The Burton films, post-Batman Begins

[General_Grievous]

Hi there.

I was wondering, now that most Batman fans agree that Begins is the truest representation of Batman portrayed on screen, going right back to the source material and presenting a story of boy to man to hero - where do the Burton films fit in your view of Batman, and Batman in movies?

Obviously they are not supposed to coincide with one another and Begins is certainly not a prequel, so how do you look at Batman and Batman Returns?

Are they just great episodes in the career of Batman but are purely for entertainment, and don't hold anything in the way of being canon, or definitive? Or do you still regard them and put them on the same mantle as Begins - or even higher?

I ask because Begins was Warner Brothers chance to put Batman back on the map after Schumacher's attempts and they certainly suceeded, but I in no way want to just forget Burton's efforts.

His films had their flaws but they are worthwhile for the director's unique, dark take on Batman, brilliant casting choices and Danny Elfman's work.

So, what do the Burton films mean to you in the wake of Batman Begins? Are they still your number one representations of Batsy on film? Or have they taken on a different feel after Christopher Nolan's brilliant work?

Sorry for the rambling nature of this post, please feel free to ask me to explain any of my points in this post.

[Dr. Fate]

It's cool.

Having grown up with Tim Burton's 1989 Batman film, there will always be a place for it in my fanboy heart. Begins may be better, but I'll give Burton this - his editors did a better job with the fight scenes and Danny Elfman's score is still probably the definitive Batman march.

[Bruce_Wayne29]

I still like them and prefer them (even though I love Begins).

[General_Grievous]

Yeah, Danny Elfman's theme just makes me think Batman immediately upon hearing it, it brings back memories of Batman The Animated Series as well, which was in fact, a brilliant portrayal of the Dark Knight and a great exploration of the character, that deservedly gained lots of praise.

I think that if the slightest element had been out of place with Burton's films, then they would have stunk. Fortunately with Burton's visual style, Elfmans score and great casting with Keaton and all of the villains chosen, the movies still hold a place in my heart too.

I guess that Begins is "proper" Batman, and Burton's films are just fun little episodes.

[Bat Attack]

I still love the two Burton bat-films and they are still my favorites. :up: :batman:

[Super_Ludacris]

There classics but they look inferior compare to Begns and that's nothing to think of as being absurd and blasphemous because when you strip down the Burton spectacle Begins grittyiness and detailed storyline for me was more appealing.
And that's not some bandwagon ****, I was around when those films came out and remember going to the cinema when they were out, its just my opinion

[SouLeSS]

Jack Nicholson (spelling) will always be the best joker around. Period.

That and the way that Batman never actually moved his neck, it was always the whole body turn. Begins was lacking that :(

Seriously, the way his suit is made, he wouldn't be able to turn his neck.

[Irony-Man]

Burton's Batman films are Batman as seen thru the eyes of German expressionism.

Nolan's Batman film is Batman as seen thru the eyes of early 70's realism - they are akin to Scorcese or Coppola's work in their attention to gritty realisim and somewhat morally ambiguous heroes.

Both interpretations are valid and should be enjoyed as expression's of their creator's vision. Burton imagined a wourld full of grotesque (meaning larger than life) characters inhabiting a city which was itself a character in the film. Burton's films could not stray from their Gotham setting, or indeed acknowledge the existence of the outside world because Gotham was the films' only reality.

Nolan's approach, rather than make a film where Batman fit in as another player in a hyper-realistic world, was to make a world as close as possible to our own reality and then see how a character like Batman would function in that world.

As they are interpretations and wholly independant from one another they don't have to fit into the larger Batman canon. Like Hamlet, Batman is a character whose story could be told over and over again by different filmakers' each adding their own unique spin to him.

BTW, Schumacher's Batman films represent Batman as protrayed by 1960's gay cinema.

[General_Grievous]

Thank you for an in-depth analysis, I really enjoyed reading it. But was the following comment serious or a joke? -

BTW, Schumacher's Batman films represent Batman as protrayed by 1960's gay cinema.

