BATMAN BEGINS Reaction Thread

Talk about the latest movies and video releases here!
Message
Author
Eric W.
Posts: 7569
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2004 2:04 pm

#16 Post by Eric W. »

Footnote: A lot of people are telling me that the score actually fares a LOT better away from the movie. Something to consider...

romanD
Posts: 806
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 4:18 am

#17 Post by romanD »

it's the same as the last 3 or 4 zimmer action scores.. nothing new or exciting... rather spend my money on the wotw score...

Id say the review at www.cinemusic.net hits the spot right on...

User avatar
AndyDursin
Posts: 34186
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
Location: RI

#18 Post by AndyDursin »

Footnote: A lot of people are telling me that the score actually fares a LOT better away from the movie. Something to consider...
I would have to disagree with them there. The lack of a central theme kills the album as far as I'm conerned...and the absence of an ending -- including the end credits -- makes it even less appealing.

This is one of those situations where a strong score would have helped the movie immeasurably. I think years from now people will look back on this film and come to the conclusion that the score was one of its biggest problems.

User avatar
AndyDursin
Posts: 34186
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
Location: RI

#19 Post by AndyDursin »

I should add I'm with Roman on PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN. That's easily one of my favorite Zimmer Company scores. At least it has a central motif you can remember, and a good amount of energy to spare.

Eric W.
Posts: 7569
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2004 2:04 pm

#20 Post by Eric W. »

AndyDursin wrote:I should add I'm with Roman on PIRATES OF THE CARIBBEAN. That's easily one of my favorite Zimmer Company scores. At least it has a central motif you can remember, and a good amount of energy to spare.
At first, I thought that Media Ventures score was as woefully miscast as Nick Glennie-Smith on Man in the Iron Mask (this a painful travesty) but...PoC's score, as is, has kind of grown on me.

I still think Pirates, like MITIM before it, should have had orchestral scores vs. Media Ventures scores.

User avatar
AndyDursin
Posts: 34186
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
Location: RI

#21 Post by AndyDursin »

I was at first disappointed Silvestri walked the plank on PIRATES (sorry couldn't resist!), but I enjoyed Badelt's score thoroughly when I saw the film. It works great and has a couple of memorable themes as well.

I'd like to see Badelt back on PIRATES 2 but with more of an orchestral arrangement to the music (have they settled on a composer yet?).

Eric W.
Posts: 7569
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2004 2:04 pm

#22 Post by Eric W. »

AndyDursin wrote:I was at first disappointed Silvestri walked the plank on PIRATES (sorry couldn't resist!), but I enjoyed Badelt's score thoroughly when I saw the film. It works great and has a couple of memorable themes as well.

I'd like to see Badelt back on PIRATES 2 but with more of an orchestral arrangement to the music (have they settled on a composer yet?).
\

Heh, I didn't even know there was a Pirates 2 in the works, but I guess I shouldn't be surprised. Anything that's even remotely successful these days immediately is guranteed a sequel.

No idea about the music, but I think Silvestri would have done a better job on the first Pirates, even though Badelt's music is...functional and it's kind of grown on me.

I just feel like all swashbuckling films should have balls to the walls, thematic, orchestral scores.

Now honestly, what the hell is Pirates 2 going to even be about?

User avatar
AndyDursin
Posts: 34186
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
Location: RI

#23 Post by AndyDursin »

Heh, I didn't even know there was a Pirates 2 in the works, but I guess I shouldn't be surprised. Anything that's even remotely successful these days immediately is guranteed a sequel.
They've been filming since March -- they're doing back-to-back sequels with all of the principal cast, same writers and director (Verbinski) as well. First one is due out next summer (2006).

This is one situation where I'm looking forward to the sequels. PIRATES was one of my favorite studio films in recent years -- a no-holds barred, highly satisfying piece of escapism on every level.

As far as the orchestral scores go, I usually like the wall-to-wall orchestral stuff, but I confess I never cared for CUTTHROAT ISLAND -- that Debney score was too bombastic and too recycled for my tastes, though I realize fans love it. I wish they kept David Arnold's score.

Eric W.
Posts: 7569
Joined: Wed Oct 06, 2004 2:04 pm

#24 Post by Eric W. »

AndyDursin wrote:
Heh, I didn't even know there was a Pirates 2 in the works, but I guess I shouldn't be surprised. Anything that's even remotely successful these days immediately is guranteed a sequel.
They've been filming since March -- they're doing back-to-back sequels with all of the principal cast, same writers and director (Verbinski) as well. First one is due out next summer (2006).

