|
| Batman Begins | 
| Category: Movie
This item is no longer available
Avg. Customer Rating:  1245 reviews
Sales Rank: 4362
Rating: PG-13 (Parental Guidance Suggested)
Media: Video On Demand
Running Time: 141 minutes
ASIN: B0014D6PCO
Theatrical Release Date: June 15, 2005
Release Date: November 7, 2008 (New: Last 30 Days)
|
| Customer Reviews:
 Forget What You Know About Batman June 19, 2005
2 out of 6 found this review helpful
This is a new direction for the Batman franchise. Forget all about the 40's & 60's style Batman, and also, forget about the direction Tim Burton took it in the 80's & 90's.
Batman has been re-worked, re-thought, re-sculpted, and pretty much all that remains from the other Batmans is charactors names. So forget all you have come to be familliuer with in the Batman sagas, and accept this movie as starting a fresh new approach that obviously will start a chain reaction of sequels to come.
The movie kicks off alternating between past, present and in between. It shows how Bruce Wayne discovered the Batcave, how his parents died, what they did for a living, and what his role is now. Bruce wants to stop the corruption plauging Gothem City, but isnt strong enough. He ventures to Asia (I think) and trys to teach himself how to be tough, and then finds his way into a monk style ninja training place (I dunno, something like that) but then Bruce wants to use his new skills for good, not assasantion. He returns to Gothem and finds that his company have a warehouse filled with gadjets and weopens that the army never wanted to use or where just too expensive to market... and so Bruce, with the help of a new friend (Morgan Freeman) slowly build up into Batman. As well as the help from his butler Alfred played by Michael Caine.
The new approach is a little confusing when you have seen the other Batmans and this movie is doing something different. I was kind of distracted with the thought that it's not the Joker who kills Bruces parents...and alot of those things with a familuer feel have been altered... but thats why you have to forget everything you previosly knew about the dark knight.
The new direction is not bad, and it's a bit more believable then past Batmans... at least to the questions of why Bruce does what he does, and how he has so much money to do so... and of coarse, where the gadjets come from.
This film wont win a best actor award, but it's entertaining and never dull. But now that Batman has been reborn with a new formula, look for alot of sequels coming in the future.
Nueva oportunidad para Batman June 19, 2005
3 out of 8 found this review helpful
Varios escalones mas arriba que las olvidables peliculas sobre el encapuchado dirigidas por Joel Schumacher, pero inferior a las versiones del magnifico Tim Burton, 'Batman Inicia' le da algo de aire a una franquicia que, luego de dos fracasos consecutivos, parecia agotada.
El filme explora los origenes del heroe creado por Bob Kane, uno de los mas oscuros y complejos del mundo del comic. Logra profundizar -con aceptable exito- sobre la psiquis del personaje y su motivacion para enfrentar al mal, pero apenas sale a flote en un punto en que toda pelicula de este genero deberia destacarse: el entretenimiento. A 'Batman Inicia' le falta accion y las contadas escenas de pelea estan filmadas demasiado sobre los actores, lo que hace que los movimientos resulten poco discernibles.
Ademas, si bien es necesaria una justificacion de las habilidades para el combate del hombre murcielago, el adiestramiento de Bruno Diaz con ninjas en un monasterio en la alta montana, recuerda a esas peliculas de artes marciales que pueden encontrarse en la teve un sabado a la tarde.
Ya entrenado y de regreso en Ciudad Gotica (que con buen criterio nuevamente luce dark como la de Burton y no rococo como en las pifias de Schumacher), Batman debe detener a un capo mafia y a un psiquiatra descarriado, quien busca enloquecer a toda la poblacion.
La pelicula se debate entre un predominante paso lento y algunas escenas abruptas, que desentonan pero logran el avance del relato. La explicacion verbal por parte de un personaje de lo que esta sucediendo, que se da reiteradas veces en el filme, denota cierta incapacidad para trasmitir desde las imagenes, que sorprende de un director como Christopher Nolan, quien se destaco con 'Memento'.
Christian Bale, un actor no muy conocido para la mayoria, pero que cuenta con varios papeles protagonicos en su haber ('El Imperio del Sol', 'Psicopata Americano' y 'Equilibrium', entre otros), realiza una buena labor y no hace extranar a Michael Keaton, quien se habia puesto el traje en 'Batman' y 'Batman Vuelve'. Los demas protagonistas: Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman, Liam Neeson, Katie Holmes y Gary Oldman, demuestran solo parte de lo que pueden ofrecer.
La trama, que no incluye a ninguno de los principales villanos del encapuchado y permite reservarlos para futuras secuelas, resulta relativamente interesante hasta el final, donde patina un poco por un cierre que no parece demasiado meditado. A pesar de sus carencias, el filme no resulta un fiasco como los dos anteriores -protagonizados por Val Kilmer y George Clooney respectivamente- y abre la posibilidad a que haya Batman para rato.
 Batman's Return to the Dark Side June 19, 2005
1 out of 1 found this review helpful
And I don't mean The Force, but that would make for one heck of a movie.