I'm guessing a joke, but you'll have to humour me and explain the pragmatics of your post. Out of interest, are you a film student or very interested in the film medium yourself, as you sound to be quite educated on the matter.

[ReTrO JuNkIe 42]

Burton's Batman films are Batman as seen thru the eyes of German expressionism.

Nolan's Batman film is Batman as seen thru the eyes of early 70's realism - they are akin to Scorcese or Coppola's work in their attention to gritty realisim and somewhat morally ambiguous heroes.

Both interpretations are valid and should be enjoyed as expression's of their creator's vision. Burton imagined a wourld full of grotesque (meaning larger than life) characters inhabiting a city which was itself a character in the film. Burton's films could not stray from their Gotham setting, or indeed acknowledge the existence of the outside world because Gotham was the films' only reality.

Nolan's approach, rather than make a film where Batman fit in as another player in a hyper-realistic world, was to make a world as close as possible to our own reality and then see how a character like Batman would function in that world.

As they are interpretations and wholly independant from one another they don't have to fit into the larger Batman canon. Like Hamlet, Batman is a character whose story could be told over and over again by different filmakers' each adding their own unique spin to him.

BTW, Schumacher's Batman films represent Batman as protrayed by 1960's gay cinema.

WOW that was perfect and funny :up: :up:

[SharonNash]

His films r great - Batman sequel (those 2 parts) was almost perfect, but it should be more insane - like (Gilliam's Brasil)

[Irony-Man]

Thank you for an in-depth analysis, I really enjoyed reading it. But was the following comment serious or a joke? -

BTW, Schumacher's Batman films represent Batman as protrayed by 1960's gay cinema.

I'm guessing a joke, but you'll have to humour me and explain the pragmatics of your post. Out of interest, are you a film student or very interested in the film medium yourself, as you sound to be quite educated on the matter.

It is a joke but actually a serious one. When I watche Batman Begins I was struck by it's similarity to early 70's cinima and that led me to the comparison of Burton's films with German expressionism. Because I'm slightly anal retentive I couldn't leave Schamacher out of the mix but (even tho I enjoyed Batman Forever) I don't think they deserve the same in-depth analysis that the other two filmmaker's films do, so I picked an area of film which was characterized by bad acting and fetishism as their touchpoint.

I'm not a film student, just a person who was lucky enough to have a father who loved movies and theatre and believed that any subject you are interested in is worthy of thoughtful discussion. Also my major in university was in anthropology, mythology and religious studies and I apply the analytical techniques I learned there to film and comics (especially as I regard comics as a form of modern mythology).

One of the reasons I jouned these boards was to discuss these matters with other interested and interesting people.

[DocLathropBrown]

Burton's films are what made me a Batman fan. I was a "Burtman" fan long before I was a "Batman" fan. His films will always be my favorite version/interpretation of Batman, and Michael Keaton will always be THE Batman to me.

But Begins kicked ass. :up:

[Catman]

To each his own, dude. Both versions are correct. Burton's Batman is a mix of Bob Kane & Bill Fingers 1939 Batman and Frank Miller's Batman from the mid-`80s. Nolan's Batman was more of a Jeph Loeb Batman. So. . .to each his own. Both versions are correct, so there is no point debating which is the truest version.

[Kevin Roegele]

To each his own, dude. Both versions are correct. Burton's Batman is a mix of Bob Kane & Bill Fingers 1939 Batman and Frank Miller's Batman from the mid-`80s. Nolan's Batman was more of a Jeph Loeb Batman. So. . .to each his own. Both versions are correct, so there is no point debating which is the truest version.

It's not a case of being correct or incorrect. Batman and Returns are Burton's Batman, Begins is Nolan's, just as Dark Knight and Year One are Miller's, and so on. All anyone can make is their own version of something, be it comic or movie or any art form, because you can only see through your own eyes.

[CLARKY]

Hi there.

