@SathingtonWaltz said:
@NaDannMaGoGo said:
@ VierasTalo I suppose our taste differs by a large degree from your comment but still, let's give it a try: Batman Begins better than TDK? How's that? I don't even like the action in Batman Begins with all that close up camera work where you can't figure shit out. And I just don't see an aspect that's worse in TDK really.
Not the guy you were replying to, but I also vastly prefer Batman Begins to TDK. Here's why: (DISCLAIMER: THESE ARE OPINIONS! WHOA!)
Batman Begins captured the brooding and moody atmosphere of Gotham and Batman perfectly. The films focus on fear was spot on for Batman, and the action scenes perfectly reflected Batman "turning fear against those who prey on the fearful." The pacing was tighter, the action though not as much of a spectacle actually made sense. Everything Batman did in BB made perfect sense, they even did a good job explaining why he had "bat ears". The films plot, while less complex, was more focused, direct, and not all over the place like TDK. And I really can't stress enough just how great the pacing was in Batman Begins. Gotham actually felt like Gotham and Batman actually felt and acted like Batman. If you watch the two films back to back it's almost startling how different they feel. In TDK, the moody dark Gotham is completely gone. Batman for some reason no longer uses stealth and fear to fight crime, in favor of just showing up (THEN YOU'RE GONNA LOVE ME). TDK was a fantastic spectacle, but when you watch it a few more times you start to really see through all that. Nearly ever action scene in TDK I queston "why did Bruce do that? That wouldn't actually work. etc.", where as in BB the action makes sense. I don't remember a single scene in TDK where Batman actually uses stealth tactics. In the penthouse party scene, he just shows up. In the nightclub scene he just shows up. The only scene in TDK that made sense for Batman not to use stealth was near the end when he was frantically searching for the Joker. That actually made sense, he didn't have time to do anything intricate.
/rant
I think, for me, what causes a lot of that is that the Joker shows up and totally fucks up Batman's game. If this was a perfect world where the films didn't have to all be increasing spectacles, I think we would have had at least one other movie before the Joker that had Batman in the same vein as Begins. Then the Joker, who is much more direct and unpredictable, shows up and forces the brutality of Batman to the forefront: he tries to reduce Batman to the other side of the same coin as him. In this way, I think the break in tone was definitely necessary but would have been better underscored by being able to spend more time in "this" universe. I don't know, then, that they really should be watched back to back as I don't view them as direct sequels in a narrative sense. There's definitely a break inbetween.
I definitely agree about Gotham, though. I really liked the feel of the Narrows and Arkham in Begins, and it was a little disappointing (if, again, thematically understandable) that the TDK spent much more time in the "nicer" parts of Gotham (AKA Chicago).
EDIT: Also, if I remember correctly, he just shows up to the party because he was already there as Bruce when Joker shows up to cause a ruckus. And the nightclub was right after Rachel's death, right? So he was crazy pissed. Or I might just be misremembering when that happened. Ah, it was Gordon's supposed death. Still makes sense though.
Log in to comment