Mr. Beaks Thinks Nolan's Batman Begins with THE DARK KNIGHT!

Ledger rules!

eh?

Going by your second sentence, I'd assume the US is located in some war-torn, African nation. But, I'll be watching this film early next week (when I can get a ticket), and expect fan-fucking-tastic awesomeness.

Lives up to all the hype, everything good anyone has ever said about it is true. The acting is perfect, the script is (nigh) perfect, the character development is perfect. This is the quintessential Batman Joker TwoFace movie.

Beaks found too much to dislike about Wall E.

Whether you actually liked the film or not. You state that yes you do at the top and the bottom of the article. And then you get critical in a way that's completely contrary to that opinion.

Supes and Scorpion invite Batman into their mediocre next gen game after the credits. True shit.

I can't wait to dig deeper into this movie. I think there's a lot there. I cut out all my THE MAN WHO SHOT LIBERTY VALANCE allusions because another critic got there before me, but, damn, they really do apply.

No, I get critical in a way that's critical. It's possible to not like Christian Bale's performance and the fight direction, but still love the film. Nearly every paragraph of this review is positive.

The most I've ever been excited for a movie since Episode I. I don't think I'll come out with the same "wtf?" feeling. Bring it on!

I haven't seen this movie just yet, I am waiting til Friday on the IMAX, but I can tell its gonna be top contender. Its kind of shitty the film has been hyped this much to make everyone go see it, but I can say I believed way before the hype, back to when we were getting first trailers and joker pics, and backstage news and photos.

Good review beaks... although I disagree insofar as I do think Nolan has improved his staging of fight sequences this time around. It's still somewhat choppy and erratic, but there's a better sense of geography and you can always tell what's happening on screen.

Among all the other award prognostications being aimed at this, I think TDK should also be recognised for some very nice editing. The pacing (within the scenes and overall) is exceptional. There's a number of scenes where the action intercuts between the main characters as the Joker's schemes are unfolding, and I felt it was just really well-handled in the application of tension.

It's great to see a film that meets its high expectations for once. For me, this is hands down best of the year so far (Wall-E hasn't been released in Australia yet).

Saw it last night (in Aust) at IMAX. Although Bale's performance didn't grate so much on me, the action direction was really off putting.
And glad you agree with Greengrass' progression from Bourne 2 to 3. It's not an opinion I hear often, but one that I'm sticking with.

One thing that bugged me, and it is small, is Scarecrow's cameo. I LOVED Murphy as Scarecrow in Begins, and to give him a ridiculous little part... what was he even doing? Was he working with fake Batmen? You've got him in for a day on the shoot, at least give him a fun line, some REASON to be there.

Anyhow, really enjoyed the flick, but think my preference is still with Begins.
Good review.

Indeed! Hype CAN kill a movie. It's happened. Going in to see The Dark Knight expecting it to be The. Best. Movie. Ever! And you WILL be disappointed. As it does have it's flaws. Enjoy it for what it is. A very excellent Batman tale. I fell in love with the movie about half way in, at the scene of the said helicopter crash and the truck incident. The reveal of the Bat Pod had me wooping with absolute geek joy. And Heath Ledger does us Aussies proud. Enjoy the movie good talkbackers. Just don't expect the second coming.

I can't possibly be any more amped to see TDK. I've preordered my tix for Friday night and i don't need any more hype to see it. I'm fully saturated on hype. Curious if MrBeaks or anyone who's seen TDK has seen the Watchmen trailer? Any good? How does Doc Manhattan look?

You make that statement as if that's the lowest of the low, Beaks. Batman's a vigilante who BREAKS THE LAW because the arm of the law isn't enough to stop crime in Gotham.

Batman broken into more homes, crippled more people, destroyed more property and violated more local, state, national, international and probably intergalactic laws than any superhero in the DC Universe (except maybe Lobo)! And he has no qualms doing it, if it gets the job done... nor should he.

If Batman DIDN'T have every nook and cranny in Gotham under video and audio surveillance, he'd be an IDIOT and probably would've been taken out years ago, due to lack of information!

If I see a better film this year, I will be a very lucky guy and the prospect of TDK being as good has me all a quiver.

Damn why can't Nolan get this right? Even I could edit halfway decent fight scenes.

He somehow found that perfect balance between Wayne and Batman. It was Burton who didn't explore him enough. Bale is serviceable, but I agree dour to the point of being inaccessible.

Where *spoiler begins* Batman snags Lau in Hong Kong *the dark spoiler* and the fight scenes in that semmed pretty solid, albeit quick.

and do I have to actually see the thing in the theater!?! Somebody leak it already. This is getting a tad bit ridiculous!!!!

The film was good, but far from great. The tone was uneven, as was the pacing. Amazed how you all froth over that film.

The character in the comics is generally humorless and pretty much all business. Basically, he doesn't fuck around because he's such a disciplined and focused individual. He intimidates everyone in the comics (including heroes who technically have much greater power than him) and his code of conduct is staunch and unflinching. Bale's performance is cold and lacking in charm because he's dealing with the weight of the world on his shoulders and a homicidal madman is putting everything he believes to the test. It's cool if people prefer Keaton's Batman, just understand that Bale is the true embodiment of what the character is in the comics. Keaton, like everything else in Burton’s Batman, is a significant departure from the established mythos.

best in-joke ever! well played! I hope everyone else gets it!

Batman doesn't enjoy what he does; he's propelled by it and feels obligated, almost to a point of obsession. (As a point of fact, that's how Bane defeats him; by relying on Batman's unwavering work ethic and his dedication to his job.) IF we're going to wax intellectual, let's at least try and understand the character. Batman's one hardcore motherfucker in the comics and that's how Nolan and Bale have been portraying him. Bruce Wayne in the comics is nothing more than a façade.

to stop cam releases

I mean, at this point, I know TDK will be good. But Watchmen? I have no idea if Snyder can pull that off. I've never looked forward to a trailer with such a combination of anticipation and dread before. It had better be a masterpiece...

In Nolan's world, Bale manages a great feat by being close to the comic book character and fitting Wayne into the real world. He is not happy-to-be-here Tony Stark and he understands the core of the character being that Bruce Wayne died at the age of twelve and the only thing that exists is Batman. The crimefighter is his real face and the other only pretends to be human. While Beak's review is good, I find his lack of understanding of the main character to be frustrating. Of course the hero will sometimes have to take a backseat when his world is filled with other colourful characters. Who sticks in your memory more, Clarice or Lecter? But I have to agree with some, his voice does grate.

I'm touched. Who here thinks that Terry Gilliam, Alex Proyas or Sam Raimi should try their hands at Batman???

Having seen Dawn of the Dead and 300 I am fully convinced there is no possible way that Snyder can pull off a masterpiece.

Ha, thanks, I'm still in denial.

The movie was amazing. The movie was just chaotic, and epic. I was a bit depressed after watching it though, because we won't be able to see Heath Ledger in anything else really to show the amazing talent he had and would've had. But he will be immortalized by this movie. Oh, and the Watchmen trailer was the best thing about staying up and watching the movie. It looks amazing, great song in the trailer too, I need to know what song that is, it goes great with the trailer.

It's too bad Greengrass didn't get to make his version, that might have been something close to a masterpiece.

Well, I personally liked Snider’s Dawn remake more than the original, which in my opinion is praised more for nostalgia than actually being the masterpiece some claim. I think Snider’s vision was intense and nasty but of course I understand that not everyone agrees with my assessment. There’s a certain stigma that comes with making a film that is labeled a remake, especially something as seminal as Dawn. It was a no win for Snyder, regardless of how good his film was. As to 300, if you had a problem with that movie you can fault Frank Miller because Snider’s film, like Sin City, was a frame-for-frame translation, save some small additions. His adherence to the comic book proves he respects the source material, which is crucial if The Watchmen is to be successful. Personally, I think he’s up to the task.

The fighting was terrible in the first film, Nolan needs to hire someone to direct just fight sequences.

The song is by Smashing Pumpkins

I have seen reports about it and read descriptions. Seems we are going to get the DrManhattan reveal. I would suggest seeing it in the cinems rather than a crappy youtube ripoff.

Fundamentally silly films have a duty to be (a) lucid; (b) elegantly plotted; (c) witty; (d) atmospheric; (e) thrilling; and (f) extremely well-crafted. THE DARK KNIGHT is partly thrilling and partly well-crafted, but it AIN'T lucid, it AIN'T elegantly plotted, and it AIN'T witty.

I hear what you're saying. My problems with 300 came from the direcion and the acting, both really bland. I can understand why a lot of people enjoyed 300, especially if they were fans of the comic book, but shooting a movie in a green box with terrible performances just kills a film for me. After 2 hours it's just motion to me. I'm holding out a little hope for Watchmen, especially since most of it has been shot on outdoor sets and not against green screens.

Totally agreed. I was so much more excited about this project when he was attached. Oh well, still hoping, glass half full and all that. From what I've seen, Snyder does have a genuine love of the source material, and sometimes in making movies, passion can go a long way. But...up OR down.

I do like the choice of music they've said is on there. It's such a good fit for Watchmen that it almost seems...inspired.

Eh .....The Prestige?

was awesome, i loved that movie. batman v wolverine. v.good.

this movie was awesome, i saw it again today and the little ticks of ledger's performance are great. thematically the movie was excellent, it operates on a huge canvas and it works. eckhart was good but i think he keeps getting oversold. maybe this is to compensate for how much ledger is being sold. people feel the need to point out that others were also good and they were. but ledger owns it.

But now i just think he is a shit.

"Unlike Paul Greengrass, who somehow improved with his filming of hand-to-hand combat between THE BOURNE SUPREMACY and THE BOURNE ULTIMATUM, Nolan is as clumsy here as he was in BATMAN BEGINS. "

Hold on a minute, the fight between Batman and Liam Neeson was a fantastically realistic and brutal punch-up, and more importantly, the pacing of the fighting in Batman Begins was actually possible to watch, unlike the 3-cuts-a-second unwatchable editing in the Bourne movies. And what's more, the Bourne fight scene editing GOT WORSE with each movie. It got to the point where only a 17 year old with ADD could possibly keep their eyes on the screen. Everyone else had to turn away for fear of triggering some kind of latent epilepsy.

Frantic editing and shaky cameras DOES NOT make a fight look more exciting. It simply makes the fight scene annoying, unwatchable and impossible to figure out what is actually happening. See "Transformers" as a great example of this modern trend to kid viewers into thinking they are watching something spectacular by simply flashing it quickly in front of your eyes, like a conman waving a $10 bill close to your face and insisting that it's actually a $100 bill.

"The Dark Knight"? That way we could refer to his trilogy as "The Dark Knight Trilogy," which sets it apart from all the other Batfilms.

"The Dark Knight"? That way we could refer to his trilogy as "The Dark Knight Trilogy," which sets it apart from all the other Batfilms.

It was fucking sarcasm people. Obvious bit of dry humor there that some of you seemed to have fallen victim to. Try again.

Since The Dark Knight has a double meaning in this film, no it shouldn't have been called that. It stands for Batman's nickname and his dark night in the movie. It's the 2nd act of a 3 act play; thus it is he darkest one. I expect rollerblading and the return of Jim Carrey in the finale.

