BATMAN (1989) Retrospective / Review
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 6 сен 2024
- / oliverharper
www.olivers-ret...
/ ollieh82
/ oliversretroreviews
/ oliverharper1982
Join the discord! / discord
BATMAN (1989) Retrospective / Review
Get the BATMAN Anthology boxset Blu-ray here goo.gl/QxKkix
Get the soundtrack to BATMAN here goo.gl/mFzHfK
Let's Play Channel
/ retropodcasts
Get the BATMAN Anthology boxset Blu-ray here goo.gl/QxKkix
Get the soundtrack to BATMAN here goo.gl/mFzHfK
Oliver Harper love
Your reviews this is & always will be my favorite batman of all time & the first robocop movie I loved that review btw keep up the good work
Oliver Harper
Not a bad price at £8 actually. Only first film is enjoyable for me. Returns is very sort of dark and weird. Forever is also weird, but weird in a more comedy-light way. And the less said about Robin the better!
@Oliver Harper I don't mean any offence my man but I take it you haven't read much comics printed before the 90's? Batman 89 is far more faithful than Nolans trilogy, _for the time_ and just in general....Batman actually killed quite a lot both before and after the 60's (the Adam West show is also accurate to the comics for that era). It's a misconception that Batman doesn't kill/hasn't killed. Even today in the most extreme circumstances he is willing to kill, but we're talking saving the planet/universe type stakes. Furthermore, _Nolan's Batman actually kills way more people, contradicting the character in the very same movies, just because he says he doesn't kill doesn't make it true when it doesn't line up with what we see_
Batman does kill people! In the comics during the golden age he killed all the time
I thought Keaton's take on Batman/Bruce Wayne was brilliant, actually, because there was no distinction and no mistake. In this movie, Bruce Wayne virtually doesn't exist. It's a mask, a facade, a nametag for convinience. Batman is his true identity, the one that has meaning and purpose. Wayne cannot live outside Batman and basically doesn't. I think Burton said himself that this film was a fight between two very disturbed people.
I thought Keaton was a revelation. I actually liked him as a brooding and somewhat hollow Bruce. That's true to his backstory imo.
My favourite thing about the film is Keaton's performance. I love the way he plays Bruce Wayne as if his mind is almost always elsewhere, it's subtly funny but at the same time more believable than other iterations where it's Bruce Wayne playing Batman rather than the Batman persona bleeding into the Bruce Wayne persona.
"Fucking MISTER MOM playing BATMAN THE DARK KNIGHT!!!!!!!!!!!!!", . . I remember THAT being on allot of people lips back when this flick was released!
@@creepyskulldini581 and that was without people all over the net complaining.
I would agree that Burton certainly made this movie from the perspective you mentioned, just look at the dinner scene where Bruce mentions not remembering being in that room.
He's blocked out so much pain that the manor and his identity as Bruce Wayne is just a facade.
Michael Keaton has always been my favorite Batman.
the best
And Kevin Conroy
Without doubt mine too, not only for batman, but for playing Bruce Wayne as competently as batman
yep, i like Bale but come on Keaton is a beast
Juliannia Huegerich Keaton will always be Batman.
This is the best Batman movie, great actors, great music and a great batmobile.
😂😂😂😂😂😂😂 its absolutely diabolical
@@Josh_J91 your favorite batman movie is probably batman & robin with george clooney lol smh
In 89 everyone had a Batman shirt EVERYONE!!
I think making the joker kill Bruce's parents is a really great idea actually
When you think about it, it still works with the story since Napier just like Joe Chill, is just a Thug when he does it, he doesn't become the Joker until later and essentially by accident.
Not to mention the fact that if Bruce hadn't seen him kill the Crime Boss, we as the audience would have never known.
You could go back to that scene and remove that part and still have the fight in the church just with altered dialogue and the movie would still have been awesome.
I think it's a cool idea, but maybe just this once
Don't understand why people are criticizing it. It was a genius idea and it sets up a great chracter development for Batman / Wayne. His seek for revenge creates an even greater evil (in this movie, he creates the Joker on accident), the events in Batman Returns - where Catwoman is some kind of dark version of himself - already change his character where he tries to prevent her from killing Shrek in the end, leading to the a Batman in Batman Forever who is more similar to the ideal of not killing.
Pjupe Good point, I agree. And for that matter, I love Batman Forever.
Personally, I’ve always appreciated this change from the source material and it makes this film itself feel to me more like a standalone story - a cohesive film in and of itself - it has a clear beginning, middle and end - the mystery of ‘The Batman’ is revealed and his parents killer resolved in the end
This could have stood as the only Batman film if needed
It’s visually stunning, the acting is compelling, the story is concise and understated, and the music score is iconic
Batman doesn’t look like any other 80’s film - there’s a ‘timeless’ quality about it
I just love this film!
My view of Keaton as Bruce Wayne is opposite to Harper's. I thought Keaton was a good Batman but utterly perfect as Bruce. Bit lost, bit fucked up, always little unsure how he should tick in any given moment. Far more masked and naked than when bat suit comes on. Perfect interpretation. Bale's Wayne is confident showman who is always in perfect control of every moment, basically super hero character of his own, more reminisced to James Bond than what I feel Bruce Wayne should be.
@Oliver Harper I greatly enjoy your retrospective series!!
Keaton's Bruce Wayne was much better than Bale's imo. His performance is more subtle and he doesn't spell his thoughts out in every little detail all the time. His Batman is the same, you'd be too scared to make fun of his voice, lol
ye, he seems like hes actually conflicted and almost guilty of being a billionare............in the bale one he is a douche and doesnt make sense he would go fight crime dressed up as a bat.......more of a yacht type person
Still the best batman movie.
I still think it's the best visually, musically, and a great one-villain only, self-contained movie. It's a masterpiece of a film even if it diverges from the comics a little.
As good as the Nolan films are in story and character, they simply don't have this style of this one.
@@dreamlandnightmare I think that was the point because back in the early thousands the misconception was people wouldn't take comic book movies seriously if it was campy weird and Goofy( comic bookie) light-hearted tone or colorful spandex costumes so they speak that all the way the early 2000s Fox X-Men movies are perfect examples of this.
