The Official Batman Forever Thread - Part 2

[Mister Meddle]

Burton's movies are a perversion of the Batman mythos. They are also not very well written.

 

[CConn]

Burton's movies are a perversion of the Batman mythos. They are also not very well written.

I always like your posts, because they're always a shining example of what not to think.

It's like an affirmation of my own sanity.

 

[Ponyboy]

I always like your posts, because they're always a shining example of what not to think.

It's like an affirmation of my own sanity.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

I was introduced to Batman via Batman 89, Batman Year One, and BTAS.

So to go from that to Batman Forever is a serious down grade. I remember seeing BF in the theater as a high school student and hating it with a passion.

 

[Elevator Man]

Burton's movies are a perversion of the Batman mythos. They are also not very well written.

[YT]pWdd6_ZxX8c[/YT]

 

[GothamAlleys]

Burton's movies are a perversion of the Batman mythos. They are also not very well written.

Right. Superman in a gay Batman suit fighting cliche crime in candy city is better than bizarre gothic setting and gothic shadowy character. Not well written?? And you like Schumachers movies? Is this a joke or just a huge double standard?

I dont get how someone can say this is a perversion opf Batman mythos

And this is not

 

[BatSpider]

Batman Forever is my favorite of the original 4 and always will be "forever"

But to teh above post and the pic of Riddler. Isn't Batman Arkham City another bright adaptation to Batman, but it always gets praised?

 

[Spoonman]

^lol how is Batman Arkham City "bright"? I don't belive you've actually played the game then.

 

[El Payaso]

Right. Superman in a gay Batman suit fighting cliche crime in candy city is better than bizarre gothic setting and gothic shadowy character. Not well written?? And you like Schumachers movies? Is this a joke or just a huge double standard?

A good Batman movie shouldn't be afraid of showing us a nice bat-butt close-up I say! That's just being a purist. t:

 

[TruerToTheCore]

Right. Superman in a gay Batman suit fighting cliche crime in candy city is better than bizarre gothic setting and gothic shadowy character. Not well written?? And you like Schumachers movies? Is this a joke or just a huge double standard?

Visually the Burton movies were alright, at least the first one, the second one was already a world that didn't fit the Batman comics. Of course I know that people usually fall for those cheap thuganomics, but in the end nothing what Burton did was truly Batman. And when the **** did Bruce Wayne ever behave like he's suffering from ****ing Aspergers syndrome.

Batman's portrayal was okay in B&R and Batman Forever.

In Batman and Batman Returns it was not Batman from the comics at all.

I dont get how someone can say this is a perversion opf Batman mythos

And this is not

The villains sucked in Batman Forever, that I have to admit. But Batman himself was so much better portrayed than what that strange Keaton guy did. And don't get me started on Black-goo-spitting-Penguin and his rocket friends and radioactive-zombie Catwoman. That's simply a Bizarro grimdark take on the Adam West show.

 

[TruerToTheCore]

I always like your posts, because they're always a shining example of what not to think.

It's like an affirmation of my own sanity.

Nay, it's just an affirmation of your low intelligence and lack of the ability to look beyond the nice pictures.

 

[Mister Meddle]

Visually the Burton movies were alright, at least the first one, the second one was already a world that didn't fit the Batman comics. Of course I know that people usually fall for those cheap thuganomics, but in the end nothing what Burton did was truly Batman. And when the **** did Bruce Wayne ever behave like he's suffering from ****ing Aspergers syndrome.

I admit you do have a point. In my honest opinion Burton's visuals are quite over rated. The Dark Knight himself doesn't belong in a dark, gothic-like universe. If anything he belongs in a brighter and more generic universe. Actually no, that's still too hardcore. How about something with colorful lights, glow in the dark thugs? Now that sounds kickass! I also think Bruce Wayne was de suckz. I mean sure I know a child could grow up a bit damaged if they went through the same thing. But damnit, this is Batman we're talking about! He should just man up, create an ordinary social life and stop acting so damn weird.

Batman's portrayal was okay in B&R and Batman Forever.

In Batman and Batman Returns it was not Batman from the comics at all.

Agreed. Especially Kilmer. Sure he was much more emo than the 4 foot tall Michael Keaton but he was superior in every way. I don't know why but he just was. But nobody could touch George Clooney. Not even with a 10 foot pole. It's almost like Batman from the comics came to life with the dude that's dating Stacy Keibler.

