Comparing the Original Superman Film Series to the Original Batman Film Series

[The Joker]

How is Batman in Batman Forever not the ideal Batman? He is essentially the Bat-god of the comics right from the start with all the trimmings.

He's also the smartest and most clever of all the Batmans.

What is Bat-God about him? What makes him more Bat-God and more smart than say Clooney's Batman?

In BF he is conned into giving away his secret identity at Nygma's party. His Batcave is infiltrated by both a teenage Dick Grayson and the Riddler. The Batobile is apparently as easy to boost as any car as Dick goes and takes it for a joyride. His Batcave security exists of nothing but a voice saying intruder alert on a loop. His crime fighting career is effectively destroyed as Two Face's men and his two hench molls, none of whom die, all learned his identity, too, but they just ignored that fact and acted like Riddler is the only one left who knows it and is written off as insane. Alfred helps him solve most of the riddles etc.

Furthermore the way he played the character was utterly vapid. All he did throughout entire movie was looking startled and moping around on Valium. Its actually what he and Schumacher DID with the character that bothered me most. The other Batmen showed emotion, anger when they were Batman.

Batman is a character who gets emotionally expressive like that;

NONE of that with Kilmer. You'd never see Kilmer's Batman being really angry, evil or frustrated. He is completely stoic all the time and seems like hes overdoing on Valium. He never does any of those different expression. he never looses temper. Even in the climax he is as calm as calm can be and speaking softly and half asleep. He either looks like he's half a sleep or startled.

Not to mention such idiotic things as Batman landing like a superhero with floating cape to-the-rescue type in the middle of the crowd and talking to police in all those colorful lights in front of the bank Two Face is robbing.

These are just some of the reasons why he is one of the least favorite versions of Batman.

That image you posted has so much color though. If you strip the panel of that color and try to go for a more realistic vibe, it's a lot less interesting to look at.

A Batman movie should be visually interesting.

That's a totally different argument. The argument I was addressing was that Gotham looks like an ordinary city in the comics, like that panel, which is the spitting image of New York. Having yellow cabs and a couple of red and yellow buildings doesn't make it look like anything other than an ordinary American city. As for visually interesting.....it looks like a New York street. If that is visually interesting to you, then ok what ever floats your boat.

But if you want to change the argument stance with the color, then I can counter that, too;

Plain ordinary non colorful looking Gotham.

 

[Spiderine]

So stupid that we never got a Reeve era Brainiac. SUCH a waste. Mxyzptlk would've worked so well in that universe too.

Superman was riding high after part 2. They royally ****ed up part 3 when they included the hyjinks of Richard Pryor. Brainiac during that era with the tone from the first two film would have been awesome if they took it seriously.

 

[Rorschach2012]

Everyone loves Richard Pryor but I was not a fan of his role in III, it was too goofy.

The supercomputer was soooo close to being Brainiac, so frustrating! So baffling that Brainiac hasn't been one the big screen yet

 

[Milk Tray Guy]

Superman was riding high after part 2. They royally ****ed up part 3 when they included the hyjinks of Richard Pryor. Brainiac during that era with the tone from the first two film would have been awesome if they took it seriously.

I've always loved Richard Prior (especially his stuff with Gene Wilder) but yes he was badly out of place here.

 

[STARMAN]

Superman III was the beginning of messing-up Superman on the big screen.

 

[The Batman]

How is Batman in Batman Forever not the ideal Batman? He is essentially the Bat-god of the comics right from the start with all the trimmings.

He's also the smartest and most clever of all the Batmans.

I'm sorry, but I don't see how he's the ideal Batman.

At best he's middle of the road Batman. He's not exceptional in the way Bat-God is. Kilmer doesn't do anything interesting with the part.

And if we're talking about the smartest Live Action Batman, that title goes to Adam West. Adam West said he used Sherlock Holmes as an inspiration for his performance, and it shows.

 

[titansupes]

All that was lacking is for the villain costumes to be neon lit in those movies.

How could you leave out--

 

[dax]

What is Bat-God about him? What makes him more Bat-God and more smart than say Clooney's Batman?

