List of Things Batman Returns got Right/Wrong

Does he record Shreck too later? Or no?

No. As far as the movie showed, he had nothing on Schreck. The only plausible explanation to the jail line is what PonyBoy suggested; he said that to try and get Selina to back down from killing Schreck.
 
No. As far as the movie showed, he had nothing on Schreck. The only plausible explanation to the jail line is what PonyBoy suggested; he said that to try and get Selina to back down from killing Schreck.

Not bad either.

Whether or not the line definitively made sense in the full scheme of the movie, I thought Keaton's delivery of it kicked a lot of ass. :up:
 
I still have a problem with the idea of Penguin somehow getting the blueprints of the Batmobile. I just don't buy it. Batman has always been mindful of his security (read: extremely paranoid) and protecting his secret ID. Leaving blueprints of the Batmobile around for his enemies to so easily steal is just wholly unbelievable to me. About the onlly place there would be any bleuprints left that hadn't been destroyed already would be in the Bat-cave.
And also how the Circus Gang became such tech wizards in bypassing the Batmobile protective shield and installing the bomb.

Speaking of which the gang seemed to be intricately going into the Batmobiles internal instruments in sabotaging it but all it took was Batman punching through the car floor and removing the barber shop spinning looking bomb. :whatever:
 
The only plausible explanation given was by PonyBoy.

Hey, I did something almost right for once! :awesome: I won't let it go to my head.

No wait. Too late.

10542d1351608673-game-servers-down-tumblr_lk31ovuwzz1qep2ygo1_500.gif
 
Batman Reterns had the best Bat-Suit and Batmobile in live action.
 
And also how the Circus Gang became such tech wizards in bypassing the Batmobile protective shield and installing the bomb.

Speaking of which the gang seemed to be intricately going into the Batmobiles internal instruments in sabotaging it but all it took was Batman punching through the car floor and removing the barber shop spinning looking bomb. :whatever:

Especially considering that the underside of the Batmobile's chassis was supposed to be heavily armored (i.e. Bomb-proof).
 
The army of penguins was pretty left field. Otherwise this is my favorite of the old Batman anthology. Its not really something that the film got wrong...but Killer Croc would've fit right in with Penguin's gang.
 
The army of penguins was pretty left field. Otherwise this is my favorite of the old Batman anthology. Its not really something that the film got wrong...but Killer Croc would've fit right in with Penguin's gang.

Modern day Killer Croc. Not 80s Croc.
 
In the fight with Catwoman, when Bats knocked Catwoman down, and she exclaimed "How could you! I'm a woman!" and he went to apologetically help her up, and she copped a sneak shot at him, I found that to be way out of character for Batman, he's much too smart a fighter to fall for such an obvious ploy (the equivalent of "Hey! Look out behind you!"). I don't care if she is indeed a woman, and generally speaking, Batman may indeed be a "Gentleman" in a non-combat situation, in the middle of an all out fight, his opponent's gender is not going to matter to him one little bit.
 
Especially considering that the underside of the Batmobile's chassis was supposed to be heavily armored (i.e. Bomb-proof).

Was it? I thought the Burton Batmobile was generally bulletproof, but the 'shields' he activated made it everythingelseproof.

Don't recall anything specific about the underside.
 
In the fight with Catwoman, when Bats knocked Catwoman down, and she exclaimed "How could you! I'm a woman!" and he went to apologetically help her up, and she copped a sneak shot at him, I found that to be way out of character for Batman, he's much too smart a fighter to fall for such an obvious ploy (the equivalent of "Hey! Look out behind you!"). I don't care if she is indeed a woman, and generally speaking, Batman may indeed be a "Gentleman" in a non-combat situation, in the middle of an all out fight, his opponent's gender is not going to matter to him one little bit.

Well, violence against women is probably not something that Batman cares too much for. In the heat of the moment he may have been shocked by the fact that he hit her (not something he would normally do)... and maybe he thought she was attacking him because she felt threatened by him. I don't think Catwoman was clearly a "villain" yet to him at that point in the film.
 
Well, violence against women is probably not something that Batman cares too much for. In the heat of the moment he may have been shocked by the fact that he hit her (not something he would normally do)... and maybe he thought she was attacking him because she felt threatened by him. I don't think Catwoman was clearly a "villain" yet to him at that point in the film.

