Tim Burton's first Batman is great, but this is a much better film in so many ways! The direction, writing, acting, action, effects are all slicker. They spent over twice as much and it really shows.
Watching them both today, Batman feels Old now, whereas Returns… it's from '92, of course it doesn't feel New, but it feels more like newer films. In a good way.
Better then the 1989 Batman, with Phieffer, DeVito, and Walken just making this one enjoyable. It was a better fit for Tim Burton's visual style as well.
I just saw both Burtons Batman movies. Let me just say that the first one, from '89, definitely isn't worth anyone's time, unless they're true TB fans.
This one, however, is worth everyone's. What a flick! Michelle Pheiffer absolutely steals the show as the split-down-the-middle catwoman, Keaton actually portrays Batman (a quality the first movie lacked), DeVito's portrayal of the villain deserves recognition (unlike Nicholson's Joker), and to top it all off - it has Christopher Walken (always a pleasure).
Great movie. Watch it!
PS: If I haven't already made it perfectly clear; you do not need to watch Batman (1989) to follow the plot. Not at all.
Definitely better than the original Batman film. Perfect by an means, no, but I enjoyed it. The Catwoman portrayal was not half bad, although I imagine the next Nolan film will do a better job with it.
Penguin portrayal had its ups and downs. I certainly wouldn't write the movie off though. Keaton actually didn't totally piss me off the entire film like he did in the first film as a terrible Batman. He kind of grew into the role, as he seemed completely inappropriate for it in the first film.
Take the film in perspective as a still-a-bit-80's-early-90's Batman and it holds up pretty well.
Tim Burton's Batman Returns is visually and tonally of a piece with his first Batman film, that is to say, it strikes an odd chord between camp and Gothic horror. At times, you wonder if Batman's even in this, given the number of villains on parade. There's a ruthless businessman named after a famous vampire actor, a revenant Catwoman animated by vengeful cat spirits, a revolting mutated Penguin written as Quasimodo with a heart of coal, and a gang of sewer clowns for good measure. Batman, in contrast, in sometimes little more than a bystander (Burton not being a very good action director hurts him probably as much as the screenplay's disinterest in the hero). It's got some good bits, like a snowy Gotham Christmas, a masquerade where only the masks come barren-faced, the giant rubber ducky, Michelle Pfeiffer's pretty great... But my problem with the movie was and remains how vile the Penguin is. My memory was that he was gory and icky, but watching him now, decades later, it's the "inappropriate sexual behavior" that turns my stomach. I get that they were sort of floating the idea of Catwoman as a feminist icon, but they don't hit that theme hard enough to justify Cobblepot acting like a real-world politician. Felt out of place. I just don't want to be thinking about the script's misogyny while watching your big, noisy,silly, superhero movie.
Add your comment
Comments 1 - 15 of 16
badblokebob
Tim Burton's first Batman is great, but this is a much better film in so many ways! The direction, writing, acting, action, effects are all slicker. They spent over twice as much and it really shows.Watching them both today, Batman feels Old now, whereas Returns… it's from '92, of course it doesn't feel New, but it feels more like newer films. In a good way.
gio87
This is my favorite Batman movie. Michelle Pfeiffer's performance was excellent.ClassicLady
Great visually. It has the Tim Burton feel.Dieguito
The catwoman parts are nicetigh66
Better then the 1989 Batman, with Phieffer, DeVito, and Walken just making this one enjoyable. It was a better fit for Tim Burton's visual style as well.rachie615
Great movie! Can even be watched as allegory in these trying times. Pretend Walken's character is the GOP and Penguin is Trump.thekure23
I just saw both Burtons Batman movies. Let me just say that the first one, from '89, definitely isn't worth anyone's time, unless they're true TB fans.This one, however, is worth everyone's. What a flick! Michelle Pheiffer absolutely steals the show as the split-down-the-middle catwoman, Keaton actually portrays Batman (a quality the first movie lacked), DeVito's portrayal of the villain deserves recognition (unlike Nicholson's Joker), and to top it all off - it has Christopher Walken (always a pleasure).
Great movie. Watch it!
PS: If I haven't already made it perfectly clear; you do not need to watch Batman (1989) to follow the plot. Not at all.
Cadeicus
It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia: Frank Goes Madakuma587
Definitely better than the original Batman film. Perfect by an means, no, but I enjoyed it. The Catwoman portrayal was not half bad, although I imagine the next Nolan film will do a better job with it.Penguin portrayal had its ups and downs. I certainly wouldn't write the movie off though. Keaton actually didn't totally piss me off the entire film like he did in the first film as a terrible Batman. He kind of grew into the role, as he seemed completely inappropriate for it in the first film.
Take the film in perspective as a still-a-bit-80's-early-90's Batman and it holds up pretty well.
sqcat
Sort of sillier than I remembered it. Maybe it's because I've seen the Batman '66 episodes that inspired the Penguin's mayoral run.mowgli1337
Still the best. Timmy knows how to get the work doneSiskoid
Tim Burton's Batman Returns is visually and tonally of a piece with his first Batman film, that is to say, it strikes an odd chord between camp and Gothic horror. At times, you wonder if Batman's even in this, given the number of villains on parade. There's a ruthless businessman named after a famous vampire actor, a revenant Catwoman animated by vengeful cat spirits, a revolting mutated Penguin written as Quasimodo with a heart of coal, and a gang of sewer clowns for good measure. Batman, in contrast, in sometimes little more than a bystander (Burton not being a very good action director hurts him probably as much as the screenplay's disinterest in the hero). It's got some good bits, like a snowy Gotham Christmas, a masquerade where only the masks come barren-faced, the giant rubber ducky, Michelle Pfeiffer's pretty great... But my problem with the movie was and remains how vile the Penguin is. My memory was that he was gory and icky, but watching him now, decades later, it's the "inappropriate sexual behavior" that turns my stomach. I get that they were sort of floating the idea of Catwoman as a feminist icon, but they don't hit that theme hard enough to justify Cobblepot acting like a real-world politician. Felt out of place. I just don't want to be thinking about the script's misogyny while watching your big, noisy,silly, superhero movie.frankqb
This Batman was greyer and grimmer than the 1989 debut of Keaton, and I felt Danny DeVito's blood-spewing Penguin portrayal ruined the film for me.saydin7
disaster moviemook
Looks good but Keaton's dull, Catwoman/origin is ridiculous & plot's nonsense. Borders on "BM & Robin" at times. 5/10.Follow me on Twitter @LastFilmSeen
Showing items 1 – 15 of 16