The Official Batman (1989) Thread - Part 3

[Green Goblin]

I found B&R funny and entertaining. But a horrible batman adaptation. Which is better Batman 89 or Batman Begins?

 

[regwec]

They're too different to compare, in some ways, but I think '89 has more re-watch value.

 

[Pfeiffer-Pfan]

They are both great in their own ways... but I do find myself reaching for Batman '89 more than BB.

 

[Green Goblin]

The only thing I thought 89 did better thàn Begins was the villain, not that the villains in Begins were even just good they were great!

 

[Senator Pleasury]

The only thing I thought 89 did better thàn Begins was the villain, not that the villains in Begins were even just good they were great!

Ra's maybe. Falcone not so much. Scarecrow was a damn baffoon.

 

[shauner111]

Don't be ridiculous...

It's a BATMAN movie.

It may not be one you like or agree with but it is a Batman movie.

WB had Burton money and said make another BATMAN movie. His creative choices are perfectly valid. As valid as anything Dozier, Schumacher, Timm/Dini and Nolan crafted.

I disagree. Just because Batman is in the title, means nothing. I DO like things about this movie. This may have been my favorite one as a child. That's why I can look at it with clear vision. It's just not a Batman movie, or at least not a good one (even if it's a good Tim Burton movie).

I tend to agree with many things Jett says about this movie, minus all the crazy hate that he has. When he says there's nothing that makes you feel like Batman is heroic. There's no great Batman moments for me. I don't cheer him, don't feel he's heroic, only feel like he's a small feature. Penguin and Catwoman have entertaining bits but theyre mutated monster versions of their true characters. Gordon is non existent. It feels like Burton took 5 characters from the mythology and said "I don't want to make a Batman movie or a sequel to 89. I want my universe. A parallel version of Gotham City that feels like a town of goth instead of a massive city. Yes. Nightmare Before Christmas with a few characters changed to fit my vision".

Like I said, it's good for what it is. But I will never see it as a Batman story. It actually feels like a dream/hallucination from the mind of Batman 89's Bruce Wayne.

Im glad Burton made it. It's bold. It led to Shumacher which led to Nolan which leads us to where we are now. But you're supposed to feel good and inspired by Batman with some tragedy thrown in. I never felt like I was on Keaton's side like I am in the first movie. Nor did I feel any character moments enough to feel anything tragic for the Wayne character.

 

[Comics N' Toons]

I'm not trying to fuel the flames of a "Burtonite/Nolanite" war, but I think it's more than fair to say the the Nolan films were FAR more influenced by the 70s comics than Burton's. In fact, I've never heard anyone say that Burton's films had a strong 70s influence.

Well you just did! LITTLE KNOWN FACT: When TOM MANKEWITZ wrote the first draft for the 89 movie, he used the Englehardt/Rogers run (Strange Apparitions) as his basis for tone. The villains were going to be Joker, Penguin and Catwoman. When MANK left the project, ENGLEHARDT himself wrote a draft from what Mank had done, deleting Catwoman and having a Joker Penguin teamup! Ultimately Sam Hamm's script used elements from the Denny O'neil stories as well as the Joker origin from KILLING JOKE, using Alan Napier's name (Alfred from Batman show) for Jack the gangster and when Warren Scarem came in and did rewrites, he brought in a lot more of the Frank Miller darkness!

 

[Pfeiffer-Pfan]

It's not about a the name in the title... it's about a director doing something different with a 50 year old character. If people can accept something as mythology bending as the ending of The Dark Knight Rises, they should be capable of accepting Returns.

I never felt like cheering for Batman in The Dark Knight Returns... but Miller's mutated version of this character is no less valid in my eyes.

Everyone is entitled to not like it, but people like Jett (hate that guy!!) are wrong to dismiss it.

Whether people like it or not it is part of Batman's 75 year history.

Tell me you don't like it, fine... but don't tell me it's not a valid Batman movie.

 

[shauner111]

Well you just did! LITTLE KNOWN FACT: When TOM MANKEWITZ wrote the first draft for the 89 movie, he used the Englehardt/Rogers run (Strange Apparitions) as his basis for tone. The villains were going to be Joker, Penguin and Catwoman. When MANK left the project, ENGLEHARDT himself wrote a draft from what Mank had done, deleting Catwoman and having a Joker Penguin teamup! Ultimately Sam Hamm's script used elements from the Denny O'neil stories as well as the Joker origin from KILLING JOKE, using Alan Napier's name (Alfred from Batman show) for Jack the gangster and when Warren Scarem came in and did rewrites, he brought in a lot more of the Frank Miller darkness!

