*** This review may contain spoilers ***
In a world where Batman was most popularly known as "Adam West in a costume", Tim Burton came along and made possibly the greatest Batman movie for it's time. Anybody who compares this to Christopher Nolan's 2005 masterpiece "Batman Begins" just doesn't appreciate what Batman really is… a superhero whose genre changes from series to series. He's always been a comic book hero since his first appearance in May 1939. But starting in 1968, Batman had a cultural impact with a campy television series that was generally well-liked, running two years with pretty consistent reception from both critics and audiences. And for twenty-one years, that's how the world viewed Batman -- Adam West assisted by Robin in whacky adventures, ranging from a surf-contest with The Joker to jellied-water in Gotham City's pipeline.
Starting in 1980, Warner Brothers went through several different scripts for the ultimate Batman movie. It took them nine years to create the perfect Batman movie, but they did it. The darkest Batman story to date. And now, thanks to this film alone, the world knows Batman as something else… a superhero who is virtually timeless. This is also the first time a lot of people saw Batman without Robin.
Tim Burton created a Gotham as ugly as possible, and a Batman who is willing to kill. And what better Bruce Wayne/Batman than Michael Keaton. The epitome of an underdog. Not handsome, but not ugly; not tall, but not short; not strong, but not weak. One could easily assume that a Bruce Wayne who looks like Val Kilmer, George Clooney or Christian Bale could easily be the man under the batsuit. What kind of secret identity is that? But with Michael Keaton, you can never be sure. Not only was Keaton's appearance fantastic, but the actual portrayal was splendid. "You wanna get nuts! Come on, let's get nuts!"
Sure, with Heath Ledger playing The Joker in the "Begins" sequel "The Dark Knight (2008), people will say that Jack Nicholson is THE Joker. But it's actually The Joker who made this film questionable. Who ever said that The Joker is supposed to have a back-story or kill Bruce's parents? Not to mention how convenient it is that a man dropped in a bath of chemicals survives with bleach-white skin, green-hair, and a permanent grin.
The film also suffers casting. Why not have characters who are critical to the franchise such as butler Alfred Pennyworth or Commissioner Jim Gordon be played by more well-known actors? Michael Cane and Gary Oldman are wonderful examples of this, from Nolan's series.
Because the Batman franchise has gone from campy-comedy all the way to intensely-dark, it's so easy to criticize any kind of portrayal of the Caped Crusader. So, judge for yourself, but keep an open-mind.
Nolan couldn't have been a better choice to take the director's seat, and while Bale has a strong resemblance to West, their Batmans are completely different. After eight years of silence, the Batman reemerges with a most appropriate reboot which explains the whole history of how Bruce Wayne became Batman. Nolan makes both Burton and Schumacher look like Ed Wood — most impressive of all is that, while technology has improved tremendously since 1997's flop "Batman & Robin", "Begins" chooses to take little advantage of it. A-list actors are casted as supporting characters, with Michael Cane as Alfred, and a calm Gary Oldman (that's a first!) as Gordon; among others like Liam Neeson, Katie Holmes and Morgan Freeman. Tom Wilkinson, Rutger Hauer, Ken Watanabe and Colin McFarlane are also so wonderful in their minor roles. Cillian Murphy modestly appears as The Scarecrow, which one can say is a bit underused as a well-known villain, but it actually makes it all the more realistic. Perhaps the older series should have considered using major stars as supporting characters, not villains. This film proves that superheroism isn't impossible — you just have to be a billionaire. Nolan's uncle, John Nolan, plays Fredericks.