I was wondering, now that most Batman fans agree that Begins is the truest representation of Batman portrayed on screen, going right back to the source material and presenting a story of boy to man to hero - where do the Burton films fit in your view of Batman, and Batman in movies?


Well because "most" of the fans of batman agree that B.Begins is the "truest" representation of batman doesn't obviously means it is.
I think it's not.I think Batman Begins is far from the comics maybe more far than the burton's ones are.
I prefer the Burton films.I think it's the best FILM representation of the character to date.

[theMan-Bat]

Well because "most" of the fans of batman agree that B.Begins is the "truest" representation of batman doesn't obviously means it is.
I think it's not. I think Batman Begins is far from the comics maybe more far than the burton's ones are.
I prefer the Burton films. I think it's the best FILM representation of the character to date.

I agree.

[El Payaso]

Well because "most" of the fans of batman agree that B.Begins is the "truest" representation of batman doesn't obviously means it is.
I think it's not.I think Batman Begins is far from the comics maybe more far than the burton's ones are.
I prefer the Burton films.I think it's the best FILM representation of the character to date.

I totally agree. Sometimes you add a name, let's say 'Flass' and human mind reads, faithfulness to the comics when it's actually nothing but a name.

Begins has the regular amount of differences than any Batman movie.

[Bat Attack]

Well because "most" of the fans of batman agree that B.Begins is the "truest" representation of batman doesn't obviously means it is.
I think it's not.I think Batman Begins is far from the comics maybe more far than the burton's ones are.
I prefer the Burton films.I think it's the best FILM representation of the character to date.
I agree too.:up:

[General_Grievous]

Well thank you for the responses.

Personally Batman Begins edges slightly into the top place if I were to class a definitive version of the Batman saga on film, but Nolan is standing on the shoulders of Burton who helped created the market for Batman on film.

I enjoy Batman and Batman Returns as interesting little pieces, purely for Burton's unique vision and directing style.

Personally, I'd rather see a character like Flass who bears little physical resemblance or even personality to the character of the comics, rather than taking the Joker and making him the killer of Bruce's parents. I enjoy Burton's films more as cartoons, or like serials, and Begins is the main event.

As I say though, Nolan wouldn't have succeeded if Burton hadn't, or even if Joel Schumacher had succeeded, so those who like Begins must also be thankful to the directors who came before.

Begins is just an overall better film, its clever, has strong characterisation and gives you a complete story from beginning to end and sets up many stories to follow.

[Super_Ludacris]

See I like this Grevious cat. Cool, calm and respectful.........reminds me of myself 3 years ago :( I am a shell of my former self

[El Payaso]

Personally, I'd rather see a character like Flass who bears little physical resemblance or even personality to the character of the comics, rather than taking the Joker and making him the killer of Bruce's parents. I enjoy Burton's films more as cartoons, or like serials, and Begins is the main event.

Well, Begins had Ducard and ras being the same character. Cartoon then? Serials?

[The Chairman]

Both Nolan's films and Burton's films are fantastic movies. Both capture the spirit of Batman perfectly.


But if I had to choose, I'd go with Burton's films. I grew up on them, they are what got me into the character along with B:TAS. Michael Keaton was and still is Batman for me (though Bale was no doubt excellent), Nicholson's Joker is still one the best movie villians ever, and Michelle Pfeiffer was the first woman I ever thought was hot. (DeVito's Penguin and Walken's Shreck were awesome as well).

They are completely different films, though. Burton's films are made for excitement. Nolan's film is more for the thinking man who wents to really get into the character (not that Burton didn't, he presented a great alternate view to Bats). Both films manage to complement each other quite well, even if they differ completely in terms of style.

I personally love all three, but like I said, if I had to choose, I prefer Burton's.

[ChrisBaleBatman]

Ya know...for me, it kinda odd. I admanetly admit that Batman Begins is the best thing since sliced bread. I feel like Begins is the IT film of comics and Batman...un-toppable, only the sequel can surpass it.

Yes....I feel that way.

