Burton's Batman VS Nolan's Batman VS Schumacher's Batman

[TruerToTheCore]

I didn't claim that the Kelley Jones Penguin art was from before 1997. In fact I provided the 1997 date and both issue numbers. So again, I wasn't falsifying anything. I was simply pointing out that the Penguin has been depicted with a hunched back in the comic books. We were not arguing about strictly comic books before Batman Returns.

Still. It was Burton's idea. Not something from the comics like you wanted to pretend.

In your opinion. As usual, I disagree with you.

I'm with Batman's creator, on this one. t:

You are with Frank Miller and Denny O'Neil.

 

[theMan-Bat]

Still. It was Burton's idea. Not something from the comics like you wanted to pretend.

You claimed "that's your typical style, falsifying evidence" and "you wanted to pretend." You are accusing me of lieing and typically lieing when I have not. That's a vindictive personal insult. There are rules against that on the boards. I sighted this from the Golden Age (from Detective Comics #87 (1944) "The Man of a Thousand Umbrellas" with art by Dick Sprang, my scan is from a reprint of it in the Batman Encyclopedia written by Michael L. Fleisher published in 1976) and I pointed out that he's back looked hunched there.

I pointed out that some artists drew him a bit differently and his look would evolve a bit. Some artists made his nose longer than others as well. Different artists draw him in different ways. Artistic licence. Then I pointed out Kelley Jones art as another example of an artist drawing Penguin differently and with a hunched back (from Batman #548 (1997) "Burning Faces" and Batman #549 (1997) "The Egyptian Falcon").

I'm with Batman's creator, on this one. t:

You are with Frank Miller and Denny O'Neil.

Myself, Frank Miller and Denny O'Neil are with the Batman's creators original uncensored 1939 origin on this rather than the Joe Chill/Martha Wayne-never-shot recon story.

 

[NosfeRomas]

Tim Burton's Batman sucked, Nolan's Batman was awesome.

there i said it !

you are trying to find depth in something that has none and take depth away from something that has (too much depth for some people). Burton's Batman had nothing to do with the character other than looks and possible aesthetics. Jack's Joker is a lighter Jack Torrance with a bad taste in music cracking some smart jokes and some really out dated ones.

Burton hasn't read any comic book other than the killing joke he has said that himself and it also shows in Batman Returns. Catwoman was wrong, Penguin was a circus freak and Batman non important. If you imagine a regular detective in Batman Returns the movie is no different. Absurd plot, false characterisations, clausterphobic setting, awesome christmas tone. The movie is a mess but an enjoyable one. Same with Batman Forever which actually was the first movie to dig upon Bruce Wayne's backstory, inspiration and motive.

Batman 89 was not bad because it was very basic. Killing Joker is also another clue that..well...Burton had no clue of what he was doing. He was charmed by the paycheck and Batman's dark atmosphere. I don't blame him. He made an enjoyable movie that was a succes because that was the only thing people had back then. It was either this or Batman 66, movie wise anyway.

Trying to undermine Nolan's Batman is stupid because you really don't have anything to back it up, saying that you just don't like it would be acceptable and it would make sense. Why do you have to bring in hollow reasoning for something that is inarguably better than what you like.

I don't like Fables but that doesn't make Once Upon A Time is better.

 

[theMan-Bat]

Tim Burton's Batman sucked, Nolan's Batman was awesome.

there i said it !

There, you confused your opinion with fact.

you are trying to find depth in something that has none and take depth away from something that has (too much depth for some people). Burton's Batman had nothing to do with the character other than looks and possible aesthetics. Jack's Joker is a lighter Jack Torrance with a bad taste in music cracking some smart jokes and some really out dated ones.

That's a ridiculous bashing of the Burton films. You'd have to have very little knowledge of Batman history to believe that nonsense.

Burton hasn't read any comic book other than the killing joke he has said that himself and it also shows in Batman Returns.

Danny Elfman explained on the Batman DVD special feature Nocturnal Overtures: The Music of Batman that Tim Burton sent Danny Elfman the Frank Miller Batman: The Dark Knight comic books as influence. "After Beetlejuice I got a call from Tim saying 'I'm doing this thing you might be interested in it.' He sent me the Dark Knight comics and that was much more up my alley than what I had known of the original Batman comics as a kid."

Tim Burton said in the book Burton on Burton, "The success of those graphic novels made our ideas more acceptable."

Michael Keaton said on a Catwoman 2004 A&E Biography "Tim was really into the Frank Miller thing and knew it and understood it far more than I did. He had the look of it, the feel of it and the tone of it."

The original Bill Finger/Bob Kane run was also a big influence.

