movie, yet I know no matter how good it is there will be a sizeable amount of the nerd populace that will hate it because Katie Holmes was never in the comic, Ras Al Ghul has too thick of a beard, or too thin, or that you can actually see Bat's eyes. There will also be those who hate it because of the same reason the prequels have gotten so much undeserved hate. They think because they are the gods of their action figure domain that Lucas' on Nolan's vision should match their own. Well guess what? Their is a reason Lucas is stinking rich and your not. He had better stories to tell than the one's you cook up while having your Han Solo figure hump your Princess Leia's and pretending she's screaming your name instead of his. In short get a life enjoy the movies for what they are MOVIES, and start your illustrious careers as gaffer grips on the set of the remake of Buck Rodgers starring Tara Reid as Wilma.

  • June 6, 2005, 12:26 p.m. CST

    Childe Roland

    by Ribbons

    It was Sartre. And no, I didn't look it up. ;-) I'm not THAT bored. As far as "Hell is other people" goes, you have to keep in mind the type of people who post here, as well as the type of people who were in "Huis Clos," which isn't really a fair or accurate representation of the world, it must be said. I propose that the saying be changed to "Hell is TalkBack." That has a nice ring to it.

  • June 6, 2005, 12:31 p.m. CST

    I keed, I keed

    by Ribbons

    "Hell is TalkBack." Eh. Anyway, Thayden, you don't find it the least bit ironic that you speak out against people trying to establish some sort of intellectual credibility through their lifestyles that don't concern one another when you were almost definitely doing the exact same thing by telling us you like to turn your brain off, BUT you do measurements and math for a living every day? You shouldn't necessarily feel bad about wanting to turn you brain off....but it helps to give people who expect something more than that the shaft, which is probably where a lot of the hostility comes from, not snobbery. If you want to be bombarded by sensations until you pass out, why don't you just binge eat?

  • June 6, 2005, 12:50 p.m. CST

    Whatevert the number,

    by I Dunno

    The point is that the 90's Batman ran out of gas and now they start all over again only 8 years later, going back over his origins and fighting the same villains, BB excluded yet some people bleat on about Star Wars "milking it". At least it told one story in 6 films and ended it. I just hope this Batman has an overall story or at least some kind of character arc. something more than a bunch of interchangeable sequels that differ only in the villain of the week and the level of action/FX.

  • June 6, 2005, 1:45 p.m. CST

    I'll tell you all something.

    by buckaroo_banzai

    You'd be shocked by the number of people in the film industry who regularly post to AICN's talkback. Shocked.

  • June 6, 2005, 2:42 p.m. CST

    Aves, you are totally bass ackwards.

    by one9deuce

    It's the fanboys with the action figures, bed-sheets, and toy lightsabers that are defending Episode 3. George Lucas can do no wrong in there eyes. Have you seen the people that lined up for Episode 3? Even though they had seen Episode 1 and 2? They are dressed up as Jedi, or Stormtroopers, or Boba Fett. And they will defend the Prequel Trilogy no matter how bad it is. I love how you believe that Star Wars will now be "over". "Star Wars" is a valuable commodity, and I guarantee that there will be more. Just like there will be more "Batman", "Superman", "Dracula", or any other recognizable name out there. I am looking forward to this Batman though.

  • June 6, 2005, 2:43 p.m. CST

    Above post should have

    by one9deuce

  • June 6, 2005, 2:45 p.m. CST


    by one9deuce

    Post above last should have "I Dunno" before "I love how you believe Star Wars will now be over".

  • June 6, 2005, 3:12 p.m. CST

    Bouncy X and Being picky

    by fxbob

    I'm not disagreeing with you here..just adding the Black and white serial...or was it two? This could be seen as 7 or 8... regardless, I'll be there and have a fun to!

  • several of my fellow lowly set crawlers are here every day, and I've had crew leads mention it while on lunch....

