RiffTrax Forum

RiffTrax Discussion => Suggest-a-Trax => Topic started by: eightcell on November 17, 2006, 02:27:30 PM

Title: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: eightcell on November 17, 2006, 02:27:30 PM
I would actualy like a Rifftrax of the Tim Burton Batman movie.  I think it takes itself to seriously and everyone has seen it.  Plus, the dvd can be found almost anywhere and is pretty cheap.

My vote: Batman '89

(http://mywebpages.comcast.net/eightcell/shared/rifftrax-bat.jpg)

Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: Cibernético II on November 17, 2006, 03:57:23 PM
nope
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: MontyServo on November 17, 2006, 04:01:32 PM
I think eventually they will get to the point where they will do these films, and there is no reason they shouldn't start with the first of those 4 Batman films.

All 4 are plenty riffable!

Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: Sharktopus on November 17, 2006, 04:40:41 PM
Definitely. A terrible adaptation of Batman. At least Batman & Robin is meant to be goofy. (I hope.)
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: Pak-Man on November 17, 2006, 05:07:35 PM
It's not. I watched the making-of specials when they came out. They thought they were making a serious Batman movie.
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: Sharktopus on November 17, 2006, 05:11:26 PM
It's not. I watched the making-of specials when they came out. They thought they were making a serious Batman movie.

I just can't believe that. They may have thought they were making a good movie, and maybe Schumacher deluded himself into believing it was a serious movie, but I refuse to believe that the actors didn't know they were in a farce. Well, maybe Chris O'Donnell and Alicia Silverstone, but certainly Clooney - and even Schwarzenegger - know better.
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: Road_Element on November 17, 2006, 06:00:37 PM
I hate to state again my dislike of the first 4 Batman movie. I dont even really like any of Tim Burtons movies. I mean if your a goth kid you might love them. But there just to weird for me and i find most of his movies to be a trumpet of style over substance. Why i love Begins is basicly because it was the first time i watched a batman movie and said to myself "Wow this is the same batman from the comics". Instead of some else version of the character. The only other movie that did that for me was "Mask of the Phantasm" based on the Animated Series. Witch i would say was better then all previous 4 movies put together. But ya they could do all four of the previous film. But if they did Begins i dont know if i would want to watch it. Just because i like that movie so much.
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: mrbasehart on November 17, 2006, 06:23:40 PM
I think Tim Burton's made some great movies: Ed Wood, Edward Scissorhands and Big Fish, but for some reason, Batman and its sequel fails to register with me.

Although getting Michelle Pfeiffer in the cat-suit was pretty damn awesome.   :P
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: ScottotD on November 17, 2006, 06:38:33 PM
Agreed, I've never seen the big deal with Burton's Batman.
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: Minnesota on November 17, 2006, 08:00:44 PM
That pic at the top of this page is priceless. Nice job.


Oh yeah, sorry to be the bearer of bad news but its going to B&R (not batman 1). JonnyFrag predicted it along with LoTR.

"LOTR  (we pretty much know one of these will happen sooner or later ...probably sooner)
Batman and Robin (very high likelyhood)
Titanic (been mentioned as a dream project from them for years)"

JonnyFrag, 11/13/06 http://rifftrax.com/smf/index.php?topic=815.0 (http://rifftrax.com/smf/index.php?topic=815.0)
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: 6079SmithW on November 17, 2006, 08:23:04 PM
I like this movie, but it really doesn't have anything to do with Batman or its mythology. As an adaptation, it's terrible, but as a movie in its own right, I think it's pretty good.
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: mrbasehart on November 17, 2006, 08:29:12 PM
I like this movie, but it really doesn't have anything to do with Batman or it's mythology. As an adaptation, it's terrible, but as a movie in its own right, I think it's pretty good.

Yeah, I've been thinking about who they should cast if they ever did a Dark Knight Returns movie and I've got two suggestions:

Gary Sinise
(http://www.ltdanband.com/grfx/bandphotos/gary_sinise/garyfinal.jpg)

Or if we wanted to cast slightly older:

Victor Garber
(http://www.alias-tv.com/imgs/s3cast15.jpg)
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: 6079SmithW on November 17, 2006, 08:38:28 PM
I'm not sure I'd want to see a DKR movie. Movies have a hard time walking a character in between good and evil, and blockbusters almost always just give up and go for good. I'd hate to see an adaptation of that where I'm supposed to believe that Bats isn't going off the deep end.
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: ScottotD on November 17, 2006, 09:07:56 PM
If they could get him, Paul Newman has the perfect chin for it.
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: mrbasehart on November 17, 2006, 09:29:43 PM
I'm not sure I'd want to see a DKR movie. Movies have a hard time walking a character in between good and evil, and blockbusters almost always just give up and go for good. I'd hate to see an adaptation of that where I'm supposed to believe that Bats isn't going off the deep end.