After all , Joker is the ultimate Batman villain. Every other villian will seem kinda anticlimactic by comparison! This is like putting "Return of the King" before "The Two Towers." Apparently there's no way in HELL can Nolan top this current installment.

It's actually painful having to wait now. I still have to wait another week!! ahhh!!

cmon people, someone just confirm ill see SOMETHING

I knew it would be big. With each new glowing review, I feel more and more amped to see it.

I'm sorry, but this discredits Beaks in my eyes as a reviewer immediately. I havn't seen TDK yet, BUT Bale was more than brilliant in every single role he played and I don't think he will drop the ball this time. Bruce Wayne is a cold man alost emotionally dead inside. Theres nothing but fury, bitterness and deep sadness. Theres no need for him to play a charismatic caped crusader.

bale isn't bad, he is adequate. there are number of great players here. freeman is good, caine is good. eckhart is stand out but he is geting a bit too much credit for the role. I actually thought maggie did a bang up job, she owned it. beat the pants offa holmes. ledger is AWESOME. so against all this bale does not stand out at all, he is actually quite bland. but this suits the role to a degree, his blandness is not necessarily a bad thing. like the straight man in a comedy act

I can likewise respect where you’re coming from on 300, as I think it’s a love-it-or-hate-it film. It has a very artificial, stylized look and everything about it, from dialogue to action, contains bombast. The whole thing is incredibly over the top, which mirrors the look and feel of the comic. That said, Snyder seems to really love The Watchmen and so far, everything I’ve seen looks very promising. There will of course be compromises to the story but if they can keep most of it intact I think the film could be pretty amazing.

It's a conspiracy!

are mad that TDK was filmed in Chi-Town and not the Big Apple. Seriously.

Hell the movie may have had it flaws, may haven´t been as complex as Nolan´s movies, but it had been fun and didn´t took itself too serious (without being goofy). Gothma didn´t looked like chicago, the setting and characters didn´t looked "reals" but "timeless" and were was a great atmosphere and vibe in it. And...you were able to SEE IT, when the goddamn Batman kicked ass!!!

Vagiant is greater than Batdance. You know it to be true.

Let’s recap what Bats ’89 actually is: A Gotham City that looks completely artificial; a Gordon who is portrayed as a fat, bumbling and completely marginalized fool despite his sizeable importance in the comics; a pudgy, middle-aged Joker who doesn’t even remotely embody the true psychotic nature of the character; a Batman who weighs 150 pounds soaking wet; a complete disregard for Bruce Wayne’s relationship with his father, which is glossed over by Burton; a murderous Batman, which goes entirely against the grain of the character. Oh, and we have Bruce Wayne upside down at one point because, you know, that’s how bats sleep. If some of you prefer his take on Batman, fine, but let’s not pretend he respected the source material because he didn’t. The only reason Burton’s Batman ever seemed dark was because, in comparison to the Adam West nonsense, anything looked dark and edgy.

I guess it may have been said but I think Bale is spot on. He may not be the colorful character and isn't that the point? He's fleshed out as a broken man. He's not going to have fun, his playboy image is total masked fakery, he doesn't enjoy anything, he's dead, except as a crazy vigilante in a rubber suit. That's the point. He's not Spiderman or IronMan, just playing at superhero in his spare time. In fact Bale, having been American Psycho Patrick Bateman is pretty much genius casting, you have an ultra-rich man with few feelings, alone in his penthouse, with a dark secret double life he feels compelled to play out. Only difference is Batman comes out of a sense of injustice and hurt. A happily charming Bruce Wayne would be a total waste of the darkness of the character.

I guess the voice is annoying to some but surely it's as much a part of the disguise as the suit and mask? I mean, who the fuck couldn't tell spiderman by the fact he sounded exactly the same as Peter Parker? You'd probably put on your gruff sexual predator deep breathing phone voice when dressed up in armour plated rubber too.

Well I am bummed... I have been looking forward to this film more than any other for ages.

I just went online to book my Tickets for Friday, to go with my Sister who is up in Scotl;and for a week from England (Missus does not want to go see Batman, weirdo)

I get into the times listing and they start on Thursday 24th July...WTF

Every film these days thats big, I mean them all, is a worldwide release date.

But the biggest film of the summer is a week behind everyone else, even bloody Germany get t before us, and since we are second biggest Hollywood film audience in the World I believe still aherad of Oz I think this is disgraceful.

And do you know what worries me, why have they done this, reeks of edits for UK audience to me, which is so insane in this day and age, because we get the correct version in the DVD later anyway.

I am very unhappy about this, nothing was publicised to say this was happening either.

So enjoy this Friday US people, and we will probably all be spoiled rotten by the time we get to see this....Shite.

One of the CHUD guys wrote a great column about Christian Bale's lack of mirth. It has to be said: he should certainly lighten up. In a way, another great actor from the seventies, that Italian-American bloke whose name I've forgotten, wasn't exactly cheerful either. Whether as Travis Bickle or Jake LaMotta or Micheal the deer hunter or as Noodles, he was always sulking or uncomfortably smiling. But Bale lacks that unique charisma. Aside from Empire of the Sun, his best performance remains American Psycho, because his seriousness does actually make him go nuts. Shame the rest of the film wasn't at the level of his performance because it would have equalled the novel. Anyway, here's hoping Bale finds his Bickle (and it wasn't the Machinist), his Noodles or his Micheal. However, the Batman movies are so choke full of great performers, it doesn't really matter so much, does it?.. De Niro: that's the one! He would have made the best Batman ever, BTW (in the seventies, that is). Nice review.

not me. i liked it.

I disagree with you regarding Bale's talents as an actor but regardless, you're entitled to your opinion. That said, I'd stay away from quoting those cunts over at CHUD. Not only do they have a serious hard-on against Nolan's Batman films but they literally suck their own dicks on a daily basis. They are in love with themselves and consider the rest of us unwashed fools.

I would love to see how Nolan would handle Catwoman. I think she should be the villain in the next Batman. Going to see this on Saturday! Hope it's good! The Baltimore Sun also hated it, so it's not just NYC critics. But honestly what do critics really know?

Batman is not a character that should "have a little fun" or "lighten up", he is a character that has put the weight of the world on his own shoulders, and then seeks to carry that weight, no matter what the cost. He is a driven individual with a single, sole purpose, his war on crime. He has distanced himself from people and from having a real life, not because he has no emotion, but because he cares too much, because he is obsessive in stopping the next crime, preventing the next bit of human misery from happening. He sacrifices everything he could have so that the people of Gotham can have a protector. Batman isn't about flash, he's about sacrifice. That's why he's the Dark Knight. People who say that Bale should lighten up, and Batman should have more fun, would do well to remember when Joel Schumacher took over the Batman franchise, (in)famously stating "I mean it's been thirty years, it's time for Batman to lighten up already. He should be over the death of his parents by now, it's time for him to have some fun out there". May we never see someone as clueless about the character handed the reigns to him again. Nolan gets Batman. Bale gets Batman. This is Batman.

You're either way older than I thought, or you had twisted criteria for what makes a good movie from a very early age.

That's part of what makes him Batman. Duh.

Batman movie that is essentially an episode of CSI?

There are several fight scenes in the film, and I can say that with the exception of TWO they're better staged than any in Begins. The Lau-napping is one of the really good ones. The last fight is supposed to be dizzying since Batman can't see shit. There's also a brief fight in a club, with strobe lights. I thought I was going to have a fucking seizure but it's less than thirty seconds long. The problem was NEVER the shaky-cam. It's the editing. In Begins you go from a cut of Batman punching someone and in mid-punch that guy is suddenly on the ground and then Batman's already kicking someone else's ass. Here, the shots are more consistent. It just looks a lot cleaner.

jesus and that fucking SUCKED. either there's a Cloverfield sized delusion going on here or this movie is actually good...only two options and that statements doesn't inspire confidence

I like Bale's Batman voice. In the universe that Nolan has created, Bale's Batman literally is Bruce Wayne's demon alternate personality. It is not the traditional Batman voice--low and gravelly--but I think Bale's voice works here. Whenever Batman talks you're hearing the balled up rage that Bruce Wayne conceals in a black cape and cowl at night. In this universe it works and I like it. But I'll grant that Kevin Conway's voice is definitively Batman for me overall.

loosen that sphincter up...theres enough room in the world for both po faced Batman and a funny one..

?

I was not aware of the animosity between AICN and CHUD and I apologize, I am but an exterior party to this feud. And by "Bale should lighten up", I was refering to his filmography in general, not Batman specifically. To get into the criticism of his Batman role, I would say that while the character is fundamentally conflicted and pessimistic, notably because of the mythos and Nolan's vision and atmosphere, he does play him a tad wooden. Difference of opinions. I would say Bale's performance in Begins is luke-warm: the sacrifice, dedication and melancholy are pitch perfect, the vengeful pathology is somewhat unconvincing. I guess it also has to do with a 180 million budget and the need for semi-sympathetic characters. For the record, I still find Bale to be a superior actor and probably the best person to play Batman today (although a buff Guy Pearce... regrets, what's the use?). I do think that Bale still needs to find his defining scripts/ character(s) (which, hopefully, will give him the awards he deserves). Anyway, I'm still waiting for the psychopathic, nihilistic Batman from Dark Knight Returns to appear on the silver screen. Perhaps, a third Batman could jump twenty/ thirty years into the future :-) And give an even darker closing chapter to this, Nolan's opus magnus.

He's off this week - Yeah, - OFF FROM WATCHING MOVIES!!! hahahah. Maybe Harry never got his Batman presskit :0

I think the Bourne movies' fight scenes went from bad to worse in the two films. It's likely a good sign that TDK's fight scenes are nothing like Greengrass's.

Everything is better with shake cam. Nolan should remake The Godfather and shoot every scene in shake cam. Sonny's demise would be so much more powerful if everything kept moving and shaking.

So the idiots would have it, anyway, as they already proclaimed that director of, so far, a few mediocre thrillers THE NEXT FELLINI! (Or they would've, if they knew who Fellini was)

The next film should seriously just be called GOTHAM and have Batman going on a kill crazy rampage as the city falls apart before killing himself in a symbolic jump off a tall building. Okay, maybe not, but it would be quite funny to get a huge audience for a total misanthropic hopeless ending to a hero.

As for Greengrass and Nolan, neither are action directors, they both obviously hand over a lot of the say in fight scenes to the DP and editor, if you don't like those elements, I think it's because they're a little uncomfortable with them too.

warped. In the interpretations in the comics I like best...he is not necessarily a good guy. I loved the recent Batgirl run of a couple of years ago. He is calculating and focused and arrogant and trained to the top of his ability. This can not be captured by an actor unless it is written that way. I think his film appearances worry too much about the character coming across as a "hero" or good guy. He is somewhere in between or on the edge of that. To me anyway. There is no question Bale could do that sort of portrayal, but it isn't in the script. Wouldn't his life experience and his obsession as Batman really torque his personality in ways that would be unsettling?

These reviewers are such little drama queens. Every dark, violent movie is now "a reflection of our times"...blah...blah...blah. So the USA is now one big Gotham City and oppressive forces are weighing down on us? I keep forgetting how hard life must be for a bunch of geeks who sit in recliners and watch TV and movies all day. Keep fighting the good fight guys!

Is it still recommended?

