I really liked Batman Begins, although I never understood the strangled voice thing. The Dark Knight I never ever got. Don't understand why everyone raved about it.
In retrospect, Batman(1989) is really baadd
- Thread starter RAMA
- Start date
I really liked Batman Begins, although I never understood the strangled voice thing. The Dark Knight I never ever got. Don't understand why everyone raved about it.
I'll have to agree with you there. "Big Fish" is a close second.
I love Tim Burton films, but it's been disappointing that the last three or four movies have been so middling. I've enjoyed them, but I always leave thinking they could have been so much better. It's annoying.
QFT. By which of course I mean "quite fucking true".
I agree although I think (for me ) Robert Doney Jr.'s and Martain Landau's performances are what really make that film VERY enjoyable/fun to watch.
Do you mean Johnny Depp? Robert Downey Jr. wasn't in ED WOOD.
Doh - you're correct. I got the two confused.
Dusty Ayres
Commodore
That's the point of the Batman comic books, and the mythos. To have the city look like it did in the 1989 movies defeats the purpose of filming it live action, and also defeats the purpose of saying that it happens in the real world (having people use modern day stuff alongside older things is what I'm getting at.) Either the movie and the character relate to the world around us, or they don't, and that's what Nolan conveyed with the recent movies.
I have to admit I disagree with that. I think it's just a question of preference. I like that Burton's Gotham City was very much in the spirit of what the Batman universe represents (at least to me). Nolan's Gotham City was good, but I think Burton's films nailed it a lot closer to my own personal vision of Gotham.
On the other hand Metropolis can look like any city, because by its very name you simply need to convey the image of a monstrous city.
I'm of two minds on this, regarding Nolan's work. It's been said before, but in Batman Begins, that really felt like a city in the spirit of the Batman universe: It had some bright, glitzy, nice areas, and others were just absolute shit, taken over by crime and corruption and housing the dregs of society. The only time I was really taken out of the suspension of disbelief was the car chase, when all I could do was sit there and think, "Yep, Batman's racing down Lower Wacker Drive."
The Dark Knight, yeah, that Gotham felt like any city (and because I grew up in Chicago, I recognized the filming locations). There was very little personality to the city in the movie, which is probably my biggest complaint with it.
Gotham looked good in the first Burton movie but looked horrible and unrealistic in the second. It looked way too much like a tiny film set.
I can agree with that somewhat. I still like some of the sets and designs in "Batman Returns", but the whole thing was done much better in the first one.
I also thought Gotham looked so much better in Batman Begins than it did in TDK. I kept seeing Chicago, too, and I've only ever been there for a couple of weeks.
I also thought Gotham looked so much better in Batman Begins than it did in TDK. I kept seeing Chicago, too, and I've only ever been there for a couple of weeks.
I think the Burton films introduced the idea of a Gotham City with "personality". Taking the "Goth(ic)" part literally. In the comics that I recall, Gotham was for the most part a pretty generic city prior to Batman 89. The comics of course followed the movies lead and made Gotham more like the designs in Burton's movie. Now every fictional city in the DCU has a "personality". Though I would venture a guess that most cities in the real worlds have "multiple personalities" 
I remember June 23, 1989 very fondly. After heaping doses of Batman comics for months set in a dark and gritty Gotham, seeing it on screen was awesome. "Batman" was what I consider the "transition" film for mass audiences to stop thinking about Batman as a cheesy 60's show and more like the crime adventure drama it was in the comics. I give it a lot of credit and I do enjoy the cheesy aspects of the performances.
In retrospect, my biggest complaint was Batman's over-reliance on gadgets as opposed to his martial arts skills in fighting criminals, but it's a minor nitpick for me since the gadgets were all kind of fun.
I also credit this film with introducing one of the most iconic Batmobile designs that influences the comic designs to this day.
In retrospect, my biggest complaint was Batman's over-reliance on gadgets as opposed to his martial arts skills in fighting criminals, but it's a minor nitpick for me since the gadgets were all kind of fun.
I also credit this film with introducing one of the most iconic Batmobile designs that influences the comic designs to this day.
Agreed. Its camp aspects are more evident now in comparison to the Nolan films, but in '89 it didn't seem that way. Today I prefer the Nolan approach, but I still have a fondness for the '89 film.