Exactly, if you read all the comments are way way more positive and superior. Hope Oliver revisits this retrospective with more hype and making more justice to this masterpiece film.
Nolan's films get lost in all the philosophising and heavy handed dialogue, he forgets that in comic books, the visuals tell the story. Burton and even Schumacher understood that.
Batman will always be special to me because I saw it my first year in the Navy while temporary stationed in France. I was so desperate to see the movie that I was willing to see it while dubbed in French. I don’t know why the French audience stood and clapped when the Joker killed his boss which I found strange. The movie has one of the best soundtracks ever plus Prince’s songs were good.
Were you able to understand it despite it being in French?
This remains my favorite Batman film. The more recent incarnations go WAY too far into the 'look how dark and SERIOUS we are!' territory, whereas this film perfectly balanced the Dark Knight aspects with needed, well placed humor. The direction, score and editing easily outdo the Nolan films for me. Burton got it right.
Michael Little Wow, opinions, huh?
Everyone seems to have them...some are just more petulant and laughable than others...
Just MY opinion.
Karstens Creations i def agree
The first two had that comic book sense of wonder. The new ones want to be Dirty Harry wearing a cape. Dirty Harry wears a blazer and holds a gun. I want my sense of wonder from Batman.
Favorite Batman film!! Yes, I prefer it over The Dark Knight.
Lucas Dunker the dark knight was over rated
The Dark Knights Returns is much better too. And Mask of the Phantasm
@@roninkraut6873 Never heard of the Dark Knight "RETURNS" [Batman Returns 1992; The Dark Knight Rises 2012]
Batman: Mask of the Phantasm is my personal favourite Batman feature-length film 😉
@@bonghunezhou5051
You’re missing out. It’s the animated movie based on Frank Miller’s comic ‘the Dark Knight Returns”
It’s awesome
I actually think Keaton captured the "genius detective" far better than Christian Bale's Bruce Wayne, although Bale does portray some of the other aspects better than Keaton. I like both interpretations of the character pretty much equally and for different reasons.
Ben Affleck’s portrayal of Bruce Wayne and Batman in Batman vs Superman were also well done despite the movies downfalls. Affleck’s portrayal is exactly what’s you’d expect the character would be like after 20 years of dealing with street scumbags and the recent added threat of kryptonians seen in Man of Steel, the prequel to Batman Vs Superman
@Tom Ffrench well, can't argue too much with that but I personally think they had good detective moments if not totally nailing it. But I'll be honest I think Kevin Conroy nailed the detective angle best out of everyone.
What do you think about Patterson’s take on the character?
The definition of a damn good comic book movie.
Aaron Scherbarth the film’s Project Consultant was Batman’s creator, Bob Kane. If he was the Consultant, you know that Batman is in good hands.
Michael Keaton is the best Batman! He was brooding, mysterious and had a soft gruff whisper when he spoke. Bale's Batman just growled and spat even when he was only taking to someone. Calm down BaleMan.
I liked them both. Bale understood the ludicrous nature of Bruce Wayne`s voice undermining his secret identidy. Get real? Everything in the Nolan version surpased previous works in this reguard!
Definitely, he was the best choice for Betman👍🏼
I agree. Sadly, I was never able to take Bale seriously, either as Wayne or (especially) as Batman. As one reviewer once said, you can tell Bale is *trying* to be intimidating, whereas Keaton just naturally *is* .
I saw the dark Knight trilogy before I saw this and I think the 1989 film is far superior.
Agree, Heath Ledger's performance is undeniable. But the rest of the movie (besides a few scenes) is underwhelming. I reference Dark Knight only because the first and the 3rd in the trilogy are pretty much trash.
For sure. Jack Nicholson was great. He was funny and terrifying at the same time. And Batman was actually really good
Have you ever danced with the devil in the pale moonlight? I ask that of all my prey...
@@jeremyhaeuptle7924 ".... I don't know what it means I just like the sound of it."
I saw the Tim Burton movies before the dark knight trilogy and I think the Nolan films are far superior.
I find the portrayal of the Joker in this one particularly interesting. I like how he's modeled on the old silent flick The Man Who Laughs (something this reviewer failed to note). There's also a strange kind of Toxic Avengerish influence on that character in this flick - how he falls into a vat of chemicals and then emerges transformed.
In my opinion, this version is actually MORE faithful to the comics than the Nolan films. Batman here is an intelligent crimefighter who uses his brain as well as his gadgets and fists to solve problems, being smart enough to deduce Joker was hiding the ingredients to the Smylex poison in various chemicals designed to be used simultaneously. He understands the virtues of theatricality a little better than Nolan's version, using costume design plus movements to make himself look like a vampiric monster, to the point where nobody's sure if he's even human. Him killing people in this movie is actually justified by Batman Forever of all movies, where Bruce harbors deep regret over his behavior in this movie and the movie after it. He explains to Dick Grayson that killing Two-Face won't bring him any satisfaction at all, and will just make the pain of losing his parents worse.
Gotham City in the Nolanverse is a non-entity. You could change the city to Chicago or Detroit and the story wouldn't be affected because of how generic the backdrop is. This movie actually went the distance to give Gotham its own character and identity: a sprawling, filthy hellhole of impossibly tall buildings, weird shapes, and needlessly Gothic architecture that perfectly exemplifies what a crappy town the place is to live in.
The Joker here is a complete lunatic, having no regard for human life or any real end goal other than to cause death and destruction by any means necessary. He's not out to prove anything, he's just here to wreck the place and have fun doing it. Without even saying it flat-out, he embodies the greatest amount of freedom any person can have; insanity. Nolan's Joker feels like he's always trying to prove a point, which is fine since Comics Joker is often trying to get Batman to see the world as he does, but Nolan's Joker is so insistent that this is how the world works that he feels less like an insane person and more like your typical anarchist. That's not saying Ledger was a bad Joker (hell no), but I feel like Nicholson embodied the character's insistence on having FUN destroying everything better.