But....I can actually enjoy the Burton film evenmoreso. They're fun to watch, especially BATMAN. Tons of excellent quotes....and just fun to watch. Never get tired of those two film.....they're not as good as Begins.....but they're still damn good films in their own right. While the Schumacher series....well......I choose to ignore those.

[Whack Arnolds]

Well, Begins had Ducard and ras being the same character. Cartoon then? Serials?No, because the swerve job of Ducard being a villain is actually faithful to the comics. In "The Man Who Falls" we find out after Bruce becomes attatched to Ducard as a mentor, and then we the audience, along with Bruce, are shocked to find out he is actually a villain. Bruce doesn't approve off his methods and they part ways. Same thing, but they just meshed the two characters together and kept the essence of both. All the movies are ADAPTATIONS so there is room to change things in order to ADAPT to the different medium of story telling. Joker however being the killer of Bruce's parents doesn't keep in line with anything from the original story. Is the essence of the character, the Joker, the exact same as the comics? You damn right it is... Is his relationship with Batman / Bruce Wayne the same as the source material? Hell no. Joker being the culprit of the murder of his parents changes their relationship, dramatically, and in a way changes the entire outlook of the story of Batman. Bruce Wayne wasn't able to get his revenge of his parents murderer... that's one of the driving forces as to why he becomes a crime fighter. He uses that anger as fuel to help catch all criminals, because he sees a piece of Joe Chill in all of them. With his parents killer still alive while Batman is Batman, and after Batman kills him...that virtually wraps up the story. What keeps Batman going in the source material, is to an extent is the fact that he will never be able to just dish out vengence on his parent's killer. So he has to deal with that pain in the form of crime fighting. Joker being the killer of Bruce's parents REALLY alters the mythos. Is it still a cool movie? No doubt. Just it cheapens the actual ideal of Batman alittle. But it doesn't to people who don't read the source material, and know Batman's rich history.

[Two-Face]

I agree with ChrisBaleBatman.

[The Chairman]

Ya know...for me, it kinda odd. I admanetly admit that Batman Begins is the best thing since sliced bread. I feel like Begins is the IT film of comics and Batman...un-toppable, only the sequel can surpass it.

Yes....I feel that way.

But....I can actually enjoy the Burton film evenmoreso. They're fun to watch, especially BATMAN. Tons of excellent quotes....and just fun to watch. Never get tired of those two film.....they're not as good as Begins.....but they're still damn good films in their own right. While the Schumacher series....well......I choose to ignore those.

:up:

The Burton films are more fun IMO.

[Catman]

It's not a case of being correct or incorrect. Batman and Returns are Burton's Batman, Begins is Nolan's, just as Dark Knight and Year One are Miller's, and so on. All anyone can make is their own version of something, be it comic or movie or any art form, because you can only see through your own eyes.

Yeah, but he asked what you felt was the truest version. They are both correct. Its just that each capture a different era.

[Super_Ludacris]

Ya know...for me, it kinda odd. I admanetly admit that Batman Begins is the best thing since sliced bread. I feel like Begins is the IT film of comics and Batman...un-toppable, only the sequel can surpass it.

Yes....I feel that way.

But....I can actually enjoy the Burton film evenmoreso. They're fun to watch, especially BATMAN. Tons of excellent quotes....and just fun to watch. Never get tired of those two film.....they're not as good as Begins.....but they're still damn good films in their own right. While the Schumacher series....well......I choose to ignore those.


Oh I think you can enjoy all the films, that's what movies are there for. Even the Schumacher films are a good laugh

[General_Grievous]

Ya know...for me, it kinda odd. I admanetly admit that Batman Begins is the best thing since sliced bread. I feel like Begins is the IT film of comics and Batman...un-toppable, only the sequel can surpass it.

Yes....I feel that way.

But....I can actually enjoy the Burton film evenmoreso. They're fun to watch, especially BATMAN. Tons of excellent quotes....and just fun to watch. Never get tired of those two film.....they're not as good as Begins.....but they're still damn good films in their own right. While the Schumacher series....well......I choose to ignore those.