In BF he is conned into giving away his secret identity at Nygma's party. His Batcave is infiltrated by both a teenage Dick Grayson and the Riddler. The Batobile is apparently as easy to boost as any car as Dick goes and takes it for a joyride. His Batcave security exists of nothing but a voice saying intruder alert on a loop. His crime fighting career is effectively destroyed as Two Face's men and his two hench molls, none of whom die, all learned his identity, too, but they just ignored that fact and acted like Riddler is the only one left who knows it and is written off as insane. Alfred helps him solve most of the riddles etc.

Furthermore the way he played the character was utterly vapid. All he did throughout entire movie was looking startled and moping around on Valium. Its actually what he and Schumacher DID with the character that bothered me most. The other Batmen showed emotion, anger when they were Batman.

Batman is a character who gets emotionally expressive like that;

NONE of that with Kilmer. You'd never see Kilmer's Batman being really angry, evil or frustrated. He is completely stoic all the time and seems like hes overdoing on Valium. He never does any of those different expression. he never looses temper. Even in the climax he is as calm as calm can be and speaking softly and half asleep. He either looks like he's half a sleep or startled.

Actually, we do see Kilmer's Batman being angry towards Dick Grayson even after he pulled him out of the demolished subway (courtesy of Two-Face). Then, he had his "evil" moment at the end of the movie as he's leaning towards a brain-fried Riddler causing him to scream like a girl and finally, Kilmer's moment of frustration came in a deleted scene when he finds the red book in the batcave and starts blaming himself for his parents' murders.

 

[wnjcwjkk]

Batman Forever is one of my all time favorite superhero movies, flaws and all. And Batman & Robin also has a number of redeeming qualities IMO, though I'm a minority in this.

Superman III and IV would be unwatchable without Reeve. Horrible writing and weak visuals.

Superman The Movie vs Batman
Winner: Batman
This is so tough, but I'm gonna go with Batman because of STM's time traveling and Hackman's campy Lex. Keaton and Nicholson absolutely killed it as Batman and Joker, and the visual style of Gotham is so perfect, it's the comics come to life.
Superman II vs Batman Returns
Winner: Batman Returns for me.
Burton was on fire for this one. DeVito and Pfeiffer turned in a couple of iconic performances that I don't think can be topped. General Zod was also very iconic, but I just think Batman Returns has the tighter, more engaging story.
Superman III vs Batman Forever
Winner: Batman Forever
I absolutely love Carrey's Riddler, and it's awesome seeing Robin's origin onscreen. Kilmer made a solid Batman as well. Superman III is only good because of the Smallville stuff and Reeve. They should've stuck with their original outline for this movie which featured Supergirl and Brainiac.
Superman IV vs Batman & Robin
Winner: Batman & Robin
I've never been able to finish IV, but B&R is a fun, campy movie despite being the worst in the series.

1. Batman, for the reasons you posted, and it had an early influence on me, between that and Dick Tracy, then later B:TAS and the old black and white Dick Tracy serials, I think they greatly contributed to my love for noir films, detective stories, gangster movies


2. Superman II

3. Batman Forever

4. Honestly can't say, but I was old enough by the time B&R came out to think it was terrible, and I loved Superman IV as a little kid, so I'll give it the win.




I absolutely love both film series, excluding B&R, because I grew up on them, going back to before I have memories, I would watch them all obsessively, on a daily basis, and they were the catalyst for my love for the characters (along with the George Reeves series, Batman '66, the Fleischer Superman cartoons, and later B:TAS). I learned to read because I was so into comics and superheroes, since I was probably about 3 years old.


So, those movies will always have a sentimental soft spot for me. But they aren't exactly the kind of movies I'd enjoy as an adult, except for some elements of Batman and Superman.

 

[wnjcwjkk]

Batman Forever is one of my all time favorite superhero movies, flaws and all. And Batman & Robin also has a number of redeeming qualities IMO, though I'm a minority in this.

Superman III and IV would be unwatchable without Reeve. Horrible writing and weak visuals.

