MovieChat Forums > Batman (1989) Discussion > Best Batmobile Ever

Best Batmobile Ever


https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BH6Prr1nvJY

This 3 minute scene alone captures the essence of Batman more than the entire Nolan trilogy. Bale's Batman has almost zero aura about him, the goofy voice didn't help either.

reply

I love the Nolan Trilogy but the 1989 Batman is the best comic book movie ever made.

Just my expert opinion. :)

reply

I did enjoy the 1989 film but I gotta disagree, my opinion is the Nolan Trilogy is the best and then comes the Burton Films, then the Schumacher films and then whatever the hell Batman vs Superman Dawn of Justice was supposed to be.

reply

I disagree, Nolan's trilogy is emotionally unengaging and visually bland/uninspiring. TDKR being the absolute worst of the three.

reply

Your opinion. I disagree. Burton's films are style with little substance.

reply

Your opinion. I disagree. Nolan's films have no style or substance.

See how redundant that is? You and MovieChatUser497 are like R2-D2 and C-3PO constantly telling people you disagree with them. We get that. You've stated the same opinion a million times.

reply

So have you. In fact you stated Nicholson is the most comic book accurate live action joker. Not true Romero is. Nicholson is not the best joker either. Phoenix mops the floor with him. Phoenix won an Oscar and Nicholson didn't even get nominated.

reply

I'm beginning to think i've actually ruined your life lol. You got demolished in that debate bud, everyone can go read it. If you won you wouldn't be following me around paraphrasing the debate so it looks like you won. You lost! It happens dude. Well not to me but you know what I mean...

reply

Nope lol. I won and you know it.

reply

Lol ok bud.

reply

Which comic book Joker?

Alan Moore wrote a psychotic maniac who assaulted Barbara Gordon and left her paralyzed.
Bill Finger wrote a twisted assassin whose machinations and plots almost foiled the Batman!
Other writers gave Joker the campy, crazy, goofball that Romero played.
Grant Morrison gathered all of them together and created a kind of "adaptive camouflage socio-psychopathic behaviour" that explained his shifting psychosis.

"Accurate" is not something that can really happen in Batman.

reply

I love this version of the Batmobile. My hope with the Nolan trilogy was that by the end of the series, Batman would have an actual, proper Batmobile. To me, the tumbler always looked like a half-developed prototype that he was temporarily using before the final design was finished.

reply

Nolan didn't put any care at all in the way he portrayed Batman. I mean, there wasn't even a batcave in TDK.

reply

To be fair, Nolan had his own "vision" which didn't quite line up with the comics. To me, it works pretty solidly as its own thing, as a loose adaptation of the source material.

reply

Yes exactly, this was Nolan's creation that was just based on a comic book. Sometimes people get all bent out of shape because the Nolan trilogy doesn't check off all the boxes they think should be checked off and they completely ignore the story and the well written characters.

Another silly complaint I heard was that Bruce doesn't wear the Batsuit enough.

reply

they completely ignore the story and the well written characters.


I can't even remember Batman Begins because it was so forgettable, but the story was poor and full of lazy writing in The Dark Knight Rises. For example, Blake figuring out who Batman was because of a 'look' lmao.

reply

TDKR was the weakest link of the trilogy.

reply

Not even close, in my opinion it was the strongest, as far as critics seem to be concerned it seems it was the 2nd best and Batman Begins was the weakest.

reply

Definitely the weakest. The writing was just shockingly bad.

reply

" I mean, there wasn't even a batcave in TDK."

Good point; now that you bring that up I just realized Batman in Nolan's trilogy never really had or used a batcat. In Begins they had a literally cave that they were in the process of converting but then the mansion was burned. As TDK is taking place there are plans to make it better and improve 'the east wing' but then by TDK's end Bruce 'quits' being batman for 8 years (never mind the theme of Rises tells us he can never give it up despite him not being Batman for 8 years).

