Batman '89

Gamb!t wrote: »

A classic,Keaton nailed the batman role and the film had IMO the best bat mobile.

I was lucky enough to see this movie in the old capital cinema in Cork when it came out in the 80's and I think it had one of the longest queues I can remember for a movie I went to.

I remember it as if it were yesterday. The queues were massive. Me and my dad had gone in early after hearing this would be the case and the excitement waiting for it was massive. I enjoyed the film immensely and it lived up to its promise.

Keaton was perfect as Batman and Bruce. This film and the sequel Batman Returns of course had the best batmobile. Tim Burton's films had such a different look and feel to them than the 2 Joel Schumacker films of slightly later on. Thankfully, Christopher Nolan saved Batman in 2005 from Schumacker's legacy and we owe both Burton and Nolan a lot for believing in their cool visions of Batman and inspiration multiple generations. Let's hope the upcoming The Batman from Matt Reeves will continue that tradition.

steve_r wrote: »

Some interesting comments here.

I loved that film growing up, and I still have a serious affection for it. I remember reading the retrospective review (below) and being so disappointed because I knew their criticisms were valid, and yet I loved the film so much.
https://comicsalliance.com/batman-1989-review-2/

The music and the setting of Gotham are really distinctive and have really made a lasting impression. Today's Marvel movies are bland in comparison and tend to fade into each other. I don't know how many of them (if any) will be discussed in 30 years time.

I loved Keaton as Bruce Wayne, I think he really captured this sense of a lost little boy who still doesn't really know how to handle his parents death. He is as much of an outcast and an oddball as the villians he fights, and he probably has more in common with them than the friends in real life. I felt Bale was a better Batman in the suit, but was a bit flat as Bruce Wayne.

Jack is utterly ott and runs amok in this, which is great as a spectacle but from the film's perspective if that could have been dialled back then it would have been a more inpactful performance. Jack could easily have done something more in line with what Ledger/Hammill did but it was clear they were looking for the 60s Joker take.

I did love the moment where Batman figures out how the toxin worked as a combination. It's probably the strongest "detective" moment I can think of in all of the Batman films.

To come back to an earlier point, I think the modern superhero takes are so homogenised, I know what a DC/Marvel movie will look like, I know what the pacing will be, I know what the jokes will be, I know what the casting will be like - it's all so safe, so bland, so forgettable.
People will rag on Forever and Batman and Robin, but honestly at least I can remember stuff from them - the amount of Marvel movies I've seen, or the likes of Amazing Spider-man 2, where I can't remember a single thing about them. For it's faults, this movie made a mark.

Today's Marvel movies especially of The Avengers variety are forgettable mainly because there are too many of them each not distinguishable from each other. Back in 1989, Batman was unique and was a welcome relief to the then infestation of low budget Vietnam war films and buddy cop films. Batman drew from but also differentiated itself from established classic franchises like Indiana Jones and Bond too. As with previous classics such as 1981's Raiders of the Lost Ark and Mad Max 2, and 1988's Die Hard, Batman was able to do something different and inspire.

Good decisions were made. Omitting Robin was good (that would make it too much like a buddy cop thing and god knows, we had enough of those by 1989) and making it more dystopian was also wise. Gotham was not your normal city and it clearly NEEDED Batman. Choosing the Joker as the villain of course was inevitable and a great decision. The Penguin was the next obvious choice and did the same for Returns.

The only regrets I have is what could Burton have done with Batman Forever? The fact that he is producer probably accounts for why there are some good bits in this. I cannot help but feel if Burton directed this, the Riddler would be a much more scary character with a more tragic backstory akin to Joker and Penguin in the 2 previous classics. Perhaps, if the decision to tone down the violence, horror and dystopia was not made by Schumacker and Burton stayed in place as director, we would not have ended the first set of films with the terrible Batman & Robin and perhaps could have had more than 4 films too.

salmocab wrote: »

The game on the Commodore 64 was delightfully bad. Shooting out the rope to make all the left turns. Only left turns as the computer couldn’t handle anything else.

It was a very frustrating game and was nothing like the film. All them computer games of the time were all copies of each other. The game of the Stallone Cobra film was the same.

Another interesting Batman trivia is Batman & Robin was not the planned to be the final film in the first set of films. A film called Batman Unchained (or maybe Batman Triumphant) was being considered as the next film possibly around 1999. This was supposed to be made by the same team as the last 2 films Forever and B&R but was cancelled because of how badly B&R was perceived. The idea of the film was supposed to be more gritty, more in line with the first 2 films. The idea was to have the Scarecrow as the villain and many of the ideas eventually went into Batman Begins.

nix wrote: »

That sounds like horse****, Nolan wouldnt have bothered his arse with it if he had to shoehorn other peoples ideas, where are you getting this stuff?

https://batman.fandom.com/wiki/Batman_Unchained

Clareman wrote: »

The great thing about Batman for me is that Batman is often third billing after Bruce Wayne and the Villain, for me the best movies have Bruce Wayne up against the odds, for example Batman 89 was Bruce vs Jack, Batman Begins was against Ra's Al Ghul, Dark Knight was Bruce saving Rachel.

