Batman 89 Vs. TDK

[GothamAlleys]

Fudgie we talked about that before. Superman did a lot, no denying that, but so did Burtons Batman and we agreed last time we spoke about it. Burtons Batman opened gate for all the dark and more brutal, grim and serious adaptations, pushing the envelope as far as possible at the time to the point in European countries cops guarded theaters so kids wont get in cause it was so dark and violent. It was something very new for comic book movies at the time which were all colorful and family friendly before

I dont think anyones getting upset here, I think we all respect our opinnions, its just that some things cant be really denied like the huge impact of Batman, or Superman for that matter

 

[El Payaso]

Fudgie we talked about that before. Superman did a lot, no denying that, but so did Burtons Batman and we agreed last time we spoke about it. Burtons Batman opened gate for all the dark and more brutal, grim and serious adaptations, pushing the envelope as far as possible at the time to the point in European countries cops guarded theaters so kids wont get in cause it was so dark and violent. It was something very new for comic book movies at the time which were all colorful and family friendly before

Not to mention that Burton made people realize that the villiain had a lot of importance in the story. More than just a comedic relief.

 

[Mister Meddle]

Not to mention that Burton made people realize that the villiain had a lot of importance in the story. More than just a comedic relief.

Agreed. Instead of having to worry about being "family friendly" or having the main villain there just for the sake of giving the hero a foe to fight against. It really felt like the characters were able to spread their wings and be their selves. Or at least the way you'd expect them to be in a movie adaptation.

 

[El Payaso]

All the ones challenging people's preferences as if they were wrong for it. One of them even called them deluded Nolanites.

He called that name not because of the voting but because of the reasoning. The poster - who we suspect is a two-time banned former member - threw a categorical opinion without any kind of base. B89 had a bigger cultural impact than TDK. That doesn't mean B89 was the better movie. But back in 1989, you didn't have many superhero movies, let alone of the magnitude of B89 and about such a popular character.

Still, his behaviour should not be labelled as Nolanite for we shouldn't assume that behaviour represent all Nolan fans.

If I ask a question that means I'm upset?

It means that it bothers you, since you assumed the whole problem is about how many are voting for this or that. But actually it was about something else.

I don't think he redefined. Donner did a comic book movie in a mature way that was well received. I think it's more iconic than Batman as well.

Before Burton superhero movies weren't the way they're today. After him, there were all kind of darkness, cool villiains, fictional cities, armours, dark colored suits, etc. Burton re-defined things since it came up with elements that were not in Donner's Superman movies.

At this point Burton's Batman is as iconic as Donner's Superman.

Nolan even used Donner's Superman as inspiration for the way he did Batman Begins.

Nolan even thinks that "The 1989 Batman film that Tim Burton did, that tone has defined comic book movies."

 

[Ponyboy]

The real travesty of his post was picking Zimmer and Howard over Elfman. I actually listened to both full length albums recently, and they aren't even in the same league. While Zimmer has some really enjoyable measures, every note of Elfman's score is engrossing. I would honestly say it's one of the best film scores of all time.

They Have Ears, but They Hear Not... Eyes Have They, but They See Not

 

[Godzilla2014]

Not to mention that Burton made people realize that the villiain had a lot of importance in the story. More than just a comedic relief.

I completely agree. Gene Hackman's Luthor never comes off as genuinely threatening as he should be in Superman: The Movie.

 

[CConn]

Hackman's Luthor could've been at least a little threatening...if they didn't have Otis stealing every scene with his slapstick.

 

[Godzilla2014]

Hackman's Luthor could've been at least a little threatening...if they didn't have Otis stealing every scene with his slapstick.

Completely agreed.

 

[CConn]

That's honestly what ruins STM for me.

Well, that and how all of the cinematography is oddly blurry for no explainable reason.

 

[OutRiddled]

Before Burton superhero movies weren't the way they're today. After him, there were all kind of darkness, cool villiains, fictional cities, armours, dark colored suits, etc. Burton re-defined things since it came up with elements that were not in Donner's Superman movies.

I know many people don't consider Robocop a superhero movie, but it definitely had a kind of comic-book feel to it. Compare Robocop to Judge Dredd, for example.

But Robocop could get away with all the violence and R rating, since it wasn't a considered a superhero movie.

Well, that and how all of the cinematography is oddly blurry for no explainable reason.

A lot of 70s movies did that. They put something over the lens to give it that blurry effect. Probably to make it look 'dreamlike' or something.

 

[El Payaso]

I completely agree. Gene Hackman's Luthor never comes off as genuinely threatening as he should be in Superman: The Movie.

Villiains were one of the things STM did NOT set the standards for in a superhero movie. B89 did.

 

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

I know many people don't consider Robocop a superhero movie, but it definitely had a kind of comic-book feel to it. Compare Robocop to Judge Dredd, for example.

But Robocop could get away with all the violence and R rating, since it wasn't a considered a superhero movie.



A lot of 70s movies did that. They put something over the lens to give it that blurry effect. Probably to make it look 'dreamlike' or something.

Robocop is basically a western.

 

[El Payaso]

Robocop is basically a western.

Now you mention it...

 

[Lead Cenobite]

Hackman's Luthor could've been at least a little threatening...if they didn't have Otis stealing every scene with his slapstick.

Honestly, I think Hackman had the makings of a perfect Luthor, but Tom Mankiewicz didn't change the Newmans' script enough. He made Luthor more of a serious threat than what he was originally written to be, supposedly a Woody Allen type who eats kleenexes when he gets nervous, but Otis brought things down by making all of his scenes into comedy skits.

 

[jb007]

TDK

Nolan

Bale

Ledger

Elfman

Gyllenhaal

Cain

Oh and a *bonus* Nolan's story hands down.

 

[Marx]

I posted this same thread on The Batman (Classic Films) board and thought I would compare the responses.

Anywho...the categories are

1) Movie - Batman '89 vs The Dark Knight
2) Director - Tim Burton vs Christopher Nolan
3) Batman - Michael Keaton vs Christian Bale
4) Joker - Jack Nicholson vs Heath Ledger
5) Sound Track - Danny Elfman vs Hans Zimmer/James Newton Howard
6) Woman friend - Kim Basinger vs Maggie Gyllenhaal
7) Alfred - Michael Gough vs Michael Caine

I prefer the bolded choices. When it comes to Nicholson and Ledger, I don't really think you can compare the two versions because they are completely different versions set in completely different batworlds. They are both great.

There's no way I can choose between the composers.

 

[Comics N' Toons]

Movie - Batman '89 vs The Dark Knight
2) Director - Christopher Nolan
3) Batman - Michael Keaton
4) Joker - Jack Nicholson
5) Sound Track - Danny Elfman
6) Woman friend - Kim Basinger
7) Alfred - Michael Caine