An OK movie?

Rating: 3/10 (2 September 2005)

Maybe it's OK. But is it a good movie? Let alone a good batman movie? By no means.
It's a dark movie. Supposedly they had a screening of Blade Runner before starting to shoot, but ask yourselves: Is this anywhere near Blade Runner Quality? If your answer is "yes" then you didn't see the same movie I saw.
Batman movies live and die by the acting capability of batman and the villain(s) and lets face it: Christian Bale is a pretty bad batman - only slightly better than Kilmer and a little worse than Clooney (and both were horrible at it). Where is the inner conflict? Where is the near insanity that Keaton betrayed so perfectly? The near-self destructiveness that Villains like Catwoman (Michelle Pfeiffer)? Where is the multi-dimensionality of the characters like The Joker (Nicholson)that has made Batman movies higher quality than Superman drivel? Arguably these actors set a pretty high gold standard as batman figures go, but if you can't play in their league then don't try. No, Bale is just a pretty face with next to no acting ability. Michael Caine could outact this guy with his head in a paper bag and all four limbs tied behind his back.
Now on to the villains: After I left the theater I had already forgotten what their names were. That's a pretty bad sign. Liam Neeson can act better than this. He just warmed up his Qi-Gon Jinn routine from the Star wars flop. Not good enough - by a long shot.
The girl? Don't even ask. She was just thrown in there as an addition for some T&A. Can you spell 'superfluous'? I know the director/writers can't.
The effects were OK, that's why I will give this a 3/10 (The car was a bit over the top, though. That's not a batmobile, that's something you can pass off in a war movie).
Summary: Not worth my money, not worth my time (not even on DVD)