The Big Picture: Batman Revisited, Part 1
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
I seriously hope that you are joking about Bane not being "interesting". I'd expect more from you.
Edit: And oh, Batman Beyond <3
Probably my favorite Batman-franchise (Since I haven't read any Non-Vertigo comic in aaaages I'm gonna put Dark Knight as second and Arkham Asylum-Batman as third).
Edit: And oh, Batman Beyond <3
Probably my favorite Batman-franchise (Since I haven't read any Non-Vertigo comic in aaaages I'm gonna put Dark Knight as second and Arkham Asylum-Batman as third).
To me, the 1989 Batman movie was less a story-driven movie than it was an EXPERIENCE.
The look of the world, the non-existence art deco city of Gotham, with the Danny Elfman soundtrack and Tim Burton's dark direction was both otherworldly yet very believable.
And then there's Micahel Keaton's Batman. To this day, to my eternal surprise, he remains my favorite Batman. He's dark, brooding, efficient, mysterious, threatening, and has that stare that scares the crap out of badguys.
Two things I dislike about Christian Bale's Batman is, obviously, that stupid growly voice that sounds like he's gurgling marbles. But the second is he's a Batman that wastes time trying to say something nonsensically deep ("It's not who I am that defines me, it's what I do." "I'm the city Gotham needs, but not the one this city deserves" etc) while Keaton actually told them to cut out of all Batman's "hero" speeches because, rightly, he said Batman was a man of actions, not words.
Granted, the Burton films did have their goofy elements (mainly the rocket-powered penguins in the sequel), but they still existed as sensory experiences no other superhero movie before or sense has been able to match.
The music, the visuals, the performances, the costumes... it was movie magic, something truly fantastical, dark, noir, and yet tangible. And no comic movie, before or since, has been that completely a sum of its parts. The "realism" and "gritty reboot" treatment is fine for those that like it, but I prefer my comic book movies to take me to places on the fringes of human reality, clashed with the powerful beats of a comic book's fantastical heart.
The look of the world, the non-existence art deco city of Gotham, with the Danny Elfman soundtrack and Tim Burton's dark direction was both otherworldly yet very believable.
And then there's Micahel Keaton's Batman. To this day, to my eternal surprise, he remains my favorite Batman. He's dark, brooding, efficient, mysterious, threatening, and has that stare that scares the crap out of badguys.
Two things I dislike about Christian Bale's Batman is, obviously, that stupid growly voice that sounds like he's gurgling marbles. But the second is he's a Batman that wastes time trying to say something nonsensically deep ("It's not who I am that defines me, it's what I do." "I'm the city Gotham needs, but not the one this city deserves" etc) while Keaton actually told them to cut out of all Batman's "hero" speeches because, rightly, he said Batman was a man of actions, not words.
Granted, the Burton films did have their goofy elements (mainly the rocket-powered penguins in the sequel), but they still existed as sensory experiences no other superhero movie before or sense has been able to match.
The music, the visuals, the performances, the costumes... it was movie magic, something truly fantastical, dark, noir, and yet tangible. And no comic movie, before or since, has been that completely a sum of its parts. The "realism" and "gritty reboot" treatment is fine for those that like it, but I prefer my comic book movies to take me to places on the fringes of human reality, clashed with the powerful beats of a comic book's fantastical heart.
Batman was a good movie. It's possibly the only movie my family, faced with a slew of options at a movie theater, actually en masse decided to see again.
It's dated (having come not too long before the mass exodus to CGI and blue/green screen over models and sets), and certainly flawed. Like pretty much all of Burton's movies, it puts a priority on visuals and tone over narrative. It's also, as I've said, one of the few movies where that approach really succeeded.
It's a rare action movie that has some solid ideas and themes running through it without needing to beat the audience over the head with them. Possibly most notably the idea of a hero and villain fighting a battle that's as much about public relations as physical prowess- that people might embrace a genial homicidal killer over an off-putting defender.
There are obvious things that could have been changed to make it a better movie, but there's also an awful lot of more subjective issues that in someone else's hands would have made it into something that simply wouldn't have occupied the niche it did, and thus not had the rippling influence it did upon multiple genres and mediums.
Largely, I feel, for the better.
It's dated (having come not too long before the mass exodus to CGI and blue/green screen over models and sets), and certainly flawed. Like pretty much all of Burton's movies, it puts a priority on visuals and tone over narrative. It's also, as I've said, one of the few movies where that approach really succeeded.
It's a rare action movie that has some solid ideas and themes running through it without needing to beat the audience over the head with them. Possibly most notably the idea of a hero and villain fighting a battle that's as much about public relations as physical prowess- that people might embrace a genial homicidal killer over an off-putting defender.
There are obvious things that could have been changed to make it a better movie, but there's also an awful lot of more subjective issues that in someone else's hands would have made it into something that simply wouldn't have occupied the niche it did, and thus not had the rippling influence it did upon multiple genres and mediums.