Blowing up a mall makes you a villain in my world.

I'm rather amazed that a ****ed up psychopath like Burton's Batman has problems with hitting women.

And falling from a skyscraper and then being resurrected by radioactive zombie cats apparently makes a shy secretary able to fight Batman.

Meh. :o
 
Blowing up a mall makes you a villain in my world.

He had no proof she did that.

I'm rather amazed that a ****ed up psychopath like Burton's Batman has problems with hitting women.

Now you're just being ridiculous. Psychopathy applies to Burton's Batman in a loose sense. He has some of the traits of a psychopath, and not even some of the the ones that we tend to identify the word with.


And falling from a skyscraper and then being resurrected by radioactive zombie cats apparently makes a shy secretary able to fight Batman.

Meh.

It gave her cat-like reflexes and abilities, I dunno? It's a comic book movie. Hey, guess what... Earth's yellow Sun makes Superman fly. I hope that doesn't ruin your enjoyment of those films.
 
He had no proof she did that.

I think he saw her coming out of the building?

Now you're just being ridiculous. Psychopathy applies to Burton's Batman in a loose sense. He has some of the traits of a psychopath, and not even some of the the ones that we tend to identify the word with.

Obvious psychopath is obvious.

It gave her cat-like reflexes and abilities, I dunno? It's a comic book movie. Hey, guess what... Earth's yellow Sun makes Superman fly. I hope that doesn't ruin your enjoyment of those films.

I thought she wasn't supernatural? :woot:
 
Well, violence against women is probably not something that Batman cares too much for. In the heat of the moment he may have been shocked by the fact that he hit her (not something he would normally do)... and maybe he thought she was attacking him because she felt threatened by him. I don't think Catwoman was clearly a "villain" yet to him at that point in the film.

Still not buying it.
Yes, Batman is against violence towards everyone (not just women), but that does not apply to people who are trying to hurt others (including himself. Batman is a smart fighter, and what Catwoman did (after she drew first blood) was rather obvious, considering she was definitely trying to hurt him. It's the kind of obvious ploy that only stupid people will fall for, and Batman is not that stupid.
 
Last edited:
Was it? I thought the Burton Batmobile was generally bulletproof, but the 'shields' he activated made it everythingelseproof.

Don't recall anything specific about the underside.

Nothing in the movie really, but in other media (like print and the like) when presenting statistics about the Batmobile (stats supplied by WB) the underside was always mentioned as being armor plated. Stiil, even if not armored, he shouldn't have been able to punch thru sheet metal, likely made of steel, as if it were flimsy tin foil. Try punching thru the floor of your own un-armored car and see how that works.
 
Still not buying it. It's the kind of obvious ploy that only stupid people will fall for, and Batman is not that stupid.

If you're not willing to suspend disbelief, then think of a better reason why Batman would've done that instead of offering reasons why he wouldn't have.
 
Got wrong:

1. Wasn't a big fan of Penguin's gang of circus freaks / clowns... seemed too "Joker-esque" to me.

2. Selina being given magical powers by cats.

3. Too many sexual innuendo jokes, overdoing the whole Penguin is a sleazy creepster thing.

4. The more confined sets / set reuse. There may have been thematic significance to this, but it isn't as fun to watch. It makes it feel as if Returns lacks the scope of 89.

5. Batman killing. I'm quite a fan of Burton's interpretation of Batman, but not of the fact that his Batman kills (and, in the case of the strongman at least, seems to enjoy it).

Got right:

1. Bruce / Selina's relationship. Nailed it. Still my favorite interpretation. Too complex to get into here.

2. Bruce's withdrawal after Vicki leaves. Bruce's whole character arc is so subtle but there's a lot of complexity under the surface. Really well done.

3. The Penguin's backstory. I like the notion of the Penguin being a monster who wants to be accepted by higher society. I think Burton made him more disgusting and less sympathetic than he could have been, but overall the Penguin was a surprisingly solid sequel villain.

4. The action. A step up from B89. I enjoy how they put together action scenes in clever ways that work around the limitations of the batsuit and still come off as badass. Batman's trick with the grappling gun and the chunk off of the wall against the circus goon is one great example.