Producer Michael Uslan explained "I only let Tim see the original year of the Bob Kane/Bill Finger run, up until the time that Robin was introduced. I showed him the Steve Englehart/Marshall Rogers and the Neal Adams/Denny O'Neil stories. My biggest fear was that somehow Tim would get hold of the campiest Batman comics and then where would we be?"
http://www.batman-on-film.com/interview_muslan_2.html

Script writer Sam Hamm explained on the Batman DVD special feature Shadows of the Bat: The Cinematic Saga of the Dark Knight - Part 2: The Gathering Storm, "The idea that interested us most was to go back to the original Bob Kane notion, and we thought that that was the version that would give us the most on-tray into the story we wanted to tell. To go dark mysteriouso. Going back to the roots of the character. We're pairing away all the detours the character has taken over the years and trying to zero in on what this original concept was."

Sam Hamm also explained about the Bill Finger/Bob Kane influence in his interview in the 1989 Comics Interview Super-Special on Batman:

Catwoman was wrong, Penguin was a circus freak and Batman non important. If you imagine a regular detective in Batman Returns the movie is no different. Absurd plot, false characterisations, clausterphobic setting, awesome christmas tone. The movie is a mess but an enjoyable one. Same with Batman Forever which actually was the first movie to dig upon Bruce Wayne's backstory, inspiration and motive.

Catwoman's origin in Batman Returns also harks back to her original Bill Finger Golden Age origin in which she was introverted, then survived a crash, but suffered from amnesia. Thereafter she became Catwoman by releasing her formerly repressed inner-self, and all her inhibitions. The version of Catwoman's origin involving the crash (a death and resurrection motif) and amnesia has psychological depth. This origin suggests that Kyle had a dual personality, and that her amnesia released her dark side, leading her not only to turn criminal, but to heighten her sexuality.

Danny DeVito captured the Penguin's murderous nature, his anger at being an outcast that was rejected by society, his dark humor, even his bird obsession, also his conning personality pretending to be high class and respectable as a front for his villainous activities. The classic elements of Penguin's character was there and they added a ton that only enhanced him. Making him more complex and interesting than he was in the comics. After the Penguin was censored in the comics from being a killer he became a pushover, a joke. Just a fat little petty thief with bird themed crimes who was contently thrown in the Gotham Penitentiary at the end of every story. His nickname became "Pudgy."
As Bill Finger and Bob Kane created the Golden Age Penguin, he was freakiest with deadly umbrellas. A ruthless and scheming criminal who didn't hesitate to commit murder.

He was also a ruthless crime boss leading gangs.

The additional deformity was an expansion on the penguin motif which was present from creation with the beak-like nose and the waddle walk. Penguin always looked like a deformed man. Was called a "grotesque creature."

A grotesque creature. Tim Burton expanded on that.

Batman is far from being a regular detective in Batman Returns or non important.

Killing Joker is also another clue that..well...Burton had no clue of what he was doing.

Tim Burton explained in his Batman DVD commentary, "The thing is, with the Joker, not that he's like Freddy Kruger or Jason from the Friday the 13th, with the Joker there's always a way."

Jack Nicholson said, "I know how to bring him back to life. There (Warner Brothers) hung up on: I died in the first picture. Are they kidding?"

Tim Burton and Jack Nicholson are friends. Jack was even in Mars Attacks. Jack wanted to play Joker again. I'm sure if they let Tim keep on making Batman movies in the 90's then Jack's Joker would have returned.

Tim Burton loves the old monster movies. Watch Ed Wood with Martin Landau as Bela Lugosi. Look how many times Bela Lugosi returned as Dracula and Boris Karloff returned as Frankenstein after their death scenes in the first motion pictures of the old monster movies.

It looked like Joker was died many times in the comics. He's had many apparent death scenes. Joker always returned, since Batman #1 (1940), where he accidentally stabs himself during a fight with Batman and falls silent and lifeless on the ground. As an ambulance speeds the Joker's apparent corpse to the morgue, an attending physician is shocked "I just examined this man-he isn't dead. He's alive!"

Etc., etc.

 

[theMan-Bat]

Trying to undermine Nolan's Batman is stupid because you really don't have anything to back it up, saying that you just don't like it would be acceptable and it would make sense. Why do you have to bring in hollow reasoning for something that is inarguably better than what you like.

Trying to say Nolan's Batman is "inarguably" better as fact is ridiculous. In trying to make everything as grounded in our world as possible, Nolan reduces the characters, simplifying them, lacking their fantastical theatricality, presence. The Scarecrow was reduced to a guy in a suit with a potato sack on his head. Heath Ledger's Joker lacked the Joker's vanity, theatrically, sense of style with a hat, cane, etc., chemistry ability, he was just an anarchist killer in sloppy clown make up, not about killing with style. A Joker simply wearing sloppy clown make up and having poorly died long hair, looked more like the Crow than the traditional iconic Joker, without the chemically altered white skin and green hair. Without even the signature Joker venom that kills his victims with a smile.

It's of course in the movie by Tim Burton, titled Smilex.

