The Official Batman (1989) Thread - Part 4

Status
Not open for further replies.
I just wish Jack Nicholson was a little bit slimmer when playing The Joker... I know it was just his middle age spread developing but he would have pulled off that great lanky Neal Adams Joker.
 
Where do these spam posters come from?

Now we know- Delhi.
 
V86tzXa.jpg
 
This is still the best live action Batman movie.

To me, the nolanverse films are more surreal and unrealistic than the burtonverse ones, Even though I like both series.

Batman and Joker fits right into Burton's dark and fantastic Gotham City, but seems out of place in Nolan's Chicagotham City. I can believe that a man would dress up like a bat in Burton's world, but in Nolan's it seems kind of unnecessary and awkward.

If you make Batman too realistic, it backfires. Batman has never been realistic in the first place...

I somewhat agree. Batman: Year One was as much realism as was needed. Nothing more. Nolan's films acted like the audience needed everything explained to them. I don't think the GA is that stupid!
 
Nolan's films acted like the audience needed everything explained to them. I don't think the GA is that stupid!

That's another thing, nobody talks like that in real life. It's extremely artificial. Take a look at Batman Begins... "fear" this and "fear" that. We get it.

Some of the scenes with Thomas Wayne is very strange too. Didn't feel natural at all, especially his death. And Rachel and Bruce in the car?:doh: "What chance does Gotham have when the good people do nothing? You should really become Batman, Bruce".
 
I somewhat agree. Batman: Year One was as much realism as was needed. Nothing more. Nolan's films acted like the audience needed everything explained to them. I don't think the GA is that stupid!

While I agree that over-exposition is a flaw in the Nolan films, I sadly can't share your optimism regarding the GA... :csad:
 
Batman 1989 Concept Art and Storyboards by David Russell

David-Russell-Batman-1989-Finale-5.jpg


David-Russell-Batman-Batplane-1-8-10.jpg
 
The story board Joker is a dead ringer for Willem Dafoe.
 
Willem Dafoe Joker would be almost too perfect.
 
So I just saw a conversation between two entertainment journalists about how B'89 apparently "doesn't hold up". Excuse me while I :whatever:.

To be fair, the film is quite dated. Maybe that was why they were referring to. Part of the reason for the film seeing dated by today's standards is the heavy emphasis on the Prince music.

Still, B89 absolutely holds up as a great film.
 
Very smart decision to leave out that scene with the little girl.
 
The story board Joker is a dead ringer for Willem Dafoe.
Odd that you mention it because in the 80's there was a comic periodical magazine called Comics Scene (sort of like Wizard) that had articles of upcoming movies/TV/comics and in an article about Batman '89 there's a mention that Willem Dafoe, James Woods and even Ray Liotta were being considered for the Joker.

Hell I think even today Dafoe and pull off an older Dark Knight Returns Joker.
 
Odd that you mention it because in the 80's there was a comic periodical magazine called Comics Scene (sort of like Wizard) that had articles of upcoming movies/TV/comics and in an article about Batman '89 there's a mention that Willem Dafoe, James Woods and even Ray Liotta were being considered for the Joker.

Hell I think even today Dafoe and pull off an older Dark Knight Returns Joker.

another person worth mentioning was Tim Curry, WB liked his creepy clown performance in "IT" and he became one of the top 3 actors on their list should Nicholson pass on the role....ironically Tim Curry was the original voice of the Joker in the Animated Series before being replaced by Mark Hamill
 
This is still the best live action Batman movie.

To me, the nolanverse films are more surreal and unrealistic than the burtonverse ones, Even though I like both series.

Batman and Joker fits right into Burton's dark and fantastic Gotham City, but seems out of place in Nolan's Chicagotham City. I can believe that a man would dress up like a bat in Burton's world, but in Nolan's it seems kind of unnecessary and awkward.

If you make Batman too realistic, it backfires. Batman has never been realistic in the first place...
I love this Batman. But how can Nolan's be more "surreal" than Burton's? Or unrealistic? When Burton's was a fairytale Gotham with monsters and campy behavior?

The idea of Batman feeling out of place in Nolan's world was the exact point. So it's a shock when people of Gotham and audiences see Batman or Joker. If that world is fantastical and gothic where people can be brought back to life then batman fits right in no problem. There's nothing shocking about it. Batman fits like a glove, like Burton's movies. The people shouldn't even have a shocked reaction. Nolan didn't want to repeat Burton because those movies happened. What's the point of making anything unless you can do it fresh?

Batman is a realistic character. It can happen. It takes a lot of money and strength and determination but it's "realistic" and "relatable".

I remember seeing the movie for the first time when i was about seven years old. My parents turned off the tv at the beginning of the "descent into mystery" part. They told me that the movie was over... But I remembered scenes from the commercials that I hadn't seen in the movie. Next time it aired they let me watch all of it. I thought the cathedral part where Batman kicks Joker's ass was a bit scary:hehe:
:hehe: your parents must be strict.

I always loved that cathedral part. Scary as a kid, but in a cool way. I saw it when I was 3 or 4 along with Returns and I couldn't get enough of it! I still love the setting of that cathedral. The PERFECT place.
 
