Batman...

[marillion]

The movie was a bitter disappointment to me back in the day, as I gotten caught up in the hype. Add to that my friend Ryan had seen it and could not stop talking about how good it was... By the time I saw it with him, I was expecting the world but then kept asking him "When is this going to get good?"

In retrospect, I was entertained, but my high hopes for it being the best thing since sliced bread were dashed...

With the advent of Nolan's movies, I've come to realize that I really enjoy a more "real world" feeling to my superhero movies and that Burton's vision of Gotham (and then subsequently Shumacher's) just left me cold, which is no way to enjoy a movie.

 

[Warped9]

With the advent of Nolan's movies, I've come to realize that I really enjoy a more "real world" feeling to my superhero movies and that Burton's vision of Gotham (and then subsequently Shumacher's) just left me cold, which is no way to enjoy a movie.

I've had similar feelings.

 

[M'rk son of Mogh]

Oddly, the Nolan movies make me miss the 89 movie more.
They're so serious and faux-realistic that they almost forget they're based on a comic book character named "Batman".

I still enjoy the Nolan movies, I'm not a hater by any means. But sometimes it's just a bit too much. I have more trouble re-watching, for example, The Dark Knight, than any other super hero movie I own, mostly because it's so dark and almost exhausting. There needs to be a bit more fun, or at least, better balance. I get more 'entertainment' value from other movies despite them not being as well crafted.

 

[Peach Wookiee]

I liked the Burton-verse, but I think I like the BTAS universe a bit better.

 

[Warped9]

Batman Returns (1992) **

Catwoman, the Penguin and a scheming financier wreak choas on Gotham City.

Some people around here aren’t going to like me. This was a bad and painful movie to watch. I remember it being better, but it’s just bad. Michelle Pfieffer notwithstanding.

The 1989 Batman had a very Burton-esque flavour to it, but Batman Returns is not only very theatrical yet also pure umistakably Tim Burton. Everything is exaggerated and over exaggerated. There is no subtlety whatsoever. Watching this is like watching a live-action cartoon, and in this context I don’t mean that in a good way.

This version of Batman has no apparent aversion to killing if it comes down to it. The origin story for Catwoman is just plain stupid. The Penguin is simply grotesque. Max Shreck is a psycho. I could find no interest whatsoever for these characters. It's not much better than a somewhat more serious version of the '60's TV series.

I couldn’t buy one thing in this film. It was one bit of nonsense and ridiculousness after another.

The one good thing I liked was that Batman’s costume looked better here than previously, particularly the cowl.

On second thought the one other good thing is that it’s somewhat better than the two films which follow it.

What a huge disappointment.

 

[Agent Richard07]

The 1989 Batman had a very Burton-esque flavour to it, but Batman Returns is not only very theatrical yet also pure umistakably Tim Burton. Everything is exaggerated and over exaggerated. There is no subtlety whatsoever. Watching this is like watching a live-action cartoon, and in this context I don’t mean that in a good way.

My understanding is that after the success of the first film, Burton was given more freedom with the second, which is why it looks even more Burton-esque. I liked it when I first saw it too, but looking back, it's a bit much. I agree on that. And what was with the slush that looked like whipcream?

 

[sonak]

Batman Returns (1992) **

Catwoman, the Penguin and a scheming financier wreak choas on Gotham City.

Some people around here aren’t going to like me. This was a bad and painful movie to watch. I remember it being better, but it’s just bad. Michelle Pfieffer notwithstanding.

The 1989 Batman had a very Burton-esque flavour to it, but Batman Returns is not only very theatrical yet also pure umistakably Tim Burton. Everything is exaggerated and over exaggerated. There is no subtlety whatsoever. Watching this is like watching a live-action cartoon, and in this context I don’t mean that in a good way.

This version of Batman has no apparent aversion to killing if it comes down to it. The origin story for Catwoman is just plain stupid. The Penguin is simply grotesque. Max Shreck is a psycho. I could find no interest whatsoever for these characters. It's not much better than a somewhat more serious version of the '60's TV series.

I couldn’t buy one thing in this film. It was one bit of nonsense and ridiculousness after another.

The one good thing I liked was that Batman’s costume looked better here than previously, particularly the cowl.

On second thought the one other good thing is that it’s somewhat better than the two films which follow it.

What a huge disappointment.

It's a truly bizarre movie, but to me that's not a bad thing. I like it better than the original now. It feels, as someone once described it "like a comic book transplanted to the big screen."

Devito's performance is really underrated. And it's a VERY dark portrayal of Batman, as disturbed and alone.

Big downsides-Batman's practically just a guest star in this one, not getting a lot of time. The main plot makes very little sense(what kind of ludicrous plot is that of Shreck's?), oh and HOW DUMB are the citizens of Gotham? Penguin for mayor? Really?

 

[Turtletrekker]

With the advent of Nolan's movies, I've come to realize that I really enjoy a more "real world" feeling to my superhero movies and that Burton's vision of Gotham (and then subsequently Shumacher's) just left me cold, which is no way to enjoy a movie.