As the Batman Encyclopedia by Micheal L. Fleisher explained:

Batman is self-reliant, a natural leader, the greatest detective, the strategist, decision maker, etc. Christian Bale's Batman is lacking in that, while Cain's Alfred and Freeman's Lucius Fox do a lot of the thinking for him. The suit, the utility belt, the Batmobile, the weapons all came from Fox rather than invented by Batman. Alfred comes up with the idea of ordering parts of the cowls from Singapore, via a dummy corporation and then separately place an order to a Chinese company for the ears for the cowl. Alfred says they'll have to be large orders, to avoid suspicion. 10,000. Batman looks shocked and dumbfounded and says "Well, at least we'll have sparse." Alfred figures out that there is a problem with the graphite in the mask. The next 10,000 will be up to specifications. Alfred explains to Batman that in the mean time he better avoid landing on his head. Even the Bruce Wayne playboy act was also Alfred's idea, as Alfred says, "Strange injuries, A none-existent social life. These things beg the question as to what exactly does Bruce Wayne do with his time and his money." Bruce asks, "What does someone like me do?" Alfred says, "Drive sports cars, date movie stars. Buy things that are not for sale. Who knows, you start pretending to have fun you might even have a little by accident." After Batman has been victim of Scarecrow's fear toxin, Fox says "I analyzed your blood, isolating the receptor compounds and the protein-based catalyst." Nolan's Batman replies dumbfounded, "Am I meant to understand any of that?" Fox says, "Not at all. I just wanted you to know how hard it was. Bottom line, I synthesized an antidote." Batman replies sheepishly, "Could you make more for me?" Fox states, "I'll bring what I have. The antidote should inoculate you for now." Batman asks, "How long would it take to manufacture on a large scale?" Fox says, "Weeks, why?" Batman says, "Somebody's planning to disperse the toxin in the water supply." Fox says, "A water supply won't help you disperse an inhalant. Unless you have a microwave emitter powerful enough to vaporize all the water in the mains. A microwave emitter like the one Wayne Enterprises just misplaced." So Fox was the one that figured out about the microwave emitter scheme, too. Etc., etc.

 

[regwec]

The lack of Joker-venom in TDK was a pity. There is nothing implausible about weaponised laughing gas. Perhaps it might have appeared in a sequel featuring The Joker.

 

[NosfeRomas]

You recycle the same points from previous answers. I'm not going to quote every single one of your statemets because i haven't got all day but i will touch upon a few.

There, you confused your opinion with fact.

Just a happy coincidence that my opinion is also a fact. Nolan's movies are better than Burton's both in story and direction as well as acting and character development, if you can't see their superiority then i recommend a good ophthalmologist. I'm neither a nolanite (such a stupid word) or a Burton hater (i love Ed Wood, Beetlejuice, Frankenweenie and to a certain extent Batman 89)

That's a ridiculous bashing of the Burton films. You'd have to have very little knowledge of Batman history to believe that nonsense.

That's half true, my age and my tight budget don't allow me full knowledge on Batman. But i have read a very good amount of books, old and new, ive researched the character, his creators, the most important people that have worked on it and nothing ive read so far screams Batman 89 and Batman Returns. Like i said, the aesthetics work and are fairly accurate to 70s Batman.

"The success of those graphic novels made our ideas more acceptable."

The succes. Not him reading them. Sam Hamm did, but not Tim Burton. The Killing Joke was the only comic book he read before doing Batman. In a Q&A Kevin Smith told a story on how he had a weird exchange of harsh words with Tim Burton over a comic book and Planet of the Apes and Tim's direct quote was "Anybody who knows me knows I would never read a comic book"


Also when i read The Dark Knight Returns techno-punk comes to mind as a musical backround not Danny Elfman's (superb) theme.

Not going to comment on the Catwoman-Penguin stuff. The Joker already did that, just re-read his comments.

It looked like Joker was died many times in the comics. Joker always returned, since Batman #1, where he accidentally stabs himself during a fight with Batman and falls silent and lifeless on the ground. As an ambulance speeds the Joker's apparent corpse to the morgue, an attending physician is shocked "I just examined this man-he isn't dead. He's alive!"

I watched him lying dead after falling from a fricken building. They showed him DEAD. They didn't make him to appear dead and later vanish into the night they SHOWED him dead. And in the Batman Triumphant movie he would appear as a hellucination. They killed Batman's greatest foe in the very first movie.

Trying to say Nolan's Batman is "inarguably" better as fact is ridiculous.

No it isn't.

In trying to make everything as grounded in our world as possible, Nolan reduces the characters, simplifying them, lacking their fantastical theatricality, presence.

The only simplified comic book character in the Nolan's films is John Blake's Robin and that's because he really isn't THE ROBIN he is thowback to what Robin represents. I found a lot of theatricality in the Trilogy, Ledger's performance, Batman's first appearance. The modern urban environment like Chicago makes my imagination run really wild as a foreigner. The scenes in GCPD's rooftop with Gordon and Batman or Gordon-Batman and Dent a la Long Halloween in my opinion were done in a very awesome theatrical way. Theatrical doesn't always mean flamboyant and steamy/gothic.