5. The ending. For all the convoluted twists and turns of the plot, the finale is hugely satisfying.
 
If you're not willing to suspend disbelief, then think of a better reason why Batman would've done that instead of offering reasons why he wouldn't have.

That makes no sense. Why would I bother to think of a better reason why he would have done that, when I feel that what happened in the movie was totally out of character for Batman as he's been presented for well over 70 years, (just as wrong as being made into a killer when for 99% of his published career he hasn't been) and it has nothing to do with suspension of disbleief.
 
Last edited:
I agree with Phantasm, particularly on the Bruce/Selina chemistry and the ending.

The grappling hook thing always made me question how much physical sense it made, but it was a fresh, clever idea.
 
I think it's really unfair to gang up on Joel Schumacher when Tim Burton didn't do the Caped Crusader any favors himself. I actually think that "Batman Forever" was an improvement over "Batman Returns" in part because it tried to distance itself from the twisted, overstuffed, and sinister aspect of Burton's mindset.

Lets see what Tim Burton brought to the table when it came to Batman:
*Batman is a supporting character in his own movies (this is especially the case in "Batman Returns", where he's overshadowed by Penguin, Catwoman and Christopher Walken)

*Batman brutally and intentionally kills his enemies with zero remorse. Tim Burton seemed to think that Batman should be some quirky, neurotic psycho with a death wish, not a heroic adventure, who is more altruistic in his goals.

*Making the Joker the killer of Bruce Wayne's parents instead of Joe Chill.

*Lando Calrissian as Two-Face. Since when was Harvey Dent ever a black man? Burton also envisioned Marlon Wayans as Robin.

*The Penguin as a bile spitting, mutant/sewer rat instead of the level headed, gentleman criminal as he was originally intended to be.

*Catwoman as a bipolar, ex-secretary, who mystically (and magically gains martial arts and gymnastic skills in the process) gets revived by alley cats after her boss pushes her out of the window.

*Batman being made to look like a complete doofus and tool in "Batman Returns" (especially by Catwoman).

*Not showing enough of what inspired Bruce Wayne to become Batman in the first place. All that we know is that his parents got killed in front of him, and now his a reclusive nerd, who wants revenge (he uses his guise as an outlet to beat people who look at him funny up) against the world.

There are some stuffs that I like in this post, and others that I find funny.

it's a movie. It's an adaptation of, at the time of its release, more than 50 years worth of comics.

There has been several takes on batman, including in the comics, and in some of them, he killed (he did kill several times during the golden age). He has been dark, camp, fun, grim and gritty, violent, all of that in the comics.

So really, Burton's take is as valid as another. You may prefer others over his, but it's still a valid take.

Bruce Wayne is still a millionaire who dresses up as a giant bat to fight crime because his parents were murdered in front of him.

What did Batman Returns got wong? It didn't have Harvey Dent.

What did it have right: its incredible atmosphere, the magnificient set, the costumes, the music, the acting, a new, different, but interesting take on the penguin. It wasn't afraid to be kinda surrealist, dark, and camp at the same time.

But most of all, it's a batman within a personal vision. We need directores to have a vision, not yes-man who will get the job done but without an identity of their own.
 
I'm not.


I am versed enough. I am much older than you, I saw Batman's decline from a cool guy into a nutjob. I watched the Batman (1989) movie in the first week it came out. I experienced the hype. I liked the movie somehow, but was still a little bit alienated by Keaton and his portrayal. Liked Jack Nicholson. The plot was thin, but okay. The visual style rocked for a Gotham City where Batman just started. But Batman Returns? I sat there and thought WTF??? every 5 minutes. Batman is a COOL GUY. A guy you WANT to be. A guy you COULD be (but in reality you can't, but you can think that). That was a constant factor. From 1939 to the mid-90s. But then (and in the Burton movies) Batman became a pathetic loser, a guy who never came to terms with his past. Yeah right. Before it was only a motiviation, then it became madness. Yeah, but Sam Hamm thought of Batman as an insane guy, so what is to wonder about those movies?
who in their right mind would want to have their parents murdered in front of them?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
200,509
Messages
21,742,872
Members
45,573
Latest member
vortep88
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"