What Writers Should Learn From Batman Begins Posted on May 29, 2019May 29, 2019 by Hans Swaniawski by Hans Swaniawski Post navigation How learning German taught me the link between maths and poetry | Harry Baker | TEDxViennaThe people's poet is dead 36 thoughts on “What Writers Should Learn From Batman Begins” TIL Bruce Wayne is a criminal and Falcon is a civilian. Reply Why do we fall? Reply the acting on batman begins is superb. Reply He’s literally one of my favorite directors and screenplay writers! Reply This sounds a lot like dramatica Reply Too bad the fight scenes in Batman Begins is poorly edited. Reply thank you so much Reply I love these kind of videos. Reply I'm Batman Reply Take notes David Benioff and D. B. Weiss. Reply I'll make my kids watch this trilogy before the MCU they'll learn things from it and after that iron man Reply The only thing i hate about these movies is his voice. They should have done it like in Batman v Superman. Like just use a voice chancer instead Reply Am I the only one who found Batman Begins rather boring? I didn't feel like I was watching a comic book film, a Batman film. Maybe that was the point, but the plot was a little slow and the characters a little unresponsive. I never felt like cheering the hero on as he battled villains in Gotham City. I wonder sometimes if too many filmmakers sacrifice story for structure, thinking that, "If I just lay down a good structure, the story will become better." Trust me; it won't. Both story and structure should be made a priority in equal measure, especially when it comes to superheroes. Reply Similar structure could be seen in Interstellar, where Mathew McCaugnahey does an excellent job adhering to a set of values that are considered outdated by the status quo. Nolan deserves way more attention than hegets, his movies are nothing short of a treat. Reply i don’t want say anything just fuck you nolan Reply Is Batman is self, u tell us is no u were insane of hours, is a are acts, are one choosing, what Define us , and also Christopher Nolan capture it all the original things about the series in the comics like a huge fan of Batman I can tell you that. cool video thumbs-up up^^ Reply There is only one batman and that is batman 89 Reply There is something very useless about batman begins, like ras al who? Where is the joker ? A whole movie with b villains really? This movie was like flushing your money down the toilet and that ridiculous overacted growl or whatever it was that Christian bale of manure would use when he talked. Reply That was quite complicated. Christopher notalent tries to hard and so do you. Reply This is an amazing video, since I love BvS for all of the same reasons that I love Batman Begins. This is way too big a thesis for me to try to tackle here, but there was one error that I saw that I think I need to highlight as a way of injecting some alternate analysis into this question. Your reason for excluding BvS from your 4 quarters opposition model has a flaw in it. In fact, what you say about the morally justified use of violence does apply to all four characters. Senator Finch is a representative of the United States government, and all modern states are accepted monopolies on violence. The only time it comes out (if the system runs right) is when one runs afoul of the law, but its threat is always underneath the surface. This is not a small or ideologically driven point, as the tension this creates with superheroes is one of the quiet unresolved problems in any universe that has superheroes in it. By the letter of the law, Batman, Superman and the rest of them are all equally criminals. So why aren't they arrested? Furthermore, if they cannot be controlled, then aren't they beyond the purview of these governments, setting up a crisis of multiple masters fighting for the sole moral use of violence? This is another point which has been made repeatedly in superhero stories of various media, and which is made with no ambiguity as the moral driving force of all three of the four corners opposed to Superman in BvS. I appreciate that you put this together and that you approach this subject intelligently. But having studied this topic pretty much from the moment the movie was released, I see these two movies having far more in common than in opposition. Reply So is that why this movie isnt boring? Not because it's a superhero movie but because it's written really well and i have good taste in film?? Reply I didn't like that movie. Reply Well that ended on a high note! Reply Im ordering papers at this site BUYESSAY. GQ (without spaces) for years, their work is wonderfull! Reply Im ordering papers at this site BUYESSAY. GQ (without spaces) for years, their work is wonderfull! Reply In Batman Begins, Gotham seemed like Gotham. In the other two movies, it seemed like Chicago. Reply That was a good analysis, I’ve never really thought about this