I just don't see any evidence in Batman Begins (to bring it back to *just* the movie) that Batman gets any joy out of scaring the crap out of Gotham's criminals.
I agree with you. Among many other details, that is a reason why I couldn't care about the Batman I saw onscreen. He was rhetoric and abstracts without enough/any concrete emotion.
Of all the comic book heroes, I expect to care about Batman the most. He's got no magic powers, and he has a tailor-made woobie-worthy backstory. My inability to care about him in this movie suggests that they left out too many of the emotions I recognize. (I don't mean that he was emotionally expressionless; I think that's a standard among many Batmans. But the film itself left out some of the variety of emotion that would have made me able to empathize.)
No reason to build up the fear there. Technically.
Except that the explicitly stated purpose of Batman is to scare criminals. And since he doesn't kill people (mumblecoughcarchasecollateraldamagemumble), he kind of has to be scary all the time. If a criminal lives to say, "Yeah, well when I was alone with him, he wasn't scary, he was just some guy in a kevlar wetsuit," then the whole Batman mystique falls apart.
[holy x-post!]
Aren't comic books at heart really meant for children?
Someone hasn't stepped into a comic book store in many, many years. Possibly ever.
Teppy, will you marry me?
If it means Blue Mountain coffee every morning, hell yes I will!
But you have to enjoy the reaction if you jump out at somebody and yell "boo" or else why do it? It doesn't really inspire true fear, just startlement.
Was the character depicted as scared? Honestly, if a man dressed as a bat and promising (authoritatively, judging by physical language) violence jumped out at me, I'd be scared.
One of the other things I very much liked about this movie is the making explicit of Bruce's first really murky decision -- what to do about
Ra's al Ghul. His "I won't kill you, but I don't have to save you," was fantastic.
I really hope they explore the further impact of that decision in the upcoming movies.
Askye--But, given the post-parole scene, and the couple of
Bruce as playboy
scenes, it makes sense that she would
see more of the Bruce she knows in
Batman
than in the public performance of
Bruce. I think we're also given to understand that at the party.
Me, I'd be more scared if I never saw my assailent. When I woke up, I'd know that something really frightening had taken me out, and all my gun-toting homies, without me ever getting a look or hearing a sound, except for the rustling of something that sounded just a bit like wings.
I like the idea of the criminals not being sure if batman is a man or a creature, at least at first. Speaking to a criminal, not the best way to maintain that mystique. I don't necessarily think this movie wanted to maintain that idea, but it still seems that silent action would be both safer and equally as scary - a better tactical judgment, if nothing else.
I'd do it the way he did it, because I'd get a thrill out of the startled reaction, and my ability to not get shot despite my giving an opening. But I'm not a master strategist in life; in a video game, I'd use a sniper there every time.
(Also, I keep misreading Batman as Bateman. I blame Christian Bale.)
Oh good, it's not just me.
I have nothing to really add to the discussion, because Teppy and ita have been saying everything I would want to say.
