The Beginning of Something Good (Batman thread)

[raydeen]

Great.

I just gave up an evening where I could've gone to the local I-MAX with the wife and her family to see the movie.

I was totally non-plussed by the previews (and by the previous movies (and the fact that it was the in-laws who are as wacky as the day is long)) that I declined. Now I have to look forward to the wife and her family coming home in about 3 hours raving about how great the movie was while I spent the night watching Animal Planet with my kid and getting drunk off my ass. Ok, so I'll be revved up for the Ren and Stimpy marathon tonight at midnight on TV-Land.
 
Phooey.

I just hope the Fantastic Four doesn't suck as much as I'm afraid it's going to. I really, really, really want this to be the third in Marvel's holy trinity of movie franchises. X-Men, Spiderman, and the 4...ohhhhhhh yeahhhhhhhhhhhhhh.

[Shockeye]

Fantastic Four will suck huge donkey balls. Two words: Julian McMahon.

Don't get me wrong, he was fine in "Profiler" and "Charmed" and I'm sure he's fine in "Nip/Tuck", but he's no Doctor Doom. NOT AT ALL.

[Shockeye]

Oh, don't worry about missing Batman in IMAX. IMAX is 4:3 aspect ratio (same as television) which means P&S. Avoid that shit.

[raydeen]

I'll have to throw that in my brother-in-law's face. He and his dad are Captain Audio and Video Boy. And they always think they know what the end-all-be-all of entertainment technology is. If and when I go see it, it'll be in 16:9. Phooey on I-MAX. We went to see Spiderman 2 in I-MAX and the center channel was either fucking blown out or someone leaned against the EQ board and muddied it all up. We couldn't understand a damn word that was said unless the actor or actress on screen at the time was thrown to the extreme right or left channel. Hold a styrofoam cup up to a friends mouth and ask him or her to say anything in what ever language you speak and you'll know how i spent that particular 2 hours of my life. Never again.

[Bunk]

Saw Batman last night. I'll give it about 4 out of 5. Very good superhero movie. It managed to stay dark throughout, like a Batman movie should be. I personally have not read any of the year one stuff (never had even heard of Ras al Gul before this) and I think it was a very refreshing rewrite of his origin. The cast was stellar for the most part. I think the only person I really didn't care for was Katie Holmes.  She just didn't click in the role for me.

I'm basically knocking one star off for an unconvincing/uninteresting "damsel" character, and for the use of shakey cam in a couple of the fights. It was no where near as bad as in say, Bourne Supremecy, but for me - even a little shakey cam is too much.

I'll still give Spiderman 2 the title of best Superhero movie of the century, but Batman Begins was very good and worth seeing.

As an afterthought - its actually tempting to not even call this a Superhero movie. I mean really, there are no super powers present in this movie whatsoever. Neither the good guys or badguys.

Oh, and Gary Oldman still kicks ass.

[Big Gulp]

Fight scenes were too choppy for me to follow which was annoying.  Christian Bale was well casted for this and the supporting cast was superb.  It lacked a bit of magic of the first one with Tim Burton, but on the other hand it was largely successful in avoiding campy elements.

I can see where people are coming from with being annoyed at the shaky cam during the fight scenes, but frankly it worked for me.  It wound up looking chaotic, violent, and nasty, which is how real fights should look.  Maybe it's just that I'm sick and tired of wire-fu ballet, but a little more chaos suits me fine.  The fights are also over quickly, which also works for me.

I do also like the fact that they don't really show Batman as combat machine; he's just a guy who's really good at sneaking around and whacking you hard in the fucking head.  That initial scene when Batman goes on his first mission really did it for me; picking off baddies one by one, faint glimpses of motion, it was like watching a scene from Alien.  That's how Batman should be portrayed, less chop socky, more mysterious, creepy motherfucker, thanks.

I also thought Batman getting his ass kicked and the resultant bruises were a nice touch as well.

