Tim Burton's Batman 3 (2015)

[Cain]

Burton's take is dead and thank god for that. Nobody under 22 remembers them.

Damn that's pretty harsh

 

[Batman Beyond]

Burton's take is dead and thank god for that. Nobody under 22 remembers them.

Way to be harsh, you dick.

 

[ALP]

I remember them pretty well...

Burton's Batman movies may not be as popular among the GA as they use to be but they are still pretty well known.

 

[GothamAlleys]

Burton's take is dead and thank god for that. Nobody under 22 remembers them.

They should tho and compare it with all the other comic book movies from the same time and from before (ex. Captain America), at least to have a respect and know which movie broke new ground , pushed the envelopes much further than it could at the time and paved the way for what comic book movies are today. It was very risky and revolutionary at the time, and cemented Batman's name with other big franchises. It ended the genre of cheap, B movies with spandex guys and an entire new outlook on Batman and comic books in general for the casual audience. And his take isnt dead btw. His original ideas are still used today by Nolan, like the idea of black makeup on the eyes, the black outfit and the idea of Batman having an armor instead of spandex. Plus, Burton's take was pretty much Kane's take as well who worked on the first movie

And out of respect, they should also at least check them out since Bruce Timm, Chris Nolan and the great late Heath Ledger always spoke superlatives about them. Nolan called the 89 movie "a brilliant film, visionary and extraordinarily idiosyncratic" in an interview with Rebecca Murray (Said that BR was too dark tho), Heath said that it was Burton's movies that got him interested in the characters and Timm said that while he prefer's Nolan's movies, he still loves Burton's , as oppose to Schumacher's who he doesnt like at all

 

[ALP]

Your Batman blog is absolutely brilliant btw! Great stuff.

 

[GothamAlleys]

Your Batman blog is absolutely brilliant btw! Great stuff.

Thank you very, very much

 

[The Joker]

It is well written, but I don't agree with a lot of the things you say in it.

 

[GothamAlleys]

It is well written, but I don't agree with a lot of the things you say in it.

About what, Returns or Killing Joke? I tried to support/prove every statement with a proof like quote or citation or a photo

 

[The Joker]

About what, Returns or Killing Joke? I tried to support/prove every statement with a proof like quote or citation or a photo

Well without going into a whole off topic discussion of your blog, I'll cite you one example regarding what you said about The Penguin in Returns:

Penguin was perhaps the best subplot and character of the movie. He was neither villain nor a good guy. He was like Edward Scissorhands, someone rejected by his own parents and the society and forced to feel and act the certain way.

Now there's no doubt Penguin was a tragic character because he was a product of his horrible childhood. But he was a straight up villain. Tragic background or not, he is probably the most evil villain of the old franchise.

I say that because he was not insane like Joker or Riddler, or conflicted like Catwoman. He was of sound rational mind. He knew what he wanted to do, and he did it. Even Danny DeVito said on the BR special features that The Penguin was the most evil character he'd ever seen.

He enjoyed attacking Gotham with his Circus Gang. "Sounds fun". He took fiendish glee in the idea of drowning little babies in toxic sewage. He casually chewed on sardines while watching his penguins march to blow up all of Gotham.

His whole "I want to find my parents" sob story to Gotham was a smoke screen to get at the birth records to make his list of first born son victims.

He was a vile villain though and through.

 

[GothamAlleys]

Perhaps, I think there's definitely room for debate there. But like I said, its all because he was hurt as a child, not for greed or power, so that kinda makes it different. Plus he actually abandoned his evil plans and wanted to be a mayor and Oswald. It was when he was betrayed and rejected again that he reverted back. Because of his hurt

 

[The Joker]

Yeah, but that was only at Max Schreck's suggestion, which came with the promise of "Unlimited poon-tang"

 

[GothamAlleys]

Yeah, but that was only at Max Schreck's suggestion, which came with the promise of "Unlimited poon-tang"

LOL. Still, he did want to change after all and reverted back to the old ways for the same reason he became the way he was - because of rejection

 

[The Joker]

LOL. Still, he did want to change after all and reverted back to the old ways for the same reason he became the way he was - because of rejection

I don't see how he wanted to change? What nice guy acts did he commit when he decided to run for Mayor? He teamed up with Catwoman, kidnapped and murdered the Ice Princess, framed Batman for it, took the Batmobile for a destructive joyride through Gotham, plowing down Gotham citizens and cars in the process etc.

