The List of Things That Batman 89 Got Right/Wrong

As far as I am concerned, B89 did not get one thing right regarding Batman.

LMAO. what are you, 12? (expecting some BS bout how your actually 32 or some sh**). you just lost all credibility on these boards bud. what a tool. guy doesnt know one thing about batman, yet tries to act like he does. what a noob. if you really knew anything about batman, you could see ALL the past 5 film have done something right regarding the character. even the pretty awful B&R got some character traits right. clooneys wayne looked alot like the comics, possibly even more then any bat actor to date, and mr freeze, while he might have been portrayed as a ice pun spouting nerd, DID have the backstory you see in the comics, how his wife was in frozen alive and how he tries everything to save her (damn, you got me defending B&R, damn you!). but saying that B89 did not get anything right at all, man, what a stupid ass statement that one is, and ive seen alot of stupid posts on here! i almost sh** my pants laughing at your post. your obviously beyond being just a biased nolanite, your just being ingorant. i hate how ppl on here wear their ignorance like a badge of honor on these boards. makes me sick.
 
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 consider B89 to be less faithful to the comics than Begins.

But it's nothing like Begins was so faithful either. It apparents to be most of the time but there are many many differences.

Rachel, Chill being captured the same night Waynes were killed, Chill being killed when Bruce is not Batman yet, Ra's being Ducard, Ra's being Bruce Wayne's mentor, Flass in name only, Loeb in name only, Crane being a pretty boy...

For me it's about if differences work and if the movie works as a whole. Can't say either B89 or BB fail in this respect.

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.

I get that all the time. It's terrible to have Joker being Waynes' killer but it's ok to have Ra's being Ducard being Wayne's trainer and mentor.

That said, I wasn't ok with a black Dent, unless he'd never become Two-Face.
 
yeah i agree, i didnt mind harvey dent bein black, but if he was a black twoface, that would be pretty lame.
 
LMAO. what are you, 12? (expecting some BS bout how your actually 32 or some sh**). you just lost all credibility on these boards bud. what a tool. guy doesnt know one thing about batman, yet tries to act like he does. what a noob. if you really knew anything about batman, you could see ALL the past 5 film have done something right regarding the character. even the pretty awful B&R got some character traits right. clooneys wayne looked alot like the comics, possibly even more then any bat actor to date, and mr freeze, while he might have been portrayed as a ice pun spouting nerd, DID have the backstory you see in the comics, how his wife was in frozen alive and how he tries everything to save her (damn, you got me defending B&R, damn you!). but saying that B89 did not get anything right at all, man, what a stupid ass statement that one is, and ive seen alot of stupid posts on here! i almost sh** my pants laughing at your post. your obviously beyond being just a biased nolanite, your just being ingorant. i hate how ppl on here wear their ignorance like a badge of honor on these boards. makes me sick.

Look who's talking. Calm down for the love of god! :whatever:
 
yeah, let me get myself together. :o

i know i have done my share of bashing and trashing, but this poster is just a flat out joke.

Maybe some people have thought the same thing about you once or twice. :dry:

Give him a break. :cwink:
 
It was a stupid statement, but Dear God on these boards you diss one of the films minus Forever & B&R then you get completely trashed but hey that's life.
 
It was a stupid statement, but Dear God on these boards you diss one of the films minus Forever & B&R then you get completely trashed but hey that's life.

No big deal. It's the guys opinion. Let him have it. :cwink:
 
Pros:

1.) Making Batman dark & not like campy 60s that was rumored to happend.

2.) The Batmobile. Despite prefering Batman Begins one, I thought this mobile was pretty cool though.

3.) Making Batman's costume all dark. I'm glad they didn't went with the blue/grey costume with trunk on the outside. I think all black suit him with the "Dark Knight" look.

4.) Danny Elfman's soundtrack on the film. :)


Cons (No one should disrespect me & flame me for my opinions on this one below. Don't like it? Too bad.)

1.) Nicholson was too old & too hammy as Joker. He is a great actor & all, but it don't mean he can do no wrong. Not to mention he was a little fat with balding hairline. Sorry, but I think Joker shouldn't be old.

2.) Lack of story. Story come first to me, then action.

3.) Vicki Vale screaming too much. Seriously, I wish Burton make her stop screaming every seconds. I feel like I want to shoot that screaming ***** for doing that.

