View Single Post
Old 11-23-2012, 03:51 PM   #272
Mrs. Sawyer
Banned User
 
Join Date: Mar 2009
Location: Jersey City, NJ
Posts: 24,547
Default Re: The Official Batman (1989) Thread - Part 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by CConn View Post
I more or less agree. I wouldn't necessarily say Burton's Batman is the most accurate overall (Cap, Hellboh, The Avengers, etc. are all pretty spot on too), but I do think, compared to all of the other Batman films - aside from West's, of course - it's the most accurate. As close as they all came to emulating key periods and aspects of the character, Schumacher and Nolan, IMO, didn't come nearly as close to Burton in capturing the core aspects and spirit of the character.

Although, I am still anxiously awaiting a Batman movie where we have a happy, well-adjusted Batman again.



In that case, I definitely agree. When it comes to Batman, I definitely think its the most comic accurate. There are some aspects I think others capture better, but overall Batman 89' is most accurate.


I will give Schumacher credit for one thing though, he nailed the Bruce Wayne aspect of the character in Batman Forever.

Quote:
Originally Posted by shauner111 View Post
It's not the most comic book accurate film. Marvel has more accuracy with some of their movies than Batman 89'.

Pros? This movie holds up better than any Bat sequel of the 90s or ANY comic book movie of the 90's in my opinion. The set design and score is iconic. Great casting for Joker and Batman (even though Keaton was unusual). The Bat-suit and Batmobile and makeup for the Joker were perfect. It was an original, fresh, fun & entertaining Batman movie. It is VERY Batman in comparison to Returns, which was not a Batman movie at all for me.

It's dark with a good amount of serious scenes but with some camp to balance it out. I don't like camp with Batman movies but they balanced it nicely here.

Now for the 'cons'. Gordon was awful in these movies. Kim Basinger was nothing to write home about but i guess it matched the cliche character she played. It's extremely dated. The Prince music doesn't help them get past the 80's vibe. There's a 40's vibe too when you look at the wardrobe of Gothams citizens, it makes the movie stick out like a sore thumb when you put it on today. The screenplay was very average. Lots of cheesy dialogue. Yes there was good dialogue too but only from Keaton and Nicholson. I never liked the last minute/end-of-the-movie twist where Joker is revealed as the killer of Bruce's parents. It felt tacked on just so they had a more emotional reason to fight in the finale. I bet they were struggling to come up with a way for Joker & Batman to keep their rivalry going.

I can live with some of the negatives because it's the first Batman movie of its kind. Batman killing people didn't bother me in this movie like it did with Returns. Maybe because it wasn't excessive or done with a smile as it was in the sequel, and because Batman killed in 1939. I usually don't like Batman as a killer but it's OK in 89'.

I prefer the location stuff for Gotham City, not everything so gothic all the time. But the stylized look here reaaaaally screams Gotham and Batman. They did a FANTASTIC job.

When only rating this continuity i give...
Batman 6/10
Batman Returns 4/10 (the score/look/cast save this from a weaker rating)
Batman Forever 4/10
Batman & Robin 1/10 (im being nice)


Like that's hard to do.

Mrs. Sawyer is offline