Batman exposed his true colors to Gotham by recording his real opinions of Gotham.

 

[GothamAlleys]

Of course he wouldnt change overnight for a goodie goodie if he was a child killer since birth, but he did abandon his plans to kill the first borns and wanted to be considered human. The stuff he did to the Ice Princess and the people on the road was all to get Batman

He is like a dog who was constantly messed around with since birth who wants to jump every person's throat now. You kinda still feel for him and that was the intention. I do see how some might have not tho

 

[The Joker]

He didn't abandon his plan to kill the children. He even kept the list of names on the table by his bed. Catwoman nearly caught a peek of them. He just put it to one side while he ran for Mayor.

Also when you look at the time frame of the movie, it all happens over the space of like three to four days.

 

[GothamAlleys]

He didn't abandon his plan to kill the children. He even kept the list of names on the table by his bed.

How could I forget that, youre right. Still, my dog comparison still stands - he really had an extremely crappy life and was pushed even further in the movie

 

[The Joker]

Yeah, being pelted with rotten fruit by an angry mob didn't improve his mood, no doubt. But I firmly believe he always intended to kill those children.

The Mayor thing was a little distraction. Like Catwoman's vendetta against Shreck gets side tracked by Batman pissing her off by burning her arm and knocking her off a building "Just when I was starting to feel good about myself" t:

 

[TruerToTheCore]

Damn that's pretty harsh

Harsh but true.

Way to be harsh, you dick.

Relax. I'm not 100% serious here, I just wanted to make clear that Burton is not returning to Batman.

But it's not that I didn't make that up out of nowhere, I have a 20 year old co-worker and for

some reason we talked a little bit about comic book movies and when I mentioned the "Batman" movie he

thought I was talking about the Nolan movies and even after I tried to get him on the right track by

saying "no, the Tim Burton movie of 1989" he was kinda shocked that there was a big Batman movie back

then. But he knows the Adam West show and the Donner Superman, which says something I doubt he

is the only case, it's shocking to see that the younger people don't know things you take for granted.

Most people aren't that interested in the past. Imagine that, I've even met Star Wars fans who do not

care about the old trilogy and are only into the new stuff.

They should tho and compare it with all the other comic book movies from

the same time and from before (ex. Captain America), at least to have a respect and know which movie

broke new ground , pushed the envelopes much further than it could at the time and paved the way for

what comic book movies are today. It was very risky and revolutionary at the time, and cemented Batman's

name with other big franchises. It ended the genre of cheap, B movies with spandex guys and an entire

new outlook on Batman and comic books in general for the casual audience.

Alright, but do I have to remind you that there is a movie called "Superman", directed by Richard

Donner, which was the most expensive movie ever made (in absolute $$$)? And were did it push the

envelope? It was "Streets of Fire" with a man in a rubber suit, a star cast (okay, only Nicholson) and a

big budget. It was seen as a big circus opera, a curiosity, a fancy-dress ball (not supposed to be

negative, at all), not really respected as a "serious" movie (compare it to "Avatar"). In all magazines

they usually wrote "Burton made Batman dark and moved him out of the kiddie territory", so much that

they really started to care about comics. And did Batman's success really spawn a large number of comic

book movies? The few that were made flopped, it wasn't until Blade and the X-Men (and cheaper CGI) that

the genre started to take off.

And his take isnt dead btw. His original ideas are still used today by Nolan, like the idea of black

makeup on the eyes, the black outfit and the idea of Batman having an armor instead of spandex.

You are right, I see this more as a case of "playing it safe", cutting away what made the series flop

and keep what worked. Which is okay, but not what I want see. But no a big deal, i know that every other

costume approach would be "cheesy" t:.

