With so many comic based movies being made or re-hashed, one could be excused for thinking that this one is another one of those formulaic, money grabbing, special effects laden, script-less piece of mindless junk. Oh, forgot about the romantic angle thrown in for the important human relationship angle. Superheroes are human too, y’know.
Well, this one isn’t all that.
From the opening scenes, you know that this will explore the psychology of the protagonist, who we all know so well. Or do we? From the beginning, Batman has been an anomaly to the superhero genre. He doesn’t have any super powers and neither is he an alien or mutated in any way. He does have all sorts of gadgets and one hell of an awesome car. So what drives him? Is it the need for justice? Maybe revenge? Either way our hero is one complicated cat … or to paraphrase a line from the movie, anyone wearing a bat suit must have some serious issues.
And it is these issues that bring this movie to life. The previous Batman movies have only touched on the issues that drive the caped crusader, using the loss of his parents as the crux of his motivation. Batman Begins, however, provides an in-depth look into all the surrounding issues that drive a billionaire playboy into donning a bat suit and getting down and dirty with the criminal elements. And it works. This is the most rounded characterization of Batman yet.
Character
From the onset, the themes of fear and its consequences are enacted, leading to the death of the parents of a young Bruce Wayne. Christian Bale is believable as the tortured and vengeful young heir who doesn’t have a care for his fortune. Micheal Caine is excellent as Alfred, the faithful butler. He has some great lines in this movie and his words of advice, delivered in a muted cockney accent, are absolute pearlers (Yoda, eat your heart out.)
Katie Holmes plays Rachel Dawes, a childhood friend of Bruce and the assistant District Attorney in Gotham City. The cynic in me was waiting for the same uncomfortable “I-have-feelings-for-you-but can’t-admit-it-because-I’m-a-superhero-but-a-wuss-in-real-life” crap ala Spiderman 2 but thankfully this didn’t happen. Instead, her character portrayed the judicious, incorruptible, law abiding and socially conscious ideal that is usually the first casualty in a society run by fear and intimidation. Even when she finds out that Batman and Bruce Wayne are one and the same, she doesn’t fall head over heels (contrary to what the movie posters might be depicting) but instead makes an allusion to how she always loved the real Bruce Wayne, not the billionaire playboy or the caped crusader.
The supporting cast is excellent and all play a part in shaping the Batman persona. Flashbacks show Thomas Wayne, Bruce’s father, as a kind, compassionate doctor who has a deep sense of duty to the community, a true philanthropist. It’s these traits that keep Bruce from becoming a murderous vigilante which attracts the ire of Raz Ul Gul played first by Ken Watanabe and then by Liam Neeson, whose tutelage turns Bruce Wayne into a multi-discipline (Jujitsu, Ninjitsu etc) martial arts expert. The whole master vs apprentice touch was subtly done.
Neeson was entirely believable as the tough as nails, egomaniacal Ducard. He has a knack for playing the flawed mentor type. Think Qui Gon Jin from Star Wars Episode 1, but with about a years worth of nandrolone coursing through his veins. The whole League of Shadows conspiracy also fit into the story well, giving the whole notion of crime a global feel as opposed to just with Gotham City.
Storyline
The way director Christopher Nolan (Memento, Insomnia), unfolds the tale is surprising given how well the story is already known. Showing a bearded and ragged Bruce Wayne in some sort of an Asian prison camp throws you. Wayne is a billionaire, so what’s he doing in prison? All these questions are answered over the course of the movie. Nolan’s attention to detail is meticulous and gives the whole movie a sense of being based in reality rather than fantasy.
The story itself traces the young Bruce Wayne’s journey through fear, despair, horror, guilt and anger. After seeing his parents murderer freed, frustration leads him to confront the underworld kingpin Carmine Falcone (played by Tom Wilkinson), who boasts of owing half the city through corruption. After being intimidated and warned, Bruce decides that the only way to beat ‘em is to join ‘em. So to understand the criminal mind, he becomes a criminal. Which explains why he’s in prison. Cool huh?
The story then follows through to his training by Ducard and his return to Gotham City. The city is stunningly large and reflects the depression era in which the Batman comics were born (circa 1939). Its when Bruce returns to Gotham and decides to clean up the city, that the story really starts moving. It explains how the Batcave came about, the acquisition of the bat suit, the making of the bat-arangs and of course, the modding (if you will) of the Batmobile (can i get a "fully sick").
We are also introduced to Lucius Fox (Morgan Freeman) the head techie at Wayne Enterprises' Applied Sciences division. Look out for the tongue-in-cheek dialogue exchanges between Bruce and Fox. We also get to meet Jim Gordon (a very believable Gary Oldman), the only honest cop in Gotham.
Nolan does a good job in keeping the story moving and the action scenes are punchy and not at all forced (as in all the previous Batman movies). There aren’t any campy or over-the-top moments or drawn out emotional interludes. Personally, the script, acting and directing of this movie was so good that my disappointment with Star Wars Ep. 3 was forgotten. This is how movies should be made.
Score: 4.5 out of 5
Thursday, June 23, 2005
Friday, June 03, 2005
The Credit Trap - Part 1
A new credit card has just been released in Australia that charges 0% interest, Wow! A bank, of all organizations, wants you to spend their money free of charge. I can't wait to get my hands on this piece of plastic.