The Scarecrow was reduced to a guy in a suit with a potato sack on his head.

If you watched the movie you would see what the people saw in this potato sack when sprayed with his drug.

Heath Ledger's Joker lacked the Joker's vanity

No he didn't. that was shown when he put the revolver to Dent's hands, he knew he wasn't going to pull the trigger, he knew Batman would choose Rachel, he had an ace in the hole, Dent. He was always one step ahead of the cops and Batman that's why we never see him panic. The only moment when things go otherwise is when the boats don't blow up.

theatrically

Oh come on, Shirley, you can't be serious.

sense of style

Oh and by the way the suit it wasn't cheap. Do you know where Jack's joker got his suit ? it could have been a halloween store for all i know.

chemistry ability

yeah ok Ledger's joker didn't have a Master at chemistry, what's your point ? that every single version of the Joker has to use the toxin ?

he was just an anarchist killer in sloppy clown make up

JUST ? JUST an anarchist ? do you even know what anarchism is and what it does to a supposedly evolved society.

not about killing with style

Well he wasn't Piccaso but i liked it, the implied violence in this movie is so brutal that it puts most modern horror films to shame. It wasn't about killing with style and bleaching a pretty girl's face it was about anarchy, dissorder and mockey of the uncivilized-civilized society and its rules.

A Joker simply wearing sloppy clown make up and having poorly died long hair

that adds to his persona and his lack of origin and identity. He doesn't really care about himself as a person but he cares for his goal and goal alone.

looked more like the Crow than the traditional iconic Joker

You do know that they are probably 1 million different artist portrayls of the Joker right ? Its not like one guy drew the joker and everything has to be like that one drawing.

without the chemically altered white skin and green hair

Dude, you accepted Jack's Joker killing Bruce's parents and you won't accept a different approach to the character in a more grounded Batman, and by grounder i mean relatable and possible to happen if you ignore the very advanced technology.

Without even the signature Joker venom that kills his victims with a smile.

yeah he did that, with paint and a knife. What can i say, his parent's didn't have money to send him to a University, he is like me. He spends his nights killing people when scaring them up and painting them with white and red face paint. Not as smart but it gets the job done......wait for it......WITH STYLE !!!

 

[TruerToTheCore]

You claimed "that's your typical style, falsifying evidence" and "you wanted to pretend."

Well, I can actually proof this. In the past, for example, you posted that panel from a Bronze Age Superman story which showed a crying Clark Kent which you used as an argument against the portrayal of the Bronze Age and many people agreed with you. But you failed to state (despite that you knew it) that in this story Superman was controlled by some sort of alien force which made him act this way...

I sighted this from the Golden Age (from Detective Comics #87 (1944) "The Man of a Thousand Umbrellas" with art by Dick Sprang, my scan is from a reprint of it in the Batman Encyclopedia written by Michael L. Fleisher published in 1976) and I pointed out that he's back looked hunched there.

Fact is, the Penguin was never depicted as deformed or something like that. Unpleasant to look at, perhaps. But not deformed.

Myself, Frank Miller and Denny O'Neil are with the Batman's creators original uncensored 1939 origin on this rather than the Joe Chill/Martha Wayne-never-shot recon story.

Well, if you really want to be play purist here than Batman would not have any origin at all, since the original one was definitely an afterthought. Then Bill Finger created it. And years later he decided to solve the murder. So that's the most valid take on Batman's origin.

Frank Miller and Denny O'Neil did enough damage to Batman.

Did you like Robbins work on Batman? Haney's? Barr's? Moench's? Conway? Reed's? Or is it just Miller and O'Neil with you?

 

[Human Torch]

That was another thing that I hated about 89.The Joker's death.No wonder they wouldn't take Nicholson's desire to come back seriously.If they wanted to bring him back after an "apparent" death,they shouldn't have shown him as road kill.

And no matter how many time you bring up the poorly drawn Penguin art,the fact is they never turned him into a sewer dwelling mutant in the comics.That was all Burton.And frankly,that was all bad.

 

[theMan-Bat]

You recycle the same points from previous answers. I'm not going to quote every single one of your statemets because i haven't got all day but i will touch upon a few.

I'm repeating some points because your repeating things I'd previously responded to.

Just a happy coincidence that my opinion is also a fact. Nolan's movies are better than Burton's both in story and direction as well as acting and character development, if you can't see their superiority then i recommend a good ophthalmologist.

My recommendation is that you buy and read more Batman comic books. Starting with the Batman Chronicles volumes reprinting the Golden Age Batman stories. Buy the Batman Encyclopedia by Michael L. Fleisher with a wealth of information. It's the Batman bible. Buy the Batman Illustrated by Neal Adams volumes 2 and 3 which reprints the Denny O'Neil/Neal Adams run, Batman in the Seventies is a good book, buy Strange Apparitions reprinting the Steve Englehart/Marshall Rogers run.

