Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Batman '89

13567

Comments

  • Registered Users Posts: 8,439 ✭✭✭brevity


    I remember the rock hard chewing gum and the stickers.


  • Registered Users Posts: 55,433 ✭✭✭✭Mr E


    A friend of mine was obsessed with the logo. He drew it everywhere. :)


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,142 ✭✭✭✭Hurrache


    Mr E wrote: »
    A friend of mine was obsessed with the logo. He drew it everywhere. :)

    I don't think you and I were friends but I loved the logo too and drew it a lot!

    Batdance is still on my Favourites playlist and gets a regular play.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,288 ✭✭✭✭branie2


    One of Jack Nicholson's best films


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,095 ✭✭✭✭Frank Bullitt




    I will always love this movie, its pretty much perfect to me.

    And Michael Keaton...still my favourite Batman, not least because of the above video.


  • Advertisement
  • Closed Accounts Posts: 840 ✭✭✭The Late Late Show


    branie2 wrote: »
    One of Jack Nicholson's best films

    Definitely. He made The Joker his own and inspired the other excellent depiction of him from Heath Ledger later. There is something magic about good Batman films.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 840 ✭✭✭The Late Late Show


    Gintonious wrote: »


    I will always love this movie, its pretty much perfect to me.

    And Michael Keaton...still my favourite Batman, not least because of the above video.

    Same here. It was more than just a movie: it was a phenomenon. I remember the Batmania everywhere: there was a novelisation, a descriptive book about making it and the characters in it, there was a computer game, Prince's soundtrack album and even a shop specialising in all things Batman.

    Michael Keaton was an excellent Batman/Bruce. He was well able to capture the complexities of his personality very well. Batman and Batman Returns revolutionised superhero films. Batman Forever was nowhere near as good and the less said about Batman & Robin the better. Thankfully, The Dark Knight trilogy got us back on track with top quality Batman.

    Those Batman/Superman/Wonderwoman collaboration films I have mixed views on. There is some great action but I feel that it goes too deep into the sci fi world, something that Batman never really was wrote to do.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,726 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    It's funny how it didn't really spawn much of an explosion in comics adaptations; there were a couple of bizarre choices like The Phantom (and of course the Batman sequels), but it took another 11 years before the comics phase truly kicked off with X-Men.

    IIRC the 90s was when Marvel did it's IP firesale, wasn't it? I think the infamous Nicholas Cage superman film gestated around that time too, but Batman 89 didn't seem to result in much of a goldrush...


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 840 ✭✭✭The Late Late Show


    pixelburp wrote: »
    It's funny how it didn't really spawn much of an explosion in comics adaptations; there were a couple of bizarre choices like The Phantom (and of course the Batman sequels), but it took another 11 years before the comics phase truly kicked off with X-Men.

    IIRC the 90s was when Marvel did it's IP firesale, wasn't it? I think the infamous Nicholas Cage superman film gestated around that time too, but Batman 89 didn't seem to result in much of a goldrush...

    That's true. I got the feeling that the Batman film was pitched more to fans of the likes of Bond, Indiana Jones and Mad Max as an action and avenger type film. The depiction of Gotham in the film reminds me very much of Blade Runner too. It was very very very different to the Christopher Reeve Superman films of the era immediately prior to it.

    I remember saying to my mam when she asked me about it that it was like Batman and James Bond combined. And this is what it was marketed as. Superhero films were scarce enough until those Marvel ones came along. Batman & Robin nearly killed off Batman too. 2005's Batman Begins was a welcome return to the spirit of a grittier Batman and 2008's The Dark Knight set a new bar.

    I notice though there was not cheap ripoffs of the film like those Mad Max, Star Wars and Indiana Jones clones of the 1980s or the current clones of The Handmaid's Tale books of the current era.

    Iron Man is probably Marvel's answer to Batman and again is a different type of a film to many of the others.


  • Registered Users Posts: 28,727 ✭✭✭✭CastorTroy


    Ever dance with the devil in the pale moonlight?


    Okay, own up! Who got the Batman logo shaved into their hair? One guy in my class had it.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 8,284 ✭✭✭dublinman1990


    I still love Batman (1989) as I think it's a great movie. Anyone who had given their opinions in the past that Michael Keaton was a bad choice for the caped crusader will regret their opinions on WB's choice when they saw him on the big screen. He was just a fantastic choice to play the character. The response to this movie when it was screened in the cinema to fans all around the world has resulted to be overwhelmingly positive. The movie had really proved to be ahead of it's time.

    The fans who went to see it in the cinema at that time probably had loved every minute of it's execution. A move in which it has proven itself to become one of the most successful comic book movies of it's time. And that level of success has not stopped there; it has both contributed & transcended into most other Batman/DC/Marvel movie franchises in later years. In today's times; movie audience attendance has notably exploded in popularity with various movies coming out in Marvel & DC franchises recently. Batman in that era really played a big part in extending that impact towards the other comic book characters.

    I have Batman (1989) at home on DVD with most of the extras. I have not watched it regularly in recent times. But when I do; I still think it's a great movie for the comic book fan inside me. The nostalgia never goes away whenever I put it into the DVD player. It still gives me goosebumps whenever I get to see it. I never got the chance to see the movie in the cinema as I was born in 1990. All of the newest fans of it however who never got the chance to see it on DVD or Blu-ray can see it on either UHD Blu-ray for the 30th anniversary. They would also have had a chance to have seen it during the 4K anniversary screenings held at selected cinemas around Ireland around the middle of May. If anyone has seen this film through the 4K screenings in the cinema or on UHD Blu-ray. Please do give us their opinions on them because I have heard some rave reviews from people on other websites online about the new 4K transfers of the movie during the cinema screenings.

    If anyone would like to share them here, particularly on boards.ie, that would be great.


  • Registered Users Posts: 452 ✭✭Boxing.Fan


    First movie I seen in a cinema, The Carlton.

    The best of the Batman films.


  • Registered Users Posts: 452 ✭✭Boxing.Fan




  • Closed Accounts Posts: 840 ✭✭✭The Late Late Show


    I still love Batman (1989) as I think it's a great movie. Anyone who had given their opinions in the past that Michael Keaton was a bad choice for the caped crusader will regret their opinions on WB's choice when they saw him on the big screen. He was just a fantastic choice to play the character. The response to this movie when it was screened in the cinema to fans all around the world has resulted to be overwhelmingly positive. The movie had really proved to be ahead of it's time.

    The fans who went to see it in the cinema at that time probably had loved every minute of it's execution. A move in which it has proven itself to become one of the most successful comic book movies of it's time. And that level of success has not stopped there; it has both contributed & transcended into most other Batman/DC/Marvel movie franchises in later years. In today's times; movie audience attendance has notably exploded in popularity with various movies coming out in Marvel & DC franchises recently. Batman in that era really played a big part in extending that impact towards the other comic book characters.

    I have Batman (1989) at home on DVD with most of the extras. I have not watched it regularly in recent times. But when I do; I still think it's a great movie for the comic book fan inside me. The nostalgia never goes away whenever I put it into the DVD player. It still gives me goosebumps whenever I get to see it. I never got the chance to see the movie in the cinema as I was born in 1990. All of the newest fans of it however who never got the chance to see it on DVD or Blu-ray can see it on either UHD Blu-ray for the 30th anniversary. They would also have had a chance to have seen it during the 4K anniversary screenings held at selected cinemas around Ireland around the middle of May. If anyone has seen this film through the 4K screenings in the cinema or on UHD Blu-ray. Please do give us their opinions on them because I have heard some rave reviews from people on other websites online about the new 4K transfers of the movie during the cinema screenings.

    If anyone would like to share them here, particularly on boards.ie, that would be great.

    If the Italia 90 World Cup dominated the summer of 1990, Batman did the very same in 1989. I agree with all you say. Before this film, I had seen Batman by Adam West on the TV Saturday mornings. The film basically ignored that completely and brought Batman to a new level.

    Going into the cinema to see it and coming out all excited and talking about nothing else for the rest of that week is a sign a film has done what it is supposed to do. This film made people happy and got people interested in it in a way few other films do.

    The other side of it is it was also a very hard film to follow. After a strong trio of an Indiana Jones, a Bond film and Batman across the summer of 1989, everything else then seemed not as exciting. I remember going to see The Karate Kid Part 3 and hating it just after seeing Batman. I am unsure if I hated it because it was bad or because I watched it after Batman.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 840 ✭✭✭The Late Late Show


    Came across this thread there now. It is hard to believe that Batman 1989 is 30 years old. I have always loved this film and the casting was excellent. I remember the queues going into the cinema and the excitement watching it for the first time and the excitement coming home talking about it with my dad who went to see it with me and then with my mam after arriving home.

    The film had the right balance of comic book stylings and 1980s action movie. It also appealed to different audiences and different age groups. It was one of those films that people went to see a second and even third time. There was literally no getting away from this film back then. It was massive.

