July 11th, 2005
have you ever danced with the devil by the pale moonlight?
As I mentioned, we saw Batman Begins at the IMAX over the weekend. We had tried to see it on the IMAX three weeks ago on our apartment-hunting trip, but all shows were sold out (it was opening weekend, after all). So as we were planning for the weekend away, Mr. Angst asked me to see where the nearest IMAX was to our hotel. Turns out, it was just a couple of miles away.
First, a note about the movie being shown in the IMAX—apparently, the powers that be have devised a way to shoot a movie for both regular movie screens and for the IMAX. So BB wasn’t just being projected onto IMAX, it was actually shot for IMAX. Which means the quality was really excellent.
Second, I find it just a little ironic (and somewhat amusing) that a movie about a quintessential American superhero was full of British actors. Major parts were played by Christian Bale (Welsh), Liam Neeson (Northern Irish), Gary Oldman (English), Tom Wilkinson (English), and Linus Roache (English). Add to that Rutger Hauer (Dutch) and Cillian Murphy (Irish) filling out the cast, and there’s barely a real American accent to be found in the movie. (Well, except for the always superb Morgan Freeman, of course.) Only Michael Caine got to play it natural—in Cockney, even!
More beyond the jump—including mild spoilers.
Finally, the storyline was really excellent. Katie Holmes was a minor presence (and I agree with the other bloggers who have wondered when her character, Rachel Dawes, actually has a chance to go to law school, since Bruce Wayne is dropping out of Princeton when she’s already working for the DA. Maybe he was dropping out of grad school).
As a movie centered around Batman’s “backstory,” there wasn’t a lot of repetition from the other Batman films, which was a relief. And the philosophical edge was a welcome addition. As Bruce trains high in the Himalayas, his anger is honed with one end: revenge. But yet he retains compassion, setting up the ultimate conflict of the film. It’s that little twist, if you will, that makes Batman who he is. A less nuanced film might have painted him too broadly, as a dark vigilante with anger as his sole motivator. But Christopher Nolan lets us inside the emotional mix—Batman is vulnerable and afraid, full of anger, yet also compassionate and deeply principled. It’s an interesting take, probably the necessary one, and it really gives the character depth.
Mr. Angst commented after the movie that some reviewers have called BB “a horror movie for criminals” and that is how it’s shot. It’s incredibly dark, full of scary things that go bump in the night and some really terrifying CGI. And like all horror films, it’s exhilerating and exciting. It’s also fun and has just the right amount of humor.
My grade: A, particularly if you see it on the IMAX.
comments
****SPOILERS****
I really liked it, too… although, there was one philosophical issue that some other blogger (I forget who at the moment) picked up on that bothered me as well:
When Bruce completed his training with Ra’s Al Ghul he couldn’t bring himself to execute the criminal and complete his training… but he had no problem blowing up the entire compound, killing all the members of the League of Shadows he’d just sworn allegiance to and the very criminal he wouldn’t execute in the first place! Uh, yeah, interesting philosophy.
Still, by far the best “Batman” movie yet…
*****MORE SPOILERS*****
I don’t necessarily see the conflict in that. Recall his last words to Ducard—he won’t kill him, but he doesn’t have to save him, either. In the case you mention, he refused to be a cold-blooded executioner, but he had no qualms about doing what was necessary to escape.
I guess I see him as being willing to be responsible for deaths, but unwilling to be an executioner. There’s a fine distinction there, but it exists.
Cool! I saw it on the regular screen and just saw it advertised for IMAX locally. I’m going tomorrow!