I had the exact opposite reaction. Gotham City should be presented as a character in it's own right, with a distinct feel and personality. Nolan's Gotham could be any city, and that bored me.

Oddly, the Nolan movies make me miss the 89 movie more.
They're so serious and faux-realistic that they almost forget they're based on a comic book character named "Batman".

I still enjoy the Nolan movies, I'm not a hater by any means. But sometimes it's just a bit too much. I have more trouble re-watching, for example, The Dark Knight, than any other super hero movie I own, mostly because it's so dark and almost exhausting. There needs to be a bit more fun, or at least, better balance. I get more 'entertainment' value from other movies despite them not being as well crafted.

QFT.

 

[Trekker4747]

Batman Returns (1992) **

Some people around here aren’t going to like me. This was a bad and painful movie to watch. I remember it being better, but it’s just bad. Michelle Pfieffer notwithstanding.

You may be surprised, I don't think it's a movie that's really fared the test of time very well. I think the worst part of it, really, is how Burton turned The Penguin from simply and oddly dapper, ugly, mobster into a freak who lived in the sewers.

And, personally, I'm not a fan of how Catwoman was done either. I really think it's not a movie that completely works and really, is a sign of the insanity from Burton that was yet to come.

 

[Agent Richard07]

I'm firmly in the "why shouldn't superhero movies be allowed to take their subject matter seriously?" camp.

 

[Warped9]

The best Batman comics had an air of realism to them, a measure of credibility, as far as can be possible when delving into the superhero genre. The Burton and Schumacher films rejected that. There is an underlying feeling of them sneering under their breath saying, "Look how silly all this is." In their own way they're mocking the whole exercise. Did they do that intentionally? Burton, maybe not, Schumacher, most likely.

But the end result is just something of a mockery of a damn good character. We all know that Batman isn't real, but part of the fun is imagining he could be real. Nolan gets that. The producers and directors and writers of the better superhero films get that.

Burton and Schumacher either didn't get it or just rejected it.

I like Batman to be given a sense of realism. I don't like him being mocked.

 

[Agent Richard07]

We all know that Batman isn't real, but part of the fun is imagining he could be real.

Exactly. What if Batman or any other superhero were real? That's the fun you get with a more naturalistic approach.

 

[Warped9]

We all know that Batman isn't real, but part of the fun is imagining he could be real.

Exactly. What if Batman or any other superhero were real? That's the fun you get with a more naturalistic approach.

In the '90s Batman TAS was consistently far better than what was being done live-action. That creative group got it. It was animation and yet they respected the subject matter, and fans in general, better than Burton and Schumacher.

And Batman in animation is still good and more generally consistent with what Nolan is doing.

 

[Turtletrekker]

I like Batman to be given a sense of realism. I don't like him being mocked.

You must loathe the Adam West TV show.

 

[Agent Richard07]

^ Personally, I love the Adam West series, but it's also good to have something that takes itself more seriously.

 

[Christopher]

The Adam West show is terrific, an extremely authentic adaptation of the way the character was handled in the comics at the time. People see it as mocking the comics, but the comics from that period actually didn't take themselves particularly seriously and were full of ridiculous and comedic situations that bordered on self-parody. If anything, the show was more sedate than the comics. At least Adam West's Batman never had Superman brainwash him into having blackouts and adopting an alternate hero persona to compete with himself to be Superman's new partner, just to pose Batman with an insoluble mystery as an anniversary present.

And people sometimes forget that the Adam West series introduced Barbara Gordon/Batgirl, one of the most important and beloved figures in the Batman family, and it was the show that defined the basic characterization she had in the comics -- her intelligence, her fearlessness and skill rivalling Batman's, her sense of joy in crimefighting. The third season was actually pretty badly done compared to the first two, but Batgirl was a fantastic addition to the mythos.

 

[sonak]

the show was awful. The humor was lame, it was extremely formulaic and repetitive, the "acting" was ridiculous.

Deliberate schlock is still schlock in the end. The comics were also awful during that period.

 

[Maurice]

Batman the series seen through modern eyes misses why it was so fresh when it appeared, It was the Airplane! of its time: taking something essentially ludicrous that was played straight and playing it SO straight that it became silly. It was really a pop-art film version of the late 50s Batman comics, with the giant death traps, etc.

 

[Aldo]

Anything I say about Batman: Returns isn't going to change anyones mind. Truth be told, what most people say are right, it does play more like a Burton film than a proper Batman film. Most of the character's are chaged around a lot, and it has this underlying theme of nastiness running throughout it.

But you know what? I love the hell out of it. It just all works for me. I love the look of Gotham, I love how it looks like exactly what it is, sets on a soundstage. There's something very theatrical about the whole thing, and fo rme, it works.

 

[sojourner]

The best things to come out of the Burton Batmans was the Gotham City architecture and Catwoman's costume.