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

[The Dark Knight]

I love Burton's Batman because he didn't concern himself with maintaining a public image in terms of his methods.

He blew up Axis Chemicals.
He shot Joker's goons via the batwing.
He burnt the firebreather.
He blew up the strongman.

Too cruel? Too bad. He got the job done.

This Batman will continue to save Gotham whether citizens or officials like it or not. His Batmobile was sabotaged and it wrecked a whole fleet of police cars and public property. Did he issue a public statement about that? Nope. He said nothing. He knew the truth and that satisifed him, and if anything, any doubt about his motives would've led to even more street cred. That's a real Dark Knight.

[The Laughing Fish]

I love Burton's Batman because he didn't concern himself with maintaining a public image in terms of his methods.

He blew up Axis Chemicals.
He shot Joker's goons via the batwing.
He burnt the firebreather.
He blew up the strongman.

Too cruel? Too bad. He got the job done.

I've seen some fans describe Burton's Batman as the Dirty Harry of the franchise, and it's very hard to ignore the comparison when looking at those points.

I think it's safe to say that they're both alpha male action heroes. Dirty Harry is fed up with the bureaucracy of the law and sees extremely dangerous criminals that need to be put down without making any apologies for it. Burton's Batman accepts that he lives in a violent and imperfect world, and he reacts accordingly.

[riddler]

I am beyond sick of hearing how super heroes should never kill. I don't think they should be written to kill everyone who looks bad but sometimes in life there's no alternative. They go off to war every night and sometimes it's kill or be killed. The Joker would have gotten away and killed more people if Batman didn't stop him, the dynamite was about to blow someone up (and anyone who thinks it's okay to fool around with dynamite in public needs to be taken off the street), ACE chemicals was basically ground zero for the joker and his goons and the exploding penguins were going to destroy the city if he didn't intervene. Despite what the detractors say, Keaton's Batman DID try and avoid killing people- if he were just a cold blooded killer he would have taken out the joker and his goons with the batwing, he just wasn't above taking people out if there was no other option.

[The Dark Knight]

I agree. It depends on the severity of the situation. The warehouse sequence in BvS is a good example. When you're in a room of ten or more armed and dangerous goons, anything can happen. Grenades are going to go off and guns are going to be fired. You do what's necessary to stay alive in the heat of battle. That was also the case with the B89 fight with Ray Charles.

[thecolorsblend]

You do what's necessary to stay alive in the heat of battle. That was also the case with the B89 fight with Ray Charles.

That's true. Very true.

I'd add that (1) Batman was f***ed up and badly injured after the Batwing crash and (2) the Joker would be escaping with Vicki any second to God only knows where.

The only choice was to go through the Ray Charles guy. Sucks to be him but lives are at stake here, including Batman's own because of his injuries.

It really blows my mind that people take exception to whacking that guy. Even now, people throw tantrums over it.

[The Laughing Fish]

I am beyond sick of hearing how super heroes should never kill. I don't think they should be written to kill everyone who looks bad but sometimes in life there's no alternative.

I've noticed people only hypocritically complain if it involves Batman and Superman, while ignoring certain popular interpretations of the characters doing the same thing.

Come to think of it, I've never seen anybody else talk about the Avengers or even Wonder Woman killing people. You would think that after all of the unfair and unjustified flack the DCEU versions of Bats and Supes received, people would've doubled down on Diana killing people. But, whatever.

Despite what the detractors say, Keaton's Batman DID try and avoid killing people.

Yes, that's true. A good example of Batman taking non-lethal force is when he fires his grapple gun at one of Jack Napier's henchmen at Axis Chemicals, and saved the goon from falling to his death by quickly attaching the hook onto the rail.

It really blows my mind that people take exception to whacking that guy. Even now, people throw tantrums over it.

People have selective outrage. That's why.

[The Dark Knight]

It really blows my mind that people take exception to whacking that guy. Even now, people throw tantrums over it.

