Superman Returns

[Shallow]

i thought Returns could've been better. i'm more a fan of the evil scientist/genius Lex Luthor rather than the Gene Hackman style with the Henchmen etc. I also thought Brandon Routh was trying to be too much like Christopher Reeve, but that's just me.

i think Batman Begins has been the best comic based movie ever, with x-men 3 coming in 2nd, but overall I prefer the Marvel movies (xmen, spiderman, fantastic four etc) to the DC movies

I think Superman Returns could have been a lot better. My calling it one of the best is more an insult to the rest of the movies. I just think it done better than the Marvel ones. I didn't like either Spiderman and hated X2 and X3. The B-Marvel movies were all atrocious so they don't even count (Hulk, Daredevil, F4). The Marvel movies just don't have the right feel. To me at least Superman got the feel right. The original was great but Hackman was ring for Luthor I agree. Why they didn't use Telly Savalas is beyond me. He was the perfect Luthor and was even used as inspiration for the animated series Luthor (the best one in Hollywood). The suave, smart, scientific and super rich tycoon type is what Luthor should be. Like an older, evil, Bruce Wayne.

[Now_Im_Not_Banned]

That's all nostalgia man. You guys were kids when you first saw Batman and Batman Returns and that's how you invisioned Batman to be. I was a fan of the Frank Miller Batman and the Alan Moore Batman before I had ever seen the films so in my case I thought the films were terrible on first watch (even at a young age). They aren't Batman movies. They are Tim Burton movies and Batman just happens to be in them. Joker isn't Joker. It's Jack Nicholson with face paint, and Jack is amazing but he's not Joker. Not in that movie. Returns was just stupid goofy. I'll never quite understand how grown adults can rewatch the Burton Batman films and truthfully think they are better. Begins made it possible to think it could be even a bit real. It explained everything properly and took it so seriously and it's a movie about a man in a bat suit fighting crime. The first two just took that goofy concept and kept it goofy. I'm surprised Adam West didn't have a cameo.

Okay, Dr. Phil...I like the Batman movies because I'm a fan of film, I don't care if it lives up to the comics or has any continuity errors, Tim Burton did an amazing job directing those films and I believe the cast couldn't have been better...I also love the dark atmosphere and vibe the films give you. "Superman", to me, is a lot cheesier and more childish...Not saying it can't be an enjoyable pop-corn flick, I'm just saying I like the "Batman" film franchise much more than anything "Superman" related...PeACe

[Javier]

Batman Begins was darker than than any of the Batman films Burton made. 

[Shallow]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


Exactly.

That's all nostalgia man. You guys were kids when you first saw Batman and Batman Returns and that's how you invisioned Batman to be. I was a fan of the Frank Miller Batman and the Alan Moore Batman before I had ever seen the films so in my case I thought the films were terrible on first watch (even at a young age). They aren't Batman movies. They are Tim Burton movies and Batman just happens to be in them. Joker isn't Joker. It's Jack Nicholson with face paint, and Jack is amazing but he's not Joker. Not in that movie. Returns was just stupid goofy. I'll never quite understand how grown adults can rewatch the Burton Batman films and truthfully think they are better. Begins made it possible to think it could be even a bit real. It explained everything properly and took it so seriously and it's a movie about a man in a bat suit fighting crime. The first two just took that goofy concept and kept it goofy. I'm surprised Adam West didn't have a cameo.

Okay, Dr. Phil...I like the Batman movies because I'm a fan of film, I don't care if it lives up to the comics or has any continuity errors, Tim Burton did an amazing job directing those films and I believe the cast couldn't have been better...I also love the dark atmosphere and vibe the films give you. "Superman", to me, is a lot cheesier and more childish...Not saying it can't be an enjoyable pop-corn flick, I'm just saying I like the "Batman" film franchise much more than anything "Superman" related...PeACe

Continuity to the comic books aside, I truthfully fel the Burton movies were just campy, goofy, movies and if they were treated as such I wouldn't have a problem but people talk about them as serious dark movies that changed Batman forever. It was Beetlejuice in the form of Batman. The whole thing just looked so bad, particularly Batman Retuns. Begins gave us a reason or every stupid looking thing about Batman and it played it straight. You can prefer whatever you want but my distaste for the Burton films would still be there even with out my knowledge of the comics or Begins. I just think it's goofy.