So the 'new' cave is relatively unused and pointless for 8 years and then barely used or shown in rises. I mean we saw more of the bunker under the Conex box in TDK then we did the 'completed' batcave in Rises.

reply

Are we seriously measuring time of batcave scenes?

reply

It is not really a huge deal, of course; but the idea is about the visual story telling. In Burton's Batman like in the comics Batman spends a lot of time in the cave; because that is where he is himself. even lego Batman gets this correct about the character (Robin: "Does batman live in Bruce Wayne's Basement?" Batman: "NO! Bruce Wayne lives in Batman's attic"). And it seems 'not true' to the character that he spent more time in the 'Bunker' in Dark Knight than he does in the Batcave for the entire trilogy.

What was the point in even completing the batcave in between Dark Knight and Rises when it went unused for 8 years? Again, not a huge deal within the films themselves but it just does not ring true to the character or his 'need' to be batman.

reply

Yes but comics are more than just visuals. There are stories, themes and character's psychology as well. Joker did not kill Bruce's parents that is a liberation taken by Burton. Burton fans will omit this and say it's no big deal. When really it is because that is not part of Joker's origin in any comic book. Thing is I don't care because I realize each version is the director's vision. Burton fans give him a free pass for liberation but do not allow Nolan that same amount of leniency. Either we criticize all liberations or none. Second yeah I get it from a visual perspective. Thing is people will literally doc the dark Knight all points simply because of the batcave... Seems a bit shallow to me.

reply

Thing is people will literally doc the dark Knight all points simply because of the batcave...


Literally nobody has said that. Ever. You're just looking for a reason to bitch and moan because you're a raging Nolan fantard. If I mentioned the lack of a Batcave, i'm criticizing that specific aspect of the movie. That's it. Stop trying to use it as an excuse to dig up an old argument we had on another thread where you got absolutely demolished lmao.

reply

Oh believe me that's what you are trying to imply. I actually like Burton's films I just prefer Nolan's. You preferring Burton's is fine, but you discredit Nolan's version any chance you get. No I won the debate actually. The most comic accurate live action joker is Romero. If you include animation it's Hammil. You denied this fact. Funny thing is the Arkham games and Batman the animated series are my favorite interpretations of Batman because it's the most comic book accurate. You are just a blind Burton fan boy.

reply

Oh believe me that's what you are slightly trying to imply.


Nope, I wasn't. You're taking a massive leap in logic so you have an excuse to bitch and moan as usual.

No I won the debate actually.


Aw it's cute when you try and convince yourself of a lie. If you won you wouldn't be chasing me for days for a rematch lmao. I pretty much snatched your soul out of your body, you can't even live with yourself anymore.

reply

Nah I simply like amusing myself with ignorant folks. Notice I debated movie chatuser497 for a while. Both you are just as ignorant. You are a blind Burton fanboy and he is a blind Nolan fanboy. Notice I can criticize both versions. Neither of you can criticize your preferred versions. It's ok the animated series Trump's both.

reply

I acknowledge the criticisms of Burton's films; I specifically point to both directors' strengths and weaknesses. See my below reply for more details.

I try very hard to be objective and fair; so long as I think people are making good faith discussions and not trying to insult and belittle each other.

reply

You and MovieChatUser497 are the same, you're both delusional fantards that are allergic to facts and logic when it suits them.

It's ok the animated series Trump's both.


The animated series owes a LOT to Burton's Batman, so you should be kissing Burton's asshole.

reply

I too prefer Burton's films (though I acknowledge the Dark Knight is arguably a perfect action film); but I don't think it helps the argument if we act deluded and pretend that Burton and his films are perfect. That is what the Nolanites do with the Dark Knight Rises.

Burton's films are great and I love them; but they are not above reproach. I can tell you are annoyed by the discussion; my advice, don't let it get to you too much; make efforts to stair the conversation back to good faith discussions. SOME users will not allow this, you mention one of their names just now; but don't lump all them together unless they prove they are arguing in bad faith and unreasonable.

reply

See as long as someone is fair Im good. Liquidocelot is not. He said Batman Begins had no cultural impact... That is a blatant lie. Simply because a film doesn't have as much cultural impact as the other doesn't mean it had no cultural impact. Batman Begins creamed any Burton film critically and by majority of users and no ledger death excuse to fall back on.

reply

I think I agree a little with both of you; Batman Begins did have a cultural impact but just not very much of one. After Batman Begins most people (that I know of) still preferred Burton's films. It was not until after The Dark Knight that people 'revised' their opinion of Batman Begins. It was the Dark KNight that had the cultural impact and some of that (not all of it) was inflated by Ledger's death

comparing online critical reviews for something that old is not fair; a lot of films' reception is inflated by the hype around stars, directors and the projects they work on in anticipation of the release. If the internet was around in 1989 the rating of Batman would be much much higher. People that reviewed Batman 1989 in the early 2000's to today are not the normies (general audience) instead they are more dedicated fans or detractors that review it. The polarization has a negative impact on the score.