I don't get that either. Mr Charles wasn't there to talk about soul music. He was there to kill Batman. That long chain he was swinging gave it away. It was pure self defence. Mr Charles tried to do the very thing Batman did to him: toss him down the bell shaft. Mr Charles was unsuccessful. Batman was successful.

[riddler]

super heroes are basically going off to war every night. Sometimes in war you find yourself in kill or be killed situations. Iron Man made multiple kills in his first movie, people forgave him because he killed people pointing guns at civilians. Is there much difference here?

[Wayne49]

I think this will always be subjective to what each of us views as "dark". Sometimes the general look of the film can be dark in tone. Others might view the definition according to the physicality of the characters and who gets hurt. For me the Burton films were surreal, so I took them as the A-typical Burton "Gothic" approach that is his signature look. The Burton universe doesn't typically concern itself with a moral code so much as survival of the fittest and character motivation backed with a load of style and charm. It always feels like I'm opening this huge fairy tale book that comes to life. Because of that, I tend to give more latitude towards what I see in the film because it never truly seats itself in a real world plane.

The Schumacher films pretty much speak for themselves. Pure comic book escapism. You either embrace them for what they are or struggle with them. I think there's always a time and place for them and I'm GLAD they have a place etched out in cinematic history. Some might argue it;s not a distinguished place. But like allot of things, time heals most wounds and both of these films seem to be getting a warmer reception these days from the fans.

The Nolan films definitely conceptualize both hero and villain with perhaps too many social overtones which tend to betray the concept based on how those are handled in each story. Some work better than others (for affect), but all of them are heavily flawed. Nolan movies tend to place the mental angst more in the foreground as part of the narrative. If the Burton films gave the "how" and the Schumacher films gave the "why nots", the Nolan films give the "why should they" a huge center stage. Some found this very deep and distressing for the license. Others enjoyed it for what it was and embraced the conceptual slant to the entire DC universe. Which brings us to Snyder...

Snyder is an acquired taste. Lets be honest. In general he does not make likable characters in any of his films (not to the masses anyway). They all tend to profile the same - Reluctant participants doing a job they feel cursed to do for a lifetime. That mission statement doesn't exactly allow for allot of room for optimism or a general embrace one typically has for traditional superheroes. It's hard to celebrate his heroes when they don't seem to like themselves. So his characters' manic depressive states tend to overshadow the story being told if not outright muddy the point for why we watch them. So this too can be defined as "dark".

I guess in the final analysis Batman is kind of like your favorite cup of coffee. You can take it black and bitter or light and colorful. But no matter what side you lean towards, you get your hero in a cape and cowl beating up the bad guys with style points. Not a bad day at the office.

[The Dark Knight]

My favorite Batman film and comic is TDK Returns. Joker shooting civilians in cold blood during the tunnel of love sequence is as bleak as anything I've seen in Batman media. It's raw and illicits a reaction. Same thing with Joker gassing the live audience, and killing Wolper with the coffee mug. Or Joker stabbing Batman repeatedly with his knife. It's pretty confronting stuff and I love it all. It keeps you on your toes.

But I think you need dark themes to match the violence to complete the package. We have:

A suicidal hero who gave up his career due to emotional trauma.
A city without hope overrun by mutant gangs.
The theme that the peace and love 1960s movement meant nothing. Things only got worse.
The theme that criminals like Harvey and Joker can't truly be rehabilitated.
The reality that Bruce is only getting older and will never father a biological child.
A hero who returns only to be hunted and hated as strongly as ever.
Batman beating his old friend Superman to a pulp.
Alfred dying and Wayne Manor destroyed in a ball of flames.

And so on.

But through of all this is an inspirational tale of a man who finally decided to never give up, even when he thought all hope was lost. He moved on from his pain and focused on the future he had left. He fought the system and won. Even if that now means he has to live the remainder of his days in seclusion.