Favorite BatMovie? [Archive]

Domino

05-08-2001, 08:18 AM

Mask of the Phantasm, followed by the 1966 Adam West movie. Before everyone jumps me, let me explain that in the mid-60s, the Adam West version was closer to the comic book at the time than Michael Keaton's was in 1989.

I will reiterate my opinion that the live action movies of 1989 and later are garbage. One of the central character traits of Batman (with the exception of 1939) has always been that he doesn't kill, and the Keaton character did it all the time; even to the point where in Batman Returns he does it for comic relief. I don't mind the costume, paunch, glasses, and all the minor trivia. You can chalk that up to artistic license. But when you change the fundamental character to that extent, it's not even the same character.

James Harvey

05-08-2001, 09:34 AM

Mine would have to be:

1) MASK OF THE PHANTASM
2) BATMAN BEYOND: ROTJ (UNEDITED CUT)
3) BATMAN (1989)

Followed by the "not a real movie" movie, WORLD'S FINEST. I think those three have portrayed Batman the best in the media, and also did really well. While MOTP only made 5.9 mill at the box office, it killed with over $50 mill in video sales. ROTJ is also a runaway hit on VHS. The first Batman was just a great pic, even though that whole killing thing does sorta get on my nerves a bit. And BATMAN (1966) wasn't influenced the comics, it was vice-versa according to that BATMAN coffee table book my Chip Kidd. Still, MOTP remains the best.

killercroc

05-08-2001, 10:28 AM

You hate Freeze? I mean he is a villian, but his reasons are more complex than most. He could just almost be a good guy. he's so conflicted, like the Bat. That's why I like him, as a villian.

Domino

05-08-2001, 10:43 AM

Originally posted by DickGrayson
And BATMAN (1966) wasn't influenced the comics, it was vice-versa according to that BATMAN coffee table book my Chip Kidd.

Nonsense; the first several episodes were based on golden age Batman stories. The show influenced later comics, with Robin saying, "Holy this," and "Holy that," but the show was most definitely close to the comics of the time.

Blight

05-08-2001, 10:49 AM

Here's my list of favs, from first to last:

1) Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker (both versions)
2) Batman: Mask of the Phantasm
3) Batman (the original Keaton film)

Well, there you have it!

See ya!
Blight

Nightwing

05-08-2001, 03:39 PM

Originally posted by Domino

Batman refused to kill in the 60s versian, and even moreso in BTAS. But I think BTAS did it better considering the times that Adam West's show were in. Not just Batman, but EVERYONE seemed corny. I mean, I feel like I can't even compare them. I love Adam West's show, it was just campy and corny, but that's only if you look at it from the 21st century. I think it's too campy too, but if you're asked who was the one who saw the old show on the Sci-fi channel ONCE, and checked back EVERY day to find out if they gave it a timeslot, the answer is ME! And I'm still lookin!

Where else can you see Batman and Robin looking at a large key made of gold, and DG says: "Wholey key hole Batman!" Oh that brings me back.

Anyway, BTAS (and TNBA) is clearly the best interpretation of Batman because they handled the don't kill thing extremely well, with episodes like His Silicon Soul, Never Fear, and even Alfred's speaches about Bruce and his obsession in Mask of The Phantasm. You can really understand how Bruce's character is. He wants to avenge everyone hurt by crime and evil, and he does so with agression, BUT his greatest fear is to let his emotions and his past get the best of him, and become what he fights against. It's an EXCELLENT blend of Bruce being extremely dark, yet still a true hero, fighting for what should be fought for.