The villains sucked in Batman Forever, that I have to admit. But Batman himself was so much better portrayed than what that strange Keaton guy did. And don't get me started on Black-goo-spitting-Penguin and his rocket friends and radioactive-zombie Catwoman. That's simply a Bizarro grimdark take on the Adam West show.

Agreed. I personally hate this bizzarro crap as well. This fantasy crap is for children but they try to hide behind teh darkness to make it appealing to adults.

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

I also think Bruce Wayne was de suckz. I mean sure I know a child could grow up a bit damaged if they went through the same thing. But damnit, this is Batman we're talking about! He should just man up, create an ordinary social life and stop acting so damn weird.

Agreed. Especially Kilmer. Sure he was much more emo than the 4 foot tall Michael Keaton but he was superior in every way. I don't know why but he just was.

He already gave a reason why he prefered the Kilmer Batman, he thought the Batman in the Burton's was just a bit *too* weird.

and i have to agree, at points, the Burton BM was just annoying.

eg, after he saved Selina Kyle at the beginning of the film, y'know, she is a bit shaken up and nervous, and makes a wee joke about how to address Batman, and he looks at her like she has asked him why he doesn't scoop up dogcrap on his patrols, ie like she is a total weirdo.
That reaction just doesn't make sense to me, I mean, it looked like a real character reaction, not an act, and Keaton's Bruce Wayne was personable enough with other people right? so what's with the weirdo Batman reaction?
It was like they were getting a bit too pretentious with the whole 'damaged crusader' bit, and sometimes what you got was a bad mixture of an attempt at being mysterious and damaged, which added up to getting an annoying character moment.

edit: and i guess someone will come in and say 'Oh, that was him having some kind of pre-cursive feeling of kinship with Selina Kyle, and was weirded out by it...' well, you can read into it that way if you want, but to me, it always read as them trying to illustrate how mysterious and damaged he was, but it came off as too spazzy(U.S. meaning) and annoying.

and anyway, there are other examples of this annoying spazziness(U.S. Meaning).

edit: It was as if every time he put on his Batman suit, Keaton became spaz(U.S. meaning)-man, he was too frickin weird with Vicki in in the cave, and was ultra spazzy(U.S. meaning) weird in that scene in her apartment with the Joker, which imo, is the most cringe worthy moment in the whole 89-97 series, it is just annoying as ****, haha, just a wreckless spaz(U.S. meaning) having a spazzy(U.S. meaning) flake out.


Kilmer's Batman maybe had more opportunities to be shown as more likeable and personable, his interactions with Grayson primarily went a long way in making him a more likeable Batman/BW.

 

[CConn]

Nay, it's just an affirmation of your low intelligence and lack of the ability to look beyond the nice pictures.

Wow, you must be a genius if you consider my IQ of 140 to be low.

And I actually wasn't a fan of BR's "nice pictures" (us adults call it cinematography and art direction, btw), but your own great intellect must provide you with a level of insight into my own mind that even I don't possess.

 

[El Payaso]

Visually the Burton movies were alright, at least the first one, the second one was already a world that didn't fit the Batman comics.

It fit the Batman world perfectly. Grim, dark, gritty. Opposite to, say, neon in every corner, Batcave included.

Of course I know that people usually fall for those cheap thuganomics, but in the end nothing what Burton did was truly Batman.

That picture of Batman in the cathedral alone was more Batman than 90% of what Schumacher did.

And when the **** did Bruce Wayne ever behave like he's suffering from ****ing Aspergers syndrome.

Because that was no Asperger syndrome. But people who has witnessed traumatic events, such as someone killing your parents, that live two lives sometimes tend to be introverted and confidential.

Batman's portrayal was okay in B&R and Batman Forever.

Of course. They're a testament on how Batman should be portrayed. A truly triumph.

Schumacher and Clooney themselves are nothing but proud about it. t:

The villains sucked in Batman Forever, that I have to admit. But Batman himself was so much better portrayed than what that strange Keaton guy did.

Wooden Kilmer did okay, but he was more pretending to be all that tormented that actually being it. And, as Batman, he tried his best to emulate Keaton's voice and gestures. I appreciated that.

And don't get me started on Black-goo-spitting-Penguin

Which was an improvement over his bland comic counterpart.

and his rocket friends

Yeah, because Penguin has never used birds as killing weapons.

and radioactive-zombie Catwoman.