I agree with you about Batman 89 using some 70s and 80s comics. But Returns feels like it belongs to nothing.

 

[Green Goblin]

Ra's maybe. Falcone not so much. Scarecrow was a damn baffoon.

They tied the villains together well. That and TDK villains are the best way of having multiple villains!

 

[shauner111]

It's not about a the name in the title... it's about a director doing something different with a 50 year old character. If people can accept something as mythology bending as the ending of The Dark Knight Rises, they should be capable of accepting Returns.

I never felt like cheering for Batman in The Dark Knight Returns... but Miller's mutated version of this character is no less valid in my eyes.

Everyone is entitled to not like it, but people like Jett (hate that guy!!) are wrong to dismiss it.

Whether people like it or not it is part of Batman's 75 year history.

Tell me you don't like it, fine... but don't tell me it's not a valid Batman movie.

It's valid as an interpretation. I respect Burton for doing it. I still dig a lot of things in it. But nobody will change my mind. I don't think it's a Batman movie or story. I don't feel like these are Batman characters at all. I feel like theyre all mutations. Batman is tragedy, darkness, heroism, inspiration, etc. It's a mix of all of those things. I even felt that more with Kilmer's Batman than here. All I felt in Returns was a dark Batman with all kinds of silliness and macabre around him. It felt more like a vampire version of Punisher than batman.

And ive always had a beef with the Penguin and Catwoman interpretations. Visually I loved them as a kid, as I grew up, I don't feel anything but them being campy-weirdo-monster versions. I facepalm just as much with Penguin as I do Freeze in B&R. They changed them just as much as Shumacher changed Two-Face and Bane into things they weren't. "Ill show her my flipper trick!" is just as ******ed as "Da Ice age!!" or any of Freeze's hilarious puns. It's all camp. But I don't feel good about it like kids did with Forever or 89 or Adam West's version. I don't cheer Batman when he smiles at a dude and blows him up with dynamite.

There are times when im cheering Frank Miller's Batman, wanting him to survive, wanting to get at the Joker for hurting innocent people. That's the difference.

Batman is a dark hero. And for me personally Batman should always be gritty. It's something Batman (89) and TDK-T have in common that the 90s sequels don't. Whether that means fantasy/sci-fi or realism, it should be gritty IMO. Returns was just a fairytale of fantasy mixing Halloween and Christmas together and promoting it as a Batman movie.

 

[Green Goblin]

I think BB & TDK are better than B89 but B89 is better than rises.

 

[Comics N' Toons]

I agree with you about Batman 89 using some 70s and 80s comics. But Returns feels like it belongs to nothing.

Returns is a film that slightly builds on Batman 89, throws in bits of Beetlejuice and Scissorhands and calls itself THE RETURN of BATMAN!

It was Pfeiffer-FAN who said something to the effect of it would have been great to get a proper sequel that built on the first Batman in the Returns thread. Pfeiffer-FAN is right. We didn't get gangsters and a nightmarish villain from the 70's and 80's comic books. We got Tim Burton creations all throughout a film that supposedly starred Batman from the 89 film.

 

[Pfeiffer-Pfan]

Did you just spell-check my username?

 

[shauner111]

Returns is a film that slightly builds on Batman 89, throws in bits of Beetlejuice and Scissorhands and calls itself THE RETURN of BATMAN!

It was Pfeiffer-FAN who said something to the effect of it would have been great to get a proper sequel that built on the first Batman in the Returns thread. Pfeiffer-FAN is right. We didn't get gangsters and a nightmarish villain from the 70's and 80's comic books. We got Tim Burton creations all throughout a film that supposedly starred Batman from the 89 film.

I agree with this 100 percent.

It wasn't really a proper sequel to the first movie. It was like a dreamworld or alternate universe to 89'. Burton's fetishes featuring some characters twisted around to fit his needs. This movie could have been called Penguin or Catwoman because Batman played third wheel to the story. He was pretty much in it as much as Max Shrek and like him had a non-heroic role but felt like he was just thrown in there so the studio can call it "Batman Returns".