Although I believe the original Batman comics had Bruce killing people. I'm not completely against those comics, or the movies, but I do highly prefer how batman animated does it.

optimal321

05-08-2001, 06:45 PM

My list:
1. BATMAN MASK OF THE PHANTASM
2. BATMAN BEYOND RETURN OF THE JOKER
3. SUBZERO/ BATMAN1 (tie)

And there ya have it.

mxyzptlk

05-08-2001, 10:23 PM

1.batman
2.mask of the phantasom
3.batman returns

Clayface

05-09-2001, 01:48 AM

Originally posted by Domino

I will reiterate my opinion that the live action movies of 1989 and later are garbage. One of the central character traits of Batman (with the exception of 1939) has always been that he doesn't kill, and the Keaton character did it all the time; even to the point where in Batman Returns he does it for comic relief.

I agree and disagree. In the first movie, I can only think of one time Bats reall "purposefully" kills - when he drives into the factory and drops the bombs outo f the Batmobile, blowing up the whole place, and taking the bad guys with. And, at the time I saw it in the movies, it didn't even register to me that he killed them - I never even noticed that until years after when someone pointed out to me. So, to me, the first movie was great - it was dark, it should be, and, for the most part, they kept everyone in character. Now the following movies, well, I'm not a big fan of them, but for other reasons.

Fish

05-09-2001, 11:31 AM

Here is my top 3 Batman movie list

1) MOTP
2) ROTJ uncut
3)Batman Returns

I think the animated series is the only ones that really shows us the whole idea of Batman, and that is why I watch it religiously like so many other peeps in here. BTAS, TNBA and BB are truely made in the spirit of The Bat IMO

<>< F I S H ><>

Domino

05-09-2001, 03:03 PM

Originally posted by Clayface

I agree and disagree. In the first movie, I can only think of one time Bats reall "purposefully" kills - when he drives into the factory and drops the bombs outo f the Batmobile, blowing up the whole place, and taking the bad guys with. And, at the time I saw it in the movies, it didn't even register to me that he killed them - I never even noticed that until years after when someone pointed out to me. So, to me, the first movie was great - it was dark, it should be, and, for the most part, they kept everyone in character. Now the following movies, well, I'm not a big fan of them, but for other reasons.

When he flies the Batwing at the Joker's gang and fires twin machine guns and surface-to-air missiles at the Joker, he was trying very hard to kill him.

How about the part where he grabs the guy around the head with his legs, clunks him into the bell in the cathedral and sends him plunging to his death? Would the Batman you know do that?

When he finally confronts the Joker, Batman says, "I'm going to kill you."

Dark is fine, but murderous?

Eldermount

05-09-2001, 03:21 PM

Originally posted by Domino
When he flies the Batwing at the Joker's gang and fires twin machine guns and surface-to-air missiles at the Joker, he was trying very hard to kill him.

How about the part where he grabs the guy around the head with his legs, clunks him into the bell in the cathedral and sends him plunging to his death? Would the Batman you know do that?

When he finally confronts the Joker, Batman says, "I'm going to kill you."

Dark is fine, but murderous?

I'm not sure that campy is that much better of a representation of Batman. And there is a precedence in the comics for Batman getting "murderous". Batman: Year Two, and Death in the Family. Batman wanting to kill Joe Chill and the Joker respectively.

Domino

05-09-2001, 04:44 PM

Originally posted by Eldermount

I'm not sure that campy is that much better of a representation of Batman. And there is a precedence in the comics for Batman getting "murderous". Batman: Year Two, and Death in the Family. Batman wanting to kill Joe Chill and the Joker respectively.

Wanting to and trying to are two completely different things. And I think that campy in 1966 was closer to the heart of the character at that time than murdering (how's that for a distinction?) was in 1989.

I'm not saying that Tim Burton's view of Batman is any less valid than any other; as anyone would tell you, there have been several different versions of the character. I'm saying that the one common thread that all of them shared until the Batman movie, (once again, excluding 1939) was that Batman does not cross that line, and I didn't care for it when the line was not only crossed, but obliterated.

Eldermount

05-09-2001, 05:06 PM

Originally posted by Domino
Wanting to and trying to are two completely different things. And I think that campy in 1966 was closer to the heart of the character at that time than murdering (how's that for a distinction?) was in 1989.