That's half true, my age and my tight budget don't allow me full knowledge on Batman.

Just as I thought. Here, they have just about every comic: http://milehighcomics.com/
There's also a lot of affordable deals on the comics here: http://www.ebay.com/

The succes. Not him reading them. Sam Hamm did, but not Tim Burton. The Killing Joke was the only comic book he read before doing Batman.

Not according to Danny Elfman, Michael Keaton, Michael Uslan and Sam Hamm. Why would they lie? I'll take their words over yours.

In a Q&A Kevin Smith told a story on how he had a weird exchange of harsh words with Tim Burton over a comic book and Planet of the Apes and Tim's direct quote was "Anybody who knows me knows I would never read a comic book"

Just because Tim Burton doesn't read comic books now, doesn't mean he hadn't read Batman comic books when he was preparing for the Batman movies. Kevin Smith said his feud with Tim Burton was just an exaggerated joke. Kevin Smith jokingly accused Tim Burton of stealing the end of Tim Burton's Planet of the Apes from Kevin Smith's Chasing Dogma comic book and Tim Burton retorted by claiming that anyone who knows him knows that he never reads comic books, and would especially never read any by Kevin Smith. Kevin Smith says it was "just a joke". On the View Askew Web site, Smith writes, "Lest anyone think some sort of holy jihad is brewing betwixt me and the mighty Tim, I'd like to set the record straight here." After saying he enjoys Tim Burton's films "to varying degrees," he goes on to say, "No — I do not think the Planet of the Apes ending was stolen from [my comic book], nor am I thinking about taking anyone to court."
http://abcnews.go.com/Entertainment/story?id=103026&page=1

Also when i read The Dark Knight Returns techno-punk comes to mind as a musical backround not Danny Elfman's (superb) theme.

That doesn't change the fact that Danny Elfman said that Tim Burton sent him Frank Miller's Batman: The Dark Knight Returns.

Not going to comment on the Catwoman-Penguin stuff. The Joker already did that, just re-read his comments.

I already responded to all of his comments. You have no thoughts of your own?

I watched him lying dead after falling from a fricken building. They showed him DEAD. They didn't make him to appear dead and later vanish into the night they SHOWED him dead. And in the Batman Triumphant movie he would appear as a hellucination. They killed Batman's greatest foe in the very first movie.

Again, according to Tim Burton, " "The thing is, with the Joker, not that he's like Freddy Kruger or Jason from the Friday the 13th, with the Joker there's always a way."

And Jack Nicholson said, "I know how to bring him back to life. There (Warner Brothers) hung up on: I died in the first picture. Are they kidding?"

No it isn't.

Oh, yes it is.

The only simplified comic book character in the Nolan's films is John Blake's Robin

I just pointed out how other characters are simplified compared to their comic book counterparts.

If you watched the movie you would see what the people saw in this potato sack when sprayed with his drug.

The fear gas hallucinations were even reduced to little screen time.

No he didn't.

Yes he did. Alfred and Fox were the idea men too often.

yeah ok Ledger's joker didn't have a Master at chemistry, what's your point ? that every single version of the Joker has to use the toxin ?

It's like the Penguin without an umbrella. The Joker venom is the Joker's signature weapon. It should be included.

You do know that they are probably 1 million different artist portrayls of the Joker right ? Its not like one guy drew the joker and everything has to be like that one drawing.

There had been a certain constancy of the Joker's appearance through the majority of the comics in Joker's history.

Well, I can actually proof this. In the past, for example, you posted that panel from a Bronze Age Superman story which showed a crying Clark Kent which you used as an argument against the portrayal of the Bronze Age and many people agreed with you. But you failed to state (despite that you knew it) that in this story Superman was controlled by some sort of alien force which made him act this way...

I didn't have my own scanner back then so I was trying to find an example of seventies Clark Kent being bulled by Steve Lombard and that was the only example I could find online at the time. I wasn't lieing about anything.

Fact is, the Penguin was never depicted as deformed or something like that. Unpleasant to look at, perhaps. But not deformed.

I said the Penguin looked deformed with a big beak-like nose.

Well, if you really want to be play purist here than Batman would not have any origin at all, since the original one was definitely an afterthought. Then Bill Finger created it. And years later he decided to solve the murder. So that's the most valid take on Batman's origin.

The most valid is the original 1939 telling of Batman's origin in which both his parents are shot.

Frank Miller and Denny O'Neil did enough damage to Batman.

Frank Miller and Denny O'Neil returned Batman closer to the way Bill Finger and Bob Kane created Batman to be in 1939.

Did you like Robbins work on Batman? Haney's? Barr's? Moench's? Conway? Reed's? Or is it just Miller and O'Neil with you?

