Eighties and Nineties Message Board >> View Thread

Author
Paste Pot Pete 

Wolfman Pete!

Member Since: Fri Jul 07, 2000
Posts: 11,450


Seeing "Birdman" the other week got me thinking.

Why is/was Tim Burton's 1989 Batman film so great?

To this day I still love it and yet Michael Keaton wasn't quite right for the part and Jack Nicholson was practically chewing the scenery he was overacting so much.

So my follow-up question is, was Batman only great back then or is it still great now? and why?

PPP





Posted with Mozilla Firefox 37.0 on Windows 7
America's Captain 

Maintainer

Location: Bayville New Jersey
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 12,139



    Quote:
    Seeing "Birdman" the other week got me thinking.



    Quote:
    Why is/was Tim Burton's 1989 Batman film so great?


I didn't like it at all.


    Quote:
    To this day I still love it and yet Michael Keaton wasn't quite right for the part and Jack Nicholson was practically chewing the scenery he was overacting so much.



    Quote:
    So my follow-up question is, was Batman only great back then or is it still great now? and why?


I haven't liked any Batman movie ever. I don't know why I can't get the Batman movie I want, but it seems I can't.







Posted with Google Chrome 42.0.2311.90 on Windows NT 4.0
Paste Pot Pete 

Wolfman Pete!

Member Since: Fri Jul 07, 2000
Posts: 11,450



    Quote:

      Quote:
      Seeing "Birdman" the other week got me thinking.

      Quote:

        Quote:
        Why is/was Tim Burton's 1989 Batman film so great?



    Quote:
    I didn't like it at all.


Por Qua? (Why didn't you like it?)


    Quote:

      Quote:
      To this day I still love it and yet Michael Keaton wasn't quite right for the part and Jack Nicholson was practically chewing the scenery he was overacting so much.

      Quote:

        Quote:
        So my follow-up question is, was Batman only great back then or is it still great now? and why?



    Quote:
    I haven't liked any Batman movie ever. I don't know why I can't get the Batman movie I want, but it seems I can't.


What would your ideal Batman movie be like?

PPP





Posted with Mozilla Firefox 37.0 on Windows 7
America's Captain 

Maintainer

Location: Bayville New Jersey
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 12,139



    Quote:
    Por Qua? (Why didn't you like it?)


It was campy. I didn't want it to be. Also the Batman archetype wasn't fully realized. See below.


    Quote:
    What would your ideal Batman movie be like?


Sherlock Holmes meets James Bond meets Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon.

All any of the movies ever really give us is James Bond in a Bat suit. I think this is intentional. James Bond is a successful franchise so the Batman producers try to mimic it, using the Bat suit as a distraction so we don't notice the mimicry.








Posted with Google Chrome 42.0.2311.90 on Windows NT 4.0
Paste Pot Pete 

Wolfman Pete!

Member Since: Fri Jul 07, 2000
Posts: 11,450



    Quote:

      Quote:
      Por Qua? (Why didn't you like it?)



    Quote:
    It was campy. I didn't want it to be. Also the Batman archetype wasn't fully realized. See below.



    Quote:

      Quote:
      What would your ideal Batman movie be like?



    Quote:
    Sherlock Holmes meets James Bond meets Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon.



    Quote:
    All any of the movies ever really give us is James Bond in a Bat suit. I think this is intentional. James Bond is a successful franchise so the Batman producers try to mimic it, using the Bat suit as a distraction so we don't notice the mimicry.



    Quote:



I think even the comics have trouble bringing out the Dark Night DETECTIVE.

And Kung Fu in a batsuit? I doubt we'll ever see that.

But yeah, great points!

PPP







Posted with Apple iPhone 7.0
America's Captain 

Maintainer

Location: Bayville New Jersey
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 12,139



    Quote:
    I think even the comics have trouble bringing out the Dark Night DETECTIVE.


Sadly the case, yes. If the detective aspect were focused on more, we'd get more Riddler stories, as the Riddler is the ideal opponent for the world's greatest detective.