IMO (tough to verify this) if Batman 1989 was reviewed in equal proportion (by general audience) it would beat the reception of Batman Begins and Rises; but i doubt it would for the Dark Knight.

reply

See but that's the thing Batman Begins sold really well on DVD. It made 167 million by 2006. Anytime I brought this up to liquidocelot this was his response well that's nothing compared to Batman 1989. I am not stupid I know Batman 1989 had more cultural impact but that doesn't mean Batman Begins had none. Also just because a movie has more cultural impact does not mean it is the better film. Titanic had more cultural impact than Blade runner, Schindler's list and the Lord of the rings films. That doesn't mean it's considered a better film. I could provide several more examples. Now yes tdk is when the impact was massive I don't dispute that.

See I don't fully agree with this. Donner's Superman edges out Batman Begins critically and that came out before Burton's Batman. Critics simply did not love Batman 1989. So critically I disagree. Now in terms of users that's a possibility.

In terms of users a tough call there. I honestly think Begins would still beat it. To me the only issue I have with begins is the editing of the fight scenes. I honestly think if you fix that it's a really solid film. I enjoy Burton's Batman but I find the villain more interesting than the hero, I also didn't like the joker killing Bruce's parents. It's a lazy screenwriting trope. Now music great, set design excellent, I just don't have much investment in the story. It's style over substance. Now luckily the style is solid I just prefer a bit more story to go with style. I have no issue with any preference but be fair.

reply

Well Superman was really the first big superhero movie and there was a lot of sympathy and love for Christopher Reeve. Keaton and Burton not so much love. In fact Burton's films started to decline around the growing popularity of the internet, while people still loved Reeves and Donner. Superman was a also a film that (more like Star Wars) in that no one really hated it (or very few) Burton films are a little more (idk what you would call it, morbid?) so there are more people that outright dislike his stuff and rate it low.

It is tough to call but you are right that cultural impact does not always indicate quality. I think Burton's film are better than Begins because of the complete use of film-making (visual story telling); Begins I would say is a 'better' written script but it is a bit to heavy on the exposition dialogue and not as visually interesting as Burton's work.

reply

True but in the end Superman is more unanimously agreed upon by the masses. When equating both the critical reaction and the audience reaction. Even Burton himself admitted Batman 1989 was more a cultural phenomenon than a great film. You are totally correct though even if people dislike Superman I rarely hear about any people who actively hate it. Burton's films can be very divided that way.

See and I can respect this point of view. Even though you think Burton's films are better you are still giving credit to Batman Begins where it is due. Personally I usually am more of a script guy but here is what I will say. I think visually I can not fight you on that, even though I prefer Nolan Burton's sets and visuals are very strong and the films are so immersive. It truly feels like you are entering Batman's world but then again Nolan's vision goes for more realism. Music definitely Burton's version on that as well that theme is just so good! I think in terms of score it is fairly close cause I do like Zimmer's score but in terms of theme Elfman definitely takes the cake. Even though I know Batman Begins does rely more on exposition it still has some good cinematography. Now the visuals are not Burton's but I do not think they are bad at all.

I agree sometimes the exposition is a bit too much. Show do not tell. However like you pointed out sometimes Burton does not rely enough on his script to a fault. I always said man if we good get a mixture of the two version you would have the perfect Batman film! Here is to hoping Matt Reeves does great, loved his works on the Apes films! If you can accomplish what Batman the animated series does but live action that would be THE Batman to end all Batman films. Why you ask? Well even though it is animation it has great style but also tons of narrative depth.

reply

I think I agree on this pretty much 100%; the visuals of Burton's Batman really do suck you in but it is style over substance. Nolan's effort for 'realism' I think might have been a bit of a mistake because it made all but the Joker rather bland to look at and watch. This is why I actually do not like Begins or Rises at all (Rises is worse IMO). There is just nothing that really grabbed me about them and I was not blown away by the action or the pacing. These things were nearly perfect in Dark Knight but Begins left something to be desired and Rises was just outright disappointing (IMO compared to the 'high' that was TDK).