[ajax34i]

I can see where people are coming from with being annoyed at the shaky cam during the fight scenes, but frankly it worked for me.  It wound up looking chaotic, violent, and nasty, which is how real fights should look. 

Except that (and I don't know if I can express this properly), during distress (and being in a fight qualifies), your brain accellerates and you perceive every detail much faster.  I've been in an accident where I saw the stop sign I missed, thought "oh shit", saw the other person's face as she looked at me, then she mouthed "no", raised her finger and wiggled it no, I hit, banged my head against the side window lightly, and stopped a little ways off.  Couldn't have been more than a fraction of a second, I was going through that intersection at 25 MPH.

So, cutting off details that I would have otherwise registered had I been in that particular fight doesn't work with me.  Plus, jarring camera movement is really bad, because in RL we compensate for our eyes being jarred about, and everything seems to move smoothly.

[Riggswolfe]

Saw in tonight. The script and the acting was really good. Shaky cam, was as usual, very distracting. These directors need to learn that this isn't MTV. I don't want to feel "Chaotic". I want to be able to follow the movie.

So...on a 1 to 10 the movie should get a 9 or a 10 but I'd give it a 7 because of the shaky cam. Shaky cam isn't stylistic, it's lazy and distracting.

[Ozzu]

I dunno, maybe the shakey cam IS stylistic in this movie. He's supposed to be elusive and only there for a few seconds. For isntance, in a couple of the Batman vs 4 or 5 guy fights, you literally see flashes of black in the middle of this crowd. If they didn't use shakey cam, you might lose this effect. I thought if they showed his moves too much, he'd lose too much of his mystery.

[Trippy]

I dunno, maybe the shakey cam IS stylistic in this movie. He's supposed to be elusive and only there for a few seconds. For isntance, in a couple of the Batman vs 4 or 5 guy fights, you literally see flashes of black in the middle of this crowd. If they didn't use shakey cam, you might lose this effect. I thought if they showed his moves too much, he'd lose too much of his mystery.

In some of the places it's fine since you aren't meant to see him fighting, just the reaction of his victims around him. However take the first sword fight between him and Liam's character at the beginning before he was all "stealthy". Couldn't tell what was going on at all.

[schild]

I haven't seen Batman Begins yet, but I'm quite sure the shaky cam isn't near as bad as the shit from Lars Von Trier or most artsy fartsy directors (the ones even *I* can't stand). That said, of all the things to complain about, shakycam should really be at the bottom of the list. I'm more worried about balanced framing, lighting and color. But to each his own or somesuch.

IIRC, the were a lot of shaky cam in Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (the original) and it's still probably the best superhero movie I've ever seen. I don't remember complaining about the shaky camera when I was young and saw that. Maybe you just have to realize you just saw a comic book put up on the silver screen. Shaking the camera doesn't break immersion that much. Things like lens flares and horrible CGI do though. And Katie Holmes. Actresses like her break immersion, though I refuse to believe she'll even figure into the equation when I see the movie.

Moral of the story is, it's a good Batman. We should be so lucky.

[Riggswolfe]

Maybe you just have to realize you just saw a comic book put up on the silver screen. Shaking the camera doesn't break immersion that much.

Ok. Then to get my extreme hate of shaky cam into the comic book world, imagine if say, in the action panels of comic books all you saw was an extreme closeup of maybe a single criminal. Then the next panel is part of an arm. Then the next is at a weird angle and if you squint it might be somebody's shoulder. Then somebody getting hit, though you're not sure who because it is real closein. You're also not sure how they were hit or by what or even who. Next panel, you see a foot hitting well, something. Do this for a multi-page action scene. Ok. Fine. Maybe. for one fights. To show it is incredibly chaotic. Not for EVERY single fucking action scene.

I liked Bourne Identity. I liked the plot of Bourne Supremacy somewhat. But only watched it once. Why bother seeing it more than once? I'll never know what was going on in the action scenes.

