I have to say up-front that I disagree with a lot of your points. The review itself is okay, although it feels like you're making a list of "this part of the film is awesome" arguments without much substantiation.
I wouldn't say it took as much courage to return to the Batman franchise as it did stubbornness and intent to milk one of the only profitable DC characters out of a fear of making a film about anybody new. This marks Batman's 6th out of 7 live action movies, and Superman has had at least five - still waiting on that Green Arrow movie, DC!
As has been stated, I think you're being overgenerous with Katie Holmes. I found it endlessly frustrating when her character, despite her apparently "strong female" persona, needs rescuing as a result of her own obliviousness in situations of danger. "Yeah, you better run!"
I thought that while Liam Neeson was a bit over-channeling Qui-Gon as Ducard, Cillian Murphy was one of the best parts of the film. I found him undeniably creepy (with the mask off, anyway) and absolutely slimy - which is what he should be, and it's what he's good at. He's proven it elsewhere in Red Eye. By comparison, Christian Bale is good, but far from "perfect" in his emotional mix. Batman himself is not exactly an emotionally complex character to begin with - alternating stripes of angst and guilt, manifesting as solitude, pretty much sums it up.
I find it interesting to note that you don't seem to count off points for my two biggest problems with [i}Batman Begins[/i] - the gaping plot holes, and the lackluster writing. I felt like the jokes in this movie really didn't mesh as well as they should have, and the film's finale is, as you say, ridiculous, both in its defiance of science (which compromises all of Nolan's efforts to reasonably explain Batman's gadgetry throughout the film) and in its blandness of premise. Oh, and the writing is notably worse than the writing in The Dark Knight - I felt, anyway. "I gotta get me one of those!"