  • June 6, 2005, 3:58 p.m. CST

    you misunderstand one9duece

    by Aves

    I don't think Star Wars is over. I never said that. I never implied it. I celebrated the fact ROTS is breaking records. I am a big fan of the saga. I own two versions (orginal and special) on VHS and the DVD of the orginal series, and the DVD of EPS 1 and 2. I have seen each film multiple times and look forward to the TV series and more novels to add the the around 50 I already own. You make a valid point about your version of fanboys, but I have met several of those who whine,cry, scream, and try to start petitions to get Lucas to change the way Vader screams "NOOOO!" I am not total "bass ackwards," as you say you probably only read half my post and then drew a premature and wrong conclusion about the point I was trying to make. If someone did not like one the installments in the saga that is fine with me they are entitled to their opinion. I personally enjoyed each movie, albeit some more than others, and I thought each fit the story well. I know plenty would disagree with me and that's ok, however when someone is so crushed because Lucas adhered to his vision and not theirs they feel the need to curse, and scream, and declare "George Lucas raped my childhood!" that is when it becomes pathetic, and those are the ones who cried in their Darth Vader pillow while cursing the name of Hayden Christiansen and burned their Qui-Gon action figures that they purchased before they saw Episode I. While I doubt that there will be another Star Wars movie, I do agree that icons such as Star Wars, Batman, and Dracula will go on in some form as well they should, and I hope they live up to the icons they represent.

  • June 6, 2005, 4:09 p.m. CST

    The difference between Talkback people and "other" people:

    by FluffyUnbound

    "Other" people are even worse.

  • June 6, 2005, 4:24 p.m. CST

    Dawson cheesecake

    by karmicnic

    It totally agree. In the trailers she looks completely out of place, like someone took a cut-out of a Dawson's Creek episode and planted it in the movie. Not that I don't love her, but seriously, man, she did the same exact thing to the Phone Booth (crapfest that it was, she didn't even seem like she was really in it). New theory... she's a hologram and Cruise is kissing thin air (that wouldn't be a first).

  • June 6, 2005, 5:51 p.m. CST

    Why I didn't like ST I&II

    by DennisMM

    Because the stories were dull, for the most part, and the characters were dull, also. In the 23 years between IV and I, Lucas did not bothered to learn the finer (and some of the duller) points of screenwriting, especially believable dialogue. There's a reason "Empire" featured the most "human" characters, and her name was Leigh Brackett. Having Lawrence Kasdan on board for "Empire" and "Jedi" didn't hurt, either. Lucas can't write and is a director only in the technical sense. "American Graffiti" was his best-written, best-directed film because he and his friends lived those stories. Cripes, here I am shoving ST talk into a Batman Talkback. I should be ashamed.

  • June 6, 2005, 5:56 p.m. CST

    Evan Dorkin's comic, "Dork"

    by DennisMM

    Had Dorkin not created the "Eltingville Comic-Book, Science-Fiction, Fantasy, Horror, and Role-Playing Club," some of you clowns would have created one from your "reality." Hell, I think lots of you did, and Dorkin's been spying on you.

  • June 6, 2005, 7:02 p.m. CST

    The movies are over, one9deuce

    by I Dunno

  • June 6, 2005, 7:21 p.m. CST

    Sorry Aves, I meant to address I Dunno for the second half of my

    by one9deuce

    Speaking of "I Dunno". There you are! The SW movies are certainly not over. Too much money at stake. If you think that George Lucas will throw away a few billion dollars a new trilogy would bring in 15/20 years to maintain artistic crediblility, you haven't been paying attention since Return of the Jedi. Now for the topic at hand, Batman Begins isn't having nearly the cultural effect that Batman: The Movie in 1966 or Batman in 1989 had, but I hope it is awesome.

  • June 6, 2005, 7:41 p.m. CST

    I have been paying attention since Return of the Jedi

    by I Dunno

    ...and I've noticed that Lucas could have squeezed in 4 or 5 movies in between ROTJ and TPM but he didn't. He told the story he wanted to tell from the beginning and that's it as far as he movies are concerned. Of course you can't be proven wrong unless we're all still posting to this message board in 15-20 years, in which case we would have have bigger issues than this but nevertheless, I'm confident there will be no more SW movies by Lucas. However, in 15-20 years we'll probably be on our third or fourth iteration of Batman. In that case, I vote Haley Joel Osment for the Joker after the next one.

  • June 6, 2005, 10:37 p.m. CST

    It's the shaky tight shot cams, the blurry tight shot cams..

    by Anla'shok

    The kind of shots that makes eyes strain in vain...It's the quick cut action cams, the a.d.d. laced cams. That really make the action scenes quite lame.