Yeah, it's more wishful thinking than anything else.  I film companies wouldn't want Bats beating the living crap out of Superman either.

They could do The Long Halloween though.
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: torgosPizza on November 18, 2006, 09:46:51 AM
The Long Halloween was a joker book wasn't it? I'm sure you guys are all aware of the Dark Night coming out in a couple years? Christian Bale and Heath Ledger?

I was pretty upset at the news of his casting but in the end I found myself liking it. Obviously if Nolan saw something in him that nailed it then I'm sure the movie's in good hands.

I also read the Ledger was given The Killing Joke graphic novel (Alan Moore) to give him background and, I'm guessing, to give him an idea of the kind of Joker they're going for this time.
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: Petey Wheatstraw on November 18, 2006, 01:10:10 PM
Definitely. A terrible adaptation of Batman.

Tim Burton's films are the only good adaptations of the comics.
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: Sharktopus on November 18, 2006, 01:20:57 PM
Definitely. A terrible adaptation of Batman.

Tim Burton's films are the only good adaptations of the comics.

Dude, have ever read a Batman comic? Burton had Batman killing guys left and right. He made a whole generation of movie-goers believe the Joker killed Bruce Wayne's parents. He even had Bruce sleeping HANGING UPSIDE DOWN BY HIS FEET. And that's just the first movie. Then he gave Catwoman vague mystically-based powers, and made the Penguin a disfigured freak of nature who lived in the sewers and used actual mind-controlled penguins as weapons. Burton obviously has zero respect for the source material. He's stated himself that he doesn't even read superhero comics. If you're going to criticize Peter Jackson for straying from Tolkien, you can't call Burton's Batman a good adaptation (And don't get uppity about me comparing Tolkien to Batman comics. Fantasy is fantasy and I love them both.) You can enjoy them as decent films, but they're terrible adaptations.


The Long Halloween was a joker book wasn't it? I'm sure you guys are all aware of the Dark Night coming out in a couple years? Christian Bale and Heath Ledger?

I was pretty upset at the news of his casting but in the end I found myself liking it. Obviously if Nolan saw something in him that nailed it then I'm sure the movie's in good hands.

I also read the Ledger was given The Killing Joke graphic novel (Alan Moore) to give him background and, I'm guessing, to give him an idea of the kind of Joker they're going for this time.

Joker shows up very briefly - dressed as Santa - in Long Halloween, sort of as a break from the whodunnit that is the rest of book. It's mostly about Batman in his first year or so, following Frank Miller's Year One, trying to help Harvey Dent and Jim Gordon take down Carmine "The Roman" Falcone's crime organization. They borrowed a little of Long Halloween for Batman Begins, and will probably borrow a little more in Dark Knight. I'd recommend anything by Jeph Loeb and Tim Sale, especially their Batman "early years" stuff - Long Halloween, Dark Victory, Catwoman: When In Rome, and Haunted Knight - in that order. Start with Miller and Mazzuchelli's Year One, of course. Batman before all the modern nonsense, but with modern storytelling - perfect to borrow for the movies. Also, Matt Wagner of Mage and Grendel is doing some early years Batman minis as well - Batman & The Monster Men and Batman & The Mad Monk. Great stuff, but I don't see them showing up in a movie.

As for the Killing Joke, if they're going for that "flavor" for the Joker, that's fine. But I hope they don't go telling the Joker's origin like Alan Moore did. It's a great story, and I like how Moore tied it into the old Red Hood story from very early Batman, but the Joker's origin should always be the mystery that Batman can't solve, so the readers shouldn't know it either. Plus, it makes Joker even creepier. He should just be the balancing force of chaos created by Batman's order. He doesn't need any more backstory than that.
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: Shinigami on November 18, 2006, 01:38:32 PM
Definitely. A terrible adaptation of Batman.

