I do wonder if they picked Prince because he had a contract with Warner music and was heavily connected to purple (a color the Joker is also connected to). :)
I look forward to the video "TURNS OUT I DON'T LIKE BATMAN ALL THAT MUCH" where Vee discusses how he's discovered that there are actually very few Batman projects he enjoys.
@@HandlesTheCyberman I don't have a problem knowing The Joker's backstory in Elseworlds like White Knight and the same with Batman killing; however I have always felt that canon Batman and Joker are intended to be opposites in every way except sex and possibly race. Joker is the worlds worst mass murderer and a happy person that never lies about who he is or what he values, Batman holds all life as sacred, is brooding and miserable and a consumate liar.
@@samuelwilliams1619 A strange as it is given that Batman is so against killing. Versions of him that do just fits the aesthetic more than the character. Like Punisher Batman is just a really cool concept arguably because of the fact that that’s not the normal for him.
The best thing the film did was paving the way for Batman: The Animated Series' popularity and aesthetic as well as opening up the avenue for darker superhero films. Its influence on Batman was great, though I agree that it doesn't hold up on its own merits for reasons mentioned in the video.
I agree with you. I saw the movie in the theatre when it first came out. I remember liking it when I was a kid. But now, anytime I make an attempt to watch it, I end up turning it off halfway through. I don't know why. But just can't force myself to watch it. But yeah, it was very influential for later Batman movies. And I do think that the 89 Batman movie has the best Batman costume and Batmobile.
@Luke Allin Less so bad and more so redundant. What good aspects of its plot, character and performance have been done better elsewhere such as the sequel as well as Batman Begins doing a better job characterising Batman, Nicholson's Joker not holding up compared to Ledger's or Phoenix's, etc. to the point that, even with its good acting, there's nothing left it really excels at as a Batman film beyond aesthetic. Even on its own, when taking away the Batman iconography, you're left with a fairly average revenge plot and what interest could be found in the concept of the main duo creating each other is somewhat dampened by the film spelling this idea out very overtly. Bringing up its awards, fanbase and profit says nothing of the film's quality. That's the definition of the ad populum fallacy. Black Panther was nominated for an Oscar and grossed even more at the box office despite being at best mediocre and at worst a mess in terms of world building and character writing. If wanting to defend the film's quality, it's better to make genuine arguments rather than basing it on mass appeal.
@Luke Allin Films most certainly can be measured by objective standards, elements such as internal consistency, direction, acting, etc. You would be right in that how much value each element has to a film's overall quality is somewhat subjective, but it's clear they all connect to one's immersion within the film which can be used as a universal standard to measure a film's quality. The idea that "like = good, dislike = bad" is also a false one as many can acknowledge that a film they like is poorly made. It's the whole reason phrases like popcorn flicks and trash entertainment exist. That said, bringing up popularity is still a highly flawed metric as how much critical thought the average moviegoer put into analysing the quality of the film is debatable at best. More to the point, I never said that the film was bad, but that its elements being done better elsewhere (something you even partially agreed on) makes it redundant in a lot of ways as it raises the question of why watch it compared to one that does the same elements better? The Godfather comparison is a false equivalence as that's a direct sequel, not an alternate take. Now, onto your arguments as to the film's strengths, I'd agree that Keaton does a great job with what he's given, but wouldn't cite him as the best onscreen Batman. Leaving aside the comic inaccuracies of his portrayal compared to that of, say, Batman Begins', he lacks several important elements of other incarnations such as the training to rationalise his capabilities Batman Begins provides or as much examination into his broken psyche as Mask of the Phantasm. Being the most comic accurate Joker doesn't mean Nicholas had the best portrayal of him as a character, with Ledger doing a better job at displaying his psychopathy and chaotic nature whereas Phoenix was by far the most in-depth character study. I'll concede on your point about their symbiotic relationship though, even if I'd say The Dark Knight provides more complex ways to do so. I can agree with the point on the action as well (at least for the larger scale parts compared to Nolan's trilogy), though that is an undeniably surface level aspect compared to that of the plot and characters.
When I was a kid I thought Vicky vale was the inspiration for Harley Quinn being created since joker’s into blondes in this movie lol so I didn’t think much of it. Also Jack Nicholson IS the best Joker visually, he’s got the classic look and man do I miss that look…I’m so tired of Hollywood trying to make him into some homeless man or a grilled-teeth gangsta freak…He’s supposed to have class and style…
He is certainly much closer to the Joker as he was being written at the time and that version is how I always think of the Joker. it still bugs me that most of the Jokers after him wear clown makeup instead of taking that chemical bath and looking that way all the time. I also actually miss things like the killer joybuzzer and the acid lapel flower and the Joker Venom (renamed Smilex for some reason, I guess because instead of making it himself he just finds out about it and copies it, which is weird given that we're told his police file says he's skilled at chemistry).
@@madddoggnogood1491 Yeah, and if not for the tats and metal teeth he would have been wonderful. Especially if they had worked in some of his classic gags. I would love to see what an R rated movie does with him finally being able to fire acid in someone's face or show the real effects of Joker Venom.
He's supposed to make fun of class and style imo. And Nicholson nails that. Ledger kinda does too but Nicholson's outfit portrays that beautifully. A completely insane person.
I like how they didn't make Jack's too dark so it was suitable for all ages and had the entire history of the character goofiness and all. Maybe he should've been a bit more composed but he was still good.
Why does everyone think he was sleeping upside down? Lol its an exercise thing, you pull yourself up - like super sit ups mannn! It was just a good shot, he doesn't sleep hanging upside down lol
As I recall, the reason they cast Billy Dee Williams then did little with him was the plan was to have him be Two-Face. Then the mother's groups complained about it being so dark and they over-corrected and here we are. As for the movie itself, it at least corrected the general public's idea of who Batman is and paved the way for came later,. for better or for worse.
I actually loved the Joker's backstory of having been in the Mafia. It made the story more realistic than if he had just been an ordinary guy. It also demonstrated the cultural clash between Gotham's more "Old World" criminals and the costumed punks who eventually eclipsed them. The Joker took an underworld that was basically THE GODFATHER (guys in suits sitting around in the darkness and having their minions slink through the shadows) and turned it into A CLOCKWORK ORANGE with funny hats, leather jackets, street mimes, museum graffiti, parade balloons, and funk music (okay, so we could have done without that last one). Without all that, we wouldn't have had the WIZARD OF OZ-like weirdness of BATMAN RETURNS, the neon décor and jazz music of BATMAN FOREVER, or the hockey players in skull masks, etc., in BATMAN & ROBIN (although, again, they got carried away with that one).
Not to mention, the "ordinary guy" thing was one comic which itself admitted it might not be his real origin since the Joker lies or doesn't remember things the same all the time. He doesn't have to be a failed comedian who was bullied into being the patsy in a robbery.
@@axebomber2108 We have to remember that, first and foremost, the Joker is a highly ambitious criminal. He'd have to assimilate himself to the criminal underworld in some way if he wanted to gather enough resources for his schemes. It's not popular to say so, but I think this characteristic was given an ingenious spin in SUICIDE SQUAD. It makes perfect sense to me that the 21st-century Joker would style himself as a ghetto pimp, with Harley Quinn as his "hoe." It's the same "made man"/gun moll dynamic between Jack and Alicia, only updated. (Also, when they're in the Joker's nightclub/strip joint and the hip-hop music is playing in the background, the horn section is so prominent that the horns sound like circus elephants. It's perfect.)
Hard to sell Batman and Robin as a sequel to Burton's Batman movies as there's almost no one from the original movie much less Batman. Kind of feel that some of your issues with the movie, though small, seem to come from either its sequels or comparing it to other Batman material.
I always look upon the later movies as being a slightly adjacent alternate Earth. It's similar in some of the events and people but different in others. It's the only way they work.
@@Sorel2020 Not true professionals it was more like they either wanted the money or they were trying to at least keep consistency in the universe. I don't want to disrespect them, they were great actors and I love them. But most smart actors left the project after Batman Forever or when Schumacher took control of the project
Batman and Robin may not be the best movie - in fact, it just might be the worst Batman movie - but it DID lead to some awesome action figures. The black and silver suits from the final act of the movie looked so good.
Honestly I still like the film. Is it 100% faithful to the comics? No. However it is still entertaining and fun to watch. I think comic fans are too obsessed with accuracy. True I want to see Hollywood show more respect to the source material (looking at you MCU) but I can forgive changes if the changes are good, and do not distract from the story.
Not true tim burton's batman 1989 is faithful to the comics not to the golden age batman era instead it's batman dc 27# from 1939-1940 and bob kane batman did kill multiple times with no remoise if he had to, he even killed the joker in his first run but it was revealed later joker survived faked his death and would continue chaos for the next decades the reason joker died in the 89 movie cause DC wasnt sure if jack nicholoson would come back to play him or if they was gonna use joker again if u read the original script most of bruce wayne/batman keaton arch is in it they also kept robin out cause it was to many characters but overall the final draft we got was the closet to the source material and jack nicholson joker is the best and original joker we got from any live action batman movie, even some of his brutal murders scenes came from 1939 era to the killing joke comics and his origin was told right but with so much studio interference alot got scrapped out and burton wanted to make sure his batman was kept a mystery as possible he didnt wanna do the batman origin but he did do the joker origin
@@sparkageddon3186 bob kane didn't create Batman. So whatever his fraudulent ass decided to do is irrelevant. A combo of Bill Finger and the editor is what established the no killing rule.
@@anthonygarcia8749 duh i know that i never said he didn't create batman i said its the beginning of bob kane era bill finger never gets the credit he deserves till this day I know my history to be a batman fan bill finger created 90% of the batman world
Wasn't that the whole idea? Jack was not only fooling around with his woman but quietly taking over his gang. It was always my impression that he was just a step or two away from just taking over and he knew it, which was just another reason why he sent him into an ambush.
I love this Batman, he's not the best Batman, but he was the first to make a "serious" movie about him, and to be able to take the character seriously in the movies.
Batman should never kill for any reason. I'm still mad about the 'I don't have to save you' scene in batman begins. Batman would and should never leave someone to die intentionally.
It's against both Batman's morals _and_ intelligence, as telling Ra's al-Ghul that you want to kill him but leaving him to his fate without making sure he's dead before you go runs the risk of an angry Ra's coming back like last night's chili surprise...especially in his case, since even if you actually could guarantee that he died after you left, if his followers get to his remains before you, he'll get a bath in the Lazarus Pit, and come out good as new and twice as out for revenge!
@@kenthegamer I just love how the prototype era of Superman in which he doesn't fly and Batman in which he doesn't have a moral code is called their Golden Age because it was first when it's not so much their peak as working the bugs out to create the characters we know and love today (for Batman, those growing pains would last until about the time that Denny O'Neil popped in iirc).
I just can't wait for the 89 Comics and the Flash movie. I want to see more Keaton, and if there is gonna be a live action Batman Beyond being played by him I'm gonna be so happy
I don't know, did you see that quote by one of the producers? I forget who it was but she described the movie as a solar-powered god (Supergirl) and two idiots (Keaton's Batman and the Flash). I don't have a good feeling for how they're going to write him and, overall, I would much rather they just did the real Flashpoint story. This is one of these movies where the more I hear the less I want to see it.
