More greatly appreciate Keaton/'89 Batman?

[Bat Attack]

I think B89 is a more nostalgic and intense film as is batman returns. BB however is a lot more pleasing to the masses, it's faster paced(although i found it not as engaging as B89 & returns) and has more action and tongue in cheek humour geared for a main stream audience, where i see batman as a dark character, like keaton, who doesn't make jokes, as he's suffered a lot and has dedicated himself to crime fighting.

BB is good, but B89 is better. Although I can't wait to see two face doen properly, but that's years away......

 

[Cyrusbales]

good good, nice to hear

 

[CConn]

Yeah, I secretly suspect most of the B89 love comes from nostalgia and childhood hero worship. People saw it as kids and like it because of that.

That's an extremely condescending belief to have.

 

[JLBats]

That's an extremely condescending belief to have.

Hey, call it condescending if you want, it's just how I feel. I apologise for it, but I do.

I'll reiterate my own feelings on Batman: The first act of the film is brilliant. It looks brilliant, it feels brilliant and it nicely sets up Batman as a mysterioso figure. However, I feel the quality of the film becomes erratic after Joker's fall. However, it still contains many brilliant moments, such as Joker's entrance and some of the museum and the chase afterwards. However, and this is one of the problems I have with Burton films in general, it never quite hangs together as well as I like it to, and a lot of the great, dark timeless feel gets lost in some scenes towards the end, particularly in the slow, non-sensical climax and in the ridiculousness of Prince music playing.

Still a brilliant look to the film, and the great moments definitely make it worth watching.

 

[The Chairman]

I'll reiterate my own feelings on Batman: The first act of the film is brilliant. It looks brilliant, it feels brilliant and it nicely sets up Batman as a mysterioso figure. However, I feel the quality of the film becomes erratic after Joker's fall. However, it still contains many brilliant moments, such as Joker's entrance and some of the museum and the chase afterwards. However, and this is one of the problems I have with Burton films in general, it never quite hangs together as well as I like it to, and a lot of the great, dark timeless feel gets lost in some scenes towards the end, particularly in the slow, non-sensical climax and in the ridiculousness of Prince music playing.

Still a brilliant look to the film, and the great moments definitely make it worth watching.

I respect your viewpoint, and you bring up a good argument (you often do). I agree that the first half of the movie is undoubtedly more cohesive in establishing the mythos. The second half is the more entertaining section of the film, but it does ignore some important aspects of the mythos that could've been fleshed out.

Anyway, here are my thoughts, which I've been trying to put together in a cohesive manner for days.

Qualitywise, there is no denying that Batman Begins is the better movie. Better direction, better overall casting, better writing, better translation of the mythos, etc.

But in terms of pure entertainment, the Burton films win easily. They're a thrill to watch and have far more memorable scenes and performances. I find that they hold up better as far as repeated viewings go than BB does. Not that Begins isn't an excellent movie (as I said it's superior, and it is in my Top 100), but I feel it's too nuanced and slowly paced for repeated viewings. Not that that's a bad thing (the pacing allows you to let the film's many key plot points and nuances sink in in a more structured manner).

BB actually did help me find a greater appreciation for the Burton films as well as Batman in general. I used to love the character as a kid, but grew out of him as I grew older. When I saw BB, my interest was renewed, and I checked out the Burton flicks for the first time in what had to be years. By establishing Batman's motivations and obessions in BB, I find B89 a much more satisfying viewing becaue BB actually lends it more substance in that you now
get a much deeper understanding of the Batman in Burton's movie.

So, in hindsight, Batman makes me appreciate BB] more.

At this point, I'm rambling, and even I'm confused on waht I mean, but **** it, I'm tired.

 

[JLBats]

I respect your viewpoint, and you birng up a good argument (you often do). I agree that the first half of the movie is undoubtedly more cohesive in establishing the mythos. The second half is the more entertaining section of the film, but it does ignore some important aspects of the mythos that could've been fleshed out.

Anyway, here are my thoughts, which I've been trying to put together in a cohesive manner for days.

Qualitywise, there is no denying that Batman Begins is the better movie. Better direction, better overall casting, better writing, better translation of the mythos, etc.

