And thanks to his creative freedom he didnt have to do a comic book movie but a character centered Burton movie.
Are you saying that Batman Returns is not a comic book movie?
It was a character centered movie. It centered around Penguin and Catwoman.
Thats why BR is more serious, more complicated and more for adults.
And probably one of the reasons why it alienated audiences and got a backlash.
And again, this time Batman is one of the main characters and we get to see him changing inside like never before. The narrative was split into three, dividing the story so we have 3 main characters, but it shifted more towards the tragic romance of Selina and Bruce.
They share ONE date, which lasts all of 5 minutes if even. It's why I never ever bought that he was in love with her. He empathized with her conflict. He recognized her pain. At least with Vicki, they shared an entire evening of personal connection and bonding, and ultimately making love.
But all that aside, Batman was not a main character. He was a secondary character. A character used to service Catwoman's story, and to a lesser extent, Penguin's. He is sued to further their stories. He doesn't have one of his own.
And its not just my opinion, the press noticed that as well
Where there was a hint of Batman's disturbing duality in the 1989 film, that agitation is enlarged for the sequel and pitted against Catwoman as his ideal mate, both psychotically and sartorially (Columbus Dispatch, June 1992)
This is an unusually complicated narrative with three separate, competing plot strands which actually take place in utterly different genres (comicsbeat.com)
So? Do you want me to dig up some official reviews that refute that? There's plenty of them, especially after Batman Begins came out, and Begins was cited for doing what the Burton movies failed to do, explore the Batman character and make him the focus, instead of the villains.
Exactly, she was atragic character whose life turned even worse. She never really changes tho as we see her loosing the fascade at the end, revealing the hurt, fractured person who never got to experience life and who didnt know who she was anymore - just like Batman. She was split in 2 and rejected by society and thats the quality that she shared with Bruce. Even when they didnt know about each other's alter egos, they already sensed that dark side and clicked. They could relate to each other.
You're just re-iterating why this was Catwoman's story and not Batman's. It was about Catwoman's pain. Catwoman's self loathing. Catwoman's inner conflict.
Not Batman's. Batman is not shown to have any inner turmoil, or self loathing, and unlike Selina, Bruce knows exactly who he is. He never questions himself like Selina does. "I don't know who I am anymore, Bruce".
I dont know Joker why you so furiously insist on writing out Batman out of it. Batman is one of the main characters now, and hes onscreen as much as its humanly possible with a Phantom of the Opera approach that he has. We see him change and we see him chasing after Selina, wanting life with her instead of focusing on villains like in the first movie, putting aside Vicky. We see him opening up for the first time to Selina. Why youre trying so hard to minimize all that? Whats with that anti-Burton rant lately?
Batman is a character that is a plot device used to further the character arcs of Penguin and Catwoman, and therefore he gets plenty of screen time, but it's screen time used as part of the Penguin and Catwoman stories.
None of it is about Batman himself. He's in the exact same place he was at the end of the movie that he was at the beginning.
It's not hard to minimize it because it's the truth, dude. I do love the Burton movies, but I'm not looking at them through rose colored glasses. Their biggest flaw is that they side line Batman in favor of the villains. All three villains are the foundation of the movies. Not Batman. He is the plot device in their story. His origin was even changed to tie in with the Joker.
It was. All the time we heard from BVurton and writers how its about those 3 characters in this movie. And if Batman was just a story device for Selina, we wouldnt see him change , he wouldnt have a character arc.
He doesn't have a character arc. That's my whole entire point. There is no change in him. We already saw him willing to give himself to another woman in Batman '89. They were just re-treading old ground here, except this woman was a character as conflicted as him. Well not quite as conflicted as him, as Selina didn't even know who she was anymore, and Batman knew exactly who he was.
Bruce is in the same place he was at the end of the movie that he was at the beginning. Nothing changed for him.
