This review focuses on Burton's Batman (Batman89, Batman Returns), Nolan's Batman (Batman Begins, the Dark Knight), and 1992 original Batman: The Animated Series. I'm excluding Schumacher's Batman (Batman Forever, Batman and Robin), the 1960's Batman series, and "The Batman", simply because I believe they are the weakest representations.

To be perfectly honest, I love Burton, Nolan, and BTAS equally. All three interpretations are so different, that they cannot be compared. And it is really annoying that I find people on YouTube trying to see which one is better (most opinions are biased). So here it goes with MY opinions:

BATMAN: Michael Keaton, Kevin Conroy, and Christian Bale have given us excellent performances. Conroy (from BTAS) has the perfect voice for Batman, though the physical depiction seems a bit too much. Bale really acts well as Bruce Wayne, but his voice for Batman is too deep and goofy. To me, Keaton is the ultimate "Bruce". He has the awkwardness and the eccentricity of the character, and plus his hoarse voice for the Bat is far superior to Bale's. It's too bad that he doesn't get that much screen time in both of Burton's films.

VILLAINS: Mr. Freeze, Riddler, Clayface, Mad Hatter, Scarface, Killer Croc, Bane, Baby Doll, Penguin, Clock King, Harley Quinn, Professor Milo, Poison Ivy, and Rupert Thorne appear only on BTAS, and they are marvelous in their own right.

The Scarecrow was better portrayed in BTAS (voice by Henry Polic II) than he was in Begins. Cillian Murphy looked too young as Doctor Crane, and the actual villain was much underused in the film. Two-Face had the scariest appearance in TDK; Aaron Eckhardt was flawless. However, Two-Face in BTAS (Richard Moll) had a much better origin. Years of suppressing anger can do that, you know. Ra's al Ghul is much more interesting in BTAS (David Warner); Liam Neeson's performance in BB was just above average as he wasn't very believable to me. The Penguin, one of my favorite Batman villains, has been blessed with both BReturns and BTAS. Danny Devito and Paul Williams have done superb jobs with this antagonist. Same goes with Catwoman: Michelle Pfeiffer had the better dialogue and better catsuit, while Adrienne Barbeau was a better Selina Kyle, and her chemistry with Batman is deeper.

Finally, for the Joker we have Jack Nicholson (B89), Mark Hamill (BTAS), and Heath Ledger (TDK). All three of them are perfect. Nicholson has the best dialogue, Hamill has the best laugh and look, and Ledger has the best sadism. Three different worlds, three different performances. People on YouTube should understand that.

SUPPORTING CHARACTERS: I couldn't see Michael Caine as Alfred, so it's thumbs down from me. Efrem Zimbalist Jr. and Michael Gough are the ideal Alfred's. Aaron Eckhardt is truly a one-of-a-kind Harvey Dent. I Believe in Harvey Dent! Billy Dee Williams was great in B89, also, and he had the tough and virtuous personality, as did Richard Moll in BTAS. Gary Oldman and Bob Hastings are the definitive Commissioner Gordon's; Pat Hingle is the weakest, but certainly not at all terrible. He's just a bit too short. Morgan Freeman is the one and only Lucius Fox; Brock Peters of BTAS had the better persona, but Freeman had the better chemistry with Batman.

GOTHAM CITY: Burton captured the dark and gothic feel of the hellish city perfectly. It looks as if "Hell came sprouting out of the concrete and kept right on growing. You gotta give credit to Anton Furst, the film's art director, for creating this atmospheric universe. Gotham in BTAS also has its advantages. The towering skyline, the dangerous alleys, and the red sky make it all more mesmerizing. Nolan's Gotham looks hellish, too, but it looks too much like Chicago (filming location for both BB and TDK). But other than that, it succeeds in creating a Faustian nightmare.

EVERYTHING ELSE: The gadgets in BTAS were the most realistic, while the Batmobile for B89 was better-looking. Keaton's Batsuit is classic, while Conroy's cape and cowl is ultimately frightening. The heroines (Basinger, Holmes, and Gyllenhaal) are lovely additions, although I wish Basinger would stop screaming throughout B89. And let's not forget the music: let's give it up for Danny Elfman, Shirley Walker, James Newton Howard, and Hans Zimmer. These are the composers who gave us those catchy Batman themes. We will never forget them or their work.

CONCLUSION: Burton's universe, Nolan's universe, and Timm's universe are near ideal. I love them equally, really. I can't wait for the next film.

I love this movie! Michael Keaton is the best Batman before Batman Begins. But the Joker a.k.a Jack Nicholson steals the show. Hes much better than Ceaser Romeros Joker. The fight scenes are some of the best. My personal favorite is and is proably everyones is Joker vs Batman. The movie could have more fight scenes and the fact that Joker killed Bruces parents in the movie didnt bode will with me because his parents were killed by some nameless crook. But it still is a great movie and I give it 4 out of 5 stars. tommorow Ill be reviewing Batman Returns. And to tell you Im using my moms msn name so call me The Cable Guy.