4.) Joker as the killer of Bruce's parents. It's one thing to make some change from the comics, but having the arch nemesis being the killer of his parents is where I cross the line. Never & I mean never mess with that origin from the comics. I think it just an pathetic excuse for Burton to make Bat hate Joker more. Like he hate him enough. :whatever:

5.) Batman kill. Burton made it look like the Punisher was wearing the suit than Bruce Wayne.

6.) The movie being more of a Joker film than Batman. If you're going to name the title "Batman", don't make him the supporting character!!

7. Dent is black. He is white, not black. Burton is color-blind.

8.) And last, Alfred let Vale inside the Batcave! I can't believe Burton allow that. Alfred would never do that. He suppose to protect his secret. I suppose every women Bruce sleep with now know he is Batman. :whatever: :whatever:
 
i still dont get some ppl who think jacks joker was "too hammy" or "too funny", when that is part of the joker character. in BTAS, he's BEYOND hammy, he is just plain corny and cheese central (strangely, fanboys seem to prefer this), but there are those few moments when BTAS joker can be scary or intimidateing, but for the most part he is a clowny clown. he cant be a deadly serious killer maniac without a joker pun or 2 or else he wouldnt be joker. and too old? this argument will never end, his being older didnt hinder the film or his performance at all. i'd prefer being slightly older with a bit of a gut (not that big at all really) whos known for acting good as a crazy person then a younger inexperienced ammature.
 
Cons (No one should disrespect me & flame me for my opinions on this one below. Don't like it? Too bad.)

I for sure won't disrespect you or flame you, but I will for sure disagree with you. Don't like it? you know...

1.) Nicholson was too old & too hammy as Joker. He is a great actor & all, but it don't mean he can do no wrong. Not to mention he was a little fat with balding hairline. Sorry, but I think Joker shouldn't be old.

I'm not sure how oldness (50 y.o.) affects the character, but Joker is a hammy character that can kill people in cruel and horrid ways. Nicholsons was that.

2.) Lack of story. Story come first to me, then action.

There was a story. Of coure, not as complex as in some other superhero movies, but certainly there was a story. About Batman appearing in town, about a gangster becoming a maniac with a clown face, about Joker becoming the mob boss, about a strange millionaire that has a secret and the journalist that, investigating him falls in love with him, and about Batman and Joker having a confrontation. And thn, there's action.

3.) Vicki Vale screaming too much. Seriously, I wish Burton make her stop screaming every seconds. I feel like I want to shoot that screaming ***** for doing that.

Most of times, love interests always screams. Rachel, Mary Jane, you name it. But yes, I agree.

4.) Joker as the killer of Bruce's parents. It's one thing to make some change from the comics, but having the arch nemesis being the killer of his parents is where I cross the line. Never & I mean never mess with that origin from the comics. I think it just an pathetic excuse for Burton to make Bat hate Joker more. Like he hate him enough. :whatever:

By far a less pathetic excuse for hating each otehr than... nothing, which is what we have in comics.

And then, Spiderman's origin was changed, Hulk's origin have been changed twice, Batman's origin has been changed in Batman Begins too.

I certainly can't see where the 'line' has to be drawn. Spercially since in Batman's case, the times the origina has been changed, it has worked perfectly.

5.) Batman kill. Burton made it look like the Punisher was wearing the suit than Bruce Wayne.

It looked more like Batman of 1939.

6.) The movie being more of a Joker film than Batman. If you're going to name the title "Batman", don't make him the supporting character!!

And don't name the movie King Kong if it's about Jack Driscoll and Ann Darrow, or Jaws if the movie is about chief Brody?

Batman, by being not in the front row, was made even more attractive and intriguing. That naturally doesn't mean it is the only way of making it work.

7. Dent is black. He is white, not black. Burton is color-blind.

And Kingpin is not black and Commissioner Loeb is not black either. And since we're on this, Flass is not fat and filthy and Crane is not a pretty face. Oh and Alfred is bald and thin.

8.) And last, Alfred let Vale inside the Batcave! I can't believe Burton allow that. Alfred would never do that. He suppose to protect his secret. I suppose every women Bruce sleep with now know he is Batman. :whatever: :whatever:

Alfre was actually more worried for Bruce and the consequences of him being Batman than the secret. As he was in Begins too (even when in Begins he never went as far as in B89). But Alfred warned Bruce many times about him playing with Vicki's feelings and letting his alter ego to screw up with everything in his life and obssessing him to unhealthy levels. He just acted consistently with his feeligs - and his paternal figure role - in the movie by forcing Bruce to face the consequences of his actions. No problem for me.
 
