Burton/Keaton Batman movie

[Warped9]

The '89 Batman was HUGE when it came out. And deservedly so. Yes, I do think the Nolan films eclipsed it and there are many things I prefer in that trilogy, but I retain a soft spot for the '89 film despite the camp being more overt than it seemed originally.

I had enjoyed the '78 Superman originally, but I think the '89 Batman was a significant step up from that. I think a good part of that is I think the '78 Supes starts falling down not long after Superman's appearance in Metropolis whereas I don't think the '89 Bats suffers from that kind of stumbling. It's pretty steady throughout.

 

[Galileo7]

I liked Burton/Keaton Batman 1989 and 1992 movies then. Albeit, they have not aged well IMHO. I am looking forward to Batman V. Superman Affleck Batman.

 

[Timby]

[*]Keaton is a pretty good actor. He transitioned quite well from long-haired gregarious comedian to socially awkward and withdrawn billionaire. I thought that his Bruce Wayne had a lot of substance on par with what we saw in Bale.

That Michael Keaton's career basically flatlined in the mid-'90s is a shame.

 

[JD]

I can't help but wonder what kind of things Tim Burton could have done with some of the other villains, like Harley Quinn, Killer Croc, Mister Freeze, Clayface or Two-Face. It especially a shame we never got Burton's Two-Face since he already introduced Billy Dee Williams as Harvey Dent in both of his movies. I can't help but wonder what he had planed for the character, because I doubt they would have introduced the character without at least a vague idea of what his Two-Face would have been like.

 

[Cyrus]

It's been quite a while since I saw the 89 Batman movie, but I liked it a lot and thought Keaton was a terrific Batman. I believe this movie also created the "In the Pale Moonlight" phrase that later became the title of a great DS9 episode.

 

[Aragorn]

I can't help but wonder what kind of things Tim Burton could have done with some of the other villains, like Harley Quinn, Killer Croc, Mister Freeze, Clayface or Two-Face. It especially a shame we never got Burton's Two-Face since he already introduced Billy Dee Williams as Harvey Dent in both of his movies. I can't help but wonder what he had planed for the character, because I doubt they would have introduced the character without at least a vague idea of what his Two-Face would have been like.

Billy Dee Williams took the part knowing the character would become Two-Face. But he only had a one movie deal.

 

[JD]

Was he not in Batman Returns? I could have sworn I remembered him being in at least one or two scenes in that one too.

It's been quite a while since I saw the 89 Batman movie, but I liked it a lot and thought Keaton was a terrific Batman. I believe this movie also created the "In the Pale Moonlight" phrase that later became the title of a great DS9 episode.

I don't know where it originally came from, but I'm pretty sure that saying has been around a lot longer than the 1989.

 

[DWF]

[*]Keaton is a pretty good actor. He transitioned quite well from long-haired gregarious comedian to socially awkward and withdrawn billionaire. I thought that his Bruce Wayne had a lot of substance on par with what we saw in Bale.

That Michael Keaton's career basically flatlined in the mid-'90s is a shame.

He still wound up with an Oscar though and really he has a good life outside of acting.

 

[davejames]

Yeah I think that line is based on old folklore about witches dancing in the light of the moon or something. And there have been slightly different versions of it over the years.

 

[theenglish]

Was he not in Batman Returns? I could have sworn I remembered him being in at least one or two scenes in that one too.

It's been quite a while since I saw the 89 Batman movie, but I liked it a lot and thought Keaton was a terrific Batman. I believe this movie also created the "In the Pale Moonlight" phrase that later became the title of a great DS9 episode.

I don't know where it originally came from, but I'm pretty sure that saying has been around a lot longer than the 1989.

According to a Google search the exact line does come from the movie.

 

[JD]

Oh, I could have sworn I'd heard it being used in reference to stuff older than the movie.

 

[theenglish]

Oh, I could have sworn I'd heard it being used in reference to stuff older than the movie.

davejames is right about the concept; it's just the exact line that is original as is, apparently the phrase "in the pale moonlight" in this context. It seems the DS9 reference WAS to the Batman movie. LSNE.

 

[wulfio]

Yup. To corroborate others statements, it references folklore, but the quote is in fact original. It's kind of impressive to be honest, that a contemporary screen writer coined such a nifty idiom. It does feel like it's something that should have been derived from classic literature.

 

[JD]

Yeah, it sounds old, and I've heard it around so I figured it was old.

 

[Maurice]

ngram of "in the pale moonlight" (link)

 

[eyeresist]

I still prefer the Nolan movies, but hey, to each his own.

Yeah, I figure a lot of people probably agree with you, but Batman 1989 will probably always be the number 1 live action Batman for me (closely followed by Batman 1966/Adam West Batman). Actually, I can see Ben Affleck's Batman being very good, too. I hope he gets at least one solo movie after Batman v Superman.

I will say one thing nice about Nolan's Batman films, though. I think that Gary Oldman is easily the best live action Commissioner Gordon

I find I'm agreeing with pretty much everything you say. 1989 Batman wasn't perfect, but was as close as we've seen so far. I found Nolan's movies incredibly disappointing (gave up on the first two after 30 minutes, watched the end of TDKR and thought Bale's voice was hilarious). Affleck seems to have potential for greatness, though of course we haven't really seen him in the role yet.

 

[Captaindemotion]

Was he not in Batman Returns? I could have sworn I remembered him being in at least one or two scenes in that one too.

No, he's not in it at all.

[*]Keaton is a pretty good actor. He transitioned quite well from long-haired gregarious comedian to socially awkward and withdrawn billionaire. I thought that his Bruce Wayne had a lot of substance on par with what we saw in Bale.

That Michael Keaton's career basically flatlined in the mid-'90s is a shame.

He still wound up with an Oscar though and really he has a good life outside of acting.

Actually, while he won virtually every other award for Birdman, he lost to Eddie Redmayne at the Oscars. The Academy seems to have a hard-on for actors in biopics and can't seem to see the skill in creating a brand new original character. *pet peeve*

 

[wulfio]

I thought birdman was a biopic!

 

[DaddlerTheDalek]

I still love Batman '89.

 

[Greg Cox]

I love the whole Gothic look and atmosphere of the first Burton movie, which is like Batman by way of Famous Monsters of Filmland. Some of the visuals, combined with Elfman's music, just send a chill down your spine, like that great shot of the Joker's bleached white hand rising up from the green toxic waste, or that moment when Gordon catches his first glimpse of Batman up on the catwalk, right before Batman vanishes in a puff of chemical smoke. And then there's the Batmobile zooming down a moonlit country round, stirring up the autumn leaves in its wake . . . .

That's pure pulp poetry right there.

BATMAN RETURNS is an utter mess, plot-wise, but there are some sublime moments that stay with you longer than any number of forgettable scenes from more logical movies. And Michelle Pfeiffer pretty much steals the movie as Catwoman.

(And I'm probably one of the few people who actually likes that movie's Caligari-esque take on the Penguin, which is a lot creepier than the original comics version.)