Previous Post Two with Michael Keaton. One with Val Kilmer. One with George Clooney. Along the way we got the Joker, the Penguin, Catwoman, the Riddler, Robin, and others I can't recall. The aesthetic was one part Kane/Fingeroth and one part Nightmare Before Christmas. The first Batman actor might legitimately, under another director, have been cast as the Joker - and I've sometimes wondered if that was the point, that Batman could have been the Joker, and the Joker could have been Batman, or so Tim Burton was trying to imply. How do you rank these films? Best ever? Worst ever? Better than the 60s film with its celebration of campiness? Worse than the Christopher Nolan films? Better than the Ben Affleck stuff? Worse even than that? I think Burton's strong point was the villains and the City. I think his weak point was Batman. What do you think? BONUS QUESTION: How did you react back then? I was strongly anti-Burton because I was strongly anti-Keaton. I liked Michael Keaton a lot in roles I considered meant for him. I didn't think Batman was meant for him and I couldn't get past it. He would have made a better Joker. Sort of in the Keith Ledger vein. I also, at the time, wanted zero camp. I wanted all dark all the time. Which of course is what we got with Christopher Nolan's version, pretty much, and I wasn't thrilled with that either. In the end, I think Burton was moving in the right direction. I wonder what Joss Whedon would have done. Probably something closer to Burton than to Nolan.

Okay first Batman Forever and Batman and Robin are disregarded by me, all blame to Schumaker.

Batman and Batman Returns: Burton looked like he was going for Dark but with perhaps a little camp thrown in such as Penguin being raised by penguins. Or how the bat-rope stopped him and Vale from a fatal fall at the end without whiplash or being torn off his utility belt....or how Batwing's weapons didn't seem to lock on Joker....either Batman adjusted his aim at the last minute or something else happened...

Batman Returns does seem to get a bad rap, yet on an 80 million budget it did 266 million box office, while the previous one had a 35 million budget and did 411 million. However I think we can thank Jack as Joker for that box office take more then Keaton or Burton.

Joker is a blank slate that can be played many ways, but they were going with the homicidal artist that finds art in death, destruction and misery vs. Ledger as an anarchic force of chaos that wants to bring people down to his level, and his version of Joker seemed to have a death wish knowing that whoever kills him will definitely stoop to his level.

Jack however brought a nice mix of calm and crazy to the Joker that I honestly to this day prefer over Ledger.

Keaton: well he definitely needed the batsuit, but then Batman should be wearing some serious body armor anyway. Also his Bat-voice was more of a menacing whisper whereas Nolan's bat-voice was basically Clint Eastwood with smoker's cough after a 10 mile uphill hike.

Keaton did a good job of portraying the silent torment that Wayne/batman goes through every day. As a kid he sees his parents gunned down by a random act of violence and could do nothing....talk about feeling helpless. He blames himself for not being able to do anything even though there was nothing he could do. So Wayne does kind of go a bit crazy but instead channels it into actions that help prevent others from suffering what he suffered. Of course dressing as a giant bat makes one wonder about his mental health despite any fear factor he generates.

Then Burton changed it up and instead of Joe Chill being the killer, it was a pre-Joker Jack Napier thus showing that they created each other and could have been each other.

Despite the fact that this movie is in the pre-cellphone/pre-internet era I think it holds up rather well.

I still love the scene when they are fleeing and he tells her to get in the car, she asks which one and then stops at the site of the Batmobile