+ AS A BATMAN STORY
It's simply the worst I've experienced. I've read bad Batman comics, I've seen bad Batman television episodes, but this goes above and beyond that. We have nothing to establish Bruce Wayne as a character, nothing to flesh him out beyond "rich guy, wears Batsuit." While this is essentially a Batman/Joker story operating around the theme "the enemies that made each other," even that works as nothing but a cheap twist. Neither of the characters are fleshed out, making them shells of the iconic characters we've read and watched. While I like when film makers take liberties from the source material, giving the Joker the role that they give him in this movie (in relation to Bruce's past) is ridiculous and, again, is simply a cheap twist that has absolutely no emotional resonance. The actor's performances are passable--though there is nothing close to a spark, or really anything convincingly romantic, between Michael Keaton and Kim Basinger--and even Jack Nicholson doesn't wow in this film. Plus, since when does Batman kill people? Is he the Punisher now? They might as well have gave him a different costume, a different name, and called the film something else, because this bears no resemblance to the real Batman.

+ AS A TIM BURTON FILM
Not only does this movie not live up to the "Batman" name, it also doesn't live up to the rest of Tim Burton's directorial accomplishments. You'd expect this kind of movie from a run-of-the-mill hack director, but from the man who brought us Edward Scissorhands, The Nightmare Before Christmas, and so many other good films? Not so much. Even Burton himself said "there's parts I liked, but it was a little boring at times." When I purchased this, I thought I'd be in for a treat. How can you go wrong with Burton and Batman? Turns out, you can go very, very wrong.

+ AS A MOVIE
The back of the DVD really convinced me to buy this from the used pile. "The best movie of the decade," it boasted. Back then, it was the selling point. Now, I'm shaking my head and chuckling at the audacity and falseness of it. This is simply a bad movie.

1/10

The story of the hero known as Batman is one that many people are familiar with to some degree. As a comic book character created by Bob Kane for DC Comics, Batman has remained one of the most popular heroes throughout the years, and the same can be said, for the most part, for all of his various incarnations in both the comics and other forms of media. In the 1960's the Caped Crusader was adapted into a weekly television series, starring Adam West (Bruce Wayne/Batman) and Burt Ward (Dick Grayson/Robin). The problem with this series, in my opinion, was that it chose to make a comedy out of Batman, everything about this series just screamed camp! I'll admit I have watched some of the episodes, along with the movie that was released around the same time, and for some reason I actually found myself unable to look away. The only conclusion I could come up with was that the series was the equivalent of a train wreck; you know the results are going to be disastrous, yet you can't bring yourself to look away. Sure the series was a hit, but I challenge any fan of the series to go back now, and actually watch it and see if you truly feel that it did any sort of justice to the character of Batman. Anyway, I digress, the series eventually ended; however, that would not be the end of Batman's life on television. He would later appear in animated form on the kid-friendly "Super Friends" show, which was basically the Justice League superhero team without the name. After a few seasons on the air, "Super Friends" ended, and once again Batman was left to only appear in the comics.

Then in 1989, Warner Brothers released what would become the first of four feature films that would comprise the original Batman film franchise. In this incarnation the character appeared to be getting the treatment he rightfully deserved, gone was the camp and stupidity of the 1960's, and in was a darker, brooding, and vengeful billionaire version of Bruce Wayne who prowls the rooftops of Gotham City in the guise of Batman

"Batman" focuses on the Batman's (Michael Keaton) initial appearances in and around Gotham City, stopping crime whenever and wherever he finds it. For many, he is nothing more than a myth supposedly lurking in the shadows, created in an effort to deter the criminal element that plagues the city. However, when a maniacal menace by the name of Joker (Jack Nicholson) begins terrorizing Gotham, Batman is forced to come out from the shadows to confront this madman before his city is plunged into madness.

After the popularity of the 60's TV series, Tim Burton's dark vision of Batman was exactly what was needed to turn the Dark Knight back into the vengeful hero he was meant to be. Burton was wise enough to create a version of Batman that was dramatically strong, yet remained true enough to the hero's legendary origins, while still adding a few tweaks for artistic license, that he was able to present a movie that would please the fanboys (and girls), and also gain great critical acclaim and commercial success. The approach of the story was different from most superhero movies of today, because here Bruce Wayne has already become Batman, and we are given his origin through a series of flashbacks. Taking the place of the traditional hero origin was the origin of the film's villain, the Joker. Generally in superhero films both origins tend to be presented simultaneously, or at least in quick succession of each other; however, the change to that method worked out well, and I believe the film's success when it was released, and its continued popularity today, is partially due to that somewhat unconventional approach to the storytelling. The overall story in "Batman" was very well-paced, and generally balanced in regards to the main characters. I did feel that at times perhaps Joker was getting way too much focus, and that Batman/Bruce Wayne was getting pushed aside a bit (this was possibly due to Jack Nicholson's much broader appeal and star power over that of Michael Keaton). Vicki Vale was fleshed out a little in the story, although she never manages to become much more than the token girlfriend for Bruce Wayne in this movie, not that this is all that surprising. The action worked well within the film, never feeling forced into the proceedings to provide the obligatory fight sequences for a comic book or action movie. Basically, all of the story elements within "Batman" worked perfectly with each other to create a very entertaining movie, and beloved comic book adaptation, and at the time, it could have been viewed as a "How To" guide for making a successful superhero movie.