Agreed on all counts. Begins seems to be the film that most fans would have imagined, or liked to have seen on screen, and is the overall greatest portrayal.

Burton's work is just fun and non-sequitir, I suppose. In my mind, those films have entered the category of being good filler material - like the brilliant Batman:TAS. They can be enjoyed as entertaining segments in the career of Batman but are seperate from each other, but still as valid.

Begins is the jewel on top of the Batman crown, but the Burton films are still very likeable bits of "gold".

And thanks for your comments, Ludacris, it means a lot coming from a "big hitter" on these boards.

(I very inaccurately judge people by their post count, the longer they have been here and the more posts they have made allows me to assess them and get what they are about)

[Mr. Socko]

I still love Burton's Batman films.

I view them all as seperate pieces of work.

-Burton's Batman
-Schumacher's Batman
-Comics
-TAS

Now Nolan's Batman

[Sandman138]

Burton's Batman movies move me much more than Begins. Granted, my main problem with Begins is what I felt to be a lackluster script, but still there are other things that put Burton's movies on top. Visually, I find Burton's movies more compelling. I'm a fan of German Expressionism anyways, but I think that the style fits Batman; he becomes a creature of the night preying on the wicked. His enterance in the '89 film will always be the cinematic pinnicale of Batman in my eyes.

I also like Keaton's performance more than Bale's. I felt that Bale pretty much mailed in a performance that was just a combination of other roles he's already played. A little American Psycho here, a little Equilibrium there; I never really got the sense that he was making the character his own. On the other hand, Keaton's neurotic and self-doubting Wayne who finds his purpose and resolve when he's Batman really resonates with me. He couldn't protect his parents, so he's lost faith in himself and can only put faith in the monsterous persona he's created (which brought up some great themes when the Penguin made him doubt the strength of the mask he wore, that exchange at the end of Returns when Penguin spits "You're just jealous because I'm a geniune freak, and you have to wear a mask." and Batman agrees with him is one of my favorite Batman moments ever). That seemed like a far more accurate portrayal of the motivations behind Batman than "becoming an uncorouptable symbol".

Burton's Batman movies just felt like they were about something. They had strong themes, Batman was explored well through his relation to the the freaks that he fought, and Batman grew through the film. Begins focused on Bruce/Batman so much that he became an island and I got bored with all of his exposition, it had a lot of seemingly "deep" one liners that I found rather shallow, and it just didn't have that creepy air that I love about the character. But Goyer's not writing the sequels so hopefully they will improve, I thought the overall concept of Begins had potential, but the execution didn't work for me. I'm looking foward to where Nolan takes it.

[Batman333]

I personally enjoy Tim Burton's versions. I like unusal casting and taking actors that can really act and placing them in a character like what he did with Keaton.

[General_Grievous]

Thanks for all the opinions, it seems that the consensus is that their can be a balance between all films - they are not in competition and can be enjoyed for their own merits.

The Burton films will always have a place in our hearts.

[Axl Van Sixx]

Burton's Batman movies just felt like they were about something. They had strong themes, Batman was explored well through his relation to the the freaks that he fought, and Batman grew through the film. Begins focused on Bruce/Batman so much that he became an island and I got bored with all of his exposition, it had a lot of seemingly "deep" one liners that I found rather shallow, and it just didn't have that creepy air that I love about the character. But Goyer's not writing the sequels so hopefully they will improve, I thought the overall concept of Begins had potential, but the execution didn't work for me. I'm looking foward to where Nolan takes it.

I actually agree with you here. Begins had a lot of lines that were represented as supposed to be deep, but they felt like the work of a screenwriter trying to insert meaning into his script. "Why do we fall, Bruce? So we can learn to pick ourselves up." "It's not who I am underneath, but what I do that defines me." etc, etc. The worst examples in my mind are Liam Neeson, in his neverending monologues about embracing your fears or whatever, and Katie Holmes, when she's lecturing Bruce about the nature of justice. Seriously, who talks like that? It kind of took me out of a film that's often praised for its "realism". The theme of fear was good, but it felt like they were just hitting you over the head with it repeatedly.

