Originally Posted by TruerToTheCore
Having a favorite movie from one's childhood is a nice thing but when you've grown up you should just notice flaws that are definitely flaws. Batman (89) is an entertaining movie, but it isn't an overly accurate depiction of Batman nor is it a very well-written movie.
Personally, I'd call it a very accurate depiction of Batman. In a lot of aspects, he does a better job at characterizing Batman than either the Nolan movies, or even comics of the past 20 years or so have. Sure it misses on some points, but every recent interpretation of Batman I've read misses somewhere.
But yes, the writing takes a backseat to every other technical aspect of the film. And it's those technical aspects that make me hold it in such high regard, not just as a childhood favorite, but as a legitimately wonderfully made film.