Batman Begins was awesome in all respects. Damn near perfect. Except for the majority of the action scenes. I literally caught myself thinking "Well maybe next time this director can do the character stuff and get a real action director to do the action scenes."

Let's put it this way. Michael Bay is a hack. But I've never walked out of a Michael Bay movie nauseated and going "What happened in all those fight scenes? I couldn't tell because the camera man had epilepsy. "

My friend and I had a debate over whether this shakycam bullshit started with Saving Private Ryan or Gladiator. Mostly because we couldn't remember which movie came first. (and of course, it may have been a movie before either of them.) All I know is, if i had my way, I'd go back in time and make sure that movie never saw the light of day if it meant never again having to see shaky cam.

Fuck this "well, it's artistic. It's showing how chaotic it is. In a real fight you'd see it like this." Bullshit. I don't want a real fight. I want a movie. I don't want wire-fu mind you. I just want some fucking fight choreography with a camera pulled back far enough I can see what is going on. Is that too much to ask?

I love action movies, but it is getting to the point where I am no longer enjoying them. Why bother watching them when all I see are blurs on the screen and the camera jerking around.

[ahoythematey]

That is a load of horseshit, Riggswolfe.  Saving Private Ryan's camera-work had specific purpose, that being to give at least a partial perspective of what things were like for an individual soldier storming the beach and going into heated fighting.  Bourne Supremacy was one thing, where it is exaggerated to such a degree where you cannot tell what in the hell is happening at all, but to allude that Janusz Kaminski was doing sloppy camerawork for SPR is fucking garbage.  If you are too busy eating popcorn to watch the movie then you can have your predictably-formulaic-camerawork Michael Bay bullshit.

As for Batman Begins, I think this is a lot of nitpicking.  You say you don't care if the fights look realistic, but then if they went with operatic camera sweeps, or even static camera viewpoints, people would complain that the action feels out of place because the rest of the film's purpose is to create a realistic world of Batman, or worse, that the fights seem dull and/or hokey compared to everything else in the film.

[Rasix]

This is the best Batman that's ever hit the screen by a wide margin, possibly the best super hero movie I've ever seen and probably the best movie I've watched this year.  This makes the Batman with Keaton and Nickolson look like complete dogshit in comparison.  (Heh, it's funny, finally something schild and I agree on in regards to movies: TMNT was a hell of a super hero flick).

The shaky cam stuff seems a bit like nitpicking to me. I could follow every fight scene just fine save the part where he takes out like 8 goons at once(when he drops into the middle of them) and at that point you're not supposed to really know how he's doing it. The first fight scene in the prison though did throw my senses for a little bit of a loop.  I can see how someome with extreme penchance toward motion sickness could be bothered.

But honestly, the movie I saw wasn't really an action film.  There was action in it, yes, but there was a lot more. It'd be kind of like calling American Pyscho a horror flick. If there's any gripe I had with the film it's that it probably would have been a bit more interesting with Talia instead of using the character of Rachael Dawes (sp).  However, Dawes character added an element which was needed in making Batman's interest in the wellfare of Gotham even more genuine.   Still, this was an opportunity missed to get the whole Ras Al Ghul family into the mix and possibly the chance of a more interesting romantic angle.

[Venkman]

I felt the shaky cam worked very well for the style of fighting invented for the movie (saw that in a preview somewhere, lest anyone thinks I'm some sort of expert). While I appreciate other movies want to reward the viewer with all sorts of stuff they'll never be able to do for the lack of interest in decades of training, the Batman Begins fighting was as primal as the symbol he created. This wasn't Jet Li impossible nor Mel Gibson over-virality. This was a guy who trained for a decade both on his own and then with some formality to kick all sorts of ass in any sort of situation. Basically, real street fighting with training.

In real street fighting, the eye can't track anything. They could have made it work of course. They could have slowed it down Matrix style so that the guys in the audience could pretend they could repeat it, or to reference any sort of formal training they had themselves. But that's not the point. Batman isn't about his ability to kick ass and use all sorts of neato whizbang tricks. He's about figuring out what to do, doing it, and always being prepared for it. Dark Boyscout.