If you notice throughout the movie, Alfred is insisting that Bruce pursue his relationship with Vicki over obsessing with the Joker and his parents' killer, yet Bruce always finds an excuse to stay away from Vicki, preferring to focus on crimefighting instead of having a normal human relationship. His line near the end, "I have no wish to fill my few remaining years grieving for the loss of old friends...or their sons", illustrates that he feels Bruce is being consumed by his quest for vengeance, so he lets VIcki Vale into the cave in order to force Bruce to confront the one thing he's denied himself for so long: happiness.
not really, nolan's batman is more fathful. batman 89 is faithful visually, but there are things that were not right, like harvey dent being black, and not even in the film except for a couple of seconds, jim gordon being a wasted character, joker killing batman's parents etc. batman in nolan's movies is also a crime fighter as well. the joker in dark knight is also a complete lunatic. more lunatic in fact. joker had tons of fun whike doing his job. heck he even kills for fun like the pencil trick scene.
mounir maged I really don't think Harvey's race was a problem. If they could cast an Irishman to play a guy from the Middle East in Batman Begins, then hiring a black guy to play a white character here isn't that big of a deal. I do wish Gordon had more screen time though, because he was a pretty commanding presence whenever he was onscreen. as for Joker killing Batman's parents, it and Batman killing are probably the only two major deviations from the comic in this movie. Honestly, I don't find it to be all that bad because it plays up an angle the comics have been doing for a while now: Batman and the Joker having an intertwined relationship that's codependent. Here, Batman and Joker literally created each other, which I think was a really neat dynamic and one of the reasons I wish Joker had survived in this movie. As for Joker and having fun, I know the one in TDK is having at least some fun with what he's doing, but it's really underplayed and often swallowed up by the constant speechifying. Nicholson's Joker just frankly didn't give a shit about the world and did whatever the hell he wanted to, whether the world wanted to do the same or not, and unfortunately roughly 70% of what he wanted to do was kill people. Not that it makes Ledger's Joker bad, I just like a goofier, more "clownish" interpretation more than a calculating terrorist. also, "This town needs an enema!".
+TheGrayMyaterious there is still a difference between a white and a black actor. harvey dent in the dark knight was more accurate. now i am not saying that the deviations in batman 89 are bad, they are just inaccurrate. joker is no longer the googy clownish character we know. i mean have you read the killing joke? he is a fucked up psycopath. the relationship in 89 felt superficial compared to nolan's. batman and joker relationship are not just revenge due to killing oarents, its a clash of ideologies, that both are two sides of the same coin, and nolan reflected that ij the dark knight with their ideologies and motivations. also the joker isnt always speechifying, he does have a lot of moments where he goes crazy and funny
mounir maged they made Perry White black in Man of Steel, but managed to stay (mostly) true to the character for a good while. Nationality shouldn't really be an issue as long as the character is still mostly the same.
Joker has ALWAYS been a funny character, even in his most deranged and sick moments, that's what makes him so unique. If he were simply a remorseless killer without a funny bone in his body, he'd just be a generic psychopath. Besides, it's not like Nicholson's Joker wasn't ever scary. Remember the scene in Vicki's apartment where he's talking about Alicia? And the relationship in Batman 89 isn't just a matter of revenge, it's symbolic that neither good nor evil can exist without each other. Joker created Batman, and Batman created Joker. Evil makes good, and good makes evil.
true in all of what you say, but the relationship was a lot much deeper than that
RIP Prince
Like the man said, HIS contribution to THIS movie really SUCKED!!
You missed the point, Oliver. The whole point .is Michael Keaton's Batman .is a throwback to... the original earliest Bill Finger and Bob Kane Batman comics from 1939 and 1940s. Tim Burton, Michael Uslan, Sam Hamm, Anton Furst and Bob Ringwood all explained that. Batman was a mysterious vigilante in those original comics. Batman killed and used guns in those comics before the Punisher was even created. Bill Finger's narration even described Batman's costume as black in those early comics, as Batman was based on Zorro and the Shadow. The killer of the parents was unknown in the original origin, therefore it could have been Jack. Joe Chill wasn't created until later in an origin recon. The Joker used the chemical weapon that the film named Smylex in the early comics. The '89 film and Batman Returns had a very retro 1930s and '40s style, and Gotham City was based on historical New York City.
Dude, yes! The problem that I've seen with most of the criticisms of the 89 film is that they compare it to the wrong era of the comics. The 89 Batman isn't supposed to be the Bronze Age version of the character. It drives me up the wall because the majority of its detractors, and supporters for that matter, are oblivious to what it's really based on.
This is great. Thanks for the history lesson!
YES!!! THANK YOU!!! I feel like a lot of people have ignored this fact because they believed it didn’t live up to their standards of what would be _their_ quintessential Batman as opposed to the filmmakers working hard and did an excellent job faithfully and accurately depicting the most important era of the character: the era of when he first appeared. Sure, Batman has evolved from that, but we mustn’t let the earliest era of the character be under the radar.
In fact, I feel like the 1989 Batman movie is one of those Batman movies that gets it the closest to bringing the original Bob Kane/Bill Finger issues of the character onto to the big screen (especially in terms of characterization and aesthetic, like you said, retro ‘30’s-‘40’s influence) and one of those comic book style movies that sets the movie’s time period into the era of when the comic book the movie is representing takes place. And that is one of the biggest reasons why I ADORE the 1989 film and is one of my all time favorite Batman flicks.
Hell, I consider Michael Keaton to be my favorite Batman because he is not only dark, brooding, intimidating, intelligent and strong but strategic enough to take on the Dark Knight’s mantle, but also he’s the closest to representing the earliest Batman character.
That and he’s also the most “batty” of the character. I mean, he raises his cape up like bat wings and he sleeps upside down like a bat. He’s is called _BATman_ for a reason, and I personally feel like that as more than just an alter ego’s name.
Still my favorite batman movie!
Best Batman movie ever in my opinion. I remember seeing it on the first day at the theater. We had to stand in line through 3 showings before me and my friend got to see it and it was definitely worth the wait. I went back and saw it 6 weekends in a role. That’s how much I loved it.
