Here's an interesting thread on SuperHeroHype.com. One user has measured the exact amount of time Batman is onscreen in each movie and calculated a percentage proportionate to the overall runtime. The results might surprise some people.
Batman – 21%
Batman Returns – 17-18%
Batman Forever – 19%
Batman and Robin – 15%
Batman Begins – 16%
The Dark Knight – 16%
So Batman has a higher percentage of screen time in Batman Returns than he does in B&R, BB and TDK (though this doesn't take into account Bruce Wayne scenes). For a full breakdown of how this was calculated, you can see the original thread here.
http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=335105
It's quite impressive. I'd be interested to see equivalent breakdowns for Bruce Wayne and the Joker.
It is important to remember the context Batman appears in. More Batman screen time in B89 and BR for example does not take away his wraith like personality. In B&R for example he's attending flower balls and walking through Freeze's snow cone hideout in full view. You get the idea.
So, both quality AND quantity
Quote from: SilentEnigma on Sun, 5 Jun 2011, 22:41
So, both quality AND quantity
Yes. On that, I also didn't like Batman standing beside Harvey's bed in TDK. Early morning or not, it's daylight.
Quote from: The Dark Knight on Mon, 6 Jun 2011, 08:07
Quote from: SilentEnigma on Sun, 5 Jun 2011, 22:41
So, both quality AND quantity
Yes. On that, I also didn't like Batman standing beside Harvey's bed in TDK. Early morning or not, it's daylight.
You're right and given the fact that he's basically considered a wanted outlaw at this point, I don't know how he sneaks into a hospital (although so does the Joker).
Interesting that despite Burton getting slammed for not enough screen time for Batman, his films had the most. Also that begins and the dark knight have the same amount despite Batman not appearing until halfway through Begins. It seemed like batman and robin had more although off the top of my head there were 3 (albeit) long sequences with Batman; the opening scene, the one in the middle (first encounter with Ivy) and end. One thing I wonder; what qualifies as a batman scene? Does Batman need to be in the scene or actually in the frame itself? The 2 schumacher films have Robin (and for a part Batgirl) so if his sidekick is on screen instead of Batman, does that take away from Batmans screentime? And yes likewise in the Burton films you know he's there but hiding, does it only count if he's actually being shown?
I just revisited the original thread on SHH to see if they'd tallied the amount of screen time for The Dark Knight Rises, and they have. Apparently Batman is onscreen for 21 minutes 13 seconds of the 164 minute running time, which accounts for 13% of the films overall length.
Quote from: Silver Nemesis on Sat, 19 Jan 2013, 23:57
I just revisited the original thread on SHH to see if they'd tallied the amount of screen time for The Dark Knight Rises, and they have. Apparently Batman is onscreen for 21 minutes 13 seconds of the 164 minute running time, which accounts for 13% of the films overall length.
The least of all the live action films, then. Not surprised in the slightest.
The facts are:
Batman – 21%
Batman Returns – 17-18%
Batman Begins – 16%
The Dark Knight – 16%
The Dark Knight Rises - 13%
Yet the myths and improper statements will continue.
Quote from: The Dark Knight on Sun, 20 Jan 2013, 01:20
Quote from: Silver Nemesis on Sat, 19 Jan 2013, 23:57
I just revisited the original thread on SHH to see if they'd tallied the amount of screen time for The Dark Knight Rises, and they have. Apparently Batman is onscreen for 21 minutes 13 seconds of the 164 minute running time, which accounts for 13% of the films overall length.
The least of all the live action films, then. Not surprised in the slightest.
The facts are:
Batman – 21%
Batman Returns – 17-18%
Batman Begins – 16%
The Dark Knight – 16%
The Dark Knight Rises - 13%
Yet the myths and improper statements will continue.
Ha! Is this perentage truly accurate? I was planning to do this myself but kept forgetting to get round to it. I wanted to compare the controversy of Batman's onscreen role in Returns with the seemingly fan-proof Rises. How funny. Batman was truly and severely underused in the last Bale film. I was shocked at how little he appeared. It took 40-45 mins before we even saw him.
So what do you say to this Batman Returns haters when considering your beloved Rises? Was it really so bad back in 1992? My ass it wasn't! lol
I'll believe that he was absent for that length in The Dark Knight Rises. It seemed to drag on a little at the beginning and middle. At least he had an excuse to be absent for the first part of Batman Begins. Burton still had the best balance IMO.
I believe both movies are fine: Batman Returns and Dark Knight Rises regardless of his screen time. Matter of fact I consider them highly connected to each other what with Catwoman's prescence and even the idea of Gotham in snow (albeit more delicate this time). Plus the fact it was released almost 20 years later.
