Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

The Batman Movies Thread

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts
    Darcy Parker
    Senior Member

  • Darcy Parker
    replied
    Honestly, the only way I'd want to revisit the Burton films would be if WB one day allowed the first cut of Returns to be released, the one that basically caused a total meltdown among the studio brass and marketing. Not only was there a fair bit of violence and disturbing imagery cut out after that, but also a good amount of plot stuff, including one scene I have a trading card of where the Penguin is piecing together shredded blueprints to figure out how to sabotage Batman's equipment.

    Leave a comment:

  • Mark Tolch
    Senior Member

  • Mark Tolch
    replied
    Yeah, the revisit of the two films definitely proves the sequel to be better. I'd argue that the only thing the first film really has going for it is Jack Nicholson.

    Leave a comment:

  • Ian Jane
    Administrator

  • Ian Jane
    replied
    So, having rewatched Batman and Batman Returns in the last week (these 4k discs are really fucking beautiful) I'm officially in the 'Batman Returns Is Better' camp. I don't think I'd seen it since its theatrical run and a lot of what Burton was doing in that movie went over my head as a teenager. As a middle aged guy who has dipped into some of the German films that clearly inspired Batman Returns, I just got more out of it. The look of the film is fantastic, Michelle Pfeiffer is better than I remember her being as Catwoman (and I remember her being pretty good), Walken just cracks me up and DeVito is kind of perfect as The Penguin. It's a zanier film in a lot of ways than the original but it just works.

    I actually kind of want to watch it again.

    Leave a comment:

  • Alex K.
    Senior Member

  • Alex K.
    replied
    I don't know if I said this before but the only good one is the first one. It still holds up for me. Returns has some good things going for it but an equal amount of bad things. After that the franchise fell off a cliff.

    Leave a comment:

  • Ian Jane
    Administrator

  • Ian Jane
    replied
    The 4 movies are also getting a (very) limited theatrical re-release.

    https://www.fathomevents.com/collect...th-anniversary

    Leave a comment:

  • Scott
    Intellectual Carrot

  • Scott
    replied
    Wow that's messed up!

    Leave a comment:

  • agent999
    Senior Member

  • agent999
    replied
    It's still going on. They offer lower certificates if the distributor is willing to cut, hence films like Aquaman, Bumblebee, Death Wish, Equalizer etc. all being cut to get more people in. Admittedly I'd rather eat a dog's arse than watch most of them, but it's the priciple. Just an obsolete organisation trying to retain some semblance of importance.

    Leave a comment:

  • Mark Tolch
    Senior Member

  • Mark Tolch
    replied
    Originally posted by Paul L View Post
    BATMAN was the first film to get the then-new '12' certificate in the UK, as it was considered too violent for a 'PG' yet obviously appealed to a younger audience. IIRC, all of the Burton and Schumacher films, aside from BATMAN & ROBIN, were cut by the BBFC. I seem to recall that when I saw Burton's BATMAN at the cinema (in the UK, of course), the scene in which Nicholson's Joker fries one of Palance's henchmen with his trick ring/hand buzzer was trimmed slightly, but there's no official listing of this being cut in the BBFC database. (I would imagine it was precut by Warner, much like the hinted fellatio later in the picture.)

    The BBFC's examiners' report for Burton's BATMAN can be found on the BBFC website as a PDF: https://www.bbfc.co.uk/sites/default...tman_final.pdf
    Cut by the BBFC. What the almighty fuck.

    Leave a comment:

  • paul h.
    woly boly

  • paul h.
    replied
    Originally posted by Ian Jane View Post
    That cover art is complete shit. All of it. Shit.
    Agree. And they cropped his bat ears in every one of those. Stupids.

    Leave a comment:

  • Paul L
    Scholar of Sleaze

  • Paul L
    replied
    Originally posted by Scott View Post
    All four of the Batman films are rated PG-13. I couldn't remember and had to look it up. I'm surprised the Schumacher films weren't PG.
    BATMAN was the first film to get the then-new '12' certificate in the UK, as it was considered too violent for a 'PG' yet obviously appealed to a younger audience. IIRC, all of the Burton and Schumacher films, aside from BATMAN & ROBIN, were cut by the BBFC. I seem to recall that when I saw Burton's BATMAN at the cinema (in the UK, of course), the scene in which Nicholson's Joker fries one of Palance's henchmen with his trick ring/hand buzzer was trimmed slightly, but there's no official listing of this being cut in the BBFC database. (I would imagine it was precut by Warner, much like the hinted fellatio later in the picture.)

    The BBFC's examiners' report for Burton's BATMAN can be found on the BBFC website as a PDF: https://www.bbfc.co.uk/sites/default...tman_final.pdf

    Leave a comment:

  • Scott
    Intellectual Carrot

  • Scott
    replied
    All four of the Batman films are rated PG-13. I couldn't remember and had to look it up. I'm surprised the Schumacher films weren't PG.

    Leave a comment:

  • Mark Tolch
    Senior Member

  • Mark Tolch
    replied
    Originally posted by Darcy Parker View Post
    Schumacher was forced to lighten things up due to the massive issues with merchandising tie-ins and advertising partners over Batman Returns. Warner Brothers didn't want to go through the controversies over kid-focused marketing of a non family-friendly film again.
    It is REALLY not family-friendly. Was it a straight PG when it came out? It's pretty dark.

    Anyway, I like to admit when I'm wrong; BATMAN RETURNS holds up far better than Burton's original film. It's pretty flawed, but still, quite an enjoyable watch. I wonder if I really loved the first Batman film and found this one a huge disappointment because it's so different. I do know I saw it in the theatre, and never watched it again until today.

    Leave a comment:

  • Darcy Parker
    Senior Member

  • Darcy Parker
    replied
    Originally posted by agent999 View Post
    Maybe, but I bet they regretted the fuck out of it later, hence Joel Schumacher's monstrosities. Burton has a producer credit on the first of those, but there's no assistant to him listed in the credits. Compare to the contempory Cabin Boy which he only exec produced yet still has an assistant listed. I think that shows tbe extent of his involvement.
    Schumacher was forced to lighten things up due to the massive issues with merchandising tie-ins and advertising partners over Batman Returns. Warner Brothers didn't want to go through the controversies over kid-focused marketing of a non family-friendly film again.

    Leave a comment:

  • Mr. Deltoid
    Member

  • Mr. Deltoid
    replied
    I loathe superhero films with a passion (Bat-Pussy excepted!) but I've got a lot of time for Batman Returns. It's brilliantly cast and quite subversive for a multiplex-friendly blockbuster. Plus, it's got Christopher Walken pushing Michelle Pfeiffer out of a window! And an army of penguins giving Danny De Vito a viking's funeral! Tod Browning would approve.

    Leave a comment:

  • agent999
    Senior Member

  • agent999
    replied
    Maybe, but I bet they regretted the fuck out of it later, hence Joel Schumacher's monstrosities. Burton has a producer credit on the first of those, but there's no assistant to him listed in the credits. Compare to the contempory Cabin Boy which he only exec produced yet still has an assistant listed. I think that shows tbe extent of his involvement.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X