In the end, I think that while Batman Begins does a better job of portraying Batman (who was grossly underexplored in the previous films compared to his villains), the Burton films are more atmospheric. Both the Burton and the Nolan versions have their merits. But I liked Tim Burton's expressionist approach to the character. Batman is, after all, a comic book character, and so I thought that his exaggerated, slightly surreal take on it perfectly fit with the source material.

[El Payaso]

I actually agree with you here. Begins had a lot of lines that were represented as supposed to be deep, but they felt like the work of a screenwriter trying to insert meaning into his script. "Why do we fall, Bruce? So we can learn to pick ourselves up." "It's not who I am underneath, but what I do that defines me." etc, etc. The worst examples in my mind are Liam Neeson, in his neverending monologues about embracing your fears or whatever, and Katie Holmes, when she's lecturing Bruce about the nature of justice. Seriously, who talks like that? It kind of took me out of a film that's often praised for its "realism". The theme of fear was good, but it felt like they were just hitting you over the head with it repeatedly.

In the end, I think that while Batman Begins does a better job of portraying Batman (who was grossly underexplored in the previous films compared to his villains), the Burton films are more atmospheric. Both the Burton and the Nolan versions have their merits. But I liked Tim Burton's expressionist approach to the character. Batman is, after all, a comic book character, and so I thought that his exaggerated, slightly surreal take on it perfectly fit with the source material.

I agree, specially on the cheesey 'morals'.
With Goyer and Holmes out of the sequel, BB2 should be much better. :up:

[theMan-Bat]

I agree, specially on the cheesey 'morals'.
With Goyer and Holmes out of the sequel, BB2 should be much better. :up:

Hmm, we will see. It's going to be interesting to see Nolan's Joker, Lachy Hulme or whoever it will be.
Will he out Joker Jack? No way.
If he doesn't have green hair, blood red lips and wear purple then he wont be the Joker to me at all.
http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f341/themanbat/1joker273633810_l.jpg

[Palpadious]

Hmm, we will see. It's going to be interesting to see Nolan's Joker, Lachy Hulme or whoever it will be.
Will he out Joker Jack? No way.
If he doesn't have green hair, blood red lips and wear purple then he wont be the Joker to me at all.
http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f341/themanbat/1joker273633810_l.jpg


Amen, the Joker has to look like that. Batman Begins is the better movie, but they lack the magic of the Burton movies. It saved the cinematic Batman from Shumacker, but I will always like Burton's movies. Keaton will always be Batman :batman:

[General_Grievous]

I think and hope that the Joker in the Begins sequel will take the look further than that in Burton's Batman.

Nolan knows full well that not only has the Joker been established on film before, but he was portrayed by a fan-favourite actor, and so all eyes will be on his treatment of the character in comparison to Nicholson's performance.

I want to see a leaner, more wiry and younger Joker, someone who you can't judge, you can never tell where he's going to move to, as opposed to the more cool, gangster don-style approach that Nicholson took.

This said, the Joker needs to show evidence of his brilliant intellect, which I felt Nicholson did really well.

"And so, as my surgeon once told me: If you gotta go, go with a smile!"

[The Chairman]

I am so looking forward to Nolan's Joker, and seeing a different take on it. However, Jack's performance will most likely always be my favorite. I personally feel it's one of the single best casting choices in film history. He absolutely ruled the part.

http://www.movie-poster.ws/movies/wallpaper/fanart/mike2/thejoker.jpg

[General_Grievous]

He certainly had the right level of charisma for the part and, as Tim Burton feared, could have been TOO perfect for the role. But he did a stand-up job.

I can't wait to see what Nolan does, whether he will opt for the more fantastical sides of the Joker's character and use some of that flamboyance, or just make him a more silent and cold killer.

The Joker is a great villain because he can use both of these traits, often laughing WHILST killing someone.

And I really want to see the Joker in a trench coat and with a hat.