Ahh, but he did try to kill the Joker in Death in the Family. He tried very hard in fact. It's been a long time since I read Batman: Year Two so I don't remember just how hard he tried to kill off Joe Chill in that one. And since I was still living at home at the time, Mom tossed it. (You did WHAT?)

Anyone have a copy that they can reference?

Clayface

05-10-2001, 01:53 AM

Yep, I'd have to agree with Eldermount - there are indeed many, many examples in the comics of Bats trying to kill someone. He doesn't approve of it, and he doesn't make it a habit, but if it comes down to it, there are times when he's tried to kill - either because he went off the deep end, or because he felt it was the only option at the time (to save an innocent, to save the city, etc). If I had the time, I'd sit down and go through my collection and point out some more examples - maybe after I finish finals....

Domino

05-10-2001, 09:36 AM

Originally posted by Clayface
Yep, I'd have to agree with Eldermount - there are indeed many, many examples in the comics of Bats trying to kill someone. He doesn't approve of it, and he doesn't make it a habit, but if it comes down to it, there are times when he's tried to kill - either because he went off the deep end, or because he felt it was the only option at the time (to save an innocent, to save the city, etc). If I had the time, I'd sit down and go through my collection and point out some more examples - maybe after I finish finals....

Okay, let's look at it this way; how many people has Batman successfully tried to kill in the comics since 1940?

'Nuff said.

Eldermount

05-10-2001, 11:05 AM

Originally posted by Domino
Okay, let's look at it this way; how many people has Batman successfully tried to kill in the comics since 1940?

'Nuff said.

Well, I wasn't going to bring this up since they're basically Elseworlds type stories, but if we're gonna start changing from his attitude about killing to his actual success in killing then...

Joker and Talia and Superman in the Armageddon 2001 Specials.

Two-Face and the Joker in The Dark Knight Returns.

And since this debate came up because you felt that the 1989 Batman movie wasn't close to how he was represented in the comic books at the time, then I'd say look at the timeline on it. '86 TDKR comes out and is a huge hit. The dark/gritty Batman is now the "in" thing. '86 or '87 is when they probably started working on the script for the movie, with the Batman from TDKR fresh in their minds. So, the '89 Batman is a reflection of the Batman represented in TDKR, and is probably a lot closer there than the '65 Batman was to the version written in the comics just prior to its release.

Now, you may have a different interpretation as to what constitutes "close". But the way that I see it, Keaton's version of Batman is a lot closer to how Bob Kane had created Batman than West's version.

And one more thing. What's with the condescending attitude to everyone who has a different opinion than you? Comments like "Nonsense" and "nuff said" don't make you sound any more credible. (Especially when we are talking about opinions instead of hard facts.) They just make you sound arrogant and rude. So please, drop the attitude.

Domino

05-10-2001, 12:05 PM

Originally posted by Eldermount

And one more thing. What's with the condescending attitude to everyone who has a different opinion than you? Comments like "Nonsense" and "nuff said" don't make you sound any more credible. (Especially when we are talking about opinions instead of hard facts.) They just make you sound arrogant and rude. So please, drop the attitude.

When I said "nonsense," I was refuting a statement from a Chip Kidd book with fact. The first Batman TV show episodes were based on golden age Batman stories. If you'd like, I can tell you which ones they were. If I sounded arrogant, I apologize.

When I said, "'Nuff said," I was refuting fact that Batman, as a comic book character, is not, and never has been (with the exception of 1939) a murderer. This is not an opinion, it is a statment of fact--at least as far as comic book characters go. It, more than any other reason, is the basis of my opinion. I have no problem with people disagreeing with my opinion, but when someone attacks the facts upon which I base my opinions, I defend them--vigorously. I admit that I overreacted, and for that I apologize, but I stand by the substance of what I said.

