Over-rated, not bad

Rating: 4/10 (17 May 2007)

I watched this film immediately biased because i loved the first two Batman's and believed no one would replace Tim Burton and Michael Keaton. Burton added a Gothic atmosphere in the city of Gotham and a sense of wonderment keeping the audience guessing in the original about Batman. He also knew how to create suspense and make the most out of characterising his villains and characters. We had many themes of duality in the movies and the villains were incredible. Michael Keaton had the dark personality to suit the Batman character, and the handsome and quirky nature to be Bruce Wayne...many BAtman fans wish we saw more from Batman as he was often upstaged in the original movies, and Returns wasn't really a batman movie but more of a Burton movie. And the less said about the atrocious Shumacher movies the better. AS FOR BEGINS.... this movie i'm sorry to say is pretty over-rated. How its made the top 250 of all time on this list i have no idea, don't get me wrong its a good film, well made, but its not better than the 1989 original, just more accessible to todays audience. First of all the only characterisation in it is Bruce Wayne himself. He wasn't quirky, interesting or multi layered, he just seemed angry and un-interesting. Bale iisn't a great Batman, a great actor, but not a great Batman in fact he seemed to be exactly the same character as he was in American Psycho- a type cast casting job. When he spoke- is just seemed goofy and unnatural...Keaton had a very good BAtman voice, Bale it sounded choked up and restrained.
Its his supporting cast that was the worst, its ridiculously type-cast....Michael CAine could have been so much more as Alfred, he is a great actor as seen in Educating Rita completely contrived in his role, which he didn't exude with the grace as Michael Gough did in the early Batman's. Alfred is meant to be far more prominent in aiding Bruce/BAtman than he ended up being in this movie. The most outrageously bad casting job was Katie Holmes- Joey from Dawsons Creek, who was basically exactly the same as she always is... the wholesome girl next door vibe she gives off is boring. Did Tom Cruise lobby for her to be involved in the movie? Revoke some Scientologist credentials from someone in the cast? How the heck she got in this movie i have no idea. Morgan Freeman-i love him as an actor but what character is he mean to be in the comics? He is the one to introduce Batmans machinery and Mobile and Armoury? And last but not least Liam Neeson, another type-cast, he's been doing the mentor sword wielding role for years in his movies- the wise but hard pushing Mentor, give me a break. He was an unconvincing bad guy. Scarecrow- could have been so much more, the mask was pretty scary, but the character he played before it just seemed annoying rather than anyone with psychoti tendencies.
The action was average it wasn't riveting, the gadgets were fun, and i believe its a good thing we see a movie on how Batman became Batman,it was too Hollywood MTV the cast wasn't imaginative enough, this isn't as close to the comics as the critics make out, its closer to the Batman graphic novels with Raj Alghul. In this movie Bale comes across as a boring, self-obsessed character.
However i await with great anticipation the sequel, it seems to be far more what fans of the franchise are looking for- it looks very dark and entertaining. Ledger looks incredible, but he has a task unseating NIckolson. I have to admit this movie borders on over-rated, but its a genererally OK movie with some very good parts to it.