batman 89 or dark knight

Post Reply New Topic

I prefer the dark knight. batman 89 is incredibly overrated. bale is a much better bruce wayne/batman than keaton. keaton is horrible as bruce wayne. as batman he is also pretty bad. he isn't physically fit enough plus he can't fight. bale is a great bruce wayne, fitting the duality. as batman, he can kick your ass. about the voice, it was edited by the sound editors of the film. his real voice is the one in batman begins, which is good. heath ledger is SO MUCH BETTER than nicholson. he is too silly. also, he is nicholson playing the part. ledger IS the joker. he is funny AND scary. nicholson doesn't have much of either. burton doesn't understand the character. joker DID NOT kill Batman's parents, Joe Chill did. Batman doesn't kill!! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !! !!

Wow I disagree with you entirely!

1. The Dark Knight while a good film is terribly overrated, I mean the films editing is terrible so that it feels much longer than it is and their was so much that cold have been cut down for viewing pleasure.

2. If you base Batman/Bruce Wayne on the comics Keaton is the best Bruce Wayne/Batman we have ever had on film and Bale is one of the worst as he is almost nothing like Bruce Wayne/Batman.

Nolan is nothing like the comics! Burton made some small changes but is still much closer to the comics than the Nolan Batfilms

To the OP: very edgy username...

i very much prefer Nolans Batman films as they were sensible and realistic.

They're both good in there own ways. I believe Keaton makes a good Batman because of his obsessiveness, and Bale makes a great Bruce Wayne because he pulls off the playboy aspect so well. Ledger does a way, way better Joker but Nicholson was good for the time. They're both wonderfully dark and brooding. I do love the scene where they f**k up the art museum to Prince.

They're both good in their ways, but overall Tim Burton's is the more iconic representation of what Batman has been over the arc of his existence - and Nicholson's Joker is the same. I was so against Keaton's casting - I'd only seen him playing sunny, affable comedy characters - I refused to see it during its theatre run, but once I watched him in Pacific Heights and saw how amazingly well he could play a complete psycho, I realized why Burton felt he could pull off Bruce/Bats. And he did.

Ledger's performance is unforgettable, I only wish I could say the same for Bale (yawn). Though Nolan does try to acknowledge the character's duality and childhood trauma (at least in Begins), there's never an iota of reflection of that in CB's performance. His Bruce is so normal he's boring.

For my money, even though I despised Joel Schumacher's gay neon set designs, I felt Val Kilmer in Forever seemed more what I would expect the character to be like. He embodied the playboy side and even looked the part, but was still controlled and subdued, as though he were constantly preoccupied with what he'd rather be doing in the Batcave.

What I really want to see is for Robert Rodriguez and Frank Miller to do a film version of The Dark Knight Returns. That's such a bad@ss Batman story, and RR did such a killer job with Sin City. Now THAT would be a dark effin' Batman movie.

@Xenu: you're right. Keaton is horrible. Also, have you ever read Batman Year one? that is what batman begins is based off of. Nolan just put the characters in a realistic setting. Also, 89 is a boring movie.

@Shadwell: Bale is more obsessive. you see that he wants to rid gotham of the criminal element. keaton is really boring to watch as both bruce wayne/batman. as batman he can't fight. also what REALLY bothered me was when he said "I'm Batman" and jumped off the rooftop, leaving the criminal free. Batman ALWAYS ties up criminals after he is done. they did that right in the nolan films. also as bruce wayne, he's horrendous. he is not supposed to be socially awkward, he is supposed to be playing as a "selfish child" so no one suspects him as batman. his voice sounds the same in both roles. Also, Nicholson isn't very funny or scary. he is the only decent character in the movie. i facepalmed at the museum scene. prince makes the movie age faster than it should. even burton himself had mixed feelings about the film and was questioning why prince was in it. also don't get me started on gordon in 89. he is horrible. gary oldman is much better, actually pulling off the gordon/batman relationship.

@Willard: Kilmer is actually a good Bruce Wayne. and as batman he is at times both better and worse than keaton. he is better because before bale, he is the only batman who bothered to lift weights for the role. he is actually fit enough. but he is worse than bale because he is not very threatening. but keaton wasn't very threatening either. i see potential in the duality. he is like freddy krueger in the Nightmare on elm street remake, he is the only decent character but he is wasted. have you read the killing joke? THAT is what joker is supposed to be. true ledger isn't joker 100%, but nicholson doesn't come CLOSE to ledger, let alone the killing joke. and why is he wasting his time with vicki vale? also, why does he use skin colored makeup? that is stupid.

to all: don't criticize bale ONLY for the voice. I know its stupid, but it is the sound editor's fault, not bale's. bale sounds like he did in Begins

Also, Keaton is a murdering thug, not Batman. He kills 3 times in 89 alone. In returns, he is basically a serial killer.

1. When batman blew up the factory. there were tons of people in it and he blew it all up. he was after the joker, but that's a different story.

2. in the church tower, he killed that african-american goon. not only that, but keaton got the crap beaten out of him.

3. he killed the joker. basically in the whole history of the comics, batman can't kill the joker, and joker keeps trying to get batman to kill him. burton just spit all over that.

@Xenu: sorry, i misread your post. also, you don't need to insult me. and to me personally, there are some scenes in 89 that drag on. Keaton was dull. he was trying to be brooding while smiling. Bale shares close to bruce wayne's actual dimensions in weight and height. burton imagines batman as a tim burton character, while nolan uses frank miller's image of batman as close to the source material as hollywood would allow.

[img][800:1024]http://images2.fanpop.com/images/photos/2700000/Batman-s-eyes-batman-2776909-1280-1024.jpg[/img]


how batman should look in live-action

to everyone who thinks 89 is closer to the comics: sorry but your argument makes no sense. Burton said he never read a comic book and shows throughout the whole movie.

Also, when Batman killed the Joker, it showed how Burton doesn't care about the comics. It was a very dark episode of the Batman 60s tv show.

Nolan read the comics, including: The Man Who Falls, Batman: Year One, the joker's first appearance in 1940, Batman: The Killing Joke and Batman: The Long Halloween.

The only things I don't like about Nolan's Batman movies are Bale's "Batman voice" (and I don't even mind it that much, it just gets a bit silly sometimes), and Katie Holmes.

Nolan wins, by far.

@KaiG: Finally, i thought this whole site was run by 89 fans. Interseting you say that because i heard an interview on the radio about his voice, and it was apparently edited by the sound editing team, bale's voice sounds like it does in batman begins. and yeah i prefer gyllenhaal to holmes. holmes was hotter, but she took away from the film (Begins). gyllenhaal never took anything away from the movie (TDK)

I enjoyed Batman 1989, but thought The Dark Knight was terrible. The latter movie had an incoherent plot and terrible acting, especially from Ledger.

I actually feel vice-versa. I loved The Dark Knight while Batman 1989 was okay. there was literally no plot in 89, just cheap effects and "atmosphere." The acting was bad from everyone except Nicholson who was decent