Loading...
Christopher's 2005 reboot of the Batman franchise that tells the origins of how Bruce Wayne became Batman.

What flaws do you see in Batman Begins.

Posts: 1997
Location: Boston, MA
Not long enough.
Zez
Posts: 154
So many plot holes and inconsistencies:

* How does Bruce contact Alfred?
* How does he shave?
* How does Batman pull off vertical jumps to nowhere?
* How can Gordon drive stick?
* Why doesn't Fox get the memo?
* Why is Katie Holmes such a terrible actress?
* The reveal of Ducard as the villain was way too fast.
* Other characters felt unnecessary- like the Felafel guy.
* How is Batman so jacked when he doesn't get much sleep/ eat that much?
* Why is Alfred British? They needed to explain his origins a bit more.
Posts: 13374
Zez wrote:So many plot holes and inconsistencies:

* How does Bruce contact Alfred?
* How does he shave?
* How does Batman pull off vertical jumps to nowhere?
* How can Gordon drive stick?
* Why doesn't Fox get the memo?
* Why is Katie Holmes such a terrible actress?
* The reveal of Ducard as the villain was way too fast.
* Other characters felt unnecessary- like the Felafel guy.
* How is Batman so jacked when he doesn't get much sleep/ eat that much?
* Why is Alfred British? They needed to explain his origins a bit more.

The felafel guy made the movie. :)
Posts: 13
The only real flaws in it I would say are mostly to do with the 3rd act, particularly the whole fear gas in Gotham and Arkam Asylum release. I just thought The Scarecrow should have been left alone once Ra's Al Ghul showed up, Scarecrow running around Gotham just causing mayhem in an already chaotic situation with just a horse and his fists is pretty stupid. And the way he just got tased off by Rachel and ran away whelping was pathetic...it almost ruined scarecrow, who up to that point was pretty cool and psychologically intimidating.

I love the Ra's Al Ghul reveal in Wayne Manor and Ra's big philosophical speech, that's probably the best part of the movie..but the rest of the 3rd act is kinda disappointing just because how great the first 2 acts were.

Only thing wrong with the first act was I feel that Ken Wanttanbee/the fake Ra's should have at least a little bit more screen time in the 1st act, he's supposed to be Ra's Al Ghul so I wish the audience would have been fooled by it more, be he basically only gets only 2 minutes of screen time speaking maybe like 3 sentences..mostly in Japanese.

Another complaint is the fight scenes are too shaky, it worked really good in the first time Batman appears on the docs but for the rest of the movie it's annoying, didnt really care much for the Monorail Batman-Ra's fight.. couldn't see much..camera too close up and too shaky.

I didn't think Katie Holmes was that bad, she looked a little too young even though she's 27 there she almost looks 18. But I'd rather look at her face than that bridge troll mug of Maggie Gyllenhaal and in The Dark Knight Rachel's character seems fickle.

But with these complaints aside, the movie still deserves a 9/10 IMO. It's far superior to the Batmans that came before it, yes including Tim Burtan's first Batman film. I still like it more than The Dark Knight, and The Dark Knight Rises although I realize i'll always be in a minority there. I think the Alfred-Bruce relationship is strongest in this film, I thought Liam Neeson's Ra's Al Ghul was an excellence mentor and I love his traditionalist good guy in the extreme type of villain aspect to him. I enjoy the scenes of the Young Bruce with his father. I think the over all design of Gotham in this film is more original than it was in the sequals, in TDK it seems exactly like Chicago, no beautiful monorail or slight Gothic scenes. And most importantly I like and identify with Bruce's journey and becoming. It's an origin story.

So yeah despite a few flaws i'd fix it's still a great movie.
Posts: 441
the biggest flaw was the action scenes. A lot of people didn't like the way he shot those scenes. I thought the best action scene in the movie was the Tumbler sequence and Bruce escaping from the police just before that.

The fight scenes are another story though.

I never understood the backlash with Katie Holmes, but to each their own. I thought she did ok in her role.
Posts: 33
The only two flaws I can see with Batman Begins is the water vapouriser which should have been replaced with something more plausible.

The other flaw is Rachel Dawes. I would have much preferred to have seen Harvey Dent introduced in Batman Begins instead of Rachel and develop his character as a parallel to Batman. Of course the Dark Knight would have to be adjusted and the deciding factor which turned Harvey into Two Face would have to be re-written. But I think it'd be worth it just to see Harvey in Batman Begins as a secondary character but already we see his obsession with the mob and underlying mental instability which didn't really form a part of his character in the films until his became Two Face.
Posts: 2
Location: PITTSBURGH!
First post.

All 3 of Nolan's Batman films are awesome.

As far as issues mentioned by the OP, I can overlook 1 or 2 scientific or character plotholes.

No major issues here, with any of the 3 films.
Posts: 8286
Location: The Island, NY
Posts: 168
Red Hood wrote:


I was kind of bummed at how underused Scarecrow was in BB. IMO he should've taken center stage as the primary villain and not Ra's al Ghul.
Posts: 16007
Location: North Carolina
gaspernoe wrote:
Red Hood wrote:


I was kind of bummed at how underused Scarecrow was in BB. IMO he should've taken center stage as the primary villain and not Ra's al Ghul.

AAAAA no
← Previous page Next page →
← Return to Batman Begins
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests.