Am I bad for not liking this?
-
war-path — 9 years ago(November 23, 2016 01:10 PM)
It's not you; it's terrible
It's not terrible.
like the tv show with the lights turned down some to make it "dark".
It's nothing like the TV show. The score, the costume, the atmosphere, the killing/violence shown in the movie, the bad ass Batmobile and even Batman killing some of the crooks would discredit that stupid comparison you threw out there. -
war-path — 9 years ago(November 26, 2016 12:53 PM)
Please - it's exactly like the tv show, just darkened up.
Not at all.
Campy and moronic. Tone all over the place.
No it's not. This movie isn't campy. Not even moronic. The tone is consistent, quite dark, gloomy and bleak.
It's okay if you like it, though.
This movie is awesome. If not for this movie, Batman would be dead to the mainstream world. -
stranglewood — 9 years ago(November 27, 2016 10:19 PM)
You can tell that the film was written during the writers strike, there are enormous script problems throughout; because there are a lot of talented people in front of and behind the camera, I believe people have convinced themselves that this is a good film. To wit -
The first act is the best part of the movie, and the problems are evident right at the beginning. It starts off well enough, and the shot of batman descending behind the thieves is fantastic. We meet the main players quickly, but we don't meet Bruce Wayne until about 20 minutes into the film. The joker is definitely the main character, and it's understandable why, but it ends up hurting the picture in the long run.
The scene in axis chemicals demonstrates both the strengths and weaknesses of the filmmakers approach. The production design is great, but the cops and the bad guys are directed to be bumbling. The blending of the modern yet forties style the filmmakers are going for feels weird; you almost expect Cesar Romero to waltz out into the set. I do like the scene, especially with how batman works in the background, but the way jack becomes the joker is extremely goofy, and the scene ends awkwardly with the fake hand rising out of the water.
I do like the Joker's scenes after this; the scene where he looks in the mirror is classic 30's horror, and the scene where he kills jack palance is a riot, and I do like the scene afterwards when he says the admittedly classic "wait till they get a load of me" line.
And then it all falls apart.
I understand that the joker is becoming more unhinged as the movie goes along, but his antics end up looking ridiculous. I cannot fathom why this film is considered dark when you have a character cutting out and coloring pictures of Kim Basinger and dancing and preening around. Speaking of Basinger, she screams A LOT in this movie.
Bruce Wayne is completely forgotten, except to endure a shoehorned romanced with Vicki Vale. The tone is just is this a comedy? A superhero film? A forties gangster film? It ends up feeling like a mishmash, and a bad one. I won't even bring up Robert Wuhl. I just won't. The scene in the art gallery is just ugh. Also, why would people go to a parade thrown by the same person who just tried to poison the city? Just monumentally stupid.
Because of the talent of everyone involved, there are moments of greatness -
The score is fantastic; I'm not a fan of Danny Elfman but his score is great and exciting.
Both jacks are fantastic; Nicholson keeps the film afloat, no doubt. Love that Jack Palance is in it, too.
The production design is incredible, and the film is shot well.
There are single shots that are great - when jack looks up and sees the batwing flying above the buildings, or when batman bursts through the window, etc.
There's one sequence that encapsulates the combination of high imagination and complete stupidity that is the dichotomy of this film; batman has caught the balloons and flys off with them, then releases the balloons so they they float up into the sky. There's so many things wrong with this sequence that it boggles the mind -
How did batman know to retrofit his jet with giant scissors? Did he know he was going to cut giant balloons one day?
I repeat, why would he have scissors on a jet?
I hate everything about this scene, but elfman's score, especially the cue that happens when he releases the balloons, is rousing, and the shot of the balloons floating in the background while the batwing crosses the foreground is great. I guess what I'm trying to say is, the movie is well made, but completely beep stupid.
W -
war-path — 9 years ago(December 16, 2016 10:53 PM)
You can tell that the film was written during the writers strike, there are enormous script problems throughout; because there are a lot of talented people in front of and behind the camera, I believe people have convinced themselves that this is a good film. To wit -
Not really. It took me a very long time to find that out. But other movies that are thought as having a bad script filled with enormous problems didn't have any writers strike happening for it to turn out that way.
The first act is the best part of the movie, and the problems are evident right at the beginning. It starts off well enough, and the shot of batman descending behind the thieves is fantastic. We meet the main players quickly, but we don't meet Bruce Wayne until about 20 minutes into the film. The joker is definitely the main character, and it's understandable why, but it ends up hurting the picture in the long run.
It was a great 1st act to see, that's for sure. I didn't mind the holding off of Bruce Wayne until nearly 20 minutes into the film.
The scene in axis chemicals demonstrates both the strengths and weaknesses of the filmmakers approach. The production design is great, but the cops and the bad guys are directed to be bumbling. The blending of the modern yet forties style the filmmakers are going for feels weird; you almost expect Cesar Romero to waltz out into the set. I do like the scene, especially with how batman works in the background, but the way jack becomes the joker is extremely goofy, and the scene ends awkwardly with the fake hand rising out of the water.