Eldermount

05-10-2001, 12:38 PM

No harm, no foul. Just wanted to draw your attention to it.:D

James Harvey

05-10-2001, 03:19 PM

That CRISIS/ZERO HOUR stuff wiped out his criminal killings, and therefore was able to retain his "I don't kill" stance. I say that MOTP catches the character perfectly. They could do no wrong in that. Even though it's the "animated syle" this movie could play great as a comic story, and catches what Batman is.

Domino

05-10-2001, 03:46 PM

Originally posted by DickGrayson
That CRISIS/ZERO HOUR stuff wiped out his criminal killings, and therefore was able to retain his "I don't kill" stance. I say that MOTP catches the character perfectly. They could do no wrong in that. Even though it's the "animated syle" this movie could play great as a comic story, and catches what Batman is.

I loved Mask of the Phantasm, but I sure wish that Mike W. Barr would have been given some sort of writing credit or at least acknowledgement for the Batman Year Two storyline to which MOTP was so similar.

James

05-12-2001, 11:21 AM

Back to the original question:

1. Return Of The Joker Cut/Uncut - Despite the heavy alterations, this movie flows in either format so well.... excellent soundtrack

2. Batman 1989 - It inspired the the animated series' and was an excellent take on the character - shame about the sequels....

3. Mask Of The Phantasm - What can be said that hasn't been said already?

JckNapier2

05-20-2001, 02:05 AM

Each live action Batman movie represents, intentional or not, a different era in the Batman legacy. To wit...

Batman - represents Batman when he first began in 1939/1940. During this time, he was a dark, bitter, murderous vigilante who would not hesitate to commit cold-blooded murder if he felt it furthered justice.

Batman Returns - represents the 1990s Batman tales. The mood is dark, gloomy, pessemistic, and glum. Batman is constantly questioning his motives and the futility of his quest. Batman only clearly takes a sinlge life (the clown with the bomb) although he may have killed the circus fire-blower who he torched with the Batmobile. Likewise, in this period of the comics, he never intentionally kills anyone but if someone must die (like the truck drivers in Poison Tomorrow) so that innocents can live, Batman laments but moves on.

Batman Forever - late 1940s/early 1950s. Batman Forever is certainly lighter than the previous two but still has an air of menace and darkness that befits the character. The villains are not particuraly scary or menacing but are still capable of murder and providing a credible threat. At this point in his life, just like the corresponding point in the comic, Batman is now adimentally (sp) opposed to killing and tries to teach Grayson to understand why. Wether he directly or indirectly caused Two-Face's death is a question of debate.

Batman & Robin - OBVIOUSLY, this is the Batman of the 1960s. The mood is light and campy and the villains present no real menace. All traces of brooding and pain are gone from Batman. The mood is such that even considering the question of killing a foe is not appropriate. Thus, Batman doesn't even come close to causing any deaths this time around.

Batman: The Animated Series (1992-1999) - In this incarnation, Batman does not kill not because he believes it is fundamentally wrong but rather because he is afraid of the legal consequences. Thus, when is is rendered fearless by the Scarecrow (Never Fear)or is already doomed in the eyes of the law (Over the Edge), Batman has no qualms about taking life. I can't say I care too much for this interpretation of that particular area but oh well.

Batman Beyond: Terry doesn't seem to have any problem with killing as he kills several bad guys during the first season. Yet, during season two, he claims that he would never shed blood in the line of duty. Hmmm...

Scott Mendelson

Nightwing

05-20-2001, 12:56 PM

Originally posted by JckNapier2
Batman - represents Batman when he first began in 1939/1940. During this time, he was a dark, bitter, murderous vigilante who would not hesitate to commit cold-blooded murder if he felt it furthered justice.

Batman Returns - represents the 1990s Batman tales. The mood is dark, gloomy, pessemistic, and glum. Batman is constantly questioning his motives and the futility of his quest. Batman only clearly takes a sinlge life (the clown with the bomb) although he may have killed the circus fire-blower who he torched with the Batmobile. Likewise, in this period of the comics, he never intentionally kills anyone but if someone must die (like the truck drivers in Poison Tomorrow) so that innocents can live, Batman laments but moves on.