The grit, the gangsters, mercenaries, whatever..just real people to fight batman..that's what feels like a Batman movie to me! With all his dark heroism and tragedy. That was like..non-existent.

 

[Snow Queen]

I found B&R funny and entertaining. But a horrible batman adaptation. Which is better Batman 89 or Batman Begins?

Batman Begins. For me, it has better acting (bar Vale and Rachel in both), dialogue (though it has it's misfires), villain (though Joker's no slouch and definitely the best part of 89), a better story, a better Batman and is just closer to the Batman and world I want to see.

 

[Comics N' Toons]

Did you just spell-check my username?

No. sorry. just forgot the spelling. LOL. sorry!

 

[BatLobster]

Well you just did! LITTLE KNOWN FACT: When TOM MANKEWITZ wrote the first draft for the 89 movie, he used the Englehardt/Rogers run (Strange Apparitions) as his basis for tone. The villains were going to be Joker, Penguin and Catwoman. When MANK left the project, ENGLEHARDT himself wrote a draft from what Mank had done, deleting Catwoman and having a Joker Penguin teamup! Ultimately Sam Hamm's script used elements from the Denny O'neil stories as well as the Joker origin from KILLING JOKE, using Alan Napier's name (Alfred from Batman show) for Jack the gangster and when Warren Scarem came in and did rewrites, he brought in a lot more of the Frank Miller darkness!

Yeah, but a lot of that 70s stuff got lost by the time Sam Hamm got around to doing his final draft.

I see what you're saying, but I guess for me when I think 70s Batman I think of the more Bond-like Bruce Wayne, exotic villains like Ra's al Ghul, international in scope plots, Bruce living in a penthouse in Gotham, etc. The influence seems more overt on the Nolan films.

To me Batman '89 felt like the Batman of the 40s fused with the modern grittiness of the Batman of the 80s. Not that some 70s stuff didn't creep in there, it just didn't pop out to me as much. I'm not criticizing the movie, that's just how I see it.

 

[Comics N' Toons]

Yeah, but a lot of that 70s stuff got lost by the time Sam Hamm got around to doing his final draft.

I see what you're saying, but I guess for me when I think 70s Batman I think of the more Bond-like Bruce Wayne, exotic villains like Ra's al Ghul, international in scope plots, Bruce living in a penthouse in Gotham, etc. The influence seems more overt on the Nolan films.

To me Batman '89 felt like the Batman of the 40s fused with the modern grittiness of the Batman of the 80s. Not that some 70s stuff didn't creep in there, it just didn't pop out to me as much. I'm not criticizing the movie, that's just how I see it.

Yeah I get ya. I guess when i say 70's, I mean the tone of the early 70's. It was, after all, the 70's when Batman became dark after the 1969 return of "The Dark Knight" with Secret of the Waiting Graves. The globetrotting hairy chested love god (as Morrison calls him) didn't appear until about 1975.

 

[Green Goblin]

Returns was a batman movie, it had batman and other batman characters in it...

 

[shauner111]

Obviously but im saying it doesn't feel like one.

 

[Green Goblin]

Obviously but im saying it doesn't feel like one.

Fair enough, it did feel a little cartoony at times. Not as bad as forever or B&R but it is not as dark as 89. It's somewhere between forever and 89.

 

[shauner111]

It's more gothic and macabre so it has this feeling of being darker or more depressing. But it's much more comical, campier. Batman 89 felt like Gotham City. Batman Returns was like Keaton's Batman was literally planted in Edward Scissorhands or Nightmare Before Christmas' universe like WHERE THE **** AM I? Yuh got women being brought back to life as acrobatic cats! Sewer dudes with flipper hands and black goo oozing out of their mouth! Our pets heads are fallin off! It's anarchy!!

 

[Green Goblin]

I think part of that is just Burton's vibe. I see your point though.

 

[Comics N' Toons]

Speaking of cartoony, does anyone else think that Returns would fit as an episode of BTAS, obviously toned down and without all the cursing etc. The rubber duck car, the penguins with rockets, elements of the Red Triangle Gang, Max Shreck etc. It does feel a bit like a Saturday morning cartoon.