Did Schumacher create the most visually appealing Batman movies?

[Wayne49]

I know fans will debate script treatment until the end of time between these two films. But shouldn't Schumacher and the effects team receive high grades for creating a visually appealing universe for Batman? The older these films get, the more they seem to retain that timeless quality that defines movies that exceeded production values for their day.

The Nolan films are still relatively new in this era to make much of an assessment for aging gracefully, but the Burton films are showing some dated qualities to them. Sure the original will always retain a degree of timeliness because of the incredible style Burton delivered to this instant classic. But that film also has the disadvantage of being the first film of the modern age to introduce (and pretty much reinvent) the superhero experience. That context should ALWAYS be given to this film, because honestly every movie made since, has built upon those ideas.

But production standards, story pacing, and just the natural evolution of action sequences have evolved allot over time. To me, the Schumacher films seem to have captured the best of those improvements and fashioned two films that look just as striking today as they did when they were released 18 and 20 years ago respectively.  They never seem to lose that 'magic' that made everything appear larger-than-life in a way that makes you want to swim in it.

With so many years invested in fans being divisive over the script treatment and overall tone, are these films not getting the proper credit they should for doing the good work on the visual experience?

[Edd Grayson]

That title goes to Burton. But Schumacher made them more like a fantasy comic. People maybe forgot that Batman comics weren't always as dark as in The Dark Knight Returns and other more modern works.

[thecolorsblend]

I guess it comes down to what your individual sensibilities are. I really dig the aesthetics that Schumacher brought to the game. His movies seemed like the kind of world where you could believe that someone can do the stuff Batman does without killing himself.

But I could see someone preferring Burton's take too because the visual angle. And tbh, I've always thought Burton's movies were visual feasts myself.

[Edd Grayson]

Yes, it depends on what appeals to you the most. I think Schumacher's films suffered from executive meddling and were toned down, otherwise they could've been as great as the Burton films in more areas than the visuals.

[The Dark Knight]

Burton is the top dog, but Snyder will be a serious challenger.

[The Laughing Fish]

Am I alone in thinking that B&R is better than BF in terms of cinematography? One of the few things that I didn't like about BF is that it had a lot of darkly lit scenes that didn't gel together with the neon colour e.g. Nygma killing the Wayne Enterprises supervisor. I thought B&R improved that in comparison and matched the bright tone of the film too.

Besides, the statues overlooking Gotham in the film certainly looks amazing.

Burton is the top dog, but Snyder will be a serious challenger.

I don't think Snyder will have any Art Deco backgrounds, but I guarantee you that we will see lots of imagery that celebrates the characters from a mythic perspective i.e. Batman posing as the thunder erupts in the sky ala Dark Knight Returns, and crashing through the window with his cape spread across. It's very larger than life.

[thecolorsblend]

Am I alone in thinking that B&R is better than BF in terms of cinematography? One of the few things that I didn't like about BF is that it had a lot of darkly lit scenes that didn't gel together with the neon colour e.g. Nygma killing the Wayne Enterprises supervisor. I thought B&R improved that in comparison and matched the bright tone of the film too.

I've wondered about that stuff too. And the most I could figure is that B&R is intentionally more stylistic. It's not a question of consistency. At least not necessarily. I just think the nature of B&R's story allowed for the brighter color designs and sets to be a consistent thing since little or none of the narrative really explores darkness.

BF, meanwhile, is basically about a stalker'ish villain, an obsessed, murderous villain and a protagonist going through one helluva dark night of the soul. The ground is already more fertile for dimmer lighting to reflect the darkness consuming Batman, Riddler and Two-Face.

I don't think Snyder will have any Art Deco backgrounds,

Yes, for better or worse live action DCU has hitched it's wagon to realism. In fact, I'm starting to think that we aren't going to see more stylized versions of Batman for long, long time. If ever.

but I guarantee you that we will see lots of imagery that celebrates the characters from a mythic perspective i.e. Batman posing as the thunder erupts in the sky ala Dark Knight Returns, and crashing through the window with his cape spread across. It's very larger than life.

Definitely. In fact, what I'm hoping is that Snyder brings his style back for BvS. For Man of Steel, it was all very gritty, very hand-held and very grounded. Watchmen, meanwhile, was full of stylizations and Snyder's approach to making films. I want that brought back for BvS.

[Catwoman]

Of course my answer was, is, and indefinitely will be Batman Returns, but I did like their look. Very comic-booky like how they made the Dick Tracy movie.

I would LOVE to see a Batman movie with the Dick Tracy look. Bright colors and larger than life criminals in a 1940s flavor but with a tone steeped in noir. That would be perfection. Well, as close to perfection as snow, Christmas lights, and mistletoe. 

[Wayne49]

I think Batman Forever was a bridge between the Burton style and Schumacher's comic book approach. With Burton onboard as producer and the rest of the WB studio watching closely because of the complaints from BR, it was destined to be a more measured response than what B&R delivered. I think Forever held on to many of the Burton-esque qualities (especially with the Batman character), so the transition was not so abrupt as it might have felt in B&R. The Batman character in B&R completely contrasted with previous interpretations, even Forever, so I think fans were a bit caught off guard by that more than anything else. I personally think had Kilmer stayed onboard, the Batman character would have stayed more brooding and allot of what people point to in the treatment would not have taken center stage.

In terms of effects and visual design, Peter MacGregor-Scott indicated there were a number of technological advancements between the making of Forever and B&R which helped them immensely in bringing a bigger visual bang to the story element. And with the success of Forever in place (leaving the Studio with the feeling that Schumacher's lighter style was publicly endorsed) the effects teams were given pretty much free reign to bring the movie to life as they saw fit. Ultimately I think that miscalculation by the studio produced the movie's greatest gem in terms of being a visual feast on the eyes. To this day, I believe that is what keeps this movie in active rotation within the series. It's just fun to look at, regardless of treatment.   

[Dagenspear]

I think Batman Forever was a bridge between the Burton style and Schumacher's comic book approach. With Burton onboard as producer and the rest of the WB studio watching closely because of the complaints from BR, it was destined to be a more measured response than what B&R delivered. I think Forever held on to many of the Burton-esque qualities (especially with the Batman character), so the transition was not so abrupt as it might have felt in B&R. The Batman character in B&R completely contrasted with previous interpretations, even Forever, so I think fans were a bit caught off guard by that more than anything else.

It didn't contrast though. It was consistent with him finding a kind of acceptance of his Batman and Bruce Wayne identities.

God bless you! God bless everyone!