  • June 6, 2005, 11:01 p.m. CST


    by MaulRat

    The names I hear most are Bruce Spence, Crispin Glover, weedy skinny guys who dispite having the facial characteristics, they both aren't an actors asshole, so they can't possibly pull off a character like Joker.. Why not someone with mainstream power, indepentant cred, critical acclaim, and acting chops.. what about Johnny Depp?.. you wouldn't like to see a Depp Joker?... besides something tells me that after Pirates is completed shooting and Charlie and the Chocolate Factory is well and truly out will be around the time WB will shoot this puppy and Depp will have some free time!..

  • June 6, 2005, 11:34 p.m. CST

    this is bat shit insane

    by donniesmith

    why is it that everything has to devolve into an argument over lucas' shitty action serials? i don't really think bringing how much money rots earned is justifying its place in film. that's assessing quantity more than quality, right? look how much money titanic or blair witch don't see many people defending those regularly and with such vigor now do you? star wars for me has never been interesting. it lacks what i love in films, mainly characters and dialogue appropriate to each of the characters. just because they threw in an a plot device lifted from sophoclean literature does not a good film make. woopty darth is luke's father. i could care less, for as i said these movies mean absolutely nothing to me. maybe if lucas could write characters that aren't as scarily clear and lucid as cellophane i'd give two shits about what he's doing. i haven't seen the new film nor will i see it because i gave the first two prequels a try and failed to find anything but revulsion in them. so i'm not going to bitch about what a crass oommercial opportunist does with his time. people dig his films, and that's perfectly fine by me. i just want nothing to do with them. and to the argument about star wars being too profitable to end, i should like to ask if you've heard about the new show lucas has been talking about creating relating to...bum da dum wars. when you speak of the length between the initial original films and the sequels you leave out the lucrative television shows, napsacks, apparel, video games, action figures, etc that lucas has produced for no reason other than monetary gain. i'm not going to vilify him for it, he's obviously a strong headed participant of capitalism (nothing wrong with that), but when that mentality is appropriated in the medium of film you are left, ineluctably, with franchises that really bring nothing new to their original stories. did any of those batman sequels really tell us anything else, anything that wasn't summed up in the first film? were the prequels absolutely necessary given the audience was supplied with all the major information in the first trilogy? it's all wholly unnecessary, isn't it? anyway, i'll probably end up seeing the new batman film on the sole basis that it will add a few pounds to christopher nolan's and patrick bateman's (errr, christan bale's) pockets.

  • June 7, 2005, 2:25 a.m. CST

    I think they should call the sequel Batman 2: Electric Boogaloo

    by Doc_Strange

    wait'll they get a load of me, BROTHER!!!!

  • June 7, 2005, 3 a.m. CST


    by zabbadoo

    "Is Poison Ivy in this movie? Because this sounds like a PLANT." Ok, congratulations on learning how to mimic human communications. What you seem to have missed is the important component of being able to analyze something and detect the subtle clues that it is in fact a plant as opposed to simply smearing every positive review as a plant. You fucking dolt.

  • June 7, 2005, 3:06 a.m. CST


    by zabbadoo

    I don't recall anyone actually saying that this piece of Sith wasn't going to make ludicrous bank. What they were saying was that the problem with Star Wars is that it's basically sfx pron for retards. In other words, the average guy on the street. I agree with them. I liked the movie. It was entertaining. It was good. Chock full of goodness. Personally I like movies that aim for greatness. Oh, and, hey. . . . shut up.

  • June 7, 2005, 4:43 a.m. CST

    I've heard the theme...

    by BV's amazing. And I'd say it's deffinitely hummable upon a second listen, at least.

  • June 7, 2005, 4:57 a.m. CST


    by BV

    Hell, I couldn't resist... Starts off with a subtle choir, staccato synth bass notes, oboe motif...choir grows. Then... Percussion and sharp repeating string arpegios, with little inflections by breathy flute, and punctuation by low brass grunts. Then... BIG brass and choir hits. Highly dramatic. Then... The theme! Starts off in a minor key, very low horns. Raises an octave, choir joins. Shifts to a more heroic major key as the string arpeggios return. Then... Sharp, staccato orchestra hits and tubular bell between low brass grunts. Think Aliens' finale, right before the facility goes nuclear. Then... Staccato synth bass notes return, along with the subtle choir, leading us to fade. All in all, I really like this theme. Deffinitely can follow Elfman's. Very powerful. Can't wait until the 14th when the album is released.

