Is Batman Returns still the darkest movie of the entire franchise?

[Wayne49]

People tend to forget also about the Penguin's origin here. Regardless of treatment, Batman has (and will always be) a film that attracts kids of all ages. I think there's a general expectation from audiences for that understanding since all of these movies unload scores of toys for it's promotion. So to have kids witness a set of parents throwing their baby into the sewer is pretty edgy subject matter. You can't expect a young person to be "worldly" about such things. And even a very young child might find that scene very distressing. So between the adult innuendo and the dark origins of the penguin, it's pretty easy to understand why audiences in the early 90's were caught off guard by this approach.

We can look at this film today and say it was way ahead of it's time for this genre. But superhero films were still very much in their infancy when Batman Returns came out, so this kind of treatment was far more edgier for it's time than what it would be now. These days you have generations who have grown up with these movies being a staple in theaters. Back then, that was not the case. For me this look for Batman remains my favorite. i feel inclined to pick up the Hot Toys version with Bruce Wayne.

[riddler]

The opening scene of the first film featured a boy witness his parents getting shot in a mugging and shows a man getting stabbed in the neck. Anyone who was shocked by the content should have done their own research, it wasn't that much of a stretch considering Tim Burton directed it. I could understand if the first movie ended up this dark since many people were expecting something on the lines of the Adam West series but this film wasn't that much darker.

[The Laughing Fish]

The opening scene of the first film featured a boy witness his parents getting shot in a mugging and shows a man getting stabbed in the neck. Anyone who was shocked by the content should have done their own research, it wasn't that much of a stretch considering Tim Burton directed it. I could understand if the first movie ended up this dark since many people were expecting something on the lines of the Adam West series but this film wasn't that much darker.

You might be getting confused with Bruce's flashback, because the opening scene shows a boy and his mother witnessing the dad getting pistol-whipped by a mugger.

But aside from that, you're absolutely right that B89 is still quite dark. For example, the Joker electrocuting a mob boss to death while laughing and mocking at his charred corpse is still disturbing, and quite possibly the most underrated example of gruesome violence in the entire franchise.

[The Laughing Fish]

Here's a blog by a fan who describes BR as a horror film.

Source: https://warrenisweird.com/2017/02/03/film-study-batman-returns-1992-is-actually-a-horror-film/

Nothing much to add that wasn't covered before, but these are some excerpts:

What makes Batman Returns a horror film on top of a superhero movie is this pervasive violence and dislike for human life sprinkled throughout the film. There is an almost a hidden smile in the death of people and during the destruction of Gotham, which comes from Batman himself too. Many people were shocked by just how easily Ben Affleck's take on Batman casually killed people in Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. But if you compare the two, he's got nothing on Keaton, who will happily turn the Batmobile back around, only to shoot flames from his tailpipe onto a fire-breather or how about that time when he drops a guy into a manhole.. who then later explodes? This is the real killer Batman and it is terrifying to know that he does it with efficiency, coldness, and even a sense of enjoyment.

It's a fair observation. No matter how brutal Affleck was in BvS, you can't deny that he never took any pleasure how he projected his anger on crooks, like Keaton does in BR. Both BR and BvS end on a bittersweet note, but the latter has Batman's faith reinvigorated and passes over the angst and cynicism. Whereas, the former has Batman heartbroken and left thinking about the one he got away. Of course, it's possible that he too turned a new corner in terms of morals, which paved the way for BF. But, in my opinion, and you may call it petty, the change in the casting always hurt the continuity for me.

Here is this writer's fascinating analysis about the Penguin, making a possible religious reference his characterisation:

What also makes his character so fascinating is the parallels between The Penguin and God and Satan. As previously discussed, Cobblepot's ultimate end game is to kidnap the first-born children of Gotham in their sleep. This is essentially the 10th Biblical plague, in which God came down and slew the first-born child of every family who was not protected by lamb's blood, Cobblepot plans to bring tremendous terror and grief to those who he feels enslaved him below the surface. However, as we all know, Penguin is no God and that's where his "palace" comes into play. Hidden in the depths of the abandoned Gotham Zoo, Cobblepot's "castle" is cold and icy, which could be seen as an allusion to Dante's Inferno, where the terrifying [and grotesque] Satan lives within the bowels of Hell, trapped in a frozen lake. Ultimately, the icy location becomes engulfed in flames, much like how we -as people – envision Hell.