So I'm glad they didn't allow us to get all gaga about the fights. Screw the fights. They weren't the point.

I loved this movie. I wrote a review, but I don't say anything that hasn't already been said, so won't both copy/pasting it. Basically, this movie worked for me in the way X-Men 1/2 and Spiderman 1 did (Spiderman 2 was good, but laborious in parts). This was a real movie with real people, some of whom rose above themselves, and some of those who did so for Good so they could fight those who didn't.

[Astorax]

Actually, Shaky cam is OFTEN not a choice of the director.  It's because the actor couldn't learn the fight technique well enough to show off the fight to the ability the director would like.

My personal guess:

The last two batman movies did not do well enough in the box offices to justify a huge expense (relatively speaking) on the part of the studio.  So the production crew had to make a decision where they would spend their money.  They opted to spend it on VERY cool sets, props, and post production work for effects like the scarecrow, etc.  Those types of shots are very expensive btw, having many friends working in the VFX industry.  They likely didn't have the luxury of training all their actors for 6-10 months before the film in figting like the Matrix did, to cite another example.

If you watch the movie, the only time the shaky cam got really distracting as per NOT a style choice (the fight where Batman is cleaning up about a dozen goons is SUPPOSED to be like that...it's not so much shaky cam as it is snapshots of a fight where a bad guy disappears with a flash of darkness, NOT shaky cam) was in my opinion, the fights between Liam Neeson and Christian Bale.  There's a very good reason for this: Liam Neeson isn't built for the type of speed fighting he's supposed to represent.  He's 6'4" and VERY solidly built, and isn't very agile.  Go watch Rob Roy for an example...he can fight, no question about that, if you give him a meat cleaver of a claymore and let him be methodical in his fight.  He's not a martial artist.

My evidence? Watch the fight between Christian Bale and Ken Wanatabe.  They show it from distance, showing full bodies, and both of them can clearly handle weapons.  The director PROBABLY had clear ideas for each fight in place, and had to make stylistic choices with the camera based on the ability of his actors.  It's been done before, and will be done again.  When you don't have the time/money to train up your actors, then you fuck with the camera to give them more ability than they have.  Incidentally, editors have been doing this to make actors look like they're more talented than they are for decades, and I'm not just talking about fighting...

[Trippy]

If you watch the movie, the only time the shaky cam got really distracting as per NOT a style choice (the fight where Batman is cleaning up about a dozen goons is SUPPOSED to be like that...it's not so much shaky cam as it is snapshots of a fight where a bad guy disappears with a flash of darkness, NOT shaky cam) was in my opinion, the fights between Liam Neeson and Christian Bale.  There's a very good reason for this: Liam Neeson isn't built for the type of speed fighting he's supposed to represent.  He's 6'4" and VERY solidly built, and isn't very agile.  Go watch Rob Roy for an example...he can fight, no question about that, if you give him a meat cleaver of a claymore and let him be methodical in his fight.  He's not a martial artist.

There's an easy way to fix that -- speed up the footage like Lucas did in Phantom Menace in the lightsaber duels.

[schild]

Speeding up slow motion fights still requires actors to be quite good. That's to say, it still looks damned awkward. With many people, it's simply not an option.

[Johny Cee]

Lest we forget,  Liam Neeson isn't young anymore.  He's probably at the outside edge for doing any kind of realistic action, unless he's in excellent shape.

After a while,  you slow down too much.  Look at Clint in Bloodwork.  Any time he moved to fast, I was worried he was going break a hip.

[Shockeye]

I just finished the Batman Begins game on the Xbox. The game is worth a rental only to be Batman in a relatively decent game. The batmobile driving sequences are a direct ripoff of Burnout, but that's ok. I enjoyed Thug and Cop takedowns.

