Messages

i liked batman begins and im dying to see the dark knight but the amount of hate toward this film for no reason makes me start to dislike the nolan films alot that why im so glad someone should me this site its great everyone is so nice and won't tear you apart for liking burtons batman the best

Wow, thats exactly how I have felt for a while now.  I liked BB when it came out(still do), and in my enthusiasm for it scoured the net for any news on a sequel and found BOF.  I really enjoyed the site (still do) and have visited it daily since I discovered it, but once I started to read op-eds and message board posts, I started discovering a strong Nolan bias and a strong anti-Burton one.

B89 made me a Batman fan and is still my favorite (probably will always be), but I was and am willing to put BB right up there, and it was the negativity and irreverence towards B89 that some of the people at BOF that have made me want to bash Nolan on occasion, even when I really enjoyed his film.  All of a sudden its Nolanites vs. Burtonites, and I found myself taking sides.  They made me a Burtonite. 

Whats wrong with having B89 (or BR for some of you) be your favorite, without having to defend yourself against hoards of Nolan extremists.  Now I'm not saying everyone at BOF is this way, some have a healthy respect for B89 (and to a lesser extent BR) there, but there are others who find it an insult to thier being for anyone to actually like Burton's take just a little better than Nolan's. 

On June 18th, I am ready and willing to put TDK right up there with (but slightly underneath) B89, and I am going to enjoy it without having to defend myself If I happen to think that Bale and Ledger were really good, but I still prefer Keation and Nicholson even if only slightly.     

Regarding this site (Batman Movie Online), I love it.  I followed a link on  raleagh's sig at BOF a few weeks ago and have enjoyed visiting it daily.  Kudos to you raleagh, for creating a refuge for us "Burtonites" on the web.  Keep it up.   

Based on the excellent thesis posted on this site, Burton's influence was minimal, compared with the producers.

B89 made me a Batman fan, and I have a tremendous amount of affection for the film.  No Batman film has yet to supplant it in my mind, because B89 is my preferred version of Batman (Kane/Finger 1939).  Having said all that, I also enjoyed BB, and am excited to see a darker version of Nolan's Batman in TDK.  Jack Nicolson defined the Joker for me (as Keaton did Batman), so I don't know if Ledger will supplant him in my mind, though his version is more in tune with Kane/Finger's original vision so I am looking foward to his performance.  I am going with my brother-in-law to see it in IMAX opening day, and look forward to enjoying TDK, and simply being a Batman fan. I believe TDK will surpass B89 as the largest grossing Batman film of all time, and very well may be a superior film, but I just can't remove B89 from the throne no matter how good TDK might be...just too much history.  Perhaps a dual monarchy is in order...hey, it worked for the Spartans      

Since B89 centered on Batman and the Joker mirroring each other, I would say that the Joker's main motivation is the same as Batman's...revenge.  So I think you are on the right track, but I do think the Joker wanted to kill Batman, and perhaps thought he did when he brought down the Batwing.  Again, I go with the mirror analogy, Batman tells the Joker in the cathedral he is going to kill him, I imply from that the Joker wanted to do the same to Batman.   

I remember a trailer with miniguns popping out of the Batmobile, the Bat symbol posters, and Topps trading cards.  Good stuff

Burtons score to Batman is what Williams score is to Superman. It helped define the character.

I agree 100%.

1.  "I'm Batman."
2.  End sequence.
3.  Descent into mystery.
4.  Batman crashing through the ceiling of the museum.
5.  Batwing silouetted against the moon.

I would classify what the die-hard Nolan deciples think of Burton's Batman as irreverant.  Like a snot-nosed kid being disrespectful towards his elders, those who laid the foundation for his very existence generations before.   Some of these deciples even go far as to say that Burton's interpretation of the character as illigitmate.  As some have stated in earlier posts, there have been many interpretations of Batman, so it is difficult to nail down the "definitive" version of the character, so all are legitimate.  I will say though, that a strong case can be made that Burton's interpretation in Batman (1989) is the definitive version as it CLOSELY mirrors Bob Kane and Bill Fingers early works.  They defined Batman, so it follows that a film based on thier vision should be considered definitive.  All other interpretations are merely evolutions based on that foundation, some small steps, and some wild leaps.  Nolan deciples should read thier Bat-history before they bash a director who made a film that depicted Batman as his creators envisioned him. 

Also, it was Burton's Batman (1989) that legimized comic book films.  He made them potential blockbusters.  The Spiderman and X-men franchises, the blossoming Iron Man and Hulk Franchises, and even Nolan's films, owe thier existence and success to B89.  They only reason movie studios clamor to get a piece of our beloved superheroes is because of Tim Burton and the Batmania he created almost 20 years ago. 

If the Nolan deciples could get past thier blind devotion, they would also acknowledge that Tim Burton gave us the most "realistic" Batman do date.  Burton's Batman is more human than Nolan's.  For Burton's Batman, his mission is personal, but for Nolan's Batman its for an ideal, which makes him less human.  I would ask the Nolan deciples to place themselves in Nolan Batman's shoes, your parents have been murdered, and thier killer taken out before you could get at him.  To believe Nolan Batman would pursue his endless mission after Chill's death is simply unrealistic and not human.  Batman's quest for revenge is what drives him and fuels him.  To him, revenge and justice ARE the same, contrary to what Nolan would have you believe.  Kane and Finger made Batman a vigilante, something Nolan tries very hard to remove from his mythos, but why would you take away that key defining characteristic from him. 

This is more of a criticism of Nolan more than his deciples, but Burton would not have filmed Batman in his full glory under flourescent lights as Nolan did in the Arkham escape scene in Begins and what looks like key scenes in TDK.  When Nolan does this, it removes the mystery and makes Batman look like a goofy guy in a rubber suit.  Batman becomes unbelievable the more real you make him, not the reverse. Batman fits in Burton's Gotham because it is mythic and Batman mythological.  Nolan demythologizes Batman when he places him in his "real-world" version of Gotham.

I appreciate and enjoy all serious interpretations of Batman, and that includes Nolan's interpretations, something the Nolan deciples should emulate.  To dismiss Burton's Batman (1989) as illigitmate is irreverent, for the Nolan deciples, including Mr. Nolan himself, owe it a large debt of gratitude.  No Batman film before or since, will ever do for Batman what Burton's film did in June of 1989.