Batman Forever - late 1940s/early 1950s. Batman Forever is certainly lighter than the previous two but still has an air of menace and darkness that befits the character. The villains are not particuraly scary or menacing but are still capable of murder and providing a credible threat. At this point in his life, just like the corresponding point in the comic, Batman is now adimentally (sp) opposed to killing and tries to teach Grayson to understand why. Wether he directly or indirectly caused Two-Face's death is a question of debate.

Batman & Robin - OBVIOUSLY, this is the Batman of the 1960s. The mood is light and campy and the villains present no real menace. All traces of brooding and pain are gone from Batman. The mood is such that even considering the question of killing a foe is not appropriate. Thus, Batman doesn't even come close to causing any deaths this time around.

Batman: The Animated Series (1992-1999) - In this incarnation, Batman does not kill not because he believes it is fundamentally wrong but rather because he is afraid of the legal consequences. Thus, when is is rendered fearless by the Scarecrow (Never Fear)or is already doomed in the eyes of the law (Over the Edge), Batman has no qualms about taking life. I can't say I care too much for this interpretation of that particular area but oh well.

Batman Beyond: Terry doesn't seem to have any problem with killing as he kills several bad guys during the first season. Yet, during season two, he claims that he would never shed blood in the line of duty.

I must say that's a very detailed and adult breakdown of all the Batman movies! You can tell a lot more thought went into, say, the Batman & Robin critique, for example, when comparing it to the curt ones that others have written: "It sucked!"

But I think it's a shame Jck doesn't like BTAS and TNBA very much. :( Many posters say it was the best interpretation, being a happy medium bewteen the dark killing mentality of Batman Returns, and the campy don't-go-there attitude of Batman & Robin.

The episode Never Fear was an excellent example of Batman's feelings about killing brought to surface, but because of Bruce's past, I don't think he's at all concerned with the legal consequences of killing, but rather the moral. He doesn't want to become what he fights against. That's his greatest fear.

JckNapier2

05-20-2001, 01:14 PM

But you are mistaken. I love Batman:TAS as much as anyone else on the board. I just have one quibble with one aspect of the show. Just like, while I wish The Joker had been played by someone closer to Keaton's age in the first Bat-film, I still love the film and think Nicholson was terrific. Overall, the show probably was the best adaptation of the character, but I still didn't like the fact that Batman himself didn't seem to think that killing his enemies was particuraly wrong on its own.

To be fair though, I do find The New Batman Adventures to be of a lesser quality over all. Although there were some episodes that measured up to the best of Batman: TAS (World's Finest, Knight Time, Growing Pains, Over the Edge, Double Talk, Holiday Knights, etc), the majority of the shows actually suffered from the lack of censorship (being someone who has the ACLU website bookmarked, I feel weird say this, but I digress). While I loved the opportunity to actually see Joker killing people, when the show was at Fox, they were unable to have a huge amount of action, so they had to concentrate on plot and character and good storytelling. When the went to WB, the standards were loosened and the creators simple made shows with non-stop action and unresolved plot threads galore (Chemistry, Ultimate Thrill).

Scott Mendelson

jackal

05-21-2001, 10:15 AM

In my opinion the Frank Miller comics TDKR reinvent and redefine the character of Batman for modern times. And I must say thank God! The Batman of the sixties and seventies was not how I imagined the character. I have very little interest in the comics from that era. He was not scary. Batman's presence must be frightening. He also was not dark enough, or written for a modern audience. He needs kevlar, those firing grapple cables, smoke bombs, and a smart Batmobile.
The first two films display exactly what a live action Batman should be. (the fight scenes especially) I believe everything from Batman 1989 to ROTJ and all the comics has used Frank Miller as the bible. As it should be.