Agreed. Warner Bros, with the darkness submerging these Batman films, have perhaps made their ballsiest move since producing rapist-singin-in-the-rain Clockwork Orange (which cost far less). Here's hoping they go all the way for the closing chapter. Which should still be a loose adaptation of Dark Knight Returns. And carry an R rating?

Yes, Dr. Manhattan was all over it. Yes, it looks good, but I'm still very wary.

FIrst, it is important that he liiks like Bruce Wayne and has a physical presence. Keaton took the role seriously but I had a little problem with Bruce Wayne being a short, balding, scrawny guy.

Kilmer and Cloonet both treated Batman as if it was Bruce Wayne's fun little hobby. Of course that probably had more to so with the horrific director than the actors. Bruce Wayne is tormented and miserable. He isn't supposed to be Danny Ocean with Kung Fu.

Pull your head out of your ass.

Also, I wouldn't be so arrogant as to compare Nolan to a master filmmaker like Fellini, but if you can't recognize (and appreciate) the craft that goes into the making of his films, you truly are a cinematic moron.

don't you mean kevin conroy?

...to the other Batmen. The only great performances in the Burton Batmans are Pfeiffer and DeVito, IMHO, but they were lost in the "gothic atmosphere". Thankfully, I've never seen the Schumacher films. One thing even the naysayers can't argue about Nolan's vision is its profound coherence (it's really what sets him apart from other directors: the same bullet-proof coherence is present in his non-linear Memento and his linear Prestige). While I'm criticizing Bale's portrayal, you have to understand it's more nit-picking (notice all the reviews calling DK a "near-masterpiece"?) than a full-fledged complaint. When you hit the ball out of the park, the sky's the limit...

and I can't wait to see this..... Sherman Oaks Arclight - 1155p!!!!

Nolan makes consistently good films, and he's barely started in hollywood! Who gives a shit about fellini, really.

All I needed was to read your first few paragraphs to realize you're way off, about America and about this film. And your criticizing that Great line of Batman's at the end of Begins clinches it. No doubt the film is Far more hopeful than you see it. The impossibility of justice in Ameica? Ha

Not about the movie, but the site. I am a huge fan of this site. I've been coming here for over 6 years and for me to have only one main problem with the site is saying something. Anyways, ever since the joker card at the end of Batman Begins, I, like everyone else, have been eagerly and somewhat impatiently waiting for this movie to come. So, I made a pact. I stayed away from every thread that talked about the movie.I wanted to know NOTHING about it. Well, just the other day I was down in the talkbacks for a thread that had nothing whatsoever to do with The Dark Knight and I read a a comment for a talkbacker. It wasn't preferenced with a 'spoiler' warning. It was just three lines detailing the very end of The Dark Knight (don't worry, I won't dare repeat them). I hoped against hope, it was just someone's sick idea of a joke and it wasn't true, but it already had me thinking I knew the end of the film. Then last night I saw The Dark Knight and sure enough, all three lines of the comment were true. Through the entire film I tried to keep those three lines out of my head, but I couldn't. It was distracting and unfair. This site is an homage to all the glory of cinema and the entire theatrical experience. You do a great disservice to fans when you spoil the end of a film that so many people are excited about it. Last night after the movie, I went back to the thread and thankfully the spoiler comment was removed. I know it must be hard to try and remove spoilers by people who are just plain mean-spirited, bored or full of so much self-hatred that they have to spread it to others, so my plea is to the spoiler-spewing talkbackers. Please oh please, keep in mind we love movies as much as you do. Whoever that person was, he was obviously a fan. He went out of his way to see the film before everyone else. He must have been filled with the same excitement I had. So why ruin it for his peers and for his fellow film fanatics? Just remember we all love movies as much as you do.

but in a clip i saw of tdk where he was 'interrogating' maroni, it sounded pretty good. But i was thinking maybe nolan could have let fox give bruce a voice-altering device in begins, like the one used in the scream movies, but better-sounding of course. That way Bale woudn't have to lose his voice from rasping it up so much and we get a consistently good growl from bats.

For the life of me, I can't figure why anyone would want Batman, particularly in this type of iteration, to exhibit charm or a sense of humor. Was Frank Miller's Batman in "Dark Knight Returns" or "Year One" any more charming? This is an obsessed and more than a little disturbed sort of character, folks. IMHO Bale nails this version of Batman to a T--voice and all. And all of the Kevin Conroy worship around here is absurd.

No comment.

at the theatre I work out. I went home at midnight and woke up and 5 AM to go catch it, the prints didn't arrive til 2 AM. Mr. Beaks review touches on almost everything I felt while watching this. It's a fucking beast, and a beauty of a beast. I can't wait to catch it again at midnight in IMAX. This is just gonna keep growing on audiences, too...

great idea, i was thinking that too yesterday- something in the throat of his cowl that deepens/roughens his voice, or changes it just to sound scarier. it would be a great ploy to scare criminals AND protect his real voice.

It's where the administrators come to shit. Worst review I've read so far. Quite an accomplishment. You did Harry proud. Huzzah!

He's the best of our generation. Even the cartoon batman is not charming, actually this is the 1st time I ever heard that complaint. Batman has always been an uptight badass, which is an aspect where he and Joker are opposites.

I'm still shaking... fucking incredible... Not going to be able to sleep for a few hours now.

...is either a mouth-breathing loser who is pseudo-offended by the messages "don't litter" and "get up off your fat ass" or someone who lacks a pulse as it could melt the heart of anyone.
Wall-E is the best film of the year, until TDK opens that is.

The last thing of his I read was snarky and petulant and by god I was worried that the most coherent, transparent (in a good way) AICN reviewer was starting to go bad. This review is back on track.

I am so glad I only rented it for $1 at RedBox. It was not what I expected at all. The animation was beyond crap. The stories could have been alright, but the crappy Japanimation was just beyond bad. If you plan on seeing this, don't.

and i've also heard from liberals that wall-e is too conservative! depends on what station you listen to and what side of the fence you're on.

has anybody realized that mocking ourselves in order to improve ourselves is neither liberal or conservative, but thinking about the earth, litter, laziness and independant thought and self-reliance are things that humans should be doing anyway?

Short Review: It better than Daredevil. Longer review: Fred had to pee. Not because Fred lost control of bladder function because movie was great - and it is. But because Fred got to Fred's seat hour and fifteen minutes before showtime, and Fred's friend was late, so Fred had to hang on to both seats facing dire threats from from people wanting the choice seats Fred picked out for IMAX. Fred had industrial size cup of coke and popcorn too. Fred's friend finally showed up 5 minutes before showtime. Too late for Fred to pee. So Fred not get to pee until 10:00 PM. Fred had not seen so many men backed up in line to pee since the last football game Fred went too! Ita long movie! Ok, onto review:

It best movie of summer. Ledger is fantastic. From the very first time he appears on screen, you can tell he did something wonderful with the role. He inhabits the role. He is funny and twisted and sick. Just a great job. The movie is very entertaining and even the bigger is better did not fail in this one. There are plot holes, and some are larger than Fred expected in such a movie. They do not deter from enjoyment though. But on other hand they do emphasize that as great a summer movie as it is, it is still a superhero action movie that at time plays fast with the plot. Eckhart does great job, but Fred found the turn into two-face not quite as believeable as the movie tried to make it. Maggie, well, she not bad, she not make you forget Katie either. Problem with Maggie is that IMAX does her no favors. She is an average to plain looking woman, with a very good body. And while Fred try not to be superficial, her face tends to distract at times - at least in IMAX. That nitpicky though, and Fred almost ashamed to write that, because Maggie is a gifted actress. Bale is good, but his Batman voice at times is very irritating. This is not his movie though - which is strange for a Batman movie. But thems the facts. Freeman and Caine get some funny stuff, with Freeman getting the second biggest laugh of movie. The Nolans once again hammer home a theme. And while admirable that they are going for a coherent theme in a comic book movie, they get a bit heavy handed at times, and just expect that it will be accepted because the say so - and not because the script was written well enough to make it so. Don't get Fred wrong, there are great moments throughout the film when it all works to perfection, but occassionally...

All that being said, it is a great flick. Very funny at times. Dark and suspenseful. Fred not love ending - it plot driven and has flaws Fred mentioned above, but still all in all it worthy to be mentioned as finest superhero movie ever. Fred not yet put it there - Fred needs to think some more on it. But it damn close.

and i payed 24 for the two disk set. the ONLY 'good' toon was the killer croc/scarecrow one done in the mignola homage/ripoff style. it felt like the episodes were like 2 minutes long.

the only saving grace was with the 2 disc set you get the 4 faorite BATMAN:TAS episodes, with the really good, grim and strange 'over the edge' which i had never seen before and am surprised it ever aired- it is so NOT for children.

the absolute worst short was the one involving the two cops going into the arkham narrows and getting caught in a gang crossfire. i think that one was aptly called crossfire. the faces were so deformed, the animation so bad and repeating, it did not look japanimation at all, it looked more like when a mildly talented junior high art student tries really hard to draw in the current hip anime white boy ripoff style. it's not elegant or polished at all. it's extremely crude and forced.

i was really surprised to watch this and fell how i did after all the rave reviews i had read.

still say, the best stuff is on disk 2. i may throw out disk one.

Gotham Knight is not good? Are you sure?? Not even close to the original batman animated series? I was thinking of buying it. How are the stories?

Ok.. Bats will be awesome. Are they playing Watchmen in front and what's it look like?

Thanks for the review; well done. I think I'm about as primed as I can be for this film. I'm hoping to catch a showing ASAP.

"And here...we...GO!"

Sucks you had to pee man. When I went to see TPM opening night, I sat there before the movie in anticipation only to have an entire large soda spilled on my lap by my older brother as the Lucasilfm logo came up. Needless to say, I didn't want to miss anything so I sat though the whole movie in a puddle. Turns out that it wasn't the worst thing that happened, the MOVIE was...he he

Fred willing to suffer for the cause!

I agree, there can be nitpicking, and I'm sure even I'll find plenty of little problems with TDK, but I still think we have to sit back for a moment and appreciate how ballsy it is that a major studio has allowed such a dark tale that doesn't talk down to it's audience on a mainstream budget. It was pretty ballsy letting Bale in first time around, there were tons of articles about this obscure character actor getting headline action star billing. I don't think this heralds a new dawn in studio risk taking, but its nice to see a little glimmer of some genuine artistic merit allowed to play in a summer blockbuster. Naturally I'd love a truly dystopic crime epic to end the trilogy and an R rating if they could wing it...I think that's a hope too far of course. TDK is pretty blood, nudity and vulgarity free but manages to haul in some genuine adult themes in the true sense of the word. But, yeah, I don't think a third film even needs a major cartoon villain, just the disintegration of batman and hope. But hey, I'm a sucker for bleak endings...