The cast was led by Michael Keaton, who was a source of much contention amongst fans at the time of his casting; because at that time all he had really been known for were comedic roles, and his most recent had been the title role in Tim Burton's "Beetlejuice". However, once trailers for the movie started appearing on TV and in movie theaters, and then the eventual release of the movie, the fans soon began supporting Michael's portrayal, and to this day he still remains the fan favorite for many Bat-fans. Michael brought a very serious minded approach to the character of Bruce Wayne, playing him as being somewhat uncomfortable in his billionaire role, and much more at ease in the part of Batman. He also was the first to give the two characters very distinct voices to differentiate from one another, a choice that has stuck with the character throughout all of his movie incarnations since then (well, except for "Batman & Robin", George Clooney never left `George Clooney' mode). Jack Nicholson ("The Bucket List") was the perfect choice for Joker, and at the time was the iconic version of the character that all other versions would be judged by; however, the late Heath Ledger has dethroned Nicholson with his recent portrayal of a much more menacing version of Joker in Christopher Nolan's "The Dark Knight". Jack brought a dark sense of humor and violent disposition to the character, aspects of the Joker that hadn't been seen before except in the comic books, mixed with a little bit of wackiness, although not so much that it became cartoonish or distracting from the movie or his performance. Rounding out the main cast was Kim Basinger ("Cellular") as Vicki Vale, her character as I stated earlier, was essentially nothing more than eye candy and a love interest for Bruce Wayne. There were a few moments where Kim was surprisingly given some important scenes in the script, therefore adding some depth to her character and her relationship with Bruce, but otherwise she was nothing more than the damsel-in-distress for the hero to save.

In the end, "Batman" was, and still is, an excellent superhero film adaptation, and at the time was responsible for resurrecting the seemingly dead comic book genre after the one-two punch of "Superman 3" and "Superman 4: The Quest for Peace" had killed it off. Boasting a very solid story that was approached seriously by all the cast and crew working on the film, Tim Burton's "Batman" was the perfect weapon for successfully destroying the public's misconception of Batman as being nothing more than a silly superhero for children that was the focal point of an extremely campy TV show.

"Batman" is rated PG-13 for violence and language.

I love this movie! jack nicholson is impeccable as the joker. this movie feels like the dark 80's comics. i am so grateful for this masterpiece. thank you tim burton and jack for getting everything on point. this, batman begins, and the darknight are the only worthy batman movies worth watching. sorry joel shumacher, your movies suck! IF YOU LIKE THE JOKER THAN YOU MUST WATCH THIS MOVIE

Batman succeeds as well as it does because, unlike most films, it doesn't look phony by trying to be real. Instead, it broadcasts its own artificiality: "Look at us -- we're doing art!" And extremely well.

Part of what gives Batman its self-awareness is an aspect of the film that I haven't seen remarked on: the range of spoofs of popular and sometimes important art that are sprinkled through it.

-- It starts by spoofing itself: the Joker reprises Carl Grissom's "You're my best man!" scene.

-- The Joker spoofs the melting witch of The Wizard of Oz.

-- The two-bladed thug spoofs the swordsman of Raiders of the Lost Ark, except that where Indiana Jones gives up and shoots him, Batman plows straight through him with his fists.

-- The Joker's lieutenant then spoofs Crocodile Dundee with his big hunting knife, except that what was so imposing in Crocodile Dundee ("This is a knife!") is laughably inadequate for confronting Batman.

-- The Batplane spoofs E.T. in crossing the moon, and then spoofs Star Wars in its strafing run through the canyon of the skyscrapers.

-- The Joker spoofs Dirty Harry's long-barreled pistol.

-- The whole tower scene is a prolonged spoof of Notre Dame de Paris ("The Hunchback of Notre Dame").

I'm sure I've forgotten other films Batman spoofs, and missed more. Batman never lets you forget that you're watching a movie about a comic book.

P.S. Kim Basinger is brilliant in an under-rated performance that realistically swings her urban working girl between conceited yuppie, terrified hostage, and insecure single: "You weigh a little more than 108!" -- "Oh, really!!"

It's hard to believe that stars like Mel Gibson, Kevin Costner, Dennis Quaid, Harrison Ford, Charlie Sheen, Pierce Brosnan, Tom Selleck and Bill Murray were all considered for Batman, at some point. It's even harder to believe that Tim Curry, Willem Dafoe, David Bowie and James Woods were considered for the Joker. Thankfully, the powers that be gave us Michael Keaton and Jack Nicholson in their respective roles that made this film a classic among Batman fans. Directed by Tim Burton, Batman was a critical and financial success. The film inspired Batman: The Animated Series and a series of films. Up until the release of "The Dark Knight", it was the highest grossing film based on a DC comic book. In my opinion, this movie is the definitive Batman movie. With over 50 years of comic books to be based upon, it's the one closest to Bob Kane's original vision for Batman. Although there were three more movies to follow after this one, This movie is my most favorite out of them all. I mean, it had an all-star cast involved with it like Kim Basinger, Michael Gough, Pat Hingle, Billy Dee Williams, Jack Palance, and Jerry Hall. Heck, even Batman creator Bob Kane has a cameo in the movie. Who wouldn't like it?? This Two-Disc Special Edition includes features such as Audio Commentary by director Tim Burton, Legends of the Dark Knight Shadows of the Bat: The Cinematic Saga of the Dark Knight Parts 1-3 Beyond Batman Documentary Galleries, On the Set with Bob Kane featurette, and three music videos by Prince. Definitely worth getting if you're a Batman fan.

Batman directed by Tim Burton is a cool and classic action adventure. Jack Nicholson is perfectly cast as the Joker, his laugh is wickedly memorable. Kim Basinger is great as well, too bad she's always being typecast. I love Michael Keaton as Batman, he's funny, suspicious, and fits the role to a T. Buy this 1989 blockbuster today!

The Good Things
*Some good action scenes, especially at the end.
*Very solid cinematography. Seems very fresh and original. Quite a few strong images.
*Pretty dark and moody, but not overwhelmingly so.
*Production design is completely awesome. Gotham City is very imaginatively designed. The Batmobile is still probably the best in this film. The Batwing is cool. There are loads of nifty gadgets, cool costumes, and good sets.
*Storyline is not too bad. Lots of memorable scenes. Has a good amount of drama, romance, action, and snippets of comedy.
*Characters are good and well-acted. Michael Keaton is cool. Jack Nicholson makes a good, funny, somewhat menacing Joker.
*Music score is good, and there are a few good late 80s songs in there (lots of Prince!).

The Bad Things
*Seems a bit long or slow in the first hour or so.

The Questionable Things
*Some parts are a little goofy (but it's not too bad in this case).

Even though the newer Batman films are stronger in a lot of ways, this version is still quite original and entertaining. It has good characters, a pretty good story, and some excellent production designs throughout. The ending has a lot of great action too. Definately reccomended for anybody who is interested in comic-book heroes.

The one-disc version has okay image and sound quality, and no special features. The two-disc version has good quality and a number of featurettes.

I remember seeing this film for the first time a long time ago. It is really much better than batman and Robin and a bit more better than batman forever. This is one film that is a favorite just the mega popular film Ghostbusters!!

This movie was good and it had the action and all the batman stuff but the joker could have been better in my opion but other than that four star movie in my book.

When the original Batman character was created by Bob Kane many years ago, he was meant to be a shadowy, scary figure that was as much vigilante as hero. Over time, though, perhaps due to the comics' appeal to children or the campy 1960s Batman TV series, Batman became a much lighter subject matter, almost rivaling the pristine Superman in terms of heroism. This 1989 film from Tim Burton that perception, bringing Batman back to his dark roots.

In the film, Batman battles the nefarious Joker, who much earlier in life murdered Bruce Wayne's parents and effectively transformed the young Bruce into the Caped Crusader. However, much time is also devoted to how Jack Napier ultimately (at the hands of Batman himself) becomes the Joker, setting up an interesting character dichotomy. A love interest (Vicki Vale) is also present for Bruce/Batman which, while never really heating up, does draw out some of the personal demons that haunt Bruce.

The acting in this movie also stands out as impressive. Michael Keaton plays a very introspective and intense Bruce Wayne and is spot-on as the brewing Batman. Of course, Jack Nickholson steals the show as the psychotic, cackling Joker in a role he seemed born to play.

Overall, this film really brings the character of Batman back to its dark, brooding roots. In typical superhero movie style, Batman features its share of cool gadgets and intense action sequences, but it also contains enough character development to make viewers care about the main storylines. Essentially, this film put Batman back on the superhero map.

In this Batman film he's taken seriously and you don't get shots of his butt in the Bat costume. Joel Schumacher was obsessed with shots of Batman's butt for some reason lol. The movie is perfectly dark and sometimes comical. It doesn't over-due the campiness like Batman Forever and Batman & Robin.

While the under-rated Michael Keaton gives us a fine Bruce Wayne that's still haunted by the death of his parents. It's also brilliant how their murder is linked to the Joker. The "You Made Me and I made You" stuff between the Joker and Batman is well done.