The news about this card was apparently so good that it even made it as an article on A Current Affair, the shining light of Australian TV journalism. For those outside of Australia, A Current Affair is a half hour "current affairs" program which runs after the 6pm news.
I shouldn't be hard on ACA. They did say that it was a comparison between the new card and existing cards on the market. Funny then that they focussed most of the story on a woman who has a massive credit card debt.
This lucky woman gets her 7 minutes of fame because she spent above her means and is now saddled with a huge debt with an even bigger interest rate.
So what does this have to do with the new credit card? Well, the new credit card has 0% interest for the first four months only. After four months (and a new plasma TV, leather lounge, new hair and total nails replacement), the interest rate goes up to 12.99% (whatever happenned to rounding off, everything these days seem to hang off the edge. It's as if people have been brainwashed into thinking that 0.01% will actually save them money!). This is ACA's service to the community at large to be wary of credit cards.
The reasoning implied is that once the interest rate goes up, you the cardholder, are back to square one. In debt and therefore property of the bank which holds the plastic leash which you so happily clamped around your neck.
So all credit card providers are evil. Credit cards are evil and we should pay for everything in cash or go back to the barter system. Thats what the TV seems to be saying everytime there's a story about the "dangers of credit cards". Its not the card, its the hand the wields the card. It's the ill-informed consumer who takes on an offer that sounds too good to be true and usually is.
In this age of information, its hard to believe that people keep falling for the old "it was in the fine print" marketing ploy. Like a double agent, it works both ways because it's a marketing ploy and also a good excuse when one finds themselves in debt trouble.
But hang on just a minute, you mean to say an offer of 0% interest does not immediately start the "whats the catch?" alarm bells ringing? Are we as a society so heavily brainwashed by consumerism that we fail to question the offer of free money? There is always a payback. It's just plain old common sense.
Credit cards can be useful if used correctly. You basically have 55 days (in most cases) to pay back what you spent. The trick is to pay it back in full. But aye, therein lies the rub. If you are paying back in full whats the point of a credit card? The point is that you have anywhere from 20 to 30 days to make that payment. This means a paycheck or two somewhere in that timeframe which can be used. You are not dipping into your savings but spending your usable income.
Of course, this will only work if you are spending within your means and if the purchase is large, you have previously saved at least part of the repayment. The trick is to repay the entire purchase(s) before the interest kicks in which is basically the moment you make a minimum payment. The kicker is that all interest is backdated to the date of the purchase. So 20-30 days of interest gets added on. Tough cookies if you did buy that plasma TV. Or borrowed cash from your credit card (usually attracts the highest interest).
This rant is not financial advice in any way or an endorsement for any particular credit card provider. I'm just sick and tired of these people on TV complaining about how they were duped, conned or mislead. What are we ... sheep? Question the offer and if you can't figure it out, speak to an accountant, the Department of Fair Trading or check out www.NotGoodEnough.org. There is a lot of information available.
An informed consumer is an empowered one. We, as consumers should not be falling for the same old marketing strategies. I quit year 10 Economics for Chemistry but I still remember this: in any transaction, caveat emptor ... buyer beware.
Wednesday, June 01, 2005
CD Review: Mesmerize - System of a Down
System of a Down - Mesmerize
Having bought this album a couple of days after its release, I figured I'd let the hype (debuted at number 1 on the BillBoard chart) and expectation (close to three years since Steal This Album! was "released") die down a little and have a few listens before writing about it.
They can go from straight up hard rock to thrash to metal infused folk within the same song before you can say "genre bending". They also combine influences of Eastern European folk, punk, ska and kitsch (Knight Rider theme anyone? Check out I-E-A-I-A-I-O) with their unique brand of metal. You could, maybe, hum a riff ... if you're lucky.
So why am I humming a previously un-hummable band's song? Because its downright catchy. Its melodic and memorable and has a great hook. No, dear reader, System of a Down have not sold out. They have mastered their art.
The song which I have been humming is called B.Y.O.B (Bring Your Own Bombs). If you haven't heard it yet you might soon given it's been nominated for a Grammy. The chorus is downright infectious, to the point of being poppy, although I doubt we'll be seeing any Idol hopefuls performing that as part of their auditions.
Don't get me wrong, this album is anything but poppy. It's still a typical System of a Down album in that it defies definition or classification. Take for example the above mentioned track. It starts off sounding like early Metallica and then the chorus kicks in ("Everybody's going to the party, have a good time. Dancing in the desert blowing up the sunshine") and you could almost dance to it. And then "Blast off. It's party time" and you're suddenly into what sounds like Slayer's Reign in Blood. What the?
All the while vocalist Serj Tankian and guitarist / vocalist Daron Malakian are either trading verses or harmonizing on the chorus. Its an effective one-two sucker punch that works through most of the songs on this album and is a change from previous albums when Tankian carried the bulk of the vocal duties. Malakian sings a whole lot more on this and brings a raspy, squeaky, manic contrast to
Tankian's dramatic, sometimes operatic delivery. Their collaboration brings an element of fun to this album and the listener is always second guessing as to which one of the vocalists will go on one of their trademark tangents.