Superman The Movie vs Batman
Winner: Batman
This is so tough, but I'm gonna go with Batman because of STM's time traveling and Hackman's campy Lex. Keaton and Nicholson absolutely killed it as Batman and Joker, and the visual style of Gotham is so perfect, it's the comics come to life.
Superman II vs Batman Returns
Winner: Batman Returns for me.
Burton was on fire for this one. DeVito and Pfeiffer turned in a couple of iconic performances that I don't think can be topped. General Zod was also very iconic, but I just think Batman Returns has the tighter, more engaging story.
Superman III vs Batman Forever
Winner: Batman Forever
I absolutely love Carrey's Riddler, and it's awesome seeing Robin's origin onscreen. Kilmer made a solid Batman as well. Superman III is only good because of the Smallville stuff and Reeve. They should've stuck with their original outline for this movie which featured Supergirl and Brainiac.
Superman IV vs Batman & Robin
Winner: Batman & Robin
I've never been able to finish IV, but B&R is a fun, campy movie despite being the worst in the series.

1. Batman, for the reasons you posted, and it had an early influence on me, between that and Dick Tracy, then later B:TAS and the old black and white Dick Tracy serials, I think they greatly contributed to my love for noir films, detective stories, gangster movies


2. Superman II

3. Batman Forever

4. Honestly can't say, but I was old enough by the time B&R came out to think it was terrible, and I loved Superman IV as a little kid, so I'll give it the win.




I absolutely love both film series, excluding B&R, because I grew up on them, going back to before I have memories, I would watch them all obsessively, on a daily basis, and they were the catalyst for my love for the characters (along with the George Reeves series, Batman '66, the Fleischer Superman cartoons, and later B:TAS). I learned to read because I was so into comics and superheroes, since I was probably about 3 years old.


So, those movies will always have a sentimental soft spot for me. But they aren't exactly the kind of movies I'd enjoy as an adult, except for some elements of Batman and Superman.

 

[The Joker]

Actually, we do see Kilmer's Batman being angry towards Dick Grayson even after he pulled him out of the demolished subway (courtesy of Two-Face).

Two things;

1. He was Bruce Wayne in that scene, not Batman.
2. You call raising his voice saying "What the hell did you think you were doing?" as him being angry like in those panels, pics, and clips above? Look at this pic:

You'd never know he was angry here. He looks like someone asked him a confusing question.

Then, he had his "evil" moment at the end of the movie as he's leaning towards a brain-fried Riddler causing him to scream like a girl and finally

How is this an evil moment? He wasn't leaning towards him, he just stood there monologuing why he is Batman, and then just walks towards him presumably to take him into custody. There was nothing evil or menacing about him in this scene. It's not his fault Riddler turned into a brain fried basket case who screams for no reason.

Kilmer's moment of frustration came in a deleted scene when he finds the red book in the batcave and starts blaming himself for his parents' murders.

Deleted scene. Doesn't count.

 

[dax]

Two things;

1. He was Bruce Wayne in that scene, not Batman.
2. You call raising his voice saying "What the hell did you think you were doing?" as him being angry like in those panels, pics, and clips above? Look at this pic:

You'd never know he was angry here. He looks like someone asked him a confusing question.

1. They're still the same person.
2. Just because Bruce didn't show any anger on his face, it doesn't mean he wasn't angry. Besides, you left out the part where after Dick kept babbling about watching over Batman every step of the way, Bruce stands up and says he's going to stop him in a threatening manner. Another thing, we do see Batman looking angry at Dick as he was pulling him out of the rubble.

How is this an evil moment? He wasn't leaning towards him, he just stood there monologuing why he is Batman, and then just walks towards him presumably to take him into custody. There was nothing evil or menacing about him in this scene. It's not his fault Riddler turned into a brain fried basket case who screams for no reason.

That scene gave no indication that Batman was going to take Riddler into custody, especially after he caused Two-Face to fall to his death. In fact, given Batman's reputation with the criminals in the Burton films, Riddler had good reason to scream in horror.

Deleted scene. Doesn't count.

It does if it's written in the graphic novel.

 

[The Joker]

1. They're still the same person.

Different personas, e.g. we don't count Bruce Wayne at a board meeting as a Batman scene do we? When people talk Batman scenes, they mean Batman, as in cape and cowl, and in Batman persona.