A lot of the Bob Haney Brave and the Bold stories are fun, the Frank Robbins Man-Bat stories, the Steve Englehart/Marshall Rogers run, a lot of the Gerry Conway run I'm a big fan of, some of Mike W. Barr's stories. I'm a big fan of the Doug Moench/Kelley Jones run as my Penguin scans should indicate.

That was another thing that I hated about 89.The Joker's death.No wonder they wouldn't take Nicholson's desire to come back seriously.If they wanted to bring him back after an "apparent" death,they shouldn't have shown him as road kill.

He was shown as road kill in Batman #1 (1940).

And no matter how many time you bring up the poorly drawn Penguin art,the fact is they never turned him into a sewer dwelling mutant in the comics.

Whether you like the comics art or not, it is Penguin art from the comics. In the comics Penguin had not specifically had a hideout in an abandoned Arctic World, which was part of an old Gotham World's Fair amusement park (Tim Burton explains this in his Batman Returns DVD commentary) with a little duck car ride that people road that traveled down to the Arctic World feature so they could see penguins, Penguin has always had a hideout in an abandoned place, with bird/penguin elements, and he's always looked deformed for decades with a beak-like nose.

 

[Senator Pleasury]

That was another thing that I hated about 89.The Joker's death.No wonder they wouldn't take Nicholson's desire to come back seriously.If they wanted to bring him back after an "apparent" death,they shouldn't have shown him as road kill.

And no matter how many time you bring up the poorly drawn Penguin art,the fact is they never turned him into a sewer dwelling mutant in the comics.That was all Burton.And frankly,that was all bad.

It's not like Nolan didn't kill Ra's al Ghul or Two Face after being Two Face for a few hours. But major damage was done to villain when Nolan decided to turn Scarecrow into a pitiful buffoon.

Penguin in BR was so much better than the average chubby guy with an umbrella I cannot even explain it, because where to start? As the Man-bat says, it is but a expansion of the original idea, this time to the point where it becomes interesting.

 

[Kevin Smith]

The lack of Joker-venom in TDK was a pity. There is nothing implausible about weaponised laughing gas. Perhaps it might have appeared in a sequel featuring The Joker.

This 100%.

 

[Shazam]

Tim Burton's Batman sucked, Nolan's Batman was awesome.

there i said it !

you are trying to find depth in something that has none and take depth away from something that has (too much depth for some people). Burton's Batman had nothing to do with the character other than looks and possible aesthetics. Jack's Joker is a lighter Jack Torrance with a bad taste in music cracking some smart jokes and some really out dated ones.

Burton hasn't read any comic book other than the killing joke he has said that himself and it also shows in Batman Returns. Catwoman was wrong, Penguin was a circus freak and Batman non important. If you imagine a regular detective in Batman Returns the movie is no different. Absurd plot, false characterisations, clausterphobic setting, awesome christmas tone. The movie is a mess but an enjoyable one. Same with Batman Forever which actually was the first movie to dig upon Bruce Wayne's backstory, inspiration and motive.

Batman 89 was not bad because it was very basic. Killing Joker is also another clue that..well...Burton had no clue of what he was doing. He was charmed by the paycheck and Batman's dark atmosphere. I don't blame him. He made an enjoyable movie that was a succes because that was the only thing people had back then. It was either this or Batman 66, movie wise anyway.

Trying to undermine Nolan's Batman is stupid because you really don't have anything to back it up, saying that you just don't like it would be acceptable and it would make sense. Why do you have to bring in hollow reasoning for something that is inarguably better than what you like.

I don't like Fables but that doesn't make Once Upon A Time is better.

Superb!

 

[Destructus86]

Burton's Batman was the best...Nolan's was pale shadow of the Batman of the comics. In fact, I would say Nolan's Batman wasn't even Batman. It was a guy dressed in a costume.
Nolan had it wrong...he made it seem that Bruce was the man and Batman was the mask...that's completely wrong and counter to the comic. Batman is who he is...Bruce is a mask.

 

[TruerToTheCore]

Frank Miller and Denny O'Neil returned Batman closer to the way Bill Finger and Bob Kane created Batman to be in 1939. [/IMG]

I do not have any problems with Denny O'Neil and his 70s stories.

Frank Miller's Batman doesn't really resemble Bill Finger's Batman.

 

[Doc Ock]

I loved Tim Burton's Batman to the core. Christopher Nolan's Batman was usually the least interesting part of each respective film. IMO off course but the villains usually outshines Bale's performance.

 

[Kevin Smith]

^^ Agreed.

 

[Thoix]

Burton has style, but Nolan had substance, and I take substance over style. That being said, both Keaton and Bale were Batman. Neither one of them were a pale-imitation of the character. That being said I do prefere Bale's because I enjoyed Bruce Wayne just as much as Batman in TDKT, where I really enjoyed Keaton's Bruce Wayne but he was certainly less interesting as Bale's.

