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

[Scott Taylor]

1) He at no point in the video complains about it not being an Origin for the character of Batman, His issue is the lack of development for Batman or the Joker
2) You realized you just contradicted yourself right? Isn't the movie called Batman not Joker?.
3) What does that even mean and how does that disprove any of the points brought up in that video?

He bemoaned that there was no character development, yes, and claimed that the origin story would have helped. I disagree with him, pretty vehemently.

You suggest a contradiction as if I am implying Batman should have character development in a Batman movie. I disagree with that notion, pretty vehemently. Action movies are ok in and of themselves.

The movie had great acting, and it made up for the movie's few irrelevant flaws. Thats what I am saying.

[Spencermalley935]

He bemoaned that there was no character development, yes, and claimed that the origin story would have helped. I disagree with him, pretty vehemently.

You suggest a contradiction as if I am implying Batman should have character development in a Batman movie. I disagree with that notion, pretty vehemently. Action movies are ok in and of themselves.

The movie had great acting, and it made up for the movie's few irrelevant flaws. Thats what I am saying.

Of course an origin story would've helped, it helped considerably in Batman Begins but even so, Batman not having an origin in the 89 movie isn't necesarrily a problem but not giving him any kind of character development is.

If Batman's name is in the title, That kinda suggests he's gonna be front and center of the movie.

Nicholson and Keaton were good but most everyone else didn't leave any kind of impression at all (especially Gordon)

[Naked Bat]

I love both batman and Batman returns. They are simply incredible. Without them, TAS wouldn't exist. It made people realize comic book movies could be well made.

The visuals are amazing. Burton and his team managed to create a world that feels unique, gothic, haunting. It does feel like an adaptation of the golden age batman.

Burton is definitely taking cues from the expressionism, especially in returns. It's true that character development is not the strength of the movie, but it's not what it aims for either.

Also, it's not true that it's not an origin movie: we see the murder of his parents, Vicky discovers about him going to crime alley for the birthday of their murder, when knox and Vicky discovers all his armours, weapons, etc, he tells them he brought everything from his travels, which is a subtle way to tell us he learnt the art of fighting all over the world. We also learn how the batsignal came to be and how he became an official ally of Gordon.

[batnbreakfast]

Batman '89 has the best 3rd act of ANY Batmovie so far.

My personal favourite BBegins has a weak 3rd act, '89 has a great showdown in an awesome Cathedral. Essentially Burton put the bat in a belfry. The showdown feels always tense, no matter how often I've watched it before. The Batwing is down, Bruce's rips are bruised or broken and he doesn't give up, Vicky is in danger, Joker almost got away.

[Naked Bat]

Batman '89 has the best 3rd act of ANY Batmovie so far.

My personal favourite BBegins has a weak 3rd act, '89 has a great showdown in an awesome Cathedral. Essentially Burton put the bat in a belfry. The showdown feels always tense, no matter how often I've watched it before. The Batwing is down, Bruce's rips are bruised or broken and he doesn't give up, Vicky is in danger, Joker almost got away.

It's definitely an amazing 3rd act. The imagery is unforgettable.

[Scott Taylor]

Nicholson and Keaton were good but most everyone else didn't leave any kind of impression at all (especially Gordon)

Well, yah, but it was a movie about Batman versus Joker. Having no one upstage that is a good thing. Its not like other performances were bad, and many were great.

Jack Palance for instance. Tracey Walter is always good at everything he does. Even Billy Dee Williams was great for the small part he played, I was upset when he didn't come back as Two-Face. Robert Wuhl as that reporter guy was ok with what he had, but the casting stands out as kind of a misfit to me. Like they felt they needed a Superman-esque newspaper reporter vibe.

Kim Basinger and Jerry Hall were bad, I think. If I could change anything about the movie, it would be to put a real part in there and hire real actors to play that part. But those two were just a couple of the popular pretty girls of the day, so whatever. They don't make or break the movie.

[byrd156]

He made an incredible follow-up video. I really don't get why people don't understand this.

[Batfan Beyond]

I don't wish any ill will towards the person that made either of these videos. I've enjoyed some of the content from their channel in the past. Having said that, I disagree with most of the things said in this video. Chief among them is how he compares the 89 film to the comics. Most of the reviews that I've seen online seem to neglect what the film was based on. Keep in mind that at the time the general populace was mostly familiar with the Adam West show. To combat this producer Michael E. Uslan set out to make a film that got back to the roots of the character aka the Bob Kane/Bill Finger version of the character. If you read those comics a lot of the decisions in this movie start to make sense for the most part. The Kane/Finger Batman had no moral code, He didn't get a relationship with Gordon until he was deputized by the Gotham PD, and he didn't run Wayne Enterprises. For a while I started to think that this film was a bad adaption of the character until I came across this bit of info, and read the Golden Age for myself (I'm still working my way through it). So if someone is going to criticize this movie properly they'd have to compare it to that era of the comics, not the Bronze Age.

Another rumor I'm sick of hearing (which is also in the video) is that Burton didn't read the comics. However, that isn't true as the Producer made Burton read the Golden Age comics, and Burton also read other comics on his own including The Killing Joke. If that isn't enough he also met with several artists/writers of the comics. To my surprise he even had lunch with Alan Moore to discuss Batman.

