Batman ’89: Does it still hold up 30 years later?

How does Tim Burton’s Batman film hold up 30 years later?

Tim Burton’s Batman or as some call it today in the pantheon of Batman films, Batman ’89 is now thirty years old. No doubt the film is a classic, starting a legacy of Batman films and comic book movies. Push that to the side, does the film still hold up well as its own? Saying that, we cannot consider other Batman films or contemporary comic book movies. In addition, we will not look at comic book accuracy. Simply, does Batman ’89 stand on solid ground as its very own film? The short answer is no, but here is the longer reason.

For a film titled Batman one can say the film hardly follows our lead character much. It is hard to say the film is even about him. Yes, we see Batman within the first few minutes, but he is less of a real character. If anything he is more of a scene or a prop almost. Yet, it is roughly eighteen minutes we meet Bruce Wayne, Batman’s alter-ego in Batman ’89. Prior to this we see a seating assignment for him at event, although vacant. ‘Who is this guy?’ as Knox asks. Again, without looking at the comic books it is hard to say.

We see the party, the fund-raiser, the wine and more. Yes, he is rich but from what? Perhaps he is some CEO or just old money. Hard to say, for the films never says. He makes the excuse of some business trip, which is untrue but given the excuse is false it does not say he is a business person, but just a liar. Outside of super-heroics as Batman who is he? How did he acquire all of this? How did he become Batman? Why is he so rich, influential and sitting as a member of a big town hall meeting on behalf of District Attorney Harvey Dent?

Batman ’89 does not particularly take place in the eighties, which we can see from its set design and style. Instead it comes off as an old 1930s to 1940’s pulpy, gangster film. Nonetheless, in the eighties being rich meant someone was a celebrity. They were simply famous, because they were rich. Still, this does not give valid reasoning for the character or lack of character of Bruce Wayne.

Later on we learn of the death of Bruce Wayne’s parents and that this leads him down the path to becoming Batman. Bruce tells Vicki he does not know what to think of this life, but that it is something he has to do. ‘Why’ as Vicki asks, because no one else can or so he responds. He might as well say because reasons. This is lazy writing at its finest. Bruce Wayne is simply Batman, the hero because the script demands it. We see this man with pent-up anger and emotion in this man. More and more today it is becoming the norm and okay for men to share how they are feeling.

More from Batman

• Batman: All 7 Batcycles ranked from worst to best
• Batman: All 11 Batgirl actresses ranked from worst to best
• All 31 animated Batman movies ranked from worst to best
• Batman may be about to kill The Joker in shocking DC twist
• Batman: Every version of Gotham City ranked from worst to best

One can maybe argue Jack Nicholson’s the Joker is the saving grace of this film. Anytime he is on the screen he is stealing the show! Prior to this film we hardly have a villain this lively and with a dark sense of humor. One problem of the film is his presence. Jack Nicholson does have top billing, meaning he has more screen time than Michael Keaton, the titular title character of Batman. We see what makes The Joker and an all-around origin you can say. Not the same for Michael Keaton’s Bruce Wayne/Batman though. Why not just call the film The Joker?

Adding further to this dilemma is The Joker’s goal or dare-say, lack thereof.  Sure, he wants nothing simple like money or domination. In one scene he states ‘I’m an artist, I make art until someone dies.’ What does that mean exactly?

It is as if this summer blockbuster, action flick is trying to appear as something more. Instead, it really is not. It says it is, but lacks the ability to truly back it up. Kim Basinger’s Vicki Vale even asks what he wants, to which he responds ‘My face on the one dollar bill.’ Simply, The Joker is… crazy? We hear of his violent mood swings from a police profile. Violent mood swings mean homicide in gassing people, destroying art, poisoning people through mysterious means? Hardly, so if anything this is a lazy excuse.

Sure, not going the route of greed or power makes for a more intriguing and original villain. The lack of a goal does not make for a complete villain. Imagine had he gotten his way of completely gassing Gotham at the end, what next? Does he move on to the next town or is he complete now?

If anything the secondary characters in Batman ’89 have more clear goals and motivations. Vicki Vale wants to take pictures and investigate this Batman. Knox, a newspaper writer also wants to investigate the Batman. Commissioner Gordon wants to do his job of keeping law and order, the mayor does the same and so does District Attorney Harvey Dent. These last three are trying to protect the streets in hopes to keep the Gotham City 200th Anniversary Celebration as scheduled.

Kim Basinger’s Vicki Vale is something of a unifying aspect for our hero and villain. She is nothing more but a damsel-in-distress. Our hero Batman is out to save the defenseless dame. The Joker is looking to get the dame because…that’s just what villains do, twirly mustache, train tracks and all. Even by 1989 standards this is somewhat dated!

In more technical aspects the film fails such as its set driven setting. Our first shot of the film is believable in this sprawling metropolis, filled with people. You believe this is a real, breathing city. Later on you never see the sky and always find that old Monarch Theater in the background. It is hard to forget or forgive the bad ADR on Lt. Eckart’s first scene. It is hard to hate Anton Furst’s Batmobile, for he does nothing wrong.

Sadly most of the Batmobile’s scenes have a slow-moving Batmobile, but the film is simply sped up to make the car appear it is driving fast. The action choreography is nothing bad but nothing to write home about. Films of the time and today do better. One can see how this film is also being re-written on a regular basis. For example, where do those goons in the bell tower come from? We only saw The Joker, Vicki Vale and Batman enter the bell tower. Where they always waiting there beforehand? They come off as the few enemies you battle before the end-boss in a video game.

Last but not least is the Prince music. Nothing against Prince, but this is keeping the film cemented into another time. How does Prince equal Batman? Look into it deeply and it is basically because Prince was a Warner Bros. recording artist and helps give the film some pop appeal. Simply, Prince is hot then, therefore this will make the film relevant… for 1989. Plus, this music does not fit well with its 1930’s to 1940’s aesthetic of Gothic architecture.

If you enjoy Batman ’89 still that is fine. No doubt the film is still fun with Jack Nicholson, Anton Furst’s Batmobile and Danny Elfman’s memorable score. One can still have a blast watching this film for pure entertainment. As far as story and character goes, the film is severally lacking. Batman and The Joker do not truly meet until the end. In reality, the film is nothing more but a commercial for comics, toys, a Prince album and a video-game.