Batman is a clear case of style over substance. Burton's gothic visual aesthetic looms over every shot of the film, which guarantees that if you lose interest on the almost non-existent plot, at the very least you'll be amazed by the striking compositions. Rewatching the film after many years, I noticed the screenplay is its weakest link, filled with cardboard characters such as the boring love interest, the comic relief reporter and other forgettable characters.
The film often resembles a series of loosely connected sequences clumsily strung together, given that Burton is less interested in plot and the titular character and more interested in the crazy villain, vividly played by Jack Nicholson. Although admittedly dated by Heath Ledger's terrifying interpretation of the character, Nicholson's Joker still remains entertaining and proves as demented as his successor, just lacking the unstoppable terrorist quality of Ledger's turn. As a result of the focus on the villain and, inexplicably, in Kim Basinger's character, Keaton barely figures in the film.
The action sequences, which are surprisingly few, are more mediocre than I remembered. Suffering from poor choreography, they only serve to reinforce that Burton's always been poor at staging action. Despite this, its production design still remains as impressive as always, and Burton provides an undeniably comic-book look to Gotham City, which the recent Nolan films sorely lacked. There are also a number of sequences which play without dialogue, which is a fresh approach compared to Nolan's nearly non-stop expositional dialogue. And lest I forget, Danny Elfman's frenetic soundtrack is unforgettable and clearly compensates for Burton's clumsily staged action.
Batman is excessively stylish and clearly dated. However, its striking production design, greatly directed sequences and its stylish cinematography still make it an enjoyable ride.
In the sense that they don’t make movies like this anymore, I suppose it is kind of dated... but that’s also part of its appeal. I love the way it initially focuses more on the journalists than Batman; the way it’s unashamedly comic book-y in its handling of characters and plot; the grandiose production design that mixes eras and fantastical alternative realities...
Also, Jack Nicholson has been somewhat overshadowed by there being so many other brilliant interpretations of the Joker in the decades since, but we shouldn’t forget how fantastic he was too.
Great design ideas, though the performances tend to sound written rather than meant. Still, hard to fault Jack Nicholson's Joker, and the right mood is evoked throughout.
In every frame there's Batman dark noir atmosphere that is absent in new movies. And Bale can be great as Bruce Wayne of coarse, but Keaton is the best Bat. Plus godlike music of Danny Elfman that makes every scene stronger from opening intro to the epic final shot in front of the bat signal in the sky.
First of the four 80/90ies Batman movies. Great design, looks sensational and fun cast with a perfect Keaton as Batman. But was never a favorite of mine. Not in 89 and aged badly. Watched it with my son of 9, he was also underwhelmed. As he said, it took too long and was dragging in places. Ok but not great!
A friend convinced me I had to see this early Tim Burton adaptation of the Batman, and I was really disappointed. The plot is incredibly boring. Almost nothing happens in the entire movie, most characters are forgettable and the whole Kim Basinger love interest is almost laughable.
Tim Burton nails the comic book visuals, which, I guess, is what saves this movie for most people. It wasn't enough for me though, as it was the ONLY aspect it had going for it. Not even Jack Nicholson's supposedly masterful portrayal of the Joker did anything for me. I was very surprised that it wasn't more spectacular to be perfectly honest. I don't understand all the recognition he got for the part.
The movie is older than I am, and that might be why my experience was sour. I guess Burton's Batman belongs to an earlier generation. But that's alright. I'm perfectly satisfied with Nolan's.
EDIT: I just watched Batman Returns (1992). Way, way better.
Add your comment
Comments 1 - 15 of 19
Jordan95
Batman is a clear case of style over substance. Burton's gothic visual aesthetic looms over every shot of the film, which guarantees that if you lose interest on the almost non-existent plot, at the very least you'll be amazed by the striking compositions. Rewatching the film after many years, I noticed the screenplay is its weakest link, filled with cardboard characters such as the boring love interest, the comic relief reporter and other forgettable characters.The film often resembles a series of loosely connected sequences clumsily strung together, given that Burton is less interested in plot and the titular character and more interested in the crazy villain, vividly played by Jack Nicholson. Although admittedly dated by Heath Ledger's terrifying interpretation of the character, Nicholson's Joker still remains entertaining and proves as demented as his successor, just lacking the unstoppable terrorist quality of Ledger's turn. As a result of the focus on the villain and, inexplicably, in Kim Basinger's character, Keaton barely figures in the film.
