I was recently looking through the 'making of' books for each of the initial four Batman films (yes, I even own one for Batman & Robin :P .) It caught my attention that whilst the Batman & Robin book authored by on-set publicist Michael Singer is 128 pages, the Batman Returns book also by Singer is only a relatively scant 90 pages long. Say what you like about the film, but the Batman & Robin book is a highly informative and thorough look behind-the-scenes. I just wish the Batman Returns book (which admittedly contains several excellent photos and interviews) received the same treatment.
I don't think this was an intentional snub by Warner Bros, since the merchandise for Returns was released months before the film was at the receiving end of its backlash. Nevertheless, it got me thinking whether Warners will release a 20th Anniversary book for Returns' Blue-Ray release in 2012, since it is often regarded as the 'black sheep' of the Batman film 'family'.
In fact, if I was to categorise the Batman movies as respective members of a family this is how I would describe them:
Batman - the older, favourite son who paved the way for his siblings.
Batman Returns - the gothic 'black sheep' of the family whose parents are too ashamed to talk about (kind of like The Penguin in fact).
Batman Forever - the bland, easy-to-please jock of the family. Not especially remarkable, but a safe 'C+' student.
Batman & Robin - the embarrassing, intellectually challenged younger brother (c. Buster in Arrested Development) who convinced his parents to stop conceiving at four.
I also liken the new Batman franchise to a parent (Warner Bros) leaving his former partner for someone new (Nolan) and hereby ignoring their first family's kids and effectively sweeping their existence under the carpet.
There's already a topic covering this (titled "Batman Returns underrated").
Sorry Dark Knight Detective. I think I started contributing to the forum a little while after that thread ended. Thanks for pointing it out for me though; I'll read through it in a moment.
Nevertheless, I was specifically interested in any thoughts on whether Warner Bros. would issue a 20th Anniversary book with the BR Blue-Ray, and whether they had specifically undervalued the film.
^ Hey, it's cool (it doesn't offend me at all), just trying to help out. ;)
I shouldn't be posting in here, should be using the original thread, but I have to say....people who like the Batman character and don't like Batman Returns are insane.
Quote from: The Dark Knight on Fri, 3 Apr 2009, 12:23
I shouldn't be posting in here, should be using the original thread, but I have to say....people who like the Batman character and don't like Batman Returns are insane.
Spot on, man. This is indeed a post of brilliance (as it really does irritate the heck out of me when people bash it when they're so-called Batman fans). Thanks! 8)
Unfortunately, that makes a lot of people insane. :-\
Personally, I couldn't praise Burton's Batman films enough. Although I marginally prefer Batman '89 as a piece of storytelling, I have a massive fondness for Batman Returns which is arguably deeper and more facinating than its predecessor.
When it comes to people that dislike or outright hate Returns, we can pretty much see where they are coming from. We have to admit it's not a film for all tastes.
Quote from: silenig on Sat, 4 Apr 2009, 07:40
When it comes to people that dislike or outright hate Returns, we can pretty much see where they are coming from. We have to admit it's not a film for all tastes.
Mmm, yes and no. There's really nothing in Returns that you couldn't reasonably extrapolate from the comics, except maybe for Penguin's mouth. And if THAT ruins the entire movie for you, I question your fandom.
People are free to love or to hate the tone of the film or the narrative or something but in terms of resonance with the comics, by now that should no longer be in question.
Quote from: thecolorsblend on Sat, 4 Apr 2009, 20:44
Quote from: silenig on Sat, 4 Apr 2009, 07:40
When it comes to people that dislike or outright hate Returns, we can pretty much see where they are coming from. We have to admit it's not a film for all tastes.
Mmm, yes and no. There's really nothing in Returns that you couldn't reasonably extrapolate from the comics, except maybe for Penguin's mouth. And if THAT ruins the entire movie for you, I question your fandom.
People are free to love or to hate the tone of the film or the narrative or something but in terms of resonance with the comics, by now that should no longer be in question.
I think people stay on the surface and how the film looks and feels, this is what I mean when I say "It's easy to see" and "not for all tastes". It's not easy to "sell" to the average fan. I'm one of those that embrace its aesthetics, including the "Penguin's mouth", considering his deformed and "pathetic" nature.
This in-depth article, citing several references and images from the comics themselves, makes a lot of things clear, but the film's aesthetics will still be not easy for them (and this is regrettable).
Quote from: The Dark Knight on Fri, 3 Apr 2009, 12:23
I shouldn't be posting in here, should be using the original thread, but I have to say....people who like the Batman character and don't like Batman Returns are insane.
