- Joined
- Nov 18, 2008
- Messages
- 6,860
- Reaction score
- 5,834
I watched the '89 film the other night as well and I have to agree with you. I think Keaton's Bruce Wayne/Batman is severely underdeveloped in the movie, and the audience is just expected to know why he does what he does. Also, the guy only says a few words in each scene he's in up until the scene where he comes to tell Vicki he's Batman; I actually found that to be a really awkward transition for the character because up till that scene he hardly spoke and then suddenly more than halfway through the film Michael Keaton finally speaks more than a few words.I too watched the original last night and didn't really like Keatons Batman. He didn't have alot of helpful gadgets and was pretty weak. The narrative was also screwed up since it didn't explain how he became Batman. But I am comparing to the reboot series so I guess I am being unfair. The Joker was brilliant however.
Meanwhile, Joker's having scene after scene, monolog after monologue, throughout the entire film. It really is Nicholson's film, with Keaton playing backup. People say the same thing about Batman taking a backseat in The Dark Knight, but the difference there is that Bruce/Batman had a whole previous film dedicated to developing him.
So I do feel that Nolan's films are significantly better, but the '89 film was exactly the right batman film for it's time. And these figures kick ***