Tim Burton's films are the only good adaptations of the comics.

Dude, have ever read a Batman comic? Burton had Batman killin guys left and right. He made a whole generation of movie-goers believe the Joker killed Bruce Wayne's parents. He even had Bruce sleeping HANGING UPSIDE DOWN BY HIS FEET. And that's just the first movie. Then he gave Catwoman vague mystically-based powers, and made the Penguin a disfigured freak of nature who lived in the sewers and used actual mind-controlled penguins as weapons. Burton obviously has zero respect for the source material. He's stated himself that he doesn't even read superhero comics. If you're going to criticize Peter Jackson for straying from Tolkien, you can't call Burton's Batman a good adaptation (And don't get uppity about me comparing Tolkien to Batman comics. Fantasy is fantasy and I love them both.) You can enjoy them as decent films, but they're terrible adaptations.

Actually no, in the earliest comics Batman did in fact kill.  And you can't always have a literal adaptation.  Penguin is a very shallow character in the comics, there's no way he could have made an interesting movie as he is.  However, the Burton version managed to create a very complex and interesting character.  There's actually been some interesting discussion and how Penguin's subplot in Returns is an homage to King Lear.  Catwoman having a mystical origin didn't bother me that much, it made things more interesting.  Joker killing Bruce's parents didn't bother me either, especially since they made it into a mutual creation theme.  Joker created Batman and Batman created Joker.  It adds a nice dynamic to the story.

And the thing you have to remember is, even in the comic world the creators take a lot of liberties with the characters.  How many characterizations of batman, joker, penguin, riddler, etc are there in the batman canon?  It can fluctuate very heavily from author to author, but you don't see fans getting so uppity about that.
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: Sharktopus on November 18, 2006, 01:58:05 PM
Batman only killed until the Comics Code Authority came into being, and not long after, Batman's policy of never killing became a strong theme for his character. As for the Penguin, I always felt that the wannabe upper-crust ganglord/arms dealer was the only believable way to use him. A short, fat supervillain whose main weapons are trick umbrellas? And it really bugged me that the animated series adopted Burton's design for the character. I guess it bugged them too, as they completely overhauled his design later on. I don't like having the Joker kill Bruce's parents simply because it's feels a little too Shakespearean. Gotham killed his parents. If the Joker had, then Batman could just kill the Joker and his mission would be over. (So there shouldn't be any movies after the first one.) Plus, if Joker (or the man who would be Joker) killed the Wayne's, he'd have to be at least ten years older than Bruce, which throws the evil foil thing out of whack.

Anyway, I could overlook the departures from the comics if the movie was better, but I just don't like it in the first place. Batman Begins has its departures, too, but it tells a good story well, and that's the key.
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: 6079SmithW on November 18, 2006, 02:38:06 PM
Batman only killed until the Comics Code Authority came into being, and not long after, Batman's policy of never killing became a strong theme for his character. As for the Penguin, I always felt that the wannabe upper-crust ganglord/arms dealer was the only believable way to use him. A short, fat supervillain whose main weapons are trick umbrellas? And it really bugged me that the animated series adopted Burton's design for the character. I guess it bugged them too, as they completely overhauled his design later on. I don't like having the Joker kill Bruce's parents simply because it's feels a little too Shakespearean. Gotham killed his parents. If the Joker had, then Batman could just kill the Joker and his mission would be over. (So there shouldn't be any movies after the first one.) Plus, if Joker (or the man who would be Joker) killed the Wayne's, he'd have to be at least ten years older than Bruce, which throws the evil foil thing out of whack.

Anyway, I could overlook the departures from the comics if the movie was better, but I just don't like it in the first place. Batman Begins has its departures, too, but it tells a good story well, and that's the key.
Thanks for pointing out the animated series, which released a far better adaptation (Mask of the Phantasm) than any of the live action movies (I believe Roger Ebert will back me up on that one.) Also, in one of the Superman animated series commentary tracks, they mention (when discussing the idea of having Brainiac come from Krypton) that they didn't like the Joker killing the Waynes idea; I believe the specific objection was that it was a little too 'pat'. I think it weakens the Joker, since in the comics he's Bats' biggest enemy without having been the one who killed his parents, so sticking that on makes what he's done since less meaningful. Besides, it's more fun never to have a clear idea of who or what he was before he was the joker.


