This movie has a number of memorable scenes, but it can’t quite hold itself together as a feature film. Nolan gets points for ambition, though I don’t like how earnestly he approaches the material. Granted, Burton is a tough act to follow, because he got it so right the first time out: the storytelling in Batman and Batman Returns may have been thin, but Burton understood that at heart, his main character was as absurd as the villains he fights, and so the right way to a handle the material was to go equal parts sincere/ridiculous.
Having nowhere to go but down, Schumacher abandoned all seriousness and erred on the side of foolishness. Nolan, in the thankless position of having to revive the franchise, had no choice but to go over the top serious.
The friend I was watching this movie with made an interesting observation: Batman is at heart a Conservative tale. Wayne Enterprises is the generous and inclusive moral center of the story, donating money to worthy charities and bettering Gotham for all. And so it’s not corporations that are evil in this tale, but genocidal ninjas and mob bosses. Which left my friend wondering, why has a company as philanthropic as Wayne Enterprises spent so much money secretly developing military weaponary? Batman Begins: a retelling of The Wizard of Oz, with Lockheed Martin finally getting its heart.
by Jason Woloski | Source: Warner DVD
21 Oct 2005 1:35 AM | Comments (2)
I thought that Wayne Enterprises had developed military technology as a result of their being controlled by the unscrupulous Rutger Hauer character?
Bruce and Lucius come to the conclusion that the weapons are being used in the wrong way, not that developing military weaponary in and of itself is morally questionable. But your point is well taken. Thank you.
John Weddell
23 October 2005
3:51 AM