Im 18 and this is my favorite batman film. Even tho i grew up with The Dark Knight Trilogy
+dvon1097 I don't understand why your age and growing up with the Dark Knight Trilogy makes any difference to which film you like. I grew up with the original Star Trek film and think the JJ Abrams versions was a million times better than Harold Linvingston's.
OP is being a hipster :P
This film was just fun. I felt like a kid again when I was watching. Good spot on review Oliver
to date, still a top 10 best super hero flix ever made!!
Yes
as an African-American, I have to say just have any black Batman or a black Superman really isn't enough. I love Batman and Superman just the way they are and I wish that filmmakers like Zack Snyder would get it. I actually think he's a good directorbut I think he is uncomfortable completely translating comic book characters to film, and it shows in the movies he makes. Many of the fans are right to criticize films like Batman versus Superman. some scenes in the movie where he slavishly recreates the fight from The Dark Knight Returns. then hesitates by revision name call El as a brooding ultrahuman rather than a God Like hopeful symbol that he was meant to be from the comics. why was Superman from the 1930s was probably harsher on criminals than our version today not Jerry Siegel and Joe Shuster had the right idea. Superman was meant to be the champion of the Everyman the little guy. I like Henry Cavill performance but he's just not hopeful enough as a character and I think Snyder tries to revise too much in his superhero movies. doesn't just go for it and let a comic book movie be a comic book movie. and that is why Marvel text DC ass in the movie business. the best brooding superhero movie so far has been Logan, followed up by the Christopher Nolan Batman trilogy.
( SPIDER-MAN 2 AND MICHAEL KEATON'S BATMAN ARE ALSO ON THAT TOP 10 LIST BUT PERHAPS HAVE THEIR OWN CATEGORY because they're not worried about being too ultra realistic but just really good comic book movies which they are)
Christopher Reeves Superman and Superman 2 or the Superman Richard Donner cut, or the Superman Richard Donner cut which actually combines both films is the precious gem of a film that kickstarts the modern superhero movie as a viable genre. it's not trying to be ultra realistic either after all it's a Superman movie. it definitely has touches of realism involved such as the gritty depiction of Metropolis, but it doesn't get lost in too much seriousness. it shouldn't even be compared to other superhero movies. it is the Year One of the whole Style.
and yes, the Dark Knight is such a great film that it transcends and celebrates the superhero genre all at once. I am not trying to diss The Dark Knight in any way.
you can look at Batman Begins and then you can look at Logan, and those two films are almost like bookends of the genre. those are well-made realistic takes of the superhero myth. I thought Batman vs Superman was good but Captain America Civil War, and was far better. the Winter Soldier was far better than Batman versus Superman. does that mean that bvs was just a horrible movie? No. no just means that it was a good movie that unfortunately competed against great movies of the same genre and lost. BVS came out at the same time as Civil War and didn't come close. BVS doesn't come close to Batman Begins or Logan.
so what does this all mean for superhero movies? Well, you have critics and other artists analyzing and deconstructing other genres of film like comedies westerns in Samurai films. why not give comic book movies the respect they really deserve, not just films that seem to apologize too much for the source material.
I do have a top 10 list of superhero movies but I'm going to save that for another comment. That's all I'm going to say today. cheers to all comic book fans because ultimately we are the demand that drives the production.
I think the music and the vehicles are the two elements the Burton films do far better than Nolan.
+rodster6 As well as the general surreal style.
+rodster6 I think the music was excellent in both films.
I really like the references to the original music by Hans Zimmer.
I think both movies can coexist peacefully without the need to pick a better one. They are different approaches, delivering a franchise to different kinds of people and the music serves it's purpose or even outshines the production.
I just came from a Hans Zimmer concert in Budapest. The Dark Knight medley played live was truly extraordinary.
Best BATMAN movie EVER!
there's only 2 good/ok batman movies. this is one of them
right on
One of my favorite films of all time. A timeless classic.
Thank you very much for your feedback!. I hope you enjoy the rest of my work. :)
they based this alot on the golden age bats who did kill villians often in the comics
And he really, really needs to go back to that, too. Screw this PC "I never kill" bullshit coming from a VIGILANTE!
Burton actually tried to stay very close to the material he was given - even the Joker's death was heavily inspired by a comic. He really only saw some of the big golden age comics and only a few others, so Burton basically had no idea Batman didn't kill.
It's based on The Dark Knight Returns comic.
@@cobius8698 well bob kane was a consultant for the movie so im not so sure bout that
@@rexcaliburn Though Kane was dick who took credit from his co creators. He still had knowledge of Batman and something I know is that Kane wanted Batman to be like The Shadow who used weapons. The first Batman comics of 1939, and early 1940 had Batman killing the bad guys. So if the screenplay writers wanted Batman to kill the bad guys, Kane approved of it.
😈 "I'm Batman." Never truer than when Keaton says it ✊
This is the best Batman - Most of the criticism is based on what comic movies have evolved. That makes no sense, the genre has to come from somewhere, so to analysis to the Nolan's movies is simply invalid.
I loved Burton's Batman. Returns is my second favorite Batman after Dark Knight.
But I'll be honest with you. I don't care about absolute fidelity to the comic book story. Ever since Spiderman I've gotten REALLY tired of seeing the same intro story..over and over and over again. So I don't mind if Batman kills. I don't mind if the Joker is given an original identity....
What matters is: IS IT A GREAT STORY?
Batman, Batman Returns and Dark Knight are GREAT STORIES.
~That is all.
"Batman and Batman Returns are GREAT STORIES", he says, despite the fact that neither film are really ABOUT Batman, but rather his villains. And "GREAT STORIES" is debatable considering Returns is a convoluted mess...
Incidentally, the entire point of an adaptation is to cater to fans of the source material while also attempting to interest mainstreme audiences to the source material. If the adaptation isn't fathful, it can fail, and even confuse mainstreme audiences.
Allow me to explain. When I was a kid, I'd sometimes quiz other kids about Batman. I'd often get results like this:
ME: Who killed Bruce Wayne's parents?
KIDS: oh, that's easy, the Joker
ME: ...and why do you say that?
KIDS: cuz it was in the movie
ME: (trick question) What is the Joker's true identity?
KIDS: ....wasn't it Jack Napier?
ME: ...