Jesus, I'm a nerd.
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: Sharktopus on November 18, 2006, 02:47:17 PM

Thanks for pointing out the animated series, which released a far better adaptation (Mask of the Phantasm) than any of the live action movies (I believe Roger Ebert will back me up on that one.) Also, in one of the Superman animated series commentary tracks, they mention (when discussing the idea of having Brainiac come from Krypton) that they didn't like the Joker killing the Waynes idea; I believe the specific objection was that it was a little too 'pat'. I think it weakens the Joker, since in the comics he's Bats' biggest enemy without having been the one who killed his parents, so sticking that on makes what he's done since less meaningful. Besides, it's more fun never to have a clear idea of who or what he was before he was the joker.


Jesus, I'm a nerd.

Batman the Animatd Series is pretty much the Batman by which all other incarnations should be judged, even the comics. It's as close to perfect as you can get, while staying kid-friendly to boot. I'd say the same thing about the Superman series too, even though it's not quite as good as Batman. But how could it? Batman's a stronger character with a much better rogue's gallery.
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: 6079SmithW on November 18, 2006, 02:57:32 PM

Thanks for pointing out the animated series, which released a far better adaptation (Mask of the Phantasm) than any of the live action movies (I believe Roger Ebert will back me up on that one.) Also, in one of the Superman animated series commentary tracks, they mention (when discussing the idea of having Brainiac come from Krypton) that they didn't like the Joker killing the Waynes idea; I believe the specific objection was that it was a little too 'pat'. I think it weakens the Joker, since in the comics he's Bats' biggest enemy without having been the one who killed his parents, so sticking that on makes what he's done since less meaningful. Besides, it's more fun never to have a clear idea of who or what he was before he was the joker.


Jesus, I'm a nerd.


Batman the Animatd Series is pretty much the Batman by which all other incarnations should be judged, even the comics. It's as close to perfect as you can get, while staying kid-friendly to boot. I'd say the same thing about the Superman series too, even though it's not quite as good as Batman. But how could it? Batman's a stronger character with a much better rogue's gallery.
I never liked Superman before watching the animated series, so I'd say they did a damn good job with what is in most incarnations a pretty boring, one-dimensional character. (Well, technically, when I was first watching the Batman/Superman edits of them, I always hoped it would be a Superman one, but that's just because I'd seen all the Batman ones.)

They make Supes even more interesting in some of the Justice League episodes; the Question Authority storyline in that show is one of the best comic book arcs around in any medium, imo.
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: Sharktopus on November 18, 2006, 03:42:20 PM
I never liked Superman before watching the animated series, so I'd say they did a damn good job with what is in most incarnations a pretty boring, one-dimensional character. (Well, technically, when I was first watching the Batman/Superman edits of them, I always hoped it would be a Superman one, but that's just because I'd seen all the Batman ones.)

They make Supes even more interesting in some of the Justice League episodes; the Question Authority storyline in that show is one of the best comic book arcs around in any medium, imo.

Same with me. I never gave a crap about Superman until I picked up the animated series DVDs while going through BTAS withdrawal. Now I have a genuine appreciation for Superman, even though he's usually pretty lame.

Superman: Any minute now Brainiac will explode. And guess what - you're going with him.
[Darkseid reaches for his Boom-Tube generator, but Superman destroys it with his heat vision]
Superman: No, Darkseid, to get off this rock, you'll have to go through me.
Darkseid: You really are a glutton for punishment. Time and again I've beaten you, humbled you. What makes you think today's outcome will be any different?
Superman: Because this time, I won't stop until you're just a greasy smear on my fist. <- BAD ASS.

Batman must have taught him that line.
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: Petey Wheatstraw on November 18, 2006, 03:47:44 PM
Burton obviously has zero respect for the source material. He's stated himself that he doesn't even read superhero comics.

Except for "Batman" - he's stated that "Batman" is the only superhero comic he likes, which is why he did the film. He definitely respects the material a whole lot.

If you're going to criticize Peter Jackson for straying from Tolkien, you can't call Burton's Batman a good adaptation (And don't get uppity about me comparing Tolkien to Batman comics. Fantasy is fantasy and I love them both.)