Yeah, lots of radioactivity there. Guess if you can't bash properly, it is better to make some things up.

That's simply a Bizarro grimdark take on the Adam West show.

Oh, yeah, not like cackling comedian Riddler and Two-Face in those flamboyant suits with their thematic hide-outs. That was nothing like the Adam West show.

Not to mention that in the Adam West show, villians used to be black-goo-spitter radioactive zombies. Nice work trying to make the connection there.

 

[CConn]

Because that was no Asperger syndrome. But people who has witnessed traumatic events, such as someone killing your parents, that live two lives sometimes tend to be introverted and confidential.

Actually, that characterization was an intentional decision on Burton's part.

His theory being that due to Bruce pouring so much of his time, energy and mind into his work as Batman, he leaves his Bruce Wayne an almost vacant shell of a person.

At its core, it's essentially the same type of psychosis that they portray Batman having in both the comics and Nolan's movies. The only difference being, Burton didn't have Bruce tack on that fake playboy persona.

But that's more of an afterthought - a veneer - not the psychosis itself.

 

[El Payaso]

How about something with colorful lights, glow in the dark thugs? Now that sounds kickass!

Yeah, ripping off Burton's Oogey Boogie Man was kickass!

I also think Bruce Wayne was de suckz. I mean sure I know a child could grow up a bit damaged if they went through the same thing. But damnit, this is Batman we're talking about! He should just man up, create an ordinary social life and stop acting so damn weird.

Yeah, a traumatized man should act like a normal man... what for exactly?

That said, when Bruce Wayne threw a party nobody seemed to have missed it. Or when he goes to talk to a billionaire like Schreck he's received and listened to.

Doesn't sound like a man without a social life to me.

Agreed. Especially Kilmer. Sure he was much more emo than the 4 foot tall Michael Keaton but he was superior in every way. I don't know why but he just was. But nobody could touch George Clooney. Not even with a 10 foot pole. It's almost like Batman from the comics came to life with the dude that's dating Stacy Keibler.

Oh, I've heard that the world, Clooney admitedly being on that list, wouldn't touch what he did to Batman with a ten foot pole.

Not that it's a flattering thing to say btw.

Agreed. I personally hate this bizzarro crap as well. This fantasy crap is for children but they try to hide behind teh darkness to make it appealing to adults.

Yeah, but few directors achieve this adult-toned world like Schumacher did in his bat-movies.

eg, after he saved Selina Kyle at the beginning of the film, y'know, she is a bit shaken up and nervous, and makes a wee joke about how to address Batman, and he looks at her like she has asked him why he doesn't scoop up dogcrap on his patrols, ie like she is a total weirdo.

That might be because she was a total weirdo.

That reaction just doesn't make sense to me, I mean, it looked like a real character reaction, not an act, and Keaton's Bruce Wayne was personable enough with other people right? so what's with the weirdo Batman reaction?

Batman =/= Bruce Wayne, remember?

Some pat in the back and going "there, there" is not Batman's stuff. It would have laughable, given that there was a dozen of clown shooting people all around.

It was like they were getting a bit too pretentious with the whole 'damaged crusader' bit, and sometimes what you got was a bad mixture of an attempt at being mysterious and damaged, which added up to getting an annoying character moment.

Yeah, acting consistently with the character might annoy some people. It is nevertheless considered a good thing by most.

edit: and i guess someone will come in and say 'Oh, that was him having some kind of pre-cursive feeling of kinship with Selina Kyle, and was weirded out by it...' well, you can read into it that way if you want, but to me, it always read as them trying to illustrate how mysterious and damaged he was, but it came off as too spazzy(U.S. meaning) and annoying.

and anyway, there are other examples of this annoying spazziness(U.S. Meaning).

edit: It was as if every time he put on his Batman suit, Keaton became spaz(U.S. meaning)-man, he was too frickin weird with Vicki in in the cave, and was ultra spazzy(U.S. meaning) weird in that scene in her apartment with the Joker, which imo, is the most cringe worthy moment in the whole 89-97 series, it is just annoying as ****, haha, just a wreckless spaz(U.S. meaning) having a spazzy(U.S. meaning) flake out.

Thanks to this piece of information I can tell what a spazzy (U.S. meaning) post is.

