Re-evaluating Geekdom: Batman 89'

[The Joker]

Cant we all agree that Batman Begins kicks '89s ass?

Nope.

Because I don't believe it improved that much on Batman 89. More faithful to the comics, certainly. But on an entertainment factor level, it's even Stephen for me.

In fact, the scales may even be tipped in B89's favor entertainment wise, due to Jack Nicholson's magnificent performance as The Joker.

The say a movie's only as strong as it's villain. Well Murphy's Scarecrow was too 2-D, with no fleshing out of the character in any way. Neeson was magnificent. But damn, he didn't top Nicholson. Not for me anyway.

Bale was a fantastic Bruce Wayne, but Keaton was a much better Batman IMO. Holmes was a lousy love interest. Basinger was great as Vicki Vale.

And I need not compare the fight scenes in each movie

BB is a great movie. But it doesn't kick Burton's Batman movies asses. Not for me anyway.

 

[El Payaso]

Doc Ock said it for me. Specially about Murphy as Crane. Really poor.

 

[ultimatefan]

Nope.

Because I don't believe it improved that much on Batman 89. More faithful to the comics, certainly. But on an entertainment factor level, it's even Stephen for me.

In fact, the scales may even be tipped in B89's favor entertainment wise, due to Jack Nicholson's magnificent performance as The Joker.

The say a movie's only as strong as it's villain. Well Murphy's Scarecrow was too 2-D, with no fleshing out of the character in any way. Neeson was magnificent. But damn, he didn't top Nicholson. Not for me anyway.

Bale was a fantastic Bruce Wayne, but Keaton was a much better Batman IMO. Holmes was a lousy love interest. Basinger was great as Vicki Vale.

And I need not compare the fight scenes in each movie

BB is a great movie. But it doesn't kick Burton's Batman movies asses. Not for me anyway.

Neeson and Nicholson were both excellent in playing different styles of villains. Neeson nailed his type of villain just as much as Nicholson nailed his.

Keaton wasn´t badass as Batman, he wasn´t truly scary, he never felt like a Batman who could make a thug piss in the pants. In the first scene, the thug seems more freaked out by his bulletproof costume than anything else. He played well the cold and stoic aspect, but only that aspect.

There was nothing remarkable about the fight scenes in 89. Maybe a little better edited, but the coreography was generic, it didn´t have its own fighting style like BB.

 

[The Joker]

Neeson and Nicholson were both excellent in playing different styles of villains. Neeson nailed his type of villain just as much as Nicholson nailed his.

Oh, I agree they were both perfect for their villains. But Nicholson was way more fun to watch IMO.

Keaton wasn´t badass as Batman, he wasn´t truly scary, he never felt like a Batman who could make a thug piss in the pants.

And you think Bale was??

Sorry, but telling some bum that he has a nice coat didn't exactly instill me with fear

Keaton was a dark, brooding beast in the bat suit. Far more than Bale was IMO.

In the first scene, the thug seems more freaked out by his bulletproof costume than anything else.

That is an element about Batman that freaks out the underworld. They think he's inhuman.

"I'm tellin' you man, a giant bat"

There was nothing remarkable about the fight scenes in 89. Maybe a little better edited, but the coreography was generic, it didn´t have its own fighting style like BB.

BB had no fighting style. It was all shaky camera, with flashes of arms, legs and black capes.

Nobody said B89's fights were remarkable. But they were vastly better than BB's in every way. For the simple fact that when Batman fought someone, you were not trying to decipher what the hell was going on half the time.

People who try to spin this realism yarn are kidding themselves IMO. When I go to a movie, I want to be able to see a fight scene clearly.

 

[ultimatefan]

Oh, I agree they were both perfect for their villains. But Nicholson was way more fun to watch IMO.



And you think Bale was??

Sorry, but telling some bum that he has a nice coat didn't exactly instill me with fear

Keaton was a dark, brooding beast in the bat suit. Far more than Bale was IMO.