@@LibraGamesUnlimited Shit. I haven't seen that If it turns out like that I'm gonna be fucking pissed. Feels like its going to try and be a female empowerment movie
@@jonger2408 Yeah, I saw it online, might be able to track it down but it sounds like they're going to make Supergirl the main character and it's not even the Supergirl everyone knows and loves, its an alternate version most people don't even know and fewer even care about.
@@LibraGamesUnlimited What a load of fucking shit. The movie is about the flash, it's literally got his name in the title. If they wanna make a supergirl movie they should name it supergirl. I'm also really pissed that if what's being said is true, and Keaton is to be an idiot then it's just destroying the Tim Burton lore. Keaton's Wayne/Batman was one of the most intelligent Bruce Waynes, he was a chemist n shit and not many other Bruce Waynes were IIRC. I won't be watching the Flash movie anymore. I just hope that if there's gonna be a live action Batman Beyond series with Keaton as the main character, so no Terry, it won't be a fucking female empowerment story
@@jonger2408 I'll hold out a little bit of cautious optimism perhaps. If only because Michael Keaton really doesn't need the work or the money. Can't believe he would just come back to play Batman again if he knew the role was going to be garbage.
Ok so I totally disagree. As a person whose in his 40s I remember this coming out. You have to remember that at the time casual audience goers only knew the Joker and Batman from the campy Adam West Tv show. This was the first time a darker Batman and Joker was introduced to many of the masses who didn’t read comics. Jack played a perfect comic accurate joker. No one would have understood the Joker going from campy to frightening killer like Jack was in the shinning. The original Batman was so influential that the creators of Batman the animated series acknowledged they borrowed so much from it, including its appearance of Gotham.lastly I hate when people act like this was a movie about the joker falling in love. This movie was about the Joker creating chaos. He took over the mob, had people scared to use their body care items, tried to turn the city against Batman and then tried to poison a large section of Gotham.
Good points. I think it just has a lot of little flaws that, in retrospective, have added up and made it seem worse than it really is over time. For example; Batman killing, Joker murdering Bruce’s parents, Joker’s boner chase for Vicki Vale. To me, these all hinder the quality of what is in reality a fantastic film that paved the way for every single comic book movie as we know it after. People actually took Batman and comics seriously because of Tim Burton’s work. The art design, acting, and music are all pretty phenomenal and unique- sure as hell standing out in the crowd of bland superhero movies we have now.
@@filmaticpictures9693 lastly the thing I just noticed that annoyed me….was that he had the word murderer beside Batman on the thumbnail. My reaction was the same as Pam’s from the office when they questioned Jim for giving her employee of the month. To try to justify it she said that she did double her sales, then Andy sarcastically asked from 1 to 2? Then they did a cut of way of Pam saying “yep”! He killed people in the movie….so what. Movies can have different interpretations of characters. The Superman we see in InJustice isn’t the Superman we are accustomed to….(he’s much more interesting but that’s another argument). Also the killing Joke came out in 1988 and Frank Miller’s work on Batman was in 1986, so this is a time(1989) where creators are molding Batman to the Batman we know. Before then In the early Batman comics he was Batman in look only, his personality didn’t resemble anything we currently know Batman for. He was more similar to the Batman portrayed in the Super friends cartoon. So I’ll give the writers and the director a pass if they didn’t nail every aspect of Batman at that time.
@@TrueAnakinSkywalker but you don't need to give the writers a pass. This isn't a different interpretation of the character. They didn't get it wrong Like Vee erroneously claims. Batman actually kills. A lot. A LOT. In the main canon timeline of comics. I'm not talking about elseworlds or just the golden age comics. But from the 60s through to the present day. From 1969 to 1988 (during production before the movie was made) Batman killed a lot of people in the comics. Here's just a few examples: 1969 - Brave/Bold 84 - Batman throws a grenade into a plane full of Nazis. Then later blows up an entire platoon. 1970 Batman 221 - throws a guy off of a building to his death 1970 DC 395 - Batman kills Dolores & Juan Muerto Brave/Bold 90 - knocks a guy out and leaves him unconscious to drown in the ocean, bragging that he "hasn't lost his touch" Batman 235 - douses a mad scientist in his own deadly chemicals and stands there watching him die with satisfaction Batman 270 - crushes a man to death under a giant statue Batman 271 - throws a grenade into a room full of cultists 1976 Detective Comics 455 - kills a vampire by destroying his heart Detective Comics 480 - Batman fights a villain called The Fighting Machine and literally beats him to death. Brave/bold 127 - lets a criminal drown at sea, shows no remorse observing the drowned body 1977 Batman 288 - Penguin is shooting at Batman who grabs a henchman as a human shield Batman 290 - Batman electrocutes Skull Dugger to death Brave/bold 157 - Batman rescues a senator from a criminal. He causes the criminal to crash the helicopter. Batman saves the senator but leaves the criminal in the exploded wreckage Batman 337 - Batman knocks a guy off a cliff, proclaiming that the criminal probably wanted to die. Brave/Bold 159 - Batman intentionally turns a Henchman into a permanent piece of Crystal Detective comics 517 - kills a crook he once sent to jail "The Doomsday Book" Detective #572 - Batman kills some henchmen, specifically using one as a meat shield to avoid gunfire from an Uzi. B/B 195 - kills another Vampire Batman Year Two - tries to kill Joe Chill. Putting a gun to his head. But Reaper kills him first. Then after Reaper accuses Batman of being a killer, he falls to his death. Batman withdraws his hand, deciding not to save him. Son of the Demon - blows up a helicopter with multiple people inside. Electrocutes an assassin. Action Comics Annual 1 - Batman kills another Vampire Batman No. 425 (1988) - Batman intentionally dropped a mountain of cars on a gangster in a junkyard. Cosmic Odyssey 1988 - Batman kills a Paradaemon with a laser gun Legends of The Dark Knight 1 - knocks an assassin off of a cliff A Death in the Family (1988-1989) - last issue - batman commits attempted murder. Tries to kill Joker in the helicopter fight. Is undeniably outraged to find out he seemingly survived and Superman has to calm him down. "The Messiah of the Crimson Sun" - Batman blows up Ra's al Ghul on a spaceship. Watching his ashes scatter. Even offering a pithy observation right after Robin exclaims "you killed him!" Batman: The Cult 1988 - Batman mows someone down with a submachine gun. Blows up a henchman. Convinces the cult members to kill their leader. Robin suggested that they should save the cult leader, but Batman stops him. 10 Nights of the Beast - locks KGBeast up to starve to death. Jim Starlin wrote it so Batman killed KGBeast in Batman Vol 1 #420 June, 1988
@@orinanime you do realize that detective comics reboots their comic continuity every other Wednesday right? I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just saying that what your referencing is material that is no longer considered in continuity or Canon with the character. Most likely. Or you might be totally correct. I don't know I can't be bothered to keep up with DC in terms of their continuity at this point. It changes so often and practically means nothing.
@@JudgeSpektre i am aware that DC reboots their continuity a lot. And at this point it averages to approximately one reboot per decade overall. But that doesn't negate my point. It just reinforces it. It shows that there are multiple examples from every continuity.
I think what it boils down to is that so much of the Batman Animated Series solidified much of what we consider quintessential parts of Batman's identity, and looking back at Batman interpretations prior that aren't quite so confident in those traits can be a strange experience. Personally I love the Burton Batman but I don't consider him the quintessential Batman simply because, I personally feel the character was enriched and perfected later down the line.
I remember seeing Batman '89 on opening night at a midnight screening. The theater was packed. Everyone was stoked to finally see a dark and brooding version of the character closer to the version overseen by Denny O'Neil in the comics. Prince's Batman album was all the rage and the nightclub my friends and I frequented that summer would throw on Batdance at midnight and have a guy dressed as Batman swing above the dance floor on a harness. Anyway, it's good because it told WB that the general audience would enjoy a serious (at least less campy) take on the character and the mythos. What's sad is that WB did a complete about face on Tim Burton after Batman Returns because parents were upset at how dark and disturbing the movie was. I had a manager who told me how he had to console his then young daughter after the movie because Catwoman sliced up a bunch of stuffed animals. This backlash led to Batman Forever being way more campy (but not overly so) and of course Batman & Robin being a bad homage to Batman of the 1960's TV show. I'll admit that the movie has its warts, but I will say this, Batman did not intentionally kill Joker in this movie. Rewatch what happens. Batman essentially anchors Joker to a gargoyle as Joker is trying to escape via helicopter. If Joker would have let go of the ladder immediately, he would have been banged up but alive. But Joker wouldn't let go. The helicopter was able to pull him and the gargoyle up which was too heavy for the Joker to maintain his grip. Joker lost his grip and fell to his death. Nicholson's Joker was a solid throwback to the comics, and Keaton's Bruce Wayne/Batman was the first time on screen that we saw the character having a disturbed personality. Unlike Adam West who portrayed Batman as more of a straight hero and not a conflicted person with serious psychological problems.
Yes, a lot of people misinterpret that final scene. However, Batman does say to him "I'm going to kill you", and punches Joker in the face, knocking him over the edge, so I don't think he cared at that point if Joker lived or died.
You're definitely one of those UA-camrs where I like the way you explain your opinion so much that even if I strongly disagree with the title I'm immediately clicking on it
I love your page, but this was very off. Batman (1989) was a great movie. It was the 1st time we saw Batman the way the comics had him. The dark setting and the hardships of being Bruce. You sir, are wrong about this and should rewatch Batman again and make a new video.
@@jtsleazeball2548 The only main timeline comics he has killed intentionally in the comics were the first few issues before that aspect of his character was swiftly retconned. His no-killing rule was both far more long-lasting and iconic to his character. By that logic of finding very temporary aspects in his long history as good comic accuracy, adding something like Ace the Bat Hound to the film would be considered a point of praise, yet I highly doubt anyone would be willing to argue that.
Here's the thing, you have to remember that this is the first movie in a franchise. It's also the first live action Batman since Adam West (1966). A lot of people going to see it didn't know his backstory. It's a clever way of avoiding the amount of screen time it would've taken to show it all in a fleshed out way. Plus this is before the internet and they're around Bruce's age so you can't really blame them for not reading the papers when they were kids. My final argument is that while Bruce is famous because he's rich, it's not like he's an actor you see on TV all the time. For instance, I know who Jeff Bezos is and what he looks like, but I have no idea about his parents or anything like that. I just know who he is cuz he's rich.
In my opnion, Nicholson is a good Joker because... he's a CLASSIC Joker. Not an original take like Headger, Letho and Phoenix, just a classical Joker like everyone should know the Joker. Like Mark Hammil's Joker: classical and not that "unique" in his interpretation (I mean, no, he IS unique, but he is a classical Joker: chemical bath, psyco-sadic, always put the smile before the killing). If I have to introduce the Joker I would use Hammil or Nicholson versions, THEN I'll say "of course there are diffrent interpretations, someone even better then these two, but THESE TWO are the CORE or the Joker character". Also, I love his permanent smile: Joker's normal/neutral face is while smiling, but it's not permanent, this was an interesting detail I really loved.
I see Jack's Joker as a little more like the classic Joker in the sense that it was before he was deconstructed by writers, he was simply a killer clown with deadly pranks.