But the whole argument over Batman's lack of time in Returns is stupid and should be now forgotten in light of the new one. There is a pretty severe gap I've noticed in the 1992 movie right in the first half hour with very little Batman. Michael Keaton doesn't even speak until 40 mins in. That's because they were setting up Penguin, Schreck and Catwoman and all subplots however. Perfectly fine.
Rises is kind of the reverse. It takes 45 or so mins before Batman finally appears. In Returns at least they tossed in the attack on Gotham Plaza up front. But both do it for storytelling sakes.
Do Batcave scenes with Bruce doing Batman's detective work and eating vichyssoise, count as Batman scenes?
Good question. Hmmm I think more Bruce Wayne clearly. Same as Bruce Wayne researching Bane and Selina in the Batcave in Rises. Hey there's another connection between the two: both researching newspaper headlines on villains in the Batcave lol
However way you look at it the fact is there is more costume action with Batman in Returns than in Rises.
In my opinion Batman/Bruce in Rises just sucks more so than any other Batman property.
I love using and emphasizing that sucks word because good ol' Jett throws it around a lot with BR.
First of all, Batman is not in the film enough.
- I like the solitary, brooding aspect of Bruce but his reasons for doing so in the movie are flimsy at best.
- He lets his company go down the tubes.
- Gets his EMP gun shot and fails to stop Bane's stock market heist on the tablet.
- Trusts Tate to take over his company without knowing much of anything about her, she then screws him over.
- Gets beaten to a pulp by Bane.
- Fails to climb the pit numerous times - only to discover he can do it without a massive rope weighing him down.
- Batman trying to save a city from a nuclear device and his friends from imminent death has time to scale a bridge and paint the symbol of a bat with fuel to announce he is back in town for everyone to see. The bomb should have been detonated right then are there.
- Batman learns nothing from the first Bane fight. He just goes after Bane again front on, and really he should have just been flogged again.
- And what was the point of the second fight scene between Batman and Bane? To find the trigger? Why not just have Batman be the one to put the transmitter on the transport with the nuke, then take care of the nuke?
- After all his no guns no killing fuss, he kills Talia and her driver.
- Batman only existed for 1 year - then quits.
- Hands the mantle over to a young punk who hasn't shown any promise and wouldn't last a week.
- Fakes his death (for no real reason) and then sits in full public view with a stupid grin as if he's home and hosed.
- His parents are held in higher regard and Bruce Wayne is publicly remembered as a playboy jerk.
Those are all valid points. Even so, I still managed to enjoy the movie for it's action and the superb acting.
Though I wonder how naive the public is after hearing that both Bruce Wayne and Batman return after 8 years, and then both coincidentally die afterwards.
Quote from: The Dark Knight on Mon, 28 Jan 2013, 01:20In my opinion Batman/Bruce in Rises just sucks more so than any other Batman property.
I love using and emphasizing that sucks word because good ol' Jett throws it around a lot with BR.
Heh heh...
I'm suprised batman has the most. not suprised TDKR has the least. i thought TDKR was great but it wud have been better with more batman time.
i wanna see one film at least have like 50% batman time. i was thinking an arkham asylum type film BUT then i thought how would he turn back into bruce wayne if the whole film was a hold-up at arkham. maybe flashbacks?
Quote from: Slash Man on Mon, 28 Jan 2013, 03:03
Those are all valid points. Even so, I still managed to enjoy the movie for it's action and the superb acting.
Though I wonder how naive the public is after hearing that both Bruce Wayne and Batman return after 8 years, and then both coincidentally die afterwards.
Especially when Batman first showed up when Bruce Wayne returned to gotham.
Quote from: Slash Man on Mon, 28 Jan 2013, 03:03Though I wonder how naive the public is after hearing that both Bruce Wayne and Batman return after 8 years, and then both coincidentally die afterwards.
Bruce would've been one of many 1%'ers who died when Occupy Gotham took over everything. I don't think the average person in Gotham would necessarily connect Bruce's death with Batman's.
Quote from: thecolorsblend on Sat, 23 Mar 2013, 17:19
Quote from: Slash Man on Mon, 28 Jan 2013, 03:03Though I wonder how naive the public is after hearing that both Bruce Wayne and Batman return after 8 years, and then both coincidentally die afterwards.
Bruce would've been one of many 1%'ers who died when Occupy Gotham took over everything. I don't think the average person in Gotham would necessarily connect Bruce's death with Batman's.