2. Just because Bruce didn't show any anger on his face, it doesn't mean he wasn't angry. Besides, you left out the part where after Dick kept babbling about watching over Batman every step of the way, Bruce stands up and says he's going to stop him in a threatening manner.

I don't care if he was feeling angry inside. It's what the character physically expresses emotionally that we're talking about here, not what feelings they decide to bottle up and not express. The other Batmen all expressed their anger. Even Batfleck, who I am no fan of at all, was a lot more emotionally expressive.

If you think standing up and saying in a calm voice "I can stop you" is an angry Batman scene, then you haven't seen any real angry Batman scenes. This is angry expressive Batman;

[YT]DAaNIkP_DHU[/YT]

[YT]-AHa6VI5Uvw[/YT]

Another thing, we do see Batman looking angry at Dick as he was pulling him out of the rubble.

No, we don't;

He looks half dazed, not angry.

That scene gave no indication that Batman was going to take Riddler into custody

Yeah, because just walking towards someone after making a non threatening monologue is a total indication you're going to hurt or kill them. The fact Riddler ended up in custody in the next scene was a huge shock to the audience. All the reviews were talking about it.

especially after he caused Two-Face to fall to his death.

He did that to stop Two Face from shooting them. Riddler was no threat here. So why would anyone think he was going to kill him?

In fact, given Batman's reputation with the criminals in the Burton films, Riddler had good reason to scream in horror.

Why would you think Burton's movies have any bearing on his reaction here? Did the villains ever make a single reference to his murderous rep from Burton's movies in BF?

It does if it's written in the graphic novel.

No, it doesn't. Graphic novels, novelizations of the movies, deleted scenes......none of them count. The only things that count are those that made it to the final cut of the movie. Period.

 

[Spider-Aziz]

No, we don't;

Spoiler

He looks half dazed, not angry.

The helmet looks angry.

 

[OutOfBoose]

I never quite understood when there's Batman and when it's Bruce Wayne. Sometimes it feels like it's similar to Superman - Batman is the real persona (even without the suit), and prince of Gotham is there to decieve people.

 

[Loki882]

As a HUGE life-long Batman fan, it pains me to say this. But Superman wins. Superman TMP and Superman II both put it over the top. They're both brilliant, whereas with Batman:

-Batman 89-Decent and enjoyable, but not great. And I feel like it's impact on pop culture far outshines it's quality as an actual film. It's not bad, but it is quite overrated amongst some imo.

-Batman Returns-All of 89's flaws, with few of it's positive qualities. I really don't like this film. And in neither film did Burton seem to understand or be interested in exploring the character of Batman/Bruce Wayne.

-Batman Forever-Flawed, but better than the Burton films at least.

-THAT MOVIE-A cinematic kick to the junk.

So Superman has greater cinematic highs, and both have really low cinematic lows.

 

[Skrilla31]

Actually, we do see Kilmer's Batman being angry towards Dick Grayson even after he pulled him out of the demolished subway (courtesy of Two-Face). Then, he had his "evil" moment at the end of the movie as he's leaning towards a brain-fried Riddler causing him to scream like a girl and finally, Kilmer's moment of frustration came in a deleted scene when he finds the red book in the batcave and starts blaming himself for his parents' murders.

Exactly.

Also how is Kilmer's Batman less emotionally expressive? Because he's not as angry all the time? What about all the other emotions? At least Kilmer had a pulse!

I feel like Schumacher's Batman had the most swag! As both Batman AND Bruce Wayne!

 

[Spider-Aziz]

Also how is Kilmer's Batman less emotionally expressive? Because he's not as angry all the time? What about all the other emotions? At least Kilmer had a pulse!

Circus scene aside, his facial expression was mostly static.

 

[spiderman2]

I am very surprised that batman is winning this but maybe just because it is batman. I have never been a big superman fan love batman but yet I never really cared for batman in till BB and superman 1 and 2 on the other hand I think are both really good for there time.

 

[Loki882]

Batman Begins is the first film to actually, you know, be about Batman and his character/psychology first and foremost. Forever tried a little bit (more than the Burton films did anyway), but with mixed results.