Even though this is my second favorite live action Batman film, I will admit that I don't think it's perfect. But I'm just tired of hearing people making up lies, or comparing it to something that it wasn't based on in the first place.

[byrd156]

I don't wish any ill will towards the person that made either of these videos. I've enjoyed some of the content from their channel in the past. Having said that, I disagree with most of the things said in this video. Chief among them is how he compares the 89 film to the comics. Most of the reviews that I've seen online seem to neglect what the film was based on. Keep in mind that at the time the general populace was mostly familiar with the Adam West show. To combat this producer Michael E. Uslan set out to make a film that got back to the roots of the character aka the Bob Kane/Bill Finger version of the character. If you read those comics a lot of the decisions in this movie start to make sense for the most part. The Kane/Finger Batman had no moral code, He didn't get a relationship with Gordon until he was deputized by the Gotham PD, and he didn't run Wayne Enterprises. For a while I started to think that this film was a bad adaption of the character until I came across this bit of info, and read the Golden Age for myself (I'm still working my way through it). So if someone is going to criticize this movie properly they'd have to compare it to that era of the comics, not the Bronze Age.

Another rumor I'm sick of hearing (which is also in the video) is that Burton didn't read the comics. However, that isn't true as the Producer made Burton read the Golden Age comics, and Burton also read other comics on his own including The Killing Joke. If that isn't enough he also met with several artists/writers of the comics. To my surprise he even had lunch with Alan Moore to discuss Batman.

Even though this is my second favorite live action Batman film, I will admit that I don't think it's perfect. But I'm just tired of hearing people making up lies, or comparing it to something that it wasn't based on in the first place.

Do you have links or articles that dispute his claims?

[Batfan Beyond]

Do you have links or articles that dispute his claims?

This blog has some of the best articles on the film, and what the intentions behind it were. There's multiple quotes with sources attached to them.
http://gothamalleys.blogspot.com/201...ovies.html?m=1
http://gothamalleys.blogspot.com/201...art-i.html?m=1 (Although I'll admit some of these might be a stretch)
http://gothamalleys.blogspot.com/201...atman.html?m=1

[DCStu]

Funnily enough I rewatched the Burton/Schumacher movies last weekend with my youngest kid. I think it had been quite a while since I'd seen them (we're going to start watched The Dark Knight Trilogy tonight).

Without having watched the video yet (I may have seen it before but can't remember anything about it offhand right now) - I don't really need it to tell me how Batman 89 ain't the best Batman movie - cause as an avid fan the problems are hard to ignore.

1 - Giving The Joker a name and a backstory.

WRONG WRONG WRONG. Part of what made The Joker so scary in the comics (and in the Nolan movie) is that we actually don't know anything about him. He's just a malevolent force of evil and that makes him pretty much the perfect villain for ANY hero to fight. Trying to somehow explain this guy really robbed the character of something intrinsic to his initial characterisation. I hated it.

2 - The Joker being responsible for the death of Bruce Wayne's parents.

Not only GLARINGLY unfaithful to the comics, but a prime example of lazy contrived script writing if I ever saw one.

3 - Batman killing people.

Just wrong.

4 - Batman being motivated by revenge.

When he realises the Joker killed his parents and sets out to kill him in retaliation it's just wrong. That ain't who Batman is or what he's about. In the movie he just feels like an unhinged psycho than a noble vigilante.

All this and more lead to Batman 89 feeling like a mean spirited movie - full of anger and hostility. Even though he saves the day and gets the girl at the end - this isn't a film that makes me feel good particularly.

[Batfan Beyond]

3 - Batman killing people.

Just wrong.

4 - Batman being motivated by revenge.

When he realises the Joker killed his parents and sets out to kill him in retaliation it's just wrong. That ain't who Batman is or what he's about. In the movie he just feels like an unhinged psycho than a noble vigilante.

All this and more lead to Batman 89 feeling like a mean spirited movie - full of anger and hostility. Even though he saves the day and gets the girl at the end - this isn't a film that makes me feel good particularly.

Not to repeat myself, but again it's just important to note that this film is based on the Golden Age Bob Kane/Bill Finger pre-Robin era. That character was almost a complete 180 from the Batman we're all familiar with. He was an unhinged vigilante rather than a noble hero with a moral code. I'm on the third volume of the Golden Age right now and for the most part this guy has no code. They've introduced the idea that he doesn't kill criminals but it's inconsistent as he will still push a criminal to their death from time to time. Keep in mind that this movie was being made around the 50th Anniversary of the character. In the context of 50 years the Neal Adams version of the character was fairly new at the time, so I can understand the impulse of going back to the characters roots rather than the contemporary comics of the time.

As for your other complaints fair enough. Film is a subjective medium, and what works for one person isn't going to work for someone else.

[Speed Force League Unlimited]

Sure, it's not the ideal representation of Batman, it misses on what makes the character what we are familiar with.

[Osiris-Rex]

Sure, it's not the ideal representation of Batman, it misses on what makes the character what we are familiar with.

I think the goal was distance the general public from the familiar image of the Adam West Batman but still retain a lot of the campy elements.

[oasis1313]

It had Prince music. That was cool.