Comic Book Heroes, Then & Now: Batman.

Comic Book Heroes, Then & Now: Batman.

Click here to read my first issue of 'Comic-Book Heroes, Then & Now' and read my comparison of Tim Burton's 1989 'Batman' to Nolan's 2005 'Batman Begins'...

Editorial Opinion
By Comedian03 - Feb 26, 2011 05:02 PM EST
Filed Under: Batman

Batman (1989)

Directed by Tim Burton
Starring:
Michael Keaton - Batman/Bruce Wayne.
Jack Nicholson - The Joker.
Kim Basinger - Vicki Vale.
Pat Hingle - Commisioner Gordan.
Billy Dee Williams - Harvey Dent.

Budget - $48 million
Gross Revenue - $411,348,924




After Tim Burton's big success with his previous film 'Pee-Wee's Big Adventure', Warner Bros. immediately brough him on as director for 'Batman'. However after reading the script for the movie, he felt it to be too campy so he had his girlfriend at the time Julie Hickson write a new 30 page treatment. Then with Burton's second huge success with 'Beetlejuice', Warner Bros. put 'Batman' into production. Once fans found out that Burton was directign with Michael Keaton set to star, they were in a complete uproar and all that came to mind was 'Pee-Wee's Big Adventure'. Apparently, the studio was pressuring Burton into casting an action star in the role of Bruce Wayne, suggesting names such as Mel Gibson, Kevin Costner, Charlie Sheen, Pierce Brosnan, Tom Selleck and Bill Murray, but in the end Tim and producer Jon Peters both settled on Keaton



Burton had this to say at the time on the main theme of 'Batman':
"The whole film and mythology of the character is a complete duel of the freaks. It's a fight between two disturbed people." He continued, "The Joker is such a great character because there's a complete freedom to him. Any character who operates on the outside of society and is deemed a freak and an outcast then has the freedom to do what they want... They are the darker sides of freedom. Insanity is in some scary way the most freedom you can have, because you're not bound by the laws of society."




'Batman' opened in theaters on June 23rd, 1989 and grossed $43 million in 2,000 theaters in it's opening weekend. The film went on to gross $252 miliion in North America and another $160 million internationally and was the highest grossing movie based on a DC comic book until 2008 when 'The Dark Knight' was released.
Overall 'Batman' was said to be "too dark" and many movie-goers noticed that Buton had focused more on the Joker then Batman. Comic Books fans were in an outrage over the plot having the Joker being the one who killed Bruce's parents.



Overall Tim Burton's 'Batman' revieved mainly good reviews from critics, and fans may have been upset about the casting of Michael Keaton but after the movies release, the complaints were few. People were extremely impressed with the films design, production, and some felt that Jack Nicholson stole every scene he was in. So for the most part 'Batman' was a huge hit with critics and fans alike, and clearly from the dollar amounts the film raked in it was a success, and it will forever remain in the minds of comic-book fans everywhere.

While it may not live up to the same standards set by Nolan's version of Batman, Tim Burton's vision for 'Batman' was amazing for the time period, it got rid of the stereotype left by Adam West's campy version of Batman from the 60's. It's a timeless classic, the solid black with the bright yellow chest emblem, and of course that classic Batman theme featured throughout the movie, I still find myself humming it from time to time.

Batman Begins (2005)

Directed by Christopher Nolan
Starring:
Christian Bale - Batman/Bruce Wayne.
Michael Caine - Alfred Pennyworth.
Liam Neeson - Ra's al Ghul.
Gary Oldman - Jim Gordan.
Katie Holmes - Rachel Dawes.

Budget - $150 million
Gross Revenue - $372,710,015




In January of 2003 Warner Bros hired Christopher Nolan to direct their then untitled Batman film, two months later David Goyer signed on to write a script. Nolan decided that his Batman would be one people could believe actually would exist, a Batman grounded in reality. Nolan also felt that the previous Batman films focused too much on style and flash rather than the drama and depth of the characters and said his inspiration for 'Batman Begins' as being the 1978 'Superman' film in the sense that the film would focus on the characters development.



Filming began in March 2004 with Nolan trying to keep most of the filming being done in England. Nolan has said that he used the cult-classic 'Blade Runner' as inspiration for 'Batman Begins' describing the film as "an interesting lesson on the technique of exploring and describing a credible universe that doesn't appear to have any boundaries".
When I first saw it in theaters I was blown away, it was amazing, Nolan's choice to use CGI as little as possible really helped make his Batman universe more realistic and believable and in my opinion looked amazing on screen and the film wouldn't have been nearly as good without it.



One of the biggest changest this film made would have to be of course, the batmobile which we're introduced to in this film with the name "The Tumbler" which was a complete reimagining of the classic batmobile most movie-goers were famliar with, and the redesign came with mixed feelings. Some fans were in love with the the new design and the realistic back story of it originally being built as a military bridging vehicle, and others were in complete disgust with what had happened to their precious batmobile.

'Batman Begins' got mainly positive reviews upon it's release with many critics giving credit to Nolan and Goyer giving us a back story of Bruce Wayne, showing us who he really is, what drives him, how he got to the point of becoming the symbol of fear and justice known as the Batman. The film was extremely well written, the dialogue between any two characters at a given point is just as interesting as any of the action scenes, there are no appropriate bathroom breaks during this movie.



'Batman Begins' opened in theaters on June 15th, 2005 and opened in 3,858 theaters across the United States and Canada and brought in $49 million it's first weekend and after five days had brought in $73 million

I think overall, both Batman films were loved by comic-book fans, and non-comic-book fans alike. It's easy to say Tim Burton's Batman movie did a lot better in theaters when you consider the margins between the budgets of both films, and what the ended up bringing in at the box office. Whether you prefer Burton's 'Batman', or Nolan's 'Batman Begins', it goes without saying that both films will forever remain close to the hearts of Batman fans around the world.

Well there you have it, my first 'Comic-Book Heroes, Then & Now'. For my next editorial I'll be comparing the 1989 Dolph Lundgren movie 'The Punisher', to the 2004 Thomas Jane version of 'The Punisher'.
Hayden Christensen Responds To BATMAN Rumors And Explains Why Darth Vader Would Beat Thanos
Related:

Hayden Christensen Responds To BATMAN Rumors And Explains Why Darth Vader Would Beat Thanos

Glen Powell Says He Has A Wild Take On BATMAN After Revealing Superhero Role He Missed Out On
Recommended For You:

Glen Powell Says He Has A "Wild Take" On BATMAN After Revealing Superhero Role He Missed Out On

DISCLAIMER: ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and... [MORE]

ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

yankeemanf
yankeemanf - 2/26/2011, 6:22 PM
idk if that batman(1989) trailer is real cuz it looked like the editing was rele terribly done and i for one prefer nolan's batman series tho not by a big amount
golden123
golden123 - 2/26/2011, 6:53 PM
I'm sorry comedian but this editorial really didn't express anything new and was just a bunch of information with no point. How/why did this make main?
screenwriter614
screenwriter614 - 2/26/2011, 6:59 PM
Um....Im pretty sure u skiped a couple of movies....dh, i agree with Golden123, i mean this could have been a lot of cut and paste...
ablee337
ablee337 - 2/26/2011, 7:05 PM
I believe that's one of the original Batman 1989 trailers. I remember it pretty well when it came out. It wasn't the first one but I do remember it airing on TV. I think it may have been the 2nd or 3rd trailer.
TheNameIsBetty
TheNameIsBetty - 2/26/2011, 7:09 PM
Comedian isn't an editor....how did his random editorial make it to the front page?

Not mad...just curious
ablee337
ablee337 - 2/26/2011, 7:18 PM
I've seen worse stuff on the front page.
Omegatron
Omegatron - 2/26/2011, 8:00 PM
I like both films and i think I would say between the the 2 i like Batman 1989 better but I think Batman Begins wouldve made more money if it weren't for Batman and Robin in 97. People just got disgusted with Batman after that movie so yeah but at the same time if that movie didn't fail we'd prolly still be on the Burton-Shumacher- and probablly another directors name attached to the series too. All in all both movies are good both movie got the money they deserved and thats about it. What i would like to ask is I dont know I wasnt born yet but do you think Batman 1989 got more exposure then Batman Begins because I feel like when I watch videos from youtube it looks like Batman 1989 got more exposure because it was the first serious Batman movie ever. Well thats how i feel
Omegatron
Omegatron - 2/26/2011, 8:05 PM
Comedian I believe ur from Canada and so am I. But wouldnt have been better and funny if your name was "Comadian" get it Com"A"dian. I dont know I was just thinking that would be better.
BlackSands
BlackSands - 2/26/2011, 8:17 PM
Nostalgia Critic - Batman vs Dark Knight (Part 1)


Nostalgia Critic - Batman vs Dark Knight (Part 2)


...and the impressively agreeable reaction to the Batman and Robin movie disaster:


TheNameIsBetty
TheNameIsBetty - 2/26/2011, 9:26 PM
Awww... :(

I wanna be a "Trusted User".