  • June 7, 2005, 8:14 a.m. CST

    Hey Powermetal

    by Aves

    I had no clue that I was saying what you did because I rarely ever read your posts because they are often filled with meaningless drivel, and believe it or not two people can have the same opinion and state that opinion in a similar way and it not be stealing another's material. This is a talkback your thoughts are not copywrighted get over it.

  • June 7, 2005, 3:13 p.m. CST

    Hey Moviemack

    by Aves

    You seem to be the type of person that has to hate something because its liked by the majority. You think that makes you some sort of intelligent rebel. I along with millions of other liked Episode 3, that doesn't make us stupid or mindless sheep, and guess what just because you think it's bad doesn't mean it is the gospel according to moviemack. You don't like a movie? Hey that's fine, but please stop being a annoying ass about it.

  • June 7, 2005, 4:09 p.m. CST

    So Moviemack, I guess you're saying you agree with Schickel?

    by FluffyUnbound

    That the way to make a good Batman movie is to fill it with humor and have somebody ham it up as a campy villain, the way Nicholson did? Wow, no wonder you have it in for this film. I didn't realize you were holding out for "La Cage Aux Batman".

  • June 7, 2005, 4:23 p.m. CST

    Way to cut n' paste, MovieMack

    by I Dunno

    Why are you here? More importantly, why am I givng this troll attention?

  • June 7, 2005, 4:34 p.m. CST

    Moviemack you just don't get it.

    by Aves

    I haven't staked my claim on anything I haven't seen the movie I don't know how good it is. If X-Men is better so be it then its better. I have chosen to skip spoilers so I really don't know much about it. I am reserving judgement until I see it. As far as other movies I liked Episode 3 because I liked it, not because someone told me too. I liked the Lord of the Rings because I thought they were great movies not because the Hollywood Hype machine said I should. I liked Burton's Batman, thought Batman Returns was too dark, Batman Forever was ok, and Batman and Robin was utter crap because I saw the movies and formed my own opinion. I think the Batsuit in Batman Begins could be better, I wish they would have left out the love story with Katie Holmes, and I think it is kind of weak the way they are having him get his gadgets, but hey I stil want to see the movie and see how it is. My opinions may change, they may not. You see the difference between you and me is that I don't scream, cry, and overall act like a child that has had his favorite toy taken away when someone doesn't agree with me. I could really care less if it makes more or less than Burton's movie. If it is great my life will go on, if it is not guess what my life will still go on. Yours however, will grind to a screeching halt if the movie is actually good, or if it trumps your predictions you will scramble to nitpick why everyone else is wrong, and you will whine, cry, and shout from the depths of your basement at anyone who will listen, and let me guess you think we're all stupid because Catwoman flopped and we couldn't understand it's "European style and artistry."

  • June 7, 2005, 5:39 p.m. CST

    Tough luck, Mack.

    by FluffyUnbound

    If you post someone else's review in support of your own viewpoint, you should expect to be called to account for the views expressed in that review. And I don't see any way to read Schickel's review that doesn't lead one to conclude that Schickel wanted camp. I'm sure that when Owen Gleiberman's review hits, we'll see another review calling for more "sassiness" and "snarky charisma" from the characters. When you post that review as evidence in your crusade to prove that the film sucks, I will assume that means you endorse THAT review, as well. See? A nice, simple system: if you post a review, I will take that as your endorsement of that review. It's funny, though; I didn't think you wanted a campy, "just-kidding" Batman.

  • June 7, 2005, 6:12 p.m. CST

    What is wrong with you people?

    by I Dunno

  • June 7, 2005, 6:24 p.m. CST

    I guess I have to assume you haven't read the entire review,

    by FluffyUnbound

    Everything about it - from the way he mocks the film's concern with Bruce Wayne's "troubled soul", as well as the fact that Gotham City is made to appear dystopic - to the way he wonders aloud where Robin is and complains that Batman is too "sexless" - to the fact that he says that the best parts of the film are when the screenplay "breaks with sobriety" to give the "fussy" butler something funny to say - to the way he wishes for a character to be, like Nicholson's Joker, "antic", "giddy" and "perverse" - screams out loud that this reviewer wanted a campy film, and was prepared to pan anything less than "Batman: Queen of the Desert". Everything he criticizes makes it clear that Schickel would similarly review virtually any Batman film that took itself seriously. And that doesn't seem to align itself very neatly with your previous position.

