First Impressions

[Edd Grayson]

I'll be the first to admit I didn't like Shreck at first, but actually Walken turned an original character into someone quite memorable and that fits the film like a glove.

Max Shreck in the film was the one pulling the strings, willingly or not, about the other villains, and his arrogance and lust for power and determination to have a "legacy" were shown perfectly in the film, from the start to his final moments...

[Catwoman]

To me Max is the true villain of the movie. Walken plays such a wonderfully wretched bastard.

My first impression was I didn't know who the hell he was. I had a coloring book that the pages were like wax paper and there was actually a page of him pushing Selina through the window. At first I thought it was Bruce! lol

He really frightened me as a little girl too obviously. I mean I was so Catwoman obsessed going into the movie, I even dressed up as her for Halloween before I saw the movie, and the way he pushed her through the window earlier and then shot her really scared me. I was glad he ended up burnt to a crisp for being mean to my Selina. That freaked me out too though lol.

[Wayne49]

I HATED Christopher Walken as Max Shrek because his villainy was so dry compared to the others

Were you taken by surprise at how much screentime he got? One could be forgiven for feeling misled since Schreck didn't appear in the trailers or film poster, and yet it turned out that he was equally prominent to the plot as the other three characters.

Very true! What most people don't realize is Christopher Walken was in the middle of this run as a kind of hip, up and coming, star in high profile movies through the mid to late 80's. In 1985 he played the main villain in the James Bond film " A View to a Kill" and had a key role in the Sean Penn movie "At Close Range" with the breakout Madonna hit "Live to Tell". By the time Batman Returns was going into production, his name was still in circulation so I think that played a big part in why he got so much screen time.

And while I don't use this film to put down Walken, because he has done his share of descent films, I never felt like he belonged in ANY big budget film where he had to play something larger-than-life like in a James Bond or Batman movie. For me, he just doesn't carry that kind of onscreen presence that contrasts well against someone who is flamboyant or colorful. He's a very eclectic actor with an odd personality. I guess Burton thought that quirkiness would play into his world of strange characters. I think it made it more convoluted.

It's interesting that we are talking about this, because my grandson who is only four wanted to watch this and I had to start the film past the opening sequence which essentially shows the penguin as a baby being abandoned in a sewer. Those are images you can't put in front of a child. Really the film as a whole is one that has to be edited through for kids because it really carries too much raw adult language and innuendo that is hard to disguise for young eyes. And I think ultimately THAT is the reason why the movie had problems then, and still carries issues today. It just has too many tonal problems as it relates to certain audiences. And for me, when we're talking about Batman that should never be the case.

[Andrew]

I first watched it at 9 in 1998, having seen and liked Batman Forever and some TAS/MotP but not a lot else. It did feel a little weird to see Batman without Robin but I loved how timeless it was and even then I think I liked that the villains reflected Batman. I was already a fan of DeVito and loved that the Penguin was really warped and how Catwoman was a dark but sympathetic anti-hero.

[riddler]

I would have been 9 when it came out. I remembered liking the first movie when I saw it on TV or video (can't remember which) but I definitely remember Batman Returns on VHS was the gift I wanted and got for Xmas 92. I can't remember my favourite parts as a kid but I do remember it scared me in a good way- not enough to give me nightmares but enough to be on the edge of my seat and afraid for the characters. I remember the Penguin scared me the most, so much so that I was actually afraid FOR Max. Selina/Catwoman scared me too, I was always frightened by people possessed by evil.

In those days it was common for kids to watch the same movies over and over again on their VHS. In 1991 it was the Back to the Future movies for me. By xmas 92, Batman Returns took over my VHS player until summer 93 when I got Home alone 2. I didn't watch it again until I decided to buy the special edition DVD. Watching it again as an adult, I found Max and Batman to be the scariest characters. Walken could go from calm to sadistic or just act creepy on queue. Keatons Bat had me afraid for the bad guys, the highlight being the scene in which the goons are driving around with the captured children before he sees the shadow of the bat on the roof and then the Bat hands reach down and grab him.

