RoR: Forum

Reminder to all who loved this film -- give it a click. (Again, I don't need sanctions, but I don't want anyone on the borderline of seeing it to pass it by.)

Post 41

Monday, June 27, 2005 - 4:31pm

I loved this film, Bale and Nolan did a great job of showing Miller's D'Acconia inspired Bruce Wayne.

This film is an example of what I love in the super-hero genre, not a hint of campiness (a crutch for poor writers/actors/dirrectors), strong themes of redemption, personal development, the costs and benefits of one's choices and what truly makes a man good or evil.

I'm kind of frustrated that I came into this discussion so late (those 12 hour shifts and lack of internet connection are going to be the death of me).

All I can really add to press reviews was that in my hometown (Indianapolis Indiana) We're primarily a bible belt state (a moderate one but you notice the christian influence on the culture and law if you spend long enough here) but we have a few liberal press "free" newspapers and one did a basically positive review of the movie/the impact of batman on pop culture. It was heavy on the praise for the more naturalistic elements of the story, (this has it's place in the genre, especially when placed in direct contrast to the more fantastic/romantic elements of the story but that is a completely different discussion) it's only complaint was that batman was a perfect naturalist hero except for the fact that a billionare industrialist hero "wasn't exactly proletarian." I think the best response to that criticism is that anyone who saw that film and saw a depiction of the strength of character actions like that would take to do something like Batman wouldn't be the type of person who settled for a job as a janitor somewhere.

My only real complaint in superhero stories are where this element is worked in and you have men working as police officers by day and costumed crimefighters by night... now THAT is an unhealthy obsession.

But to Sarah's comment specifically, I think the whole reason the Rachel Dawes character was written in was to point out that Bruce CANNOT find love as long as he's doing this. Again the only real exception is someone as extrodinary, dynamic (heroic?) as himself, in the form of a character like Catwoman. (I need to post that miller quote on the issue of super-hero romance). That's one of the big differences between the two characters Pete (in defiance of a lot of Ditko's work) sees himself as a normal guy at heart, and to top that off he's totally lovesick so he actually gets the girl, Batman's so driven a lot of writers view and approach Bruce as a virgin.

Fanboy rant concluded.

---Landon

Post 42

Monday, June 27, 2005 - 6:05pm

Landon,

It's not a matter of analysis for me. I'm just a sucker for love stories.

(ahem... Michael & Kat ;) )

Sarah

Post 43

Monday, June 27, 2005 - 6:26pm

Sarah,

Point taken. Just knowing as much about the story makes a hint of tragedy before something better happens just makes it better.

I just love that Miller quote and the idea behind it. Imagine the Fountainhead with Dominique ending up with the gas station owner who gave one of Roark's first commissions. It's a total passion for the total height thing.

---Landon

Post 44

Monday, June 27, 2005 - 8:36pm

It appears the link to the image of the Batman photo, which once topped this post, may have been disrupted, or perhaps the photo removed from the site where I found it. (Yesterday it disappeared for a while, though today it seems to be back.)

So, try this (for as long as it lasts):

Incidentally, the photo at the head of this thread is not a CGI special effects shot. Another thing I admire about the realism of the film is that many of the stunts are "for real," and that the gadgets -- including the new, incredible Batmobile -- are actual working models. That Batmobile, in fact, was one of 8 they built entirely from scratch; it does 100 mph and the action shots in the movie are almost entirely "for real," too.

Finally, here's a shot of Christian Bale as Francisco d'Anconia...er, I mean Bruce Wayne...

(Edited by Robert Bidinotto on 6/28, 6:50am)

(Edited by Robert Bidinotto on 6/28, 10:59am)

(Edited by Robert Bidinotto
on 6/28, 11:13am)

Post 45

Tuesday, June 28, 2005 - 3:02am

Guys I did know the killer was Joe Chill in the original comics, but thanks very much to those who took the time to explain ;-) It is wonderful that they've been as true to the source material as they seem to have been. I'll post more after actually seeing it.

Post 46

Thursday, June 30, 2005 - 3:16am

Since the early 1990s, Tim Burton's 1989 Batman has been my favourite screen-depiction of the character. Yesterday afternoon, when I viewed Batman Begins, that changed. What they've done with the characters and storyline here is indeed tremendous, as Robert and others have indicated on this thread.

The movie does indeed unflinchingly glorify individual struggle and individual achievement, and shows Batman to be neither a supporter of the (corrupt) establishment, nor an opponent of the justice system per se (though he comes close in planning to kill Chill); but instead working on the fringes of that system to combat the corrupt elements and perfect the system.

Much that I would have said in a review has already been picked up on by Robert and/or other posters, but another fascinating aspect of the movie is the intuitive manner in which Bruce/Batman picks his allies - while he has known Rachel and Alfred for some years, he is able to identify goodness and courage in both Fox and Gordon based on the briefest of meetings.

I certainly hope that Christopher Nolan is able to make sequels to this movie, telling his own versions of Batman's encounters with charcters such as the Joker, the Penguin and others who appeared in the Burton/Schumacher series of movies. While I still think the two Burton efforts stand up well, Nolan's easily surpasses them, and there are at any rate a number of continuity clashes between this movie and Burton's efforts.

Post 47

Thursday, June 30, 2005 - 8:11am

Glad you liked it, Matthew, as I was confident that you would.

I'm already finding a lot of people who have seen the film twice or more. In my second viewing, I noticed all sorts of detail that didn't register the first time. The subtlety of the moral/legal arguments, conveyed in just a few lines of dialogue, offer a lot to chew on and debate, for example.

On the level of myth, it's easy to see how Bruce Wayne/Batman fits in the pattern of Joseph Campbell's Hero With a Thousand Faces, as a symbolic representation of one's struggle for self-actualization. However, someone made an astute observation to me the other day. More than just a personal symbol of the individualist's quest for selfhood, this Batman can also be seen as a symbol of America -- of this nation's own adolescent strivings and moral conflicts, of its struggle to realize and assert its own highest potential. That seems right to me, and possibly part of the explanation for the character's enduring appeal in American pop culture.

Post 48

Thursday, June 30, 2005 - 12:58pm

While I still think the two Burton efforts stand up well, Nolan's easily surpasses them, and there are at any rate a number of continuity clashes between this movie and Burton's efforts.

I dislike Tim Burton films. His films are predominantly style over substance. And his style is ever more surreal and post-modern. Plot and theme are just secondary considerations as far as he is concerned. His films are just "sound and [vision] signifying nothing".

(Edited by Marcus Bachler on 6/30, 1:00pm)

Post 49

Thursday, June 30, 2005 - 4:41pm

As long as we're on the subject of Batman, I have this small personal tale from my youth to share. I was twelve years old and had 12 cents with which to buy a comic book. Yup, they were just 12 cents in those ancient times. While my mom visited a nearby store, I went into the drug store (again, yup, bought comics in the drug store in that way-back time) to make my selection.

I came across the following comic book:

This was Detective Comics #347, cover date January, 1966 (which means the release date would've been two to three months earlier) with pencil artwork and design by the great Carmine Infantino.

I was so excited by this cover that I ran out of the store, completely forgetting to pay. Only when I reached for my car door did I realize I still had my twelve cents clenched firmly in hand. An immediate sense of panic set in and I raced back into the store, went up to the sales clerk and consummated the purchase. No one seemed to have noticed my blunder but me.

I became excited over many comic book covers over the years but none so much as this. As such, this remains my personal favorite comic book cover ever. No other comic cover art has ever created such a sense of excitement in me. That memory stays with me vividly as if it were yesterday.

By the way, the story was a disappointment. Oh, well.

Post 50

Thursday, June 30, 2005 - 7:05pm

Twelve cents? You make me feel old - I remember when they were ten cents... :-)

Post 51

Thursday, June 30, 2005 - 7:12pm

Me too, Robert M.

I shudder to think of the comics I used to have as a kid, and which all long ago disappeared -- and the astronomical prices they would command today. When Marvel entered the field, I had early Fantastic Fours and Spideys and Daredevils, as well as Batmans from the late 50s, all sorts of things.

Sigh...

(Edited by Robert Bidinotto
on 6/30, 7:13pm)

Post 52

Thursday, June 30, 2005 - 7:14pm

I had the first Daredevil, among others... sigh..

Post 53

Thursday, June 30, 2005 - 7:16pm

Now I'm feeling OLD and getting DEPRESSED. Let's stop this painful nostalgia before I slash my wrists.

;^)

Post 54

Thursday, June 30, 2005 - 10:34pm

Robert and Robert,

Yes, I remember when they were ten cents, also, but I didn't buy them then. For three years, 1961 to 1964, my mom and pop owned a mom and pop convenience store. I read all the comics for free but didn't get to keep any. I remember the covers proclaiming "still ten cents" and reading the first Spider-man, Hulk, Thor and Daredevil.

The reason these old comics are worth as much as they are is precisely because most people didn't save them. Comics, just as other periodicals, were produced as and viewed by the public as throw-away items. The massive paper drives to support the war effort during World War II and house-cleaning moms are the primary culprits, the law of supply and demand being the final arbiter of today's prices.

(Edited by Bob Palin on 7/01, 2:47pm)

Post 55

Friday, July 1, 2005 - 9:09am

Yes - the house-cleaning mom, bain of every child collector...

Post 56

Friday, July 1, 2005 - 9:45am

Robert, what's this about people who collect children?

Post 57

Friday, July 1, 2005 - 2:08am

Just for the record, I would like to state the following:

1) Cillian Murphy (the Scarecrow) was the best part of the latest Batman movie; he understood perfectly the delicate balance between conscience and cruelty that the Batman mythos is all about, and in fact auditioned for the role of Batman originally,

2) Christian Bale is very athletic-looking and masculine, but does not have convey enough cruel intelligence in his eyes to properly carry the Batman character... I also did not think he was a very good American Psycho. He is most definitely homo-erotic eye candy, but that does not mean he is right for all roles.

3) I really, really hated the art of Carmine Infantino. It was always hastily done to me.

Post 58

Friday, July 1, 2005 - 2:46pm

Saturday, July 2, 2005 - 1:42pm