I don't know if I would criticize Mr. Beaks's opinion as being utterly invalid. It isn't, however, the opinion of someone who truly knows Batman. "No, I get critical in a way that's critical." What was left out here was, "...for the sake of being critical." 1.) "I won't kill you, but I don't have to save you."--That's Batman. And more importantly, it's Bruce Wayne telling his surrogate father he doesn't need him anymore, because he stands against everything his real father and every other genuine father-figure (Alfred, Jim Gordon)his life has stood for. 2) "...it's Eckhart's unfettered earnestness - which can at times destroy a movie (see De Palma's THE BLACK DAHLIA)"-- Alright, I didn't think THE BLACK DAHLIA was the next great L.A.-based noir that would inevitably unseat L.A. CONFIDENTIAL either. (Certainly, it was hyped enough.) I still don't think you can saddle Aaron Eckhart with that though, unless it is your intention to devolve into utter hyberbole. 3) "It's strange that Batman is continually the least interesting aspect of films bearing his name, but, for whatever reason, he's a better catalyst than a character." + "but I keep wondering how it would play if Nolan's version of Wayne knew how to enjoy himself." = The biggest WTF moment in the whole review. Alright, I haven't seen THE DARK KNIGHT and I won't till 12:01 am Central Standard Time. I have seen BATMAN BEGINS though, and that was the first and only time, besides in the animated series, anyone got Batman/Bruce Wayne right at all. Frankly, everybody else's portrayal so far has been okay for one aspect of his personality or another, even Val Kilmer and George Clooney. (But those movies are so bad, how could you care?) If he seems humorless, it's because he is. My proof? "Batman Unmasked: The Psychology of the Dark Knight" It was just on last night and covered this very topic. Bruce Wayne is obsessed. In fact, consider how obsessed he is, "That's it. I'm putting my mind, body and soul through years of unmitigated hell to come back here and wage a personal, one-man war on the most dangerous elements of this dictionary defintion of urban decay." Bruce Wayne isn't interested in a life, no matter how much he says he is--at least not until there is no such thing as crime. Everytime he tries, his true identity calls back to him. I recall what one writer said in the show last night. (I'm paraphrasing. So bear with me.) He had written a scene in an issue where Bruce is in the middle of a meeting. He just waits, watching the sun go down. When the last glint of light passes, he says, "I have to go." Why? He needs to. He is fulfilling the only thing that allows him to go on. Is he a hero and not just a mental patient running amok? Sure. Because if Bruce Wayne had gone another way, he'd be Patrick Bateman. That brings me to my next point. Many writers say the interesting thing about the Dark Knight is not Batman, himself, but his villains. That's what drives him, his absolute need to prove to himself and his enemies that he is not like them and no one else has to be. Otherwise, after his first encounter with the Joker, he would've hung up the cape and cowl and thought, "You know Mom & Dad we're great. But they DID me clean my room alot. I'm over it." Forgive me for ranting, but I've often shuddered at people belittling Bale's performance, whether the criticisms extend to his voice or his portrayal of a smarmy billionaire for one reason: I know they're wrong. I understand we all have different perceptions about how a page-to-screen translation might look and sound like, but this is spot on. Bale's performance IS who I've read about all these years. When I've heard all of these sort of non-issue gripes from folks I have a hard time not just wanting to dismiss them as people being contratrian for the sake of being the only man or woman in the room with a dissenting opinion. I've even heard one guy piss and moan about the "SWEAR TO ME!" line from BATMAN BEGINS. If that's your take, I'd suggest you consider sitting back a moment, and putting yourself in Detective Arnold John Flass's shoes. Anyway, I know that was a lot. I just thought I'd get it out.

While i still like the movie, It really does not hold up well at all. Everything looks fake like it is a set. Batman has no turmoil he just is batman because the script says so not because he feels like he has too. Gordan is not Gordan. Why is Lando Harvey Dent. Jack is good. But lets be honest he is playing jack. It just feels dated. I'm sure these new films will feel dated 20 years from now too. But at least they have real characters and places.

Why the dislike for that line Mr. Beaks? Could you elaborate further?

...1989, Tim Burton's Batman brings a dark edginess to the cinematic version of the character (Yeah, I know it was done in the comics first, but we're talking movies her... most people at the time remembered the goofy TV show). 1992 Burtond brings Batman Returns and an even darker, more twisted version of the Batman mythos... and everyone started screaming "Geez, it's a comic book! It's so dark... Batman needs to lighten up!" Which resulted in the dark years of Schumacher. Here we go again... Wonder if the next Batman movie will be directed by Brett Rattner...

Well said. It's good to see thoughtful critques like yours and Mr. Beaks instead of the usual "I don't like Bale's voice" and "His costume doesn't look right" pissing and moaning found here.

It was the rest that just went to crap after the sos-so opening half hour.

that 'moment' was a real moment, that line represents what Batman SHOULD do and I loved it. It speaks alot about his own irony but also righteousness but I doubt you'd ever get it because I don't really think you're a good person at heart.

"Unlike Paul Greengrass, who somehow improved with his filming of hand-to-hand combat between THE BOURNE SUPREMACY and THE BOURNE ULTIMATUM, Nolan is as clumsy here as he was in BATMAN BEGINS. " HAHAHAHA you fool. You couldn't see ANYTHING at all from the ultimatum fight scenes and unlike begins where barring the ra's al ghul train fight, batman was shown to be a scary force whilst the ultimatum fights were just stupid. Bourne isn't meant to be a visual fright like Batman.

for a reason, the guy doesnt know how to enjoy himself thats the whole point. IF he could enjoy himself and and that fortune of his he would probably find it a lot more difficult to don the cowl and risk his life every night. But he cant forget the promise he made, the burden he accepted when he was left alone in a world gone mad...so Bale's Batman/Bruce Wayne is spot on, I've been reading a lot of the batman comics lately to get fired up and I realized after reading this review that I found it hard in the comics to sometimes relate to Bruce or he would annoy me but that's how he is, all business all the time except when playing up his playboy status for the media and to keep up the facade and even that is completely forced, he'd rather be out doing his thing (busting unrighteous skulls)

That now underrated film was the turning point for super-hero adaptations. Mr. Burton showed everyone how to do it (create another universe where you could believe a guy runs around in a costume fighting evil, and make said costume believable, as in armor). Before Burton, the only thing people could think of was guys running around town in Halloween outfits. And aesthetically, Tim Burton and the late great Anton Furst gave us a paradoxical cinematic vision that both harkened back to Fritz Lang and Orson Welles but at the same time had never been seen before. All Christopher Nolan has done is adapt both Frank Miller's Dark Knight Returns and Batman:Year One to the screen. That being said, see you at midnight!

about the fight scenes though, hope they arent too bad, movie will still dominate me, this I know

Did you just say that you'd prefer George Cloney one of the most one note actors around to Christian Bale who is pretty much second to Daniel Day Lewis? You are a fucking idiot. And Bruce Wayne isn't a funny guy. God some people make me so mad because they are so fucking stupid. and when they have fingers they type these stupid opinions and it makes me sick I am the same species as them. Cockhead.

If you're that concerned with keeping unmarked spoilers off the talkbacks, maybe you shouldn't come on here and confirm their accuracy or lack thereof.

warnor must have some gag order against mentioning who Sarah Jane Dunn is in the dark kinght. She's IN IT. she's the only one NOT listed with a character on IMDB. i figure if there was any awesome nod to her being a psychiatrist at arkham it would be mentioned. I also figure if it was a mediocre part, someone would verify that it WAS NOT the part we were all waondering for the past two years.

SO WHAT THE FUCK IS IT?

...is the best film of the year so far?

Tell me oh master of good taste which film or films you think is better so that I may tell you to get a life?

I realized that joker is an opposite in a twisted way to Batman. He is an anti-detective so to speak, always one step ahead, going against the grain.

Seriously, all the shit that happens and unfolds how can they think of it and you'd believe they would be able to do it and get away with it.

I will give some tiny amount of respect for Burton making the superhero movie into blockbuster material again, so that studios started treating them with some respect, but as a film, Batman (1989) is HORRIBLY flawed. As a story, it's a lot of nonsense. As a whole composition it's a fucking mess. As an homage to Batman, it's a failure (and indeed, insults Batman quite a bit).

Burton's Batman is a murderer. He kills more unarmed people on-screen than the Joker, and openly expresses his desire to kill as if it's a goal. Burton's Batman is a clown, as well. He hangs upside-down at night. He has almost no decorum as Bruce Wayne. He cracks jokes.

Burton's Gotham City is a ridiculous set-piece. It looks like someone ate some lentil soup along with Fritz Lang's Metropolis and then vomited the whole thing back out as some larger-than-life, silly-looking place on an L.A. backlot.

Burton's (or more to the point, Hamm's) storytelling is terrible. A multi-million-dollar, armored Batwing shot out of the air by a high-calibur handgun? Batman blowing up a factory full of henchmen and MAYBE even some hostage-workers? Batman intentionally killing the Joker in the end? Batman accidentally crash-landing at Gotham Cathedral, only to find that a whole crew of Joker's henchmen were already hiding in the belfry, despite not knowing this is where Batman would show up? Batman acting more like a gadget-heavy, rubber-suited James Bond than a brooding detective? This was an awful mess.

On top of all that, between Elfman and Prince (both great musicians, normally) the score/soundtrack is a complete clusterfuck. Jack Nicholson chews the scenery as Jack Torrence (now called Jack Napier; It's as if he can't play a character not named "Jack") from the Shining, but while wearing white makeup for about 12 minutes of his screen time. Bob the goon, while played quite well, was utterly pointless comic relief. Dent, Gordon, and the rest of Gotham City seemed like they were pulled right out of the 1960s television show.

And there is no sense in getting into how this movie led into one where an evil circus, a goo-spitting sewer-dweller, and a pack of GIANT PENGUINS nearly destroy Gotham City, while falling into a truck of kitty litter gives Selina Kyle (secretary not whore) super powers... Or why she would even have a "Hello There" neon sign in her apartment in the first place.

whereas the true Bruce Wayne drove the first movie, this movie was more Batman driving it and playing up the whole comic book aspect that he will be Batman till he dies and it's tragic. He really has no way of turning back. If Beaks can't see that it's because he's a boring loser.

...is its SPOILER WARNING (what? You haven't read Dark Knight Returns??! Lucky you: buy it once you've seen TDK) optimistic ending END SPOILER. The moments in between are raw and sooooo violent, however. I'm a sucker for bleak endings as well (I think it has to do with seeing JC's The Thing and Shining when I was seven). I do believe if TDK makes the bucks it seems headed for (a lot of people who discovered Begins on DVD will not miss this one in theaters), there is a chance Nolan stops borrowing from "Year One"/ 70s reboots and convinces WB to adapt DK Returns. Albeit through his own "realistic" perspective. One can always hope for the impossible, even though statistically, the odds are pretty slim. On a sidenote: Mr Beaks, you shouldn't confuse America's imperfect justice system with those of less democratic countries where some women go to jail because... they were raped.

...because if you think Wall-E is strictly a kids movie than you really are an idiot and any opinion you have on the film is thusly rendered null and void.

of course it's overshadowed by Ledger but in the type of way that Pacino was overshadowed by Deniro in Godfather 2, you still remember it. It's such a strong performance by Bale as always, but it's just so real. It feels like Batman but something more.

seems like these nolan films are the ultra-condensed versions of the history of batman comics. not all villains have been covered yet, but not all have to be. some could simply be urban myths or rumors associated with having fought with batman. "batman's a badass! did you hear he killed that sewer mutant that's been eating children? holy shit!"

so maybe they jump forward to the end of batman's career for the third one. space out the story timeline of TDK and the next one by about 10 years. we see batman bruce is still fighting a war he can't win, we hear about some of his adventures. the batcave has started to collect trophies and mementos.something happens early in the film that changes him and makes him want to stop. this could be a movie with a message about self-reliance. batman knows from his own (and harvey's) experience that ONE MAN can't protect an entire city, or people, or world. batman is still a wanted vigilante but the people of gotham are starting to act and think and fight for themselves from his inspiration (hinted at in TDK?)and he decides it's time to hang it up. or maybe perpetuate the myth for something for people to believe in, or maybe he sees an oppourtunity to pass on the mantle to someone else willing to do it. it would be a nice and bittersweet third wrap-up, because i don't know how they can top TDK.