ME: How many Robins have there been?
KIDS: well there's Dick Grayson.....
ME: ....and?
KIDS: .....ummm.......who cares?!
ME: how did Bruce Wayne become Batman?
KIDS: his parents were killed when he was a kid.
ME: no, that's WHY he became Batman. HOW did he become Batman?
KIDS: what do you mean? His parents were killed, that's all we need to know.
ME: READ A FUCKING COMIC BOOK!
I have ACTUALLY heard people defend that when adapting a work, the filmmaker's would be allowed to "do whatever they want" with it. This is what brings us crap like Super Mario Bros., Dragon Ball Evolution, and The Last Airbender.
Also it doesn't help that Tim Burton admits that he doesn't read comics, so...
Agree!!!
EmSeeSquared First of all, Oliver is allowed to have the opinion that these are great stories. Secondly that is your subjective opinion on Batman Returns. In the past, such as during the development of this movie, they'd attempt to appeal to fans so that through word of mouth they'd get many non-fans to buy into it, as for the general audience they mainly tried to keep the most recognizable traits so they would at least be somewhat familiar.
That opinion that film makers should have free reign is totally subjective too. The mario sucked because it was a bad idea, bad script, bad casting, bad direction imo. The last airbender suffered from the wrong director, M.Night is too artsy and weird to tell a straight up adventure story, he has no experience or apparent interest in doing so either, which is why I think its weird he decided to make that film(funnily enough his kids talked him into it... maybe they should have directed the movie in 20 or so years instead).
+saquist THAT is exactly what i think ..
saquist i agree
Those shots with Keaton’s eyes in the cowl are amazing, he truly captures the Batman look
The killing is not a mistake. Keaton's Batman always tried not to kill the criminals but sometimes the circumstances did not allow for mercy and he accepted that reality. Don't forget the beating he took from the guy in the bell tower. He could have killed him at any moment during that fight and it wasn't until he was out of options and time that he took the guy out. Much like Bale's Batman was out of options with Harvey Dent when he killed him. Batman still tries to spare his victims whenever he can.
I wish you were right, but you're not. Remember that scene in Batman Returns where he defeats that thug and drops him down into a sewer...after strapping live DYNAMITE to the guy? He even smiles when he does it.
Disagree about Keaton, while it isn't faithful, he comes across as a distanced troubled person, I liked that a lot. More so than Bales fake persona Batman.
why wouldnt batman kill baddies? they murder and rape but he is just going to slap their wrist and tie them up for the police? this is better.
dave101t no it’s not, Batman doesn’t kill. This is one of the most important aspects of Batman and somehow the movie adaptations ALWAYS miss that. If you don’t like that, then Punisher is the hero for you...and all the movie batmen...unfortunately.
I absolutely LOVE the Danny Elfman score to BATMAN (1989) which is absolutely perfect.
Also been watching all the BATMAN films in cinema since I was 10 in 1989 starting with this film.
The movie of the decade. It says it on the back of the DVD. Such a masterpiece
I still prefer the Burton films because they felt like a good mix between the different eras/depictions of Batman: his more brutal/killer days, his outlandish/slightly goofier days, and his darker/more serious days, if that makes any sense (yes, Returns went way more out there with it's tone and themes, but I still felt it kept that balance pretty well). I've always felt Keaton was a great Batman who had a natural feeling of intimidation and presence which I felt Bale didn't always have or didn't have as much (I don't know, I've always felt he lost some of his presence after the first Nolan film). I also much prefer Nicholson's Joker as he seemed to give off the Joker's self-serving motivations (in that he does messed up things because it's fun to him or because it pleases him) and general character attitude more so than Ledger (while Ledger worked at times, I could never fully buy him in the role; he just felt off to me). I should point out that I was exposed to the animated series long before this film, and I saw Begins before it too. Now, I think both of those are great, especially the former, but when I saw this film, I said "yes, this is Batman on the big screen." Even with the changes that I knew were there, I still felt like I was seeing Batman realized in live action even more so than Begins, which I admit definitely delved into him as a character more (and I think did a great job of it). I guess the difference is that Begins feels more like a "special origin issue/arc" while Batman feels like a main story (not in a generic way, but more like a singular storyline in the comics or an episode of the animated series, except done in more of a film way). Sorry about the long post.
Tim Burton's movies were filled with subtle details that gave you more plot than you think, meanwhile Nolan beat us over the head with shitty exposition and foreshadowing. For example Eckhardt (dirty cop) said to Jack "Where have you been spending your nights" in an alley before he became the Joker. It sounds like a throwaway but think about it, that explains so much.
The Batman was meant to be a dark vigilante character who carries out his brand of Justice on criminals at night, but his alter ego during the day is Bruce Wayne, multi-millionaire and owner of Wayne Manor. The whole idea of Batman somehow being in cahoots with the Police just seems to defeat the purpose of the whole character. That's why the 1966 version was nowhere near as good as the '89 version with Michael (Douglas) Keaton. And in my opinion, they couldn't have chosen a better actor than Jack Nicholson to play Batman's arch-nemesis, the Joker. This movie will always be my favorite of the Batman films. I was saddened when they chose to replace Michael with Val Kilmer for the second movie of Batman Forever.
Honestly, I didn't mind that Batman killed people. They were going to kill him in the Batman '89 film, and it seemed like self defense, he was justified. To be sure, hardcore fans of the comic will disagree. But you know what? Who cares! It's a film adaptation. Liberties will be taken. Also, the whole uproar of people who complain about casting, the stories, etc. It's because in their minds, they have the perfect Batman film in their head. I challenge you to make your own fan film. (Safely of course) And BTW, love the edit at the end with the Hans Zimmer score. Very cool! :D
+Iron City Chronicles i highly agree and i love this Different and violent take on batman . he is a skilled human vigilante and there will be times where there should be self defense killings.
The Iron Detective I actually like a Batman that kills when he has to
My fav Batman film. I love Michael Keaton and the production design is wonderful. When I saw Batman Begins I initially didnt like it due to its being in a realistic setting. Of course when I saw TDK that all changed but I still prefer this.
