Could have been much better

Rating: 5/10 (23 June 2005)

I wanted desperately to enjoy this film, and I did at various times. The setup felt quite long, but I let that slide because, after all, the movie is called Batman BEGINS. To believe Batman in action with all of his expert combat moves, we have to know HOW Bruce Wayne learned these skills, and the setup shows us -- in a weirdly conjured-up way. A much more believable, interesting setup could have been written. Even so, once the setup is out of the way, the fun begins.
When Batman finally hits the streets -- and for a few scenes thereafter -- I felt an adrenaline rush that surpassed any attempted by other superhero movies. These moments made me want to give the movie a 10 out of 10 rating. Then, almost as if an entirely different writing team stepped in to relieve the first team, the movie falls apart. The story becomes mundane, contrived and predictable to an offensive degree. What was moments ago one of my favorite superhero movies of all time had degenerated into an Armageddon-like, Days of Thunder-like, race against time story that was so laughable that only a countdown clock was missing. You can actually feel the film fall apart like a sad epiphany.
Batman is most enjoyable when he is covertly conquering criminals like a camouflaged hunter. When the writers pulled Batman out of his element and made him participate in a generic race against time to save the city from destruction, they stooped to the low level of creativity perfected by post-Fleming James Bond films.
Christopher Nolan is fabulous as Batman. Michael Caine was made to play Alfred. Morgan Freeman is as enjoyable as Q from the Bond franchise. All three were excellent. The rest of the cast -- well, let's just stick to the positive.
See it if you must, but let's hope that by the time the Joker shows up, the writing team is replaced with creative writers with imagination that can construct a screenplay that lets Batman thrive in his element.