Kilmer's Batman maybe had more opportunities to be shown as more likeable and personable, his interactions with Grayson primarily went a long way in making him a more likeable Batman/BW.

Let's not forget when he meets Chase at the rooftop. She shows him her stuff and he just walks away from her giving her his back like he's too troubled to face the situation. Not since Scarlett O'Hara I had seen such a remarkable likeability.

 

[CConn]

The other thing that Burton does (and I can see why some people wouldn't like this) which I personally love, is he's always interjected a certain aspect of his own personality and psychology into his films. In Batman, Bruce's reclusive yet creative psyche was a nod to Burton's own personality.

Then, if you go through Burton's catalog with Edward Scissorhands, Ed Wood, Big Fish, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, etc. you start to see the various threads to Burton's own psychology weave themselves together.

One film might have a subplot that might be a thinly veiled reference to Burton's past, another might detail how Burton views and interacts with the world around him, and another may be an example of Burton's personality, etc.

Essentially, Burton's made his films into his own autobiography. All in all, I've never actually seen another director who's so cleverly and quite subtly interjected himself into his films. It's probably the most inventive, yet least talked about thing that Burton's done in his films.

But yes. I only like his movies for the pretty pictures.

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

That might be because she was a total weirdo.

She wasn't being weird there, just a normal way of coping with a traumatic scary situation, with levity, a pretty normal gag to make given that the guy she is speaking to does not have a normal name.

Batman =/= Bruce Wayne, remember?

Some pat in the back and going "there, there" is not Batman's stuff. It would have laughable, given that there was a dozen of clown shooting people all around.

There is always something of Bruce in Batman, Bruce and Batman are inseperable when he is talking to Selina in the finale, so why is there none of him there in that moment.

He could have at least given her a look that had a little empathy in there, he didn't have to say anything, y'know, a twinkle of the eye, a little spark of humour emerging from the mysterious personage. Instead of looking at here like she's the freak of the week, I mean, it's kind of funny in a way, because he is the one who is acting like the weirdo in that moment.

and the violence had wound down by that point, there was no more shooting in the background by that point, Batman's presence and the cops swooping in chased them all off.

Yeah, acting consistently with the character might annoy some people. It is nevertheless considered a good thing by most.

But, what i am saying is that this illustration of this mix of characteristics was annoying at points, like, if they had given him a little tiny sprinkling of humor into that reaction to Selina Kyle's gag, it would have been a much more satisfying scene imo. it is like they are too focused on the grim.

Thanks to this piece of information I can tell what a spazzy (U.S. meaning) post is.

I am being very P.C.(not U.K. meaning)

Let's not forget when he meets Chase at the rooftop. She shows him her stuff and he just walks away from her giving her his back like he's too troubled to face the situation. Not since Scarlett O'Hara I had seen such a remarkable likeability.

He actually has a pretty upfront conversation with her, basically saying he has not had much luck with women in the past, I don't see anything weird about his reactions to her there, y'know, he's shy and hesistant, but he explains why.
He is a little tiny bit 'chauvanistic' when he sits his rubber bum back in the bat-mobile and says 'Women!', haha, but that is just a bit of humour, it is kind of funny when you see Batman saying that, I always found it amusing anyway, he's just a little freaked out and wants to go home to his batarangs, and is probably also scared that Alfred will find out about her, tell her that story about him falling off that horse into the mud as he escorts her into the batcave, and then he'll have to get on the phone to Superman to fly over and give another woman the old hypno-kiss.
But, aye, he is a bit shy about the attraction to her, that is another likeable aspect of Kilmer's Batman.

 

[Mister Meddle]

He already gave a reason why he prefered the Kilmer Batman, he thought the Batman in the Burton's was just a bit *too* weird.

eg, after he saved Selina Kyle at the beginning of the film, y'know, she is a bit shaken up and nervous, and makes a wee joke about how to address Batman, and he looks at her like she has asked him why he doesn't scoop up dogcrap on his patrols, ie like she is a total weirdo.
That reaction just doesn't make sense to me, I mean, it looked like a real character reaction, not an act, and Keaton's Bruce Wayne was personable enough with other people right? so what's with the weirdo Batman reaction?
It was like they were getting a bit too pretentious with the whole 'damaged crusader' bit, and sometimes what you got was a bad mixture of an attempt at being mysterious and damaged, which added up to getting an annoying character moment.

edit: It was as if every time he put on his Batman suit, Keaton became spaz(U.S. meaning)-man, he was too frickin weird with Vicki in in the cave, and was ultra spazzy weird in that scene in her apartment with the Joker, which imo, is the most cringe worthy moment in the whole 89-97 series, it is just annoying as ****, haha, just a wreckless spaz(U.S. meaning).


