BATMAN
Directed by: Tim Burton
Written by: Sam Hamm, Warren Skaaren
Based on the classic DC Comics character created by Bob Kane
Starring: Michael Keaton, Jack Nicholson, Kim Basinger, Robert Whul, Michael Gough, Pat Hingle, Billy Dee Williams, Jack Palance, Tracey Walter, Jerry Hall
Distributed by Warner Brothers
Film was released on 23rd June 1989
Review by Matt Holmes
Batman is a visual sensation, director Tim Burton’s homage and love letter to the silent horror movies he saw in his youth and with the stunning Academy Award winning Gothic set and production design from the great Anton Furst, Burton’s Gotham is without doubt one of the most distinctive and awe inspiring settings ever created on film.
The script calls it “The City of the Future” but the Gotham depicted in this movie exists in a timeless state with Gothic European architecture, statues that would usually only exist in Greek mythology, enormous and impossible skyscrapers right out of Fritz Lang’s Metropolis and very little pop culture references, clothing or technology that could age the movie. That is except of the course the dating but strangely fitting Prince Soundtrack that accompanies the film, something which Burton had no say in.
Gotham is a depiction of New York if it had gone to hell. Like Blade Runner, it’s a place where buildings have been built without thought of it’s effect on the people who live there.
I’m convinced that if this young and at that time very naive director had the power he would have made Batman a silent picture, accompanied only by Danny Elfman’s memorable orchestral soundtrack. Despite the countless screen re-drafts, he was not interested in coming up with a plot that would satisfy audiences or get to the dramatic core of the characters, he was much more interested in what they represented. Characters gestures rather than their dialogue. The way they moved and looked on film. Batman as the duality of light and the dark, two personalities which Tim Burton could relate himself to easily and the film certainly feels more toward the loner archetype of Batman, who in this film you never get a sense feels all that comfortable as Bruce Wayne.
He would explore the monstrous characters much closer when given less restrictions and supervision from Warner Bros. in Batman Returns but for now they were still Bob Kane’s characters but very much with a Burton edge to them.
Nothing indicates Burton’s idea of suggestion - his imagery and style over substance mentality - more than the last ten minutes of the film as the controversially cast Michael Keaton and Jack Nicholson battle each other on the top of a Bell Tower, a scene straight out of a 30’s silent movie and would work fine… and possibly better with the dialogue on mute, and the score loud and thunderous. Batman moves stiffly, jolted… carrying a faceless expression. He is the archetypal German Expressionistic villain but in Burton’s world the dark white eyed character is the hero.
With much criticism, Nicholson’s visual and “bigger than the movie” representation of the Joker is clearly positioned as the main character, receiving top billing on the poster’s credits (and enjoying far more royalties for the film, still picking up paychecks nearly a decade later with Batman & Robin) and easily enjoying more screentime than the Batman. I woudn’t be surprised if many an audience member decided to cheer for The Joker towards the finale, he seems more enjoyable to be around, not brooding like Bruce Wayne.
Burton’s excuse for the small screentime of Batman was that he believed if the character were to ever exist then he wouldn’t make his presence known and would live in the shadows constantly, he is meant to be an enigma. And you know he probably has a point. The Batman as depicted in Burtons’ two films are easily the most mysterious ever placed on film and only a couple of words in the dialogue would give you any kind of sense of why he does what he does. But I actually think that is a very accurate depiction of the character from the comics and I give kudos to this, but maybe it should have been Bruce Wayne who got more screentime over The Joker.
Keeping Batman a mystery was a plus, but forgetting about Bruce Wayne was not. And no I didn’t believe in the forced love angle between him and Basinger, the pair had no chemistry, which has to be blamed on the scripts poor development which gave them no chance to have the material for a romantic spark.
In Michael Keaton, Tim Burton struck gold with his casting of the lead character. Keaton, with a background for comedy having starred in the pretty lame flicks Mr. Mom, Johnny Dangerously, Gung Ho and actually as a pretty good audition for The Joker in Burton’s Beetlejuice. His casting by many was seen as an outrage. 50,000 letters were sent to Warner Bros. offices worried that the film was going to be yet another hoaky depiction of the character like the Adam West t.v. show of the 60’s and not more like the recent surge in Bat popularity with the works of Frank Miller (Year One, The Dark Knight Returns) and Alan Moore (A Killing Joke). West in fact had lobbied long and hard at WB to be given the part but Burton knew exactly what he was doing with Keaton.