(You love the score but used Hans Zimmers at the end?)
love the channel. puts a lot of effort into his videos
If people are gonna trash the original because of the Nolan films they need to accept how horrible the Dark Knight Rises was. I actually prefer Batman and Robin to that steaming pile or poorly paced, plot hole riddled, boring garbage.
Batman and Robin? Yikes, that doesn't say much.
You got that right.
no hassle Well, at least it did have a "beginning", "middle" and an "end" unlike The Dark Knight Rises.
dude you're reaching...and not in a trying-to-be-funny way.... Rises has flaws, but goddammit comparing it to BATMAN AND ROBIN??? Lyk I get it if you hated it, but give me something lyk Batman Forever or sth if you're gonna trash Rises.... Otherwise you come off as a clueless troll trying too hard
@@michaelotis223 Truth
Still the best Batman movie in my book
Love the montage you made at the end with Zimmers score. Made the movie look even more epic than it already is.
I'm glad to see others noticed the colour change of The Joker's suit at the end.
I really love this Joker. He's one of the few chubby Jokers. Jack Nicholson did a good job
thank you!!. I have been asked to do Batman Returns, i may cover it in a couple of months. :)
To me the 1989 version is still BEST BATMAN ever made. The guy did make many good points, young Jack killing Batman parents was a good idea, better then having some random guy doing it. The Batmobile and Batplane is still awesome compared to the junk Nolan had, batmobile that looked like a damn bulky slow tank, and a plane that looked like it belonged in the future, maybe Terminator 2 movie.
One thing I didn't really like was the part he mentioned Alfred letting Vale inside the cave without asking Batman. Also good point about the movie themes, Batman has it's own theme, Ghostbusters, Jurrasic Park, Back to the Future, Terminator etc. now a days none of the movies have that.
The best Batman, Bruce Wayne, music score, Batmobile, Batplane ect " You wanna' get nuts? Lets get Nuts!!!"
Michael keaton Batman for me always will be my favorite and the best Batman ever! Including the Batmobile. 🦇
and people say that batman has never killed in his movies. they only say that because have never seen or heard of this film. batman has killed in the comics in his early days.
I don't give a damn about faithfulness to a comic book. The story for this film worked great. I'd rank this as one of the best comic book movies ever, right up there with Superman. I'm sorry but Nolan's trilogy bored me to tears.
Trivia Fact: the Project Consultant on the film was Batman’s creator, Bob Kane. He actually was there on the set for a few days during Principal Photography, and even got his photo taken with Michael Keaton in full costume.
Oliver Harper this is my favorite Batman Movie of all time!
I remember eating Batman cereal when I was a kid! I had tons of Batman toys based on this particular rendition of the character. Great video!
Best Batman movie ever made.
I like Burton and Nolan's films for what they are. I like Burton's stylistic imagery (it reminds me a lot of a comic book) while I like the realistic vision Nolan took with his storyline and characters. Let's be fair; if Burton hadn't made Batman, Nolan probably wouldn't have been able to make his trilogy.
THANK YOU!! FINALLY!! The ONE comment that doesn't feel like some nostalgic fanboy stuck in the gothic 90s or some nolanite preaching about how flawless the trilogy is.
Exactly...people in the comments are just commenting with their rose-tinted nostalgic goggles on...making it seem like the first films were flawless and Nolan's films were garbage...absolute hogwash...there was good and bad in every Batman film ever released...the problem with the internet is there are no middle grounds...something is either "ABSOLUTELY FANTASTIC" or it is "ABSOLUTE RUBBISH"...pathetic
I much rather this vision of Batman than Nolan's. I feel Nolan's trilogy tries too hard to make you think 'THIS COULD REALLY HAPPEN!' which is absurd. This movie I feel finds a nice balance between fantasy and reality. It finds a way to be dark and serious without losing its comic bookey feel. And I really don't find Nolan's Batman to be the Batman that I know but good review none the less.
Thankfully Marvel Studios isn't as ashamed of comic book material as the Nolan series was
Thank you! Somebody gets it.
I agree
"finds a balance between fantasy and reality"??? I respectfully disagree!! EVERY element in the Burton films scream FANTASY!! Nolan's gotham simply mirrored our own, aided by his practical filmmaking (which I think is why people think the trilogy is lyk real life or sth). At the end it's still fear toxins and half charred faces and anasthesic masks...
I personally view the trilogy as the original Gotham story before comic book exaggerations came in lol
When Batman's rogues gallery only has Ra's, the Joker, Bane, and Catwoman, then brief appearances of Scarecrow, Two-Face, and Talia... then Nolan's movies are TOO realistic for Batman. The same philosophy that led to generic black uniforms in the X-Men movies. It's basically showing a disdain for the Batman mythology
I was hoping the Penguin could have made an appearance in the trilogy. He's a realistic character (there's no need for Penguin to go full Burton freakshow) who's nothing more but a crime boss, that uses a similar moniker as the original mob boss Carmine "the Roman" Falcone. He would have been a better character than Sal Falcone (Eric Roberts is great, but it wasn't much of a character)
I was in college when this film came out. I had a Friday Morning class and most of the class left school and went over to the Theater that was showing it at 1:00 pm . The problem with Batman 89 is it focus more on the Joker than Bruce Wayne/Batman as a Character.
100% 89 fanboy for life here, the film transports me right back to summer 1989....I know it's not perfect but I love every minute of it. Always will. I actually like that Jack Napier kills Bruce's parents, I mean who's to say it has to follow the comic book exactly. I also like the aliented non-playboy-ish Bruce in this film.
Exactly. I love how obviously tortured, disillusioned, and distant Bruce is in this interpretation.
I totally agree with you on the score of the modern superhero movies. They are forgettable.
I also have no problem with the changes on this film. Even the fact that Batman kills people.
+SuperArppis I think Hans Zimmer did a great job on the Dark Knight series. I think it's recogniseable.
However it's true that it's not that melodic and it's difficult to hum, but I can manage :D
Róbert Paulik
Yeah he didn't do a bad job at all! But I still like themes like these, over something "muddy" like they use in modern movies. Where music becomes a secondary thing for most parts.
It's my favorite movie of all time.
Mine too.