This is one situation where I'm looking forward to the sequels. PIRATES was one of my favorite studio films in recent years -- a no-holds barred, highly satisfying piece of escapism on every level.
Man, I agree! GREAT news! :D

As far as the orchestral scores go, I usually like the wall-to-wall orchestral stuff, but I confess I never cared for CUTTHROAT ISLAND -- that Debney score was too bombastic and too recycled for my tastes, though I realize fans love it. I wish they kept David Arnold's score.
I don't s'pose you have um...any access to any of Arnold's score for that film...do ya? :)

Just for kicks, I listened to the Pirates score today. I like it. It grows on me with each listen. It works in the film. I'll live. ;)

I don't know if you could spot check me on this, but does the Pirates CD seems to be a tad bit lacking, in terms of sound quality? I found that I had to turn the volume up a little higher for it vs. plenty of other CD's that I own.

Nothing earth shattering. Once I did that, it sounded great.

mkaroly
Posts: 6214
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2005 10:44 pm
Location: Ohio

#25 Post by mkaroly »

Just saw BB- and I was more happy with the movie on the whole than I thought I'd be. I really enjoyed the first half of the film- I loved the backstory. I thought the film was much more dark and more moody (stylistic) than its predecessors, and I thoroughly enjoyed that. The complaints I have are relatively minor:

The Batman "voice" sounded to forced- I like Keaton's Batman voice better. I wanted the city to look less modern and more gothic and have more of a 30s/40s feel than it did. I can't really explain that one, but that's what I wanted. Katie Holmes ain't all that- she was serviceable but hardly worthy of excess praise.

I thought the film moved along well, and I didn't mind the special effects- I thought they were good without being maniacally over-the-top. Someone posted that Holmes' and Bale's speech towards the end wasn't very good, and I agree with that. The dialogue was forced- we didn't need an explanation. The villains were decent- I liked the psychiatrist. He was young enough for me to think he was psychotic enough to do the things he wanted to do- he looked disturbed. I agree with Andy in that the Scarecrow demise was pretty silly, but to be honest, at that point, I was more focused on other things to care. And I figured he'd be back in another episode sometime in the future.

And that brings me to super-hero films in general. My personal favorite super-hero film of all time is SUPERMAN THE MOVIE- the first half of that film has some of the best scoring and movie moments ever (IMHO). SUPE I and SUPE II are a solid 1-2 punch....the only series to come close to copying that is SPIDEY I and II. The original BATMAN, while entertaining, toned down the darker side of Bruce's personality and threw in Jack, so it became very cartoonish. I really liked BATMAN RETURNS because I thought it was interesting to give the Bruce Wayne/Batman character a love interest with the same problem of duality- Selina Kyle/Catwoman- and that person was his mirror opposite/counterpart (male/female, hero/villain). [They tried something like that with The Joker form the first film (two people cut fromt he same cloth) but it didn't work.] Unfortunately, The Penguin spoiled the movie- the only scenes I thought were worth watching were the Batman/Catwoman or Bruce/Selina scenes. Schumacher's films were excessive, dull, and unartistic- which was worse- BATMAN III and IV or SUPERMAN III and IV????

Having said all that, I prefer a darker, less comical Batman movie and BB has delivered on a lot of the things that were missing form the other films. It was more consistent and more "adult"- granted, it wasn't perfect but all-in-all I think this is a promising start. Oh- the music was annoying. I suppose I would have to see it again to really judge the score appropriately since I was paying more attention to the story than the music. I've never been a fan of Hans Zimmer and still to this day do not own a score he's done. Is there anything really worth getting?

For BB, I'd give it 3.5 to 4 points out of 5. One thing is for sure- it makes Schumacher's films look like C-films (B-films would be too kind).

User avatar
AndyDursin
Posts: 34186
Joined: Tue Oct 05, 2004 8:45 pm
Location: RI

#26 Post by AndyDursin »

BATMAN III and IV or SUPERMAN III and IV????
My take on those Michael since you asked (even if it was a rhetorical question) :)

SUPERMAN III is a good movie undeserving of its bad rep. Yes, I've taken heat for that viewpoint, but a lot of people either a) haven't seen it or b) confuse it with "Superman IV" (which is every bit as bad as its rep would have you believe). Sure Pryor's antics are a bit out of place and the movie can't compare to the epic tone of I and II, but as a comic book film, it's good fun and was still a big hit back in the summer of '83. Reeve is TERRIFIC and the Clark Vs. Superman material is great, as was the mere presence of Annette O'Toole. Even Ken Thorne's score was solid -- I love the opening "Lester comedic ballet" he underscored. Light, entertaining, and not at all a disaster...people totally forget it was the 5th highest-grossing movie of 1983 as memory serves (a pretty good year for movies, too!), so it's not as if it was this godawful sequel that viewers hated and booed off the screen. The "fanboy" response has to been to vilify it over the years, but it's worthy of a new viewing IMO.

SUPERMAN IV, on the other hand, is awful, and not in a good way, either. Embarrasing and also unfinished, I remember seeing this and being crushed at how bad it was...though its release in the middle of August, and with no critic screenings the day it came out, were definite signs of trouble (hey I was 13 at the time, I was only beginning to figure that out!).

