Movie Review: Batman Begins

Simply put, Batman Begins is the best Batman movie – the best Batman media – that has yet been made. This is saying something, since Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns impressed me as a remarkably good piece of fiction despite its "graphic novel" (read: grown-up comic book) format. It's also the best movie, of any subject matter, I have seen in the theaters this year (sorry, Star Wars fans, but I really did like this better than Revenge of the Sith, which is saying something). Even for those who do not typically enjoy superhero fiction, this is a seriously good movie and this is one that is well worth the full-ticket price for a theaters. The effects -- both sound and visual -- will not be the same on a small screen.

My review contains a few minor spoilers, most of which those who already are familiar with the Batman character should already know.

Bruce Wayne, convincingly played by Christian Bale, grows up tormented by the memory of having witnessed the brutal murder of his billionaire parents. Unlike any other Batman story I have seen or read anywhere, however, this movie explores the origins of his transformation into the enigmatic superhero-vigilante that we know all along he will eventually become. The movie opens in media res, with Bale, not yet become Batman, in a Nepalese prison, and tells the character’s story in a series of flashbacks.

In addition to a strong script and good direction from Christopher Nolan (the writer-director of the still-amazing psychological thriller Memento), the movie is enhanced by its many well-known actors in supporting roles. Sir Michael Caine (a perfect choice to play Alfred the Butler), the compelling Liam Neeson, Morgan Freeman, and the marvellously understated Gary Oldman as Sergeant (presumably to eventually become Commissioner) James Gordon all have prominent roles. Impressively made-up and presented, Rutger Hauer is barely-recongizable; at first I seriously thought he was Jerry Springer. Other names from the lower ranks of the A-list include Ken Wantanabe as the ninja mentor, Tom Wilkinson (of The Full Monty fame) as a crime boss, and Linus Roache as the ill-starred Dr. Tom Wayne. Most of these actors are of sufficient skill that they can show their chops and have good screen presence -- without taking center stage from Bale, who is after all the focus of the story.

There is one bad cast: Katie Holmes plays Christian Bale’s romantic interest – in a different movie I would like the pairing of the two but here there is not only not a lot of chemistry between them but the fetching Ms. Holmes looks far too young for the role. While there is no doubt she is attractive and pleasing to the eye, the movie is not about her character and the camera lingers on her too long during the too-frequent moments when she is not serving as a foil for the plot's forward momentum. While the screenwriters may have wanted to inject some female energy into the movie to soften it and enhance its emotional impact, Batman is ultimately an icon of masculinity, and stories involving Batman are properly focused on masculine images.

The heavies in the movie are more realistic and human than the classic comic-book bad guys from comic books or the 1960's television show. The villains, too, have human frailties; granted, those include hubris, sociopathy, and hatred as well as physical weaknesses -- but these are bad guys we're talking about. The only villian with “super powers” has those powers credibly explained; they are as within the realm of what can be believed in a movie as are the ninja skills Batman and some of his adversaries use.

I’m not saying that the movie should be enjoyed for its slavish adherence to true physical possibility; but the technology and tools and training that the characters undergo and display is within the realm of what a movie viewer can comfortably encompass within one’s willing suspension of disbelief necessary to enjoy a movie in the first place. Yes, it's a comic-book kind of danger that Gotham City is placed in, but well-presented. Because the movie keeps its storytelling within those boundaries, the story itself is greatly enhanced.

Serious in its approach, the script injects just enough wit and levity along the way to avoid becoming heavy (although the emotion does become strong at times). Nolan's story is dark and violent, and this is not comic-book or cartoon style violence. There is grit and pain (but as it turns out, not a lot of blood) and this Batman is far from invulnerable. We get to Bruce Wayne train to become Batman and acquire or create his trademark crime-fighting toys. Visually as well as narratively rich, the movie uses its locations in Chicago, the UK, and Iceland to as stunning effect as the stunning special effects and stunts -- particularly the plentiful hand-to-hand combat.

Perhaps this movie is not all that groundbreaking from a cinematic perspective. Still, I really, really liked it and I look forward to the two sequels already in the works (link contains significant spoilers to this movie and sequelae). The first sequel will necessarily cover a lot of ground similar to that covered in Tim Burton’s 1989 Batman movie, which I know has a lot of fans for its vision of a warped, nightmarish urban dystopia. It will be interesting to see who is cast as the Joker – Jack Nicholson left some pretty big shoes to fill. But as for the title character, Christian Bale has taken firm possession of both Bruce Wayne and Batman. Where Michael Keaton, George Clooney, and especially Val Kilmer just “worked the suit,” Christian Bale captures the character and makes it his own.

Burton's Batman was fun because it was magical and nightmarish. Nolan's Batman Begins is better because of its dark realism, character buildup, emphasis on plot, and its continuing reference to Nietzchesque moral theories. At the end of the movie, there are some understated questions for the thoughtful viewer to mull over: Is Batman successful in his attempts to be morally superior to, and different from, a high-tech vigilante? (Personally, I think not.) How corrupt and ineffectual does the state need to become before vigilante justice becomes preferable to that dispensed (or not) by established governmental authorities? What is the proper response of a moral person who has been the victim of a violent crime? But one need not ponder these issues to enjoy this exciting, visually gripping, well-written, well-acted, well-directed movie.