Perception of Batman Returns

[Catbat]

A little poll to see if this is actually the general feeling about Batman Returns.

Do you think that in "Returns" Batman's persona is challenged more seriously by his antagonists compared to the first movie?

[thecolorsblend]

A little poll to see if this is actually the general feeling about Batman Returns.

Do you think that in "Returns" Batman's persona is challenged more seriously by his antagonists compared to the first movie?

I'd say so. The Penguin challenges Batman's reality, Shreck warps Bruce's public persona and Catwoman gives him an outside perspective on his own basic problems.

Yeah, the Joker whacked his parents. And that sucks. But the Joker didn't challenge Batman's entire understanding of himself and his world. The BR villains did.

[Gotham Knight]

A little poll to see if this is actually the general feeling about Batman Returns.

Do you think that in "Returns" Batman's persona is challenged more seriously by his antagonists compared to the first movie?

I'd say so. The Penguin challenges Batman's reality, Shreck warps Bruce's public persona and Catwoman gives him an outside perspective on his own basic problems.

Yeah, the Joker whacked his parents. And that sucks. But the Joker didn't challenge Batman's entire understanding of himself and his world. The BR villains did.

I agree with this above.

The thing about Returns is that you have a mirror match, and ya know it is really something...I was just thinking recently about about the villain dynamics in this movie:

Batman Returns is often criticized for 'going against the comic book lore' when in fact not only is the opposite true, but I've found that the so-called depth in characterization we see in Batman comics pertaining to villains was actually largely influenced by Burton and Co. and by Paul Dini/Bruce Timm in the subsequent animated series. Reading the large back catalog of Batman comics has led me to believe that so many fans do not actually read much past Miller or Moore in the late eighties, so much of their anger with this movie is dependent upon the assumption that Penguin and Catwoman are betrayals of the source material. But if you actually read the books, you find that most of the villains had very little by way of characterization/depth before Batman Returns. Even Miller's only contribution to Catwoman, that she is a hooker who saw Batman on TV, offers very little. This is after 48 years of material....

Burton had to add dimension and did so while not altering the basic things about the characters that make them compelling, which is how one should define 'faithfulness to source material.' Beware the literalist.

In this case Burton turned the conflict into the aforementioned mirror match. It is interesting in retrospect because it is now increasingly obvious that Burton's formula could have sustained many more films. Burton's way is basically summed up this way: 

As long as you have a villain, you have a story because the villain is just a version of Batman anyway.

Brilliant is word that is thrown around much too casually, but Tim deserves it. Batman owes Burton much, and it is a shame that he doesn't get it. Look at Batman comics after Burton and the Animated series (which uses his formula to a T, Heart of Ice anyone?) and you'll find that those sources are almost singularly responsible for the 'villains need to be characters now trend' in Batman comics we now enjoy.

[BatmanFurst]

A little poll to see if this is actually the general feeling about Batman Returns.

Do you think that in "Returns" Batman's persona is challenged more seriously by his antagonists compared to the first movie?

I'd say so. The Penguin challenges Batman's reality, Shreck warps Bruce's public persona and Catwoman gives him an outside perspective on his own basic problems.

Yeah, the Joker whacked his parents. And that sucks. But the Joker didn't challenge Batman's entire understanding of himself and his world. The BR villains did.

I agree with this above.

The thing about Returns is that you have a mirror match, and ya know it is really something...I was just thinking recently about about the villain dynamics in this movie:

Batman Returns is often criticized for 'going against the comic book lore' when in fact not only is the opposite true, but I've found that the so-called depth in characterization we see in Batman comics pertaining to villains was actually largely influenced by Burton and Co. and by Paul Dini/Bruce Timm in the subsequent animated series. Reading the large back catalog of Batman comics has led me to believe that so many fans do not actually read much past Miller or Moore in the late eighties, so much of their anger with this movie is dependent upon the assumption that Penguin and Catwoman are betrayals of the source material. But if you actually read the books, you find that most of the villains had very little by way of characterization/depth before Batman Returns. Even Miller's only contribution to Catwoman, that she is a hooker who saw Batman on TV, offers very little. This is after 48 years of material....

Burton had to add dimension and did so while not altering the basic things about the characters that make them compelling, which is how one should define 'faithfulness to source material.' Beware the literalist.

In this case Burton turned the conflict into the aforementioned mirror match. It is interesting in retrospect because it is now increasingly obvious that Burton's formula could have sustained many more films. Burton's way is basically summed up this way: 

As long as you have a villain, you have a story because the villain is just a version of Batman anyway.

Brilliant is word that is thrown around much too casually, but Tim deserves it. Batman owes Burton much, and it is a shame that he doesn't get it. Look at Batman comics after Burton and the Animated series (which uses his formula to a T, Heart of Ice anyone?) and you'll find that those sources are almost singularly responsible for the 'villains need to be characters now trend' in Batman comics we now enjoy.