Here's the thing, and you can correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Bruce have a high public profile in these movies? Especially how vehicles like the Tumbler are developed by his own company? I find it too much of a stretch that nobody could figure out that Bruce and Batman were the same person despite they returned to the spotlight around the same time. Not to mention how they suddenly disappeared and re-appeared and apparently dying at the same time too.
Gotta love Nolan's logic when it comes to applying "realism" in a comic book film. ::)
Quote from: The Laughing Fish on Sun, 24 Mar 2013, 05:58
Quote from: thecolorsblend on Sat, 23 Mar 2013, 17:19
Quote from: Slash Man on Mon, 28 Jan 2013, 03:03Though I wonder how naive the public is after hearing that both Bruce Wayne and Batman return after 8 years, and then both coincidentally die afterwards.
Bruce would've been one of many 1%'ers who died when Occupy Gotham took over everything. I don't think the average person in Gotham would necessarily connect Bruce's death with Batman's.
Here's the thing, and you can correct me if I'm wrong, but doesn't Bruce have a high public profile in these movies? Especially how vehicles like the Tumbler are developed by his own company? I find it too much of a stretch that nobody could figure out that Bruce and Batman were the same person despite they returned to the spotlight around the same time. Not to mention how they suddenly disappeared and re-appeared and apparently dying at the same time too.
Gotta love Nolan's logic when it comes to applying "realism" in a comic book film. ::)
Rewatching rises for the first time; it's never explained to the general public how Bruce ends up in such poor health. Fox couldn't possibly be the only one in applied sciences, someone else had to have seen that equipment batman used.
I wonder what the breakdown is of the major villains in each film? The worst thing about rises is that plenty of scenes are without batman OR his villains.
Also for forever and batman and robin, I'd assume Robin and Batgirl's screen time are NOT counted as Batman screen time? It's more acceptable for those ones to have less of Batman since the sidekicks are brought in.
Quote from: riddler on Sun, 24 Mar 2013, 15:14
Rewatching rises for the first time; it's never explained to the general public how Bruce ends up in such poor health.
People in BB - especially after it, just thought Bale's Bruce was an airhead who threw parties, got drunk and burned down his own house. In TDK word probably seeped out he hid in his panic room as The Joker terrorised guests in his penthouse. So you could add coward to that list.
So I'm not sure if people would have been that surprised about his decay, really. People probably didn't care too much. Tuning out of his own life and Gotham itself. He didn't show much public concern while 'undercover as Bruce. Those quirky rich, all in it for themselves kind of thing. Got bored of having it all and interacting with the commoners.
He had a possible defining moment during Dent's press conference but he chose to keep his mouth closed.
Quote from: The Dark Knight on Mon, 25 Mar 2013, 11:28
Quote from: riddler on Sun, 24 Mar 2013, 15:14
Rewatching rises for the first time; it's never explained to the general public how Bruce ends up in such poor health.
People in BB - especially after it, just thought Bale's Bruce was an airhead who threw parties, got drunk and burned down his own house. In TDK word probably seeped out he hid in his panic room as The Joker terrorized guests in his penthouse. So you could add coward to that list.
So I'm not sure if people would have been that surprised about his decay, really. People probably didn't care too much. Tuning out of his own life and Gotham itself. He didn't show much public concern while 'undercover as Bruce. Those quirky rich, all in it for themselves kind of thing. Got bored of having it all and interacting with the commoners.
He had a possible defining moment during Dent's press conference but he chose to keep his mouth closed.
See, I could have bought the whole public facade excuse about no one suspecting Bruce's true identity...if Bruce at least did a better job preventing his vehicles being traced back to his company. It was ridiculous how the Tumbler and the Bat only needed a paint job so no one at Wayne Enterprises could suspect that company property was being used by a vigilante. What, Fox is the only employee there who is aware of those vehicles' existence?! Not to mention that no one found it odd that there were Tumblers patrolling around the city in the third film; no one even bothered to ask how did the League of Shadows get control of these tanks that Batman used to drive eight years earlier?
Ha, that's my thread on SHH.
Quote from: The Laughing Fish on Mon, 25 Mar 2013, 13:54
See, I could have bought the whole public facade excuse about no one suspecting Bruce's true identity...if Bruce at least did a better job preventing his vehicles being traced back to his company. It was ridiculous how the Tumbler and the Bat only needed a paint job so no one at Wayne Enterprises could suspect that company property was being used by a vigilante. What, Fox is the only employee there who is aware of those vehicles' existence?! Not to mention that no one found it odd that there were Tumblers patrolling around the city in the third film; no one even bothered to ask how did the League of Shadows get control of these tanks that Batman used to drive eight years earlier?
Yep, well said. Can't dispute that.