Burton on the other hand even though there weaknesses in the dialogue and script (most of which rightly point out) the interesting visual storytelling and immersive world more than make up for that, IMO.

HArd to say 100% which director as a whole did a better job; Nolan's got the critical score higher; but IMO there is some bias that went into that. Nolan made the best single Batman film (Dark Knight) but Burton's 2 films are 'better' than Nolan's 3; of course IMO.

reply

Yeah the issue is by making it realistic you are stripping pieces of the character away, mainly the immersion. I mean Batman is a fantasy but I argue he still keeps enough of the core characteristics intact. I mean he still fights crime, uses gadgets gets in his Batman costume does detective work etc. I also argue this at least he had his vision and stuck to it. It is not like Joel Schumacher's where in Batman Forever the film is torn between being a studio cash in film with hints of darkness which ends up in a very mixed awkward film. Even batman Returns as awkward as it was it was still Burton's world. I prefer that as opposed to studio meddling such as what was done in Batman Forever or BVS and so on. Oh and yeah TDKR was not on the level of TDK I 100% agree on that. I rate them TDK a 10/10, Batman Begins and 8.5 and TDKR a 6/10. Burton's Batman I rank an 8/10 Batman Returns I rate a 7.0/10.

Yes the immersion is honestly so good it does in fact make up for a lot of the weaknesses. His script is by no means bad I just feel it isn't as fleshed out as I would personally like. For instance a film I feel does this a little better is Sin City. That also is a style over substance film that has great immersion. Thing is I find more investment in the characters motives than I do in Burton's Batman. I also feel it is paced a bit better. There are aspects to Burton's Batman that drag a little for me.

I agree with this. I told you how I rank them. I prefer Nolan but I do not disrespect those who prefer Burton. I would give the edge to Nolan but hey maybe that is my biased seeping in. I can agree that Batman 1989 and Batman Returns are better than TDKR though. No disagreement there. It might sound strange but Matt Reeves might be able to bridge the gap between these two and make one both fans can enjoy? What do you think? I say that because he is a visual director but he also cares very much about narrative and can do it visually.

Burton is style over substance to a fault, Nolan is story over substance exposition to a fault.

Matt Reeves at least with his filmography so far seems to be a nice blend of the two. With his work on Dawn and War I though he did great at balancing the two. Batman is my favorite hero so I hope he can pull it off.

reply

Yeah something was a little lost in the effort make it too realistic. I agree Nolan's 'vision' was a lot better than Schumachers; But Nolan's vision was the story mostly. Burton's vision was the visual world of Gotham and batman.

I think you rating is pretty fair and close to mine. TDK is 9.5/10 (I very rarely give 10/10), Batman 1989 is about an 8.5; Returns is about an 7.5. Begins I would rate right about a 7 or 7.5 (i was just really bored with this one, it really felt like a pilot episode or prequel and doesn't feel like it stands on its own well. Rises I would give about a 6/10 same as you. The Schumachers crap is like 2/10 at best.

Yeah I can agree Sin City does balance script and visual better than Batman; that is a really good film

I like Matt Reeves work so far (Dawn and war were just so great); but I am unsure about Pattinson. but then I was unsure about Ledger too, and look how that turned out. we will see.

reply

I guess that's why I liked Nolan's though. All the previous live action Batman films were mostly style. Which don't get me wrong is awesome but it was neat to see a Batman film focus so heavily on the story. That's the cool thing about Batman he has depth not just style. Let me also point another huge point for me that gets neglected a lot. Commissioner Gordon. In the Burton films he is an after thought he does nothing for the plot. As a fan of the comic I always disliked that. I like that Gordon is an actual character in Nolan's vision rather than a stand in. Gary old man is solid as him also.

