126 min
7.231
1989
USA
Batman must face his most ruthless nemesis when a deformed madman calling himself "The Joker" seizes control of Gotham's criminal underworld.
Overview
Reviews
John Chard wrote:Vision not fully realised, but still a template of sorts.
It could never have lived up to the hype back in 1989, it was hailed as the film to rival the impact of "Jaws" & "Star Wars" as regards historical cinema conventions, it was, we were led to believe, a new age in cinema, or so it seemed. As it was, the film went down a treat for the modern cinema going audience, it raked in cash galore and spawned a raft of very inferior sequels, even though ultimately critics of the time were less than impressed.
So it makes for something of an interesting experience viewing it again as each decade passes. More so in light of Christopher Nolan's bank busting "Dark Knight" series of films. I remember the hype and marketing campaign (T-Shirts and toys bonanza) that ensured that the film could never live up to the gargantuan hype, and I'm honest enough to say that I was a little underwhelmed on first viewing. Yet time has been very kind to it, now showing that Burton had the nous and foresight to reignite a genre without going purely for kiddie like appeasements.
Visually the film still stands up with the best that today's genre pieces can offer, the sets are incredible, with Anton Furst rightly winning the big award for his work here, whilst Burton's dark and deep tone captures the essence of Gotham City and Bruce Wayne's troubled mind perfectly, but does the cast fully realise the potential on offer?. Michael Keaton as the troubled and vengeful Bruce Wayne, is a fine actor and it would only be in time where his take on Wayne the man would be appreciated, as the caped crusader he is outstanding and he set the bar high for all those that followed him.
Jack Nicholson has the time of his life camping it up as The Joker, and he steals the film for sure. This is not because he is acting with great poise and class, but purely because in a film calling for the battle of two unhinged characters, he is the one awash in colour and overacting the maniacal side of the character to the max. Kim Basinger looks great but doesn't have to do much as Vicki Vale except say her lines right, pout, look scared when required and scream with conviction, and she does all of these. But really any other actress could have done the same thing - though I'm personally relieved that Sean Young dropped out of the film and thus allowed some other actress to step in.
The supporting cast do OK, and the soundtrack by Prince pushes the boundaries of annoying caricature indulgence. Ultimately it's a fun ride, respectful of the source material and giving the comic book genre of fil a shot in the arm. Yet you can't help feeling that there is some great Burton vision here that never got fully realised. And that is a damn shame, and something that Burton himself would come to admit down the line. 8/10
Albert wrote:This movie is so bad I couldn't even finish it.
Jakeflix wrote:Yeah, it's good.
Wuchak wrote:_**Looks good, but surreal and tedious**_
Tim Burton's "Batman" (1989) is _so_ disappointing! Yeah, the costumes, sets, cast, cinematography and music are great, but the story is unrealistic, goofy and, worst of all, dull; in other words, it siphoned! Tim Burton is outstanding with visuals, but he failed to incorporate an interesting story. What good is a BORING film that looks great and doesn't take its subject seriously? This is a quintessential example of style over substance.
Most of the high ratings are from people who saw it when they were kids and they're just nostalgic. If they viewed the film objectively as an adult, with respect to the true Batman of the silver/bronze/modern age of comics, they'd have to admit that it's not a good interpretation.
Sure, it could be accepted as a sort of an ALTERNATIVE Batman; a friend of mine who's in the comic business said this was the only way he could appreciate it. But if you want to see a serious Batman flick, true to the legend of the Dark Knight, catch "Batman Begins" (2005) and its sequels, they blow this overrated soporific dud out of the water.
The movie's overlong at 2 hours, 6 minutes.