That is an element about Batman that freaks out the underworld. They think he's inhuman.

"I'm tellin' you man, a giant bat"



BB had no fighting style. It was all shaky camera, with flashes of arms, legs and black capes.

Nobody said B89's fights were remarkable. But they were vastly better than BB's in every way. For the simple fact that when Batman fought someone, you were not trying to decipher what the hell was going on half the time.

People who try to spin this realism yarn are kidding themselves IMO. When I go to a movie, I want to be able to see a fight scene clearly.

The coat line is an isolated example. I could make fun of "eat the dust, high fiber" from BR too. Dark and brooding, yes. A beast, not even close. That is what Bale did.

It had a very defined fighting style with KFM. Just because of the editing, doesn´t mean it didn´t have a style. To me they were much clearer on the DVD, I could tell 95% of the moves. The fights in Batman 89 weren´t vastly better than anything. Generic moves and the extremely implausible notion that Michael Keaton would have the strength to lift people up. I´d more easily buy that Jack would lift him up - with one hand.

 

[El Payaso]

It's funny to talk abouit BB fights style when you can't actually see half a **** in any fight scenes. I am supposed to assume there's something there because I can't see enough to affirm here's nothing. But only that; that 'something' is better than other thing that I can actually see. Sounds like the basis of a religion's birth.

the extremely implausible notion that Michael Keaton would have the strength to lift people up. I´d more easily buy that Jack would lift him up - with one hand.

The implausible notion of prejudice, since I can state the same I never believed that Christopher Reeve could actually fly.

 

[The Joker]

The coat line is an isolated example. I could make fun of "eat the dust, high fiber" from BR too.

Actually it's "Eat floor. High fibre"

And you can hardly compare the two. Batman having a bit of repartee with a female villain?? Happened many times in the comics, especially with Catwoman.

Complimenting some bum about his coat while he's in the middle of nailing a crimelord?? Campy stuff.

Dark and brooding, yes. A beast, not even close. That is what Bale did.

You thought Bale was a beast as Batman?? Care to explain your reasoning behind that??

It had a very defined fighting style with KFM. Just because of the editing, doesn´t mean it didn´t have a style. To me they were much clearer on the DVD, I could tell 95% of the moves.

Well, you've better eye sight than most if you could make out that bunch of blurry flailing.

The fights in Batman 89 weren´t vastly better than anything.

Better than BB's that's for sure.

Generic moves and the extremely implausible notion that Michael Keaton would have the strength to lift people up.

Implausible notion??

Because he isn't 6ft something that means he cannot lift a man??

Please.

 

[ultimatefan]

It's funny to talk abouit BB fights style when you can't actually see half a **** in any fight scenes. I am supposed to assume there's something there because I can't see enough to affirm here's nothing. But only that; that 'something' is better than other thing that I can actually see. Sounds like the basis of a religion's birth.

I had problems seeing it in theater, but on the DVD I can see pretty much everything.

 

[El Payaso]

Thank God for the pause button?

 

[ultimatefan]

Actually it's "Eat floor. High fibre"

And you can hardly compare the two. Batman having a bit of repartee with a female villain?? Happened many times in the comics, especially with Catwoman.

Complimenting some bum about his coat while he's in the middle of nailing a crimelord?? Campy stuff.



You thought Bale was a beast as Batman?? Care to explain your reasoning behind that??



Well, you've better eye sight than most if you could make out that bunch of blurry flailing.



Better than BB's that's for sure.



Implausible notion??

Because he isn't 6ft something that means he cannot lift a man??

Please.

he was referring to the coat he had given the bum years before. It was his secret pact with the people of Gotham, like saying, "I´m on your side". There was nothing campy about it.

His whole body language had the beast element. He moved through the shadows like a monster, showed up from nowhere and disappeared, THAT´S how you make a guy in a bat suit scary, the thug can´t be sure of what he´s seeing, is that a man, is that something else? It´s not clearly a guy in a costume just standing there lifting his cape right in front of you. How he interrogated Flass, the whole beast element thing was there. Before I hear anymore of this "that voice isn´t natural" crap, it´s not MEANT to be natural, it´s meant to be like a monster, a beast.