  • June 7, 2005, 9:26 p.m. CST

    I don't think Schickel's review has gay subtext.

    by FluffyUnbound

    It just demonstrates a significant desire to see camp on the screen. It just so happens that "camp" and "queen" somewhat overlap. It's not like that's MY doing. But now I actually see the problem, which is that I read your previous calls for serious treatment of the Batman character incorrectly. What you meant was, you wanted to see the more fantastical aspects of the comic, especially in its more juvenile periods, accepted at face value and put on the screen without question or explanation. Sort of like someone making a shot for shot remake of an old "Superfriends" cartoon - but doing it with a straight face. I didn't understand that. Nolan seems to consider a "serious" approach to be one that "explains every minute detail", and that does so without mockery, irony or self-conscious humor. I'm glad we were able to clear up that confusion of terms.

  • June 8, 2005, 12:09 a.m. CST


    by Ribbons be fair, I think that the credo of Batman HAVING to have a love interest every single time is ridiculous. We get it, he's not gay and you want this to be a date movie. It just doesn't feel organic most of the time. Looking at the trailer, I could have almost convinced myself that this Rachel Dawes character would work, were it not for the shitty dialogue; she's a piece of Bruce Wayne's childhood that he wants to preserve, same as Gotham on a larger scale ("Gotham isn't beyond saving"). However, hearing from Moriarty that Bats shows her around the Batcave and offers to give up being Batman for her, or something to that effect, proves it's just a big ball of nothing, another cipher who exists because of studio-enforced "notes." If it seems juvenile that Batman not be preoccupied with love, so be it. I'm just sick of his puppy-dog romances that force the movie to examine the less interesting aspects of Batman's character. The question is always "To fight or not to fight?" The answer is always yes. Meanwhile, I'm left wondering why such a compulsive character would be asking himself these things in the first place. 'Superman II' and 'Spider-Man II' are the only superhero films to have gotten it, 'Spider-Man II' basically being about the question, and I don't need to see it anymore. It just makes it obvious that Hollywood thinks of all superhero characters as the same when they shouldn't be, and they're not.

  • June 8, 2005, 8:47 a.m. CST

    Movie Mack and Powermetal

    by Aves

    staking my claim? What am I exactly claiming? I have claimed nothing about this movie, because once again. I HAVE NOT SEEN IT!!! I may like I may not, but I will not rely on some nonsensical review from a second rate news magazine to declare the quality of a movie, and just so you know I don't collect action figures. I have a life. I have more important things to spend my money on own such as rent, bills, and other things that just happen to be a part of good old fashioned daily life. You see you keep trying to attack me based on your idea that I have some "fanboy" complex. I don't. I am just irrtated by people who think they are more important than they really are. Oh and Powermetal I will say this once more. I did not know what you posted. If you choose not to believe me that is fine and try to post something without resorting to child-like insult rants. It shows a lack of intelligance and I am sure your not a total idiot. I could be wrong but I'm willing to give you the benefit of the doubt, and besides if I were going to still someone's post it would certainly not be yours.

  • June 8, 2005, 4:46 p.m. CST

    Been reading these posts...

    by Lost in Uranus

    And I have to let it out...I just wanna say, MOVIEMACK is an all-hating, all-knowing worthless piece of shit wanna be movie critic. If he could do so much better, what the fuck is he doing here wasting time and bandwith? He could be making the movies HE WANTS TO SEE. The way HE THINKS THEY SHOULD BE MADE. Of course I should point out he has a right to an opinion, but hating everything in sight just because SOME people enjoy it or look fwd to it?...GIVE ME A FUCKING BREAK. Anyhow, that is just my very own and humble opinion. Peace out.

  • June 9, 2005, 8:37 a.m. CST


    by Aves

    You talk about orginality in posts yet in just about all of yours you resort to the mindless insulting drivel that 90% of the neanderthals on this talkbacks use. Do use a favor, go to night school take a vocabulary course and come back when you can actually say something.