If that actress is in this film, she doesn't play Harley Quinn. Hopefully that character will NEVER appear in a Nolan Batman movie. She's as unnecessary and annoying as Jar-Jar Binks.

Well, no. I mean, he's been in BAD MOVIES, but he's never been BAD IN a movie. Reign of Fire -- gargabe; Shaft -- garbage; bale = enjoyable in both. His best performance: Empire of the Sun.

Great take on Batman '89. I don't think it has aged well but it has character. And your right, it really did change the idea of the way superhero films could be approached. I remember looking thru magazines for pics before it was released...no internets back then and you coulnd't get EVERY detail about a film before it's release like you can now.I still have my VHS copy.

I didn't care for The Machinist, but Bale was outstanding. Reign Of Fire was underwhelming, for me, but Bale and McConaughey still made it worth while. Newsies wasn't that great -- but Bale was only teenager, if I am not mistaken... we're all entitled to a few youthful mistakes. To answer your question: no, not yet. He delivers 9/10.

Very poor review. you've just copied other reviewers and tried to be controversial in a tasteless sense by invoking memories of 9/11. Incredibly tasteless and childish. and comparing TDK as "one of the best movies alongside WALL E" is a stupid thing to say. Mr Beaks you would be better getting a job at the New York Post.

sarah jane dunn is the only actor listed without a character part. there was big to-do when nolan hand picked her for some part. her own site at one point had her listed as harley quinn. she mispoke twice now saying she was bruce's girlfriend (she isn't- another blonde ballerina is) and maroni's girlfriend (she isn't a brunette actress is)...and another early reviewer said she was scarecrow's girlfriend. is that true?

harley doesn't have to be annoying. and the idea that anarchy and crime attracts women and forms strange relationships is strangely fact. every incarcerated killer pretty much has groupies or has gotten married after being jailed. They should at least bring in a dr. quinzell to study the joker, who's thinking fascinates her, and who she finds herself pitying.

If nothing else the general (non comic reading) public no longer had a little picture of Adam West in their heads when someone mentioned Batman.

Not that I have a problem with the '60s Batman, of course. I think there's room in the world for both interpretations.

Whoever she plays in the film it's a very minor role. Scarecrow's role is really just a cameo, so she's not his girlfriend. She may be a random party guest, or one of Bruce's arm-candy chicks.

Batman kills in Frank Miller's Dark Knight Returns. Besides, portraying a super-hero that kills was a radical approach, and Burton is a radical kind of filmmaker. Humor is very important to Burton's type of filmmaking. It wouldn't be a Burton film without it. And the reason Bruce Wayne has no decorum is because, in this film, Burton portrays him as a lost man-child, which every protagonist in every Burton film is.

The industrial expressionistic look of Gotham City was actually an extension of the Batsuit design. With the limited special effects capabities of the 80's, it was the sort of environment where you could believe a man runs around dressed in Bat Armor, as opposed to using Manhattan island as the location.

Yeah, the '89 Batman film was less about a high concept plot or Bruce Wayne's character development as the film served as a metaphor for the cult status of Batman himself and Burton's exploration of the nature of duality. But for me, super-heroes are objects of metaphorism to begin with. The film was as much about its iconic scenes, like the Batmobile charging down the lonely country road or the Batwing against the full moon, as it was about anything else.

Don't know what you're talking about with Elfman's score. That score was freggin great, it launched Elfman's career and was also recycled for the long running Batman animated series.

Are you familiar with the Joker as a villain? The Joker like chews the scenery and hams it up as he kills people. That's what the Joker does. And Mr. Nicholson's jack Torrence was basically an audition for the Joker. Jack was born to play the Joker, their names are even alliterations of each other. And Bob the Goon was Joker's expendable #2 guy, as every villain needs a #2 guy.

but it's a comic book movie...if he can't nail the action scenes, that's a pretty big problem. It was definitely Batman Begins biggest flaw.

wow, that's some bold honesty.

i don't understand what kind of action you guys want to see in a batman movie. you do realize in 98% of batman comics, the action was usually like one big splash page of a punch near the end, right? i admit i haven't read a batman comic in a couple years but i don't remember many extended pages of drawn out battle sequences. batman is a element of surprise, one move kind of guy.

Hey Dramacidal, I thought of "Heat" after seeing TDK for the following reasons. Even though I liked the movie, it felt long, which is exactly how I felt coming out of "Heat". And much like that film, the first thing I wondered was "well, what would I take out?" As I pondered that, I realized that not only did I not know what I would take out, I realized I would not want anything taken out.

do you want schumacher action? adam west, back to back, pow bang action? burton's belltower kung fu retard action? i'm all for the quick dark nolan mystery move, and leave the action to the wide angle car, air, zipline, gunfight and explosion stuff

Still Choppy, but at least this time I always knew who was getting punched.

That during the Lao capture sequence, once the timers on the window explosives started going, the following scene was all in real time. Just a neat little thing I caught on second viewing.

...if you want to make an argument for defending Nolans extreme close up quick cut style of shooting a hand to hand combat sequence, you'll do better by not being so ridiculously leading and biased. Invoking Adam West? Schumacher? Really? As if there aren't a million and one examples of fight sequences that are easy to follow and exciting. How about Woo? The warchowskis? Speilberg ala Raiders? Hell, how about Del Toro? Did you see Blade 2 or Hellboy 2 for that matter. The man can shoot a fight sequence. Not to mention the many well done fight scenes not shot by named directors. Why have Christian Bale train for months in different martial art styles and what not if you're not going to put that hard work on film in a comprehensible manner. Seems like a waste of time and money to me.

I certainly agree that life in the USA changed drastically for the worst on 9/11, but I think this movie could still have been made. But I guess it's all speculation.

EVERYBODY else involved with piece of dogshit destroyed it. Eckhardt was the only one who did a decent job.

I haven't seen TDK yet, will have to wait another week but Begins does have trouble with its fighting sequences. I agree they're tricky to shoot and that's why Matrix is still the best comic-book film in my book (and I'm fully aware it's not a comic, hence, I have a problem with comic-book films). I thought Spidey 3's action sequences sucked the balls of its flaccid script (despite some nice flourishes in Spidey 2). Superman Returns was easier to judge, because it didn't have a fight scene. However, and this is the last time I will champion this (promise): if they were to adapt Frank Miller's Dark Knight Returns as the third film, jump twenty-years and change Batman's psyche, they should unashamedly Rodriguez the fight sequences from that comic. For they are a thing of insurmountable awesomeness (helicopter sequence, mud fight?). You know this to be true.

The reason this line sucks is because it makes Batman into a preachy hypocrite. He's basically saying "hey, I'm too good to do something as bad as killing you, so pardon me while I leave you in this train that's about to plummet into a fiery explosion." That isn't hypocritical? How about Bruce going all high and mighty on not killing the criminal at the League of Shadows' place, opting instead to blow the whole place up, almost certainly killing dozens of ninjas along with said criminal? These are big problems with Batman Begins, and it's why the film isn't nearly as good as some might claim. At least Burton's Batman didn't go around preaching about how good he was before he dispatched criminals.

And what's more, I think Batman's strict no-kill policy is a bit silly to begin with. I mean, you're telling me if the Joker had a bomb on a bus full of schoolchildren 5 miles away and the only way to stop the explosion would be to kill the Joker (say the Joker had his vitals being monitored to defuse the bomb when he died), that Batman would go "nah, Joker, I'm good, I'll just run 5 miles and if those kids die in the mean time, oh well, at least I stuck to my principles!" I can understand that having Batman kill indiscriminately would be a problem, but not killing at all, ever, is silly.

That said, I fully expect The Dark Knight to kick Begins' ass.

...you may have overlooked? GOLDENEYE. The fight at the end between Pierce Brosnan and Sean Bean is great. It's a 'movie' fight but it has a visceral quality and great editing and sound effects. Choreographed but not 'too choreographed' if you know what I mean. I don't own it but if you have it on DVD check it out. One of the best I think.

Okay, so on the side is an add/spam thing about who's the better batman. Who's answering that add? How many people honestly think any batman before the current one is better? Because of these movies, i'm never watching the Tim Burton ones again...EVER

I've got to see this thing ASAP. I still like Burton's movies, but Nolan seems to have this unique ability to encapsulate EVERYTHING that basically relates and has related to Batman, in comics or television or film, in a single movie that still manages to not veer off-course or get too uneven. The imagery I've seen for Dark Knight has about made me giddy because, honestly, as much as I like Batman Begins, I never felt that the villains in that film WARRANTED the existence of Batman and his tactics of crimefighting. Maybe the amount of time that Gotham had been in the hands of corrupt people warranted it, but Ra's Al Ghul and, particularly, Scarecrow, as Nolan depicts them, didn't really scream WE NEED BATMAN to me the way I thought it should have. Nevertheless, it was and still is a great movie and I suspect that THE DARK KNIGHT is going to get right, if you will, whatever I thought was maybe just a little wrong about BATMAN BEGINS. As for this post-9/11 stuff, who does one blame for this? Desperate times call for desperate measures, regardless of who made the times desperate to begin with. In reality, I'm not even sure any of us has an answer to the question, "Who made the times desperate?" without showing our political biases, but whatever the cost of "getting the job done," the only alternative you're left with is not doing or having the job done at all. That's where it gets murky - that's where you really start defining a person or an element like Batman as a necessary evil, because some of the things he does could be construed as evil, or at least destructive, but consider the alternatives and you're left a bit speechless, a bit embarassed if you want anything to improve (for society in general, anyhow) at all. Lastly, this whole wire-tapping thing - I'm sick of it, particularly as it relates to present-day America. Fact is we, as Americans, gave up a good deal of our privacy the minute we started engaging in electronic transactions with credit cards, debit cards, etc. How someone can condone or at least stand idly by during the killing of unborn children simply because it's convenient (DO NOT use that mother's-safety and body-rights bullshit with me), but raise hell because the phones of a few immigrants or suspicious people are being tapped by the government (which everyone expects to come to their rescue anyway) is beyond me and absolutely sickening. Ask all the questions you want about whether this is ethical or that is not, but when it all comes down to it, what these Batman movies are really saying is what we should all know already - there is not, never was and never will be a perfect world. As I think Frank Miller put it in one of those DVD extra documentaries, Superman's an idealist while Batman is just fighting to keep things as they are or as safe as they can be - the status quo, the more tolerable of two miserable states of being.

