Godzilla2014
Deadpan Snarker
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2009
- Messages
- 6,844
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 31
Here's my feeling on the matter.
Batman is still the best representation of Batman as a whole. The tone, darkness, story, Keaton, Nicholson just make it a film that is STILL talked about and loved today.
Batman Returns had the right tone but Batman was not in it enough. But the characters of Catwoman and Penguin were AMAZING.
Batman Begins had some REALLY good aspects to it and very strong scenes and I liked the whole back story. But it does get slow in sections and the whole realism thing takes away what I found great about Batman, the imagery and ambiguity of a guy in a bat costume and the strangeness of that.
TDK is not a batman movie and it's not that strong a film. If it weren't for Ledger and Oldman, there is nothing in that film for me. Too preachy, feels too long (i like my long movies that are actually EPIC and well-told stories), and the Bat-voice...dear me.
But I think both directors have their strenghths and weaknesses. I just feel that Burton really understands Batman and even in Returns, whenever you saw Batman he had a very powerful presence.
While I think that Burton and Nolan chose to base their films on different eras of Batman comics, I think that I like Nolan's films better.
The realism appeals to me. It works and makes the films stand out from rest of the superhero genre.
The supporting cast are much more developed. In the Burton films, they are unimportant. In the Nolan films, they are. In the Burton films, Gordon rarely does anything important, and Harvey Dent pretty much just makes speeches. Gordon helps Batman stop Ra's al Ghul in BB, and in TDK, Gordon and Dent assist Batman in his war on crime. In the Burton films, Alfred is pretty much just a butler. In the Nolan films, he acts a moral compass for Bruce, and has helped Bruce recover from the depths of despair when he thinks he has failed so that he can keep on going.
I like Bale's Batman voice more than Keaton's. Bale's Batman voice has a rage with a hint of violence, that is a lot more intimidating than Keaton was most of the time.
Bale's Batman generally kicks far more ass than Keaton's ever did. Bale's Batman can move, and move he does. He can break into high-rise office buildings, take out guards, and extract a man in minutes. Keaton's Batman doesn't do anything like that in either film. Bale's Batman can, after having been left to die in his burning mansion, still kick the asses of many League of Shadows ninjas, and then his own mentor Ra's al Ghul. Keaton's Batman, after surviving the crash of the Batwing after the Joker shot it down with a single bullet from a revolver, gets his ass kicked by a single black dude.
Nolan's Batmobile is better too. For once, the Batmobile is a functional vehicle. This Batmobile is very maneuverable, it can turn on a dime. Burton's Batmobile can't turn without a grappling hook.
Heath Ledger's Joker is far scarier and more interesting than Jack Nicholson's Joker ever was. Ledger's Joker can put up a good fight against Bale's Batman. Nicholson's Joker can't even punch Keaton's Batman without hurting his hand, and gets his ass kicked by Keaton's Batman after he has survived a plane crash, and just got his ass kicked by a lone black dude.
In summation, I think that I like Nolan's Batman better. It appeals to me more. I am not saying I hate Burton's films, nor am I calling anyone who likes them nostalgic fools, but I prefer the Nolan films. For me, Michael Keaton is the 1939 Batman, and Christian Bale is the current Batman.