 

[StarLord]

I enjoy Batman Returns and Batman Forever out of that bunch the most, so Batman for me.

 

[Erzengel]

Superman. The first 2, I feel is better than the first 2 Burton movies.

 

[Longshot777]

Just rewatched Superman 79 and Batman 89 with Batman Returns.

Batman Returns aged pretty bad while Superman 79 and Batman 89 are still classics.

Batman Returns has so many fillers and did not like how a secretary became an accomplished acrobat as Catwoman by a fall from a building.

Also Penguin framed Batman For killing female host but was not addressed later in the film that he really did not kill her to the public.

I'm going to rewatched Superman 2 later this month to see how that aged.

But between the 2 classic films, I'll take Superman the Movie over Batman 89.

Just a quick question, when Superman turned back time, then shouldn't the earthquake would have happened again???? But yet after rewinding everything then putting play back on life, the earthquake mysteriously disappeared????

Also off topic, people was criticizing Superman Returns on how Superman didn't once threw a punch BUt in Superman 79, Supes didn't throw a punch either. But Superman 79 is definitely 100 times better than Superman Returns. Just saying.

 

[dax]

Different personas, e.g. we don't count Bruce Wayne at a board meeting as a Batman scene do we? When people talk Batman scenes, they mean Batman, as in cape and cowl, and in Batman persona.

"I'm both Bruce Wayne and Batman. Not because I have to be, because I choose to be."

Even he acknowledges that they're both the same person. He even does this in the animated series when he's talking to Alfred about how the Ninja figured out that Bruce and Batman are the same person based on their fighting styles which are like fingerprints.

I don't care if he was feeling angry inside. It's what the character physically expresses emotionally that we're talking about here, not what feelings they decide to bottle up and not express. The other Batmen all expressed their anger. Even Batfleck, who I am no fan of at all, was a lot more emotionally expressive.

If you think standing up and saying in a calm voice "I can stop you" is an angry Batman scene, then you haven't seen any real angry Batman scenes. This is angry expressive Batman;

[YT]DAaNIkP_DHU[/YT]

[YT]-AHa6VI5Uvw[/YT]

I have seen Batman express his anger in various media and for your information, Michael Keaton's Batman wasn't really angry in that photo you've posted. Even with the cowl on, he was showing more of a look of determination as he was tossing the 2 clowns off his Batmobile. You don't have to scream or shout to let someone know you're angry because even a soft, gentle voice can get that point across. Hell, Darth Vader lets people know he's angry without even saying a word.

No, we don't;

He looks half dazed, not angry.

What about after Dick says "hi" to him? He definitely looked angry right there.

Yeah, because just walking towards someone after making a non threatening monologue is a total indication you're going to hurt or kill them. The fact Riddler ended up in custody in the next scene was a huge shock to the audience. All the reviews were talking about it.

A single gesture could make anyone think you're going to hurt or kill them. Again, ask Vader.

He did that to stop Two Face from shooting them. Riddler was no threat here. So why would anyone think he was going to kill him?

Penguin wasn't a threat either but that didn't stop Batman from unleashing a group of bats at him which caused Penguin to fall 100 feet down into the water. Batman then knocked Catwoman off a building and she was lucky that a truck full of kitty litter cushioned her fall and on top of that, he tied Joker's foot to a gargoyle knowing that it would come loose causing Joker to fall to his death. Let's not forget that Batman threw the black henchman down the Cathedral tower, set the Flamethrower on fire, and planted a bomb on the Strongman's chest. With that body count, how could anyone NOT think Batman was going to kill Riddler?

Why would you think Burton's movies have any bearing on his reaction here? Did the villains ever make a single reference to his murderous rep from Burton's movies in BF?

Why don't you ask the army of neon thugs who all ran away from 1 guy in a batsuit? Their reaction alone is enough to reference his murderous rep and Riddler, even in his condition, is aware that Batman killed Two-Face so again, he had good reason to scream in horror.

No, it doesn't. Graphic novels, novelizations of the movies, deleted scenes......none of them count. The only things that count are those that made it to the final cut of the movie. Period.

Tell that to the director.