Edit: I feel this origin is the most realistic. Nicholson'd version is probably the legimiately craziest in terms of maybe not mental illness but someone who's gone nuts. I think the origin is perfect for this version. Honestly I used to share your opinion. Watch the video "jack Nicholson is the scariest joker" it changed my mind. He nailed so many aspects of the character and the gag weapons. He had a passion for it, they tried to make. I don't think it's a love triangle. Joker is obsessed with Vicki for no reason. I don't think he's genuinely in love but trying to manipulate someone. I think he's just doing something. Also Hamill's Joker in TAS has the same origin as Nicholson.
A new concept that Batman 89 introduced, which I really love, is joker’s smile. In the comics we’ve seen him frown and show other emotions, but here, his face is stuck in a permanent disfigured smile. And I think that adds a lot more creepiness to the character.
2 things: -You going to talk about the recent Batman '89 comics that continue this continuity? -When you've talked about Batman, you've generally stuck pretty close to the core Batman mythos and supers closest to him. You ever going to do any lengthy analysis of his relationships to other characters, i.e. Gordon? Superman?
You should do like a comparison of teen Titans and young justice. Also if u did one about who was your favorite robin and why. Or just a comparison of robins and the other members of the bat family
So? Superman used to not have flying powers, only jumping. When a character trait becomes iconic it shouldn't be discarded. This was more Tim Burton not knowing anything about Batman than him referencing a couple of obscure moments from 50 year old comics that none of the movie audience read.
I was 9 when the first Batman got released. Loved it then and still love it now. Batman returns was brilliant too. The rest were crap apart from the dark night and the last one with Tom hardy as bain.
I respect your opinion, it is a very good movies but I like the Dark Knight and Batman Begins better, not the Dark Knight rises though as it's interesting and very good, just more boring parts of it.
What you dislike about the concept about Joker and Batman creating each other is one of the aspects I really like about this movie. Especially when you see the first 3 movies as a connected story, then this works really well for Batman's character development, as he takes several steps to step away from killing. The only things I don't like about the movie are that Joker dies in the end and that they didn't do much with Dent. This could have been fixed in the 2nd one, but unfortunately, they didn't. The Joker as a mobster thing... it wasn't necessary. But I don't care, it works in the context of the movie.
I’m more less mixed, there’s a lot I love about this film like the performances, ascetic, and OST. As for the negatives well although I love the old 39 comics I still don’t like seeing modern Batman kill and way too much Joker that devalues his mystique, oh and never loved the origin having Joker involved it really makes there origins more generic, it’s more about revenge and Batman saving his girlfriend, then the personification of Order and Chaos clashing
@@joeker5208 Yeah. But I mean, in both Tim Burton Batman movies when he kills people it's usually because they're really endangering civilians. Except those last guys when the Joker was doing the Waltz to Death with Vicki.
@@jonger2408 I can let it pass for the Burton films as a lot of those choices were made by Bob Kane who wanted to have more of the 1939 feel, and it’s done in an over the top fashion that doesn’t piss me off that much, it’s not as bad as say BvS
The Joker killing Batman's parents definitely annoyed me. I have to agree to disagree with you regarding your other Joker points. 89 was a huge deal and this movie was definitely part of that. Of course the movie DOES have a few flaws. Having said that, I am not a fan of Phoenix as Joker so there you go. He's literally right over Leno and Romero as far as Jokers go. His ACTING in the movie is great. I just wished it wasn't a Joker movie. This movie is one of those "you had to be there" moments. I'd just graduated from high school that summer.
I'm torn on that one. On the one hand I kind of liked the idea, but I can still see the issues with it. I now the comics tried it, for some reason years later, and there was such a backlash they had to change it pretty quick. I thnk it turned out Lex had given Batman the information (that Joe Chill was just another alias for the Joker, before becoming the Joker) and it turned out he lied. I think the whole thing was to try and push Batman into killing the Joker. Overall, I would much rather see it in a movie than in the comics themselves (unless it's an Elseworlds story or something).
I appreciate his respect for the movie and the impact it had on the superhero movie genre (along with leading to the creation of BTAS) despite what he dislikes about it. I've been well aware the movie isn't perfect, but it's still one of my favorites. For me it's pretty much always been a 3-way tie between Batman 89, Batman Begins and Mask of the Phantasm as the best Batman movie (no, I don't like the Dark Knight as much, as great as it is).
Prince would probably work better with a character like Catwoman... because... let's face it.... Prince conveys powerfully, sexual and sensual lyrics and sound (Darling Nikki is definitely one of my favorite songs) and Catwoman definitely falls in that category as well... but Batman and Joker? Nope. That's a whole lot of nope.
That said the music for Batman Returns fit it to a T. I especially love that song by Sousie and the Banshees "Face to Face". It perfectly sums up the split personality theme that Catwoman AND Batman share.
@@LibraGamesUnlimited There is a rumour that at one point Siouxsie Sioux was considered to play catwoman but she was too old or declined i don't remember which one was. But yeah "Face to Face" is a great song not the best Siouxsie and the banshees song but the best theme for Catwoman. Sorry for my English. It's not my native language
A lot of the complaints seem to be that this film didn't show versions of the characters... that frankly didn't exist yet. Quick witted Alfred was created in The Animated Series as far as I am aware. Before this Alred was just a pudgy Englishman
I can see why. I would think the reason they didn't do that (other than the Harvey thing) would be that Eckhart is on the take and get killed. wouldn't want to do that to poor Bullock.
This Joker is more based of the Golden Age Joker, who was a mob boss. Either the Bronze age barely existed for few years before this movie came out and the Killing Joke comic (with the Red Hood origin) came out years later during the Dark Age. The "joker" from the Joker movie never actually was the Joker and never actually will be. They did make a comic sequel where he did become Two-Face, but the comic was so bad that less said the better and it is better 2 forget it happened.
Jesus did you nail Harvey. Never felt like diversity of a character for diversity sake. It felt like hiring an actor that could perfectly fit the role. Modern movies could learn from that
This movie is not aging well. I was 5 years old in 1989, so I'm aware of what this movie meant at the time of its release. In 100 years, if someone sat down and watched every Batman movie released between 1989 and 2022, I don't think many would favor this movie. The action is limited, and Burton was rather liberal in changing the Batman mythos. People get caught up in nostalgia, they get tricked into thinking that because something is the first (no disrespect to Adam West), it means it's the best. Again, in 100 years if someone watched every Batman movie released between 1989 and 2022, Batman '89 would not be favored. I stand by this statement.
Heath was on another level. But I love this joker. This, and the dark knight are my two favorite batman movies, and casts. For me Michael Keaton was the best batman. Maybe it's because he is what I grew up on, but I just think he fit the role the best, and did the best with it all around.
One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest is Jack Nicholsons best performance of all time and one of the greatest film's ever and also my 2th favourite film of all time.
6:45 they had plan for that relationship for the 5th movie that, no joke, would have remdeemed the "Batman Forever" and "Batman & Robin" with Joker being, this time, Harley Quinn's father and, I presume that the woman would have been the mother.
batman 89 is the batman that introduced me to the character when I was a kid. the animated series helped. i remember having the movie recored from tv onto a vhs tape and now have it on blu ray. do like how gotham looks and how the batmobile looks. its not perfect but then again i down think any of the batman movies are. way it is. for me or for anyone most likely. will say that as i get older vickie vales legs in hose hits my eyes now since im older though. hehe.
I'm in the opposite in that the first Batman movie I saw was the dark knight in theater when I was 12. I saw this one for the first time years later and just felt like it was kind of meh in comparison to Dark Knight
"Does it really hold up?" You don't exactly leave a whole lot of mystery in what your answer to that question will be, based on the thumbnail and the title.
I really liked this batman as a kid, really just because not many superhero movies were out and worth while. Wish they would make a live action Thomas Wayne movie. Thomas is a badass in flashpoint paradox.
@@axebomber2108 - We weren't OK with it when he made Bane snap Alfred's neck in front of young master Damian in *City of Bane* ... I guess since we didn't see much of him in Flashpoint, fans kinda idealized Thomas Batman, but we've seen what happens if Bruce crosses the line. He isn't Batman anymore, Batman has the trust of Jim Gordon, the Justice League, the Bat-family and of course, Alfred. He'd become the Grim Knight, and would need to put an explosive chip in Alfred's neck to prevent him from leaving, would need to force Harvey Dent into helping him, etc etc I know you weren't serious ^^ just felt like ranting a bit.
Everybody who got mad at Vee Infuso: yeah I bet all those dislikes will teach him not to talk crap the dark knight trilogy Vee Infuso talking about Batman 89: I'll fucking do it again 😂😂😂
Loved Batman '89, still do. Saw it in theaters as a kid, had the toys and although it hasn't aged well, it still has a special place in my heart as far as summer blockbuster films of my youth. All that said, I tend to agree with your take on The Joker. Jack Nicholson is/was a phenomenal actor, but by that point of his career, he was damn near typecast as playing different degrees of "crazy." Look at his filmography, he always played characters that were on a "crazy/deranged" spectrum. Nicholson's take on the Joker was nothing more than Jack in white face paint, just slightly turned up.
I agree on everything, i was born 89 in Finland but as i was old enough to watch it even as a child i loved Batman but all the faults you said i felt as kid. One thing to add, final fight with Joker that you wait whole movie and Joker offers no resistance, and Batman purposely binds his foot to dropping gargoyle thus the ending feels that cold batman executes defendeless mad/sad Joker
He ain't wrong. Prince has made many memorable songs through his career, but the one for Batman I think is for him a lowpoint. Guess he didn't get enough info to do much with considering how "off" it is
@@zilvertron I'm sorry but Batman is one of the most iconic comic book characters of all time. That's why Prince was brought in to help with the soundtrack...b/c he's one of the greatest pop artists of all time.
@@zilvertron You do realize there are multiple songs from Prince in Batman?...not just one! The fact that you don't realize that tells me that your opinion is based on ignorance and bias.
The reason Batman shouldn’t kill as a character is the fact that it turns him into a fascist. He kinda already is, putting himself above the law beating up everyone who’s getting out of line. Burton never considered this ”fact” so I’ve always had a hard time taking his iteration of Batman serious. Because he didn’t take Batman serious enough. BUT I guess the writer is to blame. BTW did you guys notice Knox’s cameo in The Dark Knight as a reporter in the scene where Harvey Dent turns himself in as Batman?
@Luke Allin it isn’t exactly that Burton didn’t take him seriously. It’s just that Burton isn’t a Batman fan. He has never even read a Batman comic, the writer of the Batman film is great, but Burton forced him to include a lot he didn’t want to. Also no, a Batman who kills, forsakes everything Batman is.
@@ColesFilmStuff It doesn't "forsake everything Batman is" Batman originally killed people and the reason he stopped was because comics were to get less violent It isn't Burton forcing people to do stuff. It was Bob Kane wanted Batman to be more like 1939 Batman.