[Now_Im_Not_Banned]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


Exactly.

That's all nostalgia man. You guys were kids when you first saw Batman and Batman Returns and that's how you invisioned Batman to be. I was a fan of the Frank Miller Batman and the Alan Moore Batman before I had ever seen the films so in my case I thought the films were terrible on first watch (even at a young age). They aren't Batman movies. They are Tim Burton movies and Batman just happens to be in them. Joker isn't Joker. It's Jack Nicholson with face paint, and Jack is amazing but he's not Joker. Not in that movie. Returns was just stupid goofy. I'll never quite understand how grown adults can rewatch the Burton Batman films and truthfully think they are better. Begins made it possible to think it could be even a bit real. It explained everything properly and took it so seriously and it's a movie about a man in a bat suit fighting crime. The first two just took that goofy concept and kept it goofy. I'm surprised Adam West didn't have a cameo.

Okay, Dr. Phil...I like the Batman movies because I'm a fan of film, I don't care if it lives up to the comics or has any continuity errors, Tim Burton did an amazing job directing those films and I believe the cast couldn't have been better...I also love the dark atmosphere and vibe the films give you. "Superman", to me, is a lot cheesier and more childish...Not saying it can't be an enjoyable pop-corn flick, I'm just saying I like the "Batman" film franchise much more than anything "Superman" related...PeACe

Continuity to the comic books aside, I truthfully fel the Burton movies were just campy, goofy, movies and if they were treated as such I wouldn't have a problem but people talk about them as serious dark movies that changed Batman forever. It was Beetlejuice in the form of Batman. The whole thing just looked so bad, particularly Batman Retuns. Begins gave us a reason or every stupid looking thing about Batman and it played it straight. You can prefer whatever you want but my distaste for the Burton films would still be there even with out my knowledge of the comics or Begins. I just think it's goofy.

You can never get the same sinister vibe from "Batman Begins" as you can get from a Tim Burton directed film...You wouldn't understand this, because you seem to be bigger on comics than you are on film. Tim Burton has an amazing unique style and I love both of the first two "Batman" movies. It's not supposed to be serious, but they make it what it is... a fantasy. "Batman Begins" was good, but it didn't give you that same cinematic feeling, it's closer to just reading the comics, and at times, it took itself too seriously, almost like they wanted you to feel like you were watching "The Pianast" or something...The modern-day "Superman" looks 10 times more camp than Tim Burton's classic "Batman's". It's all a matter of opinion, I guess. I just prefer Batman... Batman is self-made...PeACe

[Shallow]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


Exactly.

That's all nostalgia man. You guys were kids when you first saw Batman and Batman Returns and that's how you invisioned Batman to be. I was a fan of the Frank Miller Batman and the Alan Moore Batman before I had ever seen the films so in my case I thought the films were terrible on first watch (even at a young age). They aren't Batman movies. They are Tim Burton movies and Batman just happens to be in them. Joker isn't Joker. It's Jack Nicholson with face paint, and Jack is amazing but he's not Joker. Not in that movie. Returns was just stupid goofy. I'll never quite understand how grown adults can rewatch the Burton Batman films and truthfully think they are better. Begins made it possible to think it could be even a bit real. It explained everything properly and took it so seriously and it's a movie about a man in a bat suit fighting crime. The first two just took that goofy concept and kept it goofy. I'm surprised Adam West didn't have a cameo.

Okay, Dr. Phil...I like the Batman movies because I'm a fan of film, I don't care if it lives up to the comics or has any continuity errors, Tim Burton did an amazing job directing those films and I believe the cast couldn't have been better...I also love the dark atmosphere and vibe the films give you. "Superman", to me, is a lot cheesier and more childish...Not saying it can't be an enjoyable pop-corn flick, I'm just saying I like the "Batman" film franchise much more than anything "Superman" related...PeACe

Continuity to the comic books aside, I truthfully fel the Burton movies were just campy, goofy, movies and if they were treated as such I wouldn't have a problem but people talk about them as serious dark movies that changed Batman forever. It was Beetlejuice in the form of Batman. The whole thing just looked so bad, particularly Batman Retuns. Begins gave us a reason or every stupid looking thing about Batman and it played it straight. You can prefer whatever you want but my distaste for the Burton films would still be there even with out my knowledge of the comics or Begins. I just think it's goofy.