I try to be sparing with 10 but I feel tdk did what it was trying to with flying colors. However I get it. See with tdkr and Batman Begins is an interesting comparison. I feel tdkr overall has a better more colorful cast. I feel Bane is a more colorful memorable villain than Ras Al ghul even though I like Ras. Hathaway is better than Holmes and Selina Kyle is way more interesting of a character than rachael. However Begins has the better more consistent script. Which is why I rated it higher.

Well after the latest trash batman films it can only get better right? I never been a fan of Snyder's work other than just visual eye candy. Matt Reeves I think is perfect for batman so fingers crossed.

reply

That is a good point; in Burton's films the side characters feel more like props; in Nolan's they are actually characters; but then there was a much better cast in Nolan's films. Eric Roberts, Tom Wilkinson, Gary Oldman (as you point out), and more. They actually had side characters with a little more investment and motivation. Gordon is not just a flip of the switch as he is in Returns. And him and Dent are not fleshed out hardly as all in Batman 1989. So I give characterization to Nolan for sure.

Bane had potential but they really used him poorly in the 2nd half and then I was basically intellectual insulted with them turning him into a glorified henchman in the last 10 minutes of the film. That is basically an unforgivable sin (IMO). They were not equals as some others have pointed out; he obeyed her order and did not go to kill Batman until after she left, he was submissive to her.

Agreed that Begins has the better script, I think the big Achilles' heel flaw of it was it felt more like a set up film and not something on its own. I walked away from it feeling, that is it? I don't like how Ras Al Ghul was 'brought' back just for the finale showdown given him no real time to develop and do some more interesting thing; what he gave was good but it was too quick too short and too tacked on in the last minutes of the film.

Yup, Reeves is much more Solid than Snyder for sure (Snyder is like Burton only worse) 100% visual and almost no substance.

reply

Yeah see and that is a big reason I lean towards Nolan's films. I guess it is a simple preference. Both versions have their strengths and weaknesses.

My issue with TDKR mainly is how much exposition and how slow the pacing is. Honestly I think the opening to TDKR is fantastic! Unfortunately it drops off after the opening. I was not really a fan of Bruce not being Batman for 8 years. I mean it felt like we got only a year of Batman and then boom we are done. I loved Bane's voice his mannerisms his character in the beginning. A foe that can physically beat Batman we have never seen that before. All good stuff on paper. It feels like it needed a few rewrites to iron it out honestly. I see potential and I enjoyed the use of practical effects such as the vehicle chases and stuff but it did not live up to TDK. Which honestly I can forgive but there were mistakes that easily could have been avoided that were not. It could have been as good as Batman Begins.

I guess I liked that we did not know who the villain was until the end of the film. To me that was new for a Batman film. Admittedly though it does make the character not standout as much as the other villains in other Batman films.

Snyder in my book is a pretentious Michael Bay. Both are on the same level of depth but with Snyder's vision it thinks it is smart when it isn't, which always rubs me the wrong way. I hate BVS more than Batman & Robin for this exact reason. Both are terrible but at least Batman & Robin knows it is a camp fest. It is a fun movie to trash with friends and honestly is quite hilariously bad. BVS is like an edgy teenager in high school who thinks they are so deep and edgy when really it is every bit as shallow as Batman & Robin but just is not aware of it and is disguised to fool you and think it is not.

reply

Yes both have their strength and weaknesses; my preference is for the immersiveness you get from the visual story telling of Burton's film; and in addition to that I was never left feeling underwhelmed or disappointed with Burton's films. While not bad Begins I felt sorta "meh" about. And Rises was a disappointing conclusion.

Yes, the exposition and pacing are actually quite awful in Rises; it is snail slow, then for about 15 minutes jarringly fast, then snail slow again; then sort of lightly picks up pace again in the last 20 minutes but nothing like the tense pacing of Dark Knight; the pacing did not help set a mood or build tension at all. Yes him not being batman for 8 years kind of works in direct contradiction with the whole "he can't stop being batman" that one user who I won't talk to started a whole thread calling this a misconception; I am so tempted to tear his ass apart for that, but I won't talk to him because he is a delusional fanatic. Rises in many places fails the show don't tell test.

Bane had potential and was pretty imposing in the first half; then after he 'beats' batman he sort of like loses direction and purpose. He became boring with his whole "take back your city that I am going to blow up in one year" it just didn't make any sense what they were trying to accomplish with that.