@Luke Allin You’re making good point (even though your critizism of me doesn’t sit well). A Batman who kills is merely The Punisher. The fact that Batman ”kind of kills” the Joker (it might just have been an atempt to stop him from escaping) should give Batman the satisfaction of avenging the murders of his parents, which ultimatly should ”cure” him from the need of being Batman. And that logic is based on your interpretations and points. They try to talk around this fact when Robin enters the franchaise. For Batman to function as an on-going character he has to have a broader ”hate” towards criminals than merely seeking revenge. Also, to justify what he does, he needs to be better than the crooks he fights, meaning showing compassion and book’em by the law. This is how Nolan takes it seriously, because one could argue that a better way to fight crime is to be preventive instead of a reaction. In Nolan’s Batman Thomas Wayne did just that! He was a filantrop and it didn’t work. This justifies the reason for Batman to take it to the streets. Also gives the story a poetic justice-flair as he ”beats them at their on game”, with the only language they speak: the language of violence.
2 things I like in this movie are the batmobile (it’s definitely the definitive version for me) and the liberty burton added to the joker where he had a permanent smile because of his injuries. I always like it when some of the more grizzly villains have body horror elements
Fun fact: Even Tim Burton actually prefers Batman Returns over the original movie. He felt the movie was dull and boring at times and hated how the studio interfered with his vision by adding pop songs in the mix. Thankfully we got to see Burton's acquired taste for the sequel.
"Too organized", heath ledger's joker is more organized, you just don't get to see it, but everything he does seems chaotic but wouldn't make much sense if it were. It's more realistic if it were calculated.
I really agree with your take here. I love the movie, as it was the first "Batman" thing I ever saw. But I don't really think of it as my definitive "Batman." For me, that's the character from the Arkham games and Bruce Timm's DCAU.
I can completely agree. For me, I only had the ‘66 re-runs of the show for live action. So seeing this movie as a teenager actually created my cinematic recognition of my generation’s Batman, and not my parents.
In the first Batman comic i read Joker got Batman unconcious and had him strapped to a mountain side that had like arrow bombs shot at the side and Bat would die if he cant get out until the count out... i expect Jokert to fight Batman !
I'm sorry, you're wrong on many things: 1) OK, maybe Joker from the comics didn't really kill Bruce's parents, but that's the purpose of rebooting a franchise (that was viewed mainly as a kids' show until then-the 60s Adam West version). So what if it's not canon, it's still a hell of a twist and it underlines the deeper bond between Napier and Bruce. Joker 2019 did pretty much the same thing by portraying the character as some discarded lovechild of Bruce's dad. He may not have been, but that's beside the point; the point is that Joker thinks there's a bond between himself and the Waynes. 2) Seriously, Jack Nicholson as the Joker was the casting choice to end all casting choices. He was BORN to play the persona of the Joker. I've seen him in almost every film he has ever done (including Easy Rider), and this is easily among his top-5 performances. He is meant to come off as flamboyant and vicious and clearly psychotic, while the audience secretly wants him to succeed (well, sort of) 3) Tim Burton creates this totally fucked-up version of Gotham from the first five minutes without exposition. He just shows Batman doing his job while also portraying how vile and corrupt Gotham is. His aesthetic is quite something too- instead of featuring some stand-in city for Gotham (like Nolan did), he shoots the majority of the film in the studio, which allows him to display his love for all things gothic and art-deco. Nolan never did that. I agree with you on Keaton as Batman, he's the best actor who ever played the part, but try to remember what an incredible gamble it was to allow some 30 year old kid who was known for Beetlejuice to reboot a dead franchise and give it his own artistic vision.
1) you can change stuff in an adaptation but in this special case it makes the story less interesting because it becomes a simple vendetta for Batman where the Batman/Joker relationship is supposed to be way more than that. 2) Jack Nicholson just played like in all his other movies he acts the exact same way in the shining I don’t get why people think this performance is amazing. For me it’s like Johnny Depp, he plays really good but always the same kind of characters so eventually even if it’s good it becomes redundant.
@@melvinloir489 I understand what you're saying about it being simply a vendetta, but there's so much more crammed into 2 hours of screen time. We get to see the urban decay of Gotham, the ineptitude of the police who are either corrupt, or simply lack the funds to make a difference, we get to see Bruce Wayne for the first time as an eccentric billionaire and how he balances his personal life with his image. I think that Tim Burton really infused his personal aesthetic in the film while creating an origins story. And that's much more difficult than most people think. Anyway, it may be that I'm biased in favor of this film (I was just 11 when it came out and it was the movie of the year, that and Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade), but it's still an amazing movie some 32 years later and it holds quite well against the Nolan trilogy.
And it could be argued that Begins did the same thing with Ra's Al Ghul. He was made part of Batman's origin. I can guarantee Begins is the first time Bruce joined the League of Shadows or any of Ra's organizations before becoming Batman, let alone being trained and inspired by Ra's(use your fears to fight criminality). They even pinned the corruption and crime in Gotham on the League of Shadows.
Lhhh 😂😂 that scene when Bruce was sleeping upside down went right over my head when I was a kid lol. Watched it last week and thought, “ damn, this bitch has to know he’s Batman now”
When it comes to screaming damsels in distress, Vicki Vale in this movie has some serious lungpower, alongside Kirsten Dunst's Mary Jane Watson, Margot Kidder's Lois Lane, and Willie Scott from "Indiana Jones And The Temple Of Doom".
@@Mirrorcomics24 Yeah I get it. Especially the sequel, its more a Tim Burton movie than a Batman movie. That's why I still enjoy it. Everyone has their favorites, I find Keaton's Batman more interesting.
@@Mirrorcomics24 Hehe yeah. It is a weird movie....and I love it! Penguin's death is very odd, you kinda feel bad. I guess it's because of Elfman's score. Very strange feeling. Lets not forget, Batman makes out with a zombie....
His no killing rule is such a big part of his character and just to go ignore that kinda feels wrong to me. Often the most interesting Batman stuff comes from his no killing rule, there’s been many moral dilemmas and character clashes that are really interesting that are often due to his no killing rule
Yeah, by the end of the video it was pretty obvious you liked the movie, you just didnt love it... I think the only problem with Jack was that he was too old (on that note, making him the Waynes murderer was stupid, but it was the trend in the '80s), a 10 years younger Jack playing the Joker would've been perfect. And as Tim Burton said, "Michael Keaton looks like a guy who would dress like a bat to scare people", the guy is pushing 70, and still looks menacing AF.
I like the sequel more but still like that one as well. Nothing wrong with not loving that movie though, its not like its the greatest thing ever. Even I think its overrated and I like it!
yeah the live action Batman movies kind of suck for the most part, BTAS is a far better adaptation of Batman than any live action movie or TV show can ever hope to achieve
@@kwible3682 oh yeah, I just don't particularly love any of them as adaptations of Batman, most of them are good-great as movies on their own, but for me, none really get the character quite right
Absolutely gorgeous film. The aesthetic is perfect for Gotham city in my opinion.
If there’s one thing I liked it’s the visuals
I 100% agree it’s beautiful and dark just what Gotham is
Yeah best looking Gotham city ever
@@madddoggnogood1491 Only thing that rivals it is the Gotham show, for me. Really captures the grittiness and dark tone.
Don't watch it in 4k then. You can see so many of the flaws in the sets. Personally I like that but it can really t you out of the film
Can we all at least agree that the soundtrack for this movie was absolute class
I do wonder if they picked Prince because he had a contract with Warner music and was heavily connected to purple (a color the Joker is also connected to). :)
bro that shit was heat
man i bought all three soundtracks to it sooooooooooooooooo good xD
No
Also the movie is good , not everyone has to like it.
I look forward to the video "TURNS OUT I DON'T LIKE BATMAN ALL THAT MUCH" where Vee discusses how he's discovered that there are actually very few Batman projects he enjoys.
@@HandlesTheCyberman I don't have a problem knowing The Joker's backstory in Elseworlds like White Knight and the same with Batman killing; however I have always felt that canon Batman and Joker are intended to be opposites in every way except sex and possibly race. Joker is the worlds worst mass murderer and a happy person that never lies about who he is or what he values, Batman holds all life as sacred, is brooding and miserable and a consumate liar.
@@samuelwilliams1619 A strange as it is given that Batman is so against killing. Versions of him that do just fits the aesthetic more than the character. Like Punisher Batman is just a really cool concept arguably because of the fact that that’s not the normal for him.
Comic Batman is really the only Batman I like tbh. Even Elseworld stuff
What can you do, negativity is what makes money on youtube.
The best thing the film did was paving the way for Batman: The Animated Series' popularity and aesthetic as well as opening up the avenue for darker superhero films. Its influence on Batman was great, though I agree that it doesn't hold up on its own merits for reasons mentioned in the video.
Love the Reuenthal profile pic
I agree with you
I agree with you. I saw the movie in the theatre when it first came out. I remember liking it when I was a kid. But now, anytime I make an attempt to watch it, I end up turning it off halfway through. I don't know why. But just can't force myself to watch it. But yeah, it was very influential for later Batman movies. And I do think that the 89 Batman movie has the best Batman costume and Batmobile.
@Luke Allin Less so bad and more so redundant. What good aspects of its plot, character and performance have been done better elsewhere such as the sequel as well as Batman Begins doing a better job characterising Batman, Nicholson's Joker not holding up compared to Ledger's or Phoenix's, etc. to the point that, even with its good acting, there's nothing left it really excels at as a Batman film beyond aesthetic. Even on its own, when taking away the Batman iconography, you're left with a fairly average revenge plot and what interest could be found in the concept of the main duo creating each other is somewhat dampened by the film spelling this idea out very overtly.
Bringing up its awards, fanbase and profit says nothing of the film's quality. That's the definition of the ad populum fallacy. Black Panther was nominated for an Oscar and grossed even more at the box office despite being at best mediocre and at worst a mess in terms of world building and character writing. If wanting to defend the film's quality, it's better to make genuine arguments rather than basing it on mass appeal.
@Luke Allin Films most certainly can be measured by objective standards, elements such as internal consistency, direction, acting, etc. You would be right in that how much value each element has to a film's overall quality is somewhat subjective, but it's clear they all connect to one's immersion within the film which can be used as a universal standard to measure a film's quality. The idea that "like = good, dislike = bad" is also a false one as many can acknowledge that a film they like is poorly made. It's the whole reason phrases like popcorn flicks and trash entertainment exist. That said, bringing up popularity is still a highly flawed metric as how much critical thought the average moviegoer put into analysing the quality of the film is debatable at best.
More to the point, I never said that the film was bad, but that its elements being done better elsewhere (something you even partially agreed on) makes it redundant in a lot of ways as it raises the question of why watch it compared to one that does the same elements better? The Godfather comparison is a false equivalence as that's a direct sequel, not an alternate take.
Now, onto your arguments as to the film's strengths, I'd agree that Keaton does a great job with what he's given, but wouldn't cite him as the best onscreen Batman. Leaving aside the comic inaccuracies of his portrayal compared to that of, say, Batman Begins', he lacks several important elements of other incarnations such as the training to rationalise his capabilities Batman Begins provides or as much examination into his broken psyche as Mask of the Phantasm. Being the most comic accurate Joker doesn't mean Nicholas had the best portrayal of him as a character, with Ledger doing a better job at displaying his psychopathy and chaotic nature whereas Phoenix was by far the most in-depth character study. I'll concede on your point about their symbiotic relationship though, even if I'd say The Dark Knight provides more complex ways to do so. I can agree with the point on the action as well (at least for the larger scale parts compared to Nolan's trilogy), though that is an undeniably surface level aspect compared to that of the plot and characters.