It was a Frankenstein story and 2 outsiders with dual personality found each other. Its often recognized that its this tragic romance that drives the movie, its not just Selina. It really grieves me to see the fans minimalizing such great story to bring the movie down. And personally, for me its also the doomed love of Selina and Bruce that makes the movie for me
I'm not minimalizing it. I'm looking at it from a different perspective to yours. You see Bruce as having some kind of breakthrough by wanting to be with Selina. I don't. He's been there and done that with Vicki.
It's Selina that has the emotional journey here, and the romance with Bruce serves her story, because it shows her feeling happy and like she's worth something for the first time ever. Ultimately she rejects it because her self loathing is too great for her to try and live with Bruce.
It's all about her, not him.
He saw a good looking blonde at the party and invited her out. Slept with her and that was it. Yes, there was the anniversary, but he still couldve said tomorrow.
Lets re-phrase: He saw a good looking woman, who's work he was familiar with, and found her enchanting. He invited her to dinner, they bonded, they made love.
The anniversary of his most painful memory ever came up, and he needed a few days to himself while he dealt with this. As much as he liked Vicki, he only knew her a couple of days, and wasn't ready to share his inner pain with her just yet.
And still there was no word on Joker and Grissom was dead. yet he said hes getting out of town for few days.
No word on Joker? He only killed a mob boss on City Hall steps, then went on TV announcing he was poisoning all of the City's products.
"I just found out Jack Napier's still alive. He's running Grissom's men. I need all the information the Police have on him"
The Joker naturally took priority number one.
He was NEVER after her, it was her who was calling him constantly and he wasnt returning his phones. If not Alfred, I would forget about her character as well since it was always Batman working on the case and Alfred reminding him and nagging him about Vicky. It was never Bruce. ever.
He wasn't returning her calls because he was invested in the hunt for the Joker, and solving the poison code. Alfred simply reminded him of what he was missing, but knew he wanted. Alfred didn't twist his arm into it. Bruce went around to her apartment on his own steam and was prepared to tell her everything.
He obviously saw a real future with Vicki, unless Bruce spills his Batman identity to every girl he is indifferent to. I mean he got laid, he was under no obligation to see her again. But he did, because she meant way more to him than a casual fling.
In Returns, despite the villains and the city ruled by Triangle gang and Shreck, he was constantly thinking about Selina and running after her instead.
Was he now? Well lets see:
- He doesn't even ask Selina out for a date until an hour into the movie after he randomly bumps into her on the street. He never gave her a second thought after he met her in Max's office.
- After walks out in the middle of their date to rescue the Ice Princess, the next time Selina crosses his mind is when the invite to Max's ball is presented to him. This was after Penguin was exposed as the villain he was to Gotham, and the threat of him becoming Mayor was neutralized, and he was now wanted by the law.
So if that's your definition of him constantly thinking of Selina, then I find your definition of the word constantly highly flawed, mate.
It wasnt even his idea and Alfred brought it up saying that she called yet again, implying thats its pretty low to diss her like that since shes not a bimbo like others. Bruce decided to share the secret with her and agreed that she deserves the truth. After all, she wouldnt tell anyone and wouldnt be in a danger or anything. Yet soon after they split because she couldnt cope with his duality - so basically, nothing that we wouldnt predict since he never seemed to be much interested in her
It doesn't matter if it was his idea or not. The fact is he embraced the idea of sharing his secret with Vicki. Otherwise he could have simply let her down gently, instead of telling his secret to a woman he's known less than a week!
But she wasn't some piece of ass he screwed and then got bored with. Major things happened that threw their courtship off course. Namely Jack Napier coming back from the dead as the Joker, and threatening all of Gotham, and the anniversary of his parents death.
These were not little petty excuses for him not to call her. These were real solid reasons that caused him to isolate himself from her. Yeah, their relationship didn't work out because Vicki found his dangerous life as Batman too hard to handle. So what? That doesn't mean they didn't love each other. Can you imagine how difficult it would be living with a situation like that? Bruce lost several girls he loved because of that reason in the comics, like Silver St Cloud.
