Batman '89 (2021)

[The Joker]

Hamm's a good writer

https://www.batman-online.com/forum/index.php?topic=4067.290

I retract this ^ statement.

Damn.

I've purposely refrained from reading much of "Batman '89" because of wanting to read it in a tpb format, but it really sounds like that perhaps Hamm's rejected "Batman II" draft adapted into a comic book format (as basically a Burtonverse elseworlds tale from the get go) might have been less egregious than what we ultimately got with this .....

[The Laughing Fish]

I've read the last issue today, and I'm very disappointed. The Gordons were done very dirty in this shoddy excuse for a finale.

I've purposely refrained from reading much of "Batman '89" because of wanting to read it in a tpb format, but it really sounds like that perhaps Hamm's rejected "Batman II" draft adapted into a comic book format (as basically a Burtonverse elseworlds tale from the get go) might have been less egregious than what we ultimately got with this .....

The Batman II script and this mini-series has confirmed my suspicions that both of B89 and BR's legacies are owed to other writers/script doctors and Burton's direction. At best, Hamm is fine when it comes to conceiving certain concepts, and I do thank him for for shaping up the basis for B89. But if he doesn't have another writer come in and refine his work, the storytelling suffers. Up until now, I thought this comic mini-series had to have twelves issues to flesh out the story, but after looking at the end result, the length wouldn't have made any difference.

As far as comics goes, I'd say Hamm's work on Blind Justice is much better than this letdown, and that comic wasn't that good. But it was definitely better constructed than the lazy mess that Batman '89 has become.

[MILD SPOILER]
Did anybody else thought Commissioner Gordon resembled Pat Hingle the most when he got punched by Batman and tried for corruption by Dent during that imaginary sequence while Bruce was trying to bargain with Two-Face? And given that was the only time we saw Gordon in that issue, did anybody else think it was done in poor taste?
[/MILD SPOILER]

[Kamdan]

This comic series has proven that Sam Hamm was in similar situation David Goyer was in for The Dark Knight Trilogy in which the director needed a writer that was familiar with the lore and universe of Batman to create something the fans would approve. Burton's initial treatment was sorely based on the Mankiewicz script and with someone like Hamm, you get elements like the inclusion of Harvey Dent and a character like Vicki Vale with a more interesting occupation that possesses better story possibilities, but that mentality makes you more attuned to doing an issue of the comic instead of making a film, which was obviously what Burton and Nolan were interested in.

Hamm has always been very vocal about The Joker being the murder of the Waynes and Alfred letting Vicki into the Batcave, which are criticisms that are adhered to the comics, but are actually great story points and visuals for a film. I've been conducting my own personal research for Warren Skaaren's contributions to the screenplay, a task that he had to also perform on Burton's previous film Beetlejuice and reading his criticisms and suggestions on how to fix the story really did help shape the movie into the one that we know and love today. Hamm's screenplay was very clunky with unclear motivations and the misguided attempt at emulating romantic comedies from the 40's. Of course, he had to deal with the burden of including Robin in his screenplay which was something they had to come up with at the last minute to find out where exactly to place them in the story. Perhaps things would transpire differently if Hamm  did not have that directive at all, but his following track record of only getting work that involved comic adaptations showed that he was unfortunately placed in a box that he couldn't get out of. I'm curious to know if one day will get more details about what the original concept of Batman '89 was supposed to be until Hamm got involved. It perhaps was more attuned to Burton's sensibilities, but that could've been a legality problem as to why that couldn't have been carried through.

[eledoremassis02]

This needed Burton and Keaton (or one of the two) as consultants. I feel like it was all over the place. Now it takes places in 94 (not 95 like the playsation thing aluded too)??.

Dent was all over the place and the ending felt more rushed than any of the Burton films. There was really no emotional weight to anything.

Bruce and Selinas relationship at the end smacks the face of Returns. I get Bruce has to comes to terms with being a Killer but Forever (the original version and the theatrical cut) did this better.

Alfred being happy to see Selina Kyle seemed odd too since I always thought Alfred didnt care for her too much for her.

There were some interesting moments but overall, I kind wish it wasnt a thing. It had a story to tell but it wasnt really Burtons Batman.

As with everyone here, I will not be buying any more versions of this. I honestly dont think I will even be re-reading it

[thecolorsblend]

Alfred being happy to see Selina Kyle seemed odd too since I always thought Alfred didnt care for her too much for her.

This... is a good point. But I figured it was more like Alfred disapproved of her.

Alfred encouraged Bruce's burgeoning relationship with Vicki because she was a basically normally, clinically sane woman. But what I guess I interpreted over the years is that Alfred disapproved of Selina because she's shat bit nucking futs. It would be understandable if Alfred thought Selina was the worst possible influence this version of Bruce could have in his life. I wouldn't be surprised if he wasn't secretly relieved that Selina was presumed dead.