Clayface

05-21-2001, 12:25 PM

Originally posted by JckNapier2

Batman: The Animated Series (1992-1999) - In this incarnation, Batman does not kill not because he believes it is fundamentally wrong but rather because he is afraid of the legal consequences. Thus, when is is rendered fearless by the Scarecrow (Never Fear)or is already doomed in the eyes of the law (Over the Edge), Batman has no qualms about taking life. I can't say I care too much for this interpretation of that particular area but oh well.

I'm a bit confused by this statement. I never saw the BTAS Bats as being fearful of the legal reprisals. It always come across to me as though he's disapproving of the moral aspects instead. In Never Fear: what exactly were you referring to that showed this sort of attitude? I don't recall this. In Over the Edge, you have to remember that that was Bab's interpretation of what would happen - I think that's more a refleciton of her and her beliefs about Bats, rather than Bats' beliefs. In addition, it was all basically a nightmare. I've had plenty of nightmares in my time in which someone I've known has acted completely out of character, so I don't think that using this as an example really holds. Also, there are several episodes of BTAS that show that Bruce is morally opposed to killing, rather than fearful of the legal ramifications.

JckNapier2

05-21-2001, 12:41 PM

In Never Fear, Scarecrow makes a comment referring to how fear keeps people from indulging their worst impulses, etc. He is correct, as it it fear of consequences that keeps people from giving in to their basest desires. When Batman is exposed to the anti-fear gas, he then finds himself completely willing to take lives as he no longer fears the consequences. Thus, one can imply, Batman does not kill not because he believes that it is wrong to irradicate the likes of The Joker or The Scarecrow, but rather because he doesn't want to face whatever consequences may arrive, be it legal punishment or loss of respect from Gordon, Alfred, Leslie, and the rest of the city. Just my thoughts.

Scott Mendelson

Clayface

05-21-2001, 12:53 PM

Originally posted by JckNapier2
In Never Fear, Scarecrow makes a comment referring to how fear keeps people from indulging their worst impulses, etc. He is correct, as it it fear of consequences that keeps people from giving in to their basest desires. When Batman is exposed to the anti-fear gas, he then finds himself completely willing to take lives as he no longer fears the consequences. Thus, one can imply, Batman does not kill not because he believes that it is wrong to irradicate the likes of The Joker or The Scarecrow, but rather because he doesn't want to face whatever consequences may arrive, be it legal punishment or loss of respect from Gordon, Alfred, Leslie, and the rest of the city. Just my thoughts.

Scott Mendelson

Ok, I sort of agree, sort of don't. I think its all of the things you mentioned. Yes, he no longer has to fear the legal punishment, but I don't think that's a huge part of it - he is afterall, a vigilante - what he does by nature is against the law. If he truely feared the law and the reprisals for illegal actions, he wouldn't be the man that he is. Now, granted, he is sort of given an unofficial "ok" from the law to do what he does, and killing would be crossing that line, so there is some aspect of fear of legal punishment. But I think its more of moral thing than a legal thing. In my opinion, that loss of respect you mentioned falls into the moral aspects. And I think there's also a slight religious aspect - its somewhat implied that Bruce believes in an afterlife, and I think that plays a major part in his moral beliefs against killing. Thus, when he got the fear gas, it could be said that he also loses his fear of eternal punishment in the afterlife for killing, which, I think, has a much greater impact on his anti-killing beliefs.

Domino

05-21-2001, 01:23 PM

Originally posted by jackal
In my opinion the Frank Miller comics TDKR reinvent and redefine the character of Batman for modern times. And I must say thank God! The Batman of the sixties and seventies was not how I imagined the character. I have very little interest in the comics from that era. He was not scary. Batman's presence must be frightening. He also was not dark enough, or written for a modern audience. He needs kevlar, those firing grapple cables, smoke bombs, and a smart Batmobile.
The first two films display exactly what a live action Batman should be. (the fight scenes especially) I believe everything from Batman 1989 to ROTJ and all the comics has used Frank Miller as the bible. As it should be.

