Burton's Batman Films were of a much higher caliber than Schumachers but I still saw some Batman fans trying to tout Batman Forever as amazing because it had a bit more of Batman's origin in it. And that movie was horrible IMO on all fronts.
The thing is with me the reason I could enjoy Burton's films is though I read the comic books I have always realized Batman because of how the movie industry is can never fully transfer on the big screen exactly as he does in the comics. I was never that uptight about the Joker killing Batman's parents because I understood that they did that to wrap the movie up and would Joe Chill killing Batman's parents really change the storyline in that particular movie? No. So I dealt with it. Just like I dealt with Selina Kyle and the Penguin's differences in Batman Returns. As long as I could get into the particular story I was fine with the inaccuracies. But a lot of people ragged on them like Burton's films were blasphemy for daring to deviate from the source material.
However I see Nolan deviating from the source material quite a bit as well. But Nolan has much better scripts and his story telling and directing is quite masterful. But I don't even think the Batman on the screens is exactly like the Batman in the comics either. I still think the sense of madness and insanity that Batman seems to have in the comics is not here in the Nolanverse even though I really enjoyed The Dark Knight and think it is without a doubt the best Batman movie there is.
And I will say as a Two Face fan though I enjoyed his portrayal in the movie in context to the storyline some of the changes I think did take a bit away from the character as I recall him from the comics and I think it was especially dumb to have Sal Maroni in the movie and not have him more involved with his transformation even though I think the storyline worked better with the Joker.
__________________ Bruce: You've got, sort of a dark side, don't you?
yeah everyone has different opinions and how they feel towards the films as well as how they react to what changes about certain things, etc.
BB was loosely based on Year One and TDK was inspired by TDK Returns. however if they changes are too fundamental like if you have batman killing, becoming the very thing he sought out to stop, then you have something to consider.
I actually liked TDK's changes, for ex/ portraying Two Face as a sort of vigilante, his heart is in the right place, he wants to rid the streets of crime and fill it with justice, except he's doing it the wrong way, killing and stuff. Makes Dent have that eye for an eye type of justice rather than like Batman who does not exact revenge. That is a change that i myself can deal with, its different from the duality two face gimmick but whatever. We all take it differently. That other person is also right, 70 years is a longtime and comics have definately evolved. Just like movies, from burton to schumacher, to nolan. evolving for the better
Last edited by xNIXSONx on Jul 23rd, 2008 at 08:02 PM
The flaws don't detract away from the films, but it's stuff that comic book purists would be all over...
Stuff like changing Ras Al Ghul's motivations and look, changing Two-Face's origin, changing the Batmobile, Bale's Batman voice sounding too forced, adding in Rachel Dawes (she wasn't in the comics), making Detective Flass a fatass (when in the comics he's this strong looking guy), making Commissioner Loeb an African American (when in the comics he's an wrinkly old white guy), Batman not saving Ras Al Ghul, I didn't know Dent was blond, etc. etc. etc.
Like how in Burton's series Penguin's motivations and look were changed, Joker's origin was changed, Penguin had a giant rubber ducky, Keaton's Bruce Wayne looked too forced, Alexander Knox was added in (he wasn't in the comics), making Commissioner Gordon a short, plump guy (when in the comics he's fairly average sized with glasses), Harvey Dent was African American (when in the comics he's a white guy), Batman didn't save Joker, I didn't know Vale was blond, etc. etc. etc.
Those are some of the similarities with the two series taking liberties... Some are smaller than others, but they're there, and comic book purists would be bitching about them...
Like I've said before, I have absolutely no problem with Nolan's series or Burton's series, I'm merely stating that if you think Nolan didn't take just as many liberties with the source material as Burton, you're kidding yourself...
But both are just as true to the Batman eras they were trying to project... Burton preferred the Golden Age Batman stories of 1939-1940 and Frank Miller's DKR, while Nolan prefers the Modern Age Batman stories from the 1970s onward and Jeph Loeb's Long Halloween...
Yup IA Batdude 100% I've been on this forum for forever and in the comic book circles for a while and I have heard those arguments and complaints about Burton's Batman quite a bit. I was always more easy going about all of it though I just want a good Batman movie I can enjoy and if the changes help the story being told on screen I'm fine...but I was always shocked by the hostility of some towards some of the changes which I felt were rather minor.
__________________ Bruce: You've got, sort of a dark side, don't you?
As someone who has read The Batman comics since I was 4 years old I have never had any sort of problem with how Tim Burton or how Joel Schumacher interpreted Batman in their movies. I had a problem with Schumacher casting of all people George Clooney and Chris O'Donnell. And Arnold Shwarzenegger, even though I love Arnold in certain roles, he was just waaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay wrong for Mr. Freeze. Now as to Chris Nolan and the gang, he has put Batman out in the actual real world and guess what it works. Yeah something like microwave emitter and maybe the sonar device from The Dark Knight may never see the light of day in actuality, but I had no problem with it. Nor do I have a problem with how Ledger looked as The Joker. The ONLY problem I have with Chris Nolan and the gang is that I have to wait two or three years until the next one, which is perfectly fine. Bring on whoever for the next one I can wait
i think the real problem is Nolan fanboys vs Burton fanboys. We both try to point out flaws in the opposing film, who wins??
and i think Joker's make up was appropriate for the film. Im sure most of us wanted The Animated Series look and feel but it didnt go down that way. and yeah it worked. the character's mindset was clearly depicted in the way he looked.
That's the thing that's always annoyed me though because I like both. Before the Dark Knight I preferred Burton's Bat series, now I prefer Nolan's. But I still never got how one was horrible. I appreciated both for what they presented. I usually ended up defending Burton's though because people seem to hate em here.
__________________ Bruce: You've got, sort of a dark side, don't you?
Long lived Burton and his amazing Bat films.
Ledger did ok, but he was no Jack imo.
I think Batman 1989 is the best. Follow by the Dark Knight, than Batman Begains. Batman returns after that, Than you guys can rank the Schumacher "Films" were ever you like.
__________________
Have a laugh evey now and than.
its when people say that Burtons is better, the people that love Nolan's defend BB and TDK by pointing out flaws and deviation of source material in Burtons, especially how Batman ignorantly killed criminals and as amazing as Nicholson was, he simply played himself, and not the joker.
i prefer BB and TDK over Burtons, and Heath Ledger did great justice to the character, its just so much easier for Nolan's BB and TDK fans to point out and toss aside Burton's films because, in reality it appears that BB and TDK are far superior that people like myself, cannot bear watching the older batman films, and TDK from a financial success of TDK can back me up. It was like watching a high caliber oscar award winning movie and then going back and watching something like an uwe boll film, or burton film....planet of the apes?? and there is only one willy wonka btw
But thats why its easy to bash burton. Nolan lovers compromise their credibility and may appear hpyocritical when bring up issues like changes and deviation from source material but bring up very good points, things that are fundamental(ignorant burton batman killing criminals, becoming the very thing he sought out to prevent), and are willing to throw themselves at the hands of the deposition, but at the end of the day, What does a burton fanboy have to comeback with? both burtons and nolans films have their flaws and changes. so thats a stalemate, but who's film makes things work, who's is more successful and who's film did great justice to the characters and story, who's film inspired a nation, that it IS possible to do things right. Nolan's thats who. I dont need to be the one to bring up how satisfied and happy the batman community was when Batman Begins came out. It was long overdue and about time. I dont think a burton fanboys words even matter, it will fall on deaf ears, i would say they got nothing on nolan fanboys.
Last edited by xNIXSONx on Jul 24th, 2008 at 03:31 AM
"the end of the day, What does a burton fanboy have to comeback with?"
Burton's was a more enjoyable movie.
Not trying to start another Burton vs Nolan argument here, but sometimes the pieces just fit together better for some people with his version. That's just an opinion. And his Batman did so well that it led to the creation of the animated series that we all so highly regard and love.
If anything, I think BB and TDK were mostly responses to Schumacher's disasters.