You can never get the same sinister vibe from "Batman Begins" as you can get from a Tim Burton directed film...You wouldn't understand this, because you seem to be bigger on comics than you are on film. Tim Burton has an amazing unique style and I love both of the first two "Batman" movies. It's not supposed to be serious, but they make it what it is... a fantasy. "Batman Begins" was good, but it didn't give you that same cinematic feeling, it's closer to just reading the comics, and at times, it took itself too seriously, almost like they wanted you to feel like you were watching "The Pianast" or something...The modern-day "Superman" looks 10 times more camp than Tim Burton's classic "Batman's". It's all a matter of opinion, I guess. I just prefer Batman... Batman is self-made...PeACe

I'm certainly as big on cinema as I am on comics and probably more so. Like I said, Batman is Beetlejuice and Tim Burton isn't getting confused for Stanley Kubrick any time soon. The film just seemed too silly and stupid and it is rewarded for being dark when it's not even close even for science fiction. Blade Runner was dark. Terminater 1 was dark. Batman was a cartoon brought to live action and it wasn't the first or best version of it. Burton doesn't have any oscars for good reason. His movies are just plain and simple goofy and try and pretend to be deeper when they aren't, kind of like Tarantino. I really liked Edward S Hands for what it was and it was done perfectly for the kind of movie it was supposed to be. Batman wasn't supposed to be that kind of movie and it ended up being a lot like that. I know about fantasy, like Lord of the Rings or Space Oddysey. Batman just isn't one of those films. It was a great money maker and a perfect children's Batman movie but that's about it. I don't see anything amazing about the cinematography, acting style, or pacing. It's a straight forward film with straight forward shots if you take the script out of and look at it from a visual point of view. I admire the sets, they aren't Batman, but they are still good in both movies. Blade Runner set the tone for the 80s sci-fi fantasy movies and Batman is just one of the rip offs, from a visual stand point.

[Now_Im_Not_Banned]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


Exactly.

That's all nostalgia man. You guys were kids when you first saw Batman and Batman Returns and that's how you invisioned Batman to be. I was a fan of the Frank Miller Batman and the Alan Moore Batman before I had ever seen the films so in my case I thought the films were terrible on first watch (even at a young age). They aren't Batman movies. They are Tim Burton movies and Batman just happens to be in them. Joker isn't Joker. It's Jack Nicholson with face paint, and Jack is amazing but he's not Joker. Not in that movie. Returns was just stupid goofy. I'll never quite understand how grown adults can rewatch the Burton Batman films and truthfully think they are better. Begins made it possible to think it could be even a bit real. It explained everything properly and took it so seriously and it's a movie about a man in a bat suit fighting crime. The first two just took that goofy concept and kept it goofy. I'm surprised Adam West didn't have a cameo.

Okay, Dr. Phil...I like the Batman movies because I'm a fan of film, I don't care if it lives up to the comics or has any continuity errors, Tim Burton did an amazing job directing those films and I believe the cast couldn't have been better...I also love the dark atmosphere and vibe the films give you. "Superman", to me, is a lot cheesier and more childish...Not saying it can't be an enjoyable pop-corn flick, I'm just saying I like the "Batman" film franchise much more than anything "Superman" related...PeACe

Continuity to the comic books aside, I truthfully fel the Burton movies were just campy, goofy, movies and if they were treated as such I wouldn't have a problem but people talk about them as serious dark movies that changed Batman forever. It was Beetlejuice in the form of Batman. The whole thing just looked so bad, particularly Batman Retuns. Begins gave us a reason or every stupid looking thing about Batman and it played it straight. You can prefer whatever you want but my distaste for the Burton films would still be there even with out my knowledge of the comics or Begins. I just think it's goofy.