Wait...the Batman of the sixties was not scary, but way before Frank Miller came along there was Denny O'Neil, who, for some of us (myself included) wrote the definitive Batman. Paired with Neal Adams' artwork, O'Neil gave us a dark, moody Batman who never came out in the daytime, and indeed had a smart Batmobile. Moreso than ever before, Batman became a detective. This is also the time where his martial arts expertise surfaced. Before that time, Batman was a glorified boxer. O'Neil took the character from the campy sixties and removed even the word Batmobile from the vocabulary of the book. To put it simply, Batman grew up.

O'Neil, was also Miller's editor on Daredevil at Marvel and hired him for the Dark Knight and Year One after the editor took over the Batman titles. My point is not to belittle what Miller did, but rather to give credit where it is due. Denny O'Neil deserves that much.

watsonlives

05-23-2001, 01:15 AM

where can i find this uncut BB;ROTJ that everyone keeps mentioning?

Clayface

05-23-2001, 01:38 AM

Originally posted by watsonlives
where can i find this uncut BB;ROTJ that everyone keeps mentioning?

Take a look through the other threads on this board. There's one or two titled something like "BB: ROTJ Uncut" that tell you who you can contact.

wolverine

05-23-2001, 07:44 PM

my favorites would have to be:
1.return of the joker
2.worlds finest
3.batman beyond:the call
even thogh the call was only a 2 part episode i consider it a movie. it was prett neat to see the j.l.u.

Bird Boy

05-30-2001, 11:35 AM

Top 2 Animated:

1)MOTP
2) ROTJ un-cut

Top 2 Live-Action:

1) Batman (Keaton)
2) Batman Returns (yes..I liked this movie. I dunno why, I just liked it)

-BB

James Harvey

05-30-2001, 11:49 AM

I enjoyed BATMAN RETURNS as well, which sounds sweet on DVD -- especially hooke dup to a sound system. BATMAN RETURNS was incredibly dark, whichis why alot of people didn't like it.

Calhoun07

05-30-2001, 12:01 PM

Batman Returns for live action and ROTJ for animated. I liked MOTP but ROTJ has inspired better conversations on this board! It's got something deep under the surface!

I don't have any of the live action DVDs yet, and I suggest that anybody who doesn't yet have them to hold off. Warner Brothers will be re-releasing them with bonus features. And that's the only way to buy a DVD, unless you can get it under ten bucks, then I don't grumble about the lack of bonus features too much.

Joker85

05-30-2001, 02:41 PM

I liked Batman Returns also. Sure it was dark, but Batman is supposed to be dark!! It was better than any of the movies made by Joel Shumacher. I only had one small complaint about Batman Returns, the Catwoman story. It was bad and I think that the movie could have been fine without her. They could still have Selina Kyle in there for a minute or 2, but leave the catwoman part out.:)

Clayface

05-30-2001, 02:51 PM

Originally posted by Joker85
I liked Batman Returns also. Sure it was dark, but Batman is supposed to be dark!! It was better than any of the movies made by Joel Shumacher. I only had one small complaint about Batman Returns, the Catwoman story. It was bad and I think that the movie could have been fine without her. They could still have Selina Kyle in there for a minute or 2, but leave the catwoman part out.:)

I didn't think Batman Returns was all that bad either. It wasn't great, but it wasn't as bad as the Shumacher movies. Personally, i didn't care for the portrayal of the Penguin, I could have done without that. I would have preferred it if they had just focused on Catwoman, and if they would have stuck closer to her true origin - that whole mystical cat thing just didn't do it for me.