When you think about it though the script is still thin though. I mean yes the Joker is perfectly evil here but what's his real game plan ? It works that he's really not as happy as his difigurement makes him look. So he wants to disfigure other people as well. But other than that his obsession with Vicky Vale doesn't work that well. What does he want from her ? Disfigure her like he did his ex-girlfriend ? Or just dance with her on the top floor of an abandoned church ? lol.

I always had such a ball watching this movie that I never thought of such things. Jack Nicholson is so good as the Joker that I never thought about how the movie doesn't have a solid plot. He did just play a Jack yet again though even if he looked good in the role and had a great Joker laugh. Heath Ledger did more with the role since he transformed into someone else entirely. You also didn't simply have him fall in chemicals. We don't even know what made him the way he is. He tells 2 stories with both of them different and both of them probably aren't even true. Which is even more ingenious than how Jack became the Joker here.

I do still think that Roger Ebert's review was unfair though. He even picked on it saying that Keaton and Basinger have no chemestry. I think they work fine together but in a Batman film who cares about their romance ? The film still delivers and what really mattered is that Keaton and Nicholson played off of each other great. Besides, Batman Begins may be a good movie but Batman just giving a kid part of his costume bugged me as much as Alfred letting Vicky Vale into the Batcave. Yet, that didn't bug Ebert.

I'll be the first to admit that nostalgia fuels a sizeable percentage of my purchases. I remember when Dave Matthews Band was cool in high school and I keep buying their records now, even if I don't like them like I used to. The same goes for the original, animated Transformers movie. I bought that before the 2007 movie came out, watched it once, and realized that my tastes have changed since I was five. That movie is almost unwatchably bad. This Batman film, however, is still awesome. I love it. It's still my favorite, even after Batman Begins blew me away. Jack's Joker is great and Michael Keaton will always be my Batman. The look and feel of this movie is dark and exciting without being oppressive. Occassionally the strain on your suspension of disbelief is a little much, but this movie is still well worth your time and your money.

Why not start off a batman sprea with the first one containing Batman's most vile and sicotic villians the Joker. Jack Nicholson portrays the joker in a meaningfull way. true that he dosen't kick Batman's butt. but he toys with him mentally. which is a good start on nicholson's part. and michael keaton as batman it could'nt get any better. Keaton portays batman in the darkside of him. this movie is awesome. Tim Burton at his best. it's a must see for all batfans

I was nine years old when this movie came out and I can remember seeing it in theaters with my mom and dad. I remember also seeing this movie when it landed on VHS and how me,my dad and uncle must have watched it like 2 times. This is one of those types of movies you can watch over and over and over again without ever getting tired of it! A great All-Star cast,fantastic visual presentation,excellent plot,rememorable lines. If you know someone who has never got into comics this is pretty much a great way to introduce them into it by getting this move. If you are a true Batman fan and don;t have this movie in your collection,then I suggest adding this to your DVD collection.
Its amazing how visually the presentation of this movie has improved since its theatrical release,very clear,rich,smooth. Almost as if the movie came out just last week. It has close captioning in English and in Spanish for those of you that are hearing impaired and loads,loads of DVD extras which I'm not gonna spoil because that's how good they are. For the great price that Amazon has available for this DVD its a win-win situation. I highly reccomend getting this DVD.

As a boy, I remember fleeting images of Tim Burton's Batman, mostly the gloomy atmosphere that he created and Jack Nicholson's iconic Joker, especially how he was created. Then some years later, after seeing Sam Rami's Spider-Man (2002), I decided to pick up the old VHS copy I had of the film, and re-watch it, with more maturity as my advantage for understanding it better. I can say that the moment Danny Elfman's music started playing I was hooked all over again, and by the time it was over, I had nothing but good things to say about it, and it motivated me to get back into my Batman craze all over again. Though Batman Begins (2005) is more well-made than Batman (1989), Begins will never have the epic score that Danny Elfman created for this film. I believe his score is the strongest part of the film, but Michael Keaton (as Batman) and Nicholson as The Joker are good as well.

It feels unfair to compare Burton's 1989 film with `Batman Begins'; Christopher Nolan's vastly superior introduction to the Dark Knight. So, I will try with all earnestness not to do that. Burton's original is dark, brooding, moody and effective to a point, but it falls short of the brilliance that was captured by Nolan's recent attempt to revive the superhero genre.

I will say this; this is a superhero movie that for the most part feels like a `superhero' movie. Remember the days before the nipple-suits and the emo haircuts? `Batman' is one of the first films to take the `superhero' genre to a serious level, ditching the camp that comes along with most of this franchise and creating a dark and mysterious atmosphere, richly rewarding. It's a shame that the Batman films began to wane and drift backwards into camp and gag-jokes instead of sticking with Burton's original vision. Thankfully Christopher Nolan revived it, in a huge way, with `batman Begins' and it looks like `The Dark Knight' will be just as rewarding.

`Batman' follows the Dark Knight as he tracks down the insane Joker who is attempting to take over Gotham City with toxic gas. The Joker was horrendously disfigured thanks to betrayal from amongst his fellow crooks and wants to exact revenge. Batman also must juggle his personal life (that as Bruce Wayne) when the beautiful photographer Vicki Vale starts making eyes at him.

For the most part there is little to complain about here. The movie is exciting and entertaining and takes the genre to a place it had yet to be taken. The discrepancies within the plot are forgivable (this is a `superhero' movie) and the lack of real character development is understandable. `Batman Begins' for a lot of people was too long and too slow because Nolan decided to forsake an action filled film and focus on really creating the man that shaped the legend. I personally felt that that move was genius, but it's understandable why Burton would want to focus on special effects and action scenes in order to draw in a crowd as apposed to slowing down the pace and alienating the action junkies. The real drawback for me though was the acting. I found Michael Keaton's Batman to be decent, but I found his Bruce Wayne to be stale. Christian Bale brought Bruce Wayne to a whole new level that Keaton couldn't even comprehend. Yes, Wayne is a mystery, but the audience is supposed to desire to understand that mystery. Keaton bored me. Kim Basinger was you token hot chick here. There is really no development on her part. She's pretty and infatuated and she screams a lot (which can get kind of annoying).

And then we have Jack Nicholson. I'm bracing myself for a lot of `unhelpful' votes here. Let me say this first; I absolutely LOVE Jack Nicholson. He is one of my all time favorite actors in the world, and I totally understand that he plays a variation of himself in most every performance he gives, and I like that about him. Here though, I found myself annoyed. He hams up the Joker so much that he just becomes goofy. There are moments of brilliant `insanity' but for the most part he overdoes it to such an extreme that he loses any real maniacal nature. He just comes off like an idiot. I hate saying that because this performance is lauded by a lot of people as the performance that makes this movie so great, but honestly I don't see it.

In the end, I like `Batman', I just don't love it. I would watch it again and it is far grander than anything that Schumacher did with that dreadful `Batman & Robin'. Burton captured the grim feeling that surrounded the comics baring this name and infused his own visual style, which worked wonders for the film. As a `superhero' action film `Batman' is top notch. As a character study and dramatic marvel it loses ground. It all really depends on what you want to see. I personally prefer `Batman Begins' but I know a lot of people who prefer Burton's classic.

Either way, you can't really go wrong.

This is a solid film. Not my favorite Batman film - I like Batman Begins more - but solid. The thing is, without one key player it wouldn't be as good. Yes, Tim Burton's directing is excellent, the visuals are respectable, and I like Prince's soundtrack a good deal more than I probably should (favorite songs: "Partyman", "Scandalous" and "Trust"). Visually, the film is a marvel - I especially like the portrayals of the Batmobie, the Batcave, and the Batplane. This enough to make it a good, 3.5 to 4-star movie.
But here's what brings it over the edge: The Joker. Jack Nicholson outdoes himself from his first appearance as the full-blown villain (a murder set to carnival music), pumping out a flurry of puns and one-liners, equipped with many memorable props, including a boxing glove on a spring, a gloved hand that pops out of a gift box, a hand buzzer with a sick twist, and a REALLY big gun. Just when you think he can't get any better or funnier, he does. It all peaks in the unforgettable clock tower scene, where he delivers one my favorite line in the movie. I won't spoil it for you, but it's brilliant.
The only real problem with the film is that all of the other major players step back and let Nicholson run away with the show. Michael Keaton's Batman is bland, lacking in the mystique that the role requires, though he makes for a good Bruce Wayne. His girlfriend Vicki Vale (Kim Bassinger) pretty much spends the entire film shrieking, a check in the "minus" column for her likability. Alfred (Michael Gough) is decent, but I prefer the dry-humored treatment he gets in Batman Begins. I like Robert Wuhl as the uppity reporter Alexander Knox, but sadly there's not enough of him.
This is a good film, but I think Batman Begins does a better job with Batman.

I thought, "Why would anyone do Batman in 1989?" It turned out to be a strong, dark movie. Kim Basinger is Batman's girl friend. Jack Nicholson is the Joker. Roger Ebert felt that Batman is mostly form with little substance. He felt that it is rich in atmosphere with very little happening. He was right. In retrospect, it is hard to recall the plot. Comic book movies have certainly had their day. I had trouble with the Batman logo. It looks like some kind of weird boomerang. I realized it is the image of a bat flashed against a cloud cover. Beware of sequels.

This film represented a giant step forward in comic book adaptations, and, 19 years later, remains in the top tier of this peculiar drama. Key to this film's success is that, despite consider fan pressure (Tim Burton referred to them as `DC fundamentalists,' a label that is still apt) to do otherwise, the director made sure that he had a quality film first, and a comic book adaptation second. Fortunately, Burton had enough of a sense of the true character of Batman to incorporate enough of that spirit into his own vision, so as to satisfy all but the most myopic of comic book fans.