Largely, I feel, for the better.
If you guys havn't read them yet, over at Comics Alliance, Chris Sims and David Uzumeri have written what might be some of the most thorough and fascinating deconstructions of the entire Batman movie franchise, start to finish.
Here is a link for your reading pleasure. [http://www.comicsalliance.com/2011/05/23/batman-1989-review/] They are LONG, so you might wanna consume them in chunks.
Here is a link for your reading pleasure. [http://www.comicsalliance.com/2011/05/23/batman-1989-review/] They are LONG, so you might wanna consume them in chunks.
I saw this movie for the first time a couple months ago. I'd already seen movies 2-4 and liked them, so I thought I'd like this one, too. But I was wrong. Jack as the Joker did not work as well as I thought it would. I didn't like that Burton had Joker kill Bruce's parents, and what was even worse, Batman KILLS Joker at the end! Batman's whole thing is that he doesn't kill, and he blatantly killed Joker on purpose! WTF, Burton? Joker is not that short-lived! The only time Burton got the not-killing-villains-or-making-them-mental thing right was in the 4th film!
I am still waiting for them to make a costume he can move in.
I really can't say I have much love for any of the movies.
the first ones are plagued by bad, writing and effects and Nolans run are missing the fantastic elements that made the Batman universe fun.
Nolans films have removed many of the weird and supernatural things from the universe, all in the name of realism, in a comic-book movie...
I especially catch a lot of flak for not liking Ledgers version of the Joker, but he never screamed the the Joker, where's the gadgets, the gas, the things that made the Joker stand out from just being another loonie.
For the upcoming movie I am going to be severely disappointed if they do not include Bane's venom.
I really can't say I have much love for any of the movies.
the first ones are plagued by bad, writing and effects and Nolans run are missing the fantastic elements that made the Batman universe fun.
Nolans films have removed many of the weird and supernatural things from the universe, all in the name of realism, in a comic-book movie...
I especially catch a lot of flak for not liking Ledgers version of the Joker, but he never screamed the the Joker, where's the gadgets, the gas, the things that made the Joker stand out from just being another loonie.
For the upcoming movie I am going to be severely disappointed if they do not include Bane's venom.
Might I just point out that there is a typo in the beginning of the video.
It says Revisted in stead of Revisted.
It says Revisted in stead of Revisted.
And now I just really want to see Bob do an episode or two on the 90s comic book boom and crash.
In terms of marketing, merchandising and home video turnaround time, yeah, Burton's Batman set the modern standard. Especially the video thing; that a blockbuster film would be in theatres in late June and be on video before Christmas? Unprecedented. To give it context, Batman hit video about the same time as Roger Rabbit, which was released to theatres in June... of 1988.
In terms of visual aesthetic, though, Batman is pretty much just lifting wholesale from Blade Runner and subtracting the neon. As far as the craft of movie making goes, there are dozens of films that have come since Star Wars that have had a far greater impact than Batman '89.
In terms of visual aesthetic, though, Batman is pretty much just lifting wholesale from Blade Runner and subtracting the neon. As far as the craft of movie making goes, there are dozens of films that have come since Star Wars that have had a far greater impact than Batman '89.
After Gail Simone got her hands on him in Secret Six? He could have been a VERY good, and lasted a long time had the New 52 not hit...4173 said:
Tim Burton's Batman was the first and still one of the very few times I ever took Joker seriously as Batman's arch-enemy. Not that he isn't almost always a great villain, no matter in what version, but the character very rarely ever feels like THE villain that Batman should know and fear the most. Ra's Al Ghul, Jason Todd as Red Hood, Two-Face, Bane even Hush are all more deserving of the title of Batman's nemesis (and this is coming from someone who fucking hates Hush)
Turning Joker into the murderer of Batman's parents is probably the smartest thing anything has ever done with the character. Yes it's cheap, but it's the quickest and least convoluted way to make the Joker threatening to not just Gotham and Batman but to Bruce Wayne on a personal level.
Turning Joker into the murderer of Batman's parents is probably the smartest thing anything has ever done with the character. Yes it's cheap, but it's the quickest and least convoluted way to make the Joker threatening to not just Gotham and Batman but to Bruce Wayne on a personal level.
The two Burton Batman films are my favorite incarnations of Batman. They just seem suitably dark and morbid, with Batman not shying away from violence to fulfill his objectives. And the soundtrack in those films is phenomenal. And they have the best Batmobile.
The new movies are great, don't get me wrong, but the originals will probably always remain to be the best, in my opinion.
The new movies are great, don't get me wrong, but the originals will probably always remain to be the best, in my opinion.
Tim Burton's Batman is easily my favorite Batman movie.(Not too difficult considering how much I hate Batman and Robin, Batman Begins and don't particularly care about Batman forever)
