Rank the 8 batman films

[Edd Grayson]

1. Batman Returns
2.The Dark Knight
3.Batman (1989)

4.The Dark Knight Rises
5.Batman the Movie
6.Batman Begins
7.Batman Forever

8.Batman & Robin


To me, there's a gap in quality between the top 3 and the rest and between BF and B&R.

[The Laughing Fish]

1) Batman '89 - The story may not be perfect, but the actors drive the film and the film itself sets the tone and influence for Batman-related media for years to come.
...
2) Batman Returns - Pfeiffer as Catwoman was great, as is her chemistry with Keaton. My only regret is Batman not having enough screentime than I would've liked.
...
...
3) Batman '66 - I don't care what anyone says, it's a product of its time. And it's fun!
...
...
...
...
...
4) The Dark Knight Rises - Hathaway did fine as Catwoman, dumb writing notwithstanding though it's not her fault. Hardy as Bane is unintentionally comedic, and unlike Keaton in Returns, I'm glad that Bale's screentime was limited. A guilty pleasure.
5) Batman Forever - It has some great moments, but the tryhard attempt at humour hurt the film.
6) Batman & Robin, Batman Begins and The Dark Knight - tied. Can't stand or care for either of these at all.

[batman60s]

1. Batman 1966 - Timeless classic, pure and simple! I know the majority are into the dark side of Batman now but at least the classic 60's version didn't have the Joker killing Bruce Wayne's parents or Barbara GORDON being related to Alfred PENNYWORTH. Just saying!
2. The Dark Knight - Thrilling action from start to finish, Heath Ledger's Joker (need to say no more)
3. Batman Begins - was true to the comic story, a fantastic true comic book movie
4. Batman Returns - Fantastic portrayals of both Catwoman and Penguin, great showing both characters back stories, wish they spent more time on it though!
5. Dark Knight Rises - Anne as Catwoman was not amazing. In Batman's first fight with Bane he smacks punches in his face several times and nothing happens but yet at the end he smacks his face maybe twice and his masks pops off? Makes no sense! And killing him off with a missle didnt do the ending justice, expected an epic battle.
6. Batman 1989 - Centered around the Joker too much. Joe Chill murdering Bruce Waynes parents is a thundamental part of Batman, without this happening Batman wouldnt even exist so altering it by having the Joker murder them is just ridiculous IMO. But great batmobile!
7. Batman Forever - Jim Carry as Riddler didnt do it for me. This film is hit and miss really, can watch it if im in the mood.
8. Batman and Robin - Thank-You Joel for almost runining the Batman franchise! Batgirl related to Alfred is a no no. And the portrayal of Ivy didnt do the character any justice. Clooney as Batman? No thanks!

[DocLathropBrown]

6. Batman 1989 - Centered around the Joker too much. Joe Chill murdering Bruce Waynes parents is a thundamental part of Batman, without this happening Batman wouldnt even exist so altering it by having the Joker murder them is just ridiculous IMO. But great batmobile!

I think you mean 'fundamental.' But it's not. It's completely superfluous.

And it makes no difference who killed his parents. Unless the only reason Bruce became Batman was because he didn't like Chill specifically.

"Boy, y'know... I just don't care about my parents at all. Can't stand them. Someone could kill them for all I care. But not that Joe Chill guy. If Joe Chill kills my parents, I swear I'll become a vigilante! But only Chill. Anyone else? I'll live a normal life!"

[DocLathropBrown]

Error

[The Dark Knight]

And it makes no difference who killed his parents. Unless the only reason Bruce became Batman was because he didn't like Chill specifically.

"Boy, y'know... I just don't care about my parents at all. Can't stand them. Someone could kill them for all I care. But not that Joe Chill guy. If Joe Chill kills my parents, I swear I'll become a vigilante! But only Chill. Anyone else? I'll live a normal life!"

Precisely. It's not really much of a big deal who does the deed. It just has to be someone holding a gun. Nor does it matter when it is done, as Gotham By Gaslight highlights. Just as long as it all ends with Bruce vowing to clean up crime with a big broom.

[Grissom]

Batman '89
TDKR/TDK/BR


Batman Forever
Batman & Robin/B66

Each movie has its strong points and I'm glad that as bat-fans we have been privileged to get eight films over these several especially starting with the classic B89 which brought Batman back to his darker more brooding roots.

[BatmanFanatic93]

Batman 1989
Batman Forever
Batman Returns
Batman Begins
Batman & Robin
Batman The Movie
The Dark Knight
The Dark Knight Rises

[thecolorsblend]

I stand by my earlier comments about how difficult (and inaccurate) it is to rank these things.

That said though, I've noticed that if I want to watch a Batman movie, lately it's usually been either MOTP or Forever. More rarely the first hour or so of TDKRises (or whenever Bane breaks Batman's back).

Again, not ranking anything; just listing my fanboy muse's preference at the moment... which has mostly been on Superman more than Batman for the past two months or so anyway.

[thecolorsblend]

And it makes no difference who killed his parents. Unless the only reason Bruce became Batman was because he didn't like Chill specifically.

"Boy, y'know... I just don't care about my parents at all. Can't stand them. Someone could kill them for all I care. But not that Joe Chill guy. If Joe Chill kills my parents, I swear I'll become a vigilante! But only Chill. Anyone else? I'll live a normal life!"

Durrrrr, this was supposed to go in my last post. I swear, if my head wasn't attached at the shoulders...

A few things I'd want to add are that Chill specifically being the murderer of the Waynes wasn't an element of the original origin (is that redundant?). If memory serves, the killer wasn't named at all. The importance (like others have said) is that the Waynes were murdered in a seemingly random street crime. There may be embellishments added beyond that over the years but that is the core part of the origin.

The other thing is that Burton didn't just randomly swap the Joker into the role of the Waynes killer. It was done for a reason. On a thematic level, it sets up that Batman and the Joker created each other. The Joker's origin showed Batman in effect creating the Joker. So really all Burton did was close the loop. That wouldn't have been possible if a younger actor had played the Joker but Burton used Nicholson's age compared to Keaton to the film's advantage.

It economizes the plot and also subtly suggests that Batman's crusade may ultimately be self-defeating. In fighting against monsters, he may inadvertently create even worse monsters.

I would say that was somewhat continued in BR. Sure, Cobblepot's original plan was to kidnap a bunch of children... but he found enfranchisement through Shreck maneuvering him to the mayor's office. My reading is that had Cobblepot become the mayor, he wouldn't have attacked the city.

But Batman's presence pushed Cobblepot in even darker directions than he may have gone on his own. Once Batman discredits him, only then do we see the Penguin get serious about, first, killing Gotham City's first born children and, later, all of them... which, as above, just might not have happened had Batman not been in the picture.

To go back to the topic though, I say all of this to say that Burton didn't casually set Jack up as the Waynes killer. He had a reason for it and I think it served the films he made very well. Besides, if we're going to be sticklers about what the comics are up to, you could argue that the Waynes in Burton's film may well have just come out of a screening of the Mark of Zorro. That's not possible in BB. It works for what Nolan was doing, sure, and there are potential legal issues in referencing a rival studio's movie in WB's... but, all that aside, that ain't what happened in the comics. Should we gripe about that too? Or just let Nolan do his thing and judge him by his results?