Messages

By the thinnest of margins, B89.  Not a slight against Returns, at all..

I actually have a hard time with preference, in terms of Batman and Batman Returns. I tend to like both of those over BB.

In terms of B89 and BR, it kind of depends what mood I'm in.  Generally speaking, I think B89 is the superior product, but there's something haunting about BR that keeps bringing me back to it.

In terms of aesthetics?  Batman Returns.
Theme?  Batman Returns.
Ending?  Batman Returns.
Villain origins?  Batman Returns.
How Batman treats baddies?  Almost a draw.

I would say:

Batman Returns
Batman
Batman Begins

I think Dark Knight may give 'Batman 89' a run for its money in some of these areas, but I want to see the film, first. 

I don't think you're going to see the level of hype for B89.  There is hype, to be sure--sadly, some of it is morbid (Ledger's passing). 

But that's not to take away from the film.  I'm sure if Ledger were still with us, there would be the palpable buzz that there is now, but it would be a different kind of buzz. 

Having said that, Batman (89) was the first big-budget 'serious' attempt at a darker comic book properly, and the first Batman to truly adapt elements of the comics. 

Almost 20 years later, we have seen many films follow its formula for success.

A personal note: While I greatly anticipate TDK, it's no where near the level of excitement that I had for B89.

This is an excellent conversation, and I'm so pleased I read it.

I belong to another forum, and on that particular forum the seemingly endless amount of anticipatory praise for Nolan is getting a bit severe.  Let's just see the film first, shall we?

This, in itself, is not so terrible. It's great to see so many people about Batman.

But it's like others have said--there's no need to prop up TDK by bashing what Burton 'got wrong.'  I really believe that many do not bother reading the comic books pre 1989 to see what, exactly, Hamm and company were adapting, or influenced by.

How the hell could Burton be influenced by Long Halloween?  A book that arrived YEARS after B89?  It's unbelievable.

Happy to see sensible thoughts here. 

Excellent read, and agreed on all points.  Thank you!

Excellent work, Scissor!

In looking at the trailer again, I'm slightly less enthused.  I just viewed a few of the trailers back to back, and combined with the (IMO) lackluster prologue, I feel almost sad, now.  While this isn't a crime, such as Batman and Robin, it just feels as though it's going to be...bland.

I hope I'm wrong.  I mean, who has ever heard of a 'bland' Batman film?  That has never been a problem for Batman, no matter what incarnation we're discussing.

I think it looks okay.  I enjoyed Batman Begins, and I think this one will be interesting also.  My big problem with the Nolan films is that they tend to have (to quote friend) "dialogue as subtle as a jack hammer."  Sadly, it looks to be the case for this film as well.

Also, I'm not fond of the Bruce/Rachel/Dent triangle.  I tend to like the 'Dent as friend of Bruce' from the animated series idea. 

But everything else looks solid.  Ledger is an amazing actor, and he completely disappears into this role.  It may not look like my ideal Joker aesthetic, but he looks like he's delivering the good. 

^ Some of the earlier drafts, pre-Akiva, were not that bad.  Not spectacular either--I don't think any of the drafts ever actually understood Two-Face.

Still, although I wonder if this film would have up'd the ante.  Returns was a far more personal, and somewhat darker vision of the bat-world-of-story than 89--would Batman 3 have been even more bizarre?