No they were not bumbling, really. The merging of the 30's, 40's and late 80's style was not weird. It was genius! I don't expect Cesar Romero or anyone from the campy 60's Batman to pop out of nowhere. What are you smoking? I seeso getting your cheeks shot off with chunks of your face blown off and then falling into the vat of chemicals is goofy? Amazingyour unfair and almost illogical critique of this movie is much clear to behold now.
I do like the Joker's scenes after this; the scene where he looks in the mirror is classic 30's horror, and the scene where he kills jack palance is a riot, and I do like the scene afterwards when he says the admittedly classic "wait till they get a load of me" line.
And then it all falls apart.
I thought the dance with the devil by the moonlight line is more classic than that line you quoted. The movie doesn't really fall apart, no matter what flaws are present throughout the movie.
I understand that the joker is becoming more unhinged as the movie goes along, but his antics end up looking ridiculous. I cannot fathom why this film is considered dark when you have a character cutting out and coloring pictures of Kim Basinger and dancing and preening around. Speaking of Basinger, she screams A LOT in this movie.
Bruce Wayne is completely forgotten, except to endure a shoehorned romanced with Vicki Vale. The tone is just is this a comedy? A superhero film? A forties gangster film? It ends up feeling like a mishmash, and a bad one. I won't even bring up Robert Wuhl. I just won't. The scene in the art gallery is just ugh. Also, why would people go to a parade thrown by the same person who just tried to poison the city? Just monumentally stupid.
This film is considered dark because that same character you are bashing for cutting out a picture of Vicki Vale is also obsessed with pictures of people that were murdered who were experimented with the DDID nerve gas that becomes Joker's laughing gas. Him dancing and preening around to her picture was a realistic approach to the Joker's character. He would do that if he existed in real life and saw a picture of a hot babe, even Harley Quinn. Especially if Harley looks just like Margot Robbie. Get it? Cuz the Joker is a funny, clownish and bizarre madman crook. Yes, Basinger screams A LOT in this movie. Your point being?
Bruce Wayne's characterization in this film is different from the classic comic book mythos, but he is not completely forgotten. This portrayal of Bruce Wayne still holds up and fits into the liberties being taken in this movie for this type of Batman that audiences had yet to see on the big screen and many fans were waiting for. Bruce Wayne did check out Vicki and immediately had a crush on her the first time he saw her, so it's not as shoehorned of a romance as you think. The tone is fine and rather consistent throughout the movie. It has black humor in it. While still being a comic book movie with the 30's/40's gangster elements mishmashed into it. It's not a bad one really. Alexander Knox had his moments. If you didn't want to bring up Robert Wuhl's character, you wouldn't have written his name to begin with. The scene in the art gallery is something Joker from the comic books would actually do if he felt like it. I would say that the parade scene of the people wanting to attend after they find out Joker would be there since he terrorized and killed Gothamites is also a b -
HellboundHero — 9 years ago(November 30, 2016 12:11 AM)
It's moronic to say this exactly like the TV show, just because it isn't quite as dark as you expect Batman to be. The fact is, it is dark. Yeah, there's dark comedy(the bulk of it coming from the Joker. Who woulda thunk a homicidal clown would be darkly humorous?) and yes the Joker behaves clownishly, in between murdering people, but isn't that the way he's supposed to be? I remember back when TDK was being made and people on here had all these predictions about the Joker being a humorless, sickly methhead with barely any color in his look, because the Joker as a clown would be too silly. That's what people calling Batman 89 as campy as the West series reminds me of, how overly-serious and joyless Batman fanboys are. They're ashamed of how campy the comics actually are with all the animal themed heroes and villains with their ears and tails and rainbow costumes so they try to pretend it's all a Martin Scorsese epic in comic form, and anything less is the equivalent of Schumacher/Adam West/silver age.
-
justanicknamed — 9 years ago(December 05, 2016 09:31 AM)
Batman, in most forms in the comics, from the mid 70's through the mid 80's was campy or at least "silly." He figured sh!t out which had no explanation and ALWAYS had EVERYTHING he specifically needed on his utility belt - no matter how outrageous it was or if it would have made his belt weigh 300#.
It wasn't until Batman Year #1 came out that they started making him dark/serious without being absurd. -
war-path — 9 years ago(December 16, 2016 11:05 PM)
Batman, in most forms in the comics, from the mid 70's through the mid 80's was campy or at least "silly."
No he wasn't. By that point, he was already the Dark Knight Detective that was brought back to forefront thanks especially to Denny O'Neil, among others around this time.
He figured sh!t out which had no explanation and ALWAYS had EVERYTHING he specifically needed on his utility belt - no matter how outrageous it was or if it would have made his belt weigh 300#.
So you're saying that Batman is always a campy or silly character anyway? Cuz this is part of the gist to this character who continues to figure stuff out with his intellect. So the badass Batman that many people love in this day and age is just nothing but a campy/silly character to you? That's the message you're sending here.
It wasn't until Batman Year #1 came out that they started making him dark/serious without being absurd.
