It’s REALISTIC, you just don’t get it!!
That’s the most common counter argument fans of Chris Nolan’s Batman trilogy love to throw at anyone who dares to criticize the movies. But that only raises the question of how realistic can you make a film about a man who dresses up like giant bat? If you are going to try to shoehorn realism into a comic book film, you have to ask questions like how did the Joker manage to smuggle so much explosives underneath a hospital without being detected? And why didn’t the CIA know that Bane was one of their hooded prisoners, didn’t they check their identities before bringing them on board the plane? That’s what they would try to do in real life. It’s a comic book film, you let those things go but if you are trying to be realistic then these kind of things are harder to ignore. It’s REALISTIC, you just don’t get it!!
It does seem like that it it’s almost illegal to say that you didn’t like the Nolan Batman films, in the same way you cant say that The Avengers was just a bog standard superhero film with a boring hour long fight scene that we have seen a million times before. Or Prometheus was mostly just pretentious drivel with more holes in it than poor Mr Kinney in RoboCop.
But now that Nolan’s Batman trilogy is complete and can be judged as a whole, let’s compare them to the last revolution in the Batman film franchise that was Tim Burton’s 1989 Gothic masterpieces. As you will see, it’s interesting to see how many of the key ingredients you need in a Batman film that Nolan got wrong or just chose to ignore and how Burton’s 1989 film is still the best Batman movie ever released.
So sit back and relax as I take you through the 15 reasons Tim Burton’s Batman is still better than Nolan’s Dark Knight trilogy.
We are currently seeking Batman contributors on WhatCulture. To find out more about the perks of being a Batman contributor, click here.
You Might Also Like...
- 8 Classic Trilogies That Almost Turned Out Completely Different
- 8 Movie Plot Holes That Could Have Been Solved With One Line Of Dialogue
- 5 Directors That Know How To Deliver A Blockbuster
8 Actresses Who Tricked You Into Thinking You Saw Them Nude
11 Irresistible Movie Moments That Wore Out Your Pause Button
100 Things Wrong With The Dark Knight Rises [Video]
10 Scenes You Won't Believe You Missed in 2012
10 Most Infuriating Movie Cliffhangers
10 Major Plot Holes You Probably Missed
10 Happy Movie Endings That Probably Had Horrific Consequences
12 Ruthless Movie Villains Who Were Defeated By Complete Fools
173 Comments
I can use the same article and rewrite the article name to “15 reasons Chris Nolan’s The Dark Knight is better than Tim Burton’s Batman” and it would make more sense than it does now.
100% agree with ‘mads’.
Except that Bale’s bat-voice would be still laughable, his bat-suit would still be a mess, the fights scenes would still be either too shaky or too choreographed, Batman would still be a character that would NEVER retire (no matter how much he’d want to), Joker has never been a face painter, etc.
Agreed, absolutely. The Burton films were more of a mess than the Nolan films.
Tell me, my friend, have you ever danced with the devil in the pale moonlight?
I agree that we should give credit to the first ‘black rubber’ suit concept in Burton’s movies, but the trilogy’s suits are definitely better aesthetically. I don’t know why the writer doesn’t understand the beauty of small curvy cute ears of the cowl.
Thank you for writing this article! These are all things I was thinking and couldn’t understand why nobody else seemed to notice. I gave up watching superhero films after the abomination that was Batman Begins. You can be as “close to the comic book” all you want, but when it comes down to it you’re watching a film for entertainment and escapism not because it’s just like a book you read.
while having no strong opinion on burtons take, i thought nolans final film was a mess. i agree the suit was awful, as in the first two.the plot nonsensical and up itself,hardy trying vainly to act with half a face, was on a hiding to nothing.his voice and the sound mix were terrible, but my biggest problem was bale as the hero, i didnt buy him as batman at all, and his voice throughout the trilogy was laughable. i liked ledgers take on the joker, as well as hathaways catwoman.im not trying to be deliberately provocative, but after seeing tdkr i was left with a feeling of profound dissapointment. it was a case of the emperors new clothes …
You could try. But it would be forced. And there is one fact that is undeniable. Although both of the directors’ Batman movies were well made, Burton’s was truly one of a kind, and the first of its kind. Nolan just made Heat with pointed ears and a cape. Also, Burton’s Batman was more mythic, more iconic, and more fun. Nolan’s was plodding, awkward, and overly complicated. I TRULY believe that people who love TDK were fooled into liking it. Ledger’s great performance fooled people into thinking the whole movie was just as great. But without Ledger, people would have been just as enthusiastic for Dark Knight as they were for Batman Begins. Not so much. And the overlapping plot lines fooled people into thinking they were watching a deep, sophisticated epic. All this blinded them to the fact that Bale was a clunky, overdone Batman wearing an uninspired costume, speaking in an absurdly overdone gruff voice. TDK had none of the showmanship of Burton’s Batman. TDK was simply well-made and pretentious. Batman 89 was inspired.
I have a feeling that most of the comments which support the article are actually made by the author himself and all he did was use a different name because no one would prefer Burton’s films to Nolan’s and to all those who say that Burton’s films are superior c’mon who are u kidding? U people only like Burton’s films because you want to be different like those hipsters.
Thumbs UP!!
Took my 9yr old daughter to see TDKR, she loves the burton’s batman as I am. After two hours into the movie she said, I quote: WOW a Batman movie without BATMAN !
Except that Bale’s bat-voice would be still laughable, his bat-suit would still be a mess, the fights scenes would still be either too shaky or too choreographed, Batman would still be a character that would NEVER retire (no matter how much he’d want to), Joker has never been a face painter, etc.
I have never disagreed with another human being so much in my life. How can you possibly prefer Nicholson to Ledger? Also, I feel like you think serious is a bad thing. Grow up.
“Tell me, my friend, have you ever danced with the devil in the pale moonlight?”
Thats why…
Also this great line by Mr J!!!
“And now, folks, it’s time for “Who do you trust!” Hubba, hubba, hubba! Money, money, money! Who do you trust? Me? I’m giving away free money. And where is the Batman? HE’S AT HOME WASHING HIS TIGHTS!”
I love these people who insist that the Nolan Joker is more accurate to the comics.
The Hamm/Burton Joker, the Jack Nicholson Joker, is way more like comics Joker. He’s gleefully sadistic, with a playful side, and is most importantly supremely full of himself. Everything in his life is about himself. Even his romantic interest in Vicki Vale is self-serving. It’s not about being with her, but about himself.
“Also, I feel like you think serious is a bad thing. Grow up.”
Here’s the funny thing, kids are the one insecure about movies not being serious enough.
I don’t know why these other two comments disagree with your article. I absolutely agree. The new Batman movies lack the comic book feel of the movies and take a more serious take on the Series which, in my mind sucks. I was really looking forward to TDKR but was quite let down when most of the scenes I could barely make out because of the fast cuts from scene to scene whilst being unable to actually make out what was happening.
Good and honest article in my books!
Burton’s decision to make Joker kill the Waynes instead of Joe Chill was unforgivable.
I don’t think I could disagree more… I wish I could get those 5 minutes of my life back reading this article but unfortunately I can’t. The Tim Burton movies don’t even come close to comparing to Nolans films
I agree, these goose bumps lost time reading this article. Nolan is much better than Burton, without a doubt!
Nolan’s films are better FILMS because Nolan can probably turn the most obscure idea into a great film. Burton understood how a BATMAN film was supposed to be a bit better. Real and serious are fine for some things but in a film based on a comic book, it has to look a little bit like a comic book. Nolan could make a movie about me trying to get laid in high school and make it look epic, however it would probably be better handled by Judd Apatow.
It’s always interesting to read another point of view, even one you disagree with.
Also, Mr. Author, you need to know when to use the word “were” instead of the word “was”, I’m no grammar nazi, but it pains me to see this simple gramatical error repeated throughout the article.
” and you was with ” should be ” and you were with”
Apart from that, well done for taking the time to write an article voicing your opinions, look forward to reading more stuff from you.
Of couгse, I found yоur gгeat sitе on Аnа’s list!
Thаnks for this list man. reаlly aрpreciate it.
Waѕ lookіng for а similar one οn the net.
5 other articles u guys at What Culture should consider writing:
1. 10 reasons The Dark Knight Rises could have been a little longer. Maybe a tidy 5hrs. And add some Klingons. U can never go wrong with Kligons. One GOOD reason that the late nite show could become….a SLUMBER PARTY!!!!!
2. 5 reasons why Christian Bale should have simply undergone a laryngoplasty, so his voice would have sounded “right”. Just like in the comics man. Like it sounds in our heads when we read it to ourselves.
3. 15 reasons why Chris Nolan should have spent a little bit more, cloned Heath Ledger, waited 30yrs, then had him act in The Dark Knight Rises. (u should have waited, man. Waited)
4. 10 reasons why Liam Neeson should have Taken the The Dark Knight when he had the chance.
5. 57 reasons why Little house on the Prairie would have made a much grittier trilogy than the Dark Knight. If Chris directed it. And Lucious Fox was somewhere in the mix. And the Bat Pod. And the damned bike.
Dudes, u guys seriously need to give it a rest. Do all of u just sit around and think of 10 Dark Knight articles to get a response from our bastard lurkers?? Dammit. It worked.
TBH TDKR could be made a bit longer and split into 2 movies – it would feel much less chaotic and some loose ends would be tied up nicer.
This is probably the best comment I’ve read on here.
awesome article.
ive never been so on the fence. 89 means more to me and is closer to what i think the films should be. but nolans film especially tdk and tdkr are perfect.
as a batman film i sooner 89
as possibly the best films of our time ill go with nolan
LOL couldn’t have said it better. All articles about TDKR are getting more and more pointless everyday and were written only for the sake of argument. You guys need to move on.
they 100% need to move on
We did just as many articles on Prometheus and few of you guys complained. We like to tackle the films from every angle now. And I’ll repeat what I said before… these are our best read and commented pieces. So as long as that remains the case, I will give the audience what they want.
ive said it before, these viewing numbers dont mean happy readers. there probably great when selling advertising space but not much more than that.
yahoo articles get loads of interest when it features kim kardashian, doesnt mean its good interest. otherwise you might aswell go into this field.
Like I said, it does seem like that it it’s almost illegal to say that you didn’t like the Nolan Batman films…
How dare you insult their religion or holy CHRIST-opher? Bunch of annoying basement dwelling maggots these nolanites are.
Nolan’s Batman is much better than Barton’s, so, we shouldn’t compare between these two movies. Incomparable, there is more than 15 reasons for Nolan’s Batman better than Baton’s too.
I suggest naming the next article 15 reasons why Whatculture is the film equivalent of Fox news.
Seriously. Why does Matt allow for such articles? The argument “people read them” is stupid. Serious Journalism vs. creating controversy and covering only the topics that sell. Whatculture is a tabloid.
Matt had nothing to do with me writing this article. I only got around to being bored by TDKR last week, otherwise i would have written this much sooner. It hasn’t been written just to create controversy, it is my opinion. And I’m voicing what a lot of people feel about the Nolan movies.
This is a joke right?
I want to write a lengthy response but after reading the drivel that you wrote I don’t have the energy.
You are wrong on just about every level. That’s all that is needed to say
Na na na na nananananananaaaaaa BATMAN!
Well it would then look like the Tim burton suit if it was a living organism like in the spiderman movie when the black carnage wraps itself around spider man
[Comment deleted]]
Oh my god, thanks for scaring me into changing my mind and seeing the light. It’s all so clear now, Chris Nolan done an amazing job and Christian Bale was awesome as Batman! To show everyone my new found love for the trilogy, I will forever speak only using Bale’s Batman voice! You’re the best!
as great as Nolan’s “The Dark Knight” was, Burton’s “Batman” is my favorite movie of all time!! If looking at these two movies critically, it depends on taste, if you want a realistic movie that has you questioning the morale fiber of society, then Nolan’s Batman is good for you. If you want a movie filled with action, comedy, and drama, then Burton’s Batman movie is for you. This also goes for the Jokers used in both movies, Jack Nicholson’s interpretation fits in line with what the script and direction of the movie asked for, he truly was a clown and the way he killed people fit more with how comic joker did. Ledger’s joker dealt more with how a man’s circumstances cause him to challenge the moral code of society and just like Alfred told Bruce, “Some men just want to watch the world burn” Nevertheless, both of these movies are great for what they were bringing to the table of cinema and its impossible to say why one is better than the other.
15 reasons while whatculture is going down the pan, written by the viewers…
If you can make it to 20 reasons, I would consider posting it.
This seems like more of a personal vendetta than a serious comparison of the films. And it’s so trite that it’s painful.
I agree so much with chu!!! 89 batman was the best i loved it as a kid n adore it as an adult!! Same with prometheus u watch the new ones n u just wanna go home n watch the originals thank god WB Batman games took from the old batman n not the crap new one…
Also Gadgets n props (from the fake pistol with the bang coming out) where so greater the the ones Why so serious joker had…
N lastly the music from 89 batman had Prince do the soundtrack that really added to the Joker world!!!
I have to say I understand your article, but I don’t think comparing Burton and Nolan’s takes on the Caped Crusader is fair. Batman has a rich history and the universe in which he lives reflects that. He’s been dark and brooding, as well as camp and funny. In the comic we’ve seen Robin beaten to death with a crow bar, which is seriously dark, and we’ve seen the camp and predictable drivel of Batman dating Batwoman. Burton was clearly drawing more on the camp, silliness of Batman, and while he was good at tempering it with the dark gothic style he’s known for…you can’t say it’s better than Nolan. It’s only a different take on the same character. There’s a reason Adam West and Burt Ward returned to their roots to advertise in support of Burton’s Batman. It was that Campy time period that he was going for.
Nolan was drawing on much darker stories, The Long Halloween, Knightfall, Year One…all of them lacking the camp of the 60s Batman. Nolan told the story he set out to tell. It was a Batman story, and just like the comic books, it was the same Batman we’ve always known, it was just a different interpretation. Personally, I like both but for different reasons. I have to say, though, that Nolan’s trilogy has more rewatch value for me than Batman ’89 and Batman Returns.
Very True. The most logical and clear comment anyone has posted on this article so far, Thank You sir.
You know nothing of what you’re talking about. I don’t know how old are you, but Burton’s Batman was an attempt to make Batman serious and badass again, to make him dark in the public’s eye after the campy 60′s show. It was the literal opposite of what you say it was. Yes, it has more humour. Why? Becase it’s a film based in a comic book, and Burton has always had a quirky sort of humour. Burton’s was based in The Dark Knight Returns by Frank Miller, which helped redefine Batman as a dark character again. Everything Batman is today, he owes to Burton’s 89 film, because without it, people would still think of Batman as they do of Aquaman, a campy, non-serious hero.
Nolan’s film I love just as well. His attempt is part of a new wave of making everything “real”. Nolan takes more care on developing characters like Wayne and Gordon and sets them up against the real world setting. There’s rampant terrorism in his movies because that’s what America is afraid of today. I like his films, however I believe he is afraid of the source material. Just as the new Bond films seem more Bourne than Bond, so do the new Bat-films, where they shy away from the costumes (eg: Catwoman, Scarecrow), the nature of the character (Batman is a genius and the absolute human perfection in the comics: he doesn’t need Fox for his gadgets or to crack a formula, and he would never allow himself to become as weak as he was in TDKR), etc.
Also, try and analize Burton’s films and Nolan’s films thoroughly. Burton’s (particularly Batman Returns) is way darker-toned than any of Nolan’s. There’s practically no “good” character or even “evil” characters in Returns, not even Batman, wheareas in Nolan’s you know full-well who is in the right and who is bad or evil (with the exception of Harvey Dent, his character was masterfully done).
I never had a problem with the new batman voice; it felt like it was apart of the character and was necessary. Bruce’s voice was not intimidating by itself, and this isn’t the first time Batman has had a different voice than Bruce. Kevin Conroy claimed to have two different voices for Batman/Bruce Wayne and though they were more subtle than in Nolan’s movies, they worked for creating a different side to the character. That’s why the voice is all good with me.
Final Verdict:
Nolan > Burton
Burton is more atmospheric but it descends into silliness when looking at it from a logical perspective. Besides, I didn’t like how Burton’s Batman actually KILLS people! I mean, like that final scene in the ’89 film, Batman turns into a genuine, brutal killer.
Nolan’s Batman kills:
- A bunch of League of Shadows ninjas and the fake Ra’s
- Ra’s (“not saving him” counts to comics Batman)
- Harvey Dent (he doesn’t even attempt to save him)
- Bane (indirectly; he gave heavy weaponry to a woman known to use lethal force)
- Talia Ghul
And yet he spares the Joker, a mass-murderer.
@Penguin Truth I’m talking DIRECT kills. In the Burton films he placed a freakin’ time bomb on a goon in “Returns” and kicked him off a building! Now that’s brutal, especially for Batman. I remember watching Returns after Batman Begins finding myself shocked at how casually he kills people.
Sorry but i disagree with everything in the article apart from the batcave point. I was a bit let down by Nolans take on it and i’d say Burtons version was a little better.
But apart from that in my opinion I think you’re wrong on all the other points. Nolans three Batman films are leagues ahead of the old 90′d drivel which almost destroyed Batman for many non comic reading fans.
I’ve just watched the last film on sunday just gone and while it was a little slow and lacking in action in places it still beat the living crap out of the old ones. I’ll never get the god aweful scenes from the old Batman films …. pengiuns with rockets strapped to their backs …. two face giggling and dancing like a idiot with the riddler …. Robins rubber nipple and buttock shots … and last but not least Arny with those terrible cringey one liners as Dr Freeze.
You seem to lack an appreciation for character development. I didn’t find the Bruce Wayne scenes to be boring at all in the Nolan films, in fact, I love them almost as much as the scenes with Batman. Because Nolan takes time to develop a character and make him more human gives us a greater appreciation and care for Batman/Bruce Wayne throughout the series because he feels real. The Bruce Wayne portrayed in Burton’s films always seemed just like a really rich yet really nice guy to me, nothing else. He wasn’t deep and I’d go as far to say he was almost one-dimensional (though I will get some negativity for that). His films did concentrate on Batman more, but his motivations seemed lost at points without a concrete back story. That’s why I enjoyed and didn’t mind seeing a more drawn out back story in Batman Begins, and it sure paved the way for more awesome stories.
I agreed with about half of these: 100% on the bat-suit and the overwhelming joylessness and lugubrious tone of the Nolan films, especially Dark Knight sequels. I loved the Tumbler and the Bat, though.
I get the whole “let’s try to ground this in reality” intent, but it really does not work for me with superhero movies. I preferred The Avengers over the TDK and TDKR, especially because I didn’t have to rationalize why it was such a cool, fun, exhilarating movie-going experience with the former as opposed to the latter.
Go get a girlfriend or a boyfriend dude for real!!! Chill out smoke some weed or whatever makes you happy… it’s his opinion… nobody is the same not every one has the same views as you, don’t act like a 5 year old cos u just look stupid.
Suggesting that someone who’s only crime was to write an article about a mediocre film should “hang themselves”, is the most pathetic, disgusting, immature & thoroughly nasty troll behaviour. What an absolute bunch of cretins. Get a life & grow up you vulgar little bullies. If you have nothing constructive to say, keep your opinions to yourselves!!!
I think this article really suffers from a severe lack of thought, editorial input and balance. It seems to me the author succeeds only in showing a complete misunderstanding of both sets of movies, the artistic input behind them, the timing of their release. This ultimately ends up with a piece consisting of blog-standard, bias gripes that are wholly personally petty and mostly without any merit.
Indeed a lot of the articles on this website that have negative opinions of the Nolan films all seem to crave and hark on about aspects that are missing which, if included in any film, would surely end in a product that is far closer to the Schumacher take on the Batman universe than any of the critically acclaimed and beloved versions.
You cannot have a gritty and dark portrayal while at the same time having the lead character refer to everything with a “Bat-” prefix and a Joker dancing to a Prince soundtrack. On the same token you cannot have neon soaked, pun filled fantasy with a brooding, thought provoking Bruce Wayne.
The very idea of comparing the two sets of films is largely a moot point as, even though they both deal with the same material, neither one is in the same vein artistically. If they were a straight remake like the recent ‘Total Recall’ then the comparisons could be fair and direct.
This site may as well resort to schoolboy articles like “Why Robert DeNiro is better than Al Pacino” or “Why Guns n Roses are better than Iron Maiden” and have them written as the above is, one sided arguments completely redundant of any valid points worthy of interesting debate.
Sorry, I posted this twice by accident. Browser trouble!
Dude its his opinion. If you cant get with it, then don’t read it.
Do yourself a favour n go watch the opening training scene n enjoy it cos its the best for you.
Not for Amarpal tho.. it doesn’t make him stupid its just his opinion.
Are you mad? You sir need to lay off the hash. Really to even compare Burton and nolans batman, is insane. The joker (heath) was brilliant. Are you a comic book reader? Have you read the killing joke? The joker is a brutal sob who says things that are funny in a disturbing way. He says things that in a different situation would be funny. He also has been said to have a different personality every day. So to say that nolan got it wrong that it was too dark, makes you a moron.
I think this article really suffers from a severe lack of thought, editorial input and balance. It seems to me the author succeeds only in showing a complete misunderstanding of both sets of movies, the artistic input behind them, the timing of their release. This ultimately ends up with a piece consisting of blog-standard, bias gripes that are wholly personally petty and mostly without any merit.
Indeed a lot of the articles on this website that have negative opinions of the Nolan films all seem to crave and hark on about aspects that are missing which, if included in any film, would surely end in a product that is far closer to the Schumacher take on the Batman universe than any of the critically acclaimed and beloved versions.
You cannot have a gritty and dark portrayal while at the same time having the lead character refer to everything with a “Bat-” prefix and a Joker dancing to a Prince soundtrack. On the same token you cannot have neon soaked, pun filled fantasy with a brooding, thought provoking Bruce Wayne.
The very idea of comparing the two sets of films is largely a moot point as, even though they both deal with the same material, neither one is in the same vein artistically. If they were a straight remake like the recent ‘Total Recall’ then the comparisons could be fair and direct.
This site may as well resort to schoolboy articles like “Why Robert DeNiro is better than Al Pacino” or “Why Guns n Roses are better than Iron Maiden” and have them written as the above is, one sided arguments completely redundant of any valid points worthy of interesting debate.
Sorry, this went up twice!
You guys seriously have an agenda..
- Jack Nicholson basically playing Jack Nicholson and not the Joker, and spending half the film without the Joker makeup
- The Joker’s origin and name revealed, removing the sinister mystery of the character
- The Joker dancing to Prince
- Michael Keaton not bothering to create distinguishing personas for Bruce Wayne and Batman
- Batman killing criminals
You guys are ridiculous.
Also there is clearly no quality control regarding spelling and grammar when hiring writers for this site. “Too much explosives” “That was Mr. Burton’s gothic masterpieces” etc.
Its implied he’s been around for a while between Begins and Knight, the animated ‘Gotham Knight’ is evidence of that; also that he’s kind of an amateur in the first film and an established warrior in the second. Also, he couldn’t have retired immediately after The Dark Knight, or why would he bother building the Batcave or developing a new suit?
Mr. Biring, i think you have every right of exposing your opinion, i, personally only agree with the batcave thing, besides that…Nolan´s all the way
but i enjoyed your opinions on Burton´s take on Batman too, Well, a prime example, it was the first movie i saw in a movie theather!So i respect it a lot! But, you gotta face that it was a different point of view of the “batman universe” so, you can´t quite compare…
at least you didn´t say Joel Schumacher´s version were better the Nolan´s…
Contrary to what some people commenting on here think, I’m not insane enough to give credit to Joel Shumacher. But i thank you for your comment and recognizing that it is ok to have an opinion that differs from the consensus.
I don’t know if it’s your time of the month but you seriously need to learn to relax. I’m trying to figure out what has got you so excited but after reading your review for TDKR, it might be the fact that you haven’t got over that TDKR ”rises to the most emotionally exciting climax (you) have seen in a long time”…..even though that did make me LOL, I respect your right to be ”emotionally excited” by the ending.
Actually, I wish *more* people would write articles like this, Amarpal. I totally agree with you, I know at least a dozen people who totally agree with you, but we live immersed in such a culture of lynch mobs and stifled voices that none of us ever says anything. It’s awesome how you were brave enough to point out that Nolan’s films are all empty “realism,” no heart and certainly no art, while Tim Burton truly understood Batman and the mythos and made two absolutely classic movies.
We can take comfort in knowing that Nolan’s Batman films will never be classics.
That’s awesome to read. Thank you.
Yes! This! Batman Begins was gritty, but when you make a comic book movie TOO realistic (TDKR) you forfeit the audience’s suspension of disbelief and open the door to plothole nit-picks.
Good points about the costume too; I never realized how awkward the jawline was on the new suit! I have, however, been VERY distracted by that off-color suede cape.
I’m reading the comments and trying to see why so many people are attacking you Amarpal. Your job is to talk about, critique them, sometimes compare two movies of the same content, and give your opinion of which one is better. Why some feel to attack you for saying Burton’s Batman is better, is asinine to me!! I know in my early comment I didn’t say which was better, but personally, I’ve always love Batman & Batman Returns! I felt Burton provided a dark setting, filled with style, comedy, drama, action, and my favorite, LITTLE BRUCE WAYNE!! I feel Nolan tried too hard to get us to understand the “man behind the mask” and show us why Bruce Wayne is & continues to be Batman.
You just opened up a can of worms on yourself, Amarpal. Brace yourself for more Nolantards.
Why people overeact like this… I don’t get it. Tim Burton’s Batman is not better is just different. I like a lot Burton’s version but I feel more identified with Nolan’s take on the bat. I understand that the comic book fans want a faithful adaptation from the source but you can’t deny that The Dark Knight trilogy is a great accomplishment not just in comic book movies but in all of cinema history. Obviously I don’t agree with the list but it was an interesting read anyway.
This are the 15 worst reasons I have ever read. Nearly everything Nolan did was better than Burton. Especially when it came to the casting, character adaptions, and generally getting Batman right.
The Joker I know is no fat, Prince dancing, art lover who stalks Vicki Vale around. He never killed Batman’s parents. Catwoman was a zombie with nine lives. DeVito was a gross sewer freak not the Penguin. Keaton was just a killer in a cape and cowl who was boring as Bruce Wayne and even worse as Batman.
I listen to the Batman Begins soundtrack all the time. I have nothing against the Elfman theme, it’s good, but the Begins soundtrack is really great. The Dark Knight’s too.
Hey 80′s Kid! The line is “Give Knox a GRANT.”
You seem more preoccupied about how things looked and how, “It wasn’t what I grew up with” than judging the film(s) on its own merits. Out of 15 things you bring up, I agree that two are legitimate points: comparing Jokers and certain line deliveries. Everything else is your petty opinion piece…which is fine since you got it posted. (shrug)
Basically boiled down, this is the same argument that I am hearing from all the other action-junkies. “There wasn’t enough Batman, there wasn’t enough explosions! There wasn’t enough [insert gripe here].”
Both Burton’s and Nolan’s films are good for what they are, but trying to compare the two is like comparing rot gut to Johnny Walker Blue. Both will get you drunk, one is actually worth the money you paid to see it.
To each his own, but don’t go pissing in other people’s cereal. And if you must, quote the damn movie right?
I really don’t think it fair to compare Burton’s Batman to Nolan’s Batman as both franchises were made in two COMPLETELY different eras. They are stylistically different, thematically different, and have WAY too many artistic differences to even be compared. Both filmmakers were shooting for two totally different things. I find Batman ’89 to be one of the more re-watchable movies out there. While I don’t like Batman Returns as a Batman film, I find it to be a very good Tim Burton movie. And people really need to cool it on the “realism” crap. Nolan set out to make us believe that a man dressed up like a bat could exist in the real world. That’s the extent of the “realism” he tried to inject into his trilogy.
Honestly, I understand where you’re coming from on the argument that Burton’s Batman is more comic book-like. However, some of your points I completely disagree with. Eckhart was great as Harvy… But claiming he was the true star over Ledger… come on… Ledger revitalized a character that was seen as a character that could be played in only one way. His makeup was not a poor choice, in fact, I loved it. It was used to add to the unnatural feel of the Joker that was created in the Nolan Universe. If the Joker, in The Dark Knight, was a terrorist, which he was, he would take every opportunity to bring unease to his victims. The scars and makeup definitely did that.
Also, you made an interesting argument that Nolan’s films were deficient in that they did not take you away from the real world like Burton’s did, however, this argument does not sit well with me because Nolan clearly did not make these movies to make another tired, and poorly made adaptation of the amazing Batman comics (i.e. Batman and Robin… let’s pretend that movie doesn’t exist though). He reinterpreted a character and storyline in a more modern way that was, arguably, more relatable to audiences. When you look at Nolan’s movies, there is a sense of moral storytelling that is not as prominent in Burton’s Batman. Themes of Psychological strength, triumph over tragic loss, among others were explored in the Nolan films. Overall, I think that much more care, and effective storytelling was exhibited in Nolan’s film.
Also, if you’re looking for an example of amazing action, look at the first fight between Bane and Batman in TDKR. It was amazing.
And your argument that the casts of Burton’s Batman were superior is a matter of preference due to how different these films were, but here’s just a few scenes that could be seen as possible arguments against your point, all of the following scenes, in my opinion, were excellent examples of amazing acting.
1. Bruce Wayne in the hallway with Alfred when he leaves in TDKR.
2. The Joker whenever he tells the story of his scars.
3. The Joker in the MCU with Batman.
4. The Joker talking to Harvy in the Hospital.
5. Bane during his first fight with Batman.
6. Bane when he is telling Gotham to storm Blackgate prison.
7. Blake talking to Bruce about being an orphan.
8. Catwoman overall (:
9. Two-Face in the final scene of TDK.
10. Bane telling Bruce telling him about the Pit after breaking his back.
And lastly, I completely disagree that Heath Ledger did not deserve an Oscar for his performance of the Joker. I’m not trying to seem narrow-minded, but I just don’t understand how that argument has any premise… His Joker was terrifying, unpredictable, and the physicality that he invested in his character was absolutely incredible.
However, everyone is entitled to their own opinion.
And I’m not trying to be rude, but please check your grammar before posting an article. Every time I saw the word was instead of were, it completely took me out of the article. Once again, don’t think that I’m trying to overtly criticize you, or anything.
Completely disagree. How does a VERY rubbery suit with fake abs (?!) molded into it beat an army style, suit of Armour? CrAzY!
Also love the fact that if anyone dared to enjoy the first half of Batman Begins they are “fooling themselves”. Damn my enjoyment of good cinema!
Amarpal Biring, im sorry, but, Clayton is 100% right. next time be objective and have basis with your opinions, that post is just trolling.
My reply was to his abusive comment that has since been deleted. I have no problem with people disagreeing with me but verbally abusing me and others was not on and warranted a sarcastic reply.
Tim Burton’s movies were about nothing. Nolan’s movies had plot, but it seems that you are too stupid to understand them.
I think that Nolan’s interpretation of Batman is not supposed to be the same.
1. A better suit- Well for a new series, having a new suit, which is what shows the viewer that the character is batman,may be important. This shows ‘the Bat’ as a new character altogether, rather than just another guy who is playing batman. Also, the Bat-Suit is not supposed to be intimidating in Nolan’s Batman series,it is the idea of Batman which scares enemies, after all a costume can only do so much, and ends up as pointless to elaborate to much, as it does not advance the story or progress the characters. The new Batsuit is very simple in it’s looks, in comparison to the Burton Batman series which could be showing that Batman is a simple thing with one aim (I remember hearing something about this in an interview that the writer of the series (Chris Nolan’s brother) said.
2. The action? Have you ever thought that throwing someone half way across a room was a little bit strange and wouldn’t happen? Yeah, I thought so. The new Batman isn’t supposed to be seen as a superhero in the sense he was back in Burton’s film series. Bruce Wayne is the main character in the new series, as it attempts to explore his thoughts and at time justify them. Its not supposed to just be a gigantic CGI mash-up with everybody fighting, its meant to show the characters and what they stand for in the small bits of action which we see. Even so, do you really want to watch two straight hours of people punching each other in the face.
3. One again, Nolan’s series is meant to show a more serious Batman, personally I cannot compare the characters too well, however the role of the Joker was more significant in TDK. This Joker was meant to represent something, rather than just play another enemy.
*Spoiler Incoming*
In Batman Begins, the main enemy, Raz A Guhl (Sorry for the spelling)is meant to
4. Yeah of course, a Billionaire wants to spend all of his time in a cave, hanging out with a load of Bats. No Bruce is seen more than Batman in the newer films, because he progresses the story quite smoothly and shows a constant emotional Battle between his two personalities. When the Batcave is shown, it is done well. It’s a place to put his toys after-all. He has the likes of Lucius Fox who work on all of the science stuff.
5. Introducing Batman… You mean Bruce Wayne? Bruce Wayne is Batman, that’s what Burton’s series fails to capture. The closest Burton’s series gets to that is Batmans girlfreind waking up to find him already lifting weights. It’s not exactly exploring the character properly. That series does not explore the emotions of the character. Have you ever considered that’s why the character was introduced as Bruce Wayne. Batman is not Bruce Wayne – Bruce Wayne is Batman, is what the series tries to capture.
6. Boring Bruce Wayne scenes? Is this written by a tabloid, who wants to see nothing but random crap blowing up on the screen they are watching. This film is meant to be about Bruce Wayne as much as it is Batman. The writing is superb and the acting also. I especially love the scene in *spoiler* TDKR when Alfred tells Bruce he is leaving. The level of emotion in that is amazing. That scene where he is just doing push ups over and over. There is plenty going on with the other main characters at this time, in Gotham. This is meant to take a while , and it keeps coming back to this to develop emotion for when he finally escapes. When he does escape, you think thank god. That’s not because it was boring however, it represents a long struggle which has finally been relieved. Your’e meant to feel slightly bored when the film keeps cutting back to Bruce, its a writers effect.
Hmm… Hoping some decent reasons appear soon, which don’t sound like desperate pleas for attention, with the writer having nothing better to put.
7. Oh come on! Music? Danny Elfman’s theme makes me feel as though Batman is a very powerful character; yet it has a sense of mystery. In terms of meaning the Hans Zimmer theme, and soundtrack in total says more and provokes more emotion. This however is very much a matter of personal opinion, I’m no expert on film music so I cannot really say much about this.
8. A more fun Joker. ‘Ledger’s Joker was more vicious, unpredictable and much more uncomfortable to watch’ guess why? Don’t even bother thinking of them as the same character, if you explore the Jokers personality, Nolan wanted viewer as to see his unpredictability, but wanted to show his disposition towards being a villain. The Joker wears make-up for the same reason as Batman, not to hide his identity, but to act as a recognizable figure who people learn to fear. No one knows who he is, even his fingerprints cannot be traced, the only identity he has is the Joker, he does not have another side. This makes him very similar to Batman/Bruce at some points, but the complete opposite at others. During scenes as Batman, Bale removes the Bruce side of his personality and focuses, essentially making him a standalone character at these points, therefore making him similar to the Joker, as we are presented with the illusion that they are two men fighting for the opposite causes- one for order one for madness. This makes them seem similar. Yet we see the complete opposites in Wayne’s scenes, where it appears that there are three men involved. (Batman, Bruce and Joker) Having two personalities gives the illusion that Bruce/Batman is the complete opposite of the jokers single mind, which makes both characters very hard to understand; purposefully…
9/8.Grrr. Do you think that making a car which looks ‘cool’ was the first thing on the production teams’ mind? Of course it wasn’t! The new car shows what Batman needs, firepower and ‘the idea’. The Idea’ is a concept which runs throughout the Nolan series. It’s the idea of Batman which makes him scary. It’s a comparison which the viewer is given, between Batman and normal men. He is different and it scares people, which makes him powerful. Making the purpose of his car complete, it doesn’t need to drive up walls, because none of his enemies can do that.
(Same stuff applies to ‘The Bat’/Batwing.)
10. ‘Christian Bale was OK as Bruce Wayne and rubbish as Batman. He got the complex nature of Bruce Wayne’s personality right and you got a real sense that the man had issues. But as Batman, he sucked.’ There’s a real sense the man had issues. Can I just put across that I don’t think you understand either Batman or Bruce properly if the only thing you can say is ‘He had issues’. What you mean is. He couldn’t cope with his own actions, he was scared that those around him would come to harm, whilst he wanted to make Gotham a better place. But the main point is Bruce couldn’t justify his own actions as Batman fully, so he was scared of himself. He feared the idea that Batman was more than a man, because he knew that he wasn’t, yet that is what Batman has to become. But batman is an idea is what Nolan wanted to show, as shown in TDKR ****************************SPOILER************************************ Where we see Robin/John Blake find the Batcave. This is mean’t to show, not the start of Robin, but the idea that Batman will live on even after he is dead… This is as far as the public know, however Bruce is well and truly alive. BATMAN IS AN IDEA NOT A CHARACTER.
11. So now Ra’s Al Guhl is a boring villain? Why don’t you look at the story for more than stuff blowing up and people getting killed. There isn’t as much death in the new Batman, and so when it happens it provokes greater levels of emotion, making the enemies seem worse. He was, alongside Bruce, the person responsible for creating Batman. Him and his daughter Talia Al Guhl are almost as important in the story as Batman, as their words constantly manipulate him and change Batma/Bruce’s feelings. TDKR ending was not a let down. A set of girls behind me begun crying… Batman is dead yet the idea is what matters and Bruce gets his life back… That’s what the whole series comes to, which provides a brilliant ending. In TDKR Miranda/Talia was the real enemy, as much so as Bane. This provided great twists and kept the story going.
12. Your’e gonna compare cities now… I can post a reason why the one in the newer series is more realistic, if someone comments, but to be honest its a great effect to build emotion, what does bridges going through buildings and every street being a dark alley do, nothing.
13.Yeah its not lighthearted. Think of Batman as a Drama rather than a comedy. Moments like ‘WHERE IS SHE?!!!’ May appear funny at first, but they contain so much emotion that you can appreciate them from both sides, as both funny and serious. Think of Batman as a Drama rather than an Action Comedy… …Now the film should make sense.
14. Escapism. So your’e suggesting that every time you watch a film it has to be unrealistic or you won’t enjoy it, because you won’t escape from the real world. This film proves that wrong completely. It takes you so far into another world and lets you escape, by making it so realistic. (I hate using the realism thing- but it really does mean something here) No other film keeps you entertained for three hours without giving you goblins and hobbits and other stuff that doesn’t exist. So you do escape really because you are kept entertained. Then I notice, that you go on to say that Bane is a stupid character, because of his mask, because it isn’t realistic? REALISTIC? Has this whole article not been continually expressing that the series is too realistic and too serious. Haven’t you been saying that it is TOO boring because of this. Just near the end you wrote We watch films for escapism and they are good because they are not realistic. So disappointing that you kept a strong argument of saying a couple things in fifteen different ways up until the very end, where you go and contradict yourself by saying that Bane should have something like paracetamol instead? So you now want to make it realistic? I am very confused… Right below this you once again try to say that the series is too realistic, which makes it ‘fail to ignite any level of excitement.’. If this is the case, answer these
Why is The Dark Knight the 12th Highest Grossing film of all time?
Why are so many people supporting the series in the comment section?
Why are you writing articles, without checking your arguments for faults?
Yes Nolan did give us that Monday morning… …In a cinema, enjoying ourselves- its called escapism…
loved this comment enjoyed it by more than the article itself thank you :)
this is pretty poor. if you prefer burton’s films, fair enough. but if you’re going to give us fifteen reasons why burton’s were better than TDK trilogy, at least make a strong argument. all we have here is a comic book fanboy who disliked a more grounded take on batman. none of your reasons make a compelling enough argument. basically all you have done is tell us why burton’s films were more like the comic book batman. we didn’t need to know this. we knew this already. nolan did this intentionally. and nolan’s films weren’t about being “realistic” per se. they were supposed to just be closer to realism than previous films. nobody can argue that he did that successfully. poor article.
I think that Nolan’s interpretation of Batman is not supposed to be the same.
1. A better suit- Well for a new series, having a new suit, which is what shows the viewer that the character is batman,may be important. This shows ‘the Bat’ as a new character altogether, rather than just another guy who is playing batman. Also, the Bat-Suit is not supposed to be intimidating in Nolan’s Batman series,it is the idea of Batman which scares enemies, after all a costume can only do so much, and ends up as pointless to elaborate to much, as it does not advance the story or progress the characters. The new Batsuit is very simple in it’s looks, in comparison to the Burton Batman series which could be showing that Batman is a simple thing with one aim (I remember hearing something about this in an interview that the writer of the series (Chris Nolan’s brother) said.
2. The action? Have you ever thought that throwing someone half way across a room was a little bit strange and wouldn’t happen? Yeah, I thought so. The new Batman isn’t supposed to be seen as a superhero in the sense he was back in Burton’s film series. Bruce Wayne is the main character in the new series, as it attempts to explore his thoughts and at time justify them. Its not supposed to just be a gigantic CGI mash-up with everybody fighting, its meant to show the characters and what they stand for in the small bits of action which we see. Even so, do you really want to watch two straight hours of people punching each other in the face.
3. One again, Nolan’s series is meant to show a more serious Batman, personally I cannot compare the characters too well, however the role of the Joker was more significant in TDK. This Joker was meant to represent something, rather than just play another enemy.
*Spoiler Incoming*
In Batman Begins, the main enemy, Raz A Guhl (Sorry for the spelling)is meant to
4. Yeah of course, a Billionaire wants to spend all of his time in a cave, hanging out with a load of Bats. No Bruce is seen more than Batman in the newer films, because he progresses the story quite smoothly and shows a constant emotional Battle between his two personalities. When the Batcave is shown, it is done well. It’s a place to put his toys after-all. He has the likes of Lucius Fox who work on all of the science stuff.
5. Introducing Batman… You mean Bruce Wayne? Bruce Wayne is Batman, that’s what Burton’s series fails to capture. The closest Burton’s series gets to that is Batmans girlfreind waking up to find him already lifting weights. It’s not exactly exploring the character properly. That series does not explore the emotions of the character. Have you ever considered that’s why the character was introduced as Bruce Wayne. Batman is not Bruce Wayne – Bruce Wayne is Batman, is what the series tries to capture.
6. Boring Bruce Wayne scenes? Is this written by a tabloid, who wants to see nothing but random crap blowing up on the screen they are watching. This film is meant to be about Bruce Wayne as much as it is Batman. The writing is superb and the acting also. I especially love the scene in *spoiler* TDKR when Alfred tells Bruce he is leaving. The level of emotion in that is amazing. That scene where he is just doing push ups over and over. There is plenty going on with the other main characters at this time, in Gotham. This is meant to take a while , and it keeps coming back to this to develop emotion for when he finally escapes. When he does escape, you think thank god. That’s not because it was boring however, it represents a long struggle which has finally been relieved. Your’e meant to feel slightly bored when the film keeps cutting back to Bruce, its a writers effect.
Hmm… Hoping some decent reasons appear soon, which don’t sound like desperate pleas for attention, with the writer having nothing better to put.
7. Oh come on! Music? Danny Elfman’s theme makes me feel as though Batman is a very powerful character; yet it has a sense of mystery. In terms of meaning the Hans Zimmer theme, and soundtrack in total says more and provokes more emotion. This however is very much a matter of personal opinion, I’m no expert on film music so I cannot really say much about this.
8. A more fun Joker. ‘Ledger’s Joker was more vicious, unpredictable and much more uncomfortable to watch’ guess why? Don’t even bother thinking of them as the same character, if you explore the Jokers personality, Nolan wanted viewer as to see his unpredictability, but wanted to show his disposition towards being a villain. The Joker wears make-up for the same reason as Batman, not to hide his identity, but to act as a recognizable figure who people learn to fear. No one knows who he is, even his fingerprints cannot be traced, the only identity he has is the Joker, he does not have another side. This makes him very similar to Batman/Bruce at some points, but the complete opposite at others. During scenes as Batman, Bale removes the Bruce side of his personality and focuses, essentially making him a standalone character at these points, therefore making him similar to the Joker, as we are presented with the illusion that they are two men fighting for the opposite causes- one for order one for madness. This makes them seem similar. Yet we see the complete opposites in Wayne’s scenes, where it appears that there are three men involved. (Batman, Bruce and Joker) Having two personalities gives the illusion that Bruce/Batman is the complete opposite of the jokers single mind, which makes both characters very hard to understand; purposefully…
9/8.Grrr. Do you think that making a car which looks ‘cool’ was the first thing on the production teams’ mind? Of course it wasn’t! The new car shows what Batman needs, firepower and ‘the idea’. The Idea’ is a concept which runs throughout the Nolan series. It’s the idea of Batman which makes him scary. It’s a comparison which the viewer is given, between Batman and normal men. He is different and it scares people, which makes him powerful. Making the purpose of his car complete, it doesn’t need to drive up walls, because none of his enemies can do that.
(Same stuff applies to ‘The Bat’/Batwing.)
10. ‘Christian Bale was OK as Bruce Wayne and rubbish as Batman. He got the complex nature of Bruce Wayne’s personality right and you got a real sense that the man had issues. But as Batman, he sucked.’ There’s a real sense the man had issues. Can I just put across that I don’t think you understand either Batman or Bruce properly if the only thing you can say is ‘He had issues’. What you mean is. He couldn’t cope with his own actions, he was scared that those around him would come to harm, whilst he wanted to make Gotham a better place. But the main point is Bruce couldn’t justify his own actions as Batman fully, so he was scared of himself. He feared the idea that Batman was more than a man, because he knew that he wasn’t, yet that is what Batman has to become. But batman is an idea is what Nolan wanted to show, as shown in TDKR ****************************SPOILER************************************ Where we see Robin/John Blake find the Batcave. This is mean’t to show, not the start of Robin, but the idea that Batman will live on even after he is dead… This is as far as the public know, however Bruce is well and truly alive. BATMAN IS AN IDEA NOT A CHARACTER.
11. So now Ra’s Al Guhl is a boring villain? Why don’t you look at the story for more than stuff blowing up and people getting killed. There isn’t as much death in the new Batman, and so when it happens it provokes greater levels of emotion, making the enemies seem worse. He was, alongside Bruce, the person responsible for creating Batman. Him and his daughter Talia Al Guhl are almost as important in the story as Batman, as their words constantly manipulate him and change Batma/Bruce’s feelings. TDKR ending was not a let down. A set of girls behind me begun crying… Batman is dead yet the idea is what matters and Bruce gets his life back… That’s what the whole series comes to, which provides a brilliant ending. In TDKR Miranda/Talia was the real enemy, as much so as Bane. This provided great twists and kept the story going.
12. Your’e gonna compare cities now… I can post a reason why the one in the newer series is more realistic, if someone comments, but to be honest its a great effect to build emotion, what does bridges going through buildings and every street being a dark alley do, nothing.
13.Yeah its not lighthearted. Think of Batman as a Drama rather than a comedy. Moments like ‘WHERE IS SHE?!!!’ May appear funny at first, but they contain so much emotion that you can appreciate them from both sides, as both funny and serious. Think of Batman as a Drama rather than an Action Comedy… …Now the film should make sense.
14. Escapism. So your’e suggesting that every time you watch a film it has to be unrealistic or you won’t enjoy it, because you won’t escape from the real world. This film proves that wrong completely. It takes you so far into another world and lets you escape, by making it so realistic. (I hate using the realism thing- but it really does mean something here) No other film keeps you entertained for three hours without giving you goblins and hobbits and other stuff that doesn’t exist. So you do escape really because you are kept entertained.
I personally think you have misjudged the series and looked at it only on the surface. Try looking at the true meaning of the film and any other film, I also think that the amount of criticism unnecessary as so much work goes into these films…
Nolan’s films were a Monday morning… …Spent in a cinema… …enjoying myself… …It was escapism…
Thanks for your detailed response. We obviously feel different about Nolan’s movies. I totally get the thought behind them, I’m not someone who needs action in a film to keep me entertained. The fact that Star Trek The Motion Picture is one of my favorite Star Trek movies should be testament to that. But I don’t think Nolan’s version of Batman worked and this article is to highlight the things Burton got right and he got wrong. Im glad you enjoyed yourself watching them,that’s a positive thing but you got more out of them than i did.
You were abusive first, Armapal. I’ve had a chance to cool down soem and will say that my second and thrid comments were harsh. I don’t know how old you are so maybe I jumped the gun on some of my assumptions. BUT in honesty, it is NOT that well-written of a piece. It should have never gone up as-is with so many errors in grammar and spelling. And obviously your opinions are your right. But to set up your writing in a way to discount anyone else from having an opinion is WRONG. I could easily say that since you claim to like Burton’s Batman better, you are only fooling YOURSELF. But that wouldn’t be fair. So it isn’t fair for you to say that other people are foolish for enjoyign Batman Begins. Nolan’s films get better with each viewing. There are so many themes and conflicts to dig through that it rewards study. Anyone who has seen his previous features and has studied filmf or years, as I have, knows that he is more concerned with a thoughtful narrative than how cool a damn Batman suit looks. Burton’s films have nto aged well, especially Batman 89. They may have some elements that feel more like a comic book, but they are thematically empty.
I’m sorry I offended you with my harsh comments earlier, but you should really develop your writing and critique abilities and wait a few years before trying to contribute something to a website. Part of it is Whatculture’s fault for not filtering out the bad pieces. Good luck to you int he future. You’re going to need it.
There is no way I’m getting into this with you in a public forum. I have no problem with you thinking that I’m fooling myself for preferring Burtons’s Batman but I’m quite surprised at how personally you seem to take things, even when they are written in an opinion piece, but that’s your thing to deal with. I’m glad you love the Nolan Batman films and apologise for you being so hurt that I didn’t. The world is full of people with opposing tastes, that is what makes it interesting. So, thanks for your comment, even if it was put forward rather aggressively and for reading my article.
So, if I’m getting the gist of this, Tim Burton’s Batman was better because it was more faithful to the comic. That’s a fine point, but you can just say that. You don’t need 15 pages to wax lyrical pointing it out. Nolan’s Batman was an interpretation, just like Jackson’s Rings. Big deal. Some people like darker. Some people would rather buy into inept cops and federal officials, crazy people (for the record, Ledger’s Joker was spot on for Nolan’s treatment. Spot on. If you didn’t find him funny or likable, I don’t know what to tell you.), and a world, however unlikely, where a deeply-conflicted man could dress up like a bat and fight crime. If you’re going to nit pick on that level, Dinosaur Comics already beat you to it.
I guess what I’m saying is, you’re point is fine, perfectly reasonable, but this list could’ve been one page long and you’d have gotten your point across just fine.
And Batman Begins totally sucked ass.
Burton’s batman isn’t batman, watch both his movies again and keep a kill count. He murders so many people in those movies, hell he sets a henchman on fire in batman returns and later throughs catwoman off a roof (not knowing she suddenly (and stupidly) is immortal). Admittedly in the new movies he killed raz, or just didn’t save him depending on how you want to look at it. But the point remains that Burton’s batman isn’t batman he’s a murderer in a rubber suit ( a suit he can rip apart with his bare heads accoarding to returns ( he literally grabs the hood and rips it completely off, you can see the torn rubber) but stops bullets apparently. It’s not a batman movie, it’s a Tim burton movie that just has a charactor with the name of batman, but no other qualities of batman.
I think it’s unfair to compare the two films because theyre doing two totally different things. Burton was telling a story about Batman, while Nolan was telling a story about Bruce Wayne. I enjoyed the opening act of Batman Begins because it really dove into the psyche of Bruce Wayne. Youre clearly a child of the 80s which is fine. It your opinion. But I was born in ’86 so the movies of the last decade are the ones I can really relate to as “growing up” with. I appreciate the underlying tones and psychology that a Nolan film has. In my opinion, Nolan;s films were much more layered throughout. It wasn’t until I saw the first two several times that I could truly appreciate what all the had to offer. TDKR didnt offer that as much, but I still really enjoyed seeing Bruce’s story come to an end. I think it’s the most complete trilogy ever made to have not been filmed consecutively like Lord of the Rings.
Bale’s origin at the start was rich, complex and very intriguing, far more so than any character in either of Burtonès films, (or any film in Burton’s entire filmography for that matter)
This is complete trash. You’re just a Burton fanboy if you really think all these reasons make his movies better than Nolan’s. I respect your opinion, these are just terrible arguments. Honestly, you come off as someone just trying to be a contrarian.
I agree there are plenty of holes in Nolan’s trilogy, but I still think it’s lightyears ahead of Burton’s.
First off, great article, it was an interesting read. I don’t fully agree with all of it, but most of the points you made firmly resonate with me. You should come to the IMDB message boards for Batman ’89 and Batman Returns. We have fans who are for and against these older movies (and they usually get compared to the newer ones) and a lot of debate is generated. There are a solid group of fans though, including me, who prefer the Burton films to the newer ones and we go into lengthy detail as to why. Still, the discussions are usually good fun, so come join in, it would always be good to have another person who prefers the older films!!
And to the types of posters who are telling the author to ‘go hang yourself’ for having a different opinion……you all need some serious help or counselling.
Thanks, I will check it out!
Guys, see what u did?? 433 responses (can’t count, Bane stepped on my glasses). This is fuel for more of these insightful opinionated articles that the masses want.
I have nothing against either movies. Liked them both in their own way. And i am sure the next ones will have it’s merits too. I don’t know though, is saying Tim Burton’s Batman better, the cool thing to say right now? Are all the cool kids saying it at school? In college, taking a toke? Whilst talking about life, the universe and everything? I don’t man, there are some very clear arty and radical stuff going on here. Shepard Fairey? Banksy? Roy Lichtenstein? Radical views, man. Revolutionary. Dearly beloved, we are gathered here today to… Is that still cool? Oh wait, it all went south after Dirty Minds. So radical and cool.
Man, that WAS some good sheeet.
Intents and purposes. Not, “extensive purposes”.
oh Thank God someone agrees with me.
I had this HORRIBLE sense after walking out of the theater, “THIS IS IT!? THIS WHAT I GET AFTER ALL THESE YEARS ; THIS INSULT TO WHO BATMAN IS SUPPOSED TO BE, THIS TINY, INEFFECTUAL, INCOMPETENT; STUPIDLY LOOKING, STUPIDLY SOUNDING MAN DRESSED AS A BAT!?!?!”
And he’s not even on screen most of the time!!! probably because by the third movie they were FLAT OUT EMBARASSED BY what they’ve created
and for what? for realism!? I’d like to realisticly kick Nolan in the balls.
Ladies & Gents,
Different strokes for different folks!
Personally I loved both takes, for different reasons.
No need at all for the vitriol being spewed forth on here gainst ‘Nolan-ites’ or ‘Burton-ites’…
Where is the love guys?!
PS – Sheldon Cooper’s “na na na na nananananananaaaaaa BATMAN!” comment made me laugh a lot.
Adam West Batman is the best Batman case closed.
Wow. Where to start? I guess I’ll skip correcting the awful spelling and grammar of the article (ascetically; you was watching the Joker), and since most of this is straight up opinion I won’t harp on how strongly I disagree, but I will comment on the utter arrogance of the tone of this writing. To blatantly suggest that anyone considering Ledger’s performance Oscar worthy (including the f*cking Academy themselves) is being disingenuous and fooled by Ledger’s death. Well that’s just pompous on your part to explain away something everyone but you seemed to enjoy.
Worst artice Iv’e ever seen. Comparing Tim Burton’s Batman to Chris Nolan’s is like comparing “Madea’s big family” with “The Shawshank Redemption”. It’s absord
Wow, this site really hates The Dark Knight triology.
I prefer Nolan’s trilogy. To me, Burton’s Batman was style over substance. His first film had some good scenes but wasn’t that good of a movie. Very little depth to any of the characters (Gordon may as well have not even been in it). It was a true ‘comic book movie’ which is fine if that’s what you want. Different strokes…
I think the two of the more ridiculous quotes in this article were:
“Burton’s cast runs rings around all the other performances in Nolan’s three films.”
“But the best performance came from Aaron Eckhart as Two Face who was the real star of TDK and not Heath Ledger.”
Nolan’s cast featured multiple Oscar winners and nominees in performances praised by numerous critics (one was actually awarded an Oscar for his performance in a Nolan Batman movie). If Burton had stuck around for a third movie, do you think we would have seen Billy Dee Williams run rings around Nolan’s cast as Two-Face?
I think part of the reason Burton’s Batman is so fondly remembered is because was the first one and was undoubtedly a cultural and marketing phenomenon for its time.
I found it interesting that the main focus of this article was Burton’s Batman movie(singular) vs. Nolan’s trilogy. I think throwing in Burton’s ‘Batman Returns’ would seriously water down the writer’s argument. Nolan created a trilogy that was a critical and commercial success that will hold up for a long time. A trilogy that had to erase the stench of a truly awful predecessor (Batman & Robin). A much more impressive accomplishment when you consider Burton’s 1989 film would only be compared to the Adam West-era Batman.
@ Scott,
Some goods points made here.
And all- the site does have some articles that see this movie as largely positive. Remember, the WhatCulture review gave the movie 5/5 stars.
All the writers here do have different opinions.
I agree with most of the points. Keaton is the best Batman, Gotham in Burton’s looked like Gotham city, Burton’s vehicles were spot on and the suit looks like Batman. I disagree with the points about the action scenes and the Joker. As much as I love Nicholson’s Joker Ledger gave one of the greatest performances in history. Aaron Eckhart was actually a bore as Harvey Dent to me. I love both Nolan and Burton’s Batman movies, But 1989 Batman will always be the best.
It may have already been stated by another reader, but the fact that you reference a movie called “Batman Begins” and then criticise it by saying “…for 45 minutes to show us how he hones his Batman skills, that doesn’t matter” is laughable.
I think this guy forgot to put the part in all 15 of those reasons that this was just his opinion. If you prefer Burton’s Batman, fine, but leave it at that. His 15 reasons were all obviously going to be a thumbs up for Burton and a thumbs down for Nolan. On some notes, I agreed of certain elements I like better in the Burton films, like the Batcave and the Batmobile, but just because I like those two things better doesn’t make it a better movie.
WhatCulture just hire anyone willing to writefor no pay, don’t they?
I’m not sure you can hire someone for no pay? Contradiction in terms.
These are all superficial reasons listed in the article- although one has the right to like what they want when it comes to taste for certain qalitites in a work’s tone, visual design, fidelity to sources, etc. But it’s like complaining about the color of the icing on the cake instead of appreciating the taste of both icing and cake. The newer Batman movies are objectivley superior in story, theme, conflict, and character although Burton is a talented film maker. But the newer Batman movies are more engaging for adults than the previous installments. Stick to the cartoons and old TV shows for the kiddies and let teens watch Burton’s slightly above average versions. The newer superhero movies have kept the fantastic nature of the comic book content while proving that the stories need not be dumbed down because they’re comic book. Burton helped paved the way for Nolan, but Nolan has perfected the art.
For me this article is spot on. To simplify, Burton’s film was much more fun and contained lots of memorable scenes. However, Nolan’s films were dull, way to realistic and about as anti-climatic as you can get. All the reviews were 5 out of 5 and Nolan’s a genius. But I honestly can’t believe how anyone, who know’s a good movie when they see one and that is a Batman fan, would give the 1st and 3rd movies anymore than 3 out of 5. Also, please could someone tell me what the hell Bane says throughout the film because I didn’t catch it. I would have thought that being able to understand what a main character is saying in a major film franchis is a minimal requirement. It was bad enough when Batman spoke. My last rant now. I love Marion Cotillard, but the way she died was just shocking acting. I actually laughed out loud in the cinema. Can’t believe Nolan didn’t say ‘take 2′ on that one.
15. BB suit showed a man in agnst. It was fear embodied. TDK upgrade suit was an excellent in advancement. Burton’s suit was stiff and the rubber muscle suit was weird. Batman Returns suit was better.
14. Campy 80s action vs practical effects. You cant compare the too. And to add the that pretentious video at the end only turns you into the very thing you hate.
13. Burton’s cast doesnt compare. Fact. Nolan’s cast as whole runs circles around Burton’s.
12. What you just said is actually makes Nolan’s Batman truer to the comics as you have just explaind the evolution of the Batcave. BB draws from Year One. TDK draws from the time comic Bruce spent living in a pEnt house to be closer to Gotham. And TDKR draws from TDKReturns.
11. BB intoduced Batman as a suspenseful character. Alfred Hitchcock wood be proud. It’s exactly how Batman is presented in the comics. A supernatural and unstoppable terror to his enemies.
10. Clearly you arent a Batman film. Quieter moments define characters. You are clealry intrested in shiny objects and explosions.
9. Matter of Opinion. Burton’s is a classic but Nolan’s enhances it’s film better in context.
8. Joker has been around for years. There is no definitive version of Joker. However, Nolan’s Joker captured the essence of Joker better than Burton ever could. The interrogation scene perfectly expresses who the Joker is and The Joker/Batman dynamic in only a few lines. But Burton’s Joker was NOT at all more like the comics.
7 & 8. You cant compare vehicles giving they both work for their respectve films very well.
6. There is no contest. It’s Bale. His Bruce Wayne is exactly like Batman Year One. Keaton played a good creepy billionare but he was never Bruce Wayne. Burton never explored who Bruce Wayne was, Nolan did. Both Batman are good for their respectve universes. If you were a fan of Batman comics you would know that the voice Bale uses is the one that has been described multiple times in comic lore. Robin to Azreal (as Batman) “…And put on that hoarse, grating voice Bruce uses.” Post-Crisis always describe the batman voice as deep, rough and hoarse
4. Matter of opinion. But if you compare, Batman ’89 & TDK are the closest. Batman ’89 has the Bat un-stealthily climb a clock tower, get his ass-handed by 3 henchmen and kill the joker. In TDK Batman takes out two SWAT team, save the role-reversed hostages, stop the Joker with out killing him, accidentally killing Harvey in effort to save Gordon’s son and taking the blame in effort to be a different kind of hero. TDK is undisputed winner in a battle of better endings.
3. Matter of opinion. Each city works well with the Batman said film created. Gotham in TDKR is the best though. No Man’s Land >>>
2. Im sorry you dont know how to enjoy a well crafted cerebal film.
1. It sounds like you hate your life. At the end of the day, the majority of people love this vision of
Batman. If it werent for Batman Begins (the template for Superhero orgins now) you wouldnt have IronMan (and the Marvel Cinematic Universe) or Amazig Spider-man.
Overall your article reads like a jealous fan-boy. It’s clear that you dont understand the mechanics of who/what Batman is or the fact that there is not a definitve version of Batman. Sad.
15. BB suit showed a man in agnst. It was fear embodied. TDK upgrade suit was an excellent in advancement. Burton’s suit was stiff and the rubber muscle suit was weird. Batman Returns suit was better.
14. Campy 80s action vs practical effects. You cant compare the too. And to add the that pretentious video at the end only turns you into the very thing you hate.
13. Burton’s cast doesnt compare. Fact. Nolan’s cast as whole runs circles around Burton’s.
12. What you just said is actually makes Nolan’s Batman truer to the comics as you have just explaind the evolution of the Batcave. BB draws from Year One. TDK draws from the time comic Bruce spent living in a pEnt house to be closer to Gotham. And TDKR draws from TDKReturns.
11. BB intoduced Batman as a suspenseful character. Alfred Hitchcock wood be proud. It’s exactly how Batman is presented in the comics. A supernatural and unstoppable terror to his enemies.
10. Clearly you arent a Batman film. Quieter moments define characters. You are clealry intrested in shiny objects and explosions.
9. Matter of Opinion. Burton’s is a classic but Nolan’s enhances it’s film better in context.
8. Joker has been around for years. There is no definitive version of Joker. However, Nolan’s Joker captured the essence of Joker better than Burton ever could. The interrogation scene perfectly expresses who the Joker is and The Joker/Batman dynamic in only a few lines. But Burton’s Joker was NOT at all more like the comics.
7 & 8. You cant compare vehicles giving they both work for their respectve films very well.
6. There is no contest. It’s Bale. His Bruce Wayne is exactly like Batman Year One. Keaton played a good creepy billionare but he was never Bruce Wayne. Burton never explored who Bruce Wayne was, Nolan did. Both Batman are good for their respectve universes. If you were a fan of Batman comics you would know that the voice Bale uses is the one that has been described multiple times in comic lore. Robin to Azreal (as Batman) “…And put on that hoarse, grating voice Bruce uses.” Post-Crisis always describe the batman voice as deep, rough and hoarse
4. Matter of opinion. But if you compare, Batman ’89 & TDK are the closest. Batman ’89 has the Bat un-stealthily climb a clock tower, get his ass-handed by 3 henchmen and kill the joker. In TDK Batman takes out two SWAT team, save the role-reversed hostages, stop the Joker with out killing him, accidentally killing Harvey in effort to save Gordon’s son and taking the blame in effort to be a different kind of hero. TDK is undisputed winner in a battle of better endings.
3. Matter of opinion. Each city works well with the Batman said film created. Gotham in TDKR is the best though. No Man’s Land >>>
2. Im sorry you dont know how to enjoy a well crafted cerebal film.
1. It sounds like you hate your life. At the end of the day, the majority of people love this vision of Batman. If it werent for Batman Begins (the template for Superhero orgins now) you wouldnt have IronMan (and the Marvel Cinematic Universe) or Amazig Spider-man.
Overall your article reads like a jealous fan-boy. It’s clear that you dont understand the mechanics of who/what Batman is or the fact that there is not a definitve version of Batman. Sad.
15. BB suit showed a man in agnst. It was fear embodied. TDK upgrade suit was an excellent in advancement. Burton’s suit was stiff and the rubber muscle suit was weird. Batman Returns suit was better.
14. Campy 80s action vs practical effects. You cant compare the too. And to add the that pretentious video at the end only turns you into the very thing you hate.
13. Burton’s cast doesnt compare. Fact. Nolan’s cast as whole runs circles around Burton’s.
12. What you just said is actually makes Nolan’s Batman truer to the comics as you have just explaind the evolution of the Batcave. BB draws from Year One. TDK draws from the time comic Bruce spent living in a pEnt house to be closer to Gotham. And TDKR draws from TDKReturns.
11. BB intoduced Batman as a suspenseful character. Alfred Hitchcock wood be proud. It’s exactly how Batman is presented in the comics. A supernatural and unstoppable terror to his enemies.
10. Clearly you arent a Batman film. Quieter moments define characters. You are clealry intrested in shiny objects and explosions.
9. Matter of Opinion. Burton’s is a classic but Nolan’s enhances it’s film better in context.
8. Joker has been around for years. There is no definitive version of Joker. However, Nolan’s Joker captured the essence of Joker better than Burton ever could. The interrogation scene perfectly expresses who the Joker is and The Joker/Batman dynamic in only a few lines. But Burton’s Joker was NOT at all more like the comics.
7 & 8. You cant compare vehicles giving they both work for their respectve films very well.
6. There is no contest. It’s Bale. His Bruce Wayne is exactly like Batman Year One. Keaton played a good creepy billionare but he was never Bruce Wayne. Burton never explored who Bruce Wayne was, Nolan did. Both Batman are good for their respectve universes. If you were a fan of Batman comics you would know that the voice Bale uses is the one that has been described multiple times in comic lore. Robin to Azreal (as Batman) “…And put on that hoarse, grating voice Bruce uses.” Post-Crisis always describe the batman voice as deep, rough and hoarse
4. Matter of opinion. But if you compare, Batman ’89 & TDK are the closest. Batman ’89 has the Bat un-stealthily climb a clock tower, get his ass-handed by 3 henchmen and kill the joker. In TDK Batman takes out two SWAT team, save the role-reversed hostages, stop the Joker with out killing him, accidentally killing Harvey in effort to save Gordon’s son and taking the blame in effort to be a different kind of hero. TDK is undisputed winner in a battle of better endings.
3. Matter of opinion. Each city works well with the Batman said film created. Gotham in TDKR is the best though. No Man’s Land >>>
2. Im sorry you dont know how to enjoy a well crafted cerebal film.
1. It sounds like you hate your life. At the end of the day, the majority of people love this vision of Batman. If it werent for Batman Begins (the template for Superhero orgins now) you wouldnt have IronMan (and the Marvel Cinematic Universe) or Amazig Spider-man.
Overall your article reads like a jealous fan-boy. It’s clear that you dont understand the mechanics of who/what Batman is or the fact that there is not a definitve version of Batman. Sad.
I never understood why people always bring the “more comic like Style” argument.
Yes Burtons Batman looks Comic like, but not Batman Comic like.
In Batman Year One Parts of Gotham look more like Taxi Driver.
And the Christmas Chapter in the long Halloween was complete different from the Christmas Wonderland Gotham in Batman Returns.
Burton Created a Burton World and not a Batman World and Nolan uses his Style. You can prefere the Burton Style no question but stop acting like this is THE Batman Style.
Making a list why Nolans Films are better would be pretty easy too.
Gordon for example was a important charakter in the Comics, in Year one he was more in the spotlight than Bruce Wayne/Batman but in Burtons Film he is just a small role.
It seems like you’ve never read Batman comcis such as A long Halloween, Knightfall, Killing Joke. Nolan is more faithfull to the comic such as Burton represented a black Harvey Dent, a Joker who is supposed to be the killer of Wayne’s parents (WTF). The same with Catwoman who is not a “supernatural” creature as Burton shown!WTF man have you ever read Batman Comics?? And the cast.. i mean: Christian Bale, Heath Ledger, Aaron Eckhart ,Michael Caine, Gary Oldman, Morgan Freeman, Nestor Carbonell, Cillian Murphy..and you talk about a worse cast?
He said “nice coat” because it was *his* coat that he had given the homeless guy earlier as Bruce Wayne. If you can’t even follow a simple detail like that, why would I give any creedence to your opinion about the films? (Hint: I wouldn’t.)
I know that because I have seen the film, I’m just saying the follow up line wasn’t needed in that scene.
Wow Ahmad you are a person who needs help. Someone doesnt agree with you so he should go kill himself? People like you are the reason creative concise debates such as these get derailed. You should seriously consider seeking some professional help. I don’t know what happened in your life that makes you so angry but you shouldnt project your insecurities and inadequacies through posts on the internet, it just makes you sound like you have a low IQ.
Just wanted to say i agree with your article 100%! I actually went out and got a DVD of 1989 Batman and rewatched it last night because of this article, as i hadn’t seen it in probably 15 years. And it really just a lot a fun as a movie, i mean it completely holds up beyond even the 15 reasons you’ve stated. Probably 80% of the dialogue is humorous, keaton is ultra-likable as bruce wayne, i mean you’d watch a movie about just that character, Batman himself is used judiciously and doesn’t have a ridiculous growly voice, jack nicholson as the joker is just legendary (he really goes all-out, i mean literally everything he says is a one-liner and when they’re not so-bad-they’re-good they’re generally just good), jack palance is out of his mind on PCP in all his scenes (at least it seems like it) which i promise you makes for superior entertainment value (especially in the one scene where joker mimics his voice), and there’s no pointlessly overwrought plot to get in the way of a movie that’s just about some huge and weird characters/actors bouncing off each other and clearly having a great time doing it. I realize that many of these things would be negatives in a conventional movie, but this is a movie that is (and know that it is) about a man dressed as a bat for no apparent reason, and in that context it really is Pure Entertainment. And again, it’s genuinely funny, like it’s a borderline comedy compared to the Nolan films– amazing to think that people thought it was “too dark” when it first came out. It takes the character exactly as seriously as he deserves to be taken, and because of that succeeds tremendously.
Even if one is to not take my word for it on all that though, i think the real mark of a quality film is how memorable it is. I hadn’t seen ’89 batman since i was in school, yet i could still remember whole scenes from it, and as i rewatched it last night lines of dialogue were flooding back to me just as they were about to appear on screen (“he must have been… king of the wicker people!” yesss!!). Conversely, i saw the first two nolan films in the theater when they first came out, so within the past 7 years, and i honestly can’t even remember what the plot of either one is, i mean they were totally forgettable to me. Just a lot of brown and black and THAT voice. So the memory doesn’t lie, that’s my theory.
Thats awesome to read. I think there is a silent majority out there that think the same way. Thanks for your comment.
Tim Burton Nailed It.
Chris Nolan Failed It.
Excellent.
One thing that I also think is missing in the Nolan Batman trilogy is the texture of the city. Gotham is as much an integral part in the Batman mythology as any character.
Nolan’s Gotham is a bland composite of US CBDs populated by an anonymous population. Burton’s Gotham (I suppose rather obviously) is ominously Gothic and it’s citizens seemed to be teetering at the edge of a moral abyss.
Burton’s might have been less naturalistic – but I would have bought his Gothamites reveling in the lynching of city officials more than I ever did in TDKR.
Apologies – if you’re still approving comments for this thread don’t bother with this or my last one which pretty much duplicates what you say about Burton’s Gotham being better. I somehow missed that page while reading the article.
Great minds and all that!
Interesting article, but Nolan runs rings around Burton. For one, Burton’s Batman isn’t interesting when he’s Bruce Wayne– Nolan’s version is. For another, Nolan uses location shots/scenes in his trilogy. You can tell that Burton is on a soundstage with his two films.
James Gordon is more important in Nolan’s films than he ever was in Burton’s.
I could add more, but people like TheMack and GAMERROVERR gave the same reasons that I did.
Finally, Nolan is a much better storyteller than Burton, who is only better when it comes to set design. He (Nolan) has never made an awful film, while Burton has made a few(Mars Attacks! and others, including this year’s Dark Shadows).
Are you really serious with this article?? You obviously know what Nolan has done with the Batman franchise is groundbreaking….I was always a fan of Burton’s original Batman but to go to these lengths and actually say there are reason’s why Burton’s is better????sorry it just doesn’t add up. And the suit…sorry Nolan’s suit has a purpose for the character…it’s not just a rubber suit to cover his identity and look like a bat. You have missed the boat on the suit argument.. And this whole comic book BS…if you want to relate things and compare to comics…then just read comic books. Unfortunately, in today’s society we all aren’t “Fanboys” and base our whole lives and every little detail on comic books. Seriously, just enjoy the fantastic film making,directing,acting,soundtrack, we wouldn’t even be talking about Batman right now if it wasn’t for what Nolan has done. Look at the Avengers and the films that have been done for that franchise…they are more realistic views on iconic characters…look at Iron Man, Captain America, Thor..etc. The same people that create opinions like this article… are the same people with these self absorbed and naive opinions about what is happening in the “Man of Steel”….oh no! The suit doesn’t have red underwear, Henry Cavill is British, Lois has red hair now! “She didn’t have red hair in the comics”….my god, who cares if she didn’t have red hair in the comics….Just appreciate what is being done for the the characters we have loved since we were children. It’s a shame what I have see people writing in regards to the “Man of Steel”…I guarantee it will be fantastic and what we have all been waiting for…We learned what happended with Superman Returns….it is time to grow up and take that realistic, gritty, something we can relate to and feel approach, Nolan did with Batman Begins..Ultimately, the original Batman was great for what it was, I enjoyed it as a teenager…but it did not create a timeless franchise like Nolan’s Batman has done…the Batman before “Begins” was “Batman and Robin” which is totally embarassing…you should all be thanking Nolan not criticizing..simple as that. And we will all be thanking Nolan once more, as well as Zach Snyder, for their contributions to the Superman franchise…
The Dark Knight was the better out of the trilogy. Batman Begins was boring; with an enemy such as Ra’s it should have been bigger, more intense and interesting. In the comics, Ra’s has learnt many skills through the centuries he has been alive, mastering many techniques more specifically in fighting. It should have been big, but it was just boring and disappointing.
TDKR was, quite frankly, a mess. I went to the midnight screening and to be honest it was a waste of time. What I didn’t like was the amount of dialogue. They just kept talking and talking. I could have gone to the bathroom half way through the film and by the time I came back Alfred would be reviewing what has been happening up to that point. What about the endings for Talia and Bane? Where was the climax? The man that broke the bat and we just forget about him. Or Talia, daughter to Ra’s al Ghul, and she dies in the car. I mean come on, really. I understand that Nolan wanted to kill them off but there could have been other, more dramatic ways to end such respected characters.
I think we can all agree that Keaten was a better Batman than Bale. Yes, he didn’t exactly have a similar appearance to the Bruce Wayne in the comics but he had the attitude and personality. Bale was boring, simply put. As the main character of the films all the attention needed to be on him, he needed to be the interesting and intense character but to be honest I wasn’t feeling it. He was boring.
The ‘Batcave’ is a no-brainer. Nolan’s doesn’t deserve to be called the Batcave, it’s just an underground bunker or basement or whatever.
I liked Burton’s Batsuit because it was simple and similar to the comics. Nolan, again trying to be ‘realistic’, made the mistake of making it too distracting with all the plates and everything. And what about the symbol?! It blended in!
I have mixed feelings on the portrayals of the Joker. Burton’s portrayal was better in terms of being based more on the comic’s, however Nicholson’s size obviously made the difference. He had the personality and pretty much the full package. Nolan’s was definitely different. Ledger was less comedic however still did a good job. People are quick to come to the defence of Ledger’s representation because they have probably never read a Batman comic in their life, have only watched TDK and because they love Heath Ledger. I really liked Heath Ledger, yes he was a good actor, but was his representation true to the comics? No, it wasn’t. Where was the comedy? I’m just going to leave it as Nicholson was better at representing the Joker in the comics however Ledger still did a great job in his role.
Tim Burton’s was more memorable from the dialogue to the music, was more energetic and captivating, Nolan’s were boring and at some points very painful to watch (referring to the long fight scenes). Ra’s al Ghul was a big twist in BB, yes, but that’s it, that’s the twist. I didn’t like in Burton’s Batman how it was the Joker who was revealed to have killed Wayne’s parents, not Joe Chill, and that Batman left Joker to die. I think Eckhart did a good job as Harvey, however it was more the appearance that sort of steered me away from him. But that’s the same with Bale, too. The story of Harvey Dent and his tragic transformation into Two-Face from Batman Annual 14 and The Long Halloween will always be two of my favourite comics. It pulls on the emotions and heartstrings of the reader and I don’t think the film did it justice. But hey, at least they weren’t as bad as Batman Forever and Batman and Robin.
As quoted by Penguin Truth (August 7, 2012 at 3:12 am)
“Nolan’s Batman kills:
- A bunch of League of Shadows ninjas and the fake Ra’s
- Ra’s (“not saving him” counts to comics Batman)
- Harvey Dent (he doesn’t even attempt to save him)
- Bane (indirectly; he gave heavy weaponry to a woman known to use lethal force)
- Talia Ghul
And yet he spares the Joker, a mass-murderer.”
To the people pointing out grammatical issues: does your opinion really change just because there is a spelling mistake here or there? As long as you can still understand the article and the point the writer is trying to make then really there is no problem and you should try to find something else to pick on.
Also, if you’re going to voice your opinion at least try to back it up and give reasons why you think A is better than B. Also, swearing and aggression isn’t going to get you anywhere.
This is just my opinion and I’d like to see what everyone thinks. :)
Most of this “article” are just opinions, what the author likes and what he did not like, for example the batmobile, the bat, or even the casting (and by the way, he did not mention Heah Ledger nor Joseph Gordon Levitt or Tom Hardy…). I like the first Batman (89) and to some degree Batman Returns, but Burton is more interested in bring his imaginery than to make an exciting story about Batman. Christopher Nolan give us an excellent trilogy of the dak knight, ok, it is not perfect, but it is exciting and complex, with a great Batman/Bruce Wayne (the way one can understand the motivations of his actions, or how he change been Batman), a gret cast, an OST that keep you involved in this world, and a really well doing take on this dark character an his most important foes. Today it’s cool to say that Nolan sucks and things like that, but the time will prove that he will become one of the better directors of all time.
Critique –
1. An article or essay criticizing a literary or other work; detailed evaluation; review. 2. A serious examination or judgement of something.
This is for all you people who seem to take offence to the fact that the author decided to share his opinion. The funny thing about art is you can’t be objective about it. Hence, it goes without saying that critiques can’t help but be subjective about any form of art.
I don’t see why people need to get offensive and run around with pitch forks if they don’t share the views of the author. Amarpal has made a review on what “he thinks” did a better job representing one of our favourite superheros: Batman and to justify his evaluation he has produced these 15 pages. And I’m all for it! (1 for freedom of speech and 2 for hitting the matter spot on).
I grew up reading the Batman comics and watching the Batman animated series (among others) and find the recent movies an insult to the original character created by Bob Kane and Bill Finger. Christian Bale’s constipated voice of Batman, incorrect representation of Ra’s al Ghul and Joker (though an extremely commendable effort by Heath Ledger) are just some of the few things that annoy people like me.
As rightly said in one of the pages, you can’t have a realistic version of a fictional comic character, its criminal to do that! One might as well not call it Batman and give the entire characters new names.
And if you are going to stick to reality how do explain the far fetched action sequence? That impossible jump out of a prison well (that was supposed to be somewhere in USA but shot in Rajasthan, India)? Joker’s ability to plant explosives all around town without getting noticed or raising suspicion? (As pointed in the articles) and many other facts about the movies that seem counter intuitive?
I love Nolan’s work and what he has done with the trilogy is fun to watch, but it is certainly not my favourite representation of Batman, especially when compared the 1989 Burton classic!
Nolan’s version of Batman is way better than Burton’s. I completely disagree with you. Nolan’s Batman depicts much more than just entertainment, it displays a meaning and moral understanding, which you did not mention. I have studied both directors extensively and by far, Nolan is the better one.
I agree with this article for the most part. I loved Nolan’s “Dark Knight” trilogy, especially Batman Begins. And I believe he made better films in terms of technocalities (scene for scene execution). However, I believe Tim Burton made better “Bat” films. Burton’s take created the whole darkness that’s applied to super-hero films today. He set the tone of what comic book movies should be like, and marketed.
I can go on and on, but a lot was covered in the article and comments, so I’ll just leave my two cents:
I love Nolan’s trilogy, but I prefer Burton’s duology- the best Batman films.
‘But the best performance came from Aaron Eckhart as Two Face who was the real star of TDK and not Heath Ledger’
I stopped reading here.
there is no argument a comic should not be taken seriously batman might be less absurd than spider man and superman but treating him like some deep complex character is a joke and the villains in BR alone is an unmatched achievement
What?
Didn’t Tim Burton have Batman kill at least one person in Batman Returns? Watch it again, he pushes a bomb onto a guy then kicks him into Gotham River. Not to mention a few seconds before hand when he heavily sets a guy on fire.
I love both cinematic outings but you can’t compare them. 2 totally different stages in Batman’s evolution.
Let’s just keep in mind, it’s a comic book movie. Does Bill Gates kick about in a leotard fighting crime? I canny see it
This Article is biased IMHO But i do agree with the suit and batman voice/acting part
BUT HAND-DOWN !
Hans zimmer’s theme is AWESOME and Batman begins was the best in the trilogy IMO its story is what made me anticipate and watch the whole movie
his introduction with the theme is what made his entrance so EPIC !!
> Scarecrow’s fear toxins and the whole suspenseful plot really grew on me
> The Ra’s al gul’s Whole “revenge” thing was awesome
THE Last Train SCENE WAS AWESOME when he flew away saying “i won’t kill you but i do not have to save you”
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EJCxgt7Qb6k
THAT WAS EPIC And realistic that solves the whole major flaw of batman always leaving his villains to come at him again
But YEAH many Nolan fan/gs saying that “REALISM” is kinda idiotic
OMG, this top 15 sucks!
I like many things from Tim Burton movies, but the all scripts from his movies sucks a lot!
- Joker dancing around Gotham City with Prince’s music?
- Penguins with bombs?
- Bruce Wayne just a ordinary guy?
- Selina Kyle falls from the building and became Catwoman?
- Bat-robocop?
Please… Chris Nolan’s Batman is the definitive Batman!
I cannot believe, that someone actually mad these strange 15 points, and tried to say that Tim Burton’s version is better than Christopher Nolan’s. Christopher Nolan’s Batman Begins and The Dark Knight Rises, have their shortcomings, but, even at their worst, they are far better than Tim Burton’s films. Tim Burton’s films have the sensibility of someone in his early teens. Like a carton series. Nolan’s works are more modern age graphic novels. Though I initially did not like the look of Nolan’s Batmobile, because I found it too cumbersome and bulky looking, I later realised, that it looked more masculine, and tougher. Burton’s car could have as well been driven about by a babe. Also, Nolan’s Bat was pretty neat too. It’s just seemed more practical flying it around a city, than Burton’s Batwing, in a city. The Batwing is ok, for children’s books, and cartoons. Not for a movie, which is to be watched by adults. There is no logistical practicality or rationality about the Batwing. It was plain Stupid.
I agree with you, regarding the costume. The soft cape, in Nolan’s films, have a strange velvet look. Though, I am glad, he got rid of that silly yellow batman logo, pasted on his chest.
The Dark Knight has that insane action sequence, where Batman Kidnaps the bad guy, from Hong Kong. It was phenomenal scene. I didn’t like the Bane and Batman fight scenes. Either.
I thought the casting was good in Nolan’s films, as well. I didn’t like Jack Nicholson as the Joker. His acting was grossly exaggerated, his jokes were lousy, and his body language, make-up (way over the top), and built etc, were terrible. Heath Ledger’s acting was incomparable. I think, he was THE best Batman villain, in ANY Batman film, EVER MADE.
If you were expecting Batman to conduct all his experiments and technological developments in the batcave, you were really pushing it. Its stupid to think, he had night vision, and could do super human things, in a dingy cave.
I agree with you, that, the introducing dialogue, and scene, could have been a little better, in Nolan’s film.
I think your argument about the Theme Songs is also just pushing it. They both are very different, and I, personally, prefer the Nolan theme song.
Keaton and Bale are as different as night and day. Having said that, I believe, that Bale’s cold, almost limited and dark seemed more like Batman, than Keaton’s easier, softer and more human body language. Keaton was too average to be batman. Maybe, 10 years before he did Batman, he would have done Spiderman. But, Batman, was not made for him.
I didn’t like the look of Gotham City, in the Batman Begins, either. The whole set was disappointing. Though, in the Dark Knight and the Dark Knight Rises, it looked perfect, and perfectly contemporary.
I guess, they both had their good points, and their bad ones. But, for me, Nolan cracked it. By a long shot.
I can’t believe that somebody has this kind of view for the Nolan Batman films. Every point in this article is so laughable, so opposite to what’s actually happening. Wake up dude. The Suit? The Action?, The Joker?, The Batmobile? Oh God!
this crap is such DUMB, clueless, 2 year old fanboy sh!t its not even funny.
I grew up and with tim burtons batman and have watched it a solid 20,000 times. But Nolans trilogy is simply AMAZING!!!! ending: PERFECT, casting: PERFECT, writing: PERFECT, characters: PERFECT
get a clue and just keep your worthless take to yourself moron because at the end of the day EVERYONE has an opinion but guess what??? one side HAS TO be….WRONG. and believe me its you ; )
1000000000000% agree with writer of this article.. exactly my thoughts… i love Burtons Batman, like Nolans too but the Suit is HUUUUUUUUUGE mistake … BURTON has the best suit ever
yeah because rubber stops bullets and knifes :)
z
There is no legitimate reason to prefer Burton’s films over Nolans other than subjective preference. Burton just made the same damn movie he makes every single time with Batman mythology thrown in – it felt like an animated feature with real people standing in. Nolan turned Batman into a definitive film event standing tall amongst its silver screen peers – furthermore, his versions of Burton’s best characters (Joker and Catwoman) were superior.
You can’t compare this movies, its like trying to compare alans moore batman with franks miller batman, there are just different versions of the same myth. batman was lost before burton came to scene and he made an amazing job, he did what it thought it was impossible, make a superhero movie (a good superhero movie), and because of that you are clouded in this thoughts and can’t think straight, both movies are awesome.. if you like burton’s is because you were there when the movie came out and you paid your ticket to the movie theater, so its a movie that change your life (in a way).. and talking about the suit, just look how in burton’s movie he can’t even move properly (the head or even the bodie), you can get batmans suit from adam west, add a bulletproof vest, and its better and more comfortable than burtons…
Awesome article and I totally agree with every single point you made. It’s funny seeing all these salty Nolanites getting their panties in a bunch. Burton’s first Batman movie was much more fun and engrossing to watch than all three of Nolan’s pretentious Batman films.
If you have ever visited the Nolan Fans website, your opinion is invalid. You have been brainwashed, and need to seek psychological help.
Amarpal Biring has tried to slap you out of your stupor, but it seems that sheeple like to follow, send critics death threats before they see the movie, and are as unintelligent as they come.
If you believe that Freedom of thought is overrated, you should join the hundreds of NOLAN BOTS who regurgitate the same 10 things over and over again (like if they were reading from a script). Plus, they are angered when people don’t fall in line or fight being assimilated into their BORG mentality.
Amarpal Biring, you are the man!!! Nolanites like to call us the minority, and themselves the majority. Those of us capable of free thinking might be the minority, but we are definitely the ones that have vision, can see past the hype, are big picture thinkers, and eventually change things.
Sheep just move from one over-hyped dogturd like ‘Rises’ to something else; they graze and spew the same venom like all their ignorant cattle mates. Unfortunately, in the process they lower the collective IQ of the internet. Many take their stupidity, falsified facts, and flat out lies as truth.
Bravo! Excellent article!! I finally braved TDKR and it was even worse than I was expecting. What the heck was up with Bane’s voice? My husband and I couldn’t stop laughing every time he spoke.
Burton’s Batmans rule! Thank-you for writing this and reassuring us that the whole world hasn’t gone mad -it can feel like it at times when you hate the Nolan films!
PS. Do a search for “college humor Batman” for a good laugh. ;)
One trifle thing – the author wrote “And why didn’t the CIA know that Bane was one of their hooded prisoners, didn’t they check their identities before bringing them on board the plane?”, which is in contradiction with the movie. Actually CIA officers knew Bane was one of the prisoners and they were told that by a henchman of Bane’s, who pretended to cooperate with them. What they didn’t know was that Bane’s capture was all set-up.
The fact remains that there is no way in hell that the CIA would let masked men onto an airplane – the DMV won’t even let people proceed without seeing their face, and the CIA sure as hell wouldn’t considering that for all they know, it could be the Three Stooges under those masks. This way they know ahead of time who they’re letting on their airplanes – you know, so they can avoid set-ups like the one in the film.
The masks aren’t even the worst part of that whole scene with Bane and the CIA. You have the CIA interrogating prisoners on a plane as opposed to say, a highly secured base interrogation room. You have the CIA not noticing another plane approaching them on radar. Ninjas skydiving and landing on the CIA plane, despite the fact that in real life they’d have either way over shot their marks or gotten chopped into Ninja chop suey in the plane’s engines, courtesy of thermodynamics. You have the fact the CIA, once again, violates protocol by not executing their prisoners the instant first shots are fired. You have a gun battle that, in addition to being one-sided to a laughable degree, for some reason does not decompress the airplane. You have the stupid blood transfusion that is never really explained, or given a reason to have happened. Oh, and then the ninjas make the fact that this was a hijacking blatantly obvious by cutting off the plane’s wings and nose. All to claim some nuclear physicist who would have never been on the same plane as a group of terrorists, but serves no greater point to the plot aside from a line of dialog and getting shot in the face later on.
So yeah, a scene that is as moronic as the CIA seems to be within it, and over the course of five minutes, entirely destroys the suspension of disbelief, and sets us up for the following three hours of preposterous, plot-hole laden crap. A scene that’s biggest reason for being in the movie is to provide some footage for the trailers.
The only thing I really agree with is the theme music ^^;;
I can’t imagine anyone would genuinely think Burton’s films were better, except due to nostalgia..
And Catwoman, is better in Batman returns!
It’s really this simple, people who like the new ones more were not there for the Burton films. They are kids, you are arguing with kids! This is a matter of opinion yet you all insist on treating it as fact. IMO Burton nailed it like no other and Keaton is the ultimate Batman, Nicholson is the ultimate Joker if not the best villain in cinema history! Period.
Exactly. They are kids, and don’t understand that is a matter of opinion. BUT, is a fact, not subjective, that Burton’s Batman is simply better.
To writer: you Indian and you ghey
I agree with some points, and I do absolutely love the burton Batman movie, but some points I utterly disagree with. I think the Tumbler looks awesome, better than the batmobile from burtons film. With the batwing and the bat its much closer I do still like the Bat for its coolness factor. I don’t understand all the hate towards the batsuits from Nolans films that the author gave them, Yes they aren’t perfect, but my biggest complaint of a batsuit would be the bright yellow belt fron the burton one. I also liked the fight scenes a lot in the trilogy, which unlike the burton one actually gave the impression that batman is a master martial artist. Finally, I know I am a minority with this but I liked bale’s batman voice, showing a big difference and it is very close to what his voice is described as like in the comics and it adds to the inhuman factor that helps with the fear.
This is so stupid. Joker killed batmans
Parents. No it was joe chill and two face
& riddler look like Disney characters r u
kidding Burtan & I’m sure bane is a dumb
henchman for poison Ivy or at least that’s
wat Burtan thinks. Well in the end it’s THE DARK KNIGHT & BATMAN BEGINS
For the first time I liked a Superhero Film, ie after watching Nolan series. He is the man who completely changes the format of a Superhero Film in a way commercially y and critically . Hats of him.
You can’t really compare them.Look first that these are two different eras nearly 30 years apart.Oh and you can’t say you’re arguing with children when the people during burtons time rolled over into this one.Burtons film was made in a time when things were more cartoony.After a while the joke gets old and you start wanting to see something more serious.Back then it was cool to goof around.Fast forward to now and think about it.Would a guy with billions to his name really be jumping ofc rooftops thinking only about looking good?Same goes for the gadgets and tech.The batcave thing you kinda got me thinking there.Another thing how can you compare one film to a trilogy?Anywaysall thhe movies were good but for THEIR time.
Honestly, save for the overhyped Joker from Dark Knight and the utter and complete mess that was the Dark Knight Rises, I’d say the Burton films and Nolan films are about on par – both have their plus sides and minus sides, yet both fail to capture the quintessential Batman.
THAT was done by the Batman Animated Series. It blended the cinematography of Burtons films, ie, Art Decco Gotham, Danny Elfman score, with the darker themes and edge of the Nolan movies without going overboard like Nolan tends to.
Yet where it excels are the stories and characters. Until we have a live action Batman film that can claim a Joker who balances mania and clownishness like Mark Hammil, tragic villains like Mr. Freeze or the Penguin, and stories that pack as much of a wallop as Heart of Ice or Mask of the Phantasm, we haven’t had a truly great Batman movie yet.
Back to the Burton/Nolan debate, I give it to Burton, but only because of just how bad Dark Knight Rises was. Oddly enough, part of that is that Dark Knight Rises ended up being from Chris Nolan what many feared a third Burton film would be, ie, a project where they give into their worst tendencies, toss out the source material for whatever half-assed story the director wanted to tell, and the end product is shamefully bad. Burton wanted to give us Batman Triumphant – Nolan gave us the Heaven’s Gate of Comic Book movies when he made Dark Knight Rises.
I know this artical is old but I just watch Tim Burton’s Batman and B-Man Returns and probably like many others own all of them. Comparing the two by suite and graphics is stupid. That’s like comparing a 89 BMW to a 2012 BMW. Looking back you can tell Tims were made 20 years ago which is fine. The only thing I can point out is Batman’s voice is the Nolan’s is funny and Michael K. lacks the body structure. Returns Michael K. plays a far better Wayne then he did in the first one as did Christian B. in Dark Knight. I’d say that Tim’s and Nolan’s did great justice to Batman period. All are worth owning on Blu Ray. But they should gather every copy of Forever and B-Man and Robin and burn them. To even have the argument of comparing the two is as pointless to new cars and early 90′s classics just plain stupid. Enjoy the great movies and quit comparing suits because like I read up top for 15 reasons why one is better it can go the other way as well. We need to get Mask of the Phantasim on Blu Ray that’s one thing I hope we can agree on.
DAmn dude, you just hated Nolan cuz you wanted to. The Bat suit, the batmobile and batwing are by far better in Burtons film than in Nolans, your right about that ones. But on the other reasons, I guess it’s just a matter of perspective and personal opinions of a viewer.
Both movies have great casts, theme songs, action sequences, and many memorable elements that its not a matter of which is better, its a matter of which is your favorite.
Besides, you hate on the fact that in Begins with Bruce’s training in the league of shadows, but you don’t hate on the fact that in Batman, Alfred allows Vicky Vale to enter the Bat Cave (blowing Batman’s identity) or the fact that it was the Joker who killed Bruce’s parents (you only saw that in the movie, because in the comics it never happened). Like i said earlier, you hated cuz you just wanted to.
at the end of the day, times change, and change should be welcome. As much as I loved Burton’s Batman, I also enjoyed Nolan’s visions. The same goes with comic books writers, from Bob Kane to Frank Miller, from McFarlane to Snyder, all of them different visions of one character and as a reader, you decide which is your favorite.
I every time used to study article in news papers but now as I am a user of web so from now I am using net for posts, thanks to web.
Yeah i have a few reasons the Burton movies suck
1. Batman does not kill people in batman returns he straps a bomb to a guys chest and sets a guy on fire
2.Batman does not have nipples on his costume: that’s just dumb
3. Michael Keaton looks nothing like Batman
4. Commissioner Gordon is a major part of the batman universe and in his movies he appears for like ten minutes and barely talks with Batman
5.the joker did not kill Batman’s Parents that seemed like it was a completely forced plot twist