I love this Batman. But how can Nolan's be more "surreal" than Burton's? Or unrealistic? When Burton's was a fairytale Gotham with monsters and campy behavior?

It just doesn't feel right to me, when all the other fantastical elements from the comics are removed. Ra's Al Ghul should really be immortal, Joker should be permawhite, and Bane should use venom. With the "magic" removed, it makes Batman look like Ethan Hunt in a batsuit. You could replace Batman with a guy in a ninja costume and change the names, and it would just be another action thriller.


Nolan did not want to repeat Burton because those movies happened. What's the point of making anything unless you can do it fresh?

I'm not against change, and I do like tdk trilogy, but I think Batman works best in a unrealistic world. I prefer movies where you can take a break from the real world and experience something unusual and exciting. King Kong would not be special if Kong was just a rabid chimp running around New York and strangling people. Or imagine a Star Wars movie about astronauts punching each other in the face onboard a space shuttle.

I don't think Batman is very realistic. A man couldn't be a master in all the martial arts in the world, when it takes almost a lifetime to master just one. But in a fantasy world, it can work:yay:
 
:
your parents must be strict.

I always loved that cathedral part. Scary as a kid, but in a cool way. I saw it when I was 3 or 4 along with Returns and I couldn't get enough of it! I still love the setting of that cathedral. The PERFECT place.

Only a little:woot:

The cathedral part is my favorite part from the movie. It looks like the whole building can fall apart at any moment. It's like something from a horror movie.
 
It just doesn't feel right to me, when all the other fantastical elements from the comics are removed. Ra's Al Ghul should really be immortal, Joker should be permawhite, and Bane should use venom. With the "magic" removed, it makes Batman look like Ethan Hunt in a batsuit. You could replace Batman with a guy in a ninja costume and change the names, and it would just be another action thriller.

Horse radish. Another ninja is not shaped by the death of his parents, has a fear of bats, molds his image after a bat, and adopts theatricality and deception methods to scare criminals.

It's like saying you could replace Keaton's Batman with The Punisher, an angry vigilante who kills criminals because he lost his family to crime.
 
It just doesn't feel right to me, when all the other fantastical elements from the comics are removed. Ra's Al Ghul should really be immortal, Joker should be permawhite, and Bane should use venom. With the "magic" removed, it makes Batman look like Ethan Hunt in a batsuit. You could replace Batman with a guy in a ninja costume and change the names, and it would just be another action thriller.
I don't think it "should" be anything. It's up to the director to have creative freedom. The way it should be. Heath's Joker felt more like Joker to me than Nicholson's great version of Joker...and yet there was no perma-white. Arguments about perma-white, venom, lazarus pits just feel childish to me. It's the same as complaining about an actress having different hair color to what she has in the comics.

I don't see how removing the magic makes Batman dull. That doesn't make any sense to me. Batman has always had a police crime drama element to it with most characters being pretty realistic. Nolan just zoned in on those elements instead of showing things like Immortality or aliens or Mr. Freeze and Clayface.

I'm not against change, and I do like tdk trilogy, but I think Batman works best in a unrealistic world. I prefer movies where you can take a break from the real world and experience something unusual and exciting. King Kong would not be special if Kong was just a rabid chimp running around New York and strangling people. Or imagine a Star Wars movie about astronauts punching each other in the face onboard a space shuttle.

I don't think Batman is very realistic. A man couldn't be a master in all the martial arts in the world, when it takes almost a lifetime to master just one. But in a fantasy world, it can work:yay:
Sure, and that's fair. But that's Star Wars. You cant compare that to Batman. Hey, id love to see more fantastical Batman movies, I enjoy the Burton ones, id like to see Batman Beyond even. But Batman lends itself to a more realistic interpretation.

It depends on what version of Batman you're looking at. There's different versions, and some of them are realistic enough.
 
Horse radish. Another ninja is not shaped by the death of his parents, has a fear of bats, molds his image after a bat, and adopts theatricality and deception methods to scare criminals.

Ok, change that too. His parents got killed by food poisoning, and he's terrified of the dentist. Ninja-Dentistman fights for food safety:ninja:
 
I don't think it "should" be anything. It's up to the director to have creative freedom.

I agree, I just prefer Burton's version.

I don't see how removing the magic makes Batman dull. That doesn't make any sense to me. Batman has always had a police crime drama element to it with most characters being pretty realistic. Nolan just zoned in on those elements instead of showing things like Immortality or aliens or Mr. Freeze and Clayface.

There's no reason we can't have both. Batman as a detective, with unrealistic villains?:yay: worked fine in Batman TAS.
 
Arguments about perma-white, venom, lazarus pits just feel childish to me. It's the same as complaining about an actress having different hair color to what she has in the comics.

Childish? I don't see how. Some of them are in my opinion essential to the character. It's like Spider-Man with suction cups, Magneto with magnets strapped to his arms or Wolverine with kitchen knives between his fingers.
 
Yeah, we can have both. Burton went full on with the fantastical nature of Gotham and Batman's rogues. Nolan went full on with the more realistic gritty side of Gotham and Batman's rogues. I assume the reboot will be the perfect balance.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"