Batman, by being not in the front row, was made even more attractive and intriguing.

yes, this way of telling the story worked out unexpectedly well.
 
I totally agree with El Payaso on this one. But one thing I don't get why people keep saying its the Joker's Movie or the Joker is the main character, the first time I saw the film I thought Batman was the main character and I still do, for me Batman/Bruce Wayne had the most screentime and the biggest story. The only reason I believe people say this is because Jack Nicholson got his name put 1st on Posters, etc but that was only cause he was a lot more famous than Keaton at the time and attracted more people to come and see the film. In Batman Bruce Wayne/Batman storywise gets His Past, Starting out as Batman, Vicki Vale, fighting Crime, & the Joker whereas the Joker got his orgin, taking over the Mob, & fighting Batman, Batman definitely was the main character.
 
Nicholson was anything but old in this movie.
 
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. :huh:
I agree, even though I don't hate the film, I agree that was ridiculous as you put it.

Well, what else did Batman 89 get wrong -

1) Michael Keaton looks nothing like Bats/Bruce Wayne [which I can admit & still enjoy his overall performance]

2) Jack Nicholson was chunkier than your average Joker.

3) Vicki Vale is a red head in the comics, not a blonde.

And all the other stuff about Joker killing Bats' parents.

And yet, I still enjoy this film and Nolan's film. Why? Because I proudly walk the line! :oldrazz:
 
And yet, I still enjoy this film and Nolan's film. Why? Because I proudly walk the line! :oldrazz:

I love both films almost as much as each other, so I'll walk the line with you. I really don't get how people not like Batman, Batman Begins, & Batman Returns, they are all in my top 10 movies and all right next to each other, 2nd, 3rd, & 4th place respectively.
 
I love both films almost as much as each other, so I'll walk the line with you. I really don't get how people not like Batman, Batman Begins, & Batman Returns, they are all in my top 10 movies and all right next to each other, 2nd, 3rd, & 4th place respectively.
If we could all walk the line, these boards would be a happier place.

I say all these films have relative strengths & weaknesses, pros & cons, etc. But the comparisons will be eternal, inevitable and continuing till the end of time.
 
I agree, even though I don't hate the film, I agree that was ridiculous as you put it.

Well, what else did Batman 89 get wrong -

1) Michael Keaton looks nothing like Bats/Bruce Wayne [which I can admit & still enjoy his overall performance]

2) Jack Nicholson was chunkier than your average Joker.

3) Vicki Vale is a red head in the comics, not a blonde.

And all the other stuff about Joker killing Bats' parents.

And yet, I still enjoy this film and Nolan's film. Why? Because I proudly walk the line! :oldrazz:

Nice, very nice! I agree with most of this.

If we could all walk the line, these boards would be a happier place.

I say all these films have relative strengths & weaknesses, pros & cons, etc. But the comparisons will be eternal, inevitable and continuing till the end of time.

This is the greatest statement I've ever heard on these boards! Very well put sir! You are a god among men! Listen to Dr. Fate people!

I love you avatar too! :woot:
 
I agree, even though I don't hate the film, I agree that was ridiculous as you put it.

Well, what else did Batman 89 get wrong -

1) Michael Keaton looks nothing like Bats/Bruce Wayne [which I can admit & still enjoy his overall performance]

Bale doesn't, too.
2) Jack Nicholson was chunkier than your average Joker.

Heath Ledger is non-perma-whiter than your average joker.

3) Vicki Vale is a red head in the comics, not a blonde.

Wow. And BB scarecrow is dark haired, while in the source material he is blonde and skinny.
 