The game is about fear as much as the movie. You build your reputation not by engaging enemies directly, but by scaring them by affecting things around them or making one of the enemies in a group "disappear" suddenly by using the grapple hook.  Blowing up propane or causing a water tower to fall helps to scare the crap out of them as well. Once they are scared you can use smoke grenades and flashbangs to disorient them to take them out quickly. The game feels true to this Batman and for that it was enjoyable. All the voices from the film contributed to the game and many of the faces are uncanny. However, the game is way too short for a purchase. After finishing the game you can reply it with 3 alternate Batman suits from the past. You can also re-do the batmobile missions with the prototype batmobile instead of the black.

[Triforcer]

After finishing the game you can reply it with 3 alternate Batman suits from the past.

Nipplesuit?

[Abagadro]

I frankly don't even think they used "shaky cam" in Begins (which I just returned from and thought was kick ass).  I would classify it as "quick cut" sequences.  The camera seemed fixed but the cuts between shots were so fast that much of the action was a blur.  Worked sometimes, was somewhat annoying other times, but it is nothing like the shaky cam of Bourne Supremacy which has the camera shaking through long single set-up shots while he runs down the stairs.  (I have no idea why Liman who does good work chose to do this).  Quick editing can be exceptionally cool (my favorite is the Falcon v. TIE Fighter sequence in Ep. IV where each shot lasts no more than 2 seconds) or seriously distracting (one of the worst was Bay's car chase scene in The Rock which overall I liked).


EDIT: Oops, just checked and Liman didn't do the sequal, so that explain a lot.
EDIT2: Man I can't spell/type when I'm loaded.

[Riggswolfe]

You may be right Abragado. The sequences that stood out to me for this shaky cam or MTV editing, whichever were:

The prison fight scene
The fight inside Ra's house (mostly the part against Watanabe, but I may be wrong. I'll have to see it again.)
The final fight on the train.

He did it too during the dock sequence, but it felt fitting there and wasn't nearly as jarring. It fit the whole "he strikes and disappears" theme of that fight.

[schild]

Just saw the movie. Twasn't shakey cam. But no need to go into it as Abagadro already did. Shakey Cam type shit is more noticeable in Lars Von Trier movies (Dancer in the Dark, etc) because he uses hand-held cameras. Also, it's used a lot in any earthquake sequence.

Movie kicked ass. Obi-Wan was decent, but Caine and Freeman stole the show. Bale doesn't have enough of a lower jaw to be Batman, but he cuts a badass Bruce Wayne. Holmes was tolerable as she had very few lines. Rutger Hauer and Watanabe were throwaways. Oh, and Oldman was wasted. He should have been off filming something better elsewhere. He simply didn't have enough lines to be of need in this movie as Oldman has incredible delivery and never needed to show it.

8/10. Not quite as good as Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.

[Jeff Kelly]

Obi-Wan was decent

Qui Gon not Obi Wan, please get your Star Wars trivia right okthxbye.

[schild]

Sho nuff. I did fuck that up. How about this:

Batman is neither a ninja nor a padawan.

Edit: Oh, and for those of you that keep track of this kinda shit, before my movie was trailers for Sky High (which will be ass), Wonka (which will kick ass), War of the Worlds (Dakota Fanning will kick ass), and Dukes of Hazzard (a movie filled with ass). Did I mentioned Sky High is going to be just godawful? I'm thinking Rollerball bad. Just truly horrendous. Also, at the movie theater, they were giving away mini-posters of Darth Vader with the words "Who's Your Daddy?" printed on them - I nearly vomited on the ticket taker. Though, for handing out those posters, he probably deserved to be soaked by a bucket of Blood. Lucas is such an assclown.

[Fargull]

I enjoyed the movie.  Saw it on Saturday and feel it is the best of the bunch so far, though the handy cam fighting scenes sucked.  I do completely agree with Scott Kurtz on the bloody water machine though.

My trailers covered all those Schild mentioned, but included Serenty, which will kick complete ass.  I do; however, think Sky High could be fun, in a Thunderbirds type of way.