This film is unique among the many cinematic versions of Batman in various ways, but one of the most important is the fact that in the beginning of the story the audience does not see the action from the perspective of Batman or Bruce Wayne but from other characters. Nor does Burton provide a ham-fisted, histrionic, hit-you-over-the-head version of the origin story. Rather, a mystique is created and Batman emerges by bits and pieces.

The key to the character is more often hinted at, or symbolized, rather than clubbing the audience upside the head for 2 hours and 20 minutes. You come to find that Bruce Wayne has a collection of bizarre suits of armor, you see a newspaper clipping regarding the murder of his parents, you learn that he keeps his Batman suit in a huge, impenetrable vault.

This film conveys a sense of the absurd, of the gothic, of exaggerations and of the larger-than-life. All of which are also found in the classic Batman comics. The special effects are good and hold up well, 19 years later. The illusion that Michael Keaton can really move like a ninja, wearing a 70 lb. rubber suit was achieved mostly by fast editing, which is more effective than the CGI crap you get nowadays, which makes everybody look like frickin' Spider-Man.

Also, since most of the time you only see brief glimpses of Batman, it helps to maintain the mystique. Batman, when properly handled, is a very compelling character. But he is also an impossible character, and the harder you focus on him, the more you dissect him, the harder it is to ignore the absurdity of a grown man dressing like a bat to frighten criminals. Tim Burton and Michael Keaton gave us a plausible Batman, but wisely kept him somewhat at arms length, more often suggesting things, rather than saying them outright.

The cast is good-to-great, even Kim Basinger, who was never that much of a master thespian. 1989 was before everyone was sick of Jack Nicholson, he was still turning out good stuff and his Joker is great. The guys who play Alfred and Commissioner Gordon are really excellent, as is Billy Dee Williams as Harvey Dent, DA. It's too bad that this movie turned out to be the height of Michael Keaton's commercial success. Prior to the release of this film, a lot of the fan-boys got their undies all in a knot thinking he'd turn out bad in the role, yet he played this Batman so well, it's impossible to think of this film with any other lead.

ASIN: B000B5XOY8
although not everyone enjoys comic book movies, I personally find them interesting and a part of my childhood.
I had to have this item.

1989's "Batman" was rightly a cinematic hit. Directed by Tim Burton, it features a dark and brooding storyline, amazing sets, a well-chosen cast, and an update on the technology traditionally associated with the Batman character.

Michael Keaton was a surprising choice as the Dark Knight, by day a weathly philanthropist, by night the Caped Crusader. Keaton's touch is to portray on-screen, and successfully, the motivation of a scarred childhood that drives Bruce Wayne to create and live through his alter-ego, Batman. This Batman fights crime in a black rubber and kevlar-armored suit, using a variety of gadgets to come and go from crime scenes.

Batman's opponent in this film is the Joker, played with over-the-top maniacal evil by Jack Nicholson in an Academy-Award-nominated performance. The Joker is a gangland hood who survives betrayal and an industrial accident on a job, emerging as the deformed and now insane master of crime in Gotham City.

Beautiful photojournalist Vickie Vale, earnestly played by Kim Basinger, becomes the object of desire of both men. Their parallel story arcs will intersect in her person, who is kidnapped by the Joker and must be rescued by Batman, in a spectacular finale set in the bell tower Gotham Cathedral.

Burton's superb direction takes full advantage of the brooding, spectacular and vaguely retro sets; if this movie has any fault, it is that scene, mood, and setting tend to overwhelm the characters.

This movie is highly recommended as excellent entertainment for fans of the Batman franchise. Its success sparked three lesser sequels, with Valmer Kilmer and George Clooney taking their turns as Batman while being crowded off the stage by their respective villians.

I won't claim this movie is better than Batman Begins, but in my opinion it is definitely just as good. Both movies have pros and cons. One thing I liked better about Tim Burton's film is the Bruce Wayne character. Chritian Bale's version, in public at least, is rather snobby and pretentious, whereas Michael Keaton depicts a likable man. On the other hand, Batman Begins tells the story of the Dark Knight himself whereas in Tim Burton's version the Joker rather than our hero is the focus of attention. Both movies though are very dark and heavily influenced by Frank Miller's comics Batman Year 1 and the Dark Knight Returns and are nothing like the monstrosities Batman Forever and Batman and Robin in which Joel Schumacher tried his very best to completely destroy everything that is Batman and that was brought to life so well in the 1989 and 1992 movies. If only Tim Burton would ever be given a chance to go ahead with his original plan to make a film out of the Dark Knight Returns starring Mel Gibson or, why not, a return of Michael Keaton.

There are rumors of a six-foot bat in Gotham City. Whispers. Suggestions. Nothing concrete. But all that changes after the Batman confronts Carl Grissom's men at Axis Chemicals and Grissom's top hood, Jack Napier, gets dropped into a vat of chemicals, transforming him into the maniacal Joker. Discovering he had been set up by his boss to take a fall at Axis, Joker takes over Grissom's operation, in turn allowing him to try and take over Gotham City itself, with only the Dark Knight to stop him.