James Harvey

05-31-2001, 06:59 PM

Actually, calhoun07, WB is lowering the prices of those BATMAN DVDs to $9.95 this summer. WB always lowers the prices of their current DVD versions (to get every cent they can) before re-releasing them. I caved and bought Batman 1 - 3, and I plan to buy the special edition when they're released hopefully in the 4th quarter, like I was told. The picture and sound is astounding on them. To see them again in their widescreen glory is just amazing. I can't wait for the box set. Hopefully WB won't get sued over those, too.

icecold

05-31-2001, 08:47 PM

1. MOTP
2. ROTJ uncut
3. Sub-Zero
4. Batman-Superman Movie
5. Returns
6. Forever
7. Batman ('89)
8. B & R

oranthal

06-01-2001, 01:09 AM

i think it is kind of like messed up that they put the movies on the DVD and everyone expects to be the only version and they buy it. then later, the company puts out another DVD saying it is a special edition with new stuff in it. to those who already bought it, assuming it was the final product, will be screwed because now they would want to get the special edition. makes me sick! i know that they wouldn't have to buy the newer version but it still pisses me off.

Originally posted by DickGrayson
Actually, calhoun07, WB is lowering the prices of those BATMAN DVDs to $9.95 this summer. WB always lowers the prices of their current DVD versions (to get every cent they can) before re-releasing them. I caved and bought Batman 1 - 3, and I plan to buy the special edition when they're released hopefully in the 4th quarter, like I was told. The picture and sound is astounding on them. To see them again in their widescreen glory is just amazing. I can't wait for the box set. Hopefully WB won't get sued over those, too.

Frozen

06-01-2001, 10:36 AM

Well, from a personal point of view, I think 'Sub Zero' is fantastic - purely because I love the Mr Freeze character. http://cwm.ragesofsanity.com/cwm/cwm/evil3.gif

MOTP is also superb, as are ALL the animated films - and Batman Returns is the best live action movie for me because I'm a big Burton fan. It's a fabulous Burton film, but I'm not sure it's a very faithful Batman film. Still, with bravura performances from Pffeiffer, Walken, and Keaton, and such wonderful art direction - does it really matter?

James Harvey

06-02-2001, 03:12 PM

Sub-Zero sorta felt like an extended episode but it was still good. I hope for a DVD release soon. I bet you were devestated by the live action Freeze!

Calhoun07

06-02-2001, 04:48 PM

We were ALL devestated by the live action Mr Freeze! He sucked. This is just one more example of how a comic book/cartoon character doesn't translate well to the movie screen.

Calhoun07

06-02-2001, 04:50 PM

Originally posted by DickGrayson
Actually, calhoun07, WB is lowering the prices of those BATMAN DVDs to $9.95 this summer. WB always lowers the prices of their current DVD versions (to get every cent they can) before re-releasing them. I caved and bought Batman 1 - 3, and I plan to buy the special edition when they're released hopefully in the 4th quarter, like I was told. The picture and sound is astounding on them. To see them again in their widescreen glory is just amazing. I can't wait for the box set. Hopefully WB won't get sued over those, too.

AGAIN, with the 4th quarter! AAAAAAGGHHHHHHHHHH. I will never beable to afford all the DVDs coming out during that time! This sucks, truly sucks. I know I tend to budget more money for DVDs than some other forms of entertainment, but still, it's a budget. I guess I will just have to pick and choose the best of the best.

Frozen

06-04-2001, 09:27 AM

DickGrayson wrote:

Sub-Zero sorta felt like an extended episode but it was still good. I hope for a DVD release soon. I bet you were devestated by the live action Freeze!

Imagine my delight when I hear an early rumour that the superb Patrick Stewart is up for the role of Mr Freeze... Imagine my despair when Arnie is cast instead.

Fair's fair. Arnie's OK in films like 'Predator' and 'Terminator', but Mr Freeze is a character built upon despair, tragedy, and true love. You can't get that from a lump of rock like Arnie...

BUT - and I am going to get howled at in dersision here - I DID like the sequence were he carves Nora out of ice and puts her on the clock face - I thought that was a lovely little bit. Pity the rest of the film was so bad...http://cwm.ragesofsanity.com/cwm/cwm/evil3.gif