[The Chairman]

I'd prefer to see both sides shown, but I've always liked his fantastical side more.

[El Payaso]

I am so looking forward to Nolan's Joker, and seeing a different take on it. However, Jack's performance will most likely always be my favorite. I personally feel it's one of the single best casting choices in film history. He absolutely ruled the part.

And how!

Anthological role is this.

[captain_jimbo]

I love Batman Begins, but personally I love Batman 1989 and Batman Returns even more. They will always be my favourite adaptations, Keaton was the best, the villains were great and the suit and Batmobile were perfect.:batman:

[General_Grievous]

I love Batman Begins, but personally I love Batman 1989 and Batman Returns even more. They will always be my favourite adaptations, Keaton was the best, the villains were great and the suit and Batmobile were perfect.:batman:

And I love your avatar.

[Mr. Socko]

And I really want to see the Joker in a trench coat and with a hat.


As do I, there was only one scene with it in Batman '89 but I still loved it. But looking at Begins, I doubt Batman 2's Joker will be better then Jack because you can tell Nolan and team are really putting 95% of the effort into Batman. You saw how lame Scarecrow was, he only wore a business suit with a potato sack on his head and I've said it a million times but here's once more, Crane was not even in Batman Begins for 10 minutes if you count up all of his screen time. He was only a pathetic pawn. Lets hope Nolan's Joker is a bit different. And he must have the facial Joker features, I don't entirely care about the chin and nose being vey long but red lips, green hair, and pale skin is an absolute must. It's essential, he's also got to be flamboyant, every version of the Joker has been or has failed(ex. "The Batman" cartoon). Joker can wear his tux in the movie but he can't wear it throughout the entire movie or it'll be quite silly and pointless. Joker is not a dark persona type character who hides in the shadows and is apart of the night. The day time is like show time for the Joker. Everyone is around and'll see him, attention is what he's all about. He's the complete opposite of Batman.

[Mr. Socko]

Hmm, we will see. It's going to be interesting to see Nolan's Joker, Lachy Hulme or whoever it will be.
Will he out Joker Jack? No way.
If he doesn't have green hair, blood red lips and wear purple then he wont be the Joker to me at all.
http://i50.photobucket.com/albums/f341/themanbat/1joker273633810_l.jpg

Exactly, that IS The Joker. Thats a pretty cool pic, wish it was in better quality.

[Evil Dead 13]

Danny Elfman, Tim Burton, Michael Keaton, and Jack Nicholson are some of my favorite artists. So, I'm more than a little biased.

Tim did what he does with all of his movies--he takes the material, and makes it his own. That's not to say that other directors don't do the same, but Tim's movies tend to stand out a bit more--I mean, you can watch a movie for five minutes, and know whether or not he directed it.

To me, watching a Tim Burton movie, is like seeing things in color for the first time. I mean, it's a black-and-white world most of the time, and then when a Tim movie comes out, it's suddenly sensory over-load. And I think that's what he did for Batman: he took an iconic figure, and gave his perception of it. And, it's a perception I greatly appreciate.

I don't mind that he took liberties with the characters, because they were liberties taken within reason. He didn't so much change anything, as added his own version. And sometimes that ends up making things even better--a new way to look at something old.

(Mind you, of course, sometimes this theory doesn't work--henceforth the two Batman movies I don't acknowledge. And I acknowledge Tim's Batman movies and Batman Begins. So. Yeah.)

[El Payaso]

Tim did what he does with all of his movies--he takes the material, and makes it his own. That's not to say that other directors don't do the same, but Tim's movies tend to stand out a bit more--I mean, you can watch a movie for five minutes, and know whether or not he directed it.

That's called 'having a style'.

But let's not forget that there have been no director that hasn't taken liberties wioth Batman.

[Mr. Socko]

The Adam West director don't get no repsect :down

[kit1982]

The Adam West director don't get no repsect :down

What? That 60's show basically kept Batman going plus it was fantastic!

