Hot Toys DX09 - BATMAN - Batman (Michael Keaton) - Specs & Pics

[mightyq]

You're ****ting me. That's ridiculous.

Where are these stupid polls? Does anyone have a link?

Sent from my LG-E739 using Tapatalk 2

buddy i agree, this figure is hard to knock, and where on earth are all these polls?? please post these, would love to vote myself..

 

[paramoremcr88]

Couple of battle damaged Bats pics

[URL=https://s1285.photobucket.com/user/paramoremcr88/media/d072e20bbe15fb01792c916a51734481_zpsf475d3d9.jpg.html] [/URL]

[URL=https://s1285.photobucket.com/user/paramoremcr88/media/96c25d9cc0dbc8906aaa18e4f2f5e571_zps2bf092cf.jpg.html] [/URL]

 

[sky_captain]

Hi sky! I'm curious to know which cape you used. It's the Hot Toys cape or the Tony's one?

Sorry for the really late reply, but it's Tony's version 1 cape. The HT one went in the bin, where it rightfully belonged.

 

[spindrift]

Yes because he sure as hell cannot sit in it

I beg to differ- HE will, if i have to....

 

[TheFiend]

I have a version 1 Tony Meis cape ill let go for $35 shipped. That's $20 less than Tony. PM me if you're interested.

Sent from my LG-E739 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Nige]

paramoremcr88 those photos look so real. 89 Batman is such a fantastic figure. HT did such a bang up job.

1989 Batman is on on TV at this very moment... it has not stood the test of time very well

 

[sallah]

1989 Batman is on on TV at this very moment... it has not stood the test of time very well

Completely disagree. Just watched it on blu last week and I marveled again at how Burton & company were able to make the film almost completely timeless. Outside of 1 or 2 effects, I think it really holds up still and is as much a thrill to watch now as it was when I first viewed it in '89.

A lot of the movies that have come out in the last 5 years I can't even say that about. Dated dialogue and technology, poor CGI that was used because it was "cutting-edge" at the time, etc. Batman '89 doesn't suffer from any of that because the filmmakers made a conscous effort to make it a self-contained world as much as possible, not tied to a specific year. This helps greatly in a film's aging process.

And since most of the effects work was practical, it escaped the ever-changing CGI "realism". Sure, theres a spot here or there that could be better... But for the most part, if it happens in the movie, it had to work in real life. Batman's grapple was a physical prop that fired, dropping down on criminals from above really happened, and the car really drove down the street without crazy flips and jumps. And when fantastical things do happen that move away from reality, they feel like a "comic book effect"- Like the shields being deployed. All this really divorces it from age for me.

Just my opinion though...

Sallah

 

[VintijDroidGutzz]

1989 Batman is on on TV at this very moment... it has not stood the test of time very well

Yeah..........

 

[paramoremcr88]

paramoremcr88 those photos look so real. 89 Batman is such a fantastic figure. HT did such a bang up job.

1989 Batman is on on TV at this very moment... it has not stood the test of time very well

Thanks for the compliment, glad you like the pics

But, I have to agree with Sallah on the views of the film.

Love it as much now as I did when I was five.

 

[circle]

The Burton Batmans were a little too Burton-y for me. Too colorful, too cartoonish. Story and imagery were . I agree with what Sallah said about it not being so reliant to CGI though.

 

[Nige]

Hey Sallah, I do agree with most of your points, especially with the special effects. There's something charming about practical effects, that CGI action sequences just don't capture.

This film was such a blockbuster for its day - with so much hype. I loved this film in 1989 when I was 13 years old. Now, I just find the film a little too goofy; most Burton films are - maybe it's his direction I don't appreciate. Even though there's no reference to time, it just feels old to me. I watched a double feature of 1989 Batman and Superman 2 in the cinema 5 years ago and felt underwhelmed by the film then. Watching it on TV just reinforced my views.

No doubt this film set the standard / paved the way for all the comic movies of today. We have been treated to these grittier, more realistic adaptions that make Burtons film look a little silly IMO.

I love my HT Keaton Batman…. so awesome and so iconic. He looks right at home next to Superman.

 

[TheFiend]

Yeah..........

Pretty much. It's still rock solid.

 

[jye4ever]

Pretty much. It's still rock solid.

 

[Khev]

Completely disagree. Just watched it on blu last week and I marveled again at how Burton & company were able to make the film almost completely timeless. Outside of 1 or 2 effects, I think it really holds up still and is as much a thrill to watch now as it was when I first viewed it in '89.

A lot of the movies that have come out in the last 5 years I can't even say that about. Dated dialogue and technology, poor CGI that was used because it was "cutting-edge" at the time, etc. Batman '89 doesn't suffer from any of that because the filmmakers made a conscous effort to make it a self-contained world as much as possible, not tied to a specific year. This helps greatly in a film's aging process.