But in terms of pure entertainment, the Burton films win easily. They're a thrill to watch and have far more memorable scenes and performances. I find that they hold up better as far as repeated viewings go than BB does. Not that Begins isn't an excellent movie (as I said it's superior, and it is in my Top 100), but I feel it's too nuanced and slowly paced for repeated viewings. Not that that's a bad thing (the pacing allows you to let the film's many key plot points and nuances sink in in a more structured manner).

I have trouble putting my many more thoughts about this argument together, but this is basically my thoughts on the films.

See, I even have to disagree with the entertainment factor. I feel like Batman's big climax at the end of the movie, which occurs in the Cathedral, is a little too slow and too boring, and Joker's death feels really anti-climactic to me. The film is a thrill for the eyes, but it's a little too static for me.

And believe me, I don't think Begins is perfect. I've criticised it a few times in the Safe Haven threads. I still don't think the perfect Batman film has been made. The closest thing to it is BTAS.

 

[The Chairman]

See, I even have to disagree with the entertainment factor. I feel like Batman's big climax at the end of the movie, which occurs in the Cathedral, is a little too slow and too boring, and Joker's death feels really anti-climactic to me. The film is a thrill for the eyes, but it's a little too static for me.

And believe me, I don't think Begins is perfect. I've criticised it a few times in the Safe Haven threads. I still don't think the perfect Batman film has been made. The closest thing to it is BTAS.

I don't think there will ever be a better interpretation of Bats than B: TAS. It's what turned me on to the character, and for me it's my ideal interpretation of the character.

 

[Stupify_me]

89 was my favirote and I was a huge complainer before begins came out. I saw begins fell in love re watched 89 and was very disapointed by out I still think 89 had the best suit and batmobile and Keaton is now to me the second best batman perfomance but the rest of the movie was very disapointing.

 

[Cyrusbales]

I respect your viewpoint, and you bring up a good argument (you often do). I agree that the first half of the movie is undoubtedly more cohesive in establishing the mythos. The second half is the more entertaining section of the film, but it does ignore some important aspects of the mythos that could've been fleshed out.

Anyway, here are my thoughts, which I've been trying to put together in a cohesive manner for days.

Qualitywise, there is no denying that Batman Begins is the better movie. Better direction, better overall casting, better writing, better translation of the mythos, etc.

But in terms of pure entertainment, the Burton films win easily. They're a thrill to watch and have far more memorable scenes and performances. I find that they hold up better as far as repeated viewings go than BB does. Not that Begins isn't an excellent movie (as I said it's superior, and it is in my Top 100), but I feel it's too nuanced and slowly paced for repeated viewings. Not that that's a bad thing (the pacing allows you to let the film's many key plot points and nuances sink in in a more structured manner).

BB actually did help me find a greater appreciation for the Burton films as well as Batman in general. I used to love the character as a kid, but grew out of him as I grew older. When I saw BB, my interest was renewed, and I checked out the Burton flicks for the first time in what had to be years. By establishing Batman's motivations and obessions in BB, I find B89 a much more satisfying viewing becaue BB actually lends it more substance in that you now
get a much deeper understanding of the Batman in Burton's movie.

So, in hindsight, Batman makes me appreciate BB] more.

At this point, I'm rambling, and even I'm confused on waht I mean, but **** it, I'm tired.

I would disagree with quality, the attention to details in Burton's batman's was much higher. The set design was a lot more crucial for him, lining up each shot and frame with greater precision, I'm not a Burton fan though, but I do prefer his batman films to BB.

 

[Stupify_me]

I would disagree with quality, the attention to details in Burton's batman's was much higher. The set design was a lot more crucial for him, lining up each shot and frame with greater precision, I'm not a Burton fan though, but I do prefer his batman films to BB.

So you prefer the childish and cartoon like Batman

 

[CConn]

So you prefer the childish and cartoon like Batman

I'd hardly call Burton's interpretation of Batman childish.

And his visual direction cartoonish? If you honestly think giving a Batman film a gothic and Noir-ish backdrop is a bad thing, you must not be very familiar with Batman outside of Begins.

 

[Stupify_me]

I'd hardly call Burton's interpretation of Batman childish.

And his visual direction cartoonish? If you honestly think giving a Batman film a gothic and Noir-ish backdrop is a bad thing, you must not be very familiar with Batman outside of Begins.