You can never get the same sinister vibe from "Batman Begins" as you can get from a Tim Burton directed film...You wouldn't understand this, because you seem to be bigger on comics than you are on film. Tim Burton has an amazing unique style and I love both of the first two "Batman" movies. It's not supposed to be serious, but they make it what it is... a fantasy. "Batman Begins" was good, but it didn't give you that same cinematic feeling, it's closer to just reading the comics, and at times, it took itself too seriously, almost like they wanted you to feel like you were watching "The Pianast" or something...The modern-day "Superman" looks 10 times more camp than Tim Burton's classic "Batman's". It's all a matter of opinion, I guess. I just prefer Batman... Batman is self-made...PeACe

I'm certainly as big on cinema as I am on comics and probably more so. Like I said, Batman is Beetlejuice and Tim Burton isn't getting confused for Stanley Kubrick any time soon. The film just seemed too silly and stupid and it is rewarded for being dark when it's not even close even for science fiction. Blade Runner was dark. Terminater 1 was dark. Batman was a cartoon brought to live action and it wasn't the first or best version of it. Burton doesn't have any oscars for good reason. His movies are just plain and simple goofy and try and pretend to be deeper when they aren't, kind of like Tarantino. I really liked Edward S Hands for what it was and it was done perfectly for the kind of movie it was supposed to be. Batman wasn't supposed to be that kind of movie and it ended up being a lot like that. I know about fantasy, like Lord of the Rings or Space Oddysey. Batman just isn't one of those films. It was a great money maker and a perfect children's Batman movie but that's about it. I don't see anything amazing about the cinematography, acting style, or pacing. It's a straight forward film with straight forward shots if you take the script out of and look at it from a visual point of view. I admire the sets, they aren't Batman, but they are still good in both movies. Blade Runner set the tone for the 80s sci-fi fantasy movies and Batman is just one of the rip offs, from a visual stand point.

We simply have 2 different opinions...One thing though, is that a comic film is SUPPOSED to be like a cartoon made into live action. That's the vibe Tim Burton actually went for, after all, what are comics? But it's cartoonishly dark, a sinister live-action comic with dark imagery and a perfect score, I dunno how you don't see it? Tim Burton is a great director, Kubrick owns him, but I dunno where that came from. I also don't see how they were children movies, they were some pretty hard PG-13 flicks for those days and were actually a lot more violent than the next few installments. I guess to each his own though...PeACe

[Shallow]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


Exactly.

That's all nostalgia man. You guys were kids when you first saw Batman and Batman Returns and that's how you invisioned Batman to be. I was a fan of the Frank Miller Batman and the Alan Moore Batman before I had ever seen the films so in my case I thought the films were terrible on first watch (even at a young age). They aren't Batman movies. They are Tim Burton movies and Batman just happens to be in them. Joker isn't Joker. It's Jack Nicholson with face paint, and Jack is amazing but he's not Joker. Not in that movie. Returns was just stupid goofy. I'll never quite understand how grown adults can rewatch the Burton Batman films and truthfully think they are better. Begins made it possible to think it could be even a bit real. It explained everything properly and took it so seriously and it's a movie about a man in a bat suit fighting crime. The first two just took that goofy concept and kept it goofy. I'm surprised Adam West didn't have a cameo.

Okay, Dr. Phil...I like the Batman movies because I'm a fan of film, I don't care if it lives up to the comics or has any continuity errors, Tim Burton did an amazing job directing those films and I believe the cast couldn't have been better...I also love the dark atmosphere and vibe the films give you. "Superman", to me, is a lot cheesier and more childish...Not saying it can't be an enjoyable pop-corn flick, I'm just saying I like the "Batman" film franchise much more than anything "Superman" related...PeACe

Continuity to the comic books aside, I truthfully fel the Burton movies were just campy, goofy, movies and if they were treated as such I wouldn't have a problem but people talk about them as serious dark movies that changed Batman forever. It was Beetlejuice in the form of Batman. The whole thing just looked so bad, particularly Batman Retuns. Begins gave us a reason or every stupid looking thing about Batman and it played it straight. You can prefer whatever you want but my distaste for the Burton films would still be there even with out my knowledge of the comics or Begins. I just think it's goofy.