When I was a kid I thought Vicky vale was the inspiration for Harley Quinn being created since joker’s into blondes in this movie lol so I didn’t think much of it.
Also Jack Nicholson IS the best Joker visually, he’s got the classic look and man do I miss that look…I’m so tired of Hollywood trying to make him into some homeless man or a grilled-teeth gangsta freak…He’s supposed to have class and style…
He is certainly much closer to the Joker as he was being written at the time and that version is how I always think of the Joker. it still bugs me that most of the Jokers after him wear clown makeup instead of taking that chemical bath and looking that way all the time. I also actually miss things like the killer joybuzzer and the acid lapel flower and the Joker Venom (renamed Smilex for some reason, I guess because instead of making it himself he just finds out about it and copies it, which is weird given that we're told his police file says he's skilled at chemistry).
@@LibraGamesUnlimited Letos joker got the acid bath
@@madddoggnogood1491 Yeah, and if not for the tats and metal teeth he would have been wonderful. Especially if they had worked in some of his classic gags.
I would love to see what an R rated movie does with him finally being able to fire acid in someone's face or show the real effects of Joker Venom.
He's supposed to make fun of class and style imo. And Nicholson nails that. Ledger kinda does too but Nicholson's outfit portrays that beautifully. A completely insane person.
I like how they didn't make Jack's too dark so it was suitable for all ages and had the entire history of the character goofiness and all. Maybe he should've been a bit more composed but he was still good.
Why does everyone think he was sleeping upside down? Lol its an exercise thing, you pull yourself up - like super sit ups mannn! It was just a good shot, he doesn't sleep hanging upside down lol
Maybe it's false memory or because it was at night I dint know
As I recall, the reason they cast Billy Dee Williams then did little with him was the plan was to have him be Two-Face. Then the mother's groups complained about it being so dark and they over-corrected and here we are.
As for the movie itself, it at least corrected the general public's idea of who Batman is and paved the way for came later,. for better or for worse.
The aesthetic of Burton movies is still amazing almost 35 years later.
not at all. looks goofy AF.
@@phoenix21studios So glad your opinion means little 🤣. I loved it.
I actually loved the Joker's backstory of having been in the Mafia. It made the story more realistic than if he had just been an ordinary guy. It also demonstrated the cultural clash between Gotham's more "Old World" criminals and the costumed punks who eventually eclipsed them. The Joker took an underworld that was basically THE GODFATHER (guys in suits sitting around in the darkness and having their minions slink through the shadows) and turned it into A CLOCKWORK ORANGE with funny hats, leather jackets, street mimes, museum graffiti, parade balloons, and funk music (okay, so we could have done without that last one). Without all that, we wouldn't have had the WIZARD OF OZ-like weirdness of BATMAN RETURNS, the neon décor and jazz music of BATMAN FOREVER, or the hockey players in skull masks, etc., in BATMAN & ROBIN (although, again, they got carried away with that one).
Not to mention, the "ordinary guy" thing was one comic which itself admitted it might not be his real origin since the Joker lies or doesn't remember things the same all the time. He doesn't have to be a failed comedian who was bullied into being the patsy in a robbery.
Erm... pretty sure joker has always been in the Mafia
@@axebomber2108 We have to remember that, first and foremost, the Joker is a highly ambitious criminal. He'd have to assimilate himself to the criminal underworld in some way if he wanted to gather enough resources for his schemes. It's not popular to say so, but I think this characteristic was given an ingenious spin in SUICIDE SQUAD. It makes perfect sense to me that the 21st-century Joker would style himself as a ghetto pimp, with Harley Quinn as his "hoe." It's the same "made man"/gun moll dynamic between Jack and Alicia, only updated. (Also, when they're in the Joker's nightclub/strip joint and the hip-hop music is playing in the background, the horn section is so prominent that the horns sound like circus elephants. It's perfect.)
I think it would be easier for Vee to just straight up say he's just doesn't like Batman lol.
More like that Batman TAS is his favorite.
He is a hardcore batman fan he loves the animated series he loves the animated films and Arkham series and Gotham.
@@spider-manunknown9193 He just doesn't love Nolan Bat trilogy or the Tim Burton bat films.
His arguments are garbage.
@@backpackmatt His opinion is not garbage. I respect that he does not love the Burton batman film.
Hard to sell Batman and Robin as a sequel to Burton's Batman movies as there's almost no one from the original movie much less Batman. Kind of feel that some of your issues with the movie, though small, seem to come from either its sequels or comparing it to other Batman material.
I always look upon the later movies as being a slightly adjacent alternate Earth. It's similar in some of the events and people but different in others. It's the only way they work.
Actually the Alfred and Commissioner Gordan actors are the only two who stuck it out for all 4 😆 True professionals
@@Sorel2020 Not true professionals it was more like they either wanted the money or they were trying to at least keep consistency in the universe. I don't want to disrespect them, they were great actors and I love them. But most smart actors left the project after Batman Forever or when Schumacher took control of the project
Batman and Robin may not be the best movie - in fact, it just might be the worst Batman movie - but it DID lead to some awesome action figures. The black and silver suits from the final act of the movie looked so good.
@@Sorel2020 That is true, although poor Gordon got more and more marginalized as the series progressed to the point he became Nigel Exposition to him.
Honestly I still like the film. Is it 100% faithful to the comics? No. However it is still entertaining and fun to watch. I think comic fans are too obsessed with accuracy. True I want to see Hollywood show more respect to the source material (looking at you MCU) but I can forgive changes if the changes are good, and do not distract from the story.
Not true tim burton's batman 1989 is faithful to the comics not to the golden age batman era instead it's batman dc 27# from 1939-1940 and bob kane batman did kill multiple times with no remoise if he had to, he even killed the joker in his first run but it was revealed later joker survived faked his death and would continue chaos for the next decades the reason joker died in the 89 movie cause DC wasnt sure if jack nicholoson would come back to play him or if they was gonna use joker again if u read the original script most of bruce wayne/batman keaton arch is in it they also kept robin out cause it was to many characters but overall the final draft we got was the closet to the source material and jack nicholson joker is the best and original joker we got from any live action batman movie, even some of his brutal murders scenes came from 1939 era to the killing joke comics and his origin was told right but with so much studio interference alot got scrapped out and burton wanted to make sure his batman was kept a mystery as possible he didnt wanna do the batman origin but he did do the joker origin
@@sparkageddon3186 bob kane didn't create Batman. So whatever his fraudulent ass decided to do is irrelevant. A combo of Bill Finger and the editor is what established the no killing rule.
@@anthonygarcia8749 duh i know that i never said he didn't create batman i said its the beginning of bob kane era bill finger never gets the credit he deserves till this day I know my history to be a batman fan bill finger created 90% of the batman world
I just take the changes for what it is in the movie. It's a dang good flick and still one of my favorites.
I think it's pretty clear that Napiers crew is mostly independent from Grisham, having little or no loyalty to him.
Wasn't that the whole idea? Jack was not only fooling around with his woman but quietly taking over his gang. It was always my impression that he was just a step or two away from just taking over and he knew it, which was just another reason why he sent him into an ambush.
While you have your opinions.
This film got the world bat fever, and it made it dark.
I love this Batman, he's not the best Batman, but he was the first to make a "serious" movie about him, and to be able to take the character seriously in the movies.
Batman should never kill for any reason. I'm still mad about the 'I don't have to save you' scene in batman begins. Batman would and should never leave someone to die intentionally.
It's against both Batman's morals _and_ intelligence, as telling Ra's al-Ghul that you want to kill him but leaving him to his fate without making sure he's dead before you go runs the risk of an angry Ra's coming back like last night's chili surprise...especially in his case, since even if you actually could guarantee that he died after you left, if his followers get to his remains before you, he'll get a bath in the Lazarus Pit, and come out good as new and twice as out for revenge!
@@CoryPchajek #AllSuperheroesAreBastards?
To be fair he killed in the Golden Age
@@kenthegamer I just love how the prototype era of Superman in which he doesn't fly and Batman in which he doesn't have a moral code is called their Golden Age because it was first when it's not so much their peak as working the bugs out to create the characters we know and love today (for Batman, those growing pains would last until about the time that Denny O'Neil popped in iirc).
@@autobotstarscream765 Great point
I just can't wait for the 89 Comics and the Flash movie. I want to see more Keaton, and if there is gonna be a live action Batman Beyond being played by him I'm gonna be so happy
I don't know, did you see that quote by one of the producers? I forget who it was but she described the movie as a solar-powered god (Supergirl) and two idiots (Keaton's Batman and the Flash). I don't have a good feeling for how they're going to write him and, overall, I would much rather they just did the real Flashpoint story.
This is one of these movies where the more I hear the less I want to see it.
@@LibraGamesUnlimited Shit. I haven't seen that
If it turns out like that I'm gonna be fucking pissed. Feels like its going to try and be a female empowerment movie
@@jonger2408 Yeah, I saw it online, might be able to track it down but it sounds like they're going to make Supergirl the main character and it's not even the Supergirl everyone knows and loves, its an alternate version most people don't even know and fewer even care about.
@@LibraGamesUnlimited What a load of fucking shit. The movie is about the flash, it's literally got his name in the title. If they wanna make a supergirl movie they should name it supergirl.
I'm also really pissed that if what's being said is true, and Keaton is to be an idiot then it's just destroying the Tim Burton lore. Keaton's Wayne/Batman was one of the most intelligent Bruce Waynes, he was a chemist n shit and not many other Bruce Waynes were IIRC.
I won't be watching the Flash movie anymore. I just hope that if there's gonna be a live action Batman Beyond series with Keaton as the main character, so no Terry, it won't be a fucking female empowerment story
@@jonger2408 I'll hold out a little bit of cautious optimism perhaps. If only because Michael Keaton really doesn't need the work or the money. Can't believe he would just come back to play Batman again if he knew the role was going to be garbage.
I liked this movie a lot and watched it all the time when I was younger. It’s nice to hear what you think of it.
Ok so I totally disagree. As a person whose in his 40s I remember this coming out. You have to remember that at the time casual audience goers only knew the Joker and Batman from the campy Adam West Tv show. This was the first time a darker Batman and Joker was introduced to many of the masses who didn’t read comics. Jack played a perfect comic accurate joker. No one would have understood the Joker going from campy to frightening killer like Jack was in the shinning. The original Batman was so influential that the creators of Batman the animated series acknowledged they borrowed so much from it, including its appearance of Gotham.lastly I hate when people act like this was a movie about the joker falling in love. This movie was about the Joker creating chaos. He took over the mob, had people scared to use their body care items, tried to turn the city against Batman and then tried to poison a large section of Gotham.
Good points. I think it just has a lot of little flaws that, in retrospective, have added up and made it seem worse than it really is over time. For example; Batman killing, Joker murdering Bruce’s parents, Joker’s boner chase for Vicki Vale. To me, these all hinder the quality of what is in reality a fantastic film that paved the way for every single comic book movie as we know it after. People actually took Batman and comics seriously because of Tim Burton’s work. The art design, acting, and music are all pretty phenomenal and unique- sure as hell standing out in the crowd of bland superhero movies we have now.