I've posted stuff too. I guess I haven't really earned the merit yet
Darkknightman
Darkknightman - 2/26/2011, 10:39 PM
Nostalgia critic is out of his mind. Dark Knight was a much better film. Batman 89 wasn't about anything. It isn't about Batman. It really doesn't say much about anything. Batman does not go on any type of journey as a character. He kills throughout the film. And at the end, he causes Joker's death without any remorse. 89 may have been fine for it's time but it just doesn't hold up to today's films.
LOL
LOL - 2/26/2011, 11:26 PM
@Darkknightman: Bale's Batman also caused the death of Ra's Al Ghul in Batman Begins by not saving him, so how is he different, in fact are we even sure if the "monastery" he blew up while escaping completely abandoned? - for all we know, his body count may have been more than Keaton did during his first Batman film on that fact alone. Name one instance where we ACTUALLY see Keaton's Batman murder that one film personally other than letting go of the Joker due to fatigue and the moron he dumps through the bell tower. You said it yourself: "He kills throughout the film." Give us a scene by scene description to prove your fact beyond those two that we see him "kill". Did you ever take the time to analyze the film like an INTELLIGENT film critic that doesn't let personal bias get in the way of factual journalism. Look at the writing, directing, acting, etc. Pick them apart from the whole, judge each of them without complete bias. Regardless of the bombast way NC takes apart both films, any learned person would see the valid points he talks about.

Of all the different points to dispute, you pick the weakest one there - it's nonsensical. If I were to pick a funny thing to dispute, it would be Bale's voice... it's like Darth Vader without his respirator on a constant asthmatic run wearing a costume that doesn't look scary at all. I like TDK, but I'm not like those that are really overly fond of it as the die-hards that think it's god's gift to CBM.

hovis5818
hovis5818 - 2/27/2011, 2:15 AM
IMDb has been raped!
CraptainAmerica
CraptainAmerica - 2/27/2011, 2:35 AM
I thought this would be an article going through both movies and comparing points to each other. But to be honest this is better as it focuses more on background development of each movie. People can scoff at the article but it's important to compare these particular Batman outings as they are the only decent Batman origin outing that have been made (cartoons don't count). The point here was not to decide which is better (even if people believe that grossing counts as what's more superior) but what makes the other more superior in your opinion.

For me I wouldnt think it fair to pick one or the other. one is very character driven and the other was more about the performance. I LOVED Burtons take. He nailed Batman and Returns and actually wasn't far off displaying just as much 'realism' as Nolan has. The reason I feel that you can't overly compare the two is that they are separated by time...a lot of time. Peoples attitudes to film have changed dramatically and won't put up with watching any old shite company's churn out. That's why Begins had to be edgeier and more intelligent. Not to out do Burtons creations but to make it relevant in the now.

Both incarnations are true masterpieces in my eyes and given the choice I wouldn't like to pick a winner as they are titans in themselves
Fishandchips
Fishandchips - 2/27/2011, 4:37 AM
I dont like bales mask it looks too frumpy. Like burtons and nolans films, think nolan gets my vote though.
DixieWrecked
DixieWrecked - 2/27/2011, 5:59 AM
IMO the Nolan Batman was superior in nearly every way. First, it actually featured Batman...a big deal when we are talking about Batman movies. Then, when in action, Batman doesn't nearly always get his butt kicked, get shot down with a gun.

Burton's Batman looks great and still does. All of his movies do. Unfortunately, it was about the Joker and was BORING. That movie was painfully boring.

Forgotten in the article about it having made more money was the fact of the hype machine surrounding it before release. For about a year previous, you could not miss Batman anywhere. The amount of people who owned a Batman tshirt in 88 was incredible.
vanillabear
vanillabear - 2/27/2011, 6:13 AM
Great read very well written good job man:)
Spidey1996
Spidey1996 - 2/27/2011, 6:57 AM
Nolan's Batman is the best of all time and will remain like that forever. Can't wait for TDKR!
blue18
blue18 - 2/27/2011, 7:01 AM
Good review! I prefer Nolan's Batman - Burton's films seemed to focus too much on the villains. Besides, it's more enjoyable for me when it's realistic anyways. Oh, and ALL those prospective choices for the 1989 Batman? FAIL! They're good actors if in the right movie, but it's not Batman. For ANY of them. Nice pic, @Intruder! That seriously made me ROFL!
DetBullock
DetBullock - 2/27/2011, 7:01 AM
Burton's is a grim fairy tale, Nolan's is an action/noir.

Both have their faults and both are beautiful films in their own way.
CBArtist
CBArtist - 2/27/2011, 7:34 AM
I agree with DetBullock and CraptainAmerica.

Both versions were great in their own way and they both had their faults.

Personally, I loved the sets of Gotham City that Burton had in his films over the real city backdrop Nolan used. It gave it a more "Gotham" feel to it. And though I loved Heath's performance as the Joker, I feel as if Nolan screwed the character by giving him the clown makeup instead of going the origin we all know (the chemical bath). At least Burton integrated that into his.

It's all subjective. And everybody's going to have an opinion.