Doesn't mean they loved each other any less. If you think Selina would have gotten any better treatment, then I think you're deluding yourself, man.
Her immediate answer about her living with him in his castle was one clue, the other one was that he took off the mask which was symbolic, the thrid clue is the whole frankenstein story and the fourth is how she was a focus for him and took him away from his revenge , the first thing to do so. In B89 he was solely focused on his mission, now he started thinking about a girl and was obviously taken by her and found his fellow monster
I can't fathom this psycho babble stuff, man. Frankenstein story?
Why would Selina living with Bruce in his mansion mean he was going to stop being Batman at night? Second, taking off his mask was a way of letting her see his face, see him, Bruce Wayne, the guy who made her feel good about herself. It wasn't a statement that he was throwing in the towel as Batman. That's absurd.
As we've already discussed at length, he was very much thinking of the girl in Batman '89. The movie ended with him being with the girl.
Well cmon, he wouldnt ignore that to have a date. A person was kindapped, that would be sick to just brush it off.
You mean like how brushing off trying to find the Joker and cracking the poison code that was killing Gotham in favor of spending time with Vicki would be sick?
And dont forget, the previous lightning ceremony was ruined by the gang, yet instead of watching over them knowing that theres an obvious danger and threat and that theres a high probability that the event will be a target again, he decided to ave a date with Selina. Only when crap already went down he rushed to the scene
Absolutely false. He saw right through Penguin's obvious attempt to bait him into going to the tree lighting ceremony. That's why he stayed away:
Penguin: "I hope and pray that Batman will be present to preserve the peace"
Bruce: "Subtle"
Selina: "You're not going to that are you? The re-lighting of the tree thing?"
Bruce: "No, I wouldn't be caught dead there"
It was only because the Ice Princess was kidnapped did he give in and go:
Bruce: "Alfred, I've got to get down to the Plaza"
Alfred: "I saw it"
Bruce: "Yeah, I know, he's practically
begging me to show"
Alfred: "Which is why I hoped you'd snub him"
Bruce: "No, I can't, there's been a kidnapping"
They both split. And again, kids were being kidnapped, cmon. Even if she was his wife or his parenst, why would he want to stay, to comfort her while kids were being kidnapped in the town? Thats a major stretch and again, minimalizing the character and the romance here
No more of a stretch than you thinking he would drop the The Joker threat problem where he was poisoning all of Gotham, in favor of going to rekindle his romance with Vicki.
Bruce always places the mission before the women.
I just gave examples of it not being true. The second lightning ceremony, the constant chase after Selina, not focusing and not researching Shreck, not keeping a closer eye on Penguin and his relationship with Shreck etc
I've concisely refuted why each of those are false:
- The second lighting ceremony, he saw right through Penguin's unsubtle attempt to get him to be there
- There was no "constant" chase of Selina. The only time it was shown she crossed his mind when he was on his own was when Max's ball invite was presented to him. That's it.
- What was there to research on Schreck?
- Keep an eye on Penguin? At what point in the time between meeting Selina, and disgracing Penguin's public speech, did Bruce not keep an eye on Penguin? Penguin was swanning around in public, was on TV all the time etc. How much more of an eye did you want him to keep on him? Hide under his bed?
And another example of Vicky (and Alfred) chasing after Bruce, not the other way around like it was in BR
Yeah, Vicki asking if they're going to make their relationship work after she just found out he was Batman, and Bruce saying he wants to.
What a chase.
Its irrelevant. You said Schumahcer was the first to focus on Batman's character and he wasnt.
Yes, he was. Burton didn't focus on Batman's character. He gave a brief glimpse into the death of his parents, simply because it was the Joker who was the one who killed them.
It was yet another layer added to the Joker's arc in the movie.
