Can it work as a standalone film?
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — Batman Begins
gory_reer — 9 years ago(September 08, 2016 04:15 AM)
If you brush aside the title and the Joker card at the end is this film DEPENDENT on having sequels? Is it too introductory to satisfy on it's own? Is Wayne/Batman's development insufficient comparative to lead characters of various popular/critically acclaimed 90 minute films without followups?
Hypothetically (pretty implausibly), say you watched the film with someone who knows nothing of Batman's other incarnations and the content within, reckon they'd feel there HAS to be more to it? Obviously the film was always intended as the first part of a character's story but considering BB and TDK aren't the most cohesive of companion pieces I neurotically like to think of BB as it's own entity.
While Wayne/Batman's seemingly swift change of demeanour and ambitions from BB to TDK is debatable (as is his losing too much focus to the Joker and Dent) the change in atmosphere, the transforming city and the chameleonic life form known as Rachel Dawes are all harder to excuse. TDK is a good film but in my opinion, a bad sequel.
Personally I wish this was simply titled "Batman" -
d-walsh4911 — 9 years ago(January 17, 2017 09:42 PM)
Sometimes I watch This movie, and then MOS, and then BvS. Even though it's a different Batman and different Gotham, Bales origin Story feels like it could be used for any future storyline if they wanted to. It very much works as it's own film, or as an origin for other Batman films indeed.
-
TwoThousandOneMark — 9 years ago(January 17, 2017 10:48 PM)
Yes, & it certainly feels unique from TDK, as TDKR does from them as well. Not sure that's what Nolan was going for as TDK is set in the same time frame as BB (TDKR is set years later).
It stands alone for me because while Scarecrow is a serviceable foe, & the League's plot is solid, the film is essentially Batman Year One on film, which is awesome.
my essential 50
http://www.imdb.com/list/ls056413299/