Hello, I work as a projectionist at a movie theater and had the privilege of seeing this movie last night. I will first start off by saying that it is indeed a great movie and does live up to the first film. That being said... The hype for this movie is absolutely ridiculous. It is NOT the giant lead forward from the first that these AICN assholes are claiming it to be. A great movie yes, and by far the best of the summer. But, in this summer of shit, that is not saying much. Don't walk into this with huge expectations. If you do, you may be mildly disappointed. NOT the I-Thought-This-Was-Suppose-To-Be-Good disappointment that came with Spiderman 2, but disappointed never the less. The Joker is amazing, Harvey is great, and Batman is superb as usual. The story is a bit clunky at times, but the action makes up for any flaws it may have. And I'm kind of annoyed that they altered the production design from BEGINS. (Pay attention the new Wayne Enterprises building and sets to see what I mean). Any to prove I'm not pulling this review out of my ass, I will tell you a few tidbits from the film. The Batpod emerges from the damaged Batmobile very similar to the way the Batmissile did from the Batmobile in RETURNS. Rachel gets blown-up in a You-Must-Choose who dies scenario. The Joker lives and Two-Face dies. Oh, yeah. Batman decides in the end to take the blame for Two-Face's shenanigans, thus keeping the legend of Harvey Dent alive in the eyes of the people. He in essence becomes a villain in the end, but not really. I'd really like to see a sequel here. I know the the THIRD movie curse haunts all franchises, but I think they can actually one-up this. When you see the film let me know what you guys think.

Just a quick question. Not to start an arguement but I can honestly not remember The Batman killing anyone in The Dark Knight Returns. Was it the "Rubber Bullets...honest." line? The Joker kills himself...Two Face is put away, and the Mutant gang leader is broken and smashed up (literally and figuratively).
Batman's NO KILL rule is VERY important to the character. One that I despised about Burton's Batman and actually really liked about the opening fight in Batman Forever (Batman catching that Two face thug before he fell to his death through the open elevator shaft).

If you say faithfulness to the character makes a film better, then Schumacher's films, I guess are better than Burton's. I think only an insane person would argue this, but hey. Burton's films are an interpretation of the character, one that isn't entirely unprecedented (as Batman DID kill when he first appeared in comics, for one).

He blows away a guy with a machine gun to rescue a toddler. "I'll kill the kid man, believe me!" BUDDABUDDA "I believe you."

That's the thing: people ARE hypocrits. It's human. That doesn't by itself make moot ones general principles. On the contrary, i think it underlines ones ethics when they are challenged to the point of failing. And it's not the first time Batman has been brought to that precipice. It's happened in the comics and it's happened in the animated series. It happened in the three episode team up between Batman and Superman called "worlds finest". In the climax, the Joker had Lex Luthor restrained in his own giant flying wing and was systematicly destroying metropolis with it's weapon systems. Batman gets aboard and struggles with the Joker, which culminates with the Joker spilling these explosive ball-bearings which he used earlier in an earlier episode. As the ball-bearings begin to explode on the ship one by one Superman makes his dramatic entrance. Now, what Batman says in that moment is powerfull because of what he does'nt say; "Superman, get Luthor, i'll get harly" (harliquin was on the ship as well). No mention of the Joker. I laughed out loud when he said it because of the omission. Batman hate for that man was clear as day.

was that it was the first fresh look at the character in over 20 years. Up until then, it was difficult to imagine Batman as anything but Adam West - so it was easy to overlook a lot of the film's problems. And they had been trying to get Batman made w/Nicholson as the Joker since '79. By then, he was 10+ years too old, so they did something interesting: they let Nicholson play the Joker, but took the guy who SHOULD have been the Joker - Keaton - and let him be Batman. As for Bale, everytime I see him I see Steven Weber, and I hate his Batman voice.

But being a preachy hypocrite just makes you out to be a douche. I don't mind Batman breaking his rule, in fact I think it's an interesting thing dramatically to have him kill people and have to face what he's done, to realize he may be walking that razor's edge. But in BB when he goes all preachy and high and mighty, only to do something just as bad (leaving Ras in the train) or worse (destroying the League of Shadows HQ, killing dozens including the criminal he refused to kill out of principle) is just arrogant assholery.

...but citing that as some kind of precident for a kill crazy batman isn't being honest. Batman in Batman Returns torched the penguins fire blower minion with the Batmobile (yes, i know it was supposed to be irony), and he straped a bomb on another guy and threw him down a manhole. These were haphazard choices where their were other non lethal responses he could have made. The DKR incedent wasn't so cut and dried. Batmans choices were limited, and the scene didn't come off as light. Batman shooting that gang member in DKR was like Captain America shooting the Super Patriots' minion with an M-16 that was lying at his feet in Mark Gruenwalds run back in the day. Caps shield was on the ground far from him, and the minion was about to shoot hostages. Cap had to make a heavy choice. Doesn't mean when the captain America movie finally hit there should be a possibility of Cap slitting peoples throats or smilling while strapping bombs to Nazis and tossing them into tank turrets.

my statement on nolan's quick, dark fights still holds up. i was only comparing the batman movies with each other, and as it stands, nolan has the best bat-fights, well, animated series aside.

the matrix fights are the last thing i want in a batman movie. i hope i never see a two-hour forearm throw/block scene or one man versus one million ever again in my life. nor do i want batman to be blade, where all the enemies take their turn standing around waving their arms in a circle around him taking turns so they can all be picked off one by one. that kind of scene is long dead. if batman wants to drop down, throw a guy into a wall, twist an arm and take his gun, all in shadow or before you know what the fuck is going on, that sounds about right to me. do we need to see batman break a dude's arm and hold it for us in front of the camera steven segal style,and saying something like 'oops'or,'oh, snap!' giving someone behind him great oppourtunity to smack bats over the head with a pipe?

Returns is about Catwoman, Forever is about Robin, B&R is about nothing and TDK is about Joker and Dent. So why shouldn't the actor playing bats just growl and collect his paycheck?

When most of them are pampered like little dogs. Fascist state? Cry me a river you whiney little punks.

Just read Roger Eberts review in the Chicago Sun-Times, he couldn't of given it higher praise. So fuck all those critics....err.....haters that didnt like this movie. GO CUBS!

..but i'll play. Do i necessarily want to see Batman vs a lot of people who come at him one at a time? No, not really. What i do want to see is how is doing what to whom. Especially if it's Batman vs..say..a bunch of ninja who happen to be trained as he was. You don't build up to such a confrontation and then have a lot of extreme close ups and quick cuts which end with Batman standing on a mound of unconcious ninja. That's just bad form however way you shake it. Also, your missing the point again, especially where the Matrix is concerned. There wont be much back and forth Between Batman and his targets as they aren't trained martial artists and he is, but, just like the hallway sequence in the Matrix, when Neo does a flying spin kick on the guard i'm seeing keanu reeves do a frickin spin kick on a gaurd. Reeves and Fishburne trained for 4 months and i'm seeing it on screen. As far as your Steven Segal/sarcastic quip comment, that's not worth a rebuttal.

Nothing but a 2 hour gimmick and an annoying one at that. Watch that movie in the correct order and it would be just another 90s Pulp Fiction inspired indie crime drama. Thank god Insomnia was so damn good or I would have written off Batman Begins before it started filming.

I use to get tired of Shumacher being crapped on for his two Batman films, not because they weren't horrible, but because I always believed Burton's Batman films were terribly overrated and BORING. They are overlong, with no tension whatsoever. Yes, I know TDK is 2 and a half hours, but the trick is does it feel that long? Batman 89' is tough to sit through now with all the great comic book movies the past few years. The original Superman has aged better.

You get George Clooney in bat-nipples running around with Chris O'Donnell and the chick from the Aerosmith videos. It's just bad all around.

Bruce didn't make any effort whatsoever to free the prisoner or capture him in order to send him to prison. The prisoner had his hands bound behind his back and Bruce didn't even cut those for him! So what did he accomplish? He tries to act all high and mighty and above killing, but is directly responsible for the deaths of dozens of ninjas (you can clearly see many ninjas being caught in explosions that, if they weren't killed, would throw Nolan's reality-based universe into a tailspin of absurdity). That's different than Burton's Batman in one way: Burton's Batman never got all preachy about how he was above killing people. And Batman leaving Ras in the train at the end is even worse, but he gets even more preachy there before being a complete hypocrite and leaving him there to die. If Batman was really as mature, as high and mighty as he thinks he is in BB, he'd save Ras and have him imprisoned. Alas, I suspect Goyer (because I'd like to think Nolan is more intelligent than that) wrote the final stand-off. In fact, I blame a lot of BB's flaws on Goyer. The guy's an awful writer. And with minimal involvement from Goyer, I have high hopes for a Batman that isn't an arrogant, preachy hypocrite.

nolan's fights are better than the staged fights in any other live action batman incarnation. it's improvement. maybe it will be more clear cut by pt 3. we can hope.

i honestly can't say i remember anything great about matrix fights beyond part 1 or maybe the highway scne, but after a while all the exaggerated moves put me to sleep. i should rewatch, but who knows if i have that many hours of life left to spare. i just don't think batman's fight scenes need to ape the styles of other directors in 'action' movies- but i don't hold it to nolan to reinvent the genre either. giving us a good batman crime movie is enough. so, we agree, we just disagree somewhat. i agree there's room for improvement, i just don't agree it should follow any formula i've seen.

Right here: http://www.empireonline.com/video/watchmen/

WOW!

In its entire theatrical run, X-Files will be lucky to gross what TDK grosses in its opening weekend.

You can't equate KILLING with LEAVING SOMEONE TO DIE. There is a HUGE difference. Especially someone who brought on those circumsatnces himself. Don't get me wrong, I've got no problem with Batman taking someone out if he had to. Being a hypocrite is aying I'm not going to kill you and THEN killing you! Euthanising (sp?) my sick dog is different than murdering an animal etc.

Yeah, watch it again, but in the order it was meant to be. WTF: why don't you unleash the chronological Pulp Fiction edit and shit on that? Non-linear story-telling isn't a gimmick in the hands of brilliant directors, it's a point of view yielding many ramifications. And might I remind you that Memento had a budget of $9 mil (5% of TDK), so try shooting anything on that level and not make it look cheap (and I mean it: good luck to you). To tell the truth, first time I saw it, I thought "well, it's a brilliant little piece of story-telling but why all the fuss?" However, and this is the only time I've ever felt it, I think retrospectively I was just fucking jealous. When I watched it again, I found the terribly sad and mournful dimension hitting me straight in the face. I was so busy understanding and solving during the first viewing, I failed to see the absolute, Sisyphus-come-Orpheus tragedy of the whole film. Which is its endgame (probably... that's how I saw it). Which is as brilliant as it is emotional. Which is rare in any artistic medium. Nolan's finest hour and film noir's latest great addition. Just an opinion, but perhaps you're just jealous of the feat as well. However, you can argue that a film that needs to be seen twice to be fully understood is flawed. But hell, I only understood Fight Club was squarely a love letter to Marla Singer from a guy too removed and shy to say it straight upon third or fourth viewing.

He acts like he's so above killing Ras, but he just lets him die instead of having him arrested and facing due process. And how was Ras going to die without Batman's involvement? Batman got Gordon to destroy the rail and he made sure the train would run right off of it! So he knew that this train was going to plummet, leading to certain death for anyone aboard. But because it's slightly more complicated than, say, Batman shooting a rope around the Joker's leg to prevent him from escaping (escaping Joker = more people will likely die) which leads to his death, BB "gets" the character more than B89. That's a crock.