I really liked 300 and Watchmen a lot; but to be honest they were based on Graphic novels so it is pretty 'easy' to adapt to screen (I mean the storybook is already done for you). The second Snyder starting working with more 'original' material it (sucker punch) it started to show just the limits of his abilities. That was only confirmed with the DCEU stuff he basically shit the bed on.

reply

I get you to each his own. You prefer Burton I prefer Nolan.

moviechatuser497 is nothing but a deluded ignorant person. It honestly does not even bother me that he likes that film so much what bothers me is if anyone dislikes it you did not understand it. It is such a lame way to argue. Oh you dislike it because you do not get it. I love TDK , is it possible for someone to dislike it and understand it yep. If you rate it anything short of a 10 it is unacceptable in his eyes. Funny thing is you should have been around for his imdb days. He will claim LOTR is not a trilogy ever wonder why he does that? I can tell you why it is because Return of the King absolutely obliterates TDKR on imdb and it is a third entry. By omitting it being a trilogy it makes it to where TDKR can be considered the best third entry ever. Not kidding he is that lame.

Yeah I feel his first half was better than his second half.

Honestly I liked 300 on first viewing but was never that impressed by it. Yeah it is visually good and fun but really it is a b movie with a high production value. My issue with it is it thinks it is an epic in the same vein as Gladiator, Ben Hur, Lawrence of Arabia etc. With a film like John Wick it definitely is a b film with great production but it is self aware of this. My problem with Snyder's films is they are not self aware at all. See even though Nolan can be pretentious at least he can back it up with truly great writing at times. Memento being a prime example. Snyder yeah he thinks he has depth but he does not. Oh and BVS and Justice League are some of the worst blockbusters to ever grace the screen. TDKR may have flaws but man it is a masterpiece compared to those giant turds.

reply

Yeah that user is totally demented even when you try to end the conversation (because you realize you are talking to a wall) they won't let you got. I spent most of my imdb days going after TFA; I saw the disaster that was coming and it drove me nuts that people ate that film up (saying it was the best star wars ever) I couldn't believe that. And in return for my criticisms there was nothing but sophistry, it was incredible there was not one defense of that film that did not presented without being a logical fallacy. So I didn't see too much of Rises's board.

But to try to claim it is the best trilogy ever by denying other trilogies are trilogies is just insane. I saw that one he tried making; each film of the LOTR has 3 acts structure; they are independent films that tell one arcing story. I mean the non-arguments are just insane (and repetative out of that person). They are also a bully and harass people that call them out on being a bully. (online bully, nothing more pathetic than that).

Memento is defenitly Nolan's best film and I liked films like Dunkirk much better than Interstellar and Inception (too pretentious and way too much exposition dialogue in those films). But Nolan is a competant filmmaker; I just don't like people claim he is the next Kubrik (hell even Kubrik wasn't really a "Kubrik" if you get my meaning).

Big difference for me in DCEU; it started off so bad I had no investment so I was not really disappointed when they ended up sucking. I was invested after Dark Knight; so for Rises to be as disappointing as it was stung worse then Justice League which I know was going to suck (and i didn't even bother watching it). Same reaction I have to Star Wars sequels. TFA (for me) was by far the worse because of what it did to the legacy. TLJ I was already checked out so the 'flaws' didn't bother me nearly as much.

reply

As one more additional note; I usually do prefer script and writing (plot, characters and dialogue over production design and visuals. But I think Burton's writing wasn't terrible despite a few hick ups but the visual imagery and use of visuals to tell the story are truly something special in Batman 1989.

reply

I don't think it helps the argument if we act deluded and pretend that Burton and his films are perfect.


Never said or implied that once. I'm actually not even a fan of Burton outside of a handful of his movies and none of them are perfect.

I can tell you are annoyed by the discussion; my advice, don't let it get to you too much; make efforts to stair the conversation back to good faith discussions.


I'm annoyed (and amused) by moviefanatic505 following me around trying to reignite an argument from another thread where he was thoroughly dismantled. And comments like this -

Thing is people will literally doc the dark Knight all points simply because of the batcave... Seems a bit shallow to me.