The action sequences, which are surprisingly few, are more mediocre than I remembered. Suffering from poor choreography, they only serve to reinforce that Burton's always been poor at staging action. Despite this, its production design still remains as impressive as always, and Burton provides an undeniably comic-book look to Gotham City, which the recent Nolan films sorely lacked. There are also a number of sequences which play without dialogue, which is a fresh approach compared to Nolan's nearly non-stop expositional dialogue. And lest I forget, Danny Elfman's frenetic soundtrack is unforgettable and clearly compensates for Burton's clumsily staged action.
Batman is excessively stylish and clearly dated. However, its striking production design, greatly directed sequences and its stylish cinematography still make it an enjoyable ride.
greenhorg
Plot summary: Wealthy man assaults the mentally ill.Nilofarish
Jack Nicholson is so scary as the Joker! Not as scary as Heath Ledger. But at the time he must have spooked out a lot of kids!badblokebob
In the sense that they don’t make movies like this anymore, I suppose it is kind of dated... but that’s also part of its appeal. I love the way it initially focuses more on the journalists than Batman; the way it’s unashamedly comic book-y in its handling of characters and plot; the grandiose production design that mixes eras and fantastical alternative realities...Also, Jack Nicholson has been somewhat overshadowed by there being so many other brilliant interpretations of the Joker in the decades since, but we shouldn’t forget how fantastic he was too.
Siskoid
Great design ideas, though the performances tend to sound written rather than meant. Still, hard to fault Jack Nicholson's Joker, and the right mood is evoked throughout.Lirik92
Visual masterpiece.In every frame there's Batman dark noir atmosphere that is absent in new movies. And Bale can be great as Bruce Wayne of coarse, but Keaton is the best Bat. Plus godlike music of Danny Elfman that makes every scene stronger from opening intro to the epic final shot in front of the bat signal in the sky.
Easily the best Tim Burton's movie.
emi-lee
Michael Keaton is my favourite Batman; Jack Nicholson is fantastic as The Joker. I LOVE this movie!JCS
Good for its time probably but much prefer the new films.Earring72
First of the four 80/90ies Batman movies. Great design, looks sensational and fun cast with a perfect Keaton as Batman. But was never a favorite of mine. Not in 89 and aged badly. Watched it with my son of 9, he was also underwhelmed. As he said, it took too long and was dragging in places. Ok but not great!thekure23
A friend convinced me I had to see this early Tim Burton adaptation of the Batman, and I was really disappointed. The plot is incredibly boring. Almost nothing happens in the entire movie, most characters are forgettable and the whole Kim Basinger love interest is almost laughable.Tim Burton nails the comic book visuals, which, I guess, is what saves this movie for most people. It wasn't enough for me though, as it was the ONLY aspect it had going for it. Not even Jack Nicholson's supposedly masterful portrayal of the Joker did anything for me. I was very surprised that it wasn't more spectacular to be perfectly honest. I don't understand all the recognition he got for the part.
The movie is older than I am, and that might be why my experience was sour. I guess Burton's Batman belongs to an earlier generation. But that's alright. I'm perfectly satisfied with Nolan's.
EDIT: I just watched Batman Returns (1992). Way, way better.
Dieguito
The classic one. The first is always the best!naruto-uzumaki
i very love the first batman and my opinion its the best of all!junegoon
Hateable flickToljus
Really hasn't aged well; nigh-unwatchable now.jasonbudd06
Jack was awesome in this movie. Poor casting for Bruce Wayne though. I mean a slightly chubby and balding Michael Keaton?Showing items 1 – 15 of 19