But at the same time, that's never said. When Alfred has that brief scene with Selina in BR, I just assumed he was totally weirded out by her. But he never directly says that, so hmm.

Either way, him being happy to see her just doesn't scan at all.

[eledoremassis02]

I always felt the interaction he had with her and his reaction to "Salina Kyle might be there" (granted that could have also been because he just ripped the invitation up) mixed with the fact he didnt push it like he did Viki or Chase (if we're counting forever).

I always though of him not liking her because she really kind of was the female Bruce and he saw that and relaized that wasnt good for him.

But even still, youre right they didnt have much interaction so regarless his reaction does seem kind of off. Infact when I was reading this, this felt more like TAS.

[thecolorsblend]

Yo.

Of all Batman forums, I rly don't think anybody here will go easy on this comic book if it doesn't deliver the goods. Like you, I want something that feels like it could be a continuation of Burton's films. I don't particularly want the existing Batman mythos filtered through a Burton aesthetic. Any idiot can do that. I'd prefer something that feels like it could pick up where Burton left off.

Full disclosure: I haven't read a single page of this comic. My fear was that we'd get conventional Batman stories with Burtonized visuals. And glancing at this thread, that seems to be pretty much the best anybody can say.

I don't think I'll be picking this up, sadly. I'd rather avoid the comic book out of ignorance than read something that has upset everyone else around here. If it isn't good enough for the rest of you, I have my doubts it would be good enough for me.

Somebody at DC had no idea what fans wanted from this series, it seems.

[Kamdan]

Somebody at DC had no idea what fans wanted from this series, it seems.

That someone is Sam Hamm. Joe Quinones has proven himself to be on our level for the appreciation we have for Burton's work. Judging by the work he did for the initial proposal with Kate Leth, it seemed to have been on the desired level, but DC probably thought it was too close for comfort to avoid litigations from Burton and the only leeway was to hire Hamm for the project.

Hamm likes to state that it was the writer strike being the reason why he was replaced by Skaaren, but the circumstances and fax of the matter show that he was replaced before the strike took place. He must have made up this situation to save face as to why he didn't stay onboard when shooting finally took place.

[The Joker]

Hamm likes to state that it was the writer strike being the reason why he was replaced by Skaaren, but the circumstances and fax of the matter show that he was replaced before the strike took place. He must have made up this situation to save face as to why he didn't stay onboard when shooting finally took place.

That's interesting.

Truthfully, there is definitely a pattern of outright letdowns when it comes to recent spinoffs involving Keaton and the Burtonverse. Yeah, the "Earth-89/Knox" cameo over on CW was harmless enough, but from there on out, it's nothing but sheer frustration.

You got the Devito Penguin anniversary comic debacle (a weird vignette that attempts to masquerade as a story), Sam Hamm's evidently inconsistent "Batman '89" comic, and Keaton's cinematic Batman return having to be associated with the much plagued "The Flash" movie (the subsequent Batgirl movie leaks concerning Keaton sounds about as mediocre as one would expect from Warners these days too).

[thecolorsblend]

Hamm likes to state that it was the writer strike being the reason why he was replaced by Skaaren, but the circumstances and fax of the matter show that he was replaced before the strike took place. He must have made up this situation to save face as to why he didn't stay onboard when shooting finally took place.

That's interesting.

Truthfully, there is definitely a pattern of outright letdowns when it comes to recent spinoffs involving Keaton and the Burtonverse. Yeah, the "Earth-89/Knox" cameo over on CW was harmless enough, but from there on out, it's nothing but sheer frustration.

You got the Devito Penguin anniversary comic debacle (a weird vignette that attempts to masquerade as a story), Sam Hamm's evidently inconsistent "Batman '89" comic, and Keaton's cinematic Batman return having to be associated with the much plagued "The Flash" movie (the subsequent Batgirl movie leaks concerning Keaton sounds about as mediocre as one would expect from Warners these days too).

Not to sound like a Debbie Downer. But the older I get, the more I think that some things need to be left in their place. I mean, Keaton's Batman is the founder of the feast for me. I think B89 totally changed the trajectory of my life.

But it ended in 1992. For better or for worse, his time with the character came to a close.

These attempts to somehow revive that Batman have (so far) only showed me how special, unique and unrepeatable that entire experience was. Things end, it's totally okay. Nothing wrong with that.

And I'm starting to think that maybe it was better when BR was Keaton's (unwitting) swan song with the character and that universe. Because the stuff we've gotten since then and the stuff in the pipeline... ain't exactly instilling a whole lot of confidence.