A little overrated....and honestly!

Rating: 6/10 (22 March 2011)

Let me start by saying, this movie is not as good as everyone says. I've seen so many reviews praising this movie and calling it the best of the batman franchise. Personally, i completely disagree, i find Tim Burton's Batman to be a much more entertaining and well-written film with better acting. I saw both that movie and this one within a week of each other, so i could decide for myself which one was better. Well, I have to say, Tim Burton's Batman won hands down. I saw a review on youtube saying Batman Begins is overrated, and I have to agree. Now don't get me wrong, it was still entertaining, but i just felt something was missing. Now The main thing that bugged me was the fact that Batman isn't in the movie enough. I know the title is Batman Begins, but that doesn't mean we have to draw out the story of Batman's origin as long as we possibly can. I checked, it took sixty-two minutes for me to actually see Batman, and that just didn't work for me. It seemed to revolve more around Bruce's anger and fear than Batman himself. The movie would have worked better if it was called "The Times and Trials of Bruce Wayne", but it wasn't. Another minor problem i faced was with Bruce Wayne himself. For the most part he was fine, but there was one scene that really stuck out to me as being just plain stupid. When Alfred told Bruce he needs to act like a playboy billionaire so no one would suspect anything, Bruce just went to a hotel with two women and let them swim in the restaurant's fountains. Then, he pompously told the waiter he was buying the hotel and went in the fountain himself. I know that's minor but still, he was an asshole in that scene. Scarecrow was useless. I thought for a while that he would be the primary villain, which interested me, but when i found out Raz Al Gaul (i think that's how his name's spelled) was really the main villain, i was disappointed. I thought since the movie mainly revolved around fear, Scarecrow would be more fitting, but they just tossed him aside. They might as well not have included Scarecrow at all. Besides, all it takes is a little zap with a tazer for him to be defeated. That's just pathetic. The fights weren't that spectacular. Half the time i couldn't tell who was punching who. The editing was choppy and many of the cuts were unnecessary. In Tim Burton's Batman, there weren't a lot of fights, but at least they were done well. If i had to choose between Christian Bale and Michael Keaton for my favorite batman, i would have to pick Keaton. Keaton in my opinion was the better actor and proved to me that batman doesn't always have to serious. Besides, Bale's growling voice annoyed me after a couple seconds. But for the most part, i found the movie to be pretty decent. Maybe my opinion would have been different if i had seen it when it first came out (even though i was only 9 or 10 then), or if i had seen it before a saw cinemassacre's review of it. But, i didn't. Overall, it was a good movie, but that's not saying much. It's worth re-watching maybe once or twice or just looking at my favorite parts, but if i do anymore than that I'll get sick of it.
Extra note: This is me from two years in the future. Thankfully my grammar and spelling are much improved from my last review. I already explained how I found this movie to be good, but certainly not great, so there's no need to go into much more detail. I just have one more statement to make.
The fact that this movie is rated higher on IMDb than The Wizard of Oz is just ridiculous. End of story.