Lotsa people who watched the DVD thought the fights were clearer. Let me watch it again and I can describe almost every move.

No, because you can clearly see he barely has any meat on his body.

 

[The Joker]

he was referring to the coat he had given the bum years before. It was his secret pact with the people of Gotham, like saying, "I´m on your side". There was nothing campy about it.

A secret pact?? LOL! It was a campy line dude. Plain and simple.

His whole body language had the beast element. He moved through the shadows like a monster, showed up from nowhere and disappeared, THAT´S how you make a guy in a bat suit scary, the thug can´t be sure of what he´s seeing, is that a man, is that something else? It´s not clearly a guy in a costume just standing there lifting his cape right in front of you. How he interrogated Flass, the whole beast element thing was there. Before I hear anymore of this "that voice isn´t natural" crap, it´s not MEANT to be natural, it´s meant to be like a monster, a beast.

And you can say the same thing about Keaton's Batman. In fact, he pushed the inhuman element more than Bale with the 'There's no killing him' thing. Criminals shat themselves when he appeared too.

The Flass interrogation was probably the most Batmanesque scene Bale did as Batman. The rest was not on par with Keaton's Batman IMO. Good, but not Keaton good.

And Keaton's voice did sound better too. More grittier and darker.

Lotsa people who watched the DVD thought the fights were clearer. Let me watch it again and I can describe almost every move.

I'm not doubting the uses of the pause button

No, because you can clearly see he barely has any muscle mass on his body.

You could see that under the body armour?? Wow, you really do have remarkable eyes.

 

[ultimatefan]

A secret pact?? LOL! It was a campy line dude. Plain and simple.



And you can say the same thing about Keaton's Batman. In fact, he pushed the inhuman element more than Bale with the 'There's no killing him' thing. Criminals shat themselves when he appeared too.

The Flass interrogation was probably the most Batmanesque scene Bale did as Batman. The rest was not on par with Keaton's Batman IMO. Good, but not Keaton good.

And Keaton's voice did sound better too. More grittier and darker.



I'm not doubting the uses of the pause button



You could see that under the body armour?? Wow, you really do have remarkable eyes.

My interpretation makes perfect sense. You don´t wanna see it to help your case, suit yourself.

The criminals crapping themselves felt forced in his first appearance. There was nothing truly scary about it till the part where he stands up after the shooting, and that´s more the resistance of the suit than anything beastly Keaton does. Keaton did the see me, don´t see me game a little, but not with the same subtlety, and the result is far less scary.

Keaton´s voice was just a lower pitch, and easily recognizable. Bale did a much better job disguising his Bruce Wayne voice, and his one was clearly more aggressive.

No pause necessary. The lighting looks a little clearer, and it helps. I believe part of the problem was the quality of projection in some theaters.

The scene with Vale in the bat cave, he wears a shirt and you can see he´s skinny as a twig.

 

[The Joker]

My interpretation makes perfect sense. You don´t wanna see it to help your case, suit yourself.

This reminds me of what Batman said about the Joker: His insane logic makes sense to him alone.

If you want to believe Batman has some pact with the bums of Gotham, then you think that

The criminals crapping themselves felt forced in his first appearance.

I felt the same about Bale's effect in Begins.

"WHERE ARE YOU??" Reeeeeeeeeeally over the top.

There was nothing truly scary about it till the part where he stands up after the shooting, and that´s more the resistance of the suit than anything beastly Keaton does. Keaton did the see me, don´t see me game a little, but not with the same subtlety, and the result is far less scary.

Came off much better than Bale's hide and seek thing at the docks. Especially when it culminated in that horribly edited fight.

Keaton´s voice was just a lower pitch, and easily recognizable. Bale did a much better job disguising his Bruce Wayne voice, and his one was clearly more aggressive.

Keaton's was much better, and hardly recognizable. Bale's voice was truly Batman like, again, in the Flass interrogation.

Listen to him talking to Holmes in the subway station for example, there's hardly any, if no difference in his voice.

No pause necessary. The lighting looks a little clearer, and it helps. I believe part of the problem was the quality of projection in some theaters.

LOL!

Ok, you're getting ridiculous now. Secret pacts, and the projectors across the world were dodgy.

We're done with this one lol.

The scene with Vale in the bat cave, he wears a shirt and you can see he´s skinny as a twig.

No, he didn't look skinny as a twig.

Anyone got a pic from that scene, because I can't find one on Google or Yahoo.

 

[BatScot]

he was referring to the coat he had given the bum years before. It was his secret pact with the people of Gotham, like saying, "I´m on your side". There was nothing campy about it.

In a city inhabited by millions of people, Batman happens upon the very bum in the very place where they first met lo those many years ago. That’s not campy, that’s just bad writing... bad enough that it happened only once, but it happen again later in the film, when Batman managed to stumble upon Rachel amidst the throng, who herself just happened to stumble upon the balcony kid… well, that's just a tad too convenient to be taken as anything other than shoddy. Secret pact

It´s not clearly a guy in a costume…

And yet he is clearly referred to as “some a*hole in a costume”?

Before I hear anymore of this "that voice isn´t natural" crap, it´s not MEANT to be natural, it´s meant to be like a monster, a beast.

A “beast” doesn’t force it’s menace; it comes naturally... in contrast to the ‘put on’ quality that Bale projected on some occasions.

 

[Bat Attack]

Cant we all agree that Batman Begins kicks '89s ass?

Ahaha, thanks for the laugh.

 

[mister Lennon]

Batman begins kicking batman 89 ass? all the way , dude.

And sometimes, is better to cover something that show so poor fights as in 89.

And bassinguer being better than holmes? both characters were poor.

Keaton maybe did a better job with the voice, i agree, but overall, bale job was way better.

 

[El Payaso]

Ah welcome. You started this innovative party, I wouldn't want you to be late with some new ideas you've never expressed before.

 

[Bat Attack]

Batman vs. Batman Begins blah blah blah blah. Hasn't this topic been done to death people? What is going to come out of this debate? Obviously it's going to lead to nothing. What? Is someone going to debate the rest of us to death and get a trophy that says "I won the Batman vs. Batman Begins Debate on SHH!, Now my life is complete"? PUH-LEASE!

(last post in this thread, btw. I am no longer going to contribute to this ****. Atleast I can enjoy both films.)

 

[mister Lennon]

Ah welcome. You started this innovative party, I wouldn't want you to be late with some new ideas you've never expressed before.

Gime some time, im in it. Next time i'll go with my theory on why batman ears were way better in begins than in 89.

 

[cryptic name]

batman begins is a great batman movie, it has its flaws, but so far it's the best we've gotten. yet, when i sit down to watch a batman movie...i put
in '89. i can't explain it.

 

[El Payaso]

Batman vs. Batman Begins blah blah blah blah. Hasn't this topic been done to death people? What is going to come out of this debate? Obviously it's going to lead to nothing. What? Is someone going to debate the rest of us to death and get a trophy that says "I won the Batman vs. Batman Begins Debate on SHH!, Now my life is complete"? PUH-LEASE!

(last post in this thread, btw. I am no longer going to contribute to this ****. Atleast I can enjoy both films.)

Trolls feed on dead horses, didn't you know?

 

[mister Lennon]

Trolls feed on dead horses, didn't you know?

Than explains why there are so many horses lied down in el payaso's farm.

 

[EXCELSIOR]

How many times are we going to start another Batman '89 thread...
Each time a thread like this kicks up it always ends the same!

Other than the fact the B'89 & BB are both Batman films there is no comparison... it's like comparing B'89 with the Adam West 1966 feature...

They are all fruit, but they have very different tastes... some like orange some like apple... why can't we just leave it at that!