There have been a handful of stories where Batman hasn't fully realized the exact method of ridding Gotham of crime.
I make a distinction between being unsure of what to do in a particular situation and not knowing which direction to take. Batman may not always know which method to use, but he does know what his goals are. In BB it seemed to me that he had no clue at all he wanted to fight crime until Ras came to him. That seems out of character to me.
It doesn't break the movie, but I think it would have made for a stronger character if Bruce had made up his mind already what he wanted to do and Ras just gave him the means.
I seriously am dumbfounded at this idea that he has to know exactly what he wants to do immediately like the comics.
It goes to the inner core of the character.
This is a movie, there has to be concessions.
We established that earlier. This doesn't fall under the category of concessions though. It's different approach the character, that was unnecessary. There was no need for a concession and I didn't much care for it.
This is not something that changes who Batman is at all.
Eventually no. You are correct, but it changes some of the details of the journey, unnecessarily. It's ultimately a minor point, but it is important. I didn't see any need to change it.
That's like saying in the Spider-Man movie Peter Parker to immediately become Spider-Man after going after the burgler, and not after graduating high school.
Peter is a very different type of character. He is often unsure of what to do in situations and waffles quite a bit. Batman is at heart a very decisive individual. That's a key difference, and one that BB played with against my liking.
It's inconsequential to complain about when Batman decided to train to fight crime, especially since he wasn't Batman at that point in his life.
Not really. It's the basic story of Batman. Immediately following his parents death me made a vow that he would train and study to become the dark avenger and punish criminals. That's actually key to the character. Ultimately it doesn't really affect the movie since I still enjoyed it, but the devil's in the details as they say.
There has to be concessions when making a movie about a character who has a long, varied history such as Batman. The end result is the same, he hated guns.
Agreed.
Obviously that was the point for her character, but that's just the way the movie was made to go, having a character from his personal history become a sort of moral anchor to guide his motivations in a certain way.
Which is where BB goes wrong in my opinion. Rachel Dawes was something of a meaningless character. In fact now that I think about it, that character should have been Harvey Dent from the start. And in retrospect it should have been Alfred to see what he was doing and to give him the talk. By having it be anyone other than Bruce or Alfred, influencing his decision, I think takes a little bit away from the character of Batman who is supremely motivated and has to be the master of his own fate.
You can dislike it all you want, but it is not a flaw because the end result is the same.
Conversely, you can like it all you want and it doesn't mean it isn't a flaw.
Batman has machine guns on both the Batmobile and Bat-Wing IIRC, and attempted to use said machine guns on the Joker.
I'd forgotten about that. Slight difference though. Those are on vehicles and not handguns. Batman has used guns on his vehicles in the comics as well. In Batman vs Predator 3 I seem to recall him using rubber bullets on the Batplane or whatever he used. I can't remember exactly.
If you hate that, read Batman Year Two where AFTER ALREADY HAVING BEEN BATMAN
I don't like that story very much. I also don't like the current one Kevin Smith wrote that has him peeing in his pants.
If you can't deal with that, don't watch a movie called "Batman Begins".
There you go again. Check yourself. You need to remember that this conversation is taking place in light of the fact that I love both Batman Begins and the Dark Knight.
Do you need every excruciating detail spelled out for you from the comics in the movies?
I established earlier that I don't. I won't do so again. Maybe you should go back and reread some previous post so you don't keep repeating yourself.
Seven years seems like a long enough time to me to become a badass.
Once again, not the issue. You should reread the previous posts. My issue isn't with the ninja training he received. It's mostly with the fact that in Batman Begins he didn't appear to get any education at all. Just physical ninja training, which somewhat negates the key aspect of Batman--his detective skills. The movie compensates for this by delegating most of the intellectual stuff to Fox which I am okay with to an extent, but Batman is almost completely a bruiser in the Nolan films. I don't like that. That's why getting an early start is a necessity.
In the Burton films he cracks the Joker's poisonous code so we got to see some of his detective skills at work. I felt that was the biggest flaw in the Nolan films. And when you are dealing with the world's greatest detective, that's a rather big flaw in my opinion.
But you can't just throw out "Uh, Batman would never use guns" and not acknowledge the context of the scene, or the point of the scene.
It's been acknowledged multiple times.
To me, that's missing the point and you haven't proved to me that you got the point.
I'm not saying you didn't,
You kind of did in the previous statement.
but you certainly haven't made it clear that you did.
Multiple times. You are just having a difficult time acknowledging that despite the fact that you're okay with, it could easily be viewed as out of character despite "context". I'm finished discussing this particular point.
But it's like 60% Nicholson, 40% Keaton.
Which is about the right ratio for a villain like the Joker. He's the driving force behind the plot. You also are overlooking the fact that without Jack Nicholson the movie was in jeopardy of not being made or making money. His part was expanded just to get the movie made.
And Batman Returns is even worse
Multiple characters: Batman, Catwoman, and Penguin. The villains drive the plot. I will again point out (which you haven't responded to yet) that in the Dark Knight Batman has less screen time than he does in Begins I believe. This is something I've seen other fans and critics point out.
You can't just dismiss it because it explains how much of the crimes are being committed.
I didn't. It becomes less credible when it's used to explain every single occurrence without fail though. I think they skirted too close to the line with it personally.
In the scenes where he tries to tell Vicki who he is, and at the end of Returns where he wants Selina to come away with him, I get the strong impression that he insinuated those situations as being grounds for retiring.
First, the final shot of the film in Batman makes it plain your interpretation is wrong. Batman isn't going to be retiring because of Vicki Vale. Her dialogue to Alfed even makes this plain. It's also made even clearer in Batman Returns that the reason their relationship failed is because he wouldn't quit.
As far as Selina, I never got that impression. I can't say with any certainty you are wrong, other than I just know there is no way in heck that either Batman or Catwoman would give up the nightlife. They both love it too much.
I just hate it when people bring up what I think are BS reasons to hate on the movies. If anything,
I'm not too fond of it when criticisms are looked at simply as bullshit because they conflict with someone's personal preferences. But hey, what do I know?
Look, I have a feeling its just going to come down to personal opinion about most of these.
When discussing personal likes or dislikes for movies that usually is the way it is.
I'm in the mindset that MOTP is probably the best movie out of all of them
See previous posts.
