'66 Batman Fans Criticize '89 Film

[johnnygobbs]

I haven't read the article yet, but when I saw the title " '66 Batman Fans Criticize '89 Film"  I immediately thought 'April's Fools' joke.

[johnnygobbs]

I've read the article now, and all I've got to say with all due respect to Ral and the polite conduct of this site, is 'what a crock of s**t!'  I'm actually borderline disgusted that these '66 Batman 'fans' consider both the 60s and Nolan version of Batman to be superior to Burton's, when Burton's is surely the ideal midpoint between the former's overly-campy and unrealistic take on Batman, and the latter's arguably overly-'realistic' and somber interpretation of the character.

I can understand people who prefer Nolan's version to Burton's, I can understand people who prefer the 60's version to Burton's but in what universe can one argue in favour of both these respective versions over Burton's films.  Surely, you either prefer the 'campy' Batman or you like 'realistic' Batman, but to reject a version of Batman that straddles both camps (successfully in my opinion) strikes me as simply absurd, and if I didn't know any better is simply another attempt by certain 'bat-fans' to jump on the whole anti-Burton bandwagon that seems to be in full flight at the moment.  I think us 'pro-Burton' Bat-fans really need to challenge this frankly stupid twaddle before future generations are indoctrinated with this whole 'Burton's Batman is the weak-link' nonsense.

I apologise if I sound a little bullish, but I'm sure I'm not the only one who feels a little frustrated by this post-Nolan revisionist c**p.

[GothamAlleys]

I've read the article now, and all I've got to say with all due respect to Ral and the polite conduct of this site, is 'what a crock of s**t!'  I'm actually borderline disgusted that these '66 Batman 'fans' consider both the 60s and Nolan version of Batman to be superior to Burton's, when Burton's is surely the ideal midpoint between the former's overly-campy and unrealistic take on Batman

I like one of the comments I got in the blog:
This is what made the Burton Batman so great. It took the source material seriously, had the deep psychological stuff for the older fans that take the comics too seriously, and it also had the fun, over the top stuff for the people who grew up on the more fun, pre-80s grim and gritty stuff that came later

[johnnygobbs]

I like one of the comments I got in the blog:
This is what made the Burton Batman so great. It took the source material seriously, had the deep psychological stuff for the older fans that take the comics too seriously, and it also had the fun, over the top stuff for the people who grew up on the more fun, pre-80s grim and gritty stuff that came later

Don't get me wrong, there were some constructive and intelligent posts in that thread, but the general gist of the blog was '60s Batman - great, Nolan Batman - great, Burton Batman - rubbish', and when people start seriously arguing that the 60s Batmobile is superior to the 1989/92 one, the mind truly begins to boggle. 

[Azrael]

I haven't read the article yet, but when I saw the title " '66 Batman Fans Criticize '89 Film"  I immediately thought 'April's Fools' joke.

hahahaha, yeah.

The crap someone can read in there makes me even more thankful for the existence of blogs like Gotham Alleys. It's facts, not opinions, that actually matter.

I don't know why it's usually the B89 fans that have a more balanced view towards most other versions of Batman.

[The Dark Knight]

I know its about preference, but if thats so, they should say so and not fault the movie for not focusing on Batman when that was the entire point  - to keep Batman as a mysterious phantom. Instead of saying they dont like the Gothic, vampire-ish approach and its not their style, they call the movie mess and continue to poke it for featuring too much Joker

Agreed. It's fine to have a taste for something. But it's sheer stupidity to roast something you clearly don't understand and see it as valid criticism. Because it's not. It's about knowing the facts.

[GothamAlleys]

The crap someone can read in there makes me even more thankful for the existence of blogs like Gotham Alleys. It's facts, not opinions, that actually matter.

Ah, thanks!

I know its about preference, but if thats so, they should say so and not fault the movie for not focusing on Batman when that was the entire point  - to keep Batman as a mysterious phantom. Instead of saying they dont like the Gothic, vampire-ish approach and its not their style, they call the movie mess and continue to poke it for featuring too much Joker

Agreed. It's fine to have a taste for something. But it's sheer stupidity to roast something you clearly don't understand and see it as valid criticism. Because it's not. It's about knowing the facts.

Thats exactly my point.

Anyway, the reason why Burton's movies get so much beating and Schumacher's are rarely mentioned is because some people and some Nolan fans cant stand that its still so liked, and theyre trying to bury it and destroy its credibility because theyre still very praised. Thats why you dont see Schumacher beating everywhere, but its always Burton vs Nolan as oppose to Schumacher vs Nolan. Theyre attacking whats popular, and trust me, I visit sooo many different, unrelated forums, like general movie forums, James Cameron forums on JamesCameronOnline, Alien forums, Kiss band forums, and much much more, and I rarely saw anyone who wouldnt have a huge praise for Burton's movies and in vast majority of the cases I see people preferring Burton above all. Its some Nolan fans who have a very shallow view on life, and dont think theres a gray area,. In some people's minds, if you like one take then you haver to absolutely despise, hate and destroy any other. The fact that Nolan fans are universally regarded and even recognized in the press as very hateful and venom spitting ( see - http://www.radiotimes.com/blogs/1011-christopher-nolan-inception-beyond-criticism-andrew-collins/ , South Park even referenced that) and that Burton fans are usually very level headed, polite and respectable speaks for itself.

[Catwoman]

Haven't read the post yet, but I'm a member there and in the past I've seen a lot of criticism for all the Batman films from the '60s fans (and even actors on the show like Burt Ward) because of the content. To them Batman is about wholesome family fun like the show was, not a Joker who gleefully shoots a corpse or the like. Just their opinion, I respect their right to it. Can't really blame them when you look at the world around us.

I'm kind of a bipolar Batfan, sometimes I want the feel-good innocence of the '60s show and find the episodes on YouTube and sit back and grin for an hour or so, other times I want the action and (somewhat) seriousness of the later movies, but all the environments have their plusses. The films obviously have their minuses, not sure the '60s one does unless you're just not in a mood for a fun, feel-good Batman. But of the three incarnations, I don't put one above the other two because they're all great at accomplishing what they went for.

[The Dark Knight]

Thats exactly my point.

I know.

[Grissom]

Personally, I think that Burton really did something right if people still see the need to attack his films. They feel threatened by Burton's films as it is still very popular even to this day.

I am very thankful for those among us and others across the internet that will defend these films as they are great films and SHOULD be defended.