Uh, sounds like another reviewer has fallen to Garth's pompous padding effect. Just review the film and stop trying to sound like you have a degree.

It has been many years since I read TDKR so I thank you for clearing up a question I had about it.

"Batman got Gordon to destroy the rail and he made sure the train would run right off of it! So he knew that this train was going to plummet, leading to certain death for anyone aboard. " However, Ras surely had plans to get of that ride before it ended. I don't get the impression Batman's intention was to 'kill' him via the train thereby absolving himself of any responsibility. The plan reached a point where slapping him in the batcuffs and hauling him off just wasn't practical at that point and he said "see ya". As far as "...having him arrested and facing due process"...Don't forget, Ras and his buddies had infiltrated Gotham from the ground up...due proccess was sheer folly and Bruce knew it. I know this is all subjective perception but it sure is fun to hypothesize this stuff...I am a true geek.

First take a breath. Box office rarely = quality. However box office does = how much interest there is in a film. And no one except for yourself and a few other 1000 out there give 2 shites about The X-Files sequel. That was my point. You now can continue playing Magic: The Gathering

We all know Ras is immortal anyway, not sure if Bruce knew that. Maybe he'll be back in part 3? After the train exploded though who knows how much there was left of him to take to the lazarus pit.

Batman's code, while admirable in a comic book - 40 years ago, is truly a very vain stance. While not being hypocritical, it is still a vanity that Batman has that he uses to separate himself from those he fights - his self-appointed, and illegal fight. One could argue that his constant chasing and apprehension of villains, and their subsequent escape and further murders, especially with regards to the Joker, who commits murders to draw out the Batman, continue solely because of this vanity, and not due to any stronger moral compass.

batman's a hypocrite? Give me a break. As someone mentioned Liam Neeson's character was on that train due to his own actions, batman as he stated is not obligated to save him, he had a choice and he made it. With blowing up the ninjas, sometimes tough choices have to be made, he didnt have many options given that he was in a den of highly trained killers and needed to escape...he doesnt kill willingly but in his line of work, well, shit's gonna happen. And batman is an urban commando/vigilante, he would not use flashy martial arts moves (ala the matrix, because that is not realistic (I know this because I study martial arts and watch the UFC religiously) he would do whatever it took to end the fight as fast (and non lethally) as possible, this would not often rely on jump spinning back hook kicks that look good on film but any opponent with half a brain can see coming from miles away

I will try, but in vein to be as superior as you, Jeff. One turtle neck sweater and a latte voucher for your 16th coming right up.

about batman's vanity in thinking he is more righteous by not willfully killing criminals no matter who ghastly their crimes, but this makes him interesting, there is the whole cliched argument that if he kills he is no better than the criminals and obviously in comics not killing the villians is kind of important so they can keep resurfacing and posing a challenge, it also creates moral events when batman is forced to "kill" (on purpose or in a round about way) and break his personal golden rule. Basically he has a moral code, a code that he will inevitably break in some way, this creates inner conflict, this is good. Plus batman needs some public and law enforcement support, he wouldnt get it if he went around murdering thugs.

True story, some months back: My boy was playing in his room with a friend, action figures all over the place. I pop in they've got different Batman toys out among them. His friend says "I'm going to kill you Joker." My son tells him, " Batman doesn't kill." "What about guns?" I ask. "Batman hates guns." Of course, this past week, he wanted to play Hellboy with a gun, but at least he already gets it and some 'adults' here don't. You want a killer as a hero, fine. But it's not The Batman.

Nothing but a 2 hour snoozefest and an annoying one at that. Watch the original and you'll see it is just another stupid remake. Thank god Memento was so damn good or I would have written off Batman Begins before it started filming.

As we used to say in the '90s -total fucking godhead. That is, for voice acting in a superbly-written, animated Batman that works for kids and grown-ups. Thank you Bruce Timm and company, for BTAS, Justice League and more.

Apologies if this has already been pointed out but I attempted to find it using AICN's search engine which is proper shite. Anyway, just bought Begins on Bluray and couldn't believe The Dark Knight Epilogue on there which contains the bank robbery from the film! Has anyone else seen this, did you guys know, am I just a fukwit who got lucky?

I think everybody on the planet knew that before they bought the Blu Ray.

..Nolan was a pup. As a matter of fact his commentary on post 9/11 America and society (Diary of the Dead) is old school Romero brilliant, and about as devoid a=of hope as you can get.

Oh but Romero doesn't get to spend millions of dollars on FX that end up looking like a blur on the screen.

Thought so... I'm a fukwit!

...by Bob Kane. Those early stories, the truly dark Dark Knight, were a major story source for Burton's '89 Batman film.

The review seems to be fairly apathetic in regards to everything but Ekhart's and Ledger's performance. Shame he doesn't appreciate Bale as Batman. I saw it at the viral marketing screening on tuesday night and it's true that Batman often takes a backseat to the dominating personalities of the Joker and Dent, but it works. The movie isn't as much about the development of Batman/Bruce Wayne as a person as it is about the evolution of Gotham City and its people. I feel like I need a few repeat viewings to get my thoughts in order, but I came in with the highest of expectations and the movie managed to exceed them. It goes without saying that it's the best movie based on a comic book character I've ever seen, but it's so much more than that, too. Whoo, can't wait to see it again on saturday

Caesar Romero has the greatest Joker laugh IMO. Watching him and Gorshin cackle together was such s joy. Casting genius.

I didn't catch that . Good call...hehe.

Would that be a degree in Asshole?

since he works outside the law, and is not a registered bounty hunter like DOG the bounty hunter, even- anyone he brings in or any evidence he come close to or tampers with is automatically loophole enough for any of his criminals to get off. all they have to say is this nutso is trying to frame them. so what that he leaves them hanging upside down beside a stack of drugs and money? what clean evidence does he present after an altercation? he doesn't even stick around as batman to see things out and fill out paperwork. we does more damage to justice than good, and gordon should be fired for conspiring with him.

i LOVE batman,LOVE IT i'm just saying, it would never work.

That cracked me up!

Which is to say: Batman does whatever any given writer WANTS him to do. All this discussion about hypocrisy and inconsistent behavior is stupid. The only question is, do his actions make sense and serve the story? I haven't seen the film yet, but in comics Batman is not a killer, but a pragmatist. He doesn't point a gun at somebody's head and kill them, but he doesn't sweat if some murderer dies as a result of his actions either. He's worked thru that. And that makes total sense too. Batman is not a doctor; it's not his job to keep people from dying.... And another thing. If you have a nostalgic thing for Michael Keaton or Adam West for that matter - that's great! But Bale is the best Wayne/Batman and its not even a discussion. Keaton's Wayne was -face it - lame and utterly unconvincing. He was fine in the suit, but his slight frame and goofy hairpiece just didn't work. And all his line readings sounded like he was high; there was nothing even slightly 'Bruce Wayne' about him. And another thing... BATMAN 89 just doesn't hold up with time. It's barely watch-able. And Nicholson blows! He's neither scary or funny. Not a good movie.

Invoked strongly in the movie. This is not an attempt by me to be edgy. Please direct all irate emails to Christopher Nolan at bigtwelveinches@hotmail.com. I believe Jonathan checks that account, too.

"Fragile, uneducated ego...", "inferiority complex...". Jeff, if your degree is in psychology, you'd be smarter than that. Instead, you just ramp up some smarmy dime-store "insights" to continue your pathetic little pissing match with whomever. Shut the fuck up and grow the fuck up. Gee, hope I didn't misspell something.

Quote: "...being the object of your undying obsession."

Like your undying obsession to be an asshole?

Jesus...just look at your posts, man. How many people have you attacked today?

If you're in the 3rd grade. I do find it fascniating that you LIKE to draw that kind of attention to yourself. Hey, follow your bliss man.

Have you seen TDK yet? I'm locked in for this weekend. I'd be there tomorrow night but I have a previous engagement impossible to break. The agony!

*** Crickets chirping ***

Not quite yet. But I have tickets for a midnight showing and I'm really looking forward to it.

Hang in there! Take care of that previous engagement and then get your ass in the theater pronto!

What's up you crazy bastard?

Like I told DoctorWho?, I'll be seeing TDK tonight at midnight. When are you checking it out?

Giant. Robots. for BM3. Make it so.

...of the mental machinations I've gone through to get out of said engagement. My wife looks at me like I'm crazy. Normally no big deal but every so often a film comes along which makes everything else in life an obstacle to getting my ass in the seat. C'est la vie!

And the others?

...is that maybe people are getting tired of your bullshit and bullish nature.

You don't really offer much beyond insults. Oh, and maybe the occassional keen comic book insight.

look, i'm not a yank so i have no emotional investment in the whole 9/11 thing but anyone who can't see the influence of that event or the war on terror in this movie is a nut case. honestly did you watch it? illegal phone tapping. saying when soldiers die no one cares but when the mayor is killed everyone panics. the themes behind the movie are massively 9/11 inspired. when we are afraid all our little rules go out the window.

>89, begins. most of the rest, my mind has rejected from existence.

10/10 troll rating (and, yeah, I realize you were joking). Well done on both accounts.

When is everyone going to get the hell over it and stop looking at every.single.fucking.thing through the 9/11 prism?

RIGHT ON! I agree 100% with everything you said about B89 and Returns! My thoughts EXACTLY!

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/23918 always remember

You have no emotional investment in 3000 human beings being killed in a mindless act of terrorism? Wow, what a prince of compassion you are, motherfucker. Remind me not to INVEST when your little corner of the world gets attacked someday. Cuz we all know nothing really matters unless it happens to YOU personally. You're the perfect spokesman for your selfish apathetic generation. Asswipe.

..and just saw the movie :)

...hated 'Begins' as much as I did. Everything I disliked about the first film (which was a lot) was fixed in this sequel. Bring on Bats 3!

With Gordan's son as Robin!

i think you've hasselled me before and that you just go around doing that, but i will give you the benefit of the doubt.

all i was saying is this: how much do care about gallipolli or the bali bombings. do you know about them? it is reasonable to assume an american is way more sensitive about 9/11 then an australian. in fact i would not even presume to assume that it affects me as emotionally as it does an american. that would be arrogant of me. i am actually sorry if i have offened any americans but my point was that i don't care but rather my country does not have the patroit act or any of the dramas of going through airports and that as a non american i am less likely to see 9/11 in everything. additionally my country has troops in afganistan and until recently iraq, and consequently i personally know people who have put their ass on the line for your country and soon i will be deploying (not to either of those countries but to the solomons) due to the capablity gap left by the fact we back you up. additionally i have no faith in american's will to return the favour due to recently released document from ww11. lastly i do feel sorry for all of those poor people. i doubt it is as bad for me as it would be for an american.

i'm sorry to any american i offended.

my point was^not that i don't care but

nolan's batman has no love for gotham's prostitutes, and that's what ultimately sucks about his vision of gotham.

heath ledger and aaron eckhart were phenomenal, but the layering and production design, and gotham as a city in general kept THE DARK KNIGHT from being a masterpiece...for me anyways.

beaks, i think you nailed it when you said "but I keep wondering how it would play if Nolan's version of Wayne knew how to enjoy himself." where is the fun? sadly, the joker is the only one here having any fun at all.

the joker says "gotham deserves a new class of criminal, and i'm gonna give it to 'em." well i think they deserve a new class of citizen too...

frank miller's dark knight is a masterpiece. and a big part of that is how crazy gotham is...not just the criminals, but the people in the city. gotham should feel like detroit did in robocop. an impossible city to save because the degenerates that inhabit it are more concerned with reality television, snorting coke and getting blowjobs than what their kids are doing in school.

joker's monologues seem to hint that this is how life in gotham is, but unfortunately nolan's production designers and casting directors hired the most mediocre looking people as gotham's denizens, and dressed them in the most generic attire possible.

without ledger and eckhart, or better yet without the joker and two face, this would've played out like a third rate filmed version of splinter cell...some sort of boring swat team adventure. if nolan does bring gotham to the screen again, i hope it isn't the same graffiti-less cleaned up boring city...and i hope he decides to at least bring the prostitutes!