Darkknightman
Darkknightman - 2/27/2011, 8:41 AM
LOL, I don't appreciate the snotty retort. Most people like 89 out of nostalgia. Like I said, Burton's Batman films were not about anything. The films looked great, but it just wasn't about anything. Tell me, what is 89 about? Batman does not go through any journey as a character. He already is established when the movie starts. He kills without remorse. The DK did it right by having him save the Joker from falling at the end. Batman is an afterthought in his own films. We don't even find out why he chose to become a Bat. Every scene just lead to another scene without any buildup or any point to them. Do I enjoy 89? Yes. I don't think it's a bad movie. It just doesn't hold up to Nolan's versions. I however do agree with one point. The characters in the DK definitely talk a bit too much and explain everything.
LOL
LOL - 2/27/2011, 11:04 AM
Darkknightman, I don't think I was "snotty" at all, all I asked was simple proof to your words that "..he kills throughout the film..." and "...without remorse..." by citing relevant scenes other than the obvious ones toward the end where he does the so-called dirty deed blatantly. If Bale's Batman did it right by saving the Joker, explain then why he let Ra's Al Ghul die in Batman Begins? He refused to save a life. And if he did that once on purpose, he can assuredly do it again. In Batman Begins, his "...I'm not going to kill you... but I don't have to save you..." speech can be classified as justifiable homicide by "self-defense". Or at the very least, manslaughter - he may not have wanted to kill the guy, but he still died anyway when Batman had the means to save him. Batman had full control of the situation, but still refused to "lift a finger". And did he feel bad about it afterward? Nope, didn't see a thing. That also counts as having no remorse. As for his fights with the Joker in TDK... how could he be sure Joker can survive a semi being flipped over without a scratch? That alone looked like intent to kill as any normal person would have very serious injuries from an accident like that outside of Hollywood magic.

AS for Burton's Batman: "...We don't even find out why he chose to become a Bat..." His conversation with Vicki Vale in the movie gives a veiled answer in regards to that and the scene where he places the roses on the ground on the street at the anniversary of his parent's death also alludes to that point.

IN any case, Burton's Batman allows us to think on possibilities and analyze the movie rather than let it do it for us like TDK did. As much as I like TDK, the over-analyzing of every little thing put me off - I'm not that stupid to need to know each character's justification of themselves blow by blow. It's like being spoon-fed the answers to a test you've studied for - makes the whole effort you did the night before stressing about it worthless. After I left the theater, I didn't go away "getting" it in regards to the character - it was already "there" - no need to think on things further since they did it for you.

I'm sorry if you think I'm snotty, but I nitpick - A LOT. It's just how my mind works and how I do things. You're right on one thing, Burton's Batman was already established - yet with minimal flashbacks as to the reason why he became the way he did. Burton's Batman was more or less a Joker story as that was his journey. And it worked! In fact; that formula worked so well that it was mirrored in the first WB Batman animated series wherein Batman may been the linchpin of the story - the rest was mostly centered on the villains and how Bats does his business with them that fueled it. What we see is the reverse in Begins and TDK.
Darkknightman
Darkknightman - 2/27/2011, 11:43 AM
"Did you ever take the time to analyze the film like an INTELLIGENT film critic that doesn't let personal bias get in the way of factual journalism." That constitutes snotty in my opinion but I digress. I don't look at your views on the films as being inferior. If you prefer 89, well that is your business. I get that Burton's films are all about expressionism, but they still should have been about something. I can't for the life of me articulate what either of Burton's films were supposed to be about. Even Batman Forever which I hate, at least attempted to give us some kind of character development with Batman. Batman Begins and the Dark Knight do have their negative points, but they were not just visuals without any substance. As far as Batman letting Ra's die, yes I thought that was a mistake as it contradicts Batman's journey in the film. I believe he viewed Ra's as a serious danger to the world and although he didn't directly kill him, he felt the world would be much safer without him. Doesn't justify his actions as far as the character of Batman goes, but no film is perfect.
BlackSands
BlackSands - 2/27/2011, 12:05 PM
Dark@ I wouldn't call it snotty by LOL, boyo, it was sarcasm. By your reasoning, if Ra's was that much a danger to the world, Joker would fit the bill to a T and by not allowing the Joker to fall says that in between the 2 films he (batsy) became a hypocrite.
TrollBearD
TrollBearD - 2/28/2011, 1:51 AM
"Does this belong on main?"
Are you serious?!?
This site has some of the biggest pansies I've ever seen!
The guy that wrote it has to defend where the article is posted!?!? You people are [frick]ing warped! It was an interesting article. Too bad people had to start whipping out the lil smokies and piss all over it.
If you don't know...lil smokies are tiny sausages...
Color me...disappointed.
Thanks for the article though.
View Recorder