BATMAN FOREVER is a film I've never cared for (it's my least favorite of all the Batmans), but BATMAN & ROBIN is gleefully over the top. I wouldn't ever call it a "good" movie, but it's so insanely goofy and excessive that I have to confess I was entertained by it. BATMAN FOREVER was more "serious" and seemed halfway between Burton's take and BATMAN & ROBIN, and to me felt like it was off in neverland. At least Schumacher went full-bore in B&R, and Schwarzenegger was a hoot as Mr. Freeze. And how could you not love Alicia as Batgirl, back in her Clueless days? A definite "guilty pleasure" :lol:

Good write-up on BATMAN BEGINS, too, Michael! I agree with your points and couldn't have said it better re: SUPERMAN I/II and SPIDER-MAN I/II...which I'd rank as my favorite super-hero films :)

Neo Rasa
Posts: 106
Joined: Wed Nov 24, 2004 1:30 pm

#27 Post by Neo Rasa »

I think I'm the biggest Batman fan on the board so I feel obligated to chime in here:

I think a lot of the people saying it's the best superhero movie of all time mean it more in the context of how effectively it has adapted the source material. You actually can make a really strong case for this. Thematically the movie is dead on, it IS a Batman movie. Daredevil, as an example, could have been called "Costumed Vigilante" and it wouldn't have made a difference. Superman I and II remain my favorite superhero movies ever, but the way in which Begins is able to have put an original story together while still having a ton of plot elements fit in perfectly from Batman: Year One is brilliant.

I would say this is the most fan-friendly comic book adaptation since the original Superman itself.

I also enjoy how the movie doesn't hold your hand through every aspect of the plot. Like when Rutger Hauer's character Earle and Bruce have a quick exchange at the Wayne party about the company going public, we realize later on that Bruce has already taken action about this by the time they talk, and that he's so calm because he was seeing how much attention Earle was paying to the subject. There were a ton of little things like that that clicked for me throughout the movie perfectly (I would argue that in this respect, the detective aspect of the character is done while he's not in the costume, I would definitely say it's there). The story in general I found very easy to follow as long as you weren't expecting Batman to pull an Adam West and look at the camera to explain the entire plot progression to us.

Visually, some people seem letdown that the movie doesn't go for the more blatantly gothic grandeur of Burton's movies, but at the same time I don't miss it much. I think it was a smart move to not try to duplicate the art design of those two movies.

The special effects are fantastic. Outside of a few seconds of the Batmobile footage and the monorail shot at the beginning, this movie could have been made in almost any decade, which I find pretty interesting. The suit was very good too, though it's a shame real life polymers can't really do what is possible in the comics, so you still have the rubber armor type look, but it makes sense this time at least, the initial body armor looking pretty convincing. The effects had a great, visceral quality to them because they were mostly practical effects. Much better than what most superhero movies have gotten in the late nineties.

The Batman voice seems to have polarized even people who love the movie. I think it's great myself. I know a lot of people that love the movie but hated it though.

The "What are you!?" line was fine with me too. I mean how else would he make a name for himself? People hoping for some homage to the older movies (why is beyond me, but many people seem to think there must be some kind of connection no matter what, even if it's an "out of character" homage like that) are happy and it serves the story, everyone wins.

I think it was very ambitious from a Hollywood standpoint to have the scenes where Batman is dismantling a group of thugs filmed like Predator/Predator 2 or an Alien movie only with Batman as the monster. Ditto to the hallucination scene Crane has later on.

Andy you say earlier that Cillian Murphy is miscast, I think he was perfect myself. Made me think of one of those 18th/19th century ghouls scientists that would hire people to rob graves/kidnap people for a living to give them test subjects.

I'm not sure what to make of Wilkinson though. In the context of the movie he seemed out of place. It was as if they gave him a copy of Batman: Year One to read to get into character and then gave everyone else the script for Batman Begins to study. Maybe if the goons he had around him spoke the same way it wouldn't have stood out as much.

The majority of complaints people have about the movie involve it not being exactly what they wanted it to be, I feel like I'm reading a bunch of www.filmtracks.com reviews here. ;)

The way this movie started pre-production and its plot changes, it's almost like Alien 3 in a way. I have a feeling it will follow the ranks of Blade Runner and other movies where it performs below expectations but gets a massive cult following later one and is eventually recognized for the greatness that it is.

I enjoy the soundtrack quite a bit. I've been listening to a lot of soundtracks that go for somewhat similar tone like the Silent Hill series an Jacob's Ladder, so the timing was right for it I guess.

Something interesting is that you don't hear the main theme until track four, but you get snippets of it throughout the cd. I think this is worth a listen on a good sound setup, there's more going on with it than I initially thought. I definitely think it's incorrect to say it has no themes, I can pick out a very clear battle theme that's used a few times, etc.

Post Reply