The Gotham of Returns

[Catwoman]

When people talk about Returns, particularly in comparison to Batman or Nolan's movies, it seems like they always bring up its Gotham City as a weakness. "It's too small, all the action takes place in Gotham Plaza," and so on.

Am I the only one that finds that to be a positive and loves it? I love how claustrophobic it feels. It adds to the intensity with the feeling of everyone being trapped, like they're in a snowglobe or something.

[The Laughing Fish]

Gotham City in the Burton films is a character of itself. So otherworldly and unique that it allows you to believe that Batman and his freakish enemies could exist in such a world. And that's what sets it apart from all the other comic films. If you put them in the same real city, these characters would look out of place if you think too much, and it definitely would've made the film far less interesting.

Am I the only one that finds that to be a positive and loves it? I love how claustrophobic it feels. It adds to the intensity with the feeling of everyone being trapped, like they're in a snowglobe or something.

I always thought that the small sound stage that represented Gotham City was due to being a product of its time and nothing more, but that's actually a really good way of putting it. It's perfectly describes Batman trapped inside the Batmobile by the Penguin.

[thecolorsblend]

A lot of action takes place in Gotham Plaza because a lot of important events are based in Gotham Plaza. I don't see why that's a negative. Or a positive, even. It just is.

[GoNerdYourself]

I've seen similar criticisms over the first film, in which we keep seeing the same street. But I've always been amazed by the architecture and design in Burton's films. They never took me out of the movie and I never once noticed how, for example, the Monarch Theatre keeps showing up in B89 until it was pointed out.

[The Laughing Fish]

People can whine about the geography of Gotham City in BR all they want, it doesn't change the fact it left an impression. Does anybody remember the Cheshire Cat department store symbol and Penguin's rubber duck Easter eggs in Arkham City? Nice little homage there.

[Catwoman]

I don't remember seeing the duck!

I wish you could break the Cheshire Cat head. I have tried throwing countless bolas at it while hissing at the TV screen before. Maybe I didn't throw enough...

[thecolorsblend]

We live in a time when digital technology allows filmmakers to create vast, expansive cities with unique locations scattered all over the place. And in this age, I don't think people are really contextualizing the production design of BR.

The Gotham stuff from B89 was shot on a heavily renovated backlot. The crew could show more of the city there since they had overall more to work with. But in BR, they had more money but less overall space. This was a trade off of shooting in Burbank as they did. Generally, this "small world" thing wasn't a problem with film until CGI made it possible to show vastly more than would've ever been affordable to build by hand back in the old days.

I hear arguments that we see a lot more of Gotham City in Forever than we did in BR. And while that may be true, (A) Schumacher used a fair amount of CGI in Forever to expand his vision and (B) you might be surprised when you see how much stuff Schumacher shot on location with the lights turned off. It really is a wash in terms of the amount of stuff shot on a set as compared to BR.

Considering the lack of style and vision plaguing a lot of comic book movies these days, I'll take the Gotham Plaza-centric approach of BR any day of the week. At least Burton bent over backwards to show us something unique and original. And he'll always have my gratitude for that.

[The Dark Knight]

What colors says about CGI expanding worlds these days is spot on. Back in the early 1990s things were different. And in my view, those limitations added a certain degree of charm you're just not going to find these days. Matte paintings and miniatures were more regularly used, creating an otherworldly atmosphere - the establishing sweep of Arctic World being a key example. Limitations can increase creativity. In the absence of a real Gotham City, Burton had to make one with the resources he had - and he gave a new interpretation for each film. I respect that.

[The Laughing Fish]

Considering the lack of style and vision plaguing a lot of comic book movies these days, I'll take the Gotham Plaza-centric approach of BR any day of the week. At least Burton bent over backwards to show us something unique and original. And he'll always have my gratitude for that.

^This 100%. And nobody can deny the influence his Gotham City designs had on other media either. As fantastic as BTAS is with its take on the characters, I think it's fair to say the timeless, Gothic atmosphere it borrowed from the Burton films when it came to adapting its take on Gotham it a special kind of charm that made it even more memorable than The New Batman Adventures sequel series. I've no doubt that sort of flair gave Rocksteady some inspiration when designing the Arkham games too.

To further demonstrate Tim Burton's influence as a visual artist, I'm currently reading Batman: Outlaws, a story Doug Moench and Peter Gulacy did back in 2000, and I was surprised by how Gotham resembled more like Burton's Batman movies. As crazy as it might sound, probably even more so than Burton could ever possibly conceive, with with the amount of gargoyles and sophisticated statues. Although I have to admit, I do see some traces of Schumacher's design in certain pages, such as the large bat symbol planted above the Batcomputer.

Now that I mentioned Gulacy, I've only read a few other stories drawn by him such as a subplot in No Man's Land and Year One: Batman/Ra's al Ghul, and he out of all the artists I've seen has an affinity of drawing Batman's cowl and gloves similar to Bob Ringwood's designs. Yes, a lot of comics had put the "Goth" in Gotham City, but Gulacy seemed to have a fetish for the Burton/Schumacher era.

[thecolorsblend]

Considering the lack of style and vision plaguing a lot of comic book movies these days, I'll take the Gotham Plaza-centric approach of BR any day of the week. At least Burton bent over backwards to show us something unique and original. And he'll always have my gratitude for that.

^This 100%. And nobody can deny the influence his Gotham City designs had on other media either. As fantastic as BTAS is with its take on the characters, I think it's fair to say the timeless, Gothic atmosphere it borrowed from the Burton films when it came to adapting its take on Gotham it a special kind of charm that made it even more memorable than The New Batman Adventures sequel series. I've no doubt that sort of flair gave Rocksteady some inspiration when designing the Arkham games too.

To further demonstrate Tim Burton's influence as a visual artist, I'm currently reading Batman: Outlaws, a story Doug Moench and Peter Gulacy did back in 2000, and I was surprised by how Gotham resembled more like Burton's Batman movies. As crazy as it might sound, probably even more so than Burton could ever possibly conceive, with with the amount of gargoyles and sophisticated statues. Although I have to admit, I do see some traces of Schumacher's design in certain pages, such as the large bat symbol planted above the Batcomputer.

Now that I mentioned Gulacy, I've only read a few other stories drawn by him such as a subplot in No Man's Land and Year One: Batman/Ra's al Ghul, and he out of all the artists I've seen has an affinity of drawing Batman's cowl and gloves similar to Bob Ringwood's designs. Yes, a lot of comics had put the "Goth" in Gotham City, but Gulacy seemed to have a fetish for the Burton/Schumacher era.

Indeed. Gulacy's No Man's Land stuff cast Val Kilmer as Batman. He even uses the panther suit in his comics. Fun stuff.