I'm gonna assume that most of you have seen all of the previous four Batman films. There are the bad/terrible, you get to choose, films directed by Joel Shumacher. In these movies the bad guys are covered in neon colors and are busy ice skating around Batman while they are trying to fight him. Everything is colorfull and Batman even whips out a Bat-credit card. UGHHHH! Then there are the good/great Batman films, once again you get to choose. These films are dark and very intense. Batman is played by a person who understands what Bruce Wayne's character is about, meaning how tormented he is by his parent's death and how he wants to bring justice to Gotham City. Oh yeah, these films are directed by Tim Burton who seems like the person that Batman movies were meant to directed by. These movies are the example that "Batman Begins" followed. In this movie Batman/Bruce Wayne returns to his dark roots.
This film basically explores Bruce Wayne's past. It goes into great detail of what happened to him after to his parent's murder. It explains how he became a fearful, revenge-minded person that sought training to prevent criminals from flourishing in Gotham City. It goes into how he came to decide on becoming Batman. How he got his utility belt, his costume and the Batmobile. There's also a story of him saving Gotham City from nerve gas that makes you go permantly crazy, but thats not were the main story lies. Its kind of a side show.
First of all, any fan of Batman should thank Christopher Nolan if you aver meet him. As mentioned earlier, he has made Batman a dark super hero once again. One of the great things that he created an image of was the fear that bad guys had of Batman. In this film, Batman would pop out a dark spot and snatch a bad guy, just like in the comic books. The bad guys were really scared of the Dark Knight, which is how it should be. Christian Bale did a great job as Batman/Bruce Wayne. He played the most intense and darkest Batman to date. His Batman voice was a little too scruffy, but nothing else was bothersome. The rest of the supporting cast, which included Liam Neeson, Michael Caine, Gary Oldman, Cillian Murphy, and Katie Holmes, did a good job also. Not too much to complain about with the flick.
I would have to say that this film is definitely a challenger for the best of the series. This movie is so far the movie to see this summer. Definitely check this film out. There's no way that you'll be disappointed.
Thank you Christopher Nolan!!!!!!!!! June 19, 2005
0 out of 1 found this review helpful
After director Joel Schumacher made Batman a travesty of the character and left the series in shambles with his showboat-over-produced-butt-and-crotch-shot-flash-in-the-pan `96 release of Batman and Robin, it was extremely hard to see a Batman film in the future that would be worth any appeal whatsoever. Thankfully, director Chris Nolan saw this as an opportunity to do justice to the series, as well as completely reinvent it to peak the interest back into the original Batman fans, as well as create completely new fans for the new millennium.
Batman Begins is a spectacular visual feast that not only exercises visual style, but focuses more on Batman as a character as opposed to how flashy his suit or how many things his Batmobile can do. And that's what I really liked about this movie, it was more real than most of the Batman films, not substituting substance for rubberized crotch or butt shots.
And I think fans of the comic book will find this one especially interesting because this is probably the darkest Batman flick, both visually and thematically and definitely stays truer to its origins.
I was also very pleased to see The Scarecrow villain in Batman Begins, being a huge fan of his from the animated series on Fox sometime ago.
Aside from all that, I thought Batman Begins had a strong story going for it, answering all the right questions I've always had about how Batman became Batman; where did he learn to fight? and where did he get all his things like his suit and grappling guns?
If you were just as disappointed with the last couple of Batman flicks as I was or never found Batman appealing at all really, I recommend seeing Batman Begins, because it is in the truest sense of the phrase, a new beginning in the series and will have you praising Chris Nolan for either breathing a much need breath of fresh air in the series or giving you an interest in this more modern Batman.
Carmine Falcone is the real content June 19, 2005
2 out of 9 found this review helpful
Script felt like it belonged to a second THE SHADOW movie.
Then got warmed over for Batman.
Worth seeing? If you love comic book movies.
Any good? Not bad. Could've been much better.
Bruce existed. Batman barely did.
The Morgan Freeman character was not a character, just a function.
The Alfred character was not a character, just a functionary.
The "girl" character had some substance.
Most characters were not characters, just bodies to make things happen.
1989 Batman had a far better Danny Elfman score (with humor).
1989 Batman had a spirit this one at least tried to caoture.
1989 Zatoichi had editing technique used here for fight scenes. (You'd see a raised arm. You'd hear a scuffle. You'd see shadows. Then someone would be down.) You'd never actually see a fight.
But then that now-ya-see-it-now-ya-don't quality was the creative thrust of the whole movie. Which made it far less satisfying and involving than it might have been.
Carmine Falcone represented the corruption of Gotham, meaning of [name your favorite city] and this was meaningful. He was, however, neither an exaggerated comic character nor a realistic one, but a stereotype nonetheless. Identifying this form of evil was worthwhile.
Despite emotional characters, there was no emotion in the movie.
Oh yes: Some great comic book "splash panels," mostly at the end.
And the ending might imply or build demand for a sequel. I think it suggested a full circle return to the content of the 1989 Batman. A good idea. Hollywood just does not trust us so they do sequels that never equal the intensity or creative impulses of the original. They futz with them and end up with more explosions and less story.
I think there was a fine movie in there somewhere that, in all the years since the last Batman movie, got dumbed down.
|
|
|
Wildlife, nature and the Environment
Sponsored Links
Learn how to get your own Amazon Book shop | |