    To this day, Batman 1989 has inspired so many other films including The Dark Knight trilogy that revolutionised Batman for a new generation. Without the success of the first Batman movie, a lot of these would not have been possible. The other thing this film did was really put The Joker on the map. Up until then, villains in films were secondary to the hero but in Batman 1989, Jack Nicholson's portrayal of The Joker is equal to Batman. Heath Ledger would do the same in The Dark Knight nearly 20 years later.

    Of course, there is always the debate about which is the best Batman film but whether you regard Batman 1989, Batman Returns or any one of the Dark Knight trilogy or that trilogy taken as a whole as that (and there is an argument for all of them), it all started with Batman 1989. One can also see that the original films suffered when both Tim Burton and Michael Keaton left. Joel Schumacker seemed determined to bring Batman back to the 1960s TV series. Often when watching Batman in order, I go straight from Returns to Begins skipping Forever and especially Batman & Robin. There is a natural connection between Tim Burton's and Christopher Nolan's films but there is a different feel to the Joel Schumacker films.

    What Batman 1989 and Batman Begins did was bring Batman back to his gritty roots. Like all long running franchises, attempts to 'soften' a character can happen hence Adam West and the Schumacker films. Now, with the coming The Batman film, will this do the same? Of late, there have been a few weird Batman related films where his world is combined with the worlds of Superman and Wonderwoman. Once more, there is the need to bring Batman back to his roots and give us a straight ahead gritty thriller akin to the Nolan or Burton films.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,095 ✭✭✭✭Frank Bullitt


    Boxing.Fan wrote: »

    I love that it's a Francis Bacon painting that he saved at the end as well. Great taste.


  • Registered Users Posts: 635 ✭✭✭smurf492


    I thought the 4k update was phenomenal.. Caught both batman and returns as a double bill and they both looked great. Noticed quite a few small details which I didn't see on home viewing... Highly recommended


  • Registered Users Posts: 468 ✭✭w/s/p/c/


    I remember this well, it was everywhere.... I was 7 at the time and wanted to see it in the cinema, but never went! Got a die-cast model Batmobile toy to make up for it though and eventually seen it when it was released on VHS. To me Keaton will always be my favourite Batman, would love to see him play an older version of the character.


  • Registered Users Posts: 10,288 ✭✭✭✭branie2


    One of Jack Nicholson's best films as well


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 840 ✭✭✭The Late Late Show


    w/s/p/c/ wrote: »
    I remember this well, it was everywhere.... I was 7 at the time and wanted to see it in the cinema, but never went! Got a die-cast model Batmobile toy to make up for it though and eventually seen it when it was released on VHS. To me Keaton will always be my favourite Batman, would love to see him play an older version of the character.

    It was a special time and great to see in the cinema then. Back then, films came out on the old VHS videos some 2 years after they were released. I think it was 1991 when I got my copy of the VHS. Nowadays, you can get a film or TV series on at present before Christmas (I expect to have The Handmaid's Tale series 3 for Christmas along with anything else I come across I am interested in getting). This also meant why people went to see Batman in August and September 1989 2, 3 and 4 times!

    Michael Keaton and Christian Bale are both my favourite Batman and also were clearly in the best films. I think when both Keaton and Tim Burton left the original franchise things went downhill. I often when watching my Batman collection watch the 2 Burton films and then skip on and watch the 3 Christopher Nolan films. I think these 5 films were able to get into the complexities of the Batman/Bruce Wayne character very well.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 3,230 ✭✭✭jaxxx


    I must be one of the very rare few who didn't like the movie :o


    In my defence, I think Inception was overrated too! Also in my defence, Bale wasn't my favourite Batman either.


    Is it getting hot in here or is it just me???? :eek:


  • Registered Users Posts: 24,135 ✭✭✭✭Sleepy


    I was 9 when it came out and wasn't let go see it in the cinema so it would have been a couple of years later before I saw it. Of course, that didn't put me off joining in the mania for collecting the stickers (remember there were two series? The first framed in white, the second framed in yellow!)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 840 ✭✭✭The Late Late Show


    jaxxx wrote: »
    I must be one of the very rare few who didn't like the movie :o


    In my defence, I think Inception was overrated too! Also in my defence, Bale wasn't my favourite Batman either.


    Is it getting hot in here or is it just me???? :eek:

    The funny thing is how tastes change. I loved Batman and Batman Returns when they came out and still feel the exact same and regularly watch both. Same with the Dark Knight trilogy.