Kilmer's Batman maybe had more opportunities to be shown as more likeable and personable, his interactions with Grayson primarily went a long way in making him a more likeable Batman/BW.

I'll put the sarcasm to the side this time.

Maybe he was weird. But the question is this.... why is it a bad thing? What are we expecting? Some generic vigilante character that just happens to have a bat costume nearby?

I can't be too harsh on Forever and Kilmer. I don't dislike Batman Forever because it isn't terrible but it's hard to ignore the corny aspects. You said that Kilmer had the opportunity to be shown as a more likeable character. IMO that was the problem. He was too likeable. He seemed more like the grown child that witnessed the deaths of the Waynes rather than a grown man that is effected by it. The entire time it looked like the guy needed a hug. Where was the fire inside of him? Where was the anger and aggression to push him on a nightly basis?

 

[Cain]

spazzy(U.S. meaning) and annoying.

and anyway, there are other examples of this annoying spazziness(U.S. Meaning).

edit: It was as if every time he put on his Batman suit, Keaton became spaz(U.S. meaning)-man, he was too frickin weird with Vicki in in the cave, and was ultra spazzy(U.S. meaning) weird in that scene in her apartment with the Joker, which imo, is the most cringe worthy moment in the whole 89-97 series, it is just annoying as ****, haha, just a wreckless spaz(U.S. meaning) having a spazzy(U.S. meaning) flake out.

The parentheses in the bold were so weird & random yet consistent that I spilled my water from LOL'ing. Well played sir.

 

[CConn]

Ever notice that British people seem to slaughter the English language more than anything.

Your crusty old Anglo ancestors would be ashamed.

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

^I am Scottish! Hang out in Scotland for a while and you will understand the mangled nature of oor take on the auld lang.

Cain, i would explain that spaz(U.S. meaning) thing, but...i think it is best if i just look mysterious and damaged.

I'll put the sarcasm to the side this time.

Maybe he was weird. But the question is this.... why is it a bad thing? What are we expecting? Some generic vigilante character that just happens to have a bat costume nearby?

I can't be too harsh on Forever and Kilmer. I don't dislike Batman Forever because it isn't terrible but it's hard to ignore the corny aspects. You said that Kilmer had the opportunity to be shown as a more likeable character. IMO that was the problem. He was too likeable. He seemed more like the grown child that witnessed the deaths of the Waynes rather than a grown man that is effected by it. The entire time it looked like the guy needed a hug. Where was the fire inside of him? Where was the anger and aggression to push him on a nightly basis?

eh, BF was more about him coming out of the weirdo shell, finding a bona fide friend in Dick Grayson, and as i touched upon, his attraction to the Doc is handled pretty well in terms of him being all shy and hesitant about it, but slowly coming out of his shell over the course of the movie.

and in reagrds to the burton take...I do like a lot about Keaton's portrayal of BM/BW, it's just that sometimes I think they went a little too grim with the take on him being mysterious and damaged.
Sometimes it works very well, eg, his silence in the Bat-mobile when he's driving back to the cave with Vicki, his response to her 'where are we going?' being only to speed up the Bat-mobile to get some good mileage out of that big pile of leaves in the road. I mean, that is one of my all time fav onscreen Batman moments, the atmosphere, the music, that characterisation...
But that bit with Selina Kyle kind of annoys me as a Batman characterisation, she was being quite nice and funny, and he looks at her like she's a big weirdo, eh, i dunno, haha, a bit too grim there i think.

There's nothing really in the Kilmer characterisation i can fault , i mean even that bit with him almost breaking the fourth wall with the goofy grin, ok, we don't really want to see Batman with a big happy smile right? haha, but it fit in terms of where he was at in the story.

 

[Ponyboy]

The other thing that Burton does (and I can see why some people wouldn't like this) which I personally love, is he's always interjected a certain aspect of his own personality and psychology into his films. In Batman, Bruce's reclusive yet creative psyche was a nod to Burton's own personality.