@@filmaticpictures9693 lastly the thing I just noticed that annoyed me….was that he had the word murderer beside Batman on the thumbnail. My reaction was the same as Pam’s from the office when they questioned Jim for giving her employee of the month. To try to justify it she said that she did double her sales, then Andy sarcastically asked from 1 to 2? Then they did a cut of way of Pam saying “yep”! He killed people in the movie….so what. Movies can have different interpretations of characters. The Superman we see in InJustice isn’t the Superman we are accustomed to….(he’s much more interesting but that’s another argument). Also the killing Joke came out in 1988 and Frank Miller’s work on Batman was in 1986, so this is a time(1989) where creators are molding Batman to the Batman we know. Before then In the early Batman comics he was Batman in look only, his personality didn’t resemble anything we currently know Batman for. He was more similar to the Batman portrayed in the Super friends cartoon. So I’ll give the writers and the director a pass if they didn’t nail every aspect of Batman at that time.
@@TrueAnakinSkywalker but you don't need to give the writers a pass.
This isn't a different interpretation of the character.
They didn't get it wrong Like Vee erroneously claims.
Batman actually kills. A lot. A LOT. In the main canon timeline of comics.
I'm not talking about elseworlds or just the golden age comics.
But from the 60s through to the present day.
From 1969 to 1988 (during production before the movie was made) Batman killed a lot of people in the comics.
Here's just a few examples:
1969 - Brave/Bold 84 - Batman throws a grenade into a plane full of Nazis. Then later blows up an entire platoon.
1970 Batman 221 - throws a guy off of a building to his death
1970 DC 395 - Batman kills Dolores & Juan Muerto
Brave/Bold 90 - knocks a guy out and leaves him unconscious to drown in the ocean, bragging that he "hasn't lost his touch"
Batman 235 - douses a mad scientist in his own deadly chemicals and stands there watching him die with satisfaction
Batman 270 - crushes a man to death under a giant statue
Batman 271 - throws a grenade into a room full of cultists
1976 Detective Comics 455 - kills a vampire by destroying his heart
Detective Comics 480 - Batman fights a villain called The Fighting Machine and literally beats him to death.
Brave/bold 127 - lets a criminal drown at sea, shows no remorse observing the drowned body
1977 Batman 288 - Penguin is shooting at Batman who grabs a henchman as a human shield
Batman 290 - Batman electrocutes Skull Dugger to death
Brave/bold 157 - Batman rescues a senator from a criminal. He causes the criminal to crash the helicopter. Batman saves the senator but leaves the criminal in the exploded wreckage
Batman 337 - Batman knocks a guy off a cliff, proclaiming that the criminal probably wanted to die.
Brave/Bold 159 - Batman intentionally turns a Henchman into a permanent piece of Crystal
Detective comics 517 - kills a crook he once sent to jail
"The Doomsday Book" Detective #572 - Batman kills some henchmen, specifically using one as a meat shield to avoid gunfire from an Uzi.
B/B 195 - kills another Vampire
Batman Year Two - tries to kill Joe Chill. Putting a gun to his head. But Reaper kills him first.
Then after Reaper accuses Batman of being a killer, he falls to his death. Batman withdraws his hand, deciding not to save him.
Son of the Demon - blows up a helicopter with multiple people inside. Electrocutes an assassin.
Action Comics Annual 1 - Batman kills another Vampire
Batman No. 425 (1988) - Batman intentionally dropped a mountain of cars on a gangster in a junkyard.
Cosmic Odyssey 1988 - Batman kills a Paradaemon with a laser gun
Legends of The Dark Knight 1 - knocks an assassin off of a cliff
A Death in the Family (1988-1989) - last issue - batman commits attempted murder. Tries to kill Joker in the helicopter fight. Is undeniably outraged to find out he seemingly survived and Superman has to calm him down.
"The Messiah of the Crimson Sun" - Batman blows up Ra's al Ghul on a spaceship. Watching his ashes scatter. Even offering a pithy observation right after Robin exclaims "you killed him!"
Batman: The Cult 1988 - Batman mows someone down with a submachine gun. Blows up a henchman. Convinces the cult members to kill their leader. Robin suggested that they should save the cult leader, but Batman stops him.
10 Nights of the Beast - locks KGBeast up to starve to death. Jim Starlin wrote it so Batman killed KGBeast in Batman Vol 1 #420 June, 1988
@@orinanime you do realize that detective comics reboots their comic continuity every other Wednesday right?
I'm not saying you're wrong. I'm just saying that what your referencing is material that is no longer considered in continuity or Canon with the character. Most likely. Or you might be totally correct. I don't know I can't be bothered to keep up with DC in terms of their continuity at this point. It changes so often and practically means nothing.
@@JudgeSpektre i am aware that DC reboots their continuity a lot. And at this point it averages to approximately one reboot per decade overall.
But that doesn't negate my point. It just reinforces it.
It shows that there are multiple examples from every continuity.
I think what it boils down to is that so much of the Batman Animated Series solidified much of what we consider quintessential parts of Batman's identity, and looking back at Batman interpretations prior that aren't quite so confident in those traits can be a strange experience. Personally I love the Burton Batman but I don't consider him the quintessential Batman simply because, I personally feel the character was enriched and perfected later down the line.
I remember seeing Batman '89 on opening night at a midnight screening. The theater was packed. Everyone was stoked to finally see a dark and brooding version of the character closer to the version overseen by Denny O'Neil in the comics. Prince's Batman album was all the rage and the nightclub my friends and I frequented that summer would throw on Batdance at midnight and have a guy dressed as Batman swing above the dance floor on a harness.
Anyway, it's good because it told WB that the general audience would enjoy a serious (at least less campy) take on the character and the mythos.
What's sad is that WB did a complete about face on Tim Burton after Batman Returns because parents were upset at how dark and disturbing the movie was. I had a manager who told me how he had to console his then young daughter after the movie because Catwoman sliced up a bunch of stuffed animals. This backlash led to Batman Forever being way more campy (but not overly so) and of course Batman & Robin being a bad homage to Batman of the 1960's TV show.
I'll admit that the movie has its warts, but I will say this, Batman did not intentionally kill Joker in this movie. Rewatch what happens. Batman essentially anchors Joker to a gargoyle as Joker is trying to escape via helicopter. If Joker would have let go of the ladder immediately, he would have been banged up but alive. But Joker wouldn't let go. The helicopter was able to pull him and the gargoyle up which was too heavy for the Joker to maintain his grip. Joker lost his grip and fell to his death.
Nicholson's Joker was a solid throwback to the comics, and Keaton's Bruce Wayne/Batman was the first time on screen that we saw the character having a disturbed personality. Unlike Adam West who portrayed Batman as more of a straight hero and not a conflicted person with serious psychological problems.
Yes, a lot of people misinterpret that final scene. However, Batman does say to him "I'm going to kill you", and punches Joker in the face, knocking him over the edge, so I don't think he cared at that point if Joker lived or died.
Gotham is so bad that even the stuffed toys are jerks. They had it coming. :p
You're definitely one of those UA-camrs where I like the way you explain your opinion so much that even if I strongly disagree with the title I'm immediately clicking on it
I love your page, but this was very off. Batman (1989) was a great movie. It was the 1st time we saw Batman the way the comics had him. The dark setting and the hardships of being Bruce. You sir, are wrong about this and should rewatch Batman again and make a new video.
@DragonChaserKev That what I did, so he does like the movie suits bad.
> "We saw Batman the way the comics had him."
> Film has Batman killing people without a second thought.
Pick one
@@choueriito2548 Batman has killed in the comics before.
@@jtsleazeball2548 The only main timeline comics he has killed intentionally in the comics were the first few issues before that aspect of his character was swiftly retconned. His no-killing rule was both far more long-lasting and iconic to his character. By that logic of finding very temporary aspects in his long history as good comic accuracy, adding something like Ace the Bat Hound to the film would be considered a point of praise, yet I highly doubt anyone would be willing to argue that.
@DragonChaserKev it’s my least favorite by far. Keaton’s Bruce Wayne is laughable and I can’t stand this version of the joker
Here's the thing, you have to remember that this is the first movie in a franchise. It's also the first live action Batman since Adam West (1966). A lot of people going to see it didn't know his backstory. It's a clever way of avoiding the amount of screen time it would've taken to show it all in a fleshed out way. Plus this is before the internet and they're around Bruce's age so you can't really blame them for not reading the papers when they were kids. My final argument is that while Bruce is famous because he's rich, it's not like he's an actor you see on TV all the time. For instance, I know who Jeff Bezos is and what he looks like, but I have no idea about his parents or anything like that. I just know who he is cuz he's rich.
In my opnion, Nicholson is a good Joker because... he's a CLASSIC Joker. Not an original take like Headger, Letho and Phoenix, just a classical Joker like everyone should know the Joker. Like Mark Hammil's Joker: classical and not that "unique" in his interpretation (I mean, no, he IS unique, but he is a classical Joker: chemical bath, psyco-sadic, always put the smile before the killing). If I have to introduce the Joker I would use Hammil or Nicholson versions, THEN I'll say "of course there are diffrent interpretations, someone even better then these two, but THESE TWO are the CORE or the Joker character". Also, I love his permanent smile: Joker's normal/neutral face is while smiling, but it's not permanent, this was an interesting detail I really loved.
I see Jack's Joker as a little more like the classic Joker in the sense that it was before he was deconstructed by writers, he was simply a killer clown with deadly pranks.
I would love to see your Thoughts and Takes on the Arkham Games
I went and saw it in theaters when it was new. It was okay then, okay now. Batman Returns is the best of that era of films.
Gotham’s joker just combines ledger and Napier’s characters, following actors wouldnt have had any idea where to start without Nickelson
Why did you delete your other comment?
Edit: I feel this origin is the most realistic. Nicholson'd version is probably the legimiately craziest in terms of maybe not mental illness but someone who's gone nuts. I think the origin is perfect for this version.
Honestly I used to share your opinion. Watch the video "jack Nicholson is the scariest joker" it changed my mind. He nailed so many aspects of the character and the gag weapons. He had a passion for it, they tried to make. I don't think it's a love triangle. Joker is obsessed with Vicki for no reason. I don't think he's genuinely in love but trying to manipulate someone. I think he's just doing something. Also Hamill's Joker in TAS has the same origin as Nicholson.
A new concept that Batman 89 introduced, which I really love, is joker’s smile. In the comics we’ve seen him frown and show other emotions, but here, his face is stuck in a permanent disfigured smile. And I think that adds a lot more creepiness to the character.
Batman Returns is the best live action Batman film.
2 things:
-You going to talk about the recent Batman '89 comics that continue this continuity?
-When you've talked about Batman, you've generally stuck pretty close to the core Batman mythos and supers closest to him. You ever going to do any lengthy analysis of his relationships to other characters, i.e. Gordon? Superman?
1) yes and 2) not a bad idea
You should do like a comparison of teen Titans and young justice. Also if u did one about who was your favorite robin and why. Or just a comparison of robins and the other members of the bat family
Man, you are just DETERMINED to get people to hate you! I respect your conviction!
Batman murdered people for his first year of publication and this was largely based on Golden Age Batman so...
And golden age batman was boring as fuck so...