I agree about some of these characters being improvements over their comic book counterparts. In particular I think the Batman Returns version of The Penguin is a big improvement over the comics. I don't think people are very aware that the Penguin in the comics wasn't that far removed from Burgess Meredith's take at that time. Devito's Penguin was the first time I found that character to be remotely interesting.

[The Dark Knight]

A little poll to see if this is actually the general feeling about Batman Returns.

Do you think that in "Returns" Batman's persona is challenged more seriously by his antagonists compared to the first movie?

No doubt about it. Batman's methods darken once he discovers Napier killed his parents, but he ends the film as a celebrated hero with the GCPD openly embracing him. That trust is eroded in Returns when the Penguin frames him. Selina breaks his heart and disappears, whereas Vicki is driven back to Wayne Manor for a late night rendezvous.

[The Laughing Fish]

Batman Returns is often criticized for 'going against the comic book lore' when in fact not only is the opposite true, but I've found that the so-called depth in characterization we see in Batman comics pertaining to villains was actually largely influenced by Burton and Co. and by Paul Dini/Bruce Timm in the subsequent animated series. Reading the large back catalog of Batman comics has led me to believe that so many fans do not actually read much past Miller or Moore in the late eighties, so much of their anger with this movie is dependent upon the assumption that Penguin and Catwoman are betrayals of the source material. But if you actually read the books, you find that most of the villains had very little by way of characterization/depth before Batman Returns. Even Miller's only contribution to Catwoman, that she is a hooker who saw Batman on TV, offers very little. This is after 48 years of material....

I'd say some comics involving Penguin and Catwoman during the mid-to-late 1980s started exploring some edge and characterisation, with vengeance as the motivation. In 1986's Secret Origins Special, Cobblepot hardened himself as a dangerous crime figure, getting revenge at his childhood bully who taunted him for his looks and killing his pet birds; even going so far by adopting the insulting Penguin nickname his bully called him as a name to be reckoned with in the criminal underworld. It's not exactly like DeVito's Penguin, but the one trait that both versions have is they were social outcasts.

While it's true that Frank Miller didn't offer much insight into Selina's life as a hooker in Year One, the 1989 Catwoman mini-series by Mindy Newell digs deeper into what Miller introduced by showing how Catwoman goes from battered prostitute to brutal vigilante who attacks abusive pimps and corrupt cops. Even seduces Batman before slashing him violently with his claws, not unlike what we saw in BR. Admittedly, it's not the best comic out there, but it appears to be more influential than many people think, and it wouldn't surprise me if it had some creative impact on BR.

A little poll to see if this is actually the general feeling about Batman Returns.

Do you think that in "Returns" Batman's persona is challenged more seriously by his antagonists compared to the first movie?

I'd say so. The Penguin challenges Batman's reality, Shreck warps Bruce's public persona and Catwoman gives him an outside perspective on his own basic problems.

Yeah, the Joker whacked his parents. And that sucks. But the Joker didn't challenge Batman's entire understanding of himself and his world. The BR villains did.

Agreed. The only thing you could take from Batman getting his revenge over Joker was that BR showed it didn't put him at ease, as he is still as introverted and violent as ever. One might argue his violence could've come back to haunt him, as the Penguin frames him for murder and sabotages public opinion, and faces his own duality crisis with Catwoman.

[The Dark Knight]

In particular I think the Batman Returns version of The Penguin is a big improvement over the comics. I don't think people are very aware that the Penguin in the comics wasn't that far removed from Burgess Meredith's take at that time. Devito's Penguin was the first time I found that character to be remotely interesting.

Batman Returns should be the general DNA for the modern Penguin, in the same way Heart of Ice is for Mr Freeze. Pain and Prejudice retains DeVito's spirit but goes in a different direction: a bullied child who becomes a mob boss, retaining the plot to kill Gotham's children via robots he constructed. Like DeVito, there's sympathy in his origins and he's cold as ice evil against his enemies. I enjoy Meredith but this type of Penguin is more to my liking. At the very least I'm hoping Farrell is a mobster with some of the seedier elements intact, because that's when the character is at his most interesting.

[BatmanFurst]

Tbh Devito's adaptation is the only one I've enjoyed. I haven't seen Gotham and I didn't care for him in the Animated Series. I am looking forward to what he'll be like in the upcoming film. I love the design of the character so far.

[The Dark Knight]

Arkham's Penguin is good too, and I like what the Telltale games did as a point of difference. The Gotham underbelly is a universe all to itself with Black Mask and the Court of Owls, etc. Hardening Oswald up for that setting in the quest to to be top dog makes complete sense.

[BatmanFurst]

Arkham's Penguin is good too, and I like what the Telltale games did as a point of difference. The Gotham underbelly is a universe all to itself with Black Mask and the Court of Owls, etc. Hardening Oswald up for that setting in the quest to to be top dog makes complete sense.

I've never been a gamer, but the way Batman fans fawn over the Arkham game makes me want to check them out.