He cast a likeable lead, someone you understood straight away. He was an easy guy to get behind. He wasn’t like Superman, often unsympathetic because of his powers, he was just an ordinary guy but with something in his eyes that suggested something darker beneath them. He had a great vulnerability about him and as Burton has said many times, he was someone who would need to wear a Batman suit for you to be scared of him.
The casting of The Joker was an obvious one. He was always going to be played by Jack Nicholson and he was Bob Kane’s first and only choice for the role. It may have been a shame the Batman movie wasn’t made directly after Stanley Kubrick’s The Shining because at that age and stature, Jack was the walking Joker out of the comics but by the late 80’s Nicholson was such a huge star and was not in the greatest shape anymore. Jack played Jack playing The Joker, instead of just being Jack playing The Joker.
He wasn’t scary, not all that interesting and despite an energetic performance it was a very selfish one. He never gave anything to the other actors in the scenes with him, he was just having a ball. It was an enigmatic performance and it engulfed the film and really slowed it down from going anywhere but it did help make Warner Bros. an unheard of $400 million worldwide in the late 80’s. It would remain the studio’s highest grossing film until they struck gold again over a decade later with the first Harry Potter movie.
Despite Burton’s inventions and the originality that exudes through the film, Batman is something of a disappointment as a satisfying summer blockbuster.
Burton’s “look at me, look at me” style of directing where he just has so much raw energy and can’t seem to calm his movies down (when you see his depiction of Ed Wood, it could easily be a metaphor from himself) at this stage of his career helped the energy of the film but it was also a hindrance. He was very much the kid in the candy store, getting to play with “all those wonderful toys” and it wouldn’t be until Ed Wood or some say even later till Big Fish, that he would become a director who could tell a story past his gorgeous visuals.
I have a lot of time for Tim Burton. He is one of my favourite directors. I’ve always been someone who appreciates visuals, I think it’s my growing up on comic books and video games, I have a great fondness too for silent movies. I like images I can feel and Tim Burton’s Batman was one of the first films I ever remember seeing as a child. It was the first movie I ever bought on VHS (actually it was bought for me).
I got the batcave and a little set of Batman and Robin characters (which I always found strange because Robin wasn’t in the movie!!) and a really cool Burton Batmobile from the film. Yes, I was very young when Batman was released but I loved it and was terrified at it at the same time.
It’s easy to talk down about the movie’s flaws but what I keep coming back to time and time again is Keaton’s wonderful performance, the incredible set design and feeling of a real working Gotham and Tim Burton’s sheer enthusiasm as a director. And even the mystery and aura around the characters. You find out little about them. It’s not a perfect film and is by no means the definite version or even the best Batman film out there but there is something about it that’s memorable and will keep bringing you back time and time again.
This is the second of our long running Spotlight on Tim Burton series. Next up will be Ray DeRousse’s take on possibly Burton’s most fondly remembered film Edward Scissorhands.
You can read Chris Daniels’ article on Beetlejuice by clicking HERE.
Thanks for visiting us at Obsessed With Film, we update several times a day, so if you haven't done so yet you may want to subscribe to our RSS feed. You can also sign up to receive updates via e-mail.
Matt … I dunno. This movie has aged HORRIBLY. The Prince songs in no way fit the film, and their inclusion was a terrible choice. Basinger plays the entire role as if she needs to piss. And, like you said, Nicholson plays the role as Nicholson playing Nicholson playing the Joker. It is, as you said, a very selfish performance.
I thought Keaton made a wonderful Wayne/Batman. At this point, he was just old enough to believe he was a millionaire, yet young enough to kick some ass. He was conflicted, funny, and troubled … in a word, human. Out of all of the actors to play the character, I thought Keaton’s was the best by a hair - I really liked Val Kilmer’s run at the character a few years later. But Clooney?? What a joke.
Danny Elfman really shines in this movie, though.
This BATMAN was one of the first “blockbusters for the sake of blockbusters” type of film; all-star cast, huge production values, and a song-filled soundtrack by a pop star in order to maximize profits. The film was hugely successful because everyone got swept up into the hype, not because it’s a good movie. I personally do not think it’s a good movie, nor is it a particularly good version of the Batman story.
Comment by Ray | March 16, 2008
Shame too because I think George Clooney could have made a terrific Batman under the right circumstances. Those scenes with a terminally ill Alfred in Batman & Robin are a precious jem of what could have been.
Val Kilmer I enjoyed too. They were both victims of bad movies.
To give Basinger her due she was cast in the role with days to go before filming. Poor girl didn’t have a clue what she was doing and she was no worse than Katie Holmes or any of the others who have plagued these kind of flicks.
I think the Prince soundtrack fits in because it just adds to the extra sense of “what the fuck?” in terms of its setting. It helps the idea of Gotham being this very weird alternative universe where pop songs can exist with a 30’s setting.
I think it’s a very entertaining movie if not fully satisfying. It’s inventful, got terrific energy and has a sense of wonder about it.
For the time it was made and the situation Batman was in with a public eye, I think it could have been a lot worse. It’s very easy to look down upon the film now (I’m not saying you are, because you might have liked it then) but I just think for it’s time it was a good movie.
I would love to see Burton have another go at the character at the age he is now. I think he’s a far more assured director and storyteller and when he puts it to use with movies like BIG FISH and SWEENEY TODD he can now create tons of emotion with his characters that he maybe couldn’t before.
Comment by Matt Holmes | March 16, 2008
Even though I think the movie has dated badly its still a Batman movie of quality and I liked the second one too. Keaton I think is good because he is beliable as both Batman and Bruce Wayne. He had a nerdish quality as Wayne and is scary as fuck as Batman. Agree about the Joker very 2D and Basinger was very poor as Vicki Vale. I’m in the camp who thinks that Batman shouldn’t have a love intrest (Begins didn’t really have one) unless it Catwoman or Talia becaue they have a dark side to them like Batman himself. Of the five Batman films released have loved the first two and the last one and hopefully will like the Dark Knight too.
Comment by Chris | March 16, 2008
As a comic-book flick it’s got a lot of artistic merit and there’s a lot of fun on offer, but there are also a lot of flaws. Vicki Vale is disinteresting and I never feel that the duality for which the film is so acclaimed is really emphatic (the recent superhero movies have been a hell of a lot better in dealing with those themes). Burton’s style is superb though and I think if you just go along with the ride then Batman isn’t bad at all. Batman Returns is better; perhaps because Burton had more freedom and perhaps because the Penguin and Catwoman provide more substantial characters and allow for a more captivating plot.
Just another point: I agree with what you say about silent movies and expressionistic style Matt, but I’d also say that the clock tower climax owes a lot to Hitchcock’s Vertigo.
Comment by James Clayton | March 16, 2008
I didn’t see this film until after I was exposed to B:TAS. So, I was expecting it to be like that. It even had the same music. My thought are a mix of how I felt about it as kid and now as an adult.
Anyway, I thought the film was ok. I could buy Keaton as Batman, but I couldn’t buy him as Bruce Wayne. That’s just based on looks. I sill think Kilmer and Clooney were just victims of bad scripts. I friend of mine put it this way…
“Keaton as Batman is fine, but his Bruce Wayne is terrible. He’s a great actor, but he’s just not physically right for Batman is the only thing. If you could have had George Clooney’s Bruce Wayne with Keaton’s attitude and Val’s more heroic spin, it would have been spectacular. Although, I guess that’s what Christian gave us in Begins, so there’s a plus.”
Being exposed to Hamill’s Joker, I hated Jack in the role. It didn’t feel like Joker to me. I had no idea who Jack was at the time, so being the huge celeb he is didn’t register. When I see it now, I can see how it was a pretty uninspired performance for me. Still can’t believe he’s still making money off of it.
I didn’t and still don’t care for Basinger.
Pretty much, I didn’t think there was much to the story. I do appreciate showing how serious Batman is to the general audience. I liked Batman Returns much more.
Comment by Lencho | March 16, 2008