Then, if you go through Burton's catalog with Edward Scissorhands, Ed Wood, Big Fish, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, etc. you start to see the various threads to Burton's own psychology weave themselves together.

One film might have a subplot that might be a thinly veiled reference to Burton's past, another might detail how Burton views and interacts with the world around him, and another may be an example of Burton's personality, etc.

Essentially, Burton's made his films into his own autobiography. All in all, I've never actually seen another director who's so cleverly and quite subtly interjected himself into his films. It's probably the most inventive, yet least talked about thing that Burton's done in his films.

But yes. I only like his movies for the pretty pictures.

I can agree with the comments that "Burton's Batman" isn't true to the comics. But that's okay... I still feel that Michael Keaton's version of Batman/Bruce Wayne is INFINITELY more interesting to watch than any of the others who have portrayed him.

I think Keaton gets unnecessary flack to this day from some bat-fans for being miscast (in terms of his physicality). Well guess what? Jack Nicholson wasn't exactly the spitting image of Brian Bolland's Joker (My ideal image of the Joker, skinny, a mop of green hair and that long chin)... but Nicholson gave us a great Joker right? Heath Ledger's look as the Joker was very "bizarro" to me... but he also gave us a great Joker. So to write Keaton off purely in terms of his physical appearance is an argument that, for me, doesn't hold any water.

Now you take Val Kilmer... he physically looked the part on some levels. I mean if you want to get down to it, Kilmer has blonde hair. So how is that any different than a balding Keaton?

As far as Keaton vs. Kilmer goes... You take out the visuals, and the Burton-eqsue-ness, and completely strip back what Schumacher did and look at just the two men. Keaton was arguably the better performer, in terms of his eyes, his voice, and even his schizoid physical behavior? Is it Batman of the comics to a T? No of course it isn't... but it made for some damn interesting visual cinema that we're all still debating 20 years later.

 

[TruerToTheCore]

I admit you do have a point. In my honest opinion Burton's visuals are quite over rated. The Dark Knight himself doesn't belong in a dark, gothic-like universe. If anything he belongs in a brighter and more generic universe. Actually no, that's still too hardcore. How about something with colorful lights, glow in the dark thugs? Now that sounds kickass! I also think Bruce Wayne was de suckz. I mean sure I know a child could grow up a bit damaged if they went through the same thing. But damnit, this is Batman we're talking about! He should just man up, create an ordinary social life and stop acting so damn weird.

Agreed. Especially Kilmer. Sure he was much more emo than the 4 foot tall Michael Keaton but he was superior in every way. I don't know why but he just was. But nobody could touch George Clooney. Not even with a 10 foot pole. It's almost like Batman from the comics came to life with the dude that's dating Stacy Keibler.


Agreed. I personally hate this bizzarro crap as well. This fantasy crap is for children but they try to hide behind teh darkness to make it appealing to adults.

I am not even going to answer this pathetic piece of failed sarcasm.

He already gave a reason why he prefered the Kilmer Batman, he thought the Batman in the Burton's was just a bit *too* weird.

Yeah. At least someone.

edit: and i guess someone will come in and say 'Oh, that was him having some kind of pre-cursive feeling of kinship with Selina Kyle, and was weirded out by it...' well, you can read into it that way if you want, but to me, it always read as them trying to illustrate how mysterious and damaged he was, but it came off as too spazzy(U.S. meaning) and annoying.

and anyway, there are other examples of this annoying spazziness(U.S. Meaning).

edit: It was as if every time he put on his Batman suit, Keaton became spaz(U.S. meaning)-man, he was too frickin weird with Vicki in in the cave, and was ultra spazzy(U.S. meaning) weird in that scene in her apartment with the Joker, which imo, is the most cringe worthy moment in the whole 89-97 series, it is just annoying as ****, haha, just a wreckless spaz(U.S. meaning) having a spazzy(U.S. meaning) flake out.

Yeah, it's not like the Bruce Wayne I knew from the comics. At all.

Kilmer's Batman maybe had more opportunities to be shown as more likeable and personable, his interactions with Grayson primarily went a long way in making him a more likeable Batman/BW.

Kilmer was simply better. Put him and his characterization into Burton's movie and the movie would improve 300%.

Wow, you must be a genius if you consider my IQ of 140 to be low.

