Reviewed by Shahir Daud

EVERY NOW and again, I find myself compelled to revisit Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Returns, a seething apocalyptic vision of Batman well into his fifties, returning to crime fighting after a decade of retirement. In his absence, Gotham City has finally receded into chaos, with the city awash with crime. Out of every iteration of the Batman myth, Miller's vision is perhaps the bleakest, honing in on Batman's deeply ingrained psychosis and nihilism, coupled with his ethically troubling vigilantism.


Written in 1984, and appearing alongside the equally astonishing Watchmen by Alan Moore, Miller's Batman signposted a new era in superhero mythology, something darker and more troubling than the campy children's stories they'd become. The Dark Knight Returns also began the re-tooling of Hollywood superheros and kick started the Batman movie franchise, beginning with Tim Burton's 1989 film, and ending abysmally with Joel Schumacher's 1997 Batman and Robin.

It seems ironic then, that Batman's latest incarnation is titled Begins, since by all accounts, Batman began it all. Pity too, that despite this being the strongest Batman tale on screen, it is still usurped by other superhero films (the high water arguably being M. Night Shymalan's Unbreakable).

Helmed by Christopher Nolan, Batman Begins' raison d'être is to usher in a new 'serious' superhero. Nolan seems to be the ideal candidate, after demonstrating his ability to rejuvenate firmly established genres (Memento and Insomnia), and was probably brought in to balance off mainstream filmgoers who want blockbuster action, and hardcore bat-fans who want some sense of verisimilitude.

He and screenwriter David Goyer have an uphill battle all the way, since convincing anyone that a man dressed like a flying rodent could actually happen is no easy task. Quite adroitly then, they focus on Bruce Wayne rather than Batman, something that both Tim Burton and Joel Schumacher never considered. Batman Begins plots a plausible trajectory from billionaire playboy to self-funded vigilante and delivers a gripping and exhilarating summer blockbuster managing to be both contemplative and fun at the same time.


What's also remarkable about Batman Begins is that it also manages to trump Frank Miller's other seminal Batman novel, Batman: Year One. Nolan's film loosely adapts the structure of Miller's intriguing origin story, but also significantly adds to it (including the difficult addition of villains The Scarecrow and Ra's Al Ghul).

But the dialogue is portentous and laboured throughout, and the film still doesn't break out of the mould of 'comic book superhero films'. There's still a dastardly plot to destroy the world, a throwaway love interest who will inevitably become the damsel in distress and the big set up for future films that makes every superhero film feel like a marketing exercise.

And while the mood and atmosphere work perfectly for Batman's grand entrance (which doesn't occur till about an hour in), the tone jumps from action to an existentialist diatribe without much cohesiveness. For the most part, the plotting works effectively, and while the villains' master plan is executed with all seriousness, you have to work hard to get over the silliness of it all.

Nolan's impressive casting however manages to give the material the appropriate weight, and only an actor with Liam Neeson's natural charm could deliver some of the scripts clunkier lines. Bale does well as Bruce/Batman, but occasionally resorts to channelling his own performance from American Psycho. Bale's reliance on previous work is symptomatic of the film's main problem: While this is far and away the best Batman film to ever hit the screen, this is definitely not the high point of anyone's career.

For me, I'll still return to Frank Miller's stories as they still remain the quintessential Batman and far superior to anything we've yet seen on film.