Schumacher's Batman was almost a reboot of the character, it was someone different. It wasnt a misfit anymore, it wasnt a Phantom of the Opera, gothic figure anymore. It was a superhero who was the focus and main character of the entire movie and weve seen everything from his POV, thats a different approach.
They changed the tone and style after the big backlash Returns got, but it was still a continuation of the franchise, regardless of Batman being recast. There was even a nod to Catwoman in Forever. "You like strong women. I've done my homework. Or do I need skin tight vinyl and a whip?".
Schumacher just took Batman, and explored the hell out of him. Instead of creating a story where the villains are center stage, and Batman is woven in as a plot element in their story, he flipped it, and had the villains, plus the two new supporting characters, Chase and Dick, all elements in Bruce's story.
Schumacher unquestionably was the first to put the focus on Batman.
B89 was much lighter than BR, and while it was criticized for portraying Batman so darkly and Joker as psycho killer, it was still something much lighter and leaning more towards a conventional superhero movie. Dark, yes, thanks to Burton;s vision, but still a comic book movie.
Exactly.
So your point about people liking light toned lollipop stuff like what Schumacher offered is false. People were more than happy to embrace a dark take on Batman.
Returns took it way too far.
And it was a hit and youll find out that when somethings a hit most people will kiss up to it and wear it proudly as a badge.
Are you trying to say some of Batman '89's popularity was just a bunch of bandwagon hopping?
BR was much darker and much more serious, targeted for adult audiences according to Hamm and Waters. That movie was not for kids and it was so depressing ad dark that there were even TV specials and groups against the movie, it was crazy and parents really went after it.
I know. McDonalds also killed their Happy Meal tie in with the movie, too.
Obviously times have changed and in the mid 90s campy light approach was what people prefered and they applauded the pink, lollipopy approach of Schumacher. But now when the smoke clears away, in hindsight people hate Schumacher's Batman movies and the tides had turned - now people embrace something completely opposite to what they did in the mid 90s, they like the dark and depressing and deep Bat movies, like The Dark Knight. And even tho at the time BF was applauded and Burton bashed for presenting a serious and dark Batman movie, now its Schumacher that gets the beating for not treating the material seriously and turning Batman into colorful kid flick and conventional superhero movie.
That's not entirely true. People hated on Returns because they were expecting a comic book movie in the same tone as Batman '89. What they got was an overly dark and violent adult movie. It had nothing to do with people wanting a pink lollipopy approach. They didn't get that with Batman '89, and they loved it.
Do you really think if Returns had been in the same tone as Batman '89 it would have suffered a big backlash?
Nowadays people do hate on Schumacher, but that is mainly down to Batman and Robin, which effectively killed the franchise. I bet you anything if he had ended it on Batman Forever, he wouldn't get the hate he does.
Forever doesn't receive a quarter of the criticism Batman and Robin does.
Whats with the latest anti-Burton rampage Joker? Quite frankly Im shocked
I'm sorry I shocked you. Like I mentioned somewhere above, I do love the Burton Batman movies. I went out and bought them on blu-ray and everything.
But I'm not blind to the flaws. The biggest one being Batman being sidelined in both movies in favor of the villains. Fortunately all three villains were so entertaining and well played by the actors involved, that the movies are extremely enjoyable to watch.
See, I cant continue any further debate with you here. Youre saying Burton's approach is wrong because he doesnt focus on Batman? Thats not wrong, thats a different approach. Nolan's style was conventional, Burton's character was Gothic, it was phantom of the opera, it was someone who was suppose to be a psycho in the dark, discovered by others , someone that we knew very little about and knew only as much as the main characters. Again, like in Phantom of the Opera - while he was the title character, we werent shown what hes doing, just what the other characters were doing and finding out pieces about him, not fully understanding him. Thats what a Gothic character is suppose to be. Its one thing to prefer one over another, but to call it wrong and dismiss and criticizing a Gothic/Operatic story for having a Gothic/operatic characters? I like both approaches, but im surprised someone would criticize something like that.