I found it boring as a kid. I e joy it now. A very thematic and stylish movie that tells a classic story. I do think the movie could've explored Bruce's character and why he became Batman. Also Harvey Dent and Gordon were both thoroughly wasted, Harvey in particular. They should've contributed more to the story.
Harri927 Mine as well, largely for nostalgic reasons.
This was my greatest „movie-experience“ in the 80s beside Ghostbusters and totally blew me away!
The holy grail for a 10 year old comic fanboy!
Burton‘s style was/is so unique. I loved this action/comic/fairytale look in Batman 1+2. ♥️
"1989 saw Batman finally come to the big screen."
Meanwhile, the 1966 movie is watching and saying "Am I a joke to you?"
2008: "Yes!!!"
@Oliver Harper - Theres this RUclipsr called RMG Productions who has a rant about this and your Batman Returns review. He wants you to redo these to "respect these films more". He's very funny to watch get fired up and is very prejudiced, immature and possibly racist. Its a must-watch, I laughed very hard at him :)
Oh yes I've seen his video, anyone who disagrees with him he deletes their comments. I've chosen not to interact with him.
+Oliver Harper haha hes hilarious to watch in his bedroom wearing a rain jacket
and a toilet roll in the background for his down time.
+Oliver Harper Oh God ya XD
I've wondered why rmg cares about what you think Ollie? and why does he take it personally?
I have to say that in my opinion the best Batman interpretation on screen is the cartoon from the 90's. Plus Kim Basinger is smoking hot in this film.
Scott Destan yeah but the cartoon took so much inspiration from the two Burton films. Take them out of the equation and the cartoon wouldn’t exist.
Thanks Stew, oh yeah Dalton is so underrated. Glad you liked the reviews they are personally the ones im most proud of. My 'From Russia With Love' commentary will be online this evening.
I think its good to have a love interest for Bruce. It makes emotional connects for its audiences and for them as a viewer to care about the characters on screen. its more moving to see Batman try and save the one he loves but can't. Its done for dramatic affect and it works. Like the end of Superman when lois dies and Superman goes ape shit. Its powerful stuff. its great cinema.
I love Keaton’s Wayne. He nailed the stoic charm of a lonely vigilante. He was holding something back, not willing to just vomit his personal business to the audience and that made his role as Bruce Wayne more intriguing. Admirable performance.
Kind of sucked that this reviewer didn't say anything about composer Elfman's BACKGROUND! .. . like that he performed in a punk group named Oingo Boingo and both scored and acted in another movie called The Forbidden Zone! . .. THAT would have been noteworthy and interesting! Also, he didn't bother to mention cast members Kim Basinger and Michael Gough for some unfathomable reason! ,.. was it their bad breath or something?
The fuck is up with your profile picture?
Thank you very much dude!. I always appreciate your feedback and support.
There are flaws in this movie i am aware of, yes. But it still is my favorite. Joker killing Bruce's parents isn't that much of big deal for me. It ties two characters a bit better. Not being 100 % faithful to source material isn't a bad thing. I mean Forever and Batman&Robin were spot on accurate with the actual comic books of a certain era. Not many people seem to like those. About the looks and story. Some Nolan films hold up pretty good, but let's turn it around. Films are a visual medium and need creativity, you can't have "perfect" story looking average and expect it to be a great movie. I remember a film school professor describing movies as images and situations. Sometimes the story as whole doesn't hold up all that well, but the way the situations are shown, exposed, resolved, played by the actors, and photographed makes it good enough. It's not a rule by any means but works for me this time.
This is the video that introduced me to this channel! One of my favourite movies ever reviewed very well. Well done Oliver for the great content
There's a big debate that Batman did actually kill enemies in the '30s comics. But if it's true, i doubt they had known that.
Its not a debate, he really did kill, with a gun sometimes, in fact after gunning down giants with his Bat-Plane [which may have just been a plane at the time] Bob Kane was asked to cut that out when it came to the character.
Luke Carroll Yeah Batman during the Pre-Robin years in the 30's was pretty hardcore. He didn't give a fuck lol
No. this movie is completly based of the batman comics from 1939-1941. they DID know that because they did their research on THOSE comics!
Batman shot people in the books prior to Bill Finger's origin.
In the first issue he threw a villain into a vat of boiling acid and even shot a guy in his sleep. There was only like 3 or 4 issues where he actually killed people.
Would love to see a Re-Retrospective on this now that more time has passed and there are more Batman variations on film.
Great review (as always!) but I can't agree with you on Christian Bale's Bruce Wayne interpretation being better. I feel like Keaton perfected the feel of Bruce Wayne being a damaged, tormented and insular man. He's not charming and cocky and confident like Bale's version.
These are really informative, lots of stuff I didn't know. Keep up the good work!
I think that it's a bit unfair to say that Tim Burton's first Batman film is unfaithful to the source material. It's just as faithful to the material as Christopher Nolan's Batman films were.
While Nolan drew inspiration from the Batman stories of Denny O'Neil and Frank Miller, Burton's inspiration came from the Batman of Bill Finger and Bob Kane that was introduced in Detective Comics #27. And just like how Nolan's Batman films reflected the mid-2000's and used an aesthetic to make Batman more "realistic," Burton did the same thing with his film reflecting the 1980's and using his unique Gothic aesthetic to give the film character.
And in regards to Batman killing, the Batman of the original comics did indeed kill, just like Burton's Batman. It didn't make Batman like the Punisher, he just didn't have an unbending rule on killing. Burton's Batman didn't go around mowing criminals down with the intention of murder, just like Finger and Kanes' Batman, but accepted that in the heat of battle, people are most likely going to die and Batman wasn't going to lose any sleep over some no name criminal that hurt others and tried to kill him.
It's really Batman Returns that botched up the Batman character and for way more reasons than just Batman simply letting people die the way he did in the first movie. And it's nowhere near as bad as Snyder's Batman who straight up mows mother fuckers down, brands them, and uses intentional lethal force.
I have a compilation of batman stories, one of the being from the early Bob Kane/Bill Finger era where he up against Hugo Strange. Just reading felt like the 89 movie. Heck, even Batman admitted people may die but he had no choice
This is a brilliant film. All the stars aligned with this production. I love every single aspect of this movie, and it only gets better with each viewing for me.
