The List of Things That Batman 89 Got Right/Wrong

[Samurai Pasta]

1. I understand why Burton put Joker in the limelight, but I prefer The Joker to be the who pops up only sparingly. It looks like TDK won't give me what I want either.

2. Batman should be on the brink as he was in Burton's film.

3. I prefer Joe Chill to be the murderer rather than Joker, but I understand why Burton did what he did. I just prefer my Joker to be more mysterious than Jack's.

4. Gordon is my third favorite Batman character, so the more Gordon the better I say.

 

[Swordmaster]

Thing is, with Joker, he SHOULDN'T be mysterious, in the shadows, and all that. He's the living definition of an attention ****e, he's not one to go around in the shadows and all that. The only thing that should be mysterious about him is the origin.

 

[Samurai Pasta]

The only thing that should be mysterious about him is the origin.

I agree with that, but I want less scenes with Joker and more scenes with Batman. You can still be mysterious and have a lot of scenes and be an attention ****e and have few scenes.

 

[Swordmaster]

Ah, my bad then. But, I think Joker should have been in it less. Not that I'm knocking Jack's performance or the character or the movie, mind, I love them all, but I think we saw TOO much of him. Which, while fine for what Burton was going for, isn't my ideal portrayal.

 

[Noir]

And BTW, in his best stories the Joker was not an insane serial killer, but more of an eccentric, sociopathic mastermind. He didn't kill for killing's sake but for a plan.

....

 

[K.B.]

I never understood the whole "it was all about joker" argument. I feel that they payed attention to both bats and joker pretty evenly.

Someone should count how many scenes jack/joker has compared to bruce/batman.

 

[Jack Torrance]

couple of things about this thread that i don't understand

a) people are really knocking jack nicholson as the joker? the guy is the living embodiment of the joker. why is he bad? cause he doesn't kill people every 5 seconds? you people have to understand that at that time, in the 80's, you couldn't do all that and have a pg-13 rating. and besides, he still kills a good amount of people- he poisons all those people at the museum AND at the "parade," he talks to rotelli the mafia dude's corpse, etc. and for the people saying he wasn't mean or unpredictable enough- do you really think it would translate well to film to have him killing people every scene? come on.

b) why are people trashing heath ledger already? don't get me wrong, i love 89, it's my favorite comic book film of all time, and i think that it blows away batman begins. however, none of you have seen the film yet- you've just seen pictures. how could you possibly gauge a performance based on a few pictures? yeah, his skin tone is pretty lame i guess, and i think that it's going to be really hard to upstage nicholson, but anything can happen. you never know- heath ledger could be incredible as the joker. we all just have to wait and see, and complaining about pictures is pretty lame.

c) just because you like 89 doesn't mean you have to defend every single thing about it. like i said before, i LOVE 89. the first thing i thought of after i saw batman begins was "wow, batman 89 was so much better." i cannot express how much of a geek i am with batman 89. but it's not the perfect film. it's flawed as ****. yes, it IS lame that alfred let vicky vale into the batcave. you don't have to be a comic purist to think so. if anything, the film after the flugelheim scene up to the parade is pretty weak. i enjoy it, but it's weak.

d) i don't understand why people like gary oldman so much. i thought pat hingle's gordon was fantastic. to me, he was a lot tougher than gary oldman. he was believable as this tough cop kinda guy. you could really believe that if he was face to face with batman, he would not hesitate to arrest him. since i know most of you guys have such a hard-on for frank miller, who's more believable as a tough military dude? maybe i'm weird, but i always thought that pat hingle's gordon would wreck oldman's. i just thought pat hingle overall was more of an imposing and poweful presence. yeah he was wasted in the sequels, but we're not talking about them.

 

[K.B.]

Hey....I LOVED jack as joker and think he did a perfect job.

He IS joker.

 

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

Just opinion.

Pro's

The music was fantastic, visually the movie was pretty impressive also, Jacks Nicolsons performance was legendary, the movie sort of felt adult even though it has it's goofy moments, didn't use lots of cgi (yes it's 1989) and overuse special effects like many movies today, it inspired batman:tas, Kim basinger's character seemed to fit in alot better than than the other love interests.