He killed people in like, three issues and then stopped. Batman's not suppose to kill
So? Superman used to not have flying powers, only jumping. When a character trait becomes iconic it shouldn't be discarded.
This was more Tim Burton not knowing anything about Batman than him referencing a couple of obscure moments from 50 year old comics that none of the movie audience read.
@@LiveForFuntasy No it wasn't.
This Batman created the golden age Batman. Batman the animated series Batman a.k.a Kevin Conroy Batman.
I was 9 when the first Batman got released. Loved it then and still love it now. Batman returns was brilliant too. The rest were crap apart from the dark night and the last one with Tom hardy as bain.
Batman 1989 is a prime example of style over substance. I don't like the film, but appreciate it's influence.
I consider this to be better than The Dark Knight.
simply because it is.
I watched this again recently on HBO MAX and I still enjoy it a lot.
I consider you to be absolutely insane.
J/k We like what we like lol
I respect your opinion, it is a very good movies but I like the Dark Knight and Batman Begins better, not the Dark Knight rises though as it's interesting and very good, just more boring parts of it.
Hmph. And I consider batman forever better then all of them. but ofc adam west beats them all
What you dislike about the concept about Joker and Batman creating each other is one of the aspects I really like about this movie. Especially when you see the first 3 movies as a connected story, then this works really well for Batman's character development, as he takes several steps to step away from killing. The only things I don't like about the movie are that Joker dies in the end and that they didn't do much with Dent. This could have been fixed in the 2nd one, but unfortunately, they didn't.
The Joker as a mobster thing... it wasn't necessary. But I don't care, it works in the context of the movie.
Bob is the best DC character of all time
we all know who the best batman is
It’s you buddy, it’s you
you -
I appreciate your opinion Vee. Thank you for all of your videos!
I’m more less mixed, there’s a lot I love about this film like the performances, ascetic, and OST. As for the negatives well although I love the old 39 comics I still don’t like seeing modern Batman kill and way too much Joker that devalues his mystique, oh and never loved the origin having Joker involved it really makes there origins more generic, it’s more about revenge and Batman saving his girlfriend, then the personification of Order and Chaos clashing
I think that Batman killing people is okay.
@@jonger2408 under cuts a lot of what makes him interesting
@@joeker5208 Yeah. But I mean, in both Tim Burton Batman movies when he kills people it's usually because they're really endangering civilians. Except those last guys when the Joker was doing the Waltz to Death with Vicki.
@@jonger2408 I can let it pass for the Burton films as a lot of those choices were made by Bob Kane who wanted to have more of the 1939 feel, and it’s done in an over the top fashion that doesn’t piss me off that much, it’s not as bad as say BvS
@@joeker5208 Yeah absolutely
Thanks to Jack Nicholson and Christian Slater I can't watch Heathers in peace without thinking JD is just The Joker in a different font
Does that make the movie better or worse? I haven't seen it in so long I can't guess.
The Joker killing Batman's parents definitely annoyed me. I have to agree to disagree with you regarding your other Joker points. 89 was a huge deal and this movie was definitely part of that. Of course the movie DOES have a few flaws. Having said that, I am not a fan of Phoenix as Joker so there you go. He's literally right over Leno and Romero as far as Jokers go. His ACTING in the movie is great. I just wished it wasn't a Joker movie. This movie is one of those "you had to be there" moments. I'd just graduated from high school that summer.
I'm torn on that one. On the one hand I kind of liked the idea, but I can still see the issues with it. I now the comics tried it, for some reason years later, and there was such a backlash they had to change it pretty quick. I thnk it turned out Lex had given Batman the information (that Joe Chill was just another alias for the Joker, before becoming the Joker) and it turned out he lied. I think the whole thing was to try and push Batman into killing the Joker.
Overall, I would much rather see it in a movie than in the comics themselves (unless it's an Elseworlds story or something).
@@LibraGamesUnlimited I agree. I would love to see that fully realized on the big screen.
Jay Leno played the Joker?
@@dustywaynemusic6297 There's not enough greasepaint in the world to cover that massive chin. :)
@@dustywaynemusic6297 I meant Leto. Lol. Thanks
I appreciate his respect for the movie and the impact it had on the superhero movie genre (along with leading to the creation of BTAS) despite what he dislikes about it. I've been well aware the movie isn't perfect, but it's still one of my favorites. For me it's pretty much always been a 3-way tie between Batman 89, Batman Begins and Mask of the Phantasm as the best Batman movie (no, I don't like the Dark Knight as much, as great as it is).
Prince would probably work better with a character like Catwoman... because... let's face it.... Prince conveys powerfully, sexual and sensual lyrics and sound (Darling Nikki is definitely one of my favorite songs) and Catwoman definitely falls in that category as well... but Batman and Joker? Nope. That's a whole lot of nope.
That said the music for Batman Returns fit it to a T. I especially love that song by Sousie and the Banshees "Face to Face". It perfectly sums up the split personality theme that Catwoman AND Batman share.
@@LibraGamesUnlimited There is a rumour that at one point Siouxsie Sioux was considered to play catwoman but she was too old or declined i don't remember which one was. But yeah "Face to Face" is a great song not the best Siouxsie and the banshees song but the best theme for Catwoman.
Sorry for my English. It's not my native language
@@daniels9663 It is perfect for the movie. The video is also very good, it's on here somewhere.
She would have been really good judging by that video.
So you're saying you're only comfortable with the idea of sensual, sexual songs being applied to female characters.
It was originally supposed to be a collaboration between Michael Jackson and Prince. With Prince doing the Joker songs and Jackson doing Batman songs.
A lot of the complaints seem to be that this film didn't show versions of the characters... that frankly didn't exist yet.
Quick witted Alfred was created in The Animated Series as far as I am aware.
Before this Alred was just a pudgy Englishman
Wilem Defoe would've been a perfect Joker in Batman 89
I feel like he would have been too young back then. He was perfect age around 1998
He would be a great Johnathan Crane Scarecrow 🎃 for Keaton Batman 🦇
When I saw this back in '89, I immediately thought Detective Eckhart was Harvey Bullock.
I can see why. I would think the reason they didn't do that (other than the Harvey thing) would be that Eckhart is on the take and get killed. wouldn't want to do that to poor Bullock.
Persians are white. I'm an Iranian and I'm White. I preferred him to be played by an Iranian man but it's not a race change.
This Joker is more based of the Golden Age Joker, who was a mob boss. Either the Bronze age barely existed for few years before this movie came out and the Killing Joke comic (with the Red Hood origin) came out years later during the Dark Age.
The "joker" from the Joker movie never actually was the Joker and never actually will be.
They did make a comic sequel where he did become Two-Face, but the comic was so bad that less said the better and it is better 2 forget it happened.
Jesus did you nail Harvey. Never felt like diversity of a character for diversity sake. It felt like hiring an actor that could perfectly fit the role.
Modern movies could learn from that
This movie is not aging well. I was 5 years old in 1989, so I'm aware of what this movie meant at the time of its release.
In 100 years, if someone sat down and watched every Batman movie released between 1989 and 2022, I don't think many would favor this movie. The action is limited, and Burton was rather liberal in changing the Batman mythos.
People get caught up in nostalgia, they get tricked into thinking that because something is the first (no disrespect to Adam West), it means it's the best.
Again, in 100 years if someone watched every Batman movie released between 1989 and 2022, Batman '89 would not be favored.
I stand by this statement.
Heath was on another level. But I love this joker.
This, and the dark knight are my two favorite batman movies, and casts.
For me Michael Keaton was the best batman. Maybe it's because he is what I grew up on, but I just think he fit the role the best, and did the best with it all around.
i love the variety you provide on this channel, not my least favorite youtuber, more like top 10
One Flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest is Jack Nicholsons best performance of all time and one of the greatest film's ever and also my 2th favourite film of all time.
6:45 they had plan for that relationship for the 5th movie that, no joke, would have remdeemed the "Batman Forever" and "Batman & Robin" with Joker being, this time, Harley Quinn's father and, I presume that the woman would have been the mother.
batman 89 is the batman that introduced me to the character when I was a kid. the animated series helped. i remember having the movie recored from tv onto a vhs tape and now have it on blu ray. do like how gotham looks and how the batmobile looks. its not perfect but then again i down think any of the batman movies are. way it is. for me or for anyone most likely. will say that as i get older vickie vales legs in hose hits my eyes now since im older though. hehe.
I'm in the opposite in that the first Batman movie I saw was the dark knight in theater when I was 12. I saw this one for the first time years later and just felt like it was kind of meh in comparison to Dark Knight
"Does it really hold up?" You don't exactly leave a whole lot of mystery in what your answer to that question will be, based on the thumbnail and the title.
I really liked this batman as a kid, really just because not many superhero movies were out and worth while. Wish they would make a live action Thomas Wayne movie. Thomas is a badass in flashpoint paradox.
You can always watch the show *"Pennyworth"* if you want to see Thomas Wayne as a young adult. It's a solid show.
Thomas Wayne, when comic fans are suddenly ok with Batman killing people.
@@axebomber2108 - We weren't OK with it when he made Bane snap Alfred's neck in front of young master Damian in *City of Bane* ...
I guess since we didn't see much of him in Flashpoint, fans kinda idealized Thomas Batman, but we've seen what happens if Bruce crosses the line.
He isn't Batman anymore, Batman has the trust of Jim Gordon, the Justice League, the Bat-family and of course, Alfred.
He'd become the Grim Knight, and would need to put an explosive chip in Alfred's neck to prevent him from leaving, would need to force Harvey Dent into helping him, etc etc
I know you weren't serious ^^ just felt like ranting a bit.
Controversially I much preferred Batman forever to both burton films
Wow that’s different for sure but I respect it I think Batman forever is the most underrated Batman movie
This is possibly my favorite variant of Batman tied with the 90s series. However, I appreciate your opinions bro.
We can all agree that the score by Danny Elfman for this and Returns are masterpieces
No!
@@MrParkerman6YES! it insipid the theme to Batman 1989 so...🤔
I just watched this Movie for the first time and I really enjoyed this movie. I absolutely loved the Joker
Everybody who got mad at Vee Infuso: yeah I bet all those dislikes will teach him not to talk crap the dark knight trilogy
Vee Infuso talking about Batman 89: I'll fucking do it again
😂😂😂
Batman has killed before in the comics. So, don't write 1989 Batman off because of the ending alone.
Loved Batman '89, still do. Saw it in theaters as a kid, had the toys and although it hasn't aged well, it still has a special place in my heart as far as summer blockbuster films of my youth. All that said, I tend to agree with your take on The Joker. Jack Nicholson is/was a phenomenal actor, but by that point of his career, he was damn near typecast as playing different degrees of "crazy." Look at his filmography, he always played characters that were on a "crazy/deranged" spectrum. Nicholson's take on the Joker was nothing more than Jack in white face paint, just slightly turned up.
I can’t argue with that.
I agree on everything, i was born 89 in Finland but as i was old enough to watch it even as a child i loved Batman but all the faults you said i felt as kid. One thing to add, final fight with Joker that you wait whole movie and Joker offers no resistance, and Batman purposely binds his foot to dropping gargoyle thus the ending feels that cold batman executes defendeless mad/sad Joker
This Alfred is so precious I can’t breathe
i was a huge prince fan as a kid. rented this movie cause i heard he did songs for it. prince made me a life long batman fan
How many times do we have to teach you this lesson OLD MAN?!?!?!
