Options

Batman Returns (1992)

2»

Comments

  • Options
    be more pacificbe more pacific Posts: 19,061
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    theshadow wrote: »
    Love it as well. Its like a dark Christmas fairy tale.
    I saw it in the cinema as a child - and the bit where the penguins bring 'The Penguin' (Danny Devito's) body into the water had me balling my eyes out! Literally in bits at how they loved him and brought him into the pool. Then I realised NO-ONE in the cinema was crying.
    What does that say about me??! Weird-child :)
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twrvftwNZJY

    Danny Elfman's beautiful score played a MASSIVE part in making that scene work. It could have been quite ridiculous in less capable hands.

    To me, Elfman is as much responsible for Tim Burton's distinctive style as Burton is himself.
  • Options
    quirkyquirkquirkyquirk Posts: 7,160
    Forum Member
    No one has ever played Catwoman as good as Michelle Pfieffer

    Tim Burton also understood that Batman is best played by someone who hides his rock hard real persona beneath a nerdy oddball facade. Someone you wouldn't even suspect as being Batman. Rather than the "hunk" type actors that have played him since.

    Michael Keaton never had to do a silly voice to play Batman. He simply stammered and stuttered as Bruce and got deadly serious as Batman.

    Despite Keaton's small stature in build and height, his eyes and that voice were enough to make him a menacing Batman IMO.
    Batman Returns sums up why I love, and yet am a bit frustrated at times by Tim Burton. The look and style of the film is stunning and it delves properly in the dark weirdness he was obviously aiming for in his first effort. But it's a bit too arch and kooky for my liking. Maybe my tolerance for that kind of thing is lower than that of most Tim Burton fans. I don't get on with some of his films that others rate as classics, while the sometimes overlooked Ed Wood is far and away his best film in my opinion.

    The action is a bit sub par in BR as well - much as I like Michael Keaton, his Batman is basically a little bloke on a motorised winch, stuck inside a stiff rubber suit which hinders his movement.

    IMHO even all these years later,I still think the suit hinders the actors movements.In Batman Begins the fight scenes were filmed in a way that made Batman look invincible,like the ninja he's supposed to be.But in TDK and TDKR the fight scenes were filmed so you could see all his movements and he looked like he was struggling to move around.I thought both of his fights with Bane were very poor.
  • Options
    theshadowtheshadow Posts: 733
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=twrvftwNZJY

    Danny Elfman's beautiful score played a MASSIVE part in making that scene work. It could have been quite ridiculous in less capable hands.

    To me, Elfman is as much responsible for Tim Burton's distinctive style as Burton is himself.

    Yes you are completely right! The score in this scene is what lifts it up into something very special. You are right about how ridiculous it could have been with different music.
    I probably would have been laughing with different music - instead I was balling my head off in the cinema - I was young and it emotionally scarred me :)
  • Options
    [Deleted User][Deleted User] Posts: 3,538
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Anyone else a fan of this? As a Batman film it falls short and is in no way faithful to the source material but I think it's a fantastic gothic fairytale. The plot is dark,and the christmas setting and Danny Elfman's score make it very atmospheric IMO.

    Scared the crap out of me as a kid. Brilliant film
  • Options
    theshadowtheshadow Posts: 733
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    One other thing.....
    I adore "Face to Face" by Siouxsie & The Banshees - the main theme for the film.
    I know the song did not do well comercially but its just perfect for the film and a smashing song in its own right.
  • Options
    BlurayBluray Posts: 661
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    theshadow wrote: »
    One other thing.....
    I adore "Face to Face" by Siouxsie & The Banshees - the main theme for the film.
    I know the song did not do well comercially but its just perfect for the film and a smashing song in its own right.

    Totally agree - a brilliant, moody song that should've done a lot better. I still have the 12" Picture Disc.
  • Options
    RebelScumRebelScum Posts: 16,008
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    OP, I don't quite get your comment that as a Batman film it falls short. What do you mean by this?
  • Options
    Big Boy BarryBig Boy Barry Posts: 35,389
    Forum Member
    The action is a bit sub par in BR as well - much as I like Michael Keaton, his Batman is basically a little bloke on a motorised winch, stuck inside a stiff rubber suit which hinders his movement.

    This I agree with. Keaton was severely hampered by that stupid suit. The Batsuit needed to be more flexible. In the first four movies, the suit progressively became more rigid and nonsensically stiff.
  • Options
    -GONZO--GONZO- Posts: 9,624
    Forum Member
    RebelScum wrote: »
    OP, I don't quite get your comment that as a Batman film it falls short. What do you mean by this?

    Snap! It does seem an odd comment to make.
    What is the OP comparing Batman Returns to, as previous to that all there was as far as films go are Batman The Movie(1966) and Batman(1989)?
  • Options
    ASIFZEDASIFZED Posts: 1,388
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Okay, I'll bite. Not giving my age away, but was definitely not a kid!

