Batman

Batman 89 came to theaters after a long dry spell since Batman 66. In the meantime, there had been a sea of events in the realm of DC Comics adaptations. In the 1970s, Superman and Wonder Woman were doing fairly well, but by the 1980s, Superman wasn't working anymore, and even Supergirl failed to succeed. Tim Burton had to first prove his mettle with Beetlejuice. But eventually, everything came together, and the cult of Batman 89 lives on, most recently in the modern Flash. Michael Keaton, Jack Nicholson, and Kim Basinger (playing the newly iconic character Vicki Vale, already known from Batman and Robin) reign over the dark tale set in the neo-Gothic Gotham. The story is inspired by contemporary literary works, "The Dark Knight Returns" (1986) and "The Killing Joke" (1988). Many references allude to German expressionism, to The Cabinet of Dr. Caligari and Metropolis. And today, of course, new comic book continuations of the Batman 89 universe are being released. A genre classic. (18/08/2023)

Not great, Keaton. Jack is no Joker, but simply Jack with some white make-up on his face, but this doesn’t mean he doesn’t fit nicely into Burton’s approach to Batman. Not great, and I mean not rather than great, when it comes to Basinger. The visuals are great, while Elfman’s music is surprisingly not so great (apart from the central theme, that is). Looks like a mediocre movie? A bit, but it isn’t. The atmosphere of the dismal, neo-gothic Gotham City and Burton’s directing make this a quality picture that is watchable multiple times. But not too often. ♫ OST score: 3/5 (20/03/2005)

The biggest problem for me was the choice of director. I can't help but find Tim Burton's style terribly dull, and his Batman lacks pace, insight, and everything else that would adorn Nolan's dynamic spectacle 15 years later. Michael Keaton was bland and demonic, Jack Nicholson's flawless performance wasn't enough either. At least Kim Basinger was nice to look at....60% (11/02/2012)

I have to say that that film doesn't make as much of an impression on me anymore as it did when I was a child. I thought it was much darker back then. That's why it's better to watch Burton's films as a child. They have a much stronger impact on you then. But that doesn't change the fact that Jack Nicholson is still excellent and this Batman adaptation has nothing to be ashamed of. (20/05/2014)

Burton gives the impression of a man who is on his home turf, as if the visual freedom of the comics had untied his hands and allowed the film to be legitimately saturated with his peculiar vision. Batman is thus a film in the best Burton tradition, full of great shots and bold artistic solutions, which give the whole an unmistakable atmosphere on the edge between a fairy tale, a horror and creative phantasmagoria. The cynical allusions to mass character and manipulability are also excellent, as well as a great comic insert with editorial staff not wearing any makeup. However, the centerpiece of the film remains "the man with two faces" Michael Keaton (the duality really suits him) and especially Jack Nicholson's Joker, whose contagiously extravagant conception of a new deadly avantgarde is among the best villain mannerisms in the history of film. Batman feels modern for its time, as if the film was ahead of the period development and belonged more to the current wave of comic book adaptations, with all the ease, visual pickiness and resistance to vain heroism. Unfortunately, the story of the film is far too sparse, has no gradation and near the end it contains boring and purely self-serving spots, and although Burton's film vision shines, there is no tension... Batman Returns suffered from a very similar syndrome. Nevertheless, I rank the introductory adventures of the Batman on the pedestal of comic book adaptations as a film that set the direction. And I ask why Nolan et al. feel the need to retell it? (19/12/2006)