Batman (Tim Burton, 1989)
-
hearthesilence
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 8:22 am
- Location: NYC
Re: Batman (Tim Burton, 1989)
It's just tiresome, not unlike this moment which is the kind of thing I've run into way too many times growing up.
-
hearthesilence
- Joined: Fri Mar 04, 2005 8:22 am
- Location: NYC
Re: Batman (Tim Burton, 1989)
I actually caught one of the 70mm screenings at Lincoln Center - again it was advertised as an archival print that hadn't been projected since the film's original run (and as beamish said, if it's true, there must be other prints since there have been 70mm screenings elsewhere in the interim). Print looked beautiful. For the most part, it was in excellent shape with only a few moments that had anything like noticeable scratches. When this movie first came out, supposedly there were complaints that it was too dark, but assuming the grading on this print hasn't deteriorated significantly (and again I had no reason to believe it did), I would not agree with this sentiment - the balance was perfect, so much better than anything I saw as a kid. Obviously they lean heavily on black and dark lighting and this was the first time I've seen it presented so well. The walls of the Batcave resembled coal and the Joker's introductory reveal couldn't have been better - that often looked terrible on home video where Nicholson's make-up was too obvious in the shadows or everything in general was too dark depending on how you adjusted the picture, but this screening completely nailed it. So long story short, this really showed the advantage of a well-preserved print that was originally done completely in analog. Didn't matter that it was a blow-up from a picture shot in 35mm, the texture looked beautiful.
The soundtrack even had a glitch from damage that apparently did not extend to the actual picture frame - sounding like a loud thump and scratch, it was a nice indicator that this was definitely a pre-digital experience. That extended to the film itself, which was made at the height of pre-digital effects with noticeable animation done for visual effects. IIRC computers were already being used for rudimentary tasks, mostly for cost-cutting measures, but rarely as a replacement for actual craftwork.
This was one of the most expensive productions Warner Bros. had ever financed, but you could still see something resembling the limitations on cost. For example, the city looks enormous from a distance (again, as a noticeable painting) but 90% of the action - which involves City Hall, presumably the city's biggest museum, biggest church/cathedral and the movie theater that plays an important role in Bruce Wayne's history - takes place around the same city block. It's like they had the money to go all out on the biggest soundstage they could find, but then had to shoot most of the film on that same soundstage in order to justify the cost.
As mentioned before, I was always stunned how this film was literally being rewritten at the last minute, especially given the cost of the film. As Burton was waiting for the script for the newly written climax to come in, he was stalling for time by having Nicholson continue up those enormous stairs, not wanting Nicholson to realize that he had no idea what was going to happen next. So not surprisingly, so much of the movie feels as thin and slapdash as ever. The physical production is still the most impressive aspect of the movie, but it also feels a little less inspired now with too many elements feeling like obvious lifts (or at best intentional homages) to great films from the past.
Nevertheless, I still prefer this over Christopher Nolan's Batman movies, which too often appear oblivious to how inherently ridiculous Batman really is while patting themselves on the back for their dubious and insipid philosophizing. It's still kind of a tricky balance because it's possible to go too far in the other direction, and Burton clearly had no interest in doing something as self-consciously campy as the '60s TV show. The most memorable parts hit a pretty nice balance, like Nicholson hamming it up (just short of too much) or whenever Batman does something that needlessly tempts death: standing in front of a speeding car that surely will stop inches away from you, or driving that same car through a dark cave to the very edge of a catastrophic drop, etc.
The soundtrack even had a glitch from damage that apparently did not extend to the actual picture frame - sounding like a loud thump and scratch, it was a nice indicator that this was definitely a pre-digital experience. That extended to the film itself, which was made at the height of pre-digital effects with noticeable animation done for visual effects. IIRC computers were already being used for rudimentary tasks, mostly for cost-cutting measures, but rarely as a replacement for actual craftwork.
This was one of the most expensive productions Warner Bros. had ever financed, but you could still see something resembling the limitations on cost. For example, the city looks enormous from a distance (again, as a noticeable painting) but 90% of the action - which involves City Hall, presumably the city's biggest museum, biggest church/cathedral and the movie theater that plays an important role in Bruce Wayne's history - takes place around the same city block. It's like they had the money to go all out on the biggest soundstage they could find, but then had to shoot most of the film on that same soundstage in order to justify the cost.
As mentioned before, I was always stunned how this film was literally being rewritten at the last minute, especially given the cost of the film. As Burton was waiting for the script for the newly written climax to come in, he was stalling for time by having Nicholson continue up those enormous stairs, not wanting Nicholson to realize that he had no idea what was going to happen next. So not surprisingly, so much of the movie feels as thin and slapdash as ever. The physical production is still the most impressive aspect of the movie, but it also feels a little less inspired now with too many elements feeling like obvious lifts (or at best intentional homages) to great films from the past.
Nevertheless, I still prefer this over Christopher Nolan's Batman movies, which too often appear oblivious to how inherently ridiculous Batman really is while patting themselves on the back for their dubious and insipid philosophizing. It's still kind of a tricky balance because it's possible to go too far in the other direction, and Burton clearly had no interest in doing something as self-consciously campy as the '60s TV show. The most memorable parts hit a pretty nice balance, like Nicholson hamming it up (just short of too much) or whenever Batman does something that needlessly tempts death: standing in front of a speeding car that surely will stop inches away from you, or driving that same car through a dark cave to the very edge of a catastrophic drop, etc.