Did you take an internet test? t:

And I actually wasn't a fan of BR's "nice pictures" (us adults call it cinematography and art direction, btw), but your own great intellect must provide you with a level of insight into my own mind that even I don't possess.

What a lame rebuttal. I'm writing down to your intellect.

It fit the Batman world perfectly. Grim, dark, gritty. Opposite to, say, neon in every corner, Batcave included.

Meh. I'm mainly talking about Batman and how he was portrayed. Burton's Gotham looks better, his batmobile looks better, but the whole characterization is crap and just wrong, done by guys who didn't get Batman at all.

That picture of Batman in the cathedral alone was more Batman than 90% of what Schumacher did.

Visually. Again. And Batman has not always been noir n gothic. Not even the 70s.

Because that was no Asperger syndrome. But people who has witnessed traumatic events, such as someone killing your parents, that live two lives sometimes tend to be introverted and confidential.

Yeah, kitchen psychology applied to a fictional character. The Batman from the comics was not like that and that is all that counts.

Of course. They're a testament on how Batman should be portrayed. A truly triumph.

Schumacher and Clooney themselves are nothing but proud about it. t:

There was nothing wrong with their portrayal. It falls within the normal Batman range of the comics from 1939 to 1989. Keaton's "Let's blow some **** up, kill-the-poor-muscleman-but-killing-Walken-is-wrong and give a look like an idiot"-Batman does not.

Wooden Kilmer did okay, but he was more pretending to be all that tormented that actually being it. And, as Batman, he tried his best to emulate Keaton's voice and gestures. I appreciated that.

I guess Kilmer is not that tormented so he has to pretend to be. It's called acting.

Which was an improvement over his bland comic counterpart.

It had nothing to do with the comics and he turned into nothing more than a Bizarro Silver Age villain.

Yeah, because Penguin has never used birds as killing weapons.

Yeah, but that's more in tone with something you'd expect from an episode in the Adam West show. Just turned grimdark and bizarro.

Yeah, lots of radioactivity there. Guess if you can't bash properly, it is better to make some things up.

The cats probably got their dash of radiation from the bizarre "Christopher-Walken power plant that doesn't make any sense" and then brought her back to live so she could survive gunshots like it's nothing.

Typical Burton crap.

Oh, yeah, not like cackling comedian Riddler and Two-Face in those flamboyant suits with their thematic hide-outs. That was nothing like the Adam West show.

Partially. But it wasn't that far removed from the comics. Still, there's no point, I hated all the Batman villains in the old movies except for the Joker.

Not to mention that in the Adam West show, villians used to be black-goo-spitter radioactive zombies. Nice work trying to make the connection there.

They might have done that. But you know, kids are watching.

Actually, that characterization was an intentional decision on Burton's part.

His theory being that due to Bruce pouring so much of his time, energy and mind into his work as Batman, he leaves his Bruce Wayne an almost vacant shell of a person.

Thanks, Mr Burton, we had writers like Finger, Robbins, O'Neil, Englehart, Wein, Moench, Conway, Reed, Barr and Starlin before you, we didn't need your stupid Goth nerd insights.

At its core, it's essentially the same type of psychosis that they portray Batman having in both the comics and Nolan's movies. The only difference being, Burton didn't have Bruce tack on that fake playboy persona.

But that's more of an afterthought - a veneer - not the psychosis itself.

Ever read the comics BEFORE the stupid Burton movies? You know, the available source material from those days? it was portrayed totally differently.

The other thing that Burton does (and I can see why some people wouldn't like this) which I personally love, is he's always interjected a certain aspect of his own personality and psychology into his films. In Batman, Bruce's reclusive yet creative psyche was a nod to Burton's own personality.

I don't need Burton's personality in a fictional character that isn't supposed to be like Burton at all.

Then, if you go through Burton's catalog with Edward Scissorhands, Ed Wood, Big Fish, Charlie and the Chocolate Factory, etc. you start to see the various threads to Burton's own psychology weave themselves together.

I'm not going through a bunch of bad movies. Burton peaked with Mars Attacks! and that's it.

One film might have a subplot that might be a thinly veiled reference to Burton's past, another might detail how Burton views and interacts with the world around him, and another may be an example of Burton's personality, etc.

Has no place in a Batman movie. At all. I would rather prefer Russ Meyer bringing his personality into the Batman movies.

But yes. I only like his movies for the pretty pictures.

Well, it cannot be the writing.