You can never get the same sinister vibe from "Batman Begins" as you can get from a Tim Burton directed film...You wouldn't understand this, because you seem to be bigger on comics than you are on film. Tim Burton has an amazing unique style and I love both of the first two "Batman" movies. It's not supposed to be serious, but they make it what it is... a fantasy. "Batman Begins" was good, but it didn't give you that same cinematic feeling, it's closer to just reading the comics, and at times, it took itself too seriously, almost like they wanted you to feel like you were watching "The Pianast" or something...The modern-day "Superman" looks 10 times more camp than Tim Burton's classic "Batman's". It's all a matter of opinion, I guess. I just prefer Batman... Batman is self-made...PeACe

I'm certainly as big on cinema as I am on comics and probably more so. Like I said, Batman is Beetlejuice and Tim Burton isn't getting confused for Stanley Kubrick any time soon. The film just seemed too silly and stupid and it is rewarded for being dark when it's not even close even for science fiction. Blade Runner was dark. Terminater 1 was dark. Batman was a cartoon brought to live action and it wasn't the first or best version of it. Burton doesn't have any oscars for good reason. His movies are just plain and simple goofy and try and pretend to be deeper when they aren't, kind of like Tarantino. I really liked Edward S Hands for what it was and it was done perfectly for the kind of movie it was supposed to be. Batman wasn't supposed to be that kind of movie and it ended up being a lot like that. I know about fantasy, like Lord of the Rings or Space Oddysey. Batman just isn't one of those films. It was a great money maker and a perfect children's Batman movie but that's about it. I don't see anything amazing about the cinematography, acting style, or pacing. It's a straight forward film with straight forward shots if you take the script out of and look at it from a visual point of view. I admire the sets, they aren't Batman, but they are still good in both movies. Blade Runner set the tone for the 80s sci-fi fantasy movies and Batman is just one of the rip offs, from a visual stand point.

We simply have 2 different opinions...One thing though, is that a comic film is SUPPOSED to be like a cartoon made into live action. That's the vibe Tim Burton actually went for, after all, what are comics? But it's cartoonishly dark, a sinister live-action comic with dark imagery and a perfect score, I dunno how you don't see it? Tim Burton is a great director, Kubrick owns him, but I dunno where that came from. I also don't see how they were children movies, they were some pretty hard PG-13 flicks for those days and were actually a lot more violent than the next few installments. I guess to each his own though...PeACe

I'll agree on the music. The first theme was way better than the new one. I brought up Kubrick to show what a weird looking sinister film is supposed to look like. Sin City was cartoonishly dark. Batman was a cartoon. It was childish and juvenile in so many ways and so much was wasted on "wouldn't this be cool" moments that made no sense. Why are comic book movies supposed to be cartoons. Just because they are drawn on paper doesn't mean they have to be like saturday morning shows with live actors. Let's say I never read the book, or there never was a Batman until Tim Burton created and directed the movie. I'd still think it was a goofy film for children. Not todlers or infants, but anyone between the ages of 7 and 14. The whole thing just fely like I was watching a circus on film. You may like that, I don't. No one's opinion is better than the other's here. I'll also never understand the 1920s fashion with 2000s technology but oh well. I can look past that, but I don't see anything sinister about the film. I didn't see suggestive evil. I saw goofy imagery and stupid plotlines. Begins wasn't perfect but for it was the best yet. Batman was just a another great Burton pushing the ennvelope kids movie, like Beetlejuice, Nightmare Before Christmas, and Edward Scissor Hands. It did not change Batman (like it gets praised for) and it was not award winning material (and it didn't win any).

[Now_Im_Not_Banned]

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^


Exactly.

That's all nostalgia man. You guys were kids when you first saw Batman and Batman Returns and that's how you invisioned Batman to be. I was a fan of the Frank Miller Batman and the Alan Moore Batman before I had ever seen the films so in my case I thought the films were terrible on first watch (even at a young age). They aren't Batman movies. They are Tim Burton movies and Batman just happens to be in them. Joker isn't Joker. It's Jack Nicholson with face paint, and Jack is amazing but he's not Joker. Not in that movie. Returns was just stupid goofy. I'll never quite understand how grown adults can rewatch the Burton Batman films and truthfully think they are better. Begins made it possible to think it could be even a bit real. It explained everything properly and took it so seriously and it's a movie about a man in a bat suit fighting crime. The first two just took that goofy concept and kept it goofy. I'm surprised Adam West didn't have a cameo.