Frank Miller added another layer of darkness and more of the political and social elements of villainy rather than focusing too much on the costumed theatrical villains of Batman when he did Batman Year One in the mid to late 80's. But that doesn't mean that before he got involved that there was a major level of absurdity or sillyness and even campiness in the post Adam West/pre-Keaton era. -
justanicknamed — 9 years ago(December 22, 2016 10:58 AM)
No he wasn't.
You are entitled to your own opinions (no matter how wrong they are) but not your own facts. That is when I was reading comic books and they were exactly like that. In once scene his cape goes to his ankles. In another, it flows out behind him for 20' or so which allows him to capture the bad guy. He and Superman are buddy-buddy and making jokes with each other. He gets trapped and always gets out because he's got the right gear.
So you're saying that Batman is always a campy or silly character anyway?
So, is it your reading comprehension which sucks, or are you just not able to remember what was being discussed 5 minutes prior? Because you had just quoted me on
Batman, in most forms in the comics,
from the mid 70's through the mid 80's was campy or at least "silly." -
GreenGoblinsOckVenom86 — 9 years ago(December 27, 2016 07:51 AM)
He and Superman are buddy buddy and cracking jokes.
That sounds more like the late 50s comics I have read though I am sure they were still like that later on. I would say the whole Superman and Batman rivalry/conflict seen in Superman the 90s cartoon and recently BVS didn't exist til the 80s. It's why older relatives of mine refused to watch BVS. They grew up with comics where Superman and Batman were the best of friends.
"1-800 Spank me? I know that number." Scott Calvin, The Santa Clause. -
justanicknamed — 9 years ago(December 28, 2016 08:55 AM)
They were like that until about the time of Batman, Year One. After that they got a little more serious.
Unfortunately, DC thinks their movies have to be incredibly dark - to the point of morose - to be good. -
war-path — 9 years ago(December 31, 2016 12:28 PM)
You are entitled to your own opinions (no matter how wrong they are) but not your own facts.
Sorry but this is not so much my opinion as it is a broadly stated and touched upon fact that during the 1970's, Batman was returning back to his dark roots in the comic books. This was the Bronze Age, so some of the serious tone and darkness of the Golden Age version of the character was being put to the forefront in the comic books.
That is when I was reading comic books and they were exactly like that.
You aren't the only person who read the comic books in the 70's so I'm sure many around that time would agree that Batman wasn't really "campy as hell" as you've blatantly and inaccurately pointed out.
In once scene his cape goes to his ankles. In another, it flows out behind him for 20' or so which allows him to capture the bad guy.
Hasn't this visual liberty been done in the comic books even after the 70's has passed? When Batman is standing still and even when his cape is covering him front-side, it would be make sense if the cropped points of his cape go down to his ankles. When he runs, his cape would be folded and pushed behind his back already, so as he runs and motions to capture a bad guy, it should be expected that his cape flow out behind him. I don't see what there is to complain or cry about here with such a trivial detail you're pointing out.
He and Superman are buddy-buddy and making jokes with each other.
In the 70's, Batman and Superman did not have a rivalry or disputes in handling crime fighting to the point that it reached to in the mid 80's once Frank Miller got his hands on Batman and pushed this concept of them fighting each other over ideologies in The Dark Knight Returns 30 years ago. Okaybut they're just in an alliance and were part of the whole Justice League or Justice Society of America. So of course they'd get along and are like friends, but even in the 70's I don't think it's as care-free, silly and joyful as you're making it out to be.
The 70's wasn't as dark as the 80's and onward when it comes to Batman in the comic books, but it was becoming dark and therefore, really, you shouldn't just loosely say something dumb like Batman's comic books in the 70's were campy or even at least silly.
He gets trapped and always gets out because he's got the right gear.
So, is it your reading comprehension which sucks, or are you just not able to remember what was being discussed 5 minutes prior? Because you had just quoted me on
Like I said before, it's part of the gist of the character. Your comprehension is the one that sucks here, because when I wrote that line about the whole gist of the character there were some things you should've understood about that discourse.
There's a formula to the Batman character, with him using his strong will and massive intellect, and also using the gadgets to his advantage in a situation that calls for it, you should've really picked up on it immediately, it's not even reading between the lines.
As I stated before during that other time, you seem to be mocking the formula/gist of the Batman character not just in the 70's, but even overall in his quintessential bad-ass renegade glory that we have come to see him established to this very day. Because after the 70's, all the decades that followed it, he still uses his gear to get out of traps. He figured sh!t out, cuz of his incredible intelligence and genius detective skills, as it is the gist of the character, this formula has always been used since then, so by making fun of the 70's Batman's formula, you're making fun of him overall as well, when it comes to the evolution of the character in the decades after the 70's. -
Gobiastia — 9 years ago(February 03, 2017 04:10 PM)
I dislike it, too. I think the movie's biggest sin is that it is plain boring. A bad movie at least evokes some emotion, whether it's annoyance or even laughter at how bad it is. This movie doesn't stir anything in me except boredom.
-
Gobiastia — 9 years ago(February 04, 2017 01:07 PM)
I think that's an ignorant assumption to make. One can dislike something and understand what the movie was trying to do. Emphasis on the word trying. I don't think Batman 1989 achieved anything except some handsome visuals.