And another strong point with both Batman 1989 and Batman Returns is the villain got a good detailed backstory. The Joker was Jack Napier and The Penguin was Oscar Cobblepot and we get to know why they became their alter egos. Of course, Bruce and Batman was the mirror image.

nyarlothothep wrote: »

Keaton Batman was the best and has yet to be surpassed. The Joker was basically Jack Nicholson as himself, this would be weak point to an extent but at the time it probably wasn't. I think the film has aged beautifully, it's vastly superior to modern superhero films and I prefer it over Nolan's work. I really like the operatic ballet sequence with the clock tower, that black dude in the bomber jacket really gave Batman a run for his money big time and he only won the fight through a deceptive move at the end, he would have been toast otherwise. That was a really cool fight sequence. I really like the Prince soundtrack because it doesn't exactly fit, funk music in a gothic world, but that's what gives it an edge of unpredictability. Another classic sequence is when they go into the art gallery and desecrate it to Prince, classic and then the Joker just goes through Viki Vales portfolio saying crap, crap crap. So many quotable and memorable scenes like that. Another one, "lyou wanna get nuts? Let's get nuts"/"never rub another man's rhubarb!" Why don't they have this quality of script writing anymore, it's just Shakespearean in wordplay. I remember when that film came out I was skeptical thinking it would be like Adam West Batman, I think I was 4 at the time. Batman was associated with that campy light image, so Burton really kickstarted the dark Batman version which has influenced everything since. It was revolutionary for the time.

Michael Keaton's Batman/Bruce Wayne was the original and best (along with Christian Bale) serious version of the character. This film stood out because it was different and was very influential on all we've seen since. If this film wasn't made, all the other Batman films would not have been either. A masterpiece that still is enjoyed to this day.

jaxxx wrote: »

That's the one thing I didn't like about the Nolan trilogy. Anyone that knows the real character of Bruce Wayne knows that he would continue fighting until his very last breath. The idea of a normal life is alien to him. Even people are almost alien to him. He pushes people away: Dick, Tim, Barbara, etc, pretty much everyone except Alfred, whom btw would NEVER just walk out on Bruce like he did in TDKR. Did not like Caine's Alfred AT ALL.


Funnily enough I thought Irons nailed Alfred in BvS and Justice League. Alfred's wit is nothing short of legendary, and Irons absolutely made it his own. It's just a pity the rest of those films weren't as good.

That was a major change from what we saw in Burton's films and Nolan's. In Burton's, Batman was going to be Batman always and Schumacher's title Batman Forever solidified that idea.

I think that the complexities of the Batman/Bruce Wayne character were best documented in Batman 1989 and Batman Returns. The relationship with Vicki Vale documents the whole complexity of Bruce.

Just a few more thoughts on Batman: let's go back to August 11th/12th 1989. Batman premiered in Ireland and the hype was unbelievable. Putting things in context at the time then we have to remember there was no Internet and no quick to video film releases like we have today. Going to the cinema then was an event and if you wanted to see a film badly, you had to go. Today, you can own a film in the cinema now within a few months.

Setting off into town to see the film with my dad, I can remember the 'bat fever' in the air well. Arriving at the cinema, I can remember the massive queues of the kind I haven't seen before or since. People of all ages and entire families came to see it. As said in an earlier post, the 2+ hours in the cinema were among the most entertaining experiences ever and remember the excitement of talking about it coming home with my dad and we pretending the car was the batmobile! I also remember looking out at the moon on the way home and imagining the batwing flying up against it like in the film!

On arriving home, I and my mam discussed the film for an hour and I was on a high with excitement. I remember then the Sunday papers were full of praise of it and showed the iconic batwing moon picture. Watching this film at the weekend brought all these good times back to life and it is just as enjoyable now as it was 30 years ago.

I remember in 1990 the film Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles tried to create a similar hype. But turtlemania was of its place and time and while there are still films and cartoons being made of the turtles, they never were as enduring as Batman and batmania. Batmania never really went away. 6 more Batman films followed and then the Batman, Superman and Wonderwoman collaboration films not to mention the upcoming The Batman.

After Batman 1989, we have moved into a world where superhero films are more generic and more par for the course. Film studios are queueing up to revive every single superhero character and the films are almost always a success these days. It was not always the case. For example, Masters of the Universe flopped despite 'He-man-mania' being everywhere prior to the film's release. Batman changed all that and was successful because it was unique, well made and appealed to multiple audiences.