[TheNewGuy]

Don't get me wrong, Batman Begins is awesome, but to me, it still isn't as great as Batmanand Batman Returns. Maybe most of it is because I grew up on the Burton films. However, I also think that they're just the better Batman movies. Again, Batman Begins is awesome, but it just felt a little TOO real to me. Batman should have at least some fantasy to it, and the Burton films delivered that.

[ganstaman56]

Well because "most" of the fans of batman agree that B.Begins is the "truest" representation of batman doesn't obviously means it is.
I think it's not.I think Batman Begins is far from the comics maybe more far than the burton's ones are.
I prefer the Burton films.I think it's the best FILM representation of the character to date.well i think your an idiot.

[DocLathropBrown]

well i think your an idiot.

Your maturity astounds me.....

Reported.

[bdsproductions]

they're great.89 is a vaguley Batman-ish film starring a vaguley Joker-ish character great film,loosely Batman,Reutrns is NOT i repeat NOT Batman it's good,but not Batman.

[Whack Arnolds]

Your maturity astounds me.....

Reported.Oh god.


DocLathropBrown aka the annoying kid who told on everyone from Kindegarden all the way through High School, where he went onto become a successful hall monitor.

[ganstaman56]

Your maturity astounds me.....

Reported.your queerness astounds me!!!

[El Payaso]

they're great.89 is a vaguley Batman-ish film starring a vaguley Joker-ish character great film,loosely Batman,Reutrns is NOT i repeat NOT Batman it's good,but not Batman.

Yes, it was all about Plastic Man, finally someone who gets that!

[batmaluco]

lol

[Bat Attack]

your queerness astounds me!!!
So just because your immature that makes him homosexual? Wow, that makes no sense. Homophobe.:down


Btw,
I reported you too.

[Bat Attack]

edit

[Bat Attack]

edit

[Thot]

Having been a fan of Bats since the mid-70's, I've seen and enjoyed his various incarnations from Adam West to Keaton to Kilmer to Bale. There were things I liked/disliked in all of their films. Burton's films are a tasty morsels of gothic dark comedy, if there is such a thing! Nolan gave us a very different take, one grounded in a more realistic, relatable universe with tasteful hints of humor. They occupy different places in parallel Bat-worlds, if you will. But the twain shall never meet. And that's o.k. They stand alone as they are. As does BF, (a lighter, more action-hero, comic-bookish take). The only two I don't watch repeatedly are Batman Returns and Batman and Robin.

[echostation]

if basically Batman Begins - Batman was in Burton's world then that would be excellent... because the fighting and action in the original Batman was just pathetic.. Batman does not get his ass handed to him so easily by a big stupid lugging thug... He beats the royal **** out of them in the comics, cartoons on a continuous basis and in Batman Begins they show him do this clearly and easily... even if he does have a few bruises... I just found that entire thing so god damn annoying with Hammy Jack Nicholson as a NON-threatening joker dancing like a child... the point is Joker is supposed to be menacing, absolutely vicious and relentless but is so sick that it's done with humor... TAS nails this down pat and no one else has gotten in, not the 60s show and certainly not Burton's Batman... spray painting famous artwork... *shudder... oh no, sends chills down my back... what will he do next?* what's that?? DAnce to gyratingly retarded high-pitched lame ass Prince?? Oh whoops... my bad...

With that said, Anton Frust's production design, the cinematography, color palette on film just looked brilliant... it was revolutionary in terms of film and it was excellent...

[El Payaso]

He beats the royal **** out of them in the comics, cartoons on a continuous basis and in Batman Begins they show him do this clearly and easily...

Oh, yes. The edition, the blurs, perfectly clear. Like if you're tied to a spinning top. Cool.

Jack Nicholson as a NON-threatening joker

Electrocuted dude. Gasing all those people.

I know you're just trying to have a nice time bashing, but, you know...

Effort, please.

Oh whoops... my bad...

Don't worry. We all have those days.

[James"007"Bond]

I still love the two Burton bat-films and they are still my favorites. :up: :batman:


:up: :up: