MovieChat Forums > Batman (1989) Discussion > BATMAN 89 VS BATMAN RETURNS - WHICH ONE ...

BATMAN 89 VS BATMAN RETURNS - WHICH ONE IS THE BEST?

posted 4 months ago by TMC-4 (20304)
8 replies | jump to latest

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ApRw-AeyM_k

Hello my Batfriends, today we'll have a more than special video, the first big fight here in the channel, let's pit two of the best movies of all time against each other... BATMAN 89 VS BATMAN RETURNS... And see who'll be the winner in this wonderful fight.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rn4qFASsscE

Nowadays, it seems that superhero movies are being released faster than you can say “Holy... whatever Batman!” It's hard to believe that superheroes weren't a big deal back in the ‘80s. Richard Donner's Superman made people believe a man could fly, but it didn’t exactly set off an explosion of superhero fever that we're feeling now.

After Supes, the next big hero to tackle the cinemas came in 1989 with Tim Burton's BATMAN starring Michael Keaton in the titular role. Batman was a certified success with audiences, complete with its own hit album written and performed by the legendary Prince. Of course, that meant that a follow-up was inevitably going to happen. After proving such a big box office draw, Warner Brothers gave Burton the green light to do anything he wanted. What he turned in was BATMAN RETURNS. A worthy sequel that brought back Keaton alongside Michelle Pfeiffer as Selina Kyle/Catwoman and Danny Devito as Oswald Cobblepot/The Penguin. But which of these caped crusader’s outings truly deserves the Face Off mantle? Let’s fire up the Batmobile and find out!

[–] DoctorThirteen (14658) 4 months ago

Batman -- 8/10
Batman Returns -- 9/10

[–] Melton (5042) 4 months ago

[deleted]

[–] Melton (5042) 4 months ago

Batman is better. Nicholson is dynamite and it balances Burton’s aesthetic with a cool action movie. Returns lacks a great villain and is way too campy and ‘panto’. Burton was given free reign and it suffers for it.

[–] [deleted] 4 months ago

Batman 89 for me. I like the snowy Christmas setting in Returns but it has too many moments that make me roll my eyes, like the penguin army/pallbearers.

Too many moments portray Batman as either lazy or useless - he just lets one of the villains on a bike ride straight passed him instead of knocking him off just before he encounters Selina, he stands around just watching as the Ice Princess is screaming with the bats swarming her on the roof before finally deciding to take a few steps to do something....

And the whole film lacks scale. Whenever you see the streets of Gotham you just see the same soundstage over and over again - the town square. The original, even though it was all shot at Pinewood, feels much more like a real, living, breathing city.

[–] RupertPupkin1 (12) 6 days ago

Batman Returns is better - more atmospheric and I found the Bruce Wayne/Selina Kyle scenes more interesting and edgy than the Vicky Vale ones in the first film. The first film is more gimmicky and relies on the Joker's catchy one-liners, plus it takes too long to get going. The second film has a better setting and more fleshed-out characters.

[–] TheEndIsNigh (476) 6 days ago

"Batman Returns is better"

It isn't.

"More atmospheric"

It's definetly got atmosphere but ruined by the fact that there's no scope to it and you can't shake off the stagey feel of the film.

"relies on the Joker's catchy one liners"

As opposed to Batman Returns which is full of one liners from Batman, Penguin, and Catwoman, as well as frequent Adam West levels of camp.

"plus it takes too long to get going"

At least it knows where it's going. Batman Returns can't make up it's mind what the hell it's even about.

"more fleshed out characters"

I don't see how Batman was more fleshed out than he was in the original. He was reactive in '89. In this, he just sits around a lot sulking and often just lets villains walk away. Example, when the poodle catches one of his gadgets. It's just "so long muggers, have a nice night".

And how were Catwoman and The Penguin fleshed out exactly? Fans of the film can't even make up their own minds if she was brought back to life via the supernatural or not, and she spends the entire film flip flopping between who she's against. Shrek "kills her" and she just blows up one of his stores which we never even see him bothered about. Batman saved her and she's got more of a vendetta against him. What was her goal exactly? That goes for The Penguin too. Tim Burton obviously wants us to feel sorry for him like Edward Scissorhands but it doesn't work because Edward wasn't a disgusting character who wanted to kill children. And Shrek was pointless. No idea why someone as wealthy and corrupt as him hadn't run for Mayor himself or pushed his son to long before he even knew about Penguin so he could have more influence and control over the city. He made no sense as a character. He was so pointless you could've just written him out.

[–] TheEndIsNigh (476) 6 days ago

Batman - 8.5/10
Batman Returns - 6

[–] Magicdave (921) 5 days ago

For me Batman (1989) ... but for me all the 80s-90s Batman films pale in comparison to Christopher Nolan's trilogy