And since most of the effects work was practical, it escaped the ever-changing CGI "realism". Sure, theres a spot here or there that could be better... But for the most part, if it happens in the movie, it had to work in real life. Batman's grapple was a physical prop that fired, dropping down on criminals from above really happened, and the car really drove down the street without crazy flips and jumps. And when fantastical things do happen that move away from reality, they feel like a "comic book effect"- Like the shields being deployed. All this really divorces it from age for me.

Just my opinion though...

Sallah

All of those reasons you mentioned are also why the Nolan trilogy will stand the test of time as well. Real suits, real locations, real vehicles and so on.

20 years from now the tumble/Bat/Bat-pod/truck chase will still look as spectacular as it does now.

Getting back to Bats 89, yeah, if the "feel" doesn't rub you the wrong way then it really endures. Not even in a "aw how charming that people found this cool in 1989," kind of way. When Batman fights off the thugs in the alley and then remotely starts the parked Batmobile everything about that sequence just seems authentic and badass even today. I know its all a set but it looks like a real intersection with obviously real people crossing, the ambience is spot on and the low grumble of the engine starting. I don't know why but I just *love* that specific scene. And both Burton films have a lot of those moments.

Even Batman and Vicki Vale dangling from the cathedral as the searchlights flash across them. Obvious miniatures and puppets but since they aren't dated CG (like poor Catwoman being carried by Penguin's umbrella) they still look basically "real" and don't take you out of the moment.

 

[Mike86]

Hey Sallah, I do agree with most of your points, especially with the special effects. There's something charming about practical effects, that CGI action sequences just don't capture.

This film was such a blockbuster for its day - with so much hype. I loved this film in 1989 when I was 13 years old. Now, I just find the film a little too goofy; most Burton films are - maybe it's his direction I don't appreciate. Even though there's no reference to time, it just feels old to me. I watched a double feature of 1989 Batman and Superman 2 in the cinema 5 years ago and felt underwhelmed by the film then. Watching it on TV just reinforced my views.

No doubt this film set the standard / paved the way for all the comic movies of today. We have been treated to these grittier, more realistic adaptions that make Burtons film look a little silly IMO.

I love my HT Keaton Batman…. so awesome and so iconic. He looks right at home next to Superman.

Yeah I think Batman (1989) has some aspects to it that are cool but it is kind of goofy now and holds up more for me not as a good movie but more just for some nostalgia I have over it. Even still though it's not a movie I find myself wanting to watch very often anymore. Some films are able to stand up and feel timeless despite when they were originally made whereas other films like the Burton Batman films or the Reeve Superman films you can totally tell what era they're from and can be harder to watch. It could be just because they're newer now but I somehow feel like the Nolan films will hold up better as they don't have a lot of stuff in them that makes them feel like they were made in this era necessarily whereas the Burton Batman films you can tell are late 80s/early 90s films.

That being said I do still enjoy Batman (1989) and think it has a lot of cool imagery and Keaton was a decent Batman for the time and the Elfman theme is pretty great. Batman Returns on the other hand I can barely stand.

 

[vodoun]

Superman looks awesome!

All of those reasons you mentioned are also why the Nolan trilogy will stand the test of time as well. Real suits, real locations, real vehicles and so on.

20 years from now the tumble/Bat/Bat-pod/truck chase will still look as spectacular as it does now.

Getting back to Bats 89, yeah, if the "feel" doesn't rub you the wrong way then it really endures. Not even in a "aw how charming that people found this cool in 1989," kind of way. When Batman fights off the thugs in the alley and then remotely starts the parked Batmobile everything about that sequence just seems authentic and badass even today. I know its all a set but it looks like a real intersection with obviously real people crossing, the ambience is spot on and the low grumble of the engine starting. I don't know why but I just *love* that specific scene. And both Burton films have a lot of those moments.

Even Batman and Vicki Vale dangling from the cathedral as the searchlights flash across them. Obvious miniatures and puppets but since they aren't dated CG (like poor Catwoman being carried by Penguin's umbrella) they still look basically "real" and don't take you out of the moment.

You're only saying that because you haven't seen the technology of 20 years from now. The same people dissing 1989 will be whining when the newer generation are slagging Nolan 20 years from now.

 

[Khev]

You're only saying that because you haven't seen the technology of 20 years from now. The same people dissing 1989 will be whining when the newer generation are slagging Nolan 20 years from now.

Real vehicles and locations will still look like real vehicles and locations 20 years from now.

 

[vodoun]

Batmobile 89 is just imaginary?

Real vehicles and locations always end up looking dated.

 

[Khev]

Batmobile 89 is just imaginary?

Real vehicles and locations always end up looking dated.

Then explain the appeal of period films.

 

[paramoremcr88]

Done a little futzing with my stock cape and I think I got it looking quite good. I tried to take some pics to show it, but I think it looks better in person. Tried to get it to look like the wind is blowing the cape behind him.