Joker, child of abuse? What? You totally missed the entire point of what the Joker was trying to do in this movie. He didn't tell those scar-stories because they were grounded in truth, much like he said in Moore's "The Killing Joke": "Sometimes I remember it one way, sometimes another - if I have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!" He's so schizo, delusional and manipulative, that this is what comes out of his mouth when he is fucking with someone's head. I don't think you even watched or paid attention to this movie, because your review is shit, incoherent, and truly does not to the film justice as you probably think it does. DuPont, Capone, those are outstanding and articulate reviews which got the point of the movie as well as how the Joker was written. I think you wrote your review just because this movie is huge and you wanted to be heard...and just like when Harry reviews something, it pissed me off. Don't write shit just to be read. Also, I love how Harry can't even write a review on TDK - he has to pair it with the shitsack Hellboy 2. God that makes me irritated.

constantly correcting spelling/ grammar mistakes.

It really doesn't make you clever, Jeff. In fact, it just makes you look like a bit of a dick.

Please feel free to not correct any mistakes I've made.

Dude, you must be on drugs cause you were obviously impaired when you tried to watch this movie. To paraphrase from Billy Madison, Mr Beaks, what you just wrote is one of the most insanely idiotic things I have ever read. At no point in your rambling, incoherent review, were you even close to anything that could be considered a rational thought. Everyone in this talkback is now dumber for having read it. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul. Beaks, I love you, but you are way, way off on this one. P.S. Don't name check hipster movies (Memento) so much, it makes you look cheap, like a whore.

I think Bale's performances in both "Batman Begins", and "The Dark Knight" are perfect in everyway. He shows the differences between Bruce Wayne, and Batman, and reveals that the man has a split personality dissorder. He also gives both characters alot of depth, and intensity that no other actor could accomplish in their eras. And the fight sequences are beautiful directed in both films. Better then anything by Paul Greengrass, and that's mostly due to the fact that Greengrass never let's you actually see the action in those "Bourne" sequels. But then again, I find all three of those films to be some of the most boring action flicks ever made.

BEST FILM OF THE YEAR HANDS DOWN. BEAUTIFUL, DARK AND SAD.

Hey, let me know what you think in the end. You can reach me @hotmail.com.

1. A little too much plot. There was so much shit going on, although granted it was all rather riveting, it all started to get a bit convoluted to me.

2. All the surprise plot twists which take up like 1/3 of the movie won't be surprise plot twists anymore on second viewings, which kills the rewatchable factor for me.

3. The anti-climactic ending involving Two-Face. Uh...so what happened...is that it...?

4. Lame final character arc for Rachel Dawes. I mean, she had such a big role in Begins, is that how she deserves to be wrapped up?

5. Lack of emotional investment in Harvey Dent/Two-Face. Dent's character is played as a rather arrogant rival to Bruce Wayne, so that when Dent became Two-Face, I didn't really care what happened to him. But the brilliance of Two-Face as a character is that in a way we care for him as well, which is what makes him so tragic. I think Nolan failed to invest the proper amount of emotional content in Dent's character so that his fall seemed that much more tragic.

5. On the eternal comparison between Nolan's version and Tim Burton's version, I still go with the '89 Batman. Nolan's vision lacks the grand metaphorical scheme and gothic opera of Burton's Batman. Burton's vision was unique, Nolan's vision isn't. Nolan's Batman probably could've been accomplished by any good director from Michael Mann to Ridley Scott to Darren Aronofsky. Nobody, NOBODY, could've done what Time Burton did back in 1989. Nolan's Batman looks like a regular crime movie with Batman in it.

6. How come Nolan uses nearly all ethnic-Americans(Italians, hispanics, blacks, etc.) as his lower level bad guys and crooks and convicts? Because he's a pompous English bastard, that's why.

7. Can't think of anything else right now. I'll get back to you...

I'm not even going to try to argue with your first three points as they seem to be wholly made up of your own personal logic, I'll just say I disagree and move on to number 4 4.Umm Rachel Dawes is a terrible character and was easily the worst thing about Batman Begins. She was a humorless bitch who only showed up to kick Bruce Wayne in the balls. Her best scene was when she got knocked out and her chesticles went on high alert. Good riddance. 5.They went out of their way to make Wayne look like the asshole in all of his scenes with Dent to build sympathy for Harvey. Two face is at best a shallow character and Eckhardt gave him some real gravitas. That last scene with Gordon was gut wrenching. 5.(again???)Burton's batman was a projection of Burton's take on Batman the TV show. He admits as much. I hope nobody ever wants to do what Tim Burton did in '89 ever again. Batman is at its best when it is a gritty crime story with a vigilante on the fringe. Batman '89 is purple cotton candy, but not respectable, state-fair cotton candy on a paper stick, gas station cotton candy in a foil bag. Nolan's Batman is steak cooked rare and garlic mashed potatoes. 6.The mayor and the judge: hispanic. The police commissioner was black. Those are three of the highest offices in big city government. What about super-genius, moral compass Lucius Fox? Is he not black enough for you? The movie was totally PC in its ethnic diversity. The biggest psychos in it are white guys, not to mention the fact that the crooked cop and a couple other sniveling rat bastards were white as well. I can't believe you actually typed "ethnic-Americans"... heh heh heh priceless. 7.Pull your head out and go watch it again. Just kidding, but I gotta say it's puzzling that you came out of TDK with these complaints.

those Burton ones seem so pathetic and shallow now compared to TDK.

I'll agree with you that the movie is packed with plot, and that some of it could have been trimmed to streamline the story. I would have been satisfied with Harvey's story concluding (for now) in the hospital, his grief gradually overwhelming him. It would give us more material for a sequel, if Nolan plans to use Two-Face as a villain in a third movie. I wouldn't say the ending is anti-climactic... I actually enjoyed how they used Two-Face's brief rampage to remind us that Batman is not a hero, he is a silent operator with questionable morals and motives. This resolution pretty much made up for what I felt was Two-Face cluttering up the last act of the film. On emotional investment in Dent, I had it. Perhaps I wanted to "believe in Harvey Dent" as well, but even if I looked at the film objectively I'd say Nolan gave us plenty of reasons to like Harvey, and to feel truly saddened by his loss and subsequent fall. And I commend Nolan for having the stones to take a likable Dawes and use her as a vehicle for Harvey's downfall. When the Joker pitched her off the penthouse roof, I knew Batman was going to save her.. and I feared that would be her only close call in the film. I'm glad that wasn't the case. Burton's Batman is great in its own right, but it isn't the only Batman or the best Batman... it just is a flavor of Batman. He pushed the gothic quirkiness of things, Nolan is going with hyper-realism. To each their own.

In The Dark Knight, I did find his performance a bit dull, but that was largely because he was written dull. In Batman Begins he was the first actor to ever pull off Bruce Wayne/Batman "properly." The thing about Bale's portrayal that I loved so much in BB is that both Batman AND "Billionaire Playboy Bruce Wayne" are masks the "real" Bruce Wayne wears. We only see the truth in glimpses when he's alone or with Alfred, or in the flashback sequences as a confused young man. We get some of that here--the way Bale plays him as just a bit awkward when womanizing or throwing big parties compared to Robert Downey Jr.'s Tony Stark was perfect! Stark is a genuine playboy. Wayne does it for show, and it shows. BB made that perfectly clear. The only time Batman really enjoys himself, if he ever really does, is when he's beating up some thug in an alley. It's his inner torment, his total inability to "relax," "be normal," and "enjoy himself" that defines him. In devoting his life to an obsessive pursuit of the tools he needed as Batman, he's lost touch with most of his emotions and his very ability to connect with people like a normal human being. This is fascinating stuff. It's also where the script dropped the ball this time around--one of the few shortcomings (I hated the look of the new batsuit and the early tone of the film) of a damn fine movie. Hopefully the psychological aspects will be explored in the next chapter. Also, I personally thought the fight scenes were a little better shot this time around. There were fewer quick cuts and things were better lit. Still not perfect, but a slight improvement.

Perhaps it's due to his acting career and that film in the context of it. But even when he's being normal and emotionless, you get the feeling that under the surface he could go as psycho as the Joker.

But Bale isn't too far off if you've seen American Psycho, he's still perfect out of the current crop of actors.

I thought we'd see a lot more of that part of town because at the end of the first movie, it was beyond saving. The Scarecrow's gas had completely driven everyone insane and they closed the bridge connecting it to the rest of Gotham. And the Joker came out of the Narrows or so Gordon made it seem at the end of 'Begins'.

Here is hoping Two Face is not Darth Maul. Both kicked butt, yet we only got a small taste and then they were killed off. Let's hope Nolan didn't pull a Lucas, and brings back Two-Face. I don't think Nolan will revist Joker in the next film. He may have until the untimely death of Heath and no he needs a plan B. I don't think Two-Face can carry a file on his own so there needs to be another villian. Riddler would make sense but then we are back to Two-Face and Riddle ala Shumaker though it would be cool to see Nolan throttle Shuey with the same characters. I could see Catwoman since we need a new female lead, but on the heals of Batman Returns and Halle's Catwoman bomb, I am not sure we need another one. I hope Two-Face is back and I would love to see Riddler. Whatever happens I am sure Nolan will deliver a bad ass film.

Here is hoping Two Face is not Darth Maul. Both kicked butt, yet we only got a small taste and then they were killed off. Let's hope Nolan didn't pull a Lucas, and brings back Two-Face. I don't think Nolan will revist Joker in the next film. He may have until the untimely death of Heath and no he needs a plan B. I don't think Two-Face can carry a file on his own so there needs to be another villian. Riddler would make sense but then we are back to Two-Face and Riddle ala Shumaker though it would be cool to see Nolan throttle Shuey with the same characters. I could see Catwoman since we need a new female lead, but on the heals of Batman Returns and Halle's Catwoman bomb, I am not sure we need another one. I hope Two-Face is back and I would love to see Riddler. Whatever happens I am sure Nolan will deliver a bad ass film.

"Anarchists generally aren't the most sympathetic of characters." Jeez, I'm sick of this crap. The Joker is not an anarchist. Anarchism is about freedom, equality, and mutual aid. Most anarchists are nonviolent. And even with the minority who aren't, the violence perpetrated by governments is still far greater than anything ever done by anarchists.

Totally serial, dudes!