Plus, Burton's take was pretty much Kane's take as well who worked on the first movie

Bob Kane had no influence on the movie. There are some visual similarities between "Batman (89)" and the

early stories, that said I don't think Batman / Bruce Wayne's character was anything like we saw in the

comics (the public persona of BW in the Nolan movies is also quite different, but that is another

story).


[Sorry for the weird formatting, I copied it from a text editor]

 

[GothamAlleys]

Most people aren't that interested in the past. Imagine that, I've even met Star Wars fans who do not

care about the old trilogy and are only into the new stuff.

Same here. The current generation think the OT is outdated and grew up on the Prequels, but thats how it is. Still, there will be and already are many people who arent going carried away with the fad and fashion and just watch whats good, not whats new. And either way, people who dont know this kind of stuff arent some big fans anyway, just a young casual audience

Alright, but do I have to remind you that there is a movie called "Superman", directed by Richard

Donner, which was the most expensive movie ever made (in absolute $$$)?

Sure, but there was no mistake it was a kid friendly movie. No gray area there, like the 70s SpiderMan show. It was just a fun big movie with men in colorful tights. Spiderman as of today was something completely else for example and dealt a lot with Parker's melodrama. Anyway, the 60's TV show was extremely popular too, still, it was always the action shows/movies who in no way were unfriendly to kids and could be called family movies. And of course, none of them were anywhere remotely close of the Batmania that the 89 movie started.

And were did it push the

envelope? It was "Streets of Fire" with a man in a rubber suit, a star cast (okay, only Nicholson) and a

big budget. It was seen as a big circus opera, a curiosity, a fancy-dress ball (not supposed to be

negative, at all), not really respected as a "serious" movie (compare it to "Avatar"). In all magazines

It was the first comic book movie which depicted prostitutes and the city ridden with mafia and corruption. It was also the first comic book movie that was so bloody (ex: Napier's bullet ridden cheeks weren't hidden at all), it was the first comic book which depicted the hero killing and most importantly, the first comic book movie which depicted the character as someone psychologically disturbed himself and someone on both sides of the fence. Hamm and Burton spoke about how they approached the character as Phanton of the Opera, making him half insane, constantly in pain and grieving when alone, not seeing him or understanding fully, not making him the main character. Not to mention the darkest feel till then and the operatic/tragic character quality. At that time it was unthinkable. The villain was a mass murderer who killed people out of a grimace and had lots of fun doing it. In Some European country the rating was anted up because of the Joker alone and there was a lot of criticism that the movie is too dark and too violent.

they usually wrote "Burton made Batman dark and moved him out of the kiddie territory", so much that

they really started to care about comics.

Thats true of course. Peters and Gruber were constantly being laughed at everytime they mentioned to soemone that theyre making a Batman movie. And like you said, comic books were started to be taken seriously and Batman's image was forever changed in general audience's minds not to mention the movie elevated the Batman name to uncomparably higher level and the character is still so popular to this day

And did Batman's success really spawn a large number of comic

book movies? The few that were made flopped, it wasn't until Blade and the X-Men (and cheaper CGI) that

the genre started to take off.

Im not saying it spawned a large number, Im saying it changed the outlook on comic book movies. There was a hiatus in that area because Schumacher almost completely reversed everything Burton's movies did, but fortunately thanks to SpiderMan it all came back.

You are right, I see this more as a case of "playing it safe",

I think it stayed because its a really kickass idea and look. It just worked

Bob Kane had no influence on the movie.

But that's not true. He was the movie's Creative Consultant, having hand in designs and some cast choices (he was the one pitching for Jack first), and it wasnt just over the phone deal. He flew with the crew to Pinewood Studios and stayed there on set everyday

I don't think Batman / Bruce Wayne's character was anything like we saw in the comics

I think just the opposite. In the early Detective Comics, Batman killed criminals randomly, and as Wayne , he was someone who kept to himself and didnt talk to anybody while in his mansion. He was the one sitting in the dark thinking, just like in the movie. He was someone who remained in the shadows, especially as Wayne

 

[JohnnyGobbs]

Of course he wouldnt change overnight for a goodie goodie if he was a child killer since birth, but he did abandon his plans to kill the first borns and wanted to be considered human. The stuff he did to the Ice Princess and the people on the road was all to get Batman

What ever The Penguin's motive was for killing the Ice Princess and the people on the road was, he was still willing to commit murder and that's before you factor in the fact that he retained the names of Gotham's first born sons as part of his 'back-up plan', when the whole mayor thing fell through.

