Batman Begins Again...

Just got done watching Batman Begins on DVD. I really liked it at the theater, even if the theater was kinda crappy. It was just as good sitting in the confines of my own place, being able to openly comment about some things without having to worry about being shushed by someone else...

I had heard rumors that some people actually didn't like it... even worse, they thought it "sucked." So, I decided to google "Batman Beyond sucks" and see what I came across... I couldn't make it any farther than the first link before I was totally blown away by idiocy. Let's look at some of what they had to say...

from Read Magazine:

Batman leaped onto the pages of comic books, and into our hearts, in the early 1940s, beginning with his quiet appearance in a little-known graphic novel called Detective Comics.

Batman showed up in the COMIC BOOK Detective Comics in the late 1930's. A graphic novel is NOT a "comic book."
And... usually what happens is that you "leap OUT of the pages... and into our hearts." Judging by this article, I'll forgive that little bit of ineptitude.

After seeing his father get killed by a robber, Bruce decides to channel his anger to fight crime. Using his wads of money and with the help of his friend Robbin, they helped protect Gotham, a Chicago-like city full of dark alleys, corrupt police commissioners, and super villains.

For starters... both of his parents were killed... the kid's name is "Robin," not "Robbin" - the author makes this mistake a couple more times in the article, as well... Robin didn't show up in the comics until around 1941.
Also, Gotham City may have been modeled architecturally somewhat after Chicago (actually morseo Pittsburgh), but c'mon... Before Gotham City was officially named in the early '40s, Batman roamed the streets of New York City. DC made the following comparison - Metropolis (home of Superman) was "New York in the daytime," whereas Gotham City was "New York at night."

The comics were dark, but also very fun, and that fun was accurately portrayed on tv in the 1960s. Batman the tv show was a cult hit, and while the effects weren't that great, it truly showed Batman as he was originally intended - as a super detective who wasn't afraid to get into fights, but was ultimately a really nice family man with a good sense of humor.

Oh, man... Someone give this guy some help, please? Okay... Batman comics were dark... period. There were those obligatory light-hearted panels that show up in every single comic book ever printed... occasionally... Batman carried a .45, for cryin' out loud! The '60s tv show did not show Batman with much accuracy to his roots, whatsoever. Batman was not some campy goof... he was "the Dark Knight." The television show reflected the time the show was on the air, not IN ANY WAY the comic.
For the record, the Batman in Batman Begins has a pretty damn good sense of humor if you ask me.

After a couple of awful and boring movies with Michael "Snowman Jack" Keaton as the Dark Crusader, things got back on track with Batman & Robbin and Batman Forever...

Okay. Now I'm sure this guy is a moron (or that April Fool's Day comes in June, sometimes)... The Michael Keaton Batman movies were "awful and boring?" Tsk, tsk...
Who the HELL is "the Dark Crusader?" It's "CAPED Crusader," you dolt.
Batman & Robin (yes... RoBin...) and Batman Forever could possibly be two of the suckiest super hero movies ever made (not counting that scary Captain America movie starring Sam J. "Flash Gordon" Jones).

Now Batman Begins is out, and it takes it all a giant step back. Instead of making a fun family movie, Batman Begins is the darkest one yet, and light years away from the cult comic.

Batman is not a "fun, family" character... I know there were some really young kids in the theater when I saw it, but they didn't care what was going on... He shows up in his suit, whips some ass and *bang* - instant hero. The story wasn't written for your family... and it really wasn't so far away from the comic as the writer of the dreck would have you to believe.

...the movie relives Bruce Wayne - this time as a child - as he watches both (yes, both) his parents get killed. For some reason, that leads him to go to Tibet or something and learn martial arts (umm... okaaay), making enemies along the way.

Well... hmm... basically, that's what happens... BOTH his parents were killed by a mugger in the book... and he went and received training in the Far East... um... okaaay... you idiot.

...but instead of Alfred making him his costume and weapons, he hires Samuel L. Jackson to do it for him.

Umm.... the guy's name? is MORGAN FREEMAN... (you idiot)
Alfred never "made his costumes and weapons," either.
And, for the record, he doesn't hire anyone... Freeman (Lucius Fox) works for his company, Wayne Enterprises/Wayne Industries, who, among many other things, develops weaponry for the government. Wayne just "relieves" Fox of some of the supplies from his own company...

Now, I'm not a stickler for consistancy with the comic books...

You're not? ALL you've been doing is griping about how much the movie is not like the "cult comic book." Besides the fact that you don't have any idea what you're talking about (because it's way closer to the books than you apprently believe), you're also a retarded hypocrite.

Worst of all, Batman now drives some lame giant army tank instead of his normal Batmobile (which was sort of like a Lincoln Towncar with a racing stripe, tail fins and booster jets). This ugly Bat-Hummer doesn't really do much, and the CGI for it looked terrible.

No one wants to see a Lincoln Town Car being used by a super hero besides maybe the Green Hornet (and Kato)... Again... gripe about the "inconsistency" why don't ya? It was kind of silly when it was hopping rooftops and such... but the "CGI" looked pretty spiffy.

Batman himself doesn't have the stocky, square-jawed appearance that we all recognize, but is played by the thin guy from Memento.

Christian Bale was not in Memento. 'nuff said... oops, sorry Marvel.

As for the story - well, it's slow but decent. The villains don't have the fun zaniness of the Joker or Mr. Riddles or the Pengiun and they're even a little scary. (Maybe next time they'll pit Batman against Hellraiser!) But it kept me entertained, even though as a hardcore fan of the comic books, I was disappointed with their interpretation.

Oh, my god... Yeah, you're "hardcore," aren't you? Mr. Riddles??? The more you talk, the less you seem to know. I went from being angry that you were stupid to being highly amused at the same fact...
As a fan of Pinhead... fuck you.
You are possibly the LEAST "hardcore fan" of Batman comics I've ever seen being paid to write a review. If you still have a job with Readmag.com, you shouldn't... because you are an idiot.

PLEASE tell me you meant this article to be this bad to generate some publicity for your rag... please?