It's defintely the one my family get uncomfortable with to this day lol My sister who is autistic is frightened by the Penguin's birth scene. She panics at pregnancy scenes in movies and tv lol Though this is slightly worse cos you don't see what's happening.
Even some comic creators have attacked Batman Returns for pretty stupid reasons. I can't remember the artists name but he was less than impressed with the action scenes. What a spoilsport.
QuoteEven some comic creators have attacked Batman Returns for pretty stupid reasons. I can't remember the artists name but he was less than impressed with the action scenes. What a spoilsport.
You're thinking of Matt Wagner:
Quote"The Burton films were strong on atmosphere but obviously showed that Burton was more interested in the misfit villains than in his title character. In fact, BATMAN RETURNS is often credited as being a better film but I f***ing HATED how it made Batman little more than just another costumed creep, little better than the villains he's pursuing.
Additionally, Burton is so blatantly NOT an action director. That aspect of both his films just sucked."
http://www.batman-on-film.com/interview_mattwagner_jett_2006.html
I'm not sure if Burton actually directed the action scenes in the Batman films. I thought I read somewhere that the action in Batman Returns was shot by second unit director Max Kleven, whose other credits include Rollerball, Who Framed Roger Rabbit?, Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, Spider-Man and the Back to the Future trilogy. Personally, I think he's a pretty good action director.
Quote from: Silver Nemesis on Thu, 27 Sep 2012, 19:18
QuoteEven some comic creators have attacked Batman Returns for pretty stupid reasons. I can't remember the artists name but he was less than impressed with the action scenes. What a spoilsport.
You're thinking of Matt Wagner:
Quote"The Burton films were strong on atmosphere but obviously showed that Burton was more interested in the misfit villains than in his title character. In fact, BATMAN RETURNS is often credited as being a better film but I f***ing HATED how it made Batman little more than just another costumed creep, little better than the villains he's pursuing.
Additionally, Burton is so blatantly NOT an action director. That aspect of both his films just sucked."
http://www.batman-on-film.com/interview_mattwagner_jett_2006.html
I'm not sure if Burton actually directed the action scenes in the Batman films. I thought I read somewhere that the action in Batman Returns was shot by second unit director Max Kleven, whose other credits include Rollerball, Who Framed Roger Rabbit?, Robin Hood: Prince of Thieves, Spider-Man and the Back to the Future trilogy. Personally, I think he's a pretty good action director.
I'm unfamilar with Matt Wagner. What books has he done? I've probably seen his stuff somewhere. Well don't all action films rely on 2nd units and such? Some of those films you listed are also faves of mine. So no complaints there. All good stuff.
While I enjoyed the action stuff in the new Batman's at least I could actually SEE what Batman was doing in Burton's fights. In Begins they were edited so fast and gave me a good headache trying to focus. Though I did like Ra's al ghul's quote: "This is not a dance!". Which to me sounded like a direct pun on the dance like fighting styles in the other movies. But done in good taste.
I will agree however that there is a problem with Batman's killing spree mentality. But I think you can look too deeply into this stuff. For instance the scene with the big strongman being blown up with dynamite planted by Batman. Today it's controversial in the extreme. However it was meant to be funny. And Michael Keaton's manic grin always puts "a smile on that face" for me. Same with the scene where he pulls the wall out from behind Selena's mugger. Frankly I think Batman has always bordered on the severe even in comics. He cripples a guy for life in Dark Knight Returns and breaks a few bones of the Mutant's leader while he's on that roll. I'm not surprised the filmmakers got the wrong end of the stick so to speak.
The thing that annoys me more actually is this idea that it's wrong to focus on the villains rather than Batman. Preposterous. Their the best villains comics have. Dan Didio once said their characters that could almost exist on their own. Brian Bolland even stated he felt Joker was a more fascinating and rounded character whereas Batman works far better when he's 2 dimensional, being more of a shadow personality. Exactly the approach Burton took and pretty much how it was done in The Killing Joke. Nobody complained then. Even Batman Year One was less about Batman than it was about Gordon. I certainly wish I could read Wagner's thoughts on The Dark Knight which was more Joker and Two-Face centred than Batman based let's face it. Sometimes the best Batman's don't always need to shine a light 100% on Bruce Wayne.
I think Burton was more involved in action in Returns.
Dave Lea spoke about B89 how he didn't see Burton much cause he was 2 nd unit and Tim was 1st unit.
However he worked with Tim a lot more on Returns.
QuoteI'm unfamilar with Matt Wagner. What books has he done?
In terms of Batman-related material, Wagner worked on
Batman and the Monster Men (2006),
Batman/Superman/Wonder Woman: Trinity (2003) and several issues of
Legends of the Dark Knight.