movie that deeply. Not sure why Reply thats a 3 act structure, but 3 act structures are really 4 acts (they combine the middle 2 for some dumb reason) Reply BB is so freaking underrated Reply I love your insight into Batman Begins, but I'm here to defend BvS: First of all, it's a little unfair to criticize it for not fitting the four corners paradigm because not every story calls for that. But, if we wanted to try a three corners paradigm (I'm leaving out Senator Finch), you can break it into motivation (selfish or altruistic) and how far each is willing to go in those pursuits (do they have limits or not). Superman is altruistic with limits. Yes, he's willing to use violence, but only to a certain point. He doesn't want to leave behind death and destruction, but Luthor manipulates events so that it looks like he can't help but destroy everything he touches. Superman believes that Batman is more of a danger to society than a benefit, and so he tries to intimidate Batman to make him stop. Batman, on the other hand, is also altruistic, but doesn't have any limits because he's been driven mad by his fear of Superman's power. He DOES leave behind death and destruction wherever he goes because he's so driven to stop evil (including, in his eyes, Superman), that he loses sight of his core philosophy. He believes that Superman is more of a danger to society than a benefit, so he plans to murder him. See the difference? Luthor is motivated by selfish reasons, and, like Batman, has no limits. He's also willing to do whatever's necessary to stop Superman, but not because he's afraid that Superman could destroy the earth, but because he hates anything with more power than he has. He wants to be the one that people worship. That's why he rebuilt Metropolis and gave a huge endowment to the Metropolis Library. So, while there is a lot of violence and angst on display in the three characters, they're really not the same. Now let's talk about the plot structure. There's a prologue (Bruce's dream about his parents' funeral followed by the battle of Metrpolis), a long first act (starting with the desert and ending at the Capitol bombing), a brief interlude (where Bats and Supes prepare for act two), a brief second act (starting on Lex's rooftop and ending with the infamous Martha scene), and then the final act (from the end of their fight to the end of the film, including the glorious warehouse fight, the Doomsday battle, and all the denouement). I'll admit, the structure is weird. It feels off-putting because it's so unbalanced, but that's done on purpose. The first two thirds of the film are like a pressure cooker. Batman believes that Superman is too dangerous to trust, and he keeps seeing more and more evidence of that. It starts in the opening with the battle of Metropolis, is increased by the events of the desert, and is brought to a head with the Capitol bombing. Luthor is manipulating several events to make people distrust Superman, and it works, not just on the general public, but also on Batman and Superman. After the Capitol bombing, both protagonists hit their breaking points. Superman thinks he's not making anything better, so he goes into hiding. Batman decides to stop vague plotting and actually take steps toward murdering Superman. All the built up pressure of the first two hours explodes into a brutal, action-packed third hour. I understand not liking the structure, especially with the movie being so long, but it's not fair to say that it's an objectively bad or ineffective structure. It reflects the story and the characters. Even though the title implies a lot of fighting, it's mostly a character-driven film, so we spend a lot of time in the characters' heads. It's worth noting that the original Superman movie has a pretty similar plot structure. There's a prologue (on Krypton), a long first act (from the Kents finding baby Clark until Clark introduces the world to Superman), a quick second act (starting with Superman saving Lois Lane, and then going through a montage of heroics while Luthor plots his missile scheme), and then a third act (from Superman meeting Luthor until the end of the film). Reply Do all ideologies need to be destroyed in a film, or can ideologies be contrasted for artistic means to create a ying yang scenario? Reply Game of Thrones could learn a lot from Nolan's Batman movies Reply wow, I honestly didn't even finish the video yet, but I love it! I love your take on this, I'm awed, really! wow! thank you for this Reply It’s Ra’s not Roz Reply Could you do a story structure video about The Dark Knight? Reply You should try to order essay or paper here B U Y E S S A Y . G Q (without spaces) Their service are the most professional and secure on the market Reply Leave a Reply Cancel reply Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *Comment Name * Email * Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.