[Riggswolfe]

I had all the trailers Schild had plus the Island and Serenity

I am in the theater for Serenity when it opens, same with Wonka.
I will probably go see War of the Worlds (which I'm tempted to abbreviate as WoW to drive Schild nuts but I'll be nice.)
Dukes, nah, I May rent it to see Jessica Simpson in that bikini.
The Island looks fairly tempting, and Ewan Mcgregor is an awesome actor. I just get the feeling it'll be kind of over the top.

As for Sky High, my first thought was "live action Incredibles." Not that it'll be that good but that that is what they are trying for. My second thought was "I better take my daughter to see it." Cause when she sees the trailers she'll ask anyway.

As for the shaky cam, I think the prison fight clearly was shaky cam. The rest was probably what Abragado described, rapid cut editing. Which is still kind of annoying. I'm a little tired of people thinking movies need to be filmed like MTV videos.

Oh, and gotta disagree Schild, Oldman was awesome as Gordon. Especially if you think in the sequels he may get more to do. I mean, we got to see Oldman play an honest man, and one was had a minor case of nerves at times.

[WayAbvPar]

I enjoyed the movie.  Saw it on Saturday and feel it is the best of the bunch so far, though the handy cam fighting scenes sucked.  I do completely agree with Scott Kurtz on the bloody water machine though.

Not only that, but does not one in Gotham use hot water? Wouldn't a hot, steamy shower cause someone to inhale the drug?

[jpark]

I have now seen Batman about 5 times.  I guess that makes me a fan.

Saw The Machinist in the video store recently starring Christian Bale which was made just before Batman?  Holy shit, Bale lost 40 pounds, most of it muscle to play the role in machinist.  He looked like he needed to be hospitalized:  an Aids victim in his final days of muscle wasting.  I can't believe this guy recovered so quickly to put on the muscle mass needed for Batman.

[HaemishM]

Saw it yesterday.

It was so fucking good, the ONLY criticisms I have are completely and utterly nitpicking. I REPEAT, I AM NITPICKING.

Whether shaky cam or rapid-fire quick cut editing, I FUCKING HATE THIS STYLE. It is a directorial tool, to be used very sparingly. For instance, in the scene where Batman first appears at the dock, that was the perfect use of it. But in the penultimate fight scene on the train, NO NO NO. I want to see that fight, blow by blow. I understand some reasons for it, but I still want to see it. Batman is one of the world's best H2H fighters, let me see that. If you have to use body doubles and CGI faces on the bodies, DO IT.

I was disappointed that Watanabe got so little to do. He is the perfect face for Ra's Al Ghul, and there just wasn't enough of him. Also, no mention of the Lazurus Pits, which may have been one of those "didn't need to be said for this story" thing, but still. Maybe for the sequel.

Katie Holmes... get off my radar. Please. Her character was fine, and needed, but her... ugh. She didn't ruin the movie, but she was the least interesting actor in it. Nipple shot at the end was appreciated, but her face just bugs me. Maybe it's because I keep seeing the Raging Thetan Herpes on her upper lip. Please stop acting, and do not breed with Tom Cruise.

Caine and Freeman were fucking outstanding, especially Michael Caine. Oldman was as well, and I look forward to them increasing his role in the next one. The Scarecrow was done perfectly, and for such a lesser-known and somewhat maligned Batman villain, not only did they do him perfectly, they actually made him creepy. Too often in the comics he comes off as silly. The guy who played Falcone was great, Tom Wilkinson. I've seen him in things as wildly divergent as Priest, Rush Hour, and Sense and Sensibility, and he can play just about anything. Even his corny accent just fit the part perfectly. Bale nailed the part of both Wayne and Batman.

The story was fantastic, the effects were good, the blending of Chicago and CGI to make Gotham worked for me. The Batmobile/BatTank rocked the house.

It's worth seenig many times over.

