Too upset at Burton directing Batman. I had a problem with the whole thing.
Still haven't seen it.
News Variety Reports Robert Pattinson is the new Batman
- Thread starter auntiehill
- Start date
- Status
Still haven't seen it.
Sean Young was vocally upset about anyone else (than her) playing Catwoman.
When was the jay and Silent Bob Reboot filmed? Because Afleck was making lot of jokes about how cool it is to be Batman.
When was the jay and Silent Bob Reboot filmed? Because Afleck was making lot of jokes about how cool it is to be Batman.
You're missing out. Burton's playful brand of grotesquerie was the perfect match for Batman and his world, and Batman Returns remains far and away the best Batman movie ever.
You lost me at grotesque.
If you say so. Don't know how grotesque isn't perfectly appropriate for Batman and much of his rogues' gallery. As noted, however, Burton's genius was in making it playful, not grimdark.
Doesn't sound fun.
What's your favorite adaptation of Batman in live action?
Cool.
I actually share your apparent desire to avoid the grimdark and self-serious. It's just that Burton ain't that.
Grotesque is not a word I associate with fun. So, its not very appealing to me. But, I may try it for love of Keaton.Cool.
I actually share your apparent desire to avoid the grimdark and self-serious. It's just that Burton ain't that.
Yeah, Keaton's great as Bruce/Batman. I'd tend to say best ever as the character, though a case can be made for your man Adam West.
He made a better Batman than he did a Bruce. At times I got the impression he was playing Clark Kent.
I liked his quirky inwardness as Bruce.
Which is not Bruce Wayne. Burton dumped his own insecurities into the casting of Wayne. I reference that 1989 NBC interview where Burton whined that in casting Wayne/Batman, he did not want a "square-jawed" hero, and that said it all for why he hired a short, blading, gravelly-voiced comedic actor to play one of the more visually impressive, dashing superheroes ever created.
Keaton was the textbook example of wrongheaded casting.
Was in those movies.
Sure it is, it's just not what you think Bruce Wayne is.
Probably mostly because expectations were very low, no previous live-action film or version other than Adam West which most fans wanted to get away from. And Nicholson and DeVito as the Joker and Penguin respectively do kind of feel like obvious choices so most people would like or not dislike them being cast.
I also think that post-1995 or -1997 there was a whole lot of criticism of casting celebrities in comic book film roles, it became, in reaction to the Schumacher films (and some increased criticism of the Burton films) a bit of mantra that it's always better to cast an unknown actor.
I thought as Bruce he was/seemed to be a lot more of a confident, effective businessman in BR.
I would recommend watching the first movie, I like the sequel but to me it is more pure Burton for better or worse. The first movie sees the director's excesses a bit more restrained in presenting an adaptation. I can see the grotesque in BR but I don't really think it's a factor in the original.
Burton's visuals do show through in some of the gothic touches which are well served in Gotham (appropriately enough). I really like how Gotham is realized and was an early example of one of those timeless settings that looks like a mix of the decades. I'm not a great art/archtecture guy but there's a lot of what I would call art deco in the look. This is another facet that is better served, or at least differently served, in the original than the sequel which seems to have different influences. Batman's gadgets have an almost what we'd now think of as steampunk quality to them and I remember were really impressive in the day in their realization. The Batmobile is a classic and its "batarmor" or whatever was a neat effect copied many times over since.
Keaton of all the movie Batmen seems to be where Bruce Wayne is an actual character and not the "Bruce Wayne is the mask" idea you'll hear. It's mentioned above that he's awkward and introverted and when he becomes Batman it allows him to be more confident yet he still retains a bit of vulnerability. I like the performance though it might not jive well with the comics (I'm not very familiar there) and he doesn't have the traditional look one would expect (which bothers me less over time than it once may have). He also gets to use his smarts as well as fists.
I say it's at least worth a peek if the opportunity presents itself.
* As an aside, I've become fascinated with director's "second movie" in a franchise where it's interesting to see as the auteur side tends to come out more. Batman Returns is one, there's Rob Zombie's Halloween II that really brings out the "Zombie" and I know there's more but they escape me right now. Those are often fascinating to watch and contrast even if they aren't always the better movie overall.
Last edited:
^ Well-observed stuff. It's true that Batman '89 is not as "full-Burton" as its sequel. I tend to focus on Returns more because I like it better, but it's a distinction worth making, particularly for the uninitiated like fireproof78.
- Status