Okay, Dr. Phil...I like the Batman movies because I'm a fan of film, I don't care if it lives up to the comics or has any continuity errors, Tim Burton did an amazing job directing those films and I believe the cast couldn't have been better...I also love the dark atmosphere and vibe the films give you. "Superman", to me, is a lot cheesier and more childish...Not saying it can't be an enjoyable pop-corn flick, I'm just saying I like the "Batman" film franchise much more than anything "Superman" related...PeACe

Continuity to the comic books aside, I truthfully fel the Burton movies were just campy, goofy, movies and if they were treated as such I wouldn't have a problem but people talk about them as serious dark movies that changed Batman forever. It was Beetlejuice in the form of Batman. The whole thing just looked so bad, particularly Batman Retuns. Begins gave us a reason or every stupid looking thing about Batman and it played it straight. You can prefer whatever you want but my distaste for the Burton films would still be there even with out my knowledge of the comics or Begins. I just think it's goofy.

You can never get the same sinister vibe from "Batman Begins" as you can get from a Tim Burton directed film...You wouldn't understand this, because you seem to be bigger on comics than you are on film. Tim Burton has an amazing unique style and I love both of the first two "Batman" movies. It's not supposed to be serious, but they make it what it is... a fantasy. "Batman Begins" was good, but it didn't give you that same cinematic feeling, it's closer to just reading the comics, and at times, it took itself too seriously, almost like they wanted you to feel like you were watching "The Pianast" or something...The modern-day "Superman" looks 10 times more camp than Tim Burton's classic "Batman's". It's all a matter of opinion, I guess. I just prefer Batman... Batman is self-made...PeACe

I'm certainly as big on cinema as I am on comics and probably more so. Like I said, Batman is Beetlejuice and Tim Burton isn't getting confused for Stanley Kubrick any time soon. The film just seemed too silly and stupid and it is rewarded for being dark when it's not even close even for science fiction. Blade Runner was dark. Terminater 1 was dark. Batman was a cartoon brought to live action and it wasn't the first or best version of it. Burton doesn't have any oscars for good reason. His movies are just plain and simple goofy and try and pretend to be deeper when they aren't, kind of like Tarantino. I really liked Edward S Hands for what it was and it was done perfectly for the kind of movie it was supposed to be. Batman wasn't supposed to be that kind of movie and it ended up being a lot like that. I know about fantasy, like Lord of the Rings or Space Oddysey. Batman just isn't one of those films. It was a great money maker and a perfect children's Batman movie but that's about it. I don't see anything amazing about the cinematography, acting style, or pacing. It's a straight forward film with straight forward shots if you take the script out of and look at it from a visual point of view. I admire the sets, they aren't Batman, but they are still good in both movies. Blade Runner set the tone for the 80s sci-fi fantasy movies and Batman is just one of the rip offs, from a visual stand point.

We simply have 2 different opinions...One thing though, is that a comic film is SUPPOSED to be like a cartoon made into live action. That's the vibe Tim Burton actually went for, after all, what are comics? But it's cartoonishly dark, a sinister live-action comic with dark imagery and a perfect score, I dunno how you don't see it? Tim Burton is a great director, Kubrick owns him, but I dunno where that came from. I also don't see how they were children movies, they were some pretty hard PG-13 flicks for those days and were actually a lot more violent than the next few installments. I guess to each his own though...PeACe