In any case, I can't help thinking that The Penguin took particular relish in killing the various inhabitants of Gotham. For instance, Catwoman didn't expect him to murder the Ice Princess, just simply scare her. He seemed to take particular delight at her death, as if killing someone who was beautiful and privileged constituted payback for the ugliness and deformity that had blighted his sorry, deprived life up until that point.

 

[ALP]

Harsh but true.



Relax. I'm not 100% serious here, I just wanted to make clear that Burton is not returning to Batman.

But it's not that I didn't make that up out of nowhere, I have a 20 year old co-worker and for

some reason we talked a little bit about comic book movies and when I mentioned the "Batman" movie he

thought I was talking about the Nolan movies and even after I tried to get him on the right track by

saying "no, the Tim Burton movie of 1989" he was kinda shocked that there was a big Batman movie back

then. But he knows the Adam West show and the Donner Superman, which says something I doubt he

is the only case, it's shocking to see that the younger people don't know things you take for granted.

Most people aren't that interested in the past. Imagine that, I've even met Star Wars fans who do not

care about the old trilogy and are only into the new stuff.

Me and my friends know all of the classics, late teens btw. But most of us are art students so we're into movies. Star Wars, BTTF, Batman, Indiana Jones, etc. All my friends have seen those movies but even if there are some that haven't, it's not as surprising as teens that have never even heard of the older Batman movies. I find that hard to believe. The kids you met must just be a dumb bunch or the ones I know are just simply into that...

 

[TruerToTheCore]

Me and my friends know all of the classics, late teens btw. But most of us are art students so we're into movies. Star Wars, BTTF, Batman, Indiana Jones, etc. All my friends have seen those movies but even if there are some that haven't, it's not as surprising as teens that have never even heard of the older Batman movies. I find that hard to believe. The kids you met must just be a dumb bunch or the ones I know are just simply into that...

Obviously

No, they are average kids who just have no deep interest in movies. They just watch the new things and that's who most people do it. They play Playstation 3 and Wii, not seeking out the Sega Master Drive or the Nintendo Entertainment System. They probably know games like "Super Mario Bros 3" (that's Indiana Jones) but they don't know "Duck Hunt" (that's "Batman 89" )

 

[Batman Beyond]

Obviously

No, they are average kids who just have no deep interest in movies. They just watch the new things and that's who most people do it. They play Playstation 3 and Wii, not seeking out the Sega Master Drive or the Nintendo Entertainment System. They probably know games like "Super Mario Bros 3" (that's Indiana Jones) but they don't know "Duck Hunt" (that's "Batman 89" )

Batman 89 was one of the biggest box-office success of the 80's. You're telling its not well-known to late teens but Indy 3 is?

 

[TruerToTheCore]

Batman 89 was one of the biggest box-office success of the 80's. You're telling its not well-known to late teens but Indy 3 is?

"Gone With The Wind" is one of the most successful movies of all time, yet I have never seen it. It was before my time. Indy is just more popular, it gets better time slots on TV and a Blu-Ray release would be a huge event, unlike the old Batman movies, which got no real big press coverage. We can all play the delusional fanboy here and deny that, but okay. Take into account that back then we watched more television, VCR were expensive, video games not as advanced, so what you gonna do when you are young? You watched movies on TV. The generation of today rips the new stuff from the Internet, no need to watch the old stuff on TV with commercials and all the stuff.

it's just the truth. look at a character like "Dirty Harry", probably even young people know his name, now his famous catchphrase, but have they actually ever seen the movies? I doubt it.

 

[CConn]

Um, the Burton Batman movies are just as well known as Indy to late teens. If anyone would know, it would be me. Not only did I just exit my late teens a few years ago, but both myself and my wife have siblings who are still teenagers we are exposed to tons of their random idiotic friends.