You don't need to be a Batman fan to love it!

Rating: 9/10 (30 December 2008)

I hope this review will be a useful point of reference to anyone who, like me, is relatively unfamiliar with the Batman franchise and has little or no pre-existing interest in superhero movies or comic book adaptations in general. If you are reading this and are considering, against your natural instincts, giving BATMAN BEGINS a try, then let me (as a former naysayer) strongly urge you to put your preconceptions to one side and take the plunge - I did, and was thoroughly surprised by this superb, gritty, masterfully constructed and culturally relevant piece of storytelling.
So, what's in it for a superhero sceptic? Well for starters the basic plot is strong, cleverly constructed and genuinely engaging without stretching credulity too far or being overly formulaic (my main problem with mediocre action movies is the constant sense of deja vu - there's none of that nonsense here!), the character interaction is interesting and believable, and the script is more than competent and subscribes far less to tired old clichés and cheesy one-liners than one might expect. Most importantly, the story is brought to life admirably by a stellar cast!
I don't wish to give any major plot points away...I knew little about the story previously and enjoyed discovering it for myself. I'll merely say that the narrative is rich and unexpectedly complex, deftly tackling a number of serious contemporary issues without being overly ponderous or self-righteous. Refreshingly, the plot did not adhere entirely to the restrictive Hollywood formula, and wasn't geared towards pleasing children. It didn't dive headlong into the action and was relatively slow-paced at first, with more time given over to character development than to car chases and special effects (until the climax, that is). Gotham City itself was dark and atmospheric; smouldering with decaying grandeur, the perfect battleground for the curious array of heroes and grotesques we meet along the way.
Crucially, we really got under the skin of our hero Bruce Wayne/Batman (the excellent Christian Bale) which was vital, as he was a complex and subtle character whose motivations for roaming the streets as a masked vigilante had to be made thoroughly clear to the audience - and so, a large chunk of the film was dedicated to establishing his personality, his background and his relationships. With a less able actor it might have all descended into pointless "angsty" territory, but Bale was fantastic, his performance nuanced, sensitive and intense. He was aided by a superb supporting cast...Michael Caine and Morgan Freeman were magnificent choices for Bruce's allies, and provided some very welcome comic relief. Caine in particular portrayed an extremely engaging character (Bruce Wayne's butler, Alfred) and struck up a very realistic and often poignant dynamic with Bale. Gary Oldman and Liam Neeson also performed admirably, both of them playing somewhat "against type", which was refreshing; and Tom Wilkinson was suitably slick and weaselly as the sinister mobster. The cast, for me, were the key ingredient in this mixture; the crucial factor by which the movie stood or fell. Lets just say, they delivered.
Much as I enjoyed this movie and would recommend it to just about anyone, I have to nitpick on one or two points. While the extensive character development of Bruce Wayne was one of the film's main strengths, certain other characters who had genuine potential were sold a little short - most notably Rachel Dawes (a miscast but not entirely inept Katie Holmes) and of course, the most fascinating and eerie antagonist, the utterly loathsome Dr Jonathan Crane/Scarecrow (played to vile perfection by Cillian Murphy, who completely owned every scene he appeared in, and would probably have stolen the whole show if he'd had more than about ten minutes' screen-time). Rachel Dawes was just not quite the heroine I had hoped for - Katie's a beautiful-looking girl and an adequate actress but seemed a little out of her depth in this particular role. Maybe it was her lack of chemistry with Bale (that was a real shame, but it was no one's fault and couldn't be helped), maybe the character just needed fleshing out slightly, or maybe she was a couple of years two young, I'm not sure, but her performance had none of the magic the other cast members seemed to summon up with such ease. Really though, this is just me being overly critical - in an ideal world I would have liked a more compelling female lead, but she wasn't nearly bad enough to ruin the experience for me.
Cillian Murphy was, for me, the surprise gem of this film. Having only seen him before in Neil Jordan's marvellous BREAKFAST ON PLUTO (in one of the most poignant and ingenious performances I'd ever seen actually, but in such a staggeringly different role to this one that I had to wonder at the casting...until I actually saw it!), it was incredibly hard to picture him in something like this, or playing a villain at all for that matter, but he completely blew me away. He oozed genuine malice and psychosis as the malignant Scarecrow, his fresh-faced and angelic appearance unexpectedly adding to the chilling horror of his performance, and I can't help lamenting his rather limited screen-time. That said, he certainly made the best of the material given him, and I can only hope he makes another appearance later on in the series.
Minor gripes aside, my overall consensus is that you don't need to be a fan of Batman (or superheroes, or comic books, or even the crime/action genre!) to enjoy this latest inspired effort by the truly magnificent Christopher Nolan. This film has depth, complexity, originality and intelligence, and doesn't require any prior knowledge of the subject - although I'm sure any Batman fan will tell you that it helps!