I'll agree on the music. The first theme was way better than the new one. I brought up Kubrick to show what a weird looking sinister film is supposed to look like. Sin City was cartoonishly dark. Batman was a cartoon. It was childish and juvenile in so many ways and so much was wasted on "wouldn't this be cool" moments that made no sense. Why are comic book movies supposed to be cartoons. Just because they are drawn on paper doesn't mean they have to be like saturday morning shows with live actors. Let's say I never read the book, or there never was a Batman until Tim Burton created and directed the movie. I'd still think it was a goofy film for children. Not todlers or infants, but anyone between the ages of 7 and 14. The whole thing just fely like I was watching a circus on film. You may like that, I don't. No one's opinion is better than the other's here. I'll also never understand the 1920s fashion with 2000s technology but oh well. I can look past that, but I don't see anything sinister about the film. I didn't see suggestive evil. I saw goofy imagery and stupid plotlines. Begins wasn't perfect but for it was the best yet. Batman was just a another great Burton pushing the ennvelope kids movie, like Beetlejuice, Nightmare Before Christmas, and Edward Scissor Hands. It did not change Batman (like it gets praised for) and it was not award winning material (and it didn't win any).

You see it a lot different than most the world does...A lot more people see them for dark films rather than simply write them off as "a film for children"...I guess it all comes down to how you see it. I, personally, thought they were done great. Oh, and they were nominated AND won some awards...

BATMAN-
Won
ASCAP Award
Most Performed Songs from Motion Pictures
Prince
For the song "Partyman".
 
Oscar
Best Art Direction-Set Decoration
Anton Furst
Peter Young

BMI Film Award
Music Award
Danny Elfman

Brit Award
Best Soundtrack

Evening Standard British Film Award
Best Technical/Artistic Achievement
Anton Furst

People's Choice Award
Favorite All-Around Motion Picture

Favorite Dramatic Motion Picture

Nominated
Saturn Award
Best Actor
Jack Nicholson

Best Costumes
Bob Ringwood

Best Fantasy Film

Best Make-Up
Paul Engelen
Lynda Armstrong
Nick Dudman

Best Supporting Actress
Kim Basinger

President's Award   
 
BAFTA Award
Best Actor in a Supporting Role
Jack Nicholson

Best Costume Design
Bob Ringwood

Best Make Up Artist
Paul Engelen
Nick Dudman

Best Production Design
Anton Furst

Best Sound
Don Sharpe
Tony Dawe
Bill Rowe

Best Special Effects
Derek Meddings
John Evans

Golden Globe
Best Performance by an Actor in a Motion Picture - Comedy/Musical
Jack Nicholson

Grammy Award
Best Album of Original Instrumental Background Score Written for a Motion Picture or Television
Danny Elfman

Best Song Written Specifically for a Motion Picture or for Television
Prince
For the song "Partyman".
 
Hugo Award
Best Dramatic Presentation

Young Artist Award
Best Family Motion Picture - Musical or Fantasy


BATMAN RETURNS-
Nominated:

Oscar
Best Effects, Visual Effects
Michael L. Fink
Craig Barron
John Bruno
Dennis Skotak

Best Makeup
Ve Neill
Ronnie Specter
Stan Winston

Saturn Award
Best Costumes
Bob Ringwood
Mary E. Vogt
Vin Burnham

Best Director
Tim Burton

Best Fantasy Film

Best Supporting Actor
Danny DeVito

BAFTA Award
Best Make Up Artist
Ve Neill
Stan Winston

Best Special Effects
Michael L. Fink
John Bruno
Craig Barron
Dennis Skotak
 
Hugo Awards
Best Dramatic Presentation
 
MTV Movie Awards
Best Kiss
Michael Keaton
Michelle Pfeiffer

Best Villain
Danny DeVito

Most Desirable Female
Michelle Pfeiffer

Won
BMI Film & TV Awards
Music Award
Danny Elfman

Saturn Award
Best Make-Up
Stan Winston
Ve Neill

[Shallow]

I meant real awards like the Oscars, and awards for Burton, not for special effects. The effects were great.


As for dark, I just don't see it. Watch Blade Runner. That's dark. Watch Rutger Hauer play Roy Batty. That's sinister. Batman uses a lot of dark shots and little light and Jack Nicholson is so transparent as the Joker. Roy Batty is a complex figure with a real human side for such a soul-less role.

[Now_Im_Not_Banned]

I meant real awards like the Oscars, and awards for Burton, not for special effects. The effects were great.


