Batman 1989 or Dark Knight?

Nervous Wreck

Agricola wrote: »

I havent read the comics but Burton's films have that highly stylistic, surreal look and atmosphere which I remember from the cartoon series as a kid, and which was also used extremely well in the games developed by Rocksteady in recent years. That vibe will always be synonymous with the Batman universe to me, so the 1989 film would shade it as my favourite.

The cartoon was based on the film and the games were (pretty much) based on the cartoon so they all kinda feel like different takes on the same universe. They're all great.

Tomagotchye

Personally I'm not a fan of the original Batman. Think it's very cringe and kinda rubbish. I saw it for the first time only a few years ago though and people are right, it's very dated! I've never been a Jack Nicholson guy either tbh. Something about his face.

The Dark Knight is a good film but I think it's a little over-praised too. There are long spaces in it where it drags. You're basically waiting for the Batman bits to end just to get to Two-Face and the Joker. I love Batman Begins though, found it a great breath of fresh air and well done. Probably my fav of the trilogy because Dark Knight Returns was a massive letdown.

nyarlothothep

89 Batman has more style/flair. TDK has excellent philosophical themes but it conveys them without subtlety, labouring each point, it's a bit clunky. Ledger however is amazing in that film and the ethics subtext is brilliant. It's really what you're going for but neither film is better than the other. If anything it was Burton that brought "dark" batman to the screen, he reinvented it because before that 1960s camp Batman was what came to mind when people thought of Batman. Without Burton Batman you wouldn't have Nolan Batman. Also Keaton Batman was vastly superior to Bale Batman. TDKR is underrated, BB is competently made if a little dull. Batman Returns is ostentatious, it falls under the weight of its own grandiosity but it's still a visual marvel with Christopher Walken and De Vito putting in exemplary performances.

Simon2015

One major difference between the films is that Jack Nicholson's Joker is way more likeable than Heath Ledger's Joker.

Sad Professor

Even if Burton’s Batman had never existed, I think there was plenty of filmmakers in the 80s who might have taken a Nolan-esque approach to Batman. What people presently call Nolan-esque is really Donner-esque since Donner did it first. Begins is basically the same verisimilitude approach to Batman that Donner took to Superman. Serious with an epic tone but set in a world that is recognisably our own. In fact, I think that was basically what everyone expected from the 89 Batman film before Burton pushed things in a different direction.

Like Singer, I think Nolan kind of ended up with the wrong comic franchise and his true love was Superman. And when I look at Batman Begins that what’s I see: Donner’s Superman with a a bit of Blade Runner and the Roger Moore Bond movies mixed in. The films Nolan grew up with. He would have been an adult by the time Burton’s Batman came out and probably already had is own preconceived ideas about what that film should have been.

I’m not saying Nolan wasn't influenced by Burton - I’d argue Burton’s Batman is the most influential comic book movie ever made - but he was far more influenced by Donner’s Superman. I wouldn't describe anything about Nolan’s Batman as dark in the way that Burton’s Batman was. The psychology of that character is pretty f**ked up and nothing like the existential heroism of Bale, who has more in common with a Michael Mann protagonist than he does with any previous cinematic incarnation of Batman.

Wedwood

I remember when Batman came out in 1989, it was absolutely huge, putting other movies like Ghostbusters 2, Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade and Die Hard 2 well into the shade.

There was finally a 'more serious' and 'darker' Batman after years of re-runs of the camp '60's series. Finally no more Kapow! when Batman hit somebody.

I suppose the logical step when Christopher Nolan took the reins was to go even more serious and darker in his 'more realistic' version.

I suspect in the years to come, Tim Burton's version will stand the test of time better as a more 'complete' movie, albeit less serious than Nolan's version.

Jon Stark

[Deleted User] wrote: »

If you remove Heath Ledger's fantastic turn as the Joker from the Dark Knight, does it stand up as strongly? Batman Begins was a pretty good movie, but made better considering the absolute abomination of Batman movies that came before it; Ledger made Dark Knight, and I have to say that I found the last movie over-long and boring in parts.

The Joker was central to the plot so there's no point in musing "what if" he wasn't in it. It's kind of like saying what would No Country For Old Men be without Anton Chigurh or Terminator without Arnie's bad robot.

I love both Burton's and Nolan's films anyway. Batman 89 just to escape into the former's world, while the TDK trilogy is something so rarely achieved; a saga of films with a very good to brilliant beginning, middle and end.

So I honestly couldn't choose. Though I will say that I'm really looking forward to a more fantastical element being reintroduced into the films, hopefully Snyder and co don't make a balls of it.

Professey Chin

Clareman wrote: »

He indiscriminately dropped a bomb in a populated factory in an area he knew there was people. Also, didn't he actually tell the Joker at the end that he was going to kill him?

And in Batman Returns he stuck a bomb to a strongman and kicked him down a sewer

Clareman

Professey Chin wrote: »

And in Batman Returns he stuck a bomb to a strongman and kicked him down a sewer

Yup and smiled as he walked away if I remember correctly.

arcticmonkeys

I have to go for the dark knight myself even though i grew up with 89 batman and Batman Returns, they just seem kinda campy now, still great though. Although the best Batman movie for me has to be Batman Mask of the Phantom, cant be beat in term of sheer quality.