Sadly I no longer own the movie. No offense to those who hold it dear to their hearts, as you can see I did at one time too but I no longer desire to watch it regularly as I do the first and third films in the series. I find the plot to be quite a bit weaker than that of the first film. The first film felt more like a crime drama with a superhero while this one felt more like a superhero fantasy movie. Not that there's anything wrong with it, I'm just not as much as a fantasy fan. I'll still catch it when I have the chance but it's been 3 years since I saw it last. It still remains a fun film for me on occasional viewings, while the finale wasn't as epic as the Bat-wing scene, I enjoyed the Bat-sub scene immensely and in hindsight, Batman and Alfred hacking the exploding Penguins was ahead of its time.

[Wayne49]

To this day, I still think some of the editing towards the end is uncharacteristically sloppy. Using the same shot  twice of Batman turning around when the penguin missiles are exploding. The obvious missing paint around his eyes before Batman tears his mask off. And that huge electrical transformer behind Shreck falling over three times in sequence when he's being electrocuted. I get the impression Burton was fatiguing or perhaps rushed because to the release schedule and some compromises were made. But they jumped out at me during the first viewing and they're even more blatant now. I still don't understand why Burton shot that scene with his makeup missing around his eyes when he tore the mask off. To me that's a huge continuity oversight. Like audiences wouldn't notice? If we're supposed to pretend like he has no makeup there, then why not edit the shot where he's tearing off the mask with it on and just not have it there when the mask is off? I don't know. I like the idea of the scene. I just don't like the way it was executed.

[The Laughing Fish]

I still don't understand why Burton shot that scene with his makeup missing around his eyes when he tore the mask off. To me that's a huge continuity oversight. Like audiences wouldn't notice? If we're supposed to pretend like he has no makeup there, then why not edit the shot where he's tearing off the mask with it on and just not have it there when the mask is off? I don't know. I like the idea of the scene. I just don't like the way it was executed.

B89 had its share of continuity errors too. For instance, take a look at the scene where Batman and Vicki are about to leave in the Batmobile after the alley fight scene. One shot has Batman speaking in a small microphone to command the Batmobile to stop driving, and he puts his hand down. But as we the Batmobile stopping right in front of Batman in the next shot, he's still holding the microphone near his mouth.

I noticed that these continuity mistakes were quite common to see in movies that were made 25 to 30 years ago. Such mistakes still exist in today's movies, but they appear to be less obvious. I imagine today's editing software is a lot more sophisticated in removing some mistakes.

[Wayne49]

Yep. I noticed the arm positioning too in the 89 film. I think what made the unmasking in Returns so important was just the relevance of the scene. I mean there had to be a conversation that said, " We can't have black makeup around the eyes here." I can't imagine someone didn't say, "Will they notice?" 

[thecolorsblend]

Yep. I noticed the arm positioning too in the 89 film. I think what made the unmasking in Returns so important was just the relevance of the scene. I mean there had to be a conversation that said, " We can't have black makeup around the eyes here." I can't imagine someone didn't say, "Will they notice?" 

It is weird that they shot it in the most obvious way to highlight the missing eyeliner. Shooting it pretty much any other way would've made the moment a bit less jarring.

[Wayne49]

Yep. I noticed the arm positioning too in the 89 film. I think what made the unmasking in Returns so important was just the relevance of the scene. I mean there had to be a conversation that said, " We can't have black makeup around the eyes here." I can't imagine someone didn't say, "Will they notice?" 

It is weird that they shot it in the most obvious way to highlight the missing eyeliner. Shooting it pretty much any other way would've made the moment a bit less jarring.

Exactly. I think that's what makes me wonder if those scenes were late in the principle photography schedule and feeling under the gun, Burton didn't work through basic setups for scenes. As you said, Burton seem to take the worst possible angle to execute that moment. And the thing is, I love that moment, but I still have to cringe a bit because of the lack of continuity. Very glaring. I almost wish they would go in digitize it to fix that.