 

[The Joker]

"I'm both Bruce Wayne and Batman. Not because I have to be, because I choose to be."

Even he acknowledges that they're both the same person. He even does this in the animated series when he's talking to Alfred about how the Ninja figured out that Bruce and Batman are the same person based on their fighting styles which are like fingerprints.

OBVIOUSLY he's the same person. Peter Parker is both Peter and Spidey, too. Putting on a mask doesn't mind swap you into a different person's body. This was not an earth shattering revelation. But Batman scenes and Bruce Wayne scenes are apples and oranges. It's not a Batman scene unless he's wearing the costume and being Batman. Or do you count scenes like Bruce Wayne sitting at a board meeting as a Batman scene?

I have seen Batman express his anger in various media and for your information, Michael Keaton's Batman wasn't really angry in that photo you've posted. Even with the cowl on, he was showing more of a look of determination as he was tossing the 2 clowns off his Batmobile. You don't have to scream or shout to let someone know you're angry because even a soft, gentle voice can get that point across.

That's exactly the look of anger, since he sends those two clowns flying into a burning store. That's what you're not getting. You can see the other Batmen express anger visibly on their faces, whether it's silent anger or visibly showing it in a rage. They express through acting. Kilmer's Batman always had a stoic vapid emotionless look on his face. Like he was on Valium all the time.

Hell, Darth Vader lets people know he's angry without even saying a word.

He has to. His mask hides all his facial emotions.

What about after Dick says "hi" to him? He definitely looked angry right there.

That is after Dick says hi to him. His facial expression never changed.

A single gesture could make anyone think you're going to hurt or kill them. Again, ask Vader.

Could you be more vague. That's like saying a simple look can make someone think you're going to hurt or kill them. It depends entirely on the look, or in this case the gesture. When I reach for the salt on the dinner table nobody is thinking I'm reaching out to hurt them.

There was nothing in Batman's gesture that suggested he was going to hurt or kill Nygma.

Penguin wasn't a threat either but that didn't stop Batman from unleashing a group of bats at him which caused Penguin to fall 100 feet down into the water. Batman then knocked Catwoman off a building and she was lucky that a truck full of kitty litter cushioned her fall and on top of that, he tied Joker's foot to a gargoyle knowing that it would come loose causing Joker to fall to his death. Let's not forget that Batman threw the black henchman down the Cathedral tower, set the Flamethrower on fire, and planted a bomb on the Strongman's chest. With that body count, how could anyone NOT think Batman was going to kill Riddler?

Batman didn't unleash squat on Penguin. Penguin pressed the button and unleashed it on himself. He also unleashed the rockets in an attempt to kill Batman. He didn't count on the bats being released, too. In what scenario here is Penguin not a threat when he's holding a detonator that unleashed dozens of rockets?

You mean after Catwoman stabbed him in the stomach with her claws?

You mean the henchman that was beating seven shades of crap out of him, and threw him down the bell tower trying to kill him?

You mean the strongman who was immune to Batman's punches?

Have you got an example of a incidence where Batman wasn't being directly threatened? Then you can compare it to a brain melted defeated Nygma lying helpless on the floor.

Why don't you ask the army of neon thugs who all ran away from 1 guy in a batsuit? Their reaction alone is enough to reference his murderous rep and Riddler, even in his condition, is aware that Batman killed Two-Face so again, he had good reason to scream in horror.

Batman had a rep for killing from the get-go in Batman '89 when you heard the two muggers discussing him supposedly killing someone called Johnny Gobbs. He then "dropped" Jack Napier into a vat of chemicals. He blew up a bunch of Joker's men in Axis Chemicals, more at the parade, and then in the church tower.

Did this fearsome killing rep make the Red Triangle gang run in fear from him when they saw him in the sequel? No. Same as why Two Face's men didn't go running when they saw him. They were being paid by the villain to do what they were doing.

That neon gang that ran away at the sight of Batman were gutless street thugs with no incentive to try and take him on. The whole point of the image of Batman is to strike terror into the heart's of criminals.

Not a rep for being a killer. That's The Punisher's schtick.

Tell that to the director.

Sure, next time I'm having tea with Schumacher I'll be sure to pull him up on that.