    Quote:
    And Kung Fu in a batsuit? I doubt we'll ever see that.


Ninja tactics are what I'm looking for. Batman should be the ultimate Ninja.






Posted with Google Chrome 42.0.2311.90 on Windows NT 4.0
Nose Norton


Location: Plainville
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 6,626


I still like it. At the time, it was the coolest movie ever, and it's lost that shine, but I think it is still a lot of fun. Burton's setting is very comic booky and I love some of the Joker scenes. I appreciate the soundtrack more now than I did then.
I can't get my kids to watch it. They can be so stubborn.


Posted with Apple iPhone 8.0
Iron Man Unit 007

Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 6,160


It was great then and now.

Keaton made an excellent Bruce Wayne, but he really needed that suit to bulk up as Batman. Also his Batman voice was far better then the one we got in the Nolan trilogy where he sounded like Clint Eastwood with smoker's cough after a 10 mile uphill run.

Kilmer was a better Batman then Bruce though the movie itself was bad.
Clooney was better as Bruce then Batman and that movie was pathetic.

Now as to Jack Nicholson as the Joker, was he over acting or was he playing an over the top Joker as fans would expect?

Joker is always over the top whether it is Nicholson in the role, or Heath Ledger as the Joker. Both versions were over the top, but Ledger was a bit more sinister at times. Regardless though, Joker is basically a death loving nihilist that wants to kill and kill again, whether it is Jack playing him as a homicidal artist, or Ledger as a nihilistic anarchist that wants things to burn simply because he can make them burn.

Jack also pretty much set the bar for future actors that play the Joker.

Also let's be honest here, this movie was the first major Batman screen project since the days of Adam West, that alone would make people remember it fondly as it jettisoned the Adam West camp fest and made Batman the Dark Knight again.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 37.0 on Windows 7
Iron Man Unit 007

Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 6,160


I agree that Batman should be a super ninja and some ninja skills were shown in Tim Burtons' Batman and in the trilogy. However they need to up the ante on the ninja skills. OF course pulling off some serious martial arts in that Batsuit......not easy.


The main problem with the Batman movies is:

1. Finding the right person to suit up as both Bruce and Batman, sometimes I think they should get one person to be Bruce and another as Batman after all, once he suits up in that suit, he could be anyone. Also I am still not convinced about Affleck as Batman.....yikes!


2. The fans always want things like Robin, the Joker, a ton of fancy gadgets, etc. I was glad the recent trilogy did NOT give us Robin or Batgirl, we do NOT need those characters to make a good Batman movie and in fact history shows they can wreck the movie (batman Forever and Batman and Robin)


The Joker: yes he is the most colorful land notorious Batman villain but he's been done enough.

IF we get another trilogy let's save Joker for the THIRD MOVIE. The latest trilogy was smart to use Rha's Al Ghul then Joker then Bane.

For a new trilogy I'd like to see the first movie be about the RIDDLER, that character is in dire need of being redeemed after Jim Carrey's AWFUL portayal, then the second movie should be TWO-FACE as the one and only villain of the movie. ENOUGH of him being second-bananna to the main villain, TWO-FACE can carry a movie as the villain if done right. The third movie should then be the JOKER. In fact the first movie can have Harvey getting his face fried then he arises at the end and Two Face is the next enemy and at the start of the second movie, Batman can be facing the Red Hood at the chemical plant and Red Hood takes the chemical bath and Batman thinks he is dead. The movie could then have a post credits scene of the man that was the Red Hood arising as the JOKER.

See? It's beautiful!


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 37.0 on Windows 7
America's Captain 

Maintainer

Location: Bayville New Jersey
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 12,139



    Quote:
    I agree that Batman should be a super ninja and some ninja skills were shown in Tim Burtons' Batman and in the trilogy. However they need to up the ante on the ninja skills. OF course pulling off some serious martial arts in that Batsuit......not easy.


Which is why Batman shouldn't be wearing armor. He's not Iron Man. I like Iron Man and I like Batman but they're not the same archetype.