This was a very intelligent and and well made review. The best that I've seen for this film on RUclips. I don't agree with all of your opinions but I appreciate that you were fair and saw both sides on every aspect of the movie. Thank you!
thanks very much for your feedback. Its totally cool you don't agree with everything but its great you acknowledge I was fair on the movie. :)
I always loved that line, "Where does he get those wonderful toys". But you only hear it clearly in the trailers, I don't remember how it was in theaters, but on subsequent DvD editions, the scene is edited in such a way that the lines gets cut in mid-sentence.
I remember laughing to that line when I first saw the film.
This is the ONLY Batman movie I have never seen in the theatre. I was only nine years old at the time, and my parents wouldn't allow me to see it theatrically. Next year is the 25th anniversary. I think Warner Brothers should give it a limited theatrical run in 2014. Here in the States, the AMC & Cinemark theatre chains have been doing a Classic Film Series, and it would be a perfect way to let fans revisit THE blockbuster movie of 1989.
Regardless of the film's flaws, which you've done a fine job detailing, it is still a landmark film that changed so much. Just the marketing alone on this movie was absolutely INSANE, and it was one of the quickest theatre-to-home video turnarounds at the time. Most movies took a solid year to reach VHS. "Batman" took six months which was just in time for Christmas, of course.
Great review and I love the use of the Dark Knight Rises music at the end with Tim Burton's Batman film. I often wonder sometimes...what would a Tim Burton Batman movie would be like if it had a Christopher Nolan written story?
For me personally this was the film that started it all, and showed you could make a darker, less kid friendly superhero movie. I think any future Batman movie owes a small debt to what this film started. That said I agree with this review, the film has numerous script problems, and doesn't represent Batman, and it's characters as faithfully as it should have. This film was my childhood experience for Batman, even though I knew of the character, and the Batman mythos before hand. I think Nolan better captures the characters, and story aspects far better than any of the previous films, but the style of the Burton films is better in the traditional sense. Basically I like both Burton, and Nolan's take for different reasons. I don't mind if Batman kills, but he should never deliberately kill, and happened a lot in the Burton films, which is my biggest issue with it, well that, and the Knox character, he was the worst.
My dad showed me this movie when it was on tv in 2009 and i loved it. he also introduced me to the original james bond movies. although my relationship with father has been toxic and rocky im still glad he showed me the movie
Totally love your trailer at the end. Makes me want to watch the movie all over again.
I remember going to the theater to watch this movie and the opening credits with Danny Elfman's score floored me. That energy set the tone for the entire film. =)
Kim Basinger was so beautiful here
Jack Nicholson said of his role, "The thing I like about the Joker is that his sense of humor is completely tasteless." He later said The Joker was one of his favorite roles he played.
Michael Keaton came up with the famous "I'm Batman" line. The line in the script was "I am the night".
This movie was released the year of the character's 50th anniversary.
Jack Nicholson admitted in an interview that he was an enormous comic book fan in the era where Batman first appeared, and that the Joker was his favorite character from the comics.
Michelle Pfeiffer, who was dating Michael Keaton at that time, was asked to audition for Vicki Vale, but Keaton was against it, saying it would be awkward. Pfeiffer would later be cast as Selina Kyle/Catwoman in Batman Returns (1992) alongside with Keaton.
First Batman adaptation to depict the Joker's origin story. It remained the only film to do this until Batman: The Killing Joke (2016), whose source material was a big inspiration in the making of this movie
The first Batman movie to win an Academy Award (for Best Art Direction-Set Decoration). It was followed by The Dark Knight (2008) with two wins.
This was great movie for its time and im a big fan of keaton not only for batman but his comic roles. But the nolan trilogy was brilliant bale was perfect
Bale sucked! and Keaton is still the best Batman. p.s. Nolan is overrated and Batman Begins sucked ass.
DjJokerr hahaha I bet u luv val and George u have no taste so those two r definitely ur best hahaha
DjJokerr hahahahahaha unfortunately ur wrong on all accounts there it just shows how unintelligent u really r because u totally change the subject for no reason ur the one that needs to grow up
Think keaton was perfect in all aspects, Bale was a great bruce wayne but his batman sucked, i think george clooney wasnt too bad as bruce wayne, better than val kilmer but my god his batman was shit.
Timber I agree im a huge keaton fan and bale fan
Even as a kid, I HATED the reveal that The Joker killed Wayne's parents. It's so much cooler (and creepy) that Batman would THINK he killed his parents when he actually didn't.
Michael Keaton always the best Batman and Jack Nicholson is best joker
Live action wise
Well Keaton didn't have much freedom in the suit due it being so heavy and not extremely flexible so he used that to his advantage, he could only move in specific ways because the mask look funny. But you also have to remember Keaton wasn't in the suit for many of the scenes. He had doubles for even the walking scenes.
In the 1930s batman killed people with a gun until robin came in
I think what makes Burton’s films so great is simply that Gotham City seems like a place outside of our modern world. It’s a place where you find these characters and it makes sense. It doesn’t seem ridiculous because this look and breathes a comic book world.
It’s still impressive to this day. The Batman suit alone is the best it ever looked..it’s almost creepy looking at times like he could easily be the bad guy. Keaton’s subtle voice change works and you see this is a character with dual personalities that is addressed in the Batman Returns.
Bruce Wayne is the real costume that Batman wears. Truly epic filmmaking.
This review is flawless or near so anyway. You made all the right points about it and I couldn't agree more. The film should have focused on being more like Superman the movie and established a continuity with its characters but unfortunately failed at doing so. And I do agree it had a great visual style; dark, Gothic, and a good mix mash of 1940s meets 80s. As well as the suit and vehicles which were the best in the Burton versions. However as far as story it was a miss and just seemed to be a film that looked good for its time. Burton has openly admitted it himself: "I liked parts of it, but the whole movie is mainly boring to me. It's OK, but it was more of a cultural phenomenon than a great movie."
It was a film that defiantly needed polishing and more thought behind it, as well as its sequel.