So I say Nolan's Batman is the better of the two. Now we just need a movie that combines both style and substance without sacrificing the other.

 

[theMan-Bat]

Burton has style, but Nolan had substance, and I take substance over style.

Burton had included the fantastical substance and style like Joker's chemically altered skin and hair, Joker's deadly venom, etc. Nolan focused on an attempted "realistic" substance, lacking more fantastical comic book elements of substance and stylization.

I do not have any problems with Denny O'Neil and his 70s stories.

Frank Miller's Batman doesn't really resemble Bill Finger's Batman.

Frank Miller took Batman and Joker and the police and Gotham closer to Bill Finger and Bob Kane's original extreme dark version of them than Denny O'Neil had. Denny O'Neil and Neal Adams was restricted by the Comics Code Authority. Frank Miller brought Batman back to his dark roots further than anyone else had, more in line with the original vision of the character. Closer to the police-beating and bone-breaking brutal Bill Finger-Bob Kane original. The use of the bat emblem on his chest without the yellow moon. In the Golden Age this was the standard. Batman carrying and using guns in Dark Knight Returns, which hadn't been seen since 1940. Frank Miller brought back Robin's sling shot which had not been seen since 1940. The gadgets and bat vehicles which had been toned way down in the '70s. Batman originally was a terror striking creature of the night wanted by the police. Batman: The Dark Knight Returns and Batman: Year One were a return to that concept. Frank Miller clearly made Batman darker - far more brutal than he's been in decades - breaking bones, beating cops. If you actually look at the source material - the early stories written by Bill Finger and Gardner Fox - Batman's methods were brutal. He was extreme in his actions. Bill Finger also showed Batman with a sense of enjoy in brutally beating criminals, which Frank Miller bought back.

About Batman #251 (1973) "The Joker's Five-Way Revenge!", Denny O'Neil said, "I wondered if the Comics Code would let us get away with that many murders in a story, but again, you could never predict the Comics Code, but we didn't hear a peep from them. But there's no point in doing a maniacal clown who isn't maniacal. Then you've just got a clown. Big deal. And the Joker had started out, no matter who had created him; three people have claimed him (chuckle), but it was a great idea for a villain. I think in all of the trickster characters, in all of the literature of the world there is no better one than The Joker, but he had to be homicidal and insane for it to work as a story. So that's what we did. But at the time, 'Okay, you've got a homicidal maniac and he has to be the protagonist 12 times a year.' I was never satisfied with the work I did for Joker. Given the Comics Code there was just no way to make it work. He had to be Hannibal Lecter in order to be consistent and logical and be The Joker, and he couldn't be that back then. Now with the freedom comics guys have they could probably make it work."
http://www.wtv-zone.com/silverager/interviews/oneil_2.shtml

Gotham as a dark, dangerous and corrupt place with crime bosses, etc., goes back to Bill Finger and Bob Kane's early Batman stories. Denny O'Neil brought back some corruption in Gotham, and Denny O'Neil created Crime Alley in 1976, Steve Englehart created Boss Thorne in 1977. Frank Miller really popularized Gotham much more as a dark, dangerous and corrupt place with Batman: The Dark Knight Returns and Batman: Year One for contemporary audiences.

As Denny O'Neil said, in the documentary Heart of Vengeance: Returning Batman to His Roots, which is on the Batman: Year One DVD special edition and Blu-ray, "Neal, Julie Schwartz and I darkened the character and gave him some psychological realism, some psychological validity, and Frank (Miller) took Batman several shades darker."

Bronze Age Batman writer Len Wein said on the documentary, "When Denny O'Neil and Neal Adams took over the books they were actually looking for what made it work to begin with. The first thing you do when a book isn't working is - 'well, it worked for years, why?' And they sat down and they studied the original stories and went back to the creature of the night, they went back from being Batman - Mister Average Joe's pal, to The Batman - you don't want to be in the same room with him. Frank (Miller) took what Denny and Neal did and just expanded on it. He took it to it's extremes."

 

[Destructus86]

I loved Tim Burton's Batman to the core. Christopher Nolan's Batman was usually the least interesting part of each respective film. IMO off course but the villains usually outshines Bale's performance.

Maybe that's why Batman is barely in his movies It seemed like each film had less and less Batman.

 

[theMan-Bat]

Yet you post that with a happy face. Batman isn't barely in the movies. Batman's not speaking much and making big speeches and spouting one-liners because both Tim Burton and Micheal Keaton wanted to present Batman mysteriously, eerily silent, as Bill Finger and Bob Kane had conceived Batman.

Tim Burton said in the Batman DVD commentary, "We were doing something different from peoples perception of Batman, most people only knew the TV series, which was a complete opposite tone. I grew up on the TV show and I loved it. There was a fear with purists of the comics that given what I'd done before, my tendency would be to go do something like the TV series. But that was the furthest thing from my mind. I wasn't a huge comic book fan but I did love Batman, because of the Phantom of the Opera-like nature of it. I'd grown up watching horror films and also understood the psychology of the character. The hiding in the shadows. I knew right away that I wanted to be more pure to what the comic book was originally.