Negatives

Micheal Keaton was pretty stiff not much character it seemed to me, didn't talk much, wasn't really much bat development, don't recall the joker killing his parents, joker dancing to prince made me cringe, some of the flying scenes don't look to great now, Gordon seemed unimportant to the point that he might as well not exist, Harvey Dent is black, and from starwars!

It's a quility movie, if it's on tv, it will be watched, and putting the Nolan/Burton crap aside, batman/batman returns is still head and shoulders above gay bdsm fun time, Joel Schumacher.

 

[K.B.]

Was watching it last night and this is t odo with the "you killed my parents/ I was young when I killed them" debate from a few pages back...

I don't think Joker knows its Bruce Wayne like you guys were saying, don't forget that before he says all that I was young stuff he seems to not knwo what Batmans talking about ie "what? what are you talking about?" I alwasy figured Joker was backpeddling/stalling with the I was young line" and that he has killed SO many people i nhis life he really dosent have any idea who Bats is talkign about specifically.

Also I just realized after a million times seeing it.....where did the 3-4 henchmen in the bell tower come from? LMAO

 

[Mladen]

The Negatives:
1. Harvey Dent - Even though he was played by a great actor, Harvey has always been caucasian in the comics.

- What difference does his skin colour make to the character? Just about ALL of the Batman villains are race-irrelevent (their culture or race makes zero impact on their character arcs in the source material). I can understand your complaint if they'd cast, say, a physically deformed actor to play Dent (since part of Dent's tragedy is that he's such a conventionally handsome dude before his deformation), but seriously your saying this gets me pretty angry, considering Billy-dee Williams totally has the charisma for the part (I would have LOVED to have seen him as Two-face, I feel ROBBED by what they forced tommy lee williams, who is otherwise a good actor, to do). Is it the idea of Black man becoming District attorney, or the idea of any black people in Gotham besides Lucius Fox and some muggers bother you? If its about the physical appearance of a beloved character, why don't you care about Michael Keaton who is pretty scrawny and non-batman-esque?

2. Jim Gordon - Horrible casting on they're part, in the movie he didn't really serve a purpose as Gordon should & of course he was about 200 pounds overweight to play him (sorry I had to say it)

- Gordon wasn't important to the plot of the film, so I don't really care how they characterise him. Gordan is hardly EVER used well in the comics anyway (usually he's just there as a convenient plot device to give batman some information... in most comics Gordon could be replaced with the bat computer). They should have just given the character a different name and be done with it.

3. Joker doesn't have a name (Jack Napier) & never will at least thats how it should be I think.
4. The murderer of Bruce Wayne's parents (obviously)

- The film is much more a tale of Batman vs Joker than purely a Batman story. The mano-a-mano plot is what defines the film, so these two elements are pretty much vital to building up the tension between the two characters.

5. After the Joker Goon Chase with Batman/Vicki, the Batmobile is driving automatically without Batman & in a close up you can see a hand steering it inside the front window.
6. The scene where Batman takes Vicki to the Batcave they enter into the secret tunnel & you see Vicki look back to see the entrance door close but how could she see whats behind her?? (This is a minor one but still it bugs me)
7. During the Joker Parade scene you see Vicki try to drive away from the gas clouding the city but you can clearly see in the back her right side window is rolled down. (Another picky one)
8. Joker shooting Bruce in Vicki's apartment showing only a tin metal dish stopping the bullet, its not really wrong but I doubt a pan would stop a bullet & I thought Bruce always wore a bullet proof vest? In one scene anyway...

- Bloopers shouldn't count, and there are more bloopers than this.

9. Letting Vicki into the Batcave! I mean come on, thats probably the dumbest part of the movie.

- It is very out of character for Alfred, who should know better. Its a bit of a clumsy plot choice for sure.

10. In the final battle scene with Batman & Joker, Batman says "You killed my parents" as Joker replies "I was young when I killed your parents" How would he know he killed his parents in the first place when he doesn't even know who Batman really is Bruce Wayne.

- Sort of. You could argue that Jack's indiscriminate career of murdering families during stupid muggings were only conducted in his youth... Its entirely probable that he turned to organised crime not long after (hence his saying 'young')

11. Killing off The Joker, this might be the one that really ticked me off. They should of kept him alive for future use & bring a little mystery to it...

- Again, in the context of this film it makes sense, given that its definately a Batman vs Joker movie, not a Batman movie. However, it would have worked just as well if Joker fell into the river thus leaving us a nice narrative closure (matching his early fall into the vat of acid), and giving us maybe just that little bit of wonder whether he REALLY died.