Batman should be too skilled and too cunning to get hit with a bullet in the first place. And the actor should make us believe it, which no Batman actor has ever done.


    Quote:

    The main problem with the Batman movies is:



    Quote:
    1. Finding the right person to suit up as both Bruce and Batman, sometimes I think they should get one person to be Bruce and another as Batman after all, once he suits up in that suit, he could be anyone. Also I am still not convinced about Affleck as Batman.....yikes!


I think Affleck will surprise us. He has matured and he knows he has a great deal to prove in this venue. I don't think he'd be doing the movie if he didn't expect to hit the ball out of the park.

But yes - finding the right actor is crucial, and, in fact, has never been done in a serious portrayal.


    Quote:

    2. The fans always want things like Robin, the Joker, a ton of fancy gadgets, etc. I was glad the recent trilogy did NOT give us Robin or Batgirl, we do NOT need those characters to make a good Batman movie and in fact history shows they can wreck the movie (batman Forever and Batman and Robin)


We'll always have gadgets, I think, and I'm in favor of them. He's a billionaire. He'd have high tech. It's realistic. Nevertheless, he should be detective and Ninja first, using tech to augment these primary dispositions.


    Quote:

    The Joker: yes he is the most colorful land notorious Batman villain but he's been done enough.



    Quote:
    IF we get another trilogy let's save Joker for the THIRD MOVIE. The latest trilogy was smart to use Rha's Al Ghul then Joker then Bane.



    Quote:
    For a new trilogy I'd like to see the first movie be about the RIDDLER, that character is in dire need of being redeemed after Jim Carrey's AWFUL portayal, then the second movie should be TWO-FACE as the one and only villain of the movie. ENOUGH of him being second-bananna to the main villain, TWO-FACE can carry a movie as the villain if done right. The third movie should then be the JOKER. In fact the first movie can have Harvey getting his face fried then he arises at the end and Two Face is the next enemy and at the start of the second movie, Batman can be facing the Red Hood at the chemical plant and Red Hood takes the chemical bath and Batman thinks he is dead. The movie could then have a post credits scene of the man that was the Red Hood arising as the JOKER.



    Quote:
    See? It's beautiful!


I agree. I would love to see your trilogy made.






Posted with Google Chrome 42.0.2311.90 on Windows NT 4.0
Unstable Molecule


Location: Calgary, AB Canada
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 3,108


I also like the (intended?) symbolism of Two-Face as the villain for the SECOND movie. \:\)




"It is not our abilities that show what we truly are. It is our choices." – Albus Dumbledore
Posted with Mozilla Firefox 37.0 on Windows 7
thjan

Moderator

Member Since: Wed Dec 23, 2009
Posts: 2,790




    Quote:
    Sadly the case, yes. If the detective aspect were focused on more, we'd get more Riddler stories, as the Riddler is the ideal opponent for the world's greatest detective.


Yep, I really enjoyed the Nolan trilogy, but the one thing I didn't like about it was how much they downplayed the detective aspect of Batman. He let technology and other people do most of his detective work. They focused almost completely on the physical and tech aspects and just didn't make Batman as smart as he should be.


    Quote:
    Ninja tactics are what I'm looking for. Batman should be the ultimate Ninja.


Agreed. I thought they did a fairly good job of this in the Nolan trilogy though.





Posted with Mozilla Firefox 37.0 on Windows XP
Iron Man Unit 007

Moderator

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 6,160


Yep, that was very much intended.

The way I see it, movie 1 starts with Bruce having setup shop in Gotham and he has already rattled the cage as it were and helped Gordon seriously house clean the police and mayor office.

Then comes the Riddler, who aside from being a neurotic/eccentric genius, he enjoys proving his intellect over the cops with his riddle crimes, but now with the Batman he sees someone that could be his true challenge. I'd also likely include a scene where Batman confronts Nygma but has no serious evidence and before Batman leaves he tells Nygma that Nygma cannot stop himself just like he did in the ep of Batman TAS when Riddler was allegedly going straight. Riddler realizes Batman is right and sets up for the final showdown.

