"Batman" (1989) Talkback (spoilers)

[Lord Dalek]

EXPLODE



"Ever dance with the devil by the pale moonlite?" - Jack Napier/The Joker

Release Date: June 23, 1989
Studio: Warner Bros./Guber-Peters
Director: Tim Burton
Aspect Ratio: 1.85:1
Starring: Jack Nicholson, Michael Keaton, Kim Basinger, Robert Wuhl, Pat Hingle, Billy Dee Williams, Michael Gough, Jack Palance

Plot Summary: Gotham City: dark, dangerous, 'protected' only by a mostly corrupt police department. Despite the best efforts of D.A. Harvey Dent and police commissioner Jim Gordon, the city becomes increasingly unsafe...until a Dark Knight arises. We all know criminals are a superstitious, cowardly lot...so his disguise must be able to strike terror into their hearts. He becomes a bat. Enter Vicky Vale, a prize-winning photo journalist who wants to uncover the secret of the mysterious "bat-man". And enter Jack Napier, one-time enforcer for Boss Grissom, horribly disfigured after a firefight in a chemical factory...who, devoid of the last vestiges of sanity, seizes control of Gotham's underworld as the psychotic, unpredictable Clown Prince of Crime...the Joker. Gotham's only hope, it seems, lies in this dark, brooding vigilante. And just how does billionaire playboy Bruce Wayne fit into all of this?

COMMENTS?

LD Talkback #170

With Avengers out of the way (and me still not sure if I give a shit about Spidey this year), lets talk about that other major comic book character with a movie coming out this year, starting from the beginning...of the previous series.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

I know that after The Dark Knight it has become popular to say that people only still like Burton's Batman films out of nostalgia, and that they aren't really good after all of these years (well, to be fair, most people hated Batman Returns even when it came out). Perhaps it is nostalgia for some people, and these certainly aren't the types of Batman films that comic book fans would appreciate, I'm sure, but for me they are entertaining films that portray Batman in a much different, more campy (yet still serious enough in tone), style. I like Batman 1989, and Batman Returns is a guilty pleasure of mine. Both films are flawed (Batman Returns moreso than the first movie), but I still like Michael Keaton's Bruce Wayne/Batman, and I like the whole style of Gotham City in those movies.

So, for me, Batman (1989) still holds up as a good film, and Batman Returns still entertains me to some degree. And for the record, I don't like these movies out of nostalgia. Well, OK, to be specific the reason I like returns IS out of nostalgia, because believe it or not that was my first Batman film when I was a kid, so that's why I count it as a guilty pleasure, even though I recognize its not a good film when viewing it now. As for the first movie, however, I honestly didn't see it until I was about 15 or so, and I still really enjoyed it, so I can safely say that I genuinely liked it.

[Foggle]

I honestly love both of Burton's Batman films; neither of them are guilty pleasures for me. In fact, I think I prefer them to Nolan's movies, even though his are definitely "better." Batman Returns is my favorite comic book movie of all time after Kick-Ass. (Unless you count Cemetery Man, Ichi The Killer, and Oldboy, which top both.)

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

Well, in my case I say Returns is a guilty pleasure only because it DOES have a lot of nostalgic value for me, personally, so no matter what I could never judge it without any bias. It wasn't only my first Batman film, but my first superhero film in general, so I just can't help but like it. That said, I do genuinely like some aspects of the film, but at the same time I can acknowledge its many flaws. I think its an acquired taste, but I do definitely enjoy watching it, for the most part.

[Spark Of Spirit]

This feels like a genuinely good Batman movie. Returns just feels like your average Tim Burton fare to me.

That said, I don't hate either of them.

[Foggle]

Returns just feels like your average Tim Burton fare to me.

Can't say I agree. I absolutely hate the majority of Burton's films, but I like his Batman movies and Ed Wood.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

I can't say that I agree about it being average because I can't think of any Burton films that I consider "average," even by his standards. For me his movies are pretty polarizing and either a love or hate sort of affair (well, not necessarily hate, but there are films of his that I just downright dislike).

For example, I love movies like Batman (1989) and Big Fish, among other things, but I can't stand films like Mars Attacks (even though I'm sure it was supposed to be bad) and Alice in Wonderland (once again, among other things). I can't really think of any in-betweens that I thought were "just OK" off the top of my head.

[Spark Of Spirit]

I meant that it just felt like a Tim Burton movie more than it felt like a Batman movie to me, while the first felt more like a Batman movie.

I like some Tim Burton movies, but there are some I just plain don't care for.

[Foggle]

For example, I love movies like Batman (1989) and Big Fish, among other things, but I can't stand films like Mars Attacks (even though I'm sure it was supposed to be bad) and Alice in Wonderland (once again, among other things). I can't really think of any in-betweens that I thought were "just OK" off the top of my head.

Oh man, why do I always forget about Big Fish? I love that movie.

[Dr. Ensatsu-ken]

That movie is pretty underrated, in general. To be honest, that movie actually made me "sort of" shed a tear at the end, which has only ever happened with like....maybe 4 other movies that I've seen in my entire life.

[Foggle]

That movie is pretty underrated, in general. To be honest, that movie actually made me "sort of" shed a tear at the end, which has only ever happened with like....maybe 4 other movies that I've seen in my entire life.

I did too, man. Though I have teared up during lots of movies and stuff...

[talonmalon333]

Why would people say Tim Burton's are only good out of nostalgia?