Batman film of the 1989 is a BAD BATMAN FILM....

[Cmbmool]

I hope fans of Batman can look at this Youtube video which goes into depth about Batman 89 film and how it explains that while it is an enjoyable film it is A BAD BATMAN themed film...

However as fans of Batman what do you think of this Youtube video ? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XR5Iteeiq2M

[byrd156]

I think most Batman movies we have had are bad Batman movies. The Nolan movies capture the spirit and struggle of being Batman but they feel more like a crime drama movie rather than a comic book Batman film.

Other than the animated Batman films, the '66 movie is the closest we have gotten to a proper Batman film. Sure it's of the Silver Age Batman but still.

[JBatmanFan05]

Mask of the Phantasm is the only Batman film I have ever seen that understands what Batman is, where he comes from, and what his films can be.

[Alan2099]

I liked it and I still think it does a better job capturing Batman and the world he lives in than the Nolan movies did.

[Minerboh]

Ιf Batman 89 was... a bad film then what can be said for Batman Forever and the Batman And Robin which almost wiped out Batman from the cinematic map almost completely?

[Miles To Go]

Mask of the Phantasm is the only Batman film I have ever seen that understands what Batman is, where he comes from, and what his films can be.

Phantasm/World's Finest/Sub Zero/Return of the Joker are perfection

But Batman Forever>Mystery of the Batwoman

[KingsLeadHat]

Mask of the Phantasm is the only Batman film I have ever seen that understands what Batman is, where he comes from, and what his films can be.

Couldn't agree more. BTAS in general is just vastly superior to even the best Batman films as an adaptation. Hell, I think it's one of the few adaptations that's superior to the comics version.

I do think that the 1989 film succeeded in improving the aesthetic of Gotham city, shifting from a somewhat generic modern cityscape to the gothic, quasi-40's look that's been the style since BTAS.

[MarkRodriguez09]

You have to remember though, movies based on existing cartoon series and take place within their universe don't have the extra burden of explaining anything and just jump right in. Mask of Phantasm didn't have to introduce the Joker. Sub Zero didn't have to introduce Mr. Freeze and Robin. Batman Beyond.... well there's a movie's worth of story just explaining Terry being Batman to begin with.

Live action movies always have the burden of explaining everything and laying down the groundwork. The only movie I seem to remember that literally jumps right in were Batman Forever and Batman and Robin, but mostly because they were sequels and it is assumed Batman has been in action for a while and takes down villains constantly.

[ironman2978]

You have to remember though, movies based on existing cartoon series and take place within their universe don't have the extra burden of explaining anything and just jump right in. Mask of Phantasm didn't have to introduce the Joker. Sub Zero didn't have to introduce Mr. Freeze and Robin. Batman Beyond.... well there's a movie's worth of story just explaining Terry being Batman to begin with.

Live action movies always have the burden of explaining everything and laying down the groundwork. The only movie I seem to remember that literally jumps right in were Batman Forever and Batman and Robin, but mostly because they were sequels and it is assumed Batman has been in action for a while and takes down villains constantly.

Agreed, not to mention there are different target audiences (or more vast target audiences).

I feel like after rewatch Nolan Batman films and at the very least the 89 Batman film (Batman Returns) is arguable. Did understood and conveyed the core concepts of Batman and certain ideas he represents even though they weren't perfect. Plus the cartoons can do stuff and convey ideas that live action films don't always have the luxury of being able to.

[byrd156]

You have to remember though, movies based on existing cartoon series and take place within their universe don't have the extra burden of explaining anything and just jump right in. Mask of Phantasm didn't have to introduce the Joker. Sub Zero didn't have to introduce Mr. Freeze and Robin. Batman Beyond.... well there's a movie's worth of story just explaining Terry being Batman to begin with.

Live action movies always have the burden of explaining everything and laying down the groundwork. The only movie I seem to remember that literally jumps right in were Batman Forever and Batman and Robin, but mostly because they were sequels and it is assumed Batman has been in action for a while and takes down villains constantly.

Mr. Freeze was explained in Subzero and in Phantasm Joker wasn't really the main bad guy so there was no need to explain him. You understood that he was bad and what he did to the Phantasm's family. The movie was more about Bruce's relationships personal and to the mission.

[sunofdarkchild]

Pretty much agree. It's all style and no substance, plot, or character. Definitely worth a watch, but honestly listening to the soundtrack by itself is probably the best way to experience the movie. I can't think of any other super-hero movie other than the 2 Burton Batman films where the main hero has no arc. Even Batman and Robin has Bruce learning to trust others as his arc for the movie, while Forever and the Nolan films really delve into the psychology of Batman.

[Spencermalley935]

I've watched this video and honestly, it raises a lot of valid points, especially about Batman's lack of focus as a character.

[Spencermalley935]

Mask of the Phantasm is the only Batman film I have ever seen that understands what Batman is, where he comes from, and what his films can be.

I think TDK trilogy honestly gives Phantasm a run for it's money once you take the whole "It's TAS as a movie" factor out of the equation. Hell in terms of animated stuff, I think Under the Red Hood is just as good if not better.

As much as I love TAS, I've never agreed that all Batman adaptations need to follow it's example or template and it's never fun whenever fans try to tear other versions down to try and build it up.

[masahikotahara]

Well, I like Batman and I love the 1989 movie, so for me it is a fine Batman movie, despite the flaws pointed out in the video.

[Jokerz79]

I think TDK trilogy honestly gives Phantasm a run for it's money once you take the whole "It's TAS as a movie" factor out of the equation. Hell in terms of animated stuff, I think Under the Red Hood is just as good if not better.

As much as I love TAS, I've never agreed that all Batman adaptations need to follow it's example or template and it's never fun whenever fans try to tear other versions down to try and build it up.

I loved the Dark Knight Trilogy but I bought the love story between Andrea and Bruce more than Rachel and Bruce. Also Bruce's looking to retire in Dark Knight and actually retiring in Rises annoys me.

Batman theatrical releases for me are Batman Mask of the Phantasm, Batman Begins, Batman 89 (Ledger gave a better performance but Nicholson's Joker felt more like the Joker to me.), Dark Knight (Probably the best film but I enjoy the others more and feel they got Batman better), Batman 66 Movie (Just Fun), Dark Knight Rises, Batman Returns, BvS, Justice League, Batman Forever, and Batman and Robin.

Not counting Suicide Squad it was cameos.