Batman Returns was ahead of its time...

Started by MrJoker, Fri, 27 Nov 2009, 03:09

Previous topic - Next topic
Quote from: Catwoman on Tue,  1 Dec  2009, 06:34
no the dagget guy was who max was going to be in the cartoon.

You're right Catwoman, but Rupert Thorne came before Shreck and Daggett.  I have read many times that the Shreck role was originally written with Harvey Dent in mind, but I can't see it myself, so I'd have to agree that Shreck is more like a Thorne surrogate.
Johnny Gobs got ripped and took a walk off a roof, alright? No big loss.

Dan Waters' intended satire centred around a two-faced businessman attempting to buy and corrupt the government would be far more applicable today than it was in '92. I know that Waters regards TDK as being darker than Returns and is amused by how all the critics are magically on-board with a black social awareness in comic book movies.

But that was what Waters was out to do. Tim Burton's focus in the movie; duality, alienation, operatic tragedy, loneliness, misperception; is on timeless emotional issues.

tim burton actually thought batman 89 was darker.


It wasn't that returns was darker.  It was just more adult themed.  And it was set in a sewer.  To most people that was a shocker and that is why they called it dark (plus the other stuff).

So according to burton- his first one was darker.  So is batman89 darker than the dark knight?

Quote from: burtongenius on Wed, 16 Dec  2009, 23:55
So is batman89 darker than the dark knight?

Depends on if you think Chicago is darker than Burton's Gotham City.
"Imagination is a quality given a man to compensate him for what he is not, and a sense of humour was provided to console him for what he is."

i could see where you would say that the first one was darker. if i think about it hard (very dangerous), i think i agree with that.

Batman Returns is still the darkest Batman film, notably with it's themes and psychology. It's more depressing and bizzare- but to me that is reality. That is normal.