    I hated Batman & Robin when it came out and still am not gone on it although I do recognise there are 1000s of worse films than it. But Batman Forever is a different story: I remember I loved it when it came out and now while I don't hate it, I do not enjoy it much either. There was something off about the whole film and I felt The Riddler was overdone and overblown. With scenes like these fish coming out of a TV screen, you knew you were in dicey territory. On top of this, sadly the whole Robin character was pulled straight out of the 1960s TV series and this diluted the franchise very much. The dire warning signs of what would bring us Batman & Robin were there in plain sight.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,726 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Nicholson left quite the long shadow, but as time has passed, I've cooled a little on his performance. Like they took Caser Romero goofiness and let Nicholson go a bit nuts on it, turning his natural eccentricity all the way to 11. Still a fun performance, but Ledger has become the definitive adapted Joker for me, tied perhaps with Mark Hammill's animated version (needless to say Leto is nowhere on this list)


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 840 ✭✭✭The Late Late Show


    pixelburp wrote: »
    Nicholson left quite the long shadow, but as time has passed, I've cooled a little on his performance. Like they took Caser Romero goofiness and let Nicholson go a bit nuts on it, turning his natural eccentricity all the way to 11. Still a fun performance, but Ledger has become the definitive adapted Joker for me, tied perhaps with Mark Hammill's animated version (needless to say Leto is nowhere on this list)

    Cesar Romero was the first Joker I saw. What I notice is that his persona as the Joker has been influential in the later ones too and there is a consistency with this Batman villain unlike the others.

    The old TV series was perfect for its time and did some of the villains better than in the films, notably the Riddler. Nicholson's Joker took Romero's one and added a madder more unpredictable persona to it. The Joker and The Penguin stood out as the best villains in the old series and it is no coincidence they and the less classifiable Catwoman were the first of such characters to be committed to film versions. It was clear Tim Burton knew that while many read the comics, the old series could not completely be ignored and he was faithful to the Joker character.

    Heath Ledger of course gave us a more believable realistic Joker. Apart from the white and red facepaint, Ledger's Joker could fit right into Breaking Bad and the like. Ledger's character was much more grounded in realistic crime and terrorism than the other incarnations. Ledger of course would have been influenced by the Nicholson portrayal and much of that persona is kept albeit a lot of the theatrics are toned down.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Arts Moderators, Computer Games Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 29,031 CMod ✭✭✭✭johnny_ultimate


    I watched it last night for the first time since I was very young. It’s not a perfect film by any stretch - the narrative and pacing are a bit all the over shop, and it lacks focus without making a whole lot of use out of its plethora of side characters. While it’s probably the best and most comic-bookie realisation of Batman design wise, they also don’t necessarily make much use out of him as a complex, tricky character - more just happy to show off a load of gadgets.

    What I will say is that it without question shames modern superhero films in terms of its visual and art design. From the opening expressionist shots of a highly stylised Gotham to sets full of playfully distorted or exaggerated details, it’s a looker. Obviously Burton would double down on it to good effect for Returns, and Schumacher would quadruple down on it to bad effect for subsequent films. Considering how ****e and boring the vast majority of current superhero films look - the odd exception like Spiderverse aside - this is a good argument for directors following a weirder, more idiosyncratic path when dealing with superhero properties.


  • Moderators, Category Moderators, Entertainment Moderators Posts: 35,726 CMod ✭✭✭✭pixelburp


    Agree 100%, I've seen pushback when lamenting why the MCU isn't a more aesthetically interesting, creative place; I think people have forgotten how exciting in its own right a more expressive, imaginative world can make a superhero film. We're kinda deadened by the MCUs bland, flat approach, it's just what we expect now (and the outliers like Ragnarok and GoTG prove this, attempts at some creativity are seized upon).

    Batman 1989 looks amazing; it's definitely a Tim Burton film in visuals alone, but it's magnificent to behold and sucks you into its gothic world. You'll never see the like again, which is kinda sad. The two flavours now are Russo Bros.' blandness, or Zack Snyders overwrought music video. Take your pick.


  • Closed Accounts Posts: 840 ✭✭✭The Late Late Show


    I watched it last night for the first time since I was very young. It’s not a perfect film by any stretch - the narrative and pacing are a bit all the over shop, and it lacks focus without making a whole lot of use out of its plethora of side characters. While it’s probably the best and most comic-bookie realisation of Batman design wise, they also don’t necessarily make much use out of him as a complex, tricky character - more just happy to show off a load of gadgets.

