So close, but not there

Rating: 6/10 (10 April 2009)

With such effusive love offered for this movie here I feel out of place. But I don't think this is as good as Batman Begins. It's a good movie, no question. But I found it plodding more than once--the pacing just didn't work for me--and it stretched credulity too often.
Batman Begins never lost that sense of credibility for me, but this one does. I expect to have to suspend disbelief for this genre of movie, don't get me wrong. But not this far. Batman Begins' pacing kept me better engaged as well.
Nevertheless there was a lot to like here. The plot was solid, it advanced the characters and mythology of Batman well, there were inventive stunts and plot twists. There was plenty of good butt-kicking, the acting was superlative, and the new technology was great.
It's a solid action film movie, just not one of the greatest ever.
Some example of the issues I have follow, but they have some spoilers so I saved them for the end.
(*Spoilers*) The way the Gotham citizens immediately decided that made an anarchist's demands were Batman's fault didn't wash either. I think the plot could have been stronger there. The make-up on Two Face was ridiculous. A burn that eats away most of his cheek and he's up and about within no time at all? Yes it looked a bit cool, but there's no way he'd survive it or could live that way if he did.
(*Spoilers*) Then you have the Joker who seems to be able to plot excessive mayhem without anyone so much as noticing. "Let's plant 500 lbs of C4 all over a hospital. Heck, no one will notice!" Cell phones can't be triangulated in this movie. A guy with a reputation for randomly shooting henchman can get an endless supply of them. And it goes on.
I still liked the movie, but there are plot holes that I just can't paper over and the movie was too long so I can't give it the 10 that so many are giving it here.