No, I'm not going to get uppity about THAT, but how dare you put Peter Jack$$$on and Tim Burton in the same sentence?!? ;D
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: mrbakasan on November 18, 2006, 05:30:16 PM
No, I'm not going to get uppity about THAT, but how dare you put Peter Jack$$$on and Tim Burton in the same sentence?!? ;D

You haven't by chance seen Planet of the Apes have you?
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: Shinigami on November 18, 2006, 05:58:06 PM
No, I'm not going to get uppity about THAT, but how dare you put Peter Jack$$$on and Tim Burton in the same sentence?!? ;D

You haven't by chance seen Planet of the Apes have you?

I saw that, and I'm pretty convinced he had little creative say in that flick.  It doesn't have any of his style and just ends up being bland and poorly executed.  Plus the script was quite horrible.  Action movie cliches up the ass and very poor sci-fi elements.
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: Road_Element on November 18, 2006, 06:22:52 PM
Well i kinda have read the first stories of batman in the from of DC Archives and at first he did kill people. But once Robin was introduced in 1940. That pretty much stop or at least didnt happen as much. Plus the stories became more childish. But i guess i could be wrong one that. Some people say that the Burtons Batman represents the golden age batman. But why should they have made a movie about the golden age Batman. Who Wasnt that interesting. When you could have gone with a emotional complex Batman. To me thats like saying i sould buy a 1908 Model T Ford witch runs like crap. When i could get any number of good runing modern cars. I dont have anything against Bob Kane and Bill Finger original verison of batman. But to me batman didnt become really interesting untill Danny O'neil and Neil Adams change him to be more complex. But anyways this is just my opinion.
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: ScottotD on November 18, 2006, 06:28:43 PM
My issue isn't that Batman was a bad adaption so much as that it's a fairly shitty movie.
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: mrbakasan on November 18, 2006, 06:39:48 PM
My issue isn't that Batman was a bad adaption so much as that it's a fairly shitty movie.

I'd have to agree with that.  You can pretty much butcher the source material and still get a decent movie sometimes, but I just didn't like the Batman movie.  I don't read comics, but I know what I like and I really liked Batman Begins. 
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: 6079SmithW on November 18, 2006, 06:43:15 PM
My issue isn't that Batman was a bad adaption so much as that it's a fairly shitty movie.

I'd have to agree with that.  You can pretty much butcher the source material and still get a decent movie sometimes, but I just didn't like the Batman movie.  I don't read comics, but I know what I like and I really liked Batman Begins. 
I actually liked Batman more than Batman Begins, but I wasn't so much complaining that Batman was an inaccurate translation as that the portrayal of Batman himself was pretty weak. I'm willing to assume that I wouldn't have thought the character so lame if it wasn't trying to be one who is pretty easy to make awesome.

The production design in that movie was great, though. And Nicholson is always entertaining.
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: Sharktopus on November 19, 2006, 01:15:27 AM
If you're going to criticize Peter Jackson for straying from Tolkien, you can't call Burton's Batman a good adaptation (And don't get uppity about me comparing Tolkien to Batman comics. Fantasy is fantasy and I love them both.)

No, I'm not going to get uppity about THAT, but how dare you put Peter Jack$$$on and Tim Burton in the same sentence?!? ;D

The only Burton movie I really love is Ed Wood, (though I enjoyed Big Fish and Beetlejuice) and I think that's because Burton was pretty restricted by the source material. He's a talented director, but the goth lite fairy tale aura of his stuff doesn't really work for me. And he totally should've Alan Smitheed Planet Of The Apes. The ape prosthetics were amazing, though.
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: ScottotD on November 19, 2006, 02:37:31 AM
Anyone who's cynical about Peter Jackson should track down 'Forgotten Silver'
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: PsypherPunk on November 20, 2006, 02:50:10 AM
I seem to find that I enjoy Burton's films much less when they're based on other sources (Willy Wonka, Planet of the Apes, Batman, etc) but love them when it's his own work (Beetlejuice, Edward Scissorhands, Nightmare Before Christmas). I'd love to see the first Batman film Riff'ed; while I loved it when it was released - hey, I was 9 - I haven't bothered watching it again in the last 16 years.
Title: Re: Tim Burton's Batman
Post by: Petey Wheatstraw on November 20, 2006, 04:29:55 AM
Willy Wonka

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory was a book long before they made that crappy ultra-psychedelic '70s film version. Tim Burton's version was not only a better film, but more faithful to the book.