    Forever is brilliant because it moved away from the morose, depressing vibe of Returns and was much more upbeat, whilst still respecting (largely), the source material. I thought Kilmer made a great Batman / Bruce and definitely looked the part. Helped that he was younger too. The introduction of Robin was a highlight and good interplay between the two leads; more like brothers than the father / son relationship seen elsewhere. The Batmobile actually looked like it could build up some speed and be driven. Nicole Kidman looked lush. Jim Carrey was exactly what I wanted (at the time), from The Riddler. Action set pieces and hand-to-hand combat scenes were well executed. A good score by Elliott Goldenthal. Drew Barrymore. Great and varied pop soundtrack for the film, plus U2's brilliant closing track. The bluray version includes the deleted scenes, that would have provided even more gravitas to the film. Choice lines.. "Holy rusted metal Batman!", amongst others.

    Yes, it's more day-glo and bathed in neon throughout but still, of*the non Nolan Bat films I revisit the most, it's Forever the one I turn to the most. Schumacher lost the plot with B&R, (history repeating itself with both directors given free rein to indulge themselves..), but Batman Forever is in no way the poor relation in the original quartet of movies.
  • Options
    Lou KellyLou Kelly Posts: 2,778
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    Slightly off topic but if anyone has played "Batman: Arkham City" on modern consoles then this is exactly how I envision the Batman world to be. Nolan done well with modernising the franchise (and The Dark Knight is my favourite of ALL the Batman films) but the Games are what I expect from that particular world.
  • Options
    -GONZO--GONZO- Posts: 9,624
    Forum Member
    ASIFZED wrote: »
    Forever is brilliant because it moved away from the morose, depressing vibe of Returns and was much more upbeat, whilst still respecting (largely), the source material.

    But what are you basing the source material on, 60's Batman TV show with Adam West & Burt Ward or the original source material being the Comics?
    Judging by your "Holy rusted metal Batman!", amongst others comment then that suggests 60's TV show Batman.
  • Options
    roger_50roger_50 Posts: 6,928
    Forum Member
    I'll be honest, I was never fond of Batman Returns. It just felt too wacky, as if it were at odds with itself.

    Perhaps Burton should have not made the Batman films, but instead made an original faux-reality gothic fantasy series set in a metropolis. The batman characters always felt shoe-horned in.
  • Options
    quirkyquirkquirkyquirk Posts: 7,160
    Forum Member
    RebelScum wrote: »
    OP, I don't quite get your comment that as a Batman film it falls short. What do you mean by this?

    I meant that Bruce Wayne and Batman's screen time are secondary yet again to the villians, and it's as far away from the comic-book as you can get.Catwoman wasn't a secetary who possessed supernatural abilities, The Penguin wasn't some grotesque mutant who lived in the sewers and Bruce Wayne wasn't a reclusive neurotic.It's set in Tim Burton's world with his version of the characters. But it works for me as an entertaining fantasy.
  • Options
    ASIFZEDASIFZED Posts: 1,388
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    -GONZO- wrote: »
    But what are you basing the source material on, 60's Batman TV show with Adam West & Burt Ward or the original source material being the Comics?
    Judging by your "Holy rusted metal Batman!", amongst others comment then that suggests 60's TV show Batman.

    No. I think it's a blend of everything. Yes, it does cheekily homage the classic show, but the Robin origin is faithfully told and the reason why Bruce adopted the bat as his means to instill fear, was also shown. I'm quite familiar with the Batman comics of the 80s & 90s, and the key stories which supposedly informed (badly), Burton's 1989 film.

    For me, Forever struck the right tone; not overly gaudy, dark at times, good visuals / interesting angles, action packed and remains re watchable.
  • Options
    RebelScumRebelScum Posts: 16,008
    Forum Member
    ✭✭
    I meant that Bruce Wayne and Batman's screen time are secondary yet again to the villians, and it's as far away from the comic-book as you can get.Catwoman wasn't a secetary who possessed supernatural abilities, The Penguin wasn't some grotesque mutant who lived in the sewers and Bruce Wayne wasn't a reclusive neurotic.It's set in Tim Burton's world with his version of the characters. But it works for me as an entertaining fantasy.

    The villains in Batman have always been prominent in Batman lore though. There have been so many differing interpretations and spins on the Batman universe over the years, in the comics themselves, that you might as well say 99% of all Batman material falls short because it strays from the original source.
  • Options
    quirkyquirkquirkyquirk Posts: 7,160
    Forum Member
    RebelScum wrote: »
    The villains in Batman have always been prominent in Batman lore though. There have been so many differing interpretations and spins on the Batman universe over the years, in the comics themselves, that you might as well say 99% of all Batman material falls short because it strays from the original source.

    Very true.But Batman is still sidelined and for me that's a slight problem but not enough to ruin the film for me.
  • Options
    Big Boy BarryBig Boy Barry Posts: 35,389
    Forum Member
    Batman is best when sidelined. Less is more when it comes to that character.

    More screentime equals more brooding and angst, which gets old real quick.
  • Options
    quirkyquirkquirkyquirk Posts: 7,160
    Forum Member
    Batman is best when sidelined. Less is more when it comes to that character.

    More screentime equals more brooding and angst, which gets old real quick.

    Not a fan of the Nolan trilogy then :D
  • Options
    homer2012homer2012 Posts: 5,216
    Forum Member
    Batman forever was ok, good song by U2, jim carey on his game, just ashame about val kilmer and tommy lee jones been cast for the parts.

    Batman returns blows forever out of the water though.
  • Options
    dodger0703dodger0703 Posts: 1,957
    Forum Member
    ✭✭✭
    only time i have ever walked out of a cinema was this, just couldn't stand it
Sign In or Register to comment.