Yes he does. In fact I think he looks more like Bruce Wayne than any other guy that has played Batman in the past.


lets put it this way. bale looked like bruce wayne from the comics, or some of them, the "playboy" version of bruce. i'll give him that. but to me he looked like a darker less dorky sounding val kilmer. not much of a leap. but as batman, he looked like an idiot. keaton muscle-wise may not have on the outside looked exactly like the comics (if he was built up more, i bet he would have been) but when he put on that suit, he BECAME the living breathing gruff clint eastwood-like Batman from the comics. bale looked like a dork in the suit, sadly. i blame it partly on bale, because he made that horrible sounding voice that sounded like glass being shattered with dogs barking, and partly on the costume designer who created that godawful cowl, with those razor sharp jowls and that egghead, and the worst part, the supertight mouthpiece that made him look like such a nerd. bale just wasnt Batman to me. hes just bruce wayne. but keaton is still Batman.
 
Nice, very nice! I agree with most of this.



This is the greatest statement I've ever heard on these boards! Very well put sir! You are a god among men! Listen to Dr. Fate people!

I love you avatar too! :woot:
Thank you. This was me at one of my better moments.

Off record, I would say Bale comes closer to meeting the basic visual requirements of Bruce as we usually see Bruce in comics - dark haired, tall (at least taller than Keaton from what I've seen), muscular/athletic, and playboy/matinee idol good looks. Keaton is not an ugly man by any means, but he has more of a blue collar working guy kind of look to him as opposed to that playboy businessman type look (Val Kilmer was also a taller, more muscular, matinee idol type, see BF).

Now if you'll all direct your attention to the Dark Knight Caption Thread, you can see my most recent caption spoofing the Burtonite VS. Nolanite debacle.
 
lets put it this way. bale looked like bruce wayne from the comics, or some of them, the "playboy" version of bruce. i'll give him that. but to me he looked like a darker less dorky sounding val kilmer. not much of a leap. but as batman, he looked like an idiot. keaton muscle-wise may not have on the outside looked exactly like the comics (if he was built up more, i bet he would have been) but when he put on that suit, he BECAME the living breathing gruff clint eastwood-like Batman from the comics. bale looked like a dork in the suit, sadly. i blame it partly on bale, because he made that horrible sounding voice that sounded like glass being shattered with dogs barking, and partly on the costume designer who created that godawful cowl, with those razor sharp jowls and that egghead, and the worst part, the supertight mouthpiece that made him look like such a nerd. bale just wasnt Batman to me. hes just bruce wayne. but keaton is still Batman.

I would have never guessed that you feel that way... :dry:

The look of the costume had nothing to do with Bale. I guess you have preferred Bale to turn his hole body to look to the left or right like Keaton did. I like the Keaton suit better, but it's just wouldn't work in a real fight.

That "horrible sounding voice" was used to show the difference between Bruce Wayne and Batman. There was a microphone concealed in the cowl's jaw line, that allows the bat-ears to double as powerful loudspeakers. This is what gives Batman's voice that distinctive, disembodied and unearthly sound. It was also done to scare the hell out of his prey. It was the first time that had ever been done on film and it worked great.

So you think Keaton is more spot on Batman huh? Who do you think would win in a fight, Keaton's Batman or Bale's Batman?
 
lets put it this way. bale looked like bruce wayne from the comics, or some of them, the "playboy" version of bruce. i'll give him that. but to me he looked like a darker less dorky sounding val kilmer. not much of a leap. but as batman, he looked like an idiot. keaton muscle-wise may not have on the outside looked exactly like the comics (if he was built up more, i bet he would have been) but when he put on that suit, he BECAME the living breathing gruff clint eastwood-like Batman from the comics. bale looked like a dork in the suit, sadly. i blame it partly on bale, because he made that horrible sounding voice that sounded like glass being shattered with dogs barking, and partly on the costume designer who created that godawful cowl, with those razor sharp jowls and that egghead, and the worst part, the supertight mouthpiece that made him look like such a nerd. bale just wasnt Batman to me. hes just bruce wayne. but keaton is still Batman.

Thank you. This was me at one of my better moments.

Off record, I would say Bale comes closer to meeting the basic visual requirements of Bruce as we usually see Bruce in comics - dark haired, tall (at least taller than Keaton from what I've seen), muscular/athletic, and playboy/matinee idol good looks. Keaton is not an ugly man by any means, but he has more of a blue collar working guy kind of look to him as opposed to that playboy businessman type look (Val Kilmer was also a taller, more muscular, matinee idol type, see BF).

Now if you'll all direct your attention to the Dark Knight Caption Thread, you can see my most recent caption spoofing the Burtonite VS. Nolanite debacle.

Your welcome! I agree!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"