This was the film that gave us the "movie Batman" we know today: dark and armored. If it wasn't for director Tim Burton's gothic and grim vision of crime-ridden Gotham City and its brooding protector, I suspect the edgy superhero movies of today wouldn't exist.

Michael Keaton takes on the title role as billionaire playboy Bruce Wayne and his rubber-clad alter ego Batman, delivering one of the greatest Batman performances that many, at the time, hadn't expected from "Mr. Mom." And after his memorable line during the opening rooftop scene, "I'm Batman," from that moment on he had you sold that his version of the Dark Knight meant business and quenches any lingering thought that Batman, thanks to the 1960's TV series, is a campy superhero.

Stealing the stage is Jack Nicholson as the Joker. Basically take the Jack from One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest and crank it up to 100 and you have the Joker. Nicholson does a brilliant job of blending the serious and twisted Joker while also playing the crazy, laughing machine. I'm sure when Batman: The Animated Series came along, Nicholson's Joker was the template for Mark Hamill's performance as the voice of the character. Awesome.

Danny Elfman's haunting and lonely score only adds to the movie's eeriness.

My only problem with the film was there wasn't enough Batman. I remember that bothering me as a kid. Batman shows up all of four times in the film, the first being something like only for a minute. Each subsequent time gets progressively longer, thankfully.

Bold, atmospheric and downright fun, Batman is one for the ages. It was where the modern dark superhero movie started.

Language warning: Cursing and blasphemy

Are you at least 25 years old? Do you remember the big promotional campaign and the anticipation? I remember going to the theater every week for months before this movie came out just to see the trailer. Sometimes I stayed and watched the feature I paid for. Sometimes I walked out half way through. A lot of movies should be thankful to the first "serious" big screen Batman movie. The Batman trailer boosted box office sales for many otherwise less than appealing movies. I was telling everyone I knew and complete strangers that BATMAN is going to be the greatest movie ever made. I even came to terms with them hiring a short guy to play Batman/Bruce Wayne because they hired a short guy to play Joker/Jack Napier. I was so excited to see this I asked my boss for the day off. Then finally came the big day. There I was standing in line outside the theater. I convinced my then wife to come along, first off to show her there's more to movies than cheap teen flicks and secondly to trade off restroom time without losing our place in line. Finally we get in. After butterflies and darkness the movie begins. A rousing theme song encompasses the theater seats and a bizarre looking city is shown on the giant screen. A crime is committed and Batman shows up to teach the bad guys a "lesson". Unfortunately he doesn't show up while the poor family is being mugged. If he had he may have looked more like a hero. The rest of the movie is filled with alot of interesting scenes that hold your attention but no real plot exists. Eventually Joker tricks Vicky Vale into meeting him at the museum because she thinks it's Bruce Wayne who sent the message. Batman shows up crashing through the glass ceiling. (an impressive entrance) Now I'm reminded of SPACEBALLS with Dark Helmut playing with his dolls. In a nasally voice saying "I'm here to save my girlfriend, Hi honey!" Batman's best line. "You weigh a little more than a hundred and eight" Joker's best line. "Bob? Gun. Without even looking at him (POW) shoots Bob. Anyway because of all the hype and my big mouth, I had to save as much face as I could by focusing on all the positive aspects I could. But when people kept bringing up how Batman missed Joker with a barrage of ammunition and Joker knocked the Batwing out of the sky with one bullet (Joker didn't have a "The" in front of his name for this movie.) I used to say it wasn't really Joker but a projected image and the bullet was really a small missile. That's why the gun barrel was so long. I stopped covering up and came to grips with that this was not the greatest movie ever made. Nor was it the worst. It was just a movie that fell far below expectations because of too too much hype. I remember the hype... Don't let my review throw you off. I do recommend this 2 disc set to own. It is still a fun movie to watch, despite it's shortcomings and the bonus features are plentiful. Or you can get the 8 disc Anthology. That's the one I got. The choice is yours. I love all things BATMAN, even when I hate it.

Batman is a great comic book movie. The pace keeps it from dragging. Jack gives an inspired effort as the Joker, Michael Keaton does well as Bruce Wayne and Batman. The supporting cast do a good job Jack Palance stands out. This is a dark violent film. The Jokers warped sense of humor gives enough laughs to to break the tension, the gadgets, weapons and vehicles are inovative. Batman has never been done better.

It's a pretty good movie with all the right actors. Michael Keaton is a good Batman and I love Jack Nicholson as the Joker because he always makes me laugh.I like how the film is dark and scary but sometimes when you see the city it's not realistic.I hate the way Batman kills villians in the movie.He would never do that in the comics.Batman Begins is way better with better acting and a better cast but I think this is one of the best Batman films evermade.

Let me tell you a story, and take you back in time.
The year, was 1986. The world had last known Batman as Adam West, a campy, blue caped superhero who fought the likes of a silly goofball named the Joker, among others, whilst passing on good advice to his good natured compadre, Robