well the origin story was part of it.
But most of what was supposed to be "darker, grittier, more realistic" was really just a matter of production; lighting, camera angles and sets.. and I rarely give those kinds of things much credit for really creating the movie. Yeah, they are nice to add to the total atmosphere of a movie, but they don't give the movie something it doesn't have.
Looking past that, this is what I had
Fearless... my take... on your take...
1) Story- Not counting the origin story, the whole plot was inane. Poison the water supply and then steal a secret highly-convenient weapon to turn water into mist so that everybody inhales the poison into having nightmares. Good grief but that is a seriously stupid "bad guy" plot. Too much coincidence, contrivance and convenience there to be take seriously. *Most* bag-guy-plots in superhero movies are pretty dumb on the face of it so that's no big knock on it as another superhero movie plot, but then don't expect me to elevate my thoughts of this movie amongst any others.
True a lot of bad guy plots are dumb, but then a lot of bad guy plots are right out of the comics and that's what this is... a comic book movie. Besides they had to do something with the significance of the little blue flower, his ninja training and Raul Al Gul right? Tie it all in together.
Oh and in case you didn't know it... movies like this... I tend to leave my brain in the car. I enjoy it more.
2) Talk - Christian Bale, when you are Bruce Wayne you are not Batman, stop whispering everything and growling out your dialog, *talk*.
Bale was never a strong speaking person. His other movies will attest to that. Also remember
why he chose "the Bat!" Raul Al Gul even explained it just into his first few days of training that to choose something that your enemies will fear. Thanks to your aforementioned vampire movies a lot of people (incorrectly and needlessly I might stress) fear bats. Likewise his first major fear was the bats that came out of the cave at the bottom of the well that he fell into.
Growling at certain villains here and there was a bit contrived but it probably worked for some people. Personally I think Bale is able to carry it off but my heart still goes for Keaton who surprised everyone with his take on the dual personality crime fighter with a personal vendetta.
3) Characterization - Batman didn't have the professionalism I would expect. He did some decidedly non-Batman actions and attempts. Watching him run from the cops was like watching Antonio Banderas put on a costume and run through town claiming to be Zorro. No, the real Zorro is back in the bat-cave, you're just an amateur in the suit.
Well at the time the cops didn't know he was on their side. Not to mention they were shooting at him and called a heavily armed SWAT team to boot. Would you stand around and try to explain yourself? Neither would I. But at least he managed to befriend Gordon who would eventually help him clean out the corruption in the department that was there in the first place.
4. Acting/Dialog/Directing - Not sure who to pin this one on but..the soap-opera, over-melodramatic line-delivery...ugh "Is there anyone here who *doesn't* have amnesia?" *That* is not 'gritty realism', that is 'lazy'. Realism is taking the time to flesh out a three dimensional character in the dialog and the acting and the directing. Having everyone over-dramatize every line and every exchange os just..well, people don't talk like that. Even in emergencies or in serious situations. Sure, it adds for "drama" but not for "believability" or "empathy"
True, no everyone talks with a comic book dialog in mind. But it is after all a comic book movie.
Overall it wasn't too bad a movie. I watch much worse on a regular basis. It was a decent entertainment with B movie level acting/directing and C movie level story and some pretty good production values. Not nearly, in my opinion, the great movie the hype has it to be.
Agreed... not as great as Burton's vision but not so bad that I walk out of the theater and into another (which I've done several times before if dissatisfied with what I paid for).
and speaking of the Origin Story, the first Batman movie by Burton got it right. Right into the action, very light backstory told throughout, mostly through flashbacks. Non-intrusive and the audience didn't have to suffer through half a movie to get on with the character. (although almost get the feeling that Nolan just wanted to tell an origin story but had to throw in the bad guys to make it an action/super-hero movie).
Actually if you're a true DK fan you'd see that the "origin story" was wrong on both accounts. The murder of his parents yes, was done right... but his decision to become a bat was wrong. If you recall... In the Mansion Wayne is pacing the study in front of the fireplace after making his fateful decision to fight crime in honor of his parents and free Gotham citizens from the corruption that was plaguing their fair city (sorry), he was wondering what can he become to strike fear into the hearts of his enemies (criminals)??? Just then a bat flies into the room via an open window and "That's IT! I'll become a bat!"
Also, on the subject. the main character is a guy who dress up like a *bat* to fight crime. Remember at core how silly an idea that is. You've got a simple backstory that "said crime fighter is rich was access to lot's of cool tech" .. don't bury yourself in the minutia of going shopping for a utility belt and a pimping out your wings... Work within the reality of the fantasy setting and just go with it and don't try to justify it all to be taken seriously, but treat the fantasy as serious in its on right and people will come along for the ride. Otherwise you end up in the uncanny valley. (A *lot* of vampire movies in the last thirty years or so have fallen into this trap...too much time trying to justify vampires exist in a 'modern' world)
At the core, yes it is pretty silly. So is a guy who dresses up in skin-tight red and blue leotards swinging from building to building or (again) skin-tight red and blue leotards that flies everywhere and is the only registered (real) alien from the planet, and so on.
Burton's first Batman film focused a lot on the origins of the Joker and then killed him off, go figure that one out.
I think showing how he acquired his "wonderful toys" a bit at a time was a good way to show that instead of volia there it all is. They knew they were going to make a sequel so better to explain it all now and it's out of the way for the next film. It also gave Morgan Freeman an excuse to be there. I think if they went straight into it, belt, car, and other "wonderful toys" then that would've been jumping into the uncanny valley right?
Kinda go figure also that the Wayne/Batman character is an extremely complex character in of by itself. Not easy to tell his story.
One last thing... kinda funny that guys our age are taking this comic book story seriously enough to have these kind of in-depth discussions huh?
Right.
Escapism.
p.s. I think Batman Returns was/is still the best of them all so far. Devito's Penguin and Phiffer's Catwoman absolutely rocked.