- Does Batman's numerous murders in this film not even make your list? i personally don't mind them in the context of his anger etc, but i'm suprised you didn't list them.

The Positives:

1. The character of Alfred, great acting....all around awesome performance

For sure. Great balance of fatherly love and chastising as well as a graceful presense on screen, which was nice.

2. The Joker, I'm sure several people will deny Jack was an awesome Joker but in my opinion he captured the character all around, the only thing I didn't like was he was a little overweight to play him but he made up for it.

He's a bit over the top, but his goofy childishness is a great match against Batman's grim exterior, for sure.

3. Vicki Vale, Kim really was great if you ask me & her look was close to the comics if I remember correctly.

This one I take exception to. She jumps into bed with Bats on a first date (which is pretty much assumed, since the date is at Bruce's house anyway), and with all of her shrieking and fainting throughout the film she just degenerates into a damsel in distress who the hero and villains alternately vie for her affections. In this context, Joker should have tied her to the train tracks while twiddling his moustache.

4. The Batmobile - I think everyone agrees the car rules
5. The Batcave, even though they didn't show much of it, it was just designed well from the equipment he had & the darkness of it.

Pretty much every set and prop in this film is excellent, Anton Furst really delivered on this project.

6. The character of Batman - Keaton did very well in the suit although there were restrictions. His voice was pretty good, his eyes/face told the story. I didn't really love his Bruce Wayne but it was pretty good all around (Fans are still half & half I think).

I understand the choice of a thinner actor to play Batman... The 'scary' suit and need for theatrics makes sense if Bruce is physically a bit of a wimp. His voice is good, and I like keaton as an actor anyway so it worked for me.

 

[ab38416]

edit

 

[David Rice]

9. Letting Vicki into the Batcave! I mean come on, thats probably the dumbest part of the movie.

How is it that nobody other then myself agrees with this one? This part was so ridiculous that they made fun of it in the second film.

 

[David Rice]

i'd have to agree with this. so far, im not seein anything "right" with ledgers joker. the look is all wrong, i mean, nothin but the purple suit looks joker. dyed hair? painted on makeup? wtf is this? joker has ALWAYS been permawhite because he fell into acid. i know that they feel they MUST do something different from burtons version, but still, there are some things in this world that you simply do NOT mess with, and one of those things is Joker and the way hes portrayed. so far, i am not really that pumped about anything in TDK except maybe the batpod and the new cooler looking batsuit. even though the batsuit looks nothing like the comics, i am no comics purist so that doesnt bug me. but Joker....COME ON!! hes so easy to get right, and even i have to say that i like the comics joker by far when compared to what they seem to be doing with nolans joker, and im not even a big fan of the comics! really upsetting so far, i hope nolan makes him so cool that i can eat all my words, but i have my doubts.


and as for "killing off joker: good move or bad move", seriously, why does anyone want to see joker survive? that would be very anti-climactic and ppl would probably think he'll be in the next one too. i just like it when either the villian is locked up or killed off, because then there is no way he could return. they did it for Ras, they should do it for joker. cuz unlike Ras, joker is just an evil SOB who you WANT to see die by the end of the film. if nolan keeps him alive, um, that would suck, and be illogical.

*sigh*

 

[Iceburgeruk]

10. In the final battle scene with Batman & Joker, Batman says "You killed my parents" as Joker replies "I was young when I killed your parents" How would he know he killed his parents in the first place when he doesn't even know who Batman really is Bruce Wayne.
QUOTE]

This isn`t a problem. Batman an average sized gruff voiced man says joker killed his parents. Joker thereby assumes that batman is not a seven-year old and thereby assumes it must have happened when he was a lot younger. Add in back peddling for self preservation and the line makes sense.

Course the other explanation is that jack napier wasn`t always murdering families and that it was a one off. Or maybe he killed a lot of families and that was the only one where he had a side kick who stopped him killing the kid.

 

[Iceburgeruk]

My beef with the movie was the casting of nicholson in the first place. Joker was never a physical match for batman to start with making him 20 years older doesn`t help. Its like having the riddler with only one leg.

I mean Its a pity they didn`t just use the guy who played the Jack Napier from the flashbacks. He was frickin scary with his seriously joker like grin. Watch it again and you`ll see he looks perfect for the joker role.