__________________ Paying member of the Official Cliegg Lars Fan Club
yeah im just stating how the nolan vs burton thing goes down lol and why and all that stuff. Burton turned a campy batman into something to be reckon with, at the time. He was onto something. and The animated series was great.
if we take a look at the spiderman franchise, raimi amazed all of us back then, i could not wait for spiderman 1, i loved it, simply because there was nothing like it before, but looking at it today, i could definately say that it couldve been done way better and spiderman 3 was a disgrace, a progression a lower quality that of burton handing it down to schumacher. Its like Burton, im waiting for the next Nolan, to do what Nolan did but with Spiderman. (not in the sense of gritty dark spiderman, but raise the quality,etc) im waiting for spiderman to be reinvented
main point: at the time, the film appears to be great, but let time have a crack at it, and let it sink in.
Last edited by xNIXSONx on Jul 24th, 2008 at 03:45 AM
agreed with u there, man. Loved Spider-man 1 when it came out, but now looking back...they sure did some crappy stuff to him. I want my wisecracking Spidey and HOT MJ!
__________________ Paying member of the Official Cliegg Lars Fan Club
yeah the green goblin power ranger, fugmo mj, not enough wet shirt scenes for mj, organics, nitpicks here and there whatever, i think the real crime was how corny spidermans jokes were
but what we can take from this is if we compare burtons film like this, was it succesful because it was the first of its kind? we're talking about like, super nintendo vs wii. SNES and the original NES were very succesful back in the day, but Today, which would the majority prefer...some like tried test and true, while others prefer new, innovative, and revolutionary
The game has evolved, we as movie goers have evolved. and thats why some of us hail Nolan's as dark, brilliant and masterful while otherwise proclaim burton as classic, eerie, and spectacular, im going to take a huge guess that the people who prefer burtons batman grew up with it, meaning they are older, and since movies have evolved, have these older movie goers evolved, and when i bring that up, can you teach an old dog new tricks? is there such thing as a stubborn mule
Last edited by xNIXSONx on Jul 24th, 2008 at 04:01 AM
Well, to be fair, in Burton's Batman, every time Batman killed, he had a reason to...
-The guys at Axis Chemicals: His main goal was to stop the flow of Joker's tainted products (something Golden Age Batman would have done)...
-The big guy in the cathedral: It was "kill or be killed" in that situation (again, something Golden Age Batman would have done)
That's really all the killing Batman did in his films, tbh... Joker would have gone to Arkham had he let go of the ladder in time (he would have been hanging upside down from the cathedral: The helicopter is what pulled the gargoyle from its place. Batman and Vicki would have fallen and grappled to safety down on the streets, and the cops would have gotten to the top of the cathedral via helicopter, catching Joker before Batman could kill him. Then eventually Batman would realize it's for the best, knowing he's getting what he deserves by being in Arkham) and Penguin could have easily ran in the opposite direction when the bats came, or not pressed the button at all (he would've continued to try and fight, but he'd lose, and be captured, and then taken to jail for his crimes: Batman had no reason to want to kill him)
Regarding the big strongman: How do we know it was a REAL bomb? They WERE clowns and circus performers... It could have been a trick bomb or something just to get Batman nervous (and the guy originally carrying it had to have been on a suicide mission, which I doubt). And since we never actually see him die, I can't put him on the list...
*Note: By "trick bomb", I mean something like a confetti bomb*
__________________ JESUS SAVES!
Last edited by Bat Dude on Jul 24th, 2008 at 04:08 AM
Yeah and really how is what happened at Axis chemicals that much different than what happened in the beginning of the Dark Knight when the Tumbler went into intimidate mode. No way Batman knew those explosions couldn't possibly have killed some of the henchmen when he blew up those cars. And like I said he had no way of knowing he wasn't gonna kill the Joker when he flipped that semi truck. I think Batman got very close to killing the Joker in this movie too I think the only reason he didn't is because he didn't want the Joker to win by causing him to break his one rule more so than his one rule actually mattered that much to him in this case.
And I agree the Burton movies can't hold up now that the Dark Knight has come out but still before that I still thought Burton's movies were way more entertaining than Batman Begins but I still didn't try to rip Begins to shreds because of that.
__________________ Bruce: You've got, sort of a dark side, don't you?
KMC Community Forums
Jul 23rd, 2008 05:35 PM