Also I'd have to update his costume, make it more like a business suit with the question marks rather then spandex like Gorshin and Carey used. Also an attempt at recreating Gorshin's Riddler laugh would be done, mainly due to the fact that Riddler really wasn't defined as a character in the comics until Gorshin played him on the Adam West series. his portrayal helped define the character


TWO FACE: harvey gets fried in movie 1, possible due to a plan of Riddler's. Riddler is in Arkham and Harvey continually asks the coin if the time is right to get Riddler but the coin always comes up on the shiny side. So instead Two Face is committing crimes with the number 2 as the theme, just like in the comics and cartoon. He also quickly takes control of Gotham's underworld and makes it clear that he is not second fiddle to any other super villain.


JOKER: Red Hood faces Batman in movie 2, possibly in the employ of Two Face, gets the chemical bath and movie 3 is all about Joker


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 37.0 on Windows 7
thjan

Moderator

Member Since: Wed Dec 23, 2009
Posts: 2,790



I think it's still great. I'm sure nostalgia plays a bit of a role in me thinking that, but I also think it is just a good movie. I loved Jack Nicholson as the Joker and even though he was a little small for the role, I still think Keaton did an amazing job, both as Bruce Wayne and as Batman. Some of my favorite elements are the music and the atmosphere and tone of the movie though. I think the music was great and very powerful. I still think about the music that's played at the beginning of the movie whenever I see the dvd cover or the yellow Bat symbol on shirts(man were those huge back in the 90s, and I still occasionally see them to this day). And as much as I liked the Nolan trilogy, it certainly did not have the awesome atmosphere and the great visuals of Gotham City that the 89 movie had. Even all the things that you knew were fake and all the comic booky elements seemed real and were captured really well. I think Batman 89 is just a fun movie and I think it gives you the pure, popcorn eating, movie going experience.





Posted with Mozilla Firefox 37.0 on Windows XP
thjan





    Quote:
    I think Affleck will surprise us. He has matured and he knows he has a great deal to prove in this venue. I don't think he'd be doing the movie if he didn't expect to hit the ball out of the park.


I probably shouldn't comment since I don't plan on seeing the movie(for a lot more reasons than just Affleck), but I just don't think he's right for the role. I don't buy him as a superhero. He was one of the worst parts of the Daredevil movie(and that's saying a lot with the amount of bad that was in that movie), and when I saw him playing Bruce Wayne in the trailer for the new Superman/Batman movie, all I saw was Ben Affleck(same as it was in the Daredevil movie). I don't know what it is about him, since I usually don't have a problem with not seeing the actor and letting the story pull me in, but I can't do that with him for some reason. Plus, he just seems very stiff and unathletic, and I don't think he can pull off the intimidating presence that Batman should have in and out of the suit(I most especially don't think he can pull it off out of the suit). Maybe that's all just me though, and others will enjoy him in the role. All I know is that this Batman will not be for me and that I will just have to wait for the next reboot to hopefully get a Batman I like again.


Posted with Mozilla Firefox 37.0 on Windows XP
Gernot 

Manager

Location: St. Louis, MO
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Posts: 12,418


I think people were SO hungry for a serious Batman film (the last one we'd had was in 1949 at that time) that the 1989 film seemed like a masterpiece.

Another thing that marred the film was Joker's death. They COULD have brought him back easily, though. Remember how Jack Napier was shot across the face, giving him a gruesome grin? They could have had it done the same way with the Joker and Bob. The Joker said, "Give me your gun, Bob!" and shot Bob in the face, causing Bob to fall. They could have had Bob survive with the same sort of wound the Joker had received, becoming the second Joker. He could have blamed Batman for his creation, too. If Batman hadn't defied the FIRST Joker, Bob never would have been shot! ;\)



Posted with Mozilla Firefox 37.0 on Windows Vista

Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2022 Powermad Software