Are ridiculous and unfounded. I don't see where anyone has implied that. If you're going to stalk me and make silly comments, don't expect a civil response from me.

reply

"Thing is people will literally doc the dark Knight all points simply because of the batcave... Seems a bit shallow to me."

Yeah, there was some condescension in that comment; but it wasn't as egregious as the "you just don't get it" crap that we get from SOME user. I will reserve judgement on moviefanatic505 for now; so far they seem to be mostly acting in good faith (at least to me) we'll see if that continues

reply

Nope that's you. You denied blatant facts.

And Burton's owes plenty to the comics. Just because there were inspirations doesn't mean those can't be perfected. They perfected and did better anything Burton attempted to do.

reply

Visuals can be used to tell stories, themes and show (rather then tell) aspects about the character's psychology. The point about the difference between burton and nolan is Burton relies too much on the visual to tell the story and set the theme and not enough on the dialogue, plot and character interactions where as Nolan focuses too much on those aspects and does so through us of heavy exposition and does not even really attempt to tell any aspect of the story through the visual.

I will admit I don't really like how Burton tacked on Joker killed Bruce's parents; it felt like a lazy way to 'increase' his emotional investment in stopping the joker. I wish they would have left it a little ambiguous or maybe suggest that Bruce was 'imagining' it was Jack Napier that killed his parents. Sort of like a Memento type of thing where he is always imagining the next criminal is the one that killed his parents; sort of show a more insane a deluded side of Batman.

The point about the batcat is 'showing' rather than telling the character's need to be Batman. Showing him in the batcat a lot a simple yet effective way to show the character is obsessive and only comfortable as Batman and Bruce Wayne is the 'character'. If that makes sense. There are other ways to show this yes; but I don't like how Nolan's films kept 'telling' us how deeply Bruce needed to be Batman and IMO they did a bad job of "showing' this.

reply

There are other ways to show this yes; but I don't like how Nolan's films kept 'telling' us how deeply Bruce needed to be Batman and IMO they did a bad job of "showing' this.


Exposition is a hallmark of Nolan's movies. Inception for example was like 50% exposition, i.e. a character explaining a plot device or how something works. It's the equivalent of reading an instruction manual.

Movies are a visual medium, you should always show more than you tell. Exposition is a sign of bad writing.

reply

I agree; that is one thing I don't like about Nolan or his films and why I prefer Burton; but Burton also relies too much on the visual to tell the story and often times character development and dialogue (character interactions) suffer for it (at least a little bit).

reply

See and this is a fair point. I agree there can be too much exposition but as you pointed out Burton can rely on visuals to a fault.

reply

Yes, I think it is a fair assessment of the difference between the 2. Those that really like heavy and well written dialogue will often like Nolan better; those like like interesting visual story telling will like Burton better. I prefer the latter myself which is why I take Burton's Batman over Nolan's but even so I fully acknowledge that Dark Knight is pretty much objectively better than Batman 1989; even if I prefer the 1989.

reply

The internet was made for nitpicking.

reply

He didn't put the batsuit on in those 8 years because there wasn't a need to be Batman, the cops were busy chasing down overdue library books, however he spent 4 of those years just sitting around waiting for there to be a need to be Batman again which is why jumped right back into being Batman as soon as he found out about Bane.

reply

Lame critique. What effect does that have on story and themes? That's like saying well at least Robin is in tdk trilogy. Burton didn't have Robin...

reply

That guy Blake was not Robin. He didn't even fight with Batman.

reply

Name was Robin and he helped Batman fight those guards.

reply

I guess if I change my name to Abraham Lincoln that means I freed the slaves.

reply

Well he certainly wasn't anything like Robin from the comics or the 90s cartoon. It's also common knowledge that Christian Bale refused to do the movies if Robin as he was in the comics was in them.

reply

This was my introduction to Batman so I'm sure nostalgia plays a part but, yes, I love this Batmobile and the look of the first film overall. As for Bale, I'd almost preferred he just kept his regular speaking voice.

reply

[deleted]

Oh yes! The Westmobile is DEFINITELY the best.

Batman, Batman, Batman!

reply

As much as I love the 1966 Batmobile, the 1989 is the best

reply