[Riggswolfe]

I enjoyed the movie.  Saw it on Saturday and feel it is the best of the bunch so far, though the handy cam fighting scenes sucked.  I do completely agree with Scott Kurtz on the bloody water machine though.

This Scott Kurtz guy actually has almost my exact feelings about the movie, from his review:

I've heard some complain about the first half of the movie (before Bruce becomes Batman) but for me, the first half was the most engaging part. The fight scenes in the second half are awful and are so jumpy you don't really see anything. The movie shines most between the action. I kept waiting for the action to end so that I could get back to the movie.

I couldn't have said it better myself. I felt exactly the same. And then later he adds:

The Bat-action was weird. Doing Batattacks in the same vein as the alien movies is cool. You only see pieces of him as he's taking people out. But the fight scenes are awful. It's a total mess. You have no idea what's going on or who's winning until it's over and the camera stops moving.

I am beginning to realize I have the same unreasoning hatred for this "style" of action directing that Schild does for a certain director who willl remain unnamed.

Edit: Ham and I see very eye to eye on the movie. As for Katie Holmes, my issue with her is her face is weird. It's too thin or something so she looks kind of like a concentration camp victim or something.

[Fargull]

Katie Holmes... get off my radar. Please. Her character was fine, and needed, but her... ugh. She didn't ruin the movie, but she was the least interesting actor in it. Nipple shot at the end was appreciated, but her face just bugs me. Maybe it's because I keep seeing the Raging Thetan Herpes on her upper lip. Please stop acting, and do not breed with Tom Cruise.

Not trying to champion Katie, but I dont think she did a bad job.  Her character was just poorly written for the material.  She was the common cobble stone in a road lined with gold.  She looked gorgious and I kept waiting for her character to get more dynamic, which never happened, and thus made her shine out of place.

Kudos for casting Caine, he was hands down the best Alfred and made the Bruce Wayne portions of the movie.

[jpark]

Maybe I am getting old but I found Katie just too young looking to take seriously in the role she was depicted in.  I just kept seeing her as a kid.

About all the comments on the actions scenes - one welcome positive mentioned above was the return to some "real" fighting.  The film industry and its audiences have become so enamored with matrix style combat involving unstated supernatural agility that regular fight scenes using real strength and flexibility have been absent from action films for a long time.  It's great to see some of that resurrected in Batman.

I recall Christian in an older film in which he played a punk - and I was immediately struck by how capable he was in martial arts.  Good to see an actor for a change that can meet the real physical demands of depicting some conflicts.

So.  Have they started shooting the sequal?  I hate waiting ;)

[Evil Elvis]

I liked the movie, but I didn't think it was as good as some people think.  I'll have to watch it a few more times, but my first impression of X2 was higher.

Katie Holmes was a distraction only because every scene with her in it had me hoping someone would swoop down, rip her from the clutches of Cruise, and deprogram the bint before she's able to multiply.  She did a decent job for her part, though, despite her character feeling disposable.

I didn't really like Caines take on Alfred.  I always liked Alfred to be depicted as somewhat stuffy, with a kind heart, and a wry sense of humor.  Caine seems to make the character more common that I like him.

And as everyone's said, the action scenes were cut horribly, and probably was the worst part of the film.  Another thing that annoyed me were the cliche one-liners.  It's ok in a special effects movie like Terminator 3, but it just felt out of place here, and they really started to annoy me near the end of the film.  Then there was the whole water-microwave plot device.  *groan*  At least the movie didn't focus on it much, which was a blessing.  Oh, and I'd LOVE to never have to watch another batman film that delves into Bruces infatuation with Bats.  I thought it was fairly necessary for this movie,, but I'd appreciate never having to see it or bruces parents death again.

I loved that it felt darker, and more realistic. It seemed to hold true to the feel of Year One, which was nice.  The whole Dark Detective aspect of Batman is what I like most about the character, and this film touched on that better than any of the previous films.  That and Neeson's charisma put it above Keaton/Nicholson's flick