GRADE: C
The Movie Mob wrote:**Batman 1989 burst on the scene shattering the box office and rewriting the rules of comic book films with dark characters and high stakes in ways no superhero movie had seen before.**
Superhero movies of the 70s and 80s were bright and colorful, goofy and optimistic, champions of truth, Justice, and the American Way. Movies like Superman, Supergirl, the original Captain America, and even Adam West’s Batman all fit this vibe and aesthetic, with many overly campy but charming. This made Tim Burton’s darker, more violent Batman a huge gamble. Warner Bros literally sank every last penny they had into the movie as the studio was collapsing and going out of business. A dark superhero film with murder and blood? Michael Keaton? Mr. Mom himself as Batman? It was a massive risk with a tremendous payoff! Warner Bros survived and thrived off the enormous box office profits, and Batman reinvented the superhero genre showing that adults could enjoy superhero movies too. Even though Batman 1989 is a little dated and campy now, it broke every mold when it was released. Michael Keaton proved himself as the incredible star and bankable actor that he is. Jack Nicholson’s Joker stood as the iconic standard for villains for decades. Kim Basinger’s Vicki Vale is still one of the best Batman love interests to date. Tim Burton saved superheroes and movie studios with this dark reinvention of the comic book genre. It’s a true superhero classic.
Andre Gonzales wrote:There will never be a greater batman or movie ever. The original is still the only good batman movie out there. They keep trying but they had it right the 1st time, and they messed it up now.
Rob wrote:Probably one of the first serious attempts at bringing a comic to the big screen with a decent budget. The vision of the world is brilliant. Keaton's Batman is spot on and the Prince soundtrack ties the whole thing together perfectly. Unfortunately, Tim Burton's flamboyance lets things down in the end. But still the most memorable Batman to date. Although Ben Affleck's jaded, grumpy and bulked-out depiction of the character in Batman V Superman is my favourite.
CinemaSerf wrote:"Batman" never was my favourite superhero, and although Michael Keaton tries hard here to inject a little soul into the character, I'm afraid I found Jack Nicholson's totally over-the-top "Joker" to be just annoying and the whole film to be little underwhelming. "Gotham City" is essentially an urban jungle under the boot of the menacing "Grissom" (Jack Palance). He and his sidekick "Napier" (Nicholson) - who only has a limited grasp on his sanity - have a bit of a falling out, though, and the latter man is soon swimming in a vat of deadly chemicals... The result? Well his madness is now completely unleashed on his former boss then on the entire city as he attempts to gain complete control. Luckily for DA "Harvey Dent" (Billy Dee Williams) and Police Commissioner "Gordon" (Pat Hingle) the city might just have a chance of salvation in the form of our eponymous, black leather-caped, crusader. Equipped with a bullet-proof car, a super-charged motor bike and some heavy duty kevlar body armour he vows to take on the criminal element and restore some sort of order. He, too, has his demons - which we learn about as the story develops, and it seems they can only be tempered by his loyal retainer "Alfred" (Michael Gough). As the stakes rise, it soon becomes a man-to-man combat scenario that I found all rather too theatrical. The visual effects are solid, the audio and lighting also work well to create an at times intimidating atmosphere, but I just found myself missing the point. There can be no doubt that Nicholson's performance as an actor is outstanding, but for me it created a relentless, almost pantomime-style, character that as it persisted just rather left me looking around the cinema wondering what Burt Ward was doing nowadays. Groundbreaking it was in 1989. In 2023 - well I'm not at all sure. It does look good, though!
kevin2019 wrote:"Batman" certainly can't be beaten just for pure entertainment value. It was a high profile event movie and you can immediately understand why with a stellar cast such as this one on board along with director Tim Burton - just fresh from the successful "Beetlejuice" (1988) at the time - behind the cameras. They have unquestionably produced a fast paced feast for the eyes in every way possible and Gotham City itself is a shadowy, sinister, and menacing place. It is also an extremely good idea to completely remove it from the light hearted and garishly coloured television series and pretty much make the primary colour black with the only exception being The Joker's overly colourful costumes which perfectly reflect the clownish exterior of this truly ruthless and cold blooded killer. This film deserved to do well and it will probably remain a highly enjoyable guilty pleasure for many more years to come.