As for dark, I just don't see it. Watch Blade Runner. That's dark. Watch Rutger Hauer play Roy Batty. That's sinister. Batman uses a lot of dark shots and little light and Jack Nicholson is so transparent as the Joker. Roy Batty is a complex figure with a real human side for such a soul-less role.

It won an Oscar...and also, it won awards in areas like "favorite film" as well. But it won a great amount of music awards, which is one of the things that gives those films their dark vibe and it's main feel...It might appeal to you in a different way, but to me it is perfect how it is...PeACe

[Shallow]

I meant real awards like the Oscars, and awards for Burton, not for special effects. The effects were great.


As for dark, I just don't see it. Watch Blade Runner. That's dark. Watch Rutger Hauer play Roy Batty. That's sinister. Batman uses a lot of dark shots and little light and Jack Nicholson is so transparent as the Joker. Roy Batty is a complex figure with a real human side for such a soul-less role.

It won an Oscar...and also, it won awards in areas like "favorite film" as well. But it won a great amount of music awards, which is one of the things that gives those films their dark vibe and it's main feel...It might appeal to you in a different way, but to me it is perfect how it is...PeACe

But the focus of what we are talking about it Burton and his choices with the film. The music was great but Burton had little to do with that, and that didn't make or break the movie with me nor should it anyone, and the Oscar it won was not for the movie or direction. It was for the sets, which I already said were great.

[Now_Im_Not_Banned]

I meant real awards like the Oscars, and awards for Burton, not for special effects. The effects were great.


As for dark, I just don't see it. Watch Blade Runner. That's dark. Watch Rutger Hauer play Roy Batty. That's sinister. Batman uses a lot of dark shots and little light and Jack Nicholson is so transparent as the Joker. Roy Batty is a complex figure with a real human side for such a soul-less role.

It won an Oscar...and also, it won awards in areas like "favorite film" as well. But it won a great amount of music awards, which is one of the things that gives those films their dark vibe and it's main feel...It might appeal to you in a different way, but to me it is perfect how it is...PeACe

But the focus of what we are talking about it Burton and his choices with the film. The music was great but Burton had little to do with that, and that didn't make or break the movie with me nor should it anyone, and the Oscar it won was not for the movie or direction. It was for the sets, which I already said were great.

Is the set not part of what makes the film? Is the music not part of what makes the film? Tim Burton loves to have a lot of creative control over his movies, so I'm sure a good portion of what we see/hear in the film are there because of him, including the music chosen...To me, his choices with the film were great...Everything fit in perfectly like a puzzle, I like Tim Burton a lot...PeACe

[Javier]

Batman Begins is darker than Batman and Batman Returns.  Tim Burton's Gotham was it's own little universe while Nolan's Gotham actually looked like a real metropolis.  Go ahead and like Tim Burton's films more than Batman Begins, that's a matter of taste but accept the fact that Batman Begins is much darker. 

[Shallow]

I don't blame Burton for the poor storyline so I'm not gong to give hikm credit for Danny Elfman's magical theme or Prince's song writing. I will fault Burton for choosing some of the goofy background music during a lot of the scenes. The tubas or whatever they were added to the goofy atmospehere and Burton was in charge of that most likely. I'm certain he had no control over the main theme though. There were 6 producers on this thing to get involved every which way they liked. In the end I'm sticking to my original view point; it was a goofy pair of films that were weird rather than dark or sinister. The characters were weird, the costumes were weird, the sets were weird (I said they were good, not dark or good for Batman), and the music was weird, and all this weirdness made it a goofy movie. Batman fought like a jackass, the villains were charicatures (Bob, the martial arts black guy that seemed to appear in just about every action movie of the 80s), the loive story had no real intesity brought to (Burton did a much better job with Depp and Rider in Edward Scissorhands), the Joker had no real motive for his stupidity and the character was not explained well. The stupid "you killed my father" cliche didn't help. The whole thing was just bad for me.

Batman Begins explained everything in a proper way thaat made it not only believable but you cared for and wanted Wayne to do it. In Batman you were given no reason or explanation for Wayne's foray into crimefighting. If they were horror movies Batman would be Chucky while Begins transcends the genre and is Silence of the Lambs (I don't think it was as good as Lambs. I'm just highlighting how difference it was). Of course some prefer Chucky.