 

[Myrddin_Emrys]

As far as I am concerned, B89 did not get one thing right regarding Batman.
That also goes for Returns, Forever and B&R.

BB, thats where its at baby, thats where its at.

 

[Damiean Dark]

^Your opinion of course but I say lets give BB twenty years to see if it will still be remembered in the same way as B89.

 

[Why Are You Crouching Spock?]

The Negatives:
1. Harvey Dent - Even though he was played by a great actor, Harvey has always been caucasian in the comics.

- What difference does his skin colour make to the character? Just about ALL of the Batman villains are race-irrelevent (their culture or race makes zero impact on their character arcs in the source material). I can understand your complaint if they'd cast, say, a physically deformed actor to play Dent (since part of Dent's tragedy is that he's such a conventionally handsome dude before his deformation), but seriously your saying this gets me pretty angry, considering Billy-dee Williams totally has the charisma for the part (I would have LOVED to have seen him as Two-face, I feel ROBBED by what they forced tommy lee williams, who is otherwise a good actor, to do). Is it the idea of Black man becoming District attorney, or the idea of any black people in Gotham besides Lucius Fox and some muggers bother you? If its about the physical appearance of a beloved character, why don't you care about Michael Keaton who is pretty scrawny and non-batman-esque?

I'm afraid id have to disagree, comics convey them selfs through the use of imagery as well as grammar, not trying to keep the black man down, it's an argument of appearance than race, people of diffrent races just happen to have diffrent appearances, there's no getting around it, people complain about the bat suit not being grey, Michael Kane's Alfred, Heath Ledger's non permanent smile, panda eye's and browning hair, the scarecrow in a suit, Harvey Dent being black, is just as reasonable an argument, I don't think it should be cushioned or non relevant for race.

your point about him being a better two face than Jones, i would agree with, mainly down to the interpretation of the source material than anything else, if Tommy Lee Jones was in Burtons, i reckon he's do a pretty good job, if Billy Dee Williams was in Joel Schumacher's, it would probably still be horrendously campy and alot of bat-fans would probably be scratching there heads saying "he's black? ok".

Keaton Didn't seem scrawny to me, mainly due to the suit with molded muscles, the problem was I think, he wasn't used more physically, alot of the time he seems very static with robotic like movements.

 

[Damiean Dark]

I think keaton did a good job with the limitations of the suit even in BB bale has a bit of trouble wih it i think the dark knights new suit will be the most versatile to move about in.

 

[El Payaso]

As far as I am concerned, B89 did not get one thing right regarding Batman.
That also goes for Returns, Forever and B&R.

BB, thats where its at baby, thats where its at.

Just to name one thing, the black rubber suit concept of B89 was again re-used for the oh-so-faithful Batman Begins instead of the traditional blue-greay tights. Yeah, baby, yeah.

 

[Mr. Socko]

Just to name one thing, the black rubber suit concept of B89 was again re-used for the oh-so-faithful Batman Begins instead of the traditional blue-greay tights. Yeah, baby, yeah.

QFT.

 

[Myrddin_Emrys]

Just to name one thing, the black rubber suit concept of B89 was again re-used for the oh-so-faithful Batman Begins instead of the traditional blue-greay tights. Yeah, baby, yeah.

The story of the Batman is more than a rubber suit.

 

[Kargo Warrior]

As far as I am concerned, B89 did not get one thing right regarding Batman.
That also goes for Returns, Forever and B&R.

BB, thats where its at baby, thats where its at.

Completelly agree.

I can understand how can someone argue that Batman is a better movie then Batman Begins i mean it has great cinematography,music,atmosphere...but as a Batman movie the 1989 is as faithfull to Batman and his mythology and supporting characters as the cloud was to Galactus.

I freakin hate the hypocrisy on these boards sometimes...The Joker not being perma white(and we still dont know that for certain) is terrible but Harvey as a black guy is ok just because some people will be subjective to no end and defend Batman (1989) like they've made it.

 

[El Payaso]

The story of the Batman is more than a rubber suit.

QFP

(quote for pointless)

It was just to prove you wrong about 'nothing being right' but somehow I think you know it.

That said, the presence of Batman, his mutual hatred with Joker, the parents' killing, Alfred, the fundamental core things were very faithful to the first Bat-comics.