Bit late with this comment, but I think the best comparison to the 89 Batman (for me anyway) is fittingly enough given this board, the Abrams Star Trek.
Both movies at the end of their respective decades made by then hot directors/creators, who with their own particularly unique aesthetic aimed to bring back/alter the perception of a long time franchise which had not been popular with the broader media in some time. Fun and exciting summer blockbusters, but not really emblematic of the deeper elements of the canon and the performances of iconic characters ranges from solid to "meh".
They kick off a strong interest in the series again, and lead to a revival in various forms of media (though that's still a bit up in the air with ST).
Thats not a bad comparison and a similar thought did occur to me.
The '89 Batman
doesn't gel with what I remember of the comics of the 1970s and ''80s. It's a Tim Burtonesque film with Batman and related elements in it.
Ditto ST09. Abrams film doesn't gel with TOS despite having Kirk, Spock, an Enterprise
and other (somewhat) familiar elements. It isn't what (or similar to what) TOS was, but rather what J.J. thinks it should be. And it will be interesting to see if there's some sort of backlash down the road if/when Trek is rebooted yet again into something more akin to familiar like TOS.