It was really important to us to get into the psychology of the Batman character. We tried to give him the profile that he wanted. It's a scary figure. It's Phantom-esque. 'Is it human? Is it not human?' Keeping that sort of mystery that the character wanted to create for himself. The reason why the guy dresses up like a bat is because he's trying to create a menacing persona for himself. He has to create this look with this costume to make himself scarier."

Batman Returns writer Daniel Waters said on the Batman Returns DVD special feature Batman: The Heroes - Batman, "He's the only actor I know who would go through my script that goes 'I should say less here, I should say less here.' I had so many angry Batman rant speeches and he's like, 'Batman would never say that. Batman should just say this line right here.'"

Tim Burton said on the Batman Returns DVD special feature Shadows of the Bat: The Cinematic Saga of the Dark Knight: Part 4 The Dark Side of the Knight, "I remember hearing, 'Oh, in the first movie the Joker stole the show and in the second movie Batman's hardly in it, it's all about Catwoman and Penguin.' I always felt those people were missing the point of the character of Batman. This guy wants to remain as hidden as possible, as in the shadows as possible, as unrevealing about himself as possible. So he's not gonna eat up screentime by making big speeches and dancing around the Batcave. I always felt he was in it the right amount and the right level of him."

 

[regwec]

Either a silent or a talkative Batman are acceptable. What isn't acceptable is a talkative Batman with a comedy voice.

 

[TruerToTheCore]

In Englehart's run it's clearly stated that tourists prefer visiting Gotham instead of New York because it's safer - because of Batman.

And Frank Miller's Batman is an Urban Swat Commando not a creature of the night.

 

[Kevin Smith]

Yet you post that with a happy face. Batman isn't barely in the movies. Batman's not speaking much and making big speeches and spouting one-liners because both Tim Burton and Micheal Keaton wanted to present Batman mysteriously, eerily silent, as Bill Finger and Bob Kane had conceived Batman.

Tim Burton said in the Batman DVD commentary, "We were doing something different from peoples perception of Batman, most people only knew the TV series, which was a complete opposite tone. I grew up on the TV show and I loved it. There was a fear with purists of the comics that given what I'd done before, my tendency would be to go do something like the TV series. But that was the furthest thing from my mind. I wasn't a huge comic book fan but I did love Batman, because of the Phantom of the Opera-like nature of it. I'd grown up watching horror films and also understood the psychology of the character. The hiding in the shadows. I knew right away that I wanted to be more pure to what the comic book was originally.

It was really important to us to get into the psychology of the Batman character. We tried to give him the profile that he wanted. It's a scary figure. It's Phantom-esque. 'Is it human? Is it not human?' Keeping that sort of mystery that the character wanted to create for himself. The reason why the guy dresses up like a bat is because he's trying to create a menacing persona for himself. He has to create this look with this costume to make himself scarier."

Batman Returns writer Daniel Waters said on the Batman Returns DVD special feature Batman: The Heroes - Batman, "He's the only actor I know who would go through my script that goes 'I should say less here, I should say less here.' I had so many angry Batman rant speeches and he's like, 'Batman would never say that. Batman should just say this line right here.'"

Tim Burton said on the Batman Returns DVD special feature Shadows of the Bat: The Cinematic Saga of the Dark Knight: Part 4 The Dark Side of the Knight, "I remember hearing, 'Oh, in the first movie the Joker stole the show and in the second movie Batman's hardly in it, it's all about Catwoman and Penguin.' I always felt those people were missing the point of the character of Batman. This guy wants to remain as hidden as possible, as in the shadows as possible, as unrevealing about himself as possible. So he's not gonna eat up screentime by making big speeches and dancing around the Batcave. I always felt he was in it the right amount and the right level of him."

This is Batman to me. He's not making grandiose speeches about the nature of criminals and philosophizing, saying things that sound like discussions people would have about the character rather than something the characters themselves would say.

 

[Bigjxxx]

This is Batman to me. He's not making grandiose speeches about the nature of criminals and philosophizing, saying things that sound like discussions people would have about the character rather than something the characters themselves would say.

Kevin Smith what you just said is what was right about Burton'Batman. Nolan's was more speech and preaching then detective skills or fighting crinimals. Nolan's dry humor if you can call that made it worse. The problem with modern Batman fans is many of them are bought up on the post Batman Year One. They are completely ignorant on Bob Kane Bill Finger Batman of the late 1930's. If you showed them a Batman from Detective 27 to Batman Last pre-1969 solo adventure against Hugo Strange' monsters Batman#1, they would claimed that's not the real Batman. This is why I love the golden age Batman and even the golden age Superman. They were hard characters that was gutsy but now they are too soft and too dramatic for my taste.