    What I will say is that it without question shames modern superhero films in terms of its visual and art design. From the opening expressionist shots of a highly stylised Gotham to sets full of playfully distorted or exaggerated details, it’s a looker. Obviously Burton would double down on it to good effect for Returns, and Schumacher would quadruple down on it to bad effect for subsequent films. Considering how ****e and boring the vast majority of current superhero films look - the odd exception like Spiderverse aside - this is a good argument for directors following a weirder, more idiosyncratic path when dealing with superhero properties.

    Batman was not 100% perfect and then again no film really is. There may have been improvements like The Dark Knight and there may have been better background information given (Batman Begins). What it did was entertain. What is also did of course was pioneer this kind of a film. There was plenty action, gadgets and crazy villains and it satisfied film lovers used to Bond, Indiana Jones and similar films of the time (there are homages to both these franchises if you look carefully).

    We are well aware of the myriad of superhero films that have come out in the last number of years. For every Superman, Superman 2, Batman, Batman Returns, The Dark Knight trilogy, the better Spiderman films and Iron Man, there are countless woeful ones. Prior to Batman, Superman had lost the plot with the awful Quest For Peace.

    Batman was in safe hands with Tim Burton and the sequel Batman Returns was every bit as good and got into grittier, darker stuff explaining the dystopia that his Gotham was. But then, as often can be the case, a decision was made to 'soften' the franchise because there were complaints about the violence, dystopian and horror influences on Burton's films.

    The result was Batman Forever, a generic superhero action flick with the dystopia of the Burton films replaced with over the top characters and silly plots. Burton's Gotham was as terrifying as Mad Max's Wasteland or The Handmaid's Tale's Gilead: the need for a Batman to clean up the place was there. In Forever, it felt like a circus and everyone seemed to be having too much fun.

    Then, Batman & Robin brought matters down further in the worst Batman ever made. Spiderman followed both Batman and Superman down a path where 2 great films were made but Spiderman 3 was poor. Another Spiderman called The Amazing Spider 2 was also poor after a lukewarm first one called The Amazing Spiderman. Iron Man was excellent and the 2 sequels were good too. Stuff like Daredevil and Catwoman did not help the superhero genre much either and the latter is often cited as the worst superhero film ever made.

    Back then to Batman: The Dark Knight trilogy especially The Dark Knight itself are excellent and erased the bad taste of B&R from our mouths. But as with Burton, the Nolan films made way for worse Batman interpretations with the likes of Batman v Superman and Justice League. Let's hope the new film The Batman can get Batman back on track.
    pixelburp wrote: »
    Agree 100%, I've seen pushback when lamenting why the MCU isn't a more aesthetically interesting, creative place; I think people have forgotten how exciting in its own right a more expressive, imaginative world can make a superhero film. We're kinda deadened by the MCUs bland, flat approach, it's just what we expect now (and the outliers like Ragnarok and GoTG prove this, attempts at some creativity are seized upon).

    Batman 1989 looks amazing; it's definitely a Tim Burton film in visuals alone, but it's magnificent to behold and sucks you into its gothic world. You'll never see the like again, which is kinda sad. The two flavours now are Russo Bros.' blandness, or Zack Snyders overwrought music video. Take your pick.

    Batman was not only a good enjoyable film but it was an event, it was unique. As with so many other films that proved iconic, it was able to be a trendsetter and an entertaining experience. It sucked one into its world and it looked like nothing else at the time.

    Today, with a superhero film coming out every minute and bringing in all the cliches from the last one, being different is much much harder. But with the market there for dystopian fiction (Mad Max Fury Road, The Handmaid's Tale) in recent years, a good dystopian Batman that is gritty and unique has a market. Bringing Batman back into Burton's world with a 21st century twist would be a good way to go.


  • Registered Users Posts: 11,095 ✭✭✭✭Frank Bullitt


    dd755ed7e487bb99dfdffad0e9cfa9a1.jpg

    Special mention to this fantastic poster as well.

    Watched it last night. As far as comic book hero movies go, it has to be top 3.

    Danny Elfmans soundtrack is the secret star of it as well. I am really on a memory lane trip right now.


  • Advertisement
  • Registered Users Posts: 6,452 ✭✭✭Oafley Jones


    Gintonious wrote: »
    Danny Elfmans soundtrack is the secret star of it as well. I am really on a memory lane trip right now.

    This and Anton Furst’s production design (of which Burton gets way too much credit) are the two standouts of this movie. Otherwise, it’s fairly clunky and frankly not a great Batman movie. At least the titular character isn’t completely sidelined like in the sequel. Burton really had no handle on him as a character.


Advertisement