I like the young people......
After hearing the Nostalgia Critic saying why the Batman 1989 is his favorite, this video popped into my next interest.
I hated the new Batman and everyone else likes it but the original Batman is my favorite I think Jack is the best joker and Michael is the best Batman
This video currently has 89k views, perfect
"I don't like 'Batman' because it has music from Prince." That's what you call an argument? 🙄
He ain't wrong. Prince has made many memorable songs through his career, but the one for Batman I think is for him a lowpoint. Guess he didn't get enough info to do much with considering how "off" it is
@@zilvertron I'm sorry but Batman is one of the most iconic comic book characters of all time. That's why Prince was brought in to help with the soundtrack...b/c he's one of the greatest pop artists of all time.
@@backpackmatt Just because its 2 greats doesnt make the sum fantastic.
@@zilvertron Of course it does...that's what's called Star Power.
@@zilvertron You do realize there are multiple songs from Prince in Batman?...not just one! The fact that you don't realize that tells me that your opinion is based on ignorance and bias.
Moreso an iconic movie than a loyal one. It helped spark a lot of interest for Batman.
The reason Batman shouldn’t kill as a character is the fact that it turns him into a fascist. He kinda already is, putting himself above the law beating up everyone who’s getting out of line. Burton never considered this ”fact” so I’ve always had a hard time taking his iteration of Batman serious. Because he didn’t take Batman serious enough. BUT I guess the writer is to blame.
BTW did you guys notice Knox’s cameo in The Dark Knight as a reporter in the scene where Harvey Dent turns himself in as Batman?
I think for the Burton verse it was fitting that he kills
@Luke Allin it isn’t exactly that Burton didn’t take him seriously. It’s just that Burton isn’t a Batman fan. He has never even read a Batman comic, the writer of the Batman film is great, but Burton forced him to include a lot he didn’t want to. Also no, a Batman who kills, forsakes everything Batman is.
@@ColesFilmStuff It doesn't "forsake everything Batman is" Batman originally killed people and the reason he stopped was because comics were to get less violent
It isn't Burton forcing people to do stuff. It was Bob Kane wanted Batman to be more like 1939 Batman.
@Luke Allin You’re making good point (even though your critizism of me doesn’t sit well). A Batman who kills is merely The Punisher. The fact that Batman ”kind of kills” the Joker (it might just have been an atempt to stop him from escaping) should give Batman the satisfaction of avenging the murders of his parents, which ultimatly should ”cure” him from the need of being Batman. And that logic is based on your interpretations and points. They try to talk around this fact when Robin enters the franchaise. For Batman to function as an on-going character he has to have a broader ”hate” towards criminals than merely seeking revenge. Also, to justify what he does, he needs to be better than the crooks he fights, meaning showing compassion and book’em by the law. This is how Nolan takes it seriously, because one could argue that a better way to fight crime is to be preventive instead of a reaction. In Nolan’s Batman Thomas Wayne did just that! He was a filantrop and it didn’t work. This justifies the reason for Batman to take it to the streets. Also gives the story a poetic justice-flair as he ”beats them at their on game”, with the only language they speak: the language of violence.
2 things I like in this movie are the batmobile (it’s definitely the definitive version for me) and the liberty burton added to the joker where he had a permanent smile because of his injuries. I always like it when some of the more grizzly villains have body horror elements
Fun fact: Even Tim Burton actually prefers Batman Returns over the original movie. He felt the movie was dull and boring at times and hated how the studio interfered with his vision by adding pop songs in the mix. Thankfully we got to see Burton's acquired taste for the sequel.
As much as I love 1989 I think I love Batman Returns more than 89 mainly because it featured my favorite villains at the time.
It was Keaton who started the Bruce and Batman differences.
The first to use a different voice.
"Too organized", heath ledger's joker is more organized, you just don't get to see it, but everything he does seems chaotic but wouldn't make much sense if it were. It's more realistic if it were calculated.
Why I didn’t like this video: the dude didn’t like Batman 1989
I’ve always said this Batman 89 was a Batman movie directed by Tim Burton but Batman Returns is a Tim Burton Batman movie
Exactly. Couldn’t have said it better myself. That’s one of the reasons why I take Batman 89 over Batman Returns anyday (in terms of a BATMAN movie).
I really agree with your take here. I love the movie, as it was the first "Batman" thing I ever saw. But I don't really think of it as my definitive "Batman." For me, that's the character from the Arkham games and Bruce Timm's DCAU.
I can completely agree. For me, I only had the ‘66 re-runs of the show for live action. So seeing this movie as a teenager actually created my cinematic recognition of my generation’s Batman, and not my parents.
In the first Batman comic i read Joker got Batman unconcious and had him strapped to a mountain side that had like arrow bombs shot at the side and Bat would die if he cant get out until the count out... i expect Jokert to fight Batman !
I didn’t love this movie either, but I think the sequel is PERFECT
Are you on acid?
Batman Returns was literally garbage
@@markmaher1098 it’s fine to have an opinion it was a good movie
@@James.row3 yet some people in these comments aren’t accepting vees
Batman Returns is not only a perfect movie, but a perfect Christmas movie.
U have got to be out of your mind if you didn’t like Batman 1989 only a troll wouldn’t like this movie
Some good points were made in this video.
I'm sorry, you're wrong on many things: 1) OK, maybe Joker from the comics didn't really kill Bruce's parents, but that's the purpose of rebooting a franchise (that was viewed mainly as a kids' show until then-the 60s Adam West version). So what if it's not canon, it's still a hell of a twist and it underlines the deeper bond between Napier and Bruce. Joker 2019 did pretty much the same thing by portraying the character as some discarded lovechild of Bruce's dad. He may not have been, but that's beside the point; the point is that Joker thinks there's a bond between himself and the Waynes. 2) Seriously, Jack Nicholson as the Joker was the casting choice to end all casting choices. He was BORN to play the persona of the Joker. I've seen him in almost every film he has ever done (including Easy Rider), and this is easily among his top-5 performances. He is meant to come off as flamboyant and vicious and clearly psychotic, while the audience secretly wants him to succeed (well, sort of) 3) Tim Burton creates this totally fucked-up version of Gotham from the first five minutes without exposition. He just shows Batman doing his job while also portraying how vile and corrupt Gotham is. His aesthetic is quite something too- instead of featuring some stand-in city for Gotham (like Nolan did), he shoots the majority of the film in the studio, which allows him to display his love for all things gothic and art-deco. Nolan never did that. I agree with you on Keaton as Batman, he's the best actor who ever played the part, but try to remember what an incredible gamble it was to allow some 30 year old kid who was known for Beetlejuice to reboot a dead franchise and give it his own artistic vision.
1) you can change stuff in an adaptation but in this special case it makes the story less interesting because it becomes a simple vendetta for Batman where the Batman/Joker relationship is supposed to be way more than that.
2) Jack Nicholson just played like in all his other movies he acts the exact same way in the shining I don’t get why people think this performance is amazing. For me it’s like Johnny Depp, he plays really good but always the same kind of characters so eventually even if it’s good it becomes redundant.
@@melvinloir489 I understand what you're saying about it being simply a vendetta, but there's so much more crammed into 2 hours of screen time. We get to see the urban decay of Gotham, the ineptitude of the police who are either corrupt, or simply lack the funds to make a difference, we get to see Bruce Wayne for the first time as an eccentric billionaire and how he balances his personal life with his image. I think that Tim Burton really infused his personal aesthetic in the film while creating an origins story. And that's much more difficult than most people think. Anyway, it may be that I'm biased in favor of this film (I was just 11 when it came out and it was the movie of the year, that and Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade), but it's still an amazing movie some 32 years later and it holds quite well against the Nolan trilogy.
And it could be argued that Begins did the same thing with Ra's Al Ghul. He was made part of Batman's origin. I can guarantee Begins is the first time Bruce joined the League of Shadows or any of Ra's organizations before becoming Batman, let alone being trained and inspired by Ra's(use your fears to fight criminality). They even pinned the corruption and crime in Gotham on the League of Shadows.
@@axebomber2108 Yes, both Batman and Batman Begins are great origins stories and have some common themes, but I prefer the 1989 Batman to be honest.
Lhhh 😂😂 that scene when Bruce was sleeping upside down went right over my head when I was a kid lol. Watched it last week and thought, “ damn, this bitch has to know he’s Batman now”
He isn't sleeping. He's exercising.
Exercising. You never seen those setups for crunches?
😂😂😂
When it comes to screaming damsels in distress, Vicki Vale in this movie has some serious lungpower, alongside Kirsten Dunst's Mary Jane Watson, Margot Kidder's Lois Lane, and Willie Scott from "Indiana Jones And The Temple Of Doom".
I'm starting to wonder if you like anything 🤣😂🤣😂
A film adaptation of the Joker graphic novel with Jack Nicholson would be great
If it’s a young Easy Rider, Cuckoo Nest Nicholson, then yes.
@@ForPetesake552 definitely
I believe that the symbiotic relationship was handled better in The Dark knight
22:51 Best Batman movie is t mask of the Phantasm I called it
I don't mind Batman killing people, never bothered me. It was just, Oh....I see. And he does it again in the sequel, with a smile.
Personally to me he shouldn’t
@@Mirrorcomics24 Yeah I get it. Especially the sequel, its more a Tim Burton movie than a Batman movie. That's why I still enjoy it. Everyone has their favorites, I find Keaton's Batman more interesting.
@@jwnj9716 I could let off this killing but I think it was too far in the sequel
@@Mirrorcomics24 Hehe yeah. It is a weird movie....and I love it! Penguin's death is very odd, you kinda feel bad. I guess it's because of Elfman's score. Very strange feeling. Lets not forget, Batman makes out with a zombie....
His no killing rule is such a big part of his character and just to go ignore that kinda feels wrong to me. Often the most interesting Batman stuff comes from his no killing rule, there’s been many moral dilemmas and character clashes that are really interesting that are often due to his no killing rule
Yeah, by the end of the video it was pretty obvious you liked the movie, you just didnt love it...
I think the only problem with Jack was that he was too old (on that note, making him the Waynes murderer was stupid, but it was the trend in the '80s), a 10 years younger Jack playing the Joker would've been perfect.
And as Tim Burton said, "Michael Keaton looks like a guy who would dress like a bat to scare people", the guy is pushing 70, and still looks menacing AF.
I like the sequel more but still like that one as well. Nothing wrong with not loving that movie though, its not like its the greatest thing ever. Even I think its overrated and I like it!
I put "Batman Returns" on my Christmas movie list. :)
Kevin Conroy’s Bruce Wayne/Batman from Batman The Animated Series will always be my Bruce Wayne/Batman.
Never liked any of the live action Batman movies TBH. Mostly because Mask of the Phantasm exists lol
yeah the live action Batman movies kind of suck for the most part, BTAS is a far better adaptation of Batman than any live action movie or TV show can ever hope to achieve
@@Meowdab did you at least enjoy any of the live action batman movies?
@@kwible3682 oh yeah, I just don't particularly love any of them as adaptations of Batman, most of them are good-great as movies on their own, but for me, none really get the character quite right