I am very familar with Batman but things look differant in comics differant visuals work differantly for comics and film. Saying that Burton paid attention to detail is almost a joke he basically used the same vision he uses in every thing he does. You can watch Batman 89 and Return and you know exactly who directed I was wondering where the hell was Jack Skelington and Edward seriously the only thing missing from that movie was Johnny Depp. The gothic unrealistic look works when it is ink and paper but not on film with real people. Of course it was cartoonish I mean they were more over the top in the movie then they are in the comics the worst part of the movie the scenes all involved the Joker I mean he was walking around with a bom box and a button hat. I loved the movie my entire life until I watch begins and I went back to 89 and almost cried.

 

[CConn]

I am very familar with Batman but things look differant in comics differant visuals work differantly for comics and film. Saying that Burton paid attention to detail is almost a joke he basically used the same vision he uses in every thing he does. You can watch Batman 89 and Return and you know exactly who directed I was wondering where the hell was Jack Skelington and Edward seriously the only thing missing from that movie was Johnny Depp.

You really aren't very observant then. B89's art direction was totally different from Returns. Let alone the Nightmare Before Christmas (which didn't even feature real people ) and Edward Scissorhands. They were all Gothic - to be sure - but it's pretty obviously all of them featured different characteristics and artistic styles.

The gothic unrealistic look works when it is ink and paper but not on film with real people.

In your opinion.

Of course it was cartoonish I mean they were more over the top in the movie then they are in the comics the worst part of the movie the scenes all involved the Joker I mean he was walking around with a bom box and a button hat.

I'm sorry, I didn't understand a word of that.

I loved the movie my entire life until I watch begins and I went back to 89 and almost cried.

You're much too much sensative then.

 

[Stupify_me]

You really aren't very observant then. B89's art direction was totally different from Returns. Let alone the Nightmare Before Christmas (which didn't even feature real people ) and Edward Scissorhands. They were all Gothic - to be sure - but it's pretty obviously all of them featured different characteristics and artistic styles.
In your opinion.
I'm sorry, I didn't understand a word of that.
You're much too much sensative then.

Don't tell me I have to post the meaning of the word exaggerate I simply meant I was disapointed with the quality of 89 after watching begins.

Oh and never once did I say that Nighmare had real people in it I am not even sure where you came up with that. This is just getting pointless you liked 89 better in my opinion it was to cartoonie and over the top sorry we disagree but do you have to get so defensive?

 

[CConn]

Don't tell me I have to post the meaning of the word exaggerate I simply meant I was disapointed with the quality of 89 after watching begins.

Oh and never once did I say that Nighmare had real people in it I am not even sure where you came up with that. This is just getting pointless you liked 89 better in my opinion it was to cartoonie and over the top sorry we disagree but do you have to get so defensive?

I wasn't being defensive. You posted something that didn't make sense to me, so I argued it...that's what the Hype's for.

Well, that and the TMNT forum.

 

[Stupify_me]

I wasn't being defensive. You posted something that didn't make sense to me, so I argued it...that's what the Hype's for.

Well, that and the TMNT forum.

Sorry it seemed defensive to me.

Look it's simple I though the 89 version was very cartoonie while I can still watch it there are to many things that make me cringe for me to enjoy it anymore:

Perma Smile
The scene where he has on the french hat na dis dancing around (Joker)
The lack of chemistry with Batman and Gordon
The very Burton Esc look and feel I mean I can tell it is burton simply by looking at the trees
The Bat Jet which is something that I hope to never see in Nolans movies
The strong lack of substance
The joy buzzer turning a guy in to a skellaton (seriously WTF?)
The annoying reporter who hangs with Vikie Vale
and other things but this is far longer then I wantas it is and don't get me started on returns I really hated that one.

It's just not for me I love Begins for the realistic nature that Nolan used. I also enjoy the strong story and the fact that he didn't depend to much on action and being over the top to tell his story. Christian Bale is an amazing actor and did an even better job than Keaton which I didn't think was possible because Keaton was great. I just loved the movie. Sorry we disagree but hopefully we can agree to disagree and I can go to bed because im tired.

 

[El Payaso]

Saying that Burton paid attention to detail is almost a joke he basically used the same vision he uses in every thing he does.

As every director with a style does.

You can watch Batman 89 and Return and you know exactly who directed

Which happens with artist with a style. They're recognizable becauise of the personal seal.

I was wondering where the hell was Jack Skelington and Edward seriously the only thing missing from that movie was Johnny Depp.

And even if you have those kind of hallucinations... is it bad?

Well I saw Taxi Driver the other night and I was wondering where was Spiderman... you know... it's New York.

The gothic unrealistic look works when it is ink and paper but not on film with real people.

Yeah, Cabinet of Dr. Caligari sucks.

(you were trying to stupifying us right?)

Of course it was cartoonish I mean they were more over the top in the movie then they are in the comics

Really? There were giant typewriters and all like in the old comic books?

I loved the movie my entire life until I watch begins and I went back to 89 and almost cried.

So basically you don't have any idea of what you like.

 

[Stupify_me]

As every director with a style does.



Which happens with artist with a style. They're recognizable becauise of the personal seal.



And even if you have those kind of hallucinations... is it bad?

Well I saw Taxi Driver the other night and I was wondering where was Spiderman... you know... it's New York.



Yeah, Cabinet of Dr. Caligari sucks.

(you were trying to stupifying us right?)



Really? There were giant typewriters and all like in the old comic books?



So basically you don't have any idea of what you like.

IM in a hurry and have to go to work so the bold part is all I have time for.

I was about 5 when Batman 89 came out and the last time I had seen it before begins came out was when I was 11 Sorry my memory didn't have a perfect vission of Batman 89 when I was 21 10 years seems to mess with your memoreys.

 

[Cyrusbales]

B89 and returns are both more pleasing to watch than BB. You can pause burton's films at any point and marvel at his wonderous mise-en-scene. Each frame is like a painting, and I agree that some bits are a little odd, like the killer buzzer, that to me seemed like the joker, but not jack nicholson's joker, but I am willing to forgive this due to the high quality of the rest of the film.

BB is bland in my opinion, It's an OK action flick, as comic book films go(since 89), i'd rate it about a quarter or a third down the list. There's no spectacular images, and the car chase is soooo bad, he turns his lights off to 'disapear' only to reappear seconds later, pointless! The badguy's scheme also was rather silly, Nolan's 'realism' is defunkt when a microwave dosn't boil the water in people!

I am still looking forward to BB2, (and especially BB3 with two face!) but I am not expecting it to be as classy as burtons, although I will keep an open mind!

 

[mister Lennon]

As every director with a style does.



Which happens with artist with a style. They're recognizable becauise of the personal seal.



And even if you have those kind of hallucinations... is it bad?

Well I saw Taxi Driver the other night and I was wondering where was Spiderman... you know... it's New York.



Yeah, Cabinet of Dr. Caligari sucks.

(you were trying to stupifying us right?)



Really? There were giant typewriters and all like in the old comic books?



So basically you don't have any idea of what you like.

Most demagogue post ever.

 

[El Payaso]

^ Sometimes having all those stalkers is creepy.

 

[XCharlieX]

a lot of the great, dark timeless feel gets lost in some scenes towards the end, particularly in the slow, non-sensical climax and in the ridiculousness of Prince music playing.

You mean the mock parade joker makes to become the most vicious mobster of all time? That was quite a scene with him throwing money at everyone just to gas them. Dark indeed. I found that scene pretty perfect for the film.

 

[Cyrusbales]

You mean the mock parade joker makes to become the most vicious mobster of all time? That was quite a scene with him throwing money at everyone just to gas them. Dark indeed. I found that scene pretty perfect for the film.

I agree, a very poigniant social comment!

 

[XCharlieX]

Yes however i do like batman begins as nolan looked back at these films and decided to make a new school formula with even less zany-ness than Burtons which i found a true sucessor to Burtons. Seems to me Nolan saw the over the top-ness of both Schumacher and then Burtons gothic and fetish style particularly in Batman Returns and reacted to it. When I walked out of the theater for BB i knew the man did his homework on how to solidify Batman and keep it from being stretched askew by gothic orcartoony influences.

 

[Cyrusbales]

I'm glad to see something new, I just prefered burton's version.