Returns has things that are just as silly as Batman and Robin.
I actually agree there.
While I really dig Returns and think it's camp was tastefully done (unlike the Schumacher flicks) I think it started the trend of going back to the comedic approach that everyone wanted to move away from, especially with the Penguin, Triangle Circus gang, mayor plot and missile launching penguins gag.
It balanced it out with some drama and tragedy though. It's like a black comedy, especially with the villains. Still, while it's no where near as goofy as say Batman and Robin (which makes light of pretty much everything), I do think it was the one that started going down that path.
It's more serious, only in comparison to the Adam West version or a Reeve Superman, but it's far from "serious". It's still full of gags, and is still a pretty goofy movie. Tim Burton's Batman is still a great popcorn movie. Yes, it's a popcorn movie, just with a gothic look.
Nah, not seeing it. I'm not really sure what's "goofy" about it. There's some gags, but so what? The Joker is in it with his gimmicks. It's not even on the same level as the others, why? Batman doesn't partake in the shenanigans. The city, the story, Batman, Bruce Wayne, etc. are all taken seriously. As serious as it possibly could get for 1988/1989. Even with the Joker there's still this grimness to it. He kills people in horrible, sadistic ways, but his electrifying personality and showman like charisma that makes it feel light, which is totally appropriate for the character.
Popcorn movie? What does that have to do with camp or "seriousness"? I think Batman '89 had the right amount of "depth" to it for a huge summer block buster. There are a lot of nice, quiet somber scenes amongst the splosions and spectacle that get overlooked, mostly coming from Batman/Bruce himself. For the most part, I think all of the Batman films could be viewed as "popcorn movies" save for Returns and the Dark Knight. They both have some serious undertones going on.
I could definitely argue that TDKR is a pretty brainless popcorn flick after the first 50 mins (pretty much as soon as Batman shows up). The last half of the film is practically destruction porn. Even the dialogue is pretty babified and typical Hollywood.
No he doesn't whip out a credit card. And of course he's darker and more serious than Kilmer or Clooney. But there are plenty of scenes that tell the audience that it's practically a dark comedy. Keaton's Wayne in or out of the public is still a quirkball, very awkward and always really funny. With the exception of 1 or 2 scenes that he has with Alfred/Vale. Those are minimal.
He's awkward in two scenes, in the armory during the charity ball and to Vicki when he tries to tell him he's Batman, so it's not minimal. The rest of the Bruce/Batman stuff? I don't think there's any thing that goes to Kilmer or Clooney levels. Hell, as much as I love Bale, even his Bruce Wayne playboy goes to silly and funny places.
Keaton Bruce uncomfortable neurtoic rich guy act = Bale Bruce toothy grin, sarcastic/snarky act
As long as the audience understands that the "real" Bruce/Batman is the one Keaton and Bale portrays down in his cave or bunker, brooding, thawing/outwitting criminals, there should be no misinterpretation that the character is "silly".
You can say the same about the couple of scenes Kilmer's Bruce has with Dick/Chase.
Kilmer's Bruce isn't really goofy at all. Kilmer's Bruce personality is more comparable to Bale if anything. He has a lot of great speeches about pain and vengeance.
Keaton's Bruce? Pretty introverted. He's not nearly as "showy" as the other three. Most of the messages about the character are done in wordless scenes without any exposition like when Vicki is following Wayne to crime alley or "Childhood Remembered". Not a word is spoken but you get the character's pain.
The movie knows its genre, and doesn't try to hide from it. The thugs, the cops, they all act hammy and cartoony. Almost every word out of Knox's mouth is a one-liner or bad pick-up line, or a joke about bats. He's their attempt at a comic relief character. Nicholson's Joker is hysterical all the way through, in a very dark way at times. Like i said, the movie is a dark comedy.
Every Batman movie has this though? Crappy, themed "action thugs", incompetent/brainless cops, and baaaaaad one liners.
- Batman Returns has more sexual innuendos than any of the Batman films combined. All of the humor is geared towards adults, none of it is something a kid would understand. The citizens are obnoxiously stupid. Can't forget "eat floor, high fiber" or killer poodles.
- Forever is chalk full of hammy villains. Everything they say is comic relief and they just don't have the nads that Nicholson did to pull off "fun but sinister". Cringe worthy dialogue like, "black rubber", "chicks dig the car", etc.
- B&R has ice puns galore. Nothing the villains say is ever serious, not even when Freeze is lamenting over his wife. Every scene except the ones involving the "Alfred is sick" subplot is a literal joke, never taking itself seriously.
- Batman Begins has the worst acting cops . . . EVER. Nuff said. After Batman's introduction we get, "nice coat". Alfred provides the comic relief, Jim Gordon tries to get the kiddies to buy a Mattel Batmobile, etc. The last half is literally a cliched comic book movie.
- The Dark Knight is my favorite Batman film but, as good as it is it doesn't even get away with those sins. The mob is stereotypical, every cop/citizen that isn't a main character is a dolt, and who can forget about the poultry one liners from the "I DIDN'T SIGN UP FOR THIS" SWAT cop?
- TDKR has not so subtle anti-wealth dialogue that is exaggerated. We got annoying comedic relief cops saying "sorry". Dagget and Foley who are more like cliched caricatures than actual characters. Catwoman/Selina spewing one liner crap like "cat got your tongue" left and right (which I don't mind really, but does bother other people). Even Batman himself "gets" how absurd this whole thing is by sort of breaking the 4th wall when he gets a taste of his own medicine with the "so that's what that feels like line". Even things that are meant to be 100% serious like Batman and Bane come off as preposterous.
Still doesn't change each film's tone. I hate TDKR with a seething passion, but even with all of it's lameness I'd never try and claim it as having the same goals or tone as freakin' Batman and Robin, which is clearly meant to be a joke. Nolan and Co. were trying to make a serious movie with serious characters whereas Schumacher and Co. were making flashy, toy commercials.
Batman 1989 has none of those bad vibes, even if Robert Whul gets underneath someone's skin. What the filmmakers were going for in 1989 is the exact opposite of what was going on in 1995 and 1997. All 7 Batman films are on certain points of a wide spectrum.
t:
