Hot Toys - Batman 1989 - Michael Keaton

[Khonsu70]

89 Bats got it right...you can't pinpoint a specific time...it's like a collage of eras.

Yup! Burton's genius was creating a universe for Bats to play in that was all his own. I recently re-watched 89 Batman ad the only thing that seemed overtly dated were the television sets with the curved tubes. Nolan's Batman will seem verrry dated someday, to future audiences it will seem as relevant as George Reeves' Superman does now. It would be like if Burton had made his Batman contemporary by having him use cutting-edge technology of the time, like breaking out one of those 80s cell phones that looked like something the army would have used in the field - and having everyone "ohh and ahh" over it. "Dated" can come in many forms.

 

[poomonk]

He could've played a great toyman

What a useless character though

Supes's rogue gallery = fail

Agreed, but Darkseid is cool. I consider him a Superman Rogue. However, I still think The Flash has a worse Rogue gallery. (Mirror Man? Captain Cold? Professor Zoom? So lame.)

 

[SnakeDoctor]

Agreed, but Darkseid is cool. I consider him a Superman Rogue. However, I still think The Flash has a worse Rogue gallery. (Mirror Man? Captain Cold? Professor Zoom? So lame.)

Lex Luthor, Darkseid, Zod and Doomsday are very solid. There are a couple of others that are OK -- like the one that zaps Superman's powers (can't remember his name).

SnakeDoc

 

[Khonsu70]

Lex Luthor, Darkseid, Zod and Doomsday are very solid. There are a couple of others that are OK -- like the one that zaps Superman's powers (can't remember his name).

SnakeDoc

Would add Brainiac, Bizarro, Parasite, and Metallo to that list (names aside, they're pretty decent villains).

 

[SnakeDoctor]

Would add Brainiac, Bizarro, Parasite, and Metallo to that list (names aside, they're pretty decent villains).

I knew there were a few I was forgetting. Parasite was the one I couldn't remember his name. Can't figure how I forgot Bizarro and Brainiac.

SnakeDoc

 

[thenammagazine]

I think it's quite plausible that, in 20 years time, people will look back at these films and see that they represent a specific time in our history as well. In this case, the case can be made that they are quite evidently the cultural product and part of the dialogue of an America responding to September 11, 2001.

Just as we look back at the Dirty Harry movies and see them as a cultural product and a part of the dialogue of their own time, when urban crime and ineffectual bureaucracy and lawyering became a paramount problem. They were made as "contemporary" films and not to be modern-day period pieces. But even though their day has passed, they are not dated - they have simply moved to become period pieces of a bygone period.

Again, trying to compare it with another period piece just isn't working. Dirty Harry capitalizes off of the terror caused by the Zodiac Killer during the late 60's and early 70's. It's not a "contemporary" piece, but another period piece capitalizing off of a specific time in history. The sequels are debatable, but comparing it to Dirty Harry is again inaccurate. I think the comparison to George Reeves' Superman is more accurate. This made an impact in your life so you'll remember it with a fondness as much as us older members fondly remember watching the West Batman on television, but it simply won't have the timelessness of Burton's Batman.

 

[intothevoid]

I'd compare TDK to Heat

Heat if viewed today feels pretty 90s but still Badass crime thriller. I take the point though that in another 10-20 yrs it may feel a bit dated in terms of it's physical setting but the story will hold up, the soundtrack will hold up, and ultimately the movie will still 'work' well

That's how I feel about TDK. The setting may be distinctly contemporary to the 2000s but the story and themes I think are timeless

 

[EVILFACE]

Still one of the 3-5 all-time best stand up performances imo.

I tried to watch Beverly Hills Cop II the other day and all I could picture was Donkey on the fauking screen.

 

[jye4ever]

I'm sure there are people who would think i'm nuts if I told them that I could never sit thru again Gone With the Wind, Wizard of Oz, Dr. Zhivago, Psycho, Rear Window, Citizen Kane, The Grapes of Wrath, Casablanca, The Bridge on the River Kwai, Lawrence of Arabia, The Ten Commandments, Dr. Strangelove, China Town and the list can go on and on for me.

We all have our personal tastes of what we choose to tolerate or shrug off what we believe is dated and irrelevant for us in the present day.

Then again, I could just have a ____ty taste in movies

 

[intothevoid]

You have ____ty taste in movies

But great taste in cats and bat movies

 

[jye4ever]

You have ____ty taste in movies

But great taste in cats and bat movies

Edit:

I do love The Twilight Zone series though, I'll watch that collection until I burn a hole in those damn discs

Oh, and I love The Good and the Bad and the Ugly.

See, I do have good tastes afterall!

 

[DiFabio]

Actually, it's funny you mention that Void because TDK, despite the cell phones has this 90s feel to it that is hard to describe. The soundtrack is very reminiscent to Zimmer's earlier scores from the late 80s and 90s and the film just has this particular look to it. I can't remember exactly which part, but there's a sequence in TDK, I believe it's the shot of Gotham after Mayor Garcia and Gordon discuss Dent's whereabouts, where the time elapses, the music builds up and it almost feels like you're shifted into the third act. Similar to the Fugitive and Forrest Gump, which are both, you guessed it 90s films. I know Heat is usually used as a reference/similarity, but I think there's a more distinct one, and that's Terminator 2. It's not just because of the blue film filter either.

Batman Returns is also another one of those films where the freshness and "new look" hasn't worn off. There's just something clean about them. They don't have that film grittiness that older films tend to have, nor are they filmed with elaborate, in your face computer imaging.

TDK will eventually be "of it's time", just like the previous Batman films. It's inevitable and it's already starting to happen with more people reminiscing with nostalgic feeling from a film that's only 4 years old. Then there's also the fact TDKR is around the corner and it will have a particular look and tone that will vary TDK's and make fans audiences view it in a different light.

 

[Deak Starkiller]

I think Burton did Batman a service, making the films stylized. They don't fit in a certain time or place and have that "classic" mythos to them. Nolan's films on the other hand, are rooted very much in today. In 20 years I'm betting a lot of kids then will look down on Nolan's films the same way Nolan's fans look down on the West Batman series today.

I disagree, I think a good movie is a good movie no matter how old it is. There is no way of making a comic book movie timeless. Watch Batman and it's very late 80's (not in a bad way) with Prince's soundtrack, Bruce Wayne's hair, the fashion, and of course the costume design itself (but that's more 1990's). I actually prefer Batman Returns even though it's technically nuttier/dated in every way. When Bruce tries to pull a DJ record scratch on the compact disc, well there you go...there is your dated scene. And yes Bale was over the top in the Dark Knight, Heath Ledger brought something new which I liked. May not be the be all end all of the Joker but he was more the Joker than Jack Nicholson playing, well Jack Nicholson. The one thing the Nolan movies have that no other incarnation of Batman had previously is that it is the closest thing to an actual Batman comic book/story. Well at least the modern age Batman (1980's on up). Sure it is hyper-realistic but the nature of Batman and Jim Gordon is there. Well except for letting Ras Al Ghul die. Whoops.

 

[EVILFACE]

A good movie is a good movie no matter when it was made.

 

[Spanbauer]

When it comes to things being "dated," I tend to think either about production values being dated (cheap special effects, inappropriate music that was used just because it was popular at the time) or storytelling techniques being dated (different kinds of pacing or cliches, etc.).

And in these regards, Burton's Batman is most certainly dated. Lots of visuals look very hokey, the action scenes and stunts are pretty weak, the sound effects sometimes ridiculous (the gunfire specifically), but most importantly the story is riddled with moments that today's audiences wouldn't just blindly accept. We're much more critical today than we were in 1989.

The way I would judge whether or not a film is "dated" is by asking how the film would fare if it were released today. Burton's Batman does not hold up, unfortunately. But it was awesome for it's time, and its great that they're making these figures!

 

[DiFabio]

And in these regards, Burton's Batman is most certainly dated. Lots of visuals look very hokey, the action scenes and stunts are pretty weak, the sound effects sometimes ridiculous (the gunfire specifically), but most importantly the story is riddled with moments that today's audiences wouldn't just blindly accept. We're much more critical today than we were in 1989.

The way I would judge whether or not a film is "dated" is by asking how the film would fare if it were released today. Burton's Batman does not hold up, unfortunately. But it was awesome for it's time, and its great that they're making these figures!

Eh, I don't know. I think the fact that there's still Batman '89 interest and awareness says, to me, that it does hold up. Dated, yes, but it certainly doesn't fall apart. I mean, it's constantly pitted against The Dark Knight (thankfully that hasn't been the case lately) with literally thousands of polls, that's got to mean something. The fact that it's quality is even questioned to this day should be an eye opener. It didn't just get lost in the shuffle, forgotten like the 80s Punisher (or the new one for that matter) or the 1990s Captain America. It transcended, became a household name and franchise.

The Original Star Wars trilogy and the early Reeve Superman films look hokey, dated and weak to today's standards but they're still classics.

It's the mindset you have going into any particular film. If you're not willing to suspend your disbelief and only see said film as "old" then you won't let yourself enjoy it. If you purposely look to out a movie and find flaws in it then you'll find them. It's also worth noting that you'll find them in ANY movie. However, if you just enjoy it for what it is and look for good then age doesn't matter and you will find something to enjoy. This applies to any age group as well. If you let yourself accept it and you see the quality, then you will.

If you go in putting a wall up, then you won't.


Of course these older films wouldn't fare if they were made today, they set the record for what was/is great. Every movie, I don't care what it is, is "of it's time". It never makes sense to me when people contemplate "what ifs". Batman came out in 1989, that's it. There are no what ifs. It set the standard for comic book films, at that time and while it may seem shallow and light now, looking back it certainly wasn't when it was released. People took that ____ seriously because it hadn't been done before. Now, it's been taken for granted and evolved, that's where The Dark Knight comes in. It's a progression, film and ideas evolve.

 

[jye4ever]

Difabio wins in my book

 

[Deak Starkiller]

Eh, I don't know. I think the fact that there's still Batman '89 interest and awareness says, to me, that it does hold up. Dated, yes, but it certainly doesn't fall apart. I mean, it's constantly pitted against The Dark Knight (thankfully that hasn't been the case lately) with literally thousands of polls, that's got to mean something. The fact that it's quality is even questioned to this day should be an eye opener. It didn't just get lost in the shuffle, forgotten like the 80s Punisher (or the new one for that matter) or the 1990s Captain America. It transcended, became a household name and franchise.

The Original Star Wars trilogy and the early Reeve Superman films look hokey, dated and weak to today's standards but they're still classics.

It's the mindset you have going into any particular film. If you're not willing to suspend your disbelief and only see said film as "old" then you won't let yourself enjoy it. If you purposely look to out a movie and find flaws in it then you'll find them. It's also worth noting that you'll find them in ANY movie. However, if you just enjoy it for what it is and look for good then age doesn't matter and you will find something to enjoy. This applies to any age group as well. If you let yourself accept it and you see the quality, then you will.

If you go in putting a wall up, then you won't.


Of course these older films wouldn't fare if they were made today, they set the record for what was/is great. Every movie, I don't care what it is, is "of it's time". It never makes sense to me when people contemplate "what ifs". Batman came out in 1989, that's it. There are no what ifs. It set the standard for comic book films, at that time and while it may seem shallow and light now, looking back it certainly wasn't when it was released. People took that ____ seriously because it hadn't been done before. Now, it's been taken for granted and evolved, that's where The Dark Knight comes in. It's a progression, film and ideas evolve.

Difabio wins in my book

WHAT?!?!?!? Look, I like the Tim Burton Batman films, but you don't start ripping on the holy TRILOGY!!!

 

[DiFabio]

 

[thenammagazine]

And in these regards, Burton's Batman is most certainly dated. Lots of visuals look very hokey, the action scenes and stunts are pretty weak, the sound effects sometimes ridiculous (the gunfire specifically), but most importantly the story is riddled with moments that today's audiences wouldn't just blindly accept. We're much more critical today than we were in 1989.

That's why TDK is unique to this time and it's jaded audience. Today's audience lacks the imagination to appreciate movie magic and has to see it all for themselves. This is why there was no giant squid at the end of Watchmen, it's why Joker wears clown make-up and it's why all the mystique has been stripped from Batman.

The way I would judge whether or not a film is "dated" is by asking how the film would fare if it were released today. Burton's Batman does not hold up, unfortunately. But it was awesome for it's time, and its great that they're making these figures!

I'd be willing to bet you'd sell out a midnight matinee faster with the '89 Batman than you would Batman Begins or TDK. In 20 years, it'll still be the same. You'll sell out a midnight matinee faster with '89 Batman than you would with Begins or TDK.