“凄いうえに、凄いらしい。”
DCコミックスの誇るスーパー・ヒーローを巨費を投じて映画化した大作。ゴッサム・シティの闇に跳梁し悪を粉砕するバットマンと犯罪組織の新ボス・ジョーカーとの戦い。単純明解な娯楽編にはせずにひねった作品を目指していたのか、バットマンの誕生の秘密やジョーカーの設定などかなり暗めで、マニアックな仕上がりになっている。ニコルソン怪演。
映画化された原作や関連書籍を読んで、映像との違いや独自の世界観を楽しみましょう。
製作費: $35,000,000 (53億円)
興行収入: $411,348,924 (617億円)
推定収支: $376,348,924 (565億円)
※製作費・興行収入はTMDBのデータを参照しています。収支は(興行収入 - 製作費)で算出したFindKey独自の推定値であり、広告宣伝費や諸経費は含まれません (1ドル=150円換算)。
FindKeyのエディトリアルチームがこの作品の深層や歴史を解説しています。
監督: ティム・バートン
脚本: ボブ・ケーン / Warren Skaaren / Sam Hamm
音楽: ダニー・エルフマン
制作: Peter Guber / Jon Peters / Michael Uslan
撮影監督: ロジャー・プラット
制作会社: Warner Bros. Pictures / Polygram Pictures / The Guber-Peters Company
Vision not fully realised, but still a template of sorts. It could never have lived up to the hype back in 1989, it was hailed as the film to rival the impact of "Jaws" & "Star Wars" as regards historical cinema conventions, it was, we were led to believe, a new age in cinema, or so it seemed. As it was, the film went down a treat for the modern cinema going audience, it raked in cash galore and spawned a raft of very inferior sequels, even though ultimately critics of the time were less than impressed. So it makes for something of an interesting experience viewing it again as each decade passes. More so in light of Christopher Nolan's bank busting "Dark Knight" series of films. I remember the hype and marketing campaign (T-Shirts and toys bonanza) that ensured that the film could never live up to the gargantuan hype, and I'm honest enough to say that I was a little underwhelmed on first viewing. Yet time has been very kind to it, now showing that Burton had the nous and foresight to reignite a genre without going purely for kiddie like appeasements. Visually the film still stands up with the best that today's genre pieces can offer, the sets are incredible, with Anton Furst rightly winning the big award for his work here, whilst Burton's dark and deep tone captures the essence of Gotham City and Bruce Wayne's troubled mind perfectly, but does the cast fully realise the potential on offer?. Michael Keaton as the troubled and vengeful Bruce Wayne, is a fine actor and it would only be in time where his take on Wayne the man would be appreciated, as the caped crusader he is outstanding and he set the bar high for all those that followed him. Jack Nicholson has the time of his life camping it up as The Joker, and he steals the film for sure. This is not because he is acting with great poise and class, but purely because in a film calling for the battle of two unhinged characters, he is the one awash in colour and overacting the maniacal side of the character to the max. Kim Basinger looks great but doesn't have to do much as Vicki Vale except say her lines right, pout, look scared when required and scream with conviction, and she does all of these. But really any other actress could have done the same thing - though I'm personally relieved that Sean Young dropped out of the film and thus allowed some other actress to step in. The supporting cast do OK, and the soundtrack by Prince pushes the boundaries of annoying caricature indulgence. Ultimately it's a fun ride, respectful of the source material and giving the comic book genre of fil a shot in the arm. Yet you can't help feeling that there is some great Burton vision here that never got fully realised. And that is a damn shame, and something that Burton himself would come to admit down the line. 8/10
This movie is so bad I couldn't even finish it.
Yeah, it's good.
_**Looks good, but surreal and tedious**_ Tim Burton's "Batman" (1989) is _so_ disappointing! Yeah, the costumes, sets, cast, cinematography and music are great, but the story is unrealistic, goofy and, worst of all, dull; in other words, it siphoned! Tim Burton is outstanding with visuals, but he failed to incorporate an interesting story. What good is a BORING film that looks great and doesn't take its subject seriously? This is a quintessential example of style over substance. Most of the high ratings are from people who saw it when they were kids and they're just nostalgic. If they viewed the film objectively as an adult, with respect to the true Batman of the silver/bronze/modern age of comics, they'd have to admit that it's not a good interpretation. Sure, it could be accepted as a sort of an ALTERNATIVE Batman; a friend of mine who's in the comic business said this was the only way he could appreciate it. But if you want to see a serious Batman flick, true to the legend of the Dark Knight, catch "Batman Begins" (2005) and its sequels, they blow this overrated soporific dud out of the water. The movie's overlong at 2 hours, 6 minutes. GRADE: C
**Batman 1989 burst on the scene shattering the box office and rewriting the rules of comic book films with dark characters and high stakes in ways no superhero movie had seen before.** Superhero movies of the 70s and 80s were bright and colorful, goofy and optimistic, champions of truth, Justice, and the American Way. Movies like Superman, Supergirl, the original Captain America, and even Adam West’s Batman all fit this vibe and aesthetic, with many overly campy but charming. This made Tim Burton’s darker, more violent Batman a huge gamble. Warner Bros literally sank every last penny they had into the movie as the studio was collapsing and going out of business. A dark superhero film with murder and blood? Michael Keaton? Mr. Mom himself as Batman? It was a massive risk with a tremendous payoff! Warner Bros survived and thrived off the enormous box office profits, and Batman reinvented the superhero genre showing that adults could enjoy superhero movies too. Even though Batman 1989 is a little dated and campy now, it broke every mold when it was released. Michael Keaton proved himself as the incredible star and bankable actor that he is. Jack Nicholson’s Joker stood as the iconic standard for villains for decades. Kim Basinger’s Vicki Vale is still one of the best Batman love interests to date. Tim Burton saved superheroes and movie studios with this dark reinvention of the comic book genre. It’s a true superhero classic.
