Batman Begins review

:. Director: Christopher Nolan
:. Starring: Christian Bale, Michael Caine
:. Running Time: 2:21
:. Year: 2006
:. Country: USA




Although director Christopher Nolan's Memento was a surprise indie hit, his Batman Begins is a very mainstream treatment of a very non-mainstream hero. In spite of their good points, neither Nolan's film nor the two other noteworthy Batman films, directed by Tim Burton (Batman, 1989; Batman Returns, 1992), live up to the standard set by the franchise.

Batman Begins, as one would assume, takes us back before the original 1989 Batman, introducing us to the hero and showing us just how he came to do what he does. Once he establishes himself in Gotham City, he uncovers a conspiracy fronted by psychiatrist Jonathan Crane (who frightens his various mental patients with his alias the Scarecrow) and does his best to stop it while fending off skeptical law enforcement.

The opening sequences of this film add up to one of the best comic-book character creation stories in memory, surpassing the upbeat yet well-done Spider-Man. Christian Bale engulfs himself in the drama creating a truly tortured, melancholy and wrathful Bruce Wayne. Liam Neeson, an even better actor, has decent chemistry with Bale, although this might have been improved.

After the fantastic beginning, the movie goes downhill, throwing in more and more clichés and contrivances up to its disappointing finish. After Bale dons the cape and cowel of Batman, gone are the melancholy thoughts and tortured persona, replaced by zippy one-liners and a very unflattering mask. If this is not enough, by the end of the film, we have two characters fighting on a train destined to crash, an imminent plague, poorly thought out scientific contrivances, and one-liners thrown in between every punch. A recurring theme that the movie keeps bringing back is Batman's inability to "mind his surroundings." Naturally, the line comes back at the end; only this time, Batman says it to his enemy. These kinds of lines do not belong in Batman's mouth; they belong in that of a mediocre mainstream hero.

I don't think I'd be giving anything away by saying that Batman lives, saves Gotham, and everyone lives happily ever after. The mistake here is that everyone lives far too happily ever after. Batman's melancholy doesn't return, Gary Oldman's Gordon character provides unneeded comic relief, and Katie Holmes' character, unnecessary from the start, becomes an annoyance to us now. The music is also a far cry from the majesty of Danny Elfman's original scores. The pounding Hans Zimmer/James Newton Howard compositions throughout the action sequences and belittling piano music during the "tender" scenes at the end seal this film's fate as a mainstream attraction.

There are elements of this film that work better than in the Burton films. For instance, Batman's humanity and vulnerability are greatly accented in this movie, in contrast to the mystical and vague Keaton creation in the original films. Batman Begins explains everything about its main character in a logical and understandable fashion. More time is spent on the main hero as well. The flip side of this is that the villains (which have so much potential) are woefully underused; but one of the main faults of the Burton films was that Batman was overshadowed by his colorful and outrageous villains who, driving the action and plot, required more screen time than the hero himself.

Nolan's Gotham City is a disappointment. In the scenes when Wayne is a young boy, it is a bright, shimmering metropolis, resembling very closely a modern-day New York. Later in the movie, it is a muddy dystopia, full of grime and dirt. However, it still resembles a modern-day city. In the Burton films, Gotham was a gothic nightmare city, a much more suitable home to its wacky characters. Both Nolan's realistic Gotham and Burton's surrealistic vision have merit, as the character of Batman has changed drastically from those films. In Burton's movies, he was a brooding schizophrenic, whereas in the Nolan film, he is a standard action-hero persona. The differing cities fit their differing heroes.

Personally, I still prefer the Burton films. I identify more with the artistic vision and disturbed characters than with the Bruckheimer-like antics of Nolan's film. I have thought of the first two Batman movies as merely Burton films that use the character of Batman, and now must think of Nolan's film as a mainstream action movie that also uses the character of Batman. All of the Batman films made up to now have their own faults, and I believe that the great Batman movie still has yet to be made. But Nolan's effort, while mainstream, is a fair enough try.


  Jonathan Anderson


     Movie Reviews: 1998 - 2011
     Movie Reviews: 2012 - present


  + MOVIE GUIDE
MOVIE REVIEWS
A B C D E F G H
I J K L M N O
P Q R S T U
V W X Y Z
  + FILM FESTIVALS
  .: AFI Fest
  .: Cannes Festival
  .: COL COA
  .: LA Film Festival
  .: LA Latino Festival
  .: more Festivals
  + CULT MOVIES
  .: Cult Classic
  .: Foreign
  .: U.S. Underground
  .: Musical Films
  .: Controversial Films
  .: Silent Films
  .: Spaghetti Westerns
  .: Erotica
  + RESOURCES
  .: Download Movies
  .: Movie Rentals
  .: Movie Trailer
| About Plume Noire | Contacts | Advertising | Submit for review | Help Wanted! | Privacy Policy | Questions/Comments |
| Work in Hollywood | Plume Noire en français [in French] |