Thursday, August 10, 2006

Batman Begins (Movie Review)

While it's true I haven't seen previous Batman movies in years — and I was just a kid when most of them were released — I don't feel unjustified in declaring this newest installment, Batman Begins (2005), to be the best in the series.

And this, despite the fact that it contains many of the same elements that typically annoy me in comic book films (including moments of contrived dialogue, which I generally have no patience for). But it also does a lot that previous Batman films didn't do: it digs more into the psychological motivation that drove billionaire Bruce Wayne to assume his crime-fighting alter ego. And it's not as simple as "seeking revenge" on those who killed his parents when he was a kid: it's much more complex than that. "Fear" (and, yes, "fear itself") is the catalyst that drives the plot. In short: this is one pretty dark movie.

Batman Begins also attempts to explain Wayne's Achilles heel: his general refusal to kill even his greatest enemies. He prefers to chase them down and then hand them over the authorities, which (naturally) leads to their return in future episodes. This trait is another element that frequently annoys me in comic book movies... and though I appreciated the attempted explanation in this film, I find its presence to be nevertheless annoying.

I was also frustrated by Wayne's post-Princeton (and pre-Batman) travels abroad, as the feasibility of his adventures there didn't quite cut it with me — though I'll admit this trip is vital to Wayne's transformation into Batman.

And so a mortal hero emerges, frightening criminals and inspiring citizens by donning a mask of immortality... all the while returning home with various bumps and bruises. I loved this contrast: at long last, Bruce Wayne and Batman really felt like they were the same person. And though I'm hesitant to say Christian Bale is a better Batman than was Michael Keaton, he certainly has Val Kilmer and George Clooney beat.

I also enjoyed seeing Gary Oldman as the soon-to-be-commissioner-Gordon (Oldman was scarcely recognizable), and though Michael Caine is more able-bodied than Alfred has previously been portrayed, I enjoyed seeing Caine take on that character. Even Katie Holmes surprised me.

And what better city to serve as the backdrop for Gotham than the Midwest's own Chicago, a city in which corruption is so inexorably tied to everyday operations that natives worry the city couldn't function without it (or to quote a recent story on NPR: "When I die, bury me in Chicago... so that I can continue to vote").

4 comments:

Unacademic Advisor said...

For a person with a self-professed dislike for movie adaptations of comic books, you certainly see a lot of them.

My attitude toward them is very similar to yours, i.e., they annoy me on principle and very often in execution. However, I have enjoyed one or two on occasion because it was entertaining and attempted to portray depth of character beyond the silly lines and overly stylized scenes. I agree that this particular instance falls into this category.

thirdworstpoetinthegalaxy said...

I've been waiting for someone to point out that contradiction. Suffice it to say, I'm not the one with the Netflix account. I'm at Washington's mercy, there... and he likes comic book movies, Westerns, sci-fi and the like... whereas I go in for the dark comedies, satires, documentaries, philosophy-ridden dramas, etc. On occasion he'll queue up something I request, too. Which is nice.

Donaldson said...

My opinions on comic books (and the movies they spawn) are that if you don't like them, you haven't read (or seen) the right one yet.

But that's me—I'm a nerd.

thirdworstpoetinthegalaxy said...

Given I've seen (and enjoyed) a few such movies in the past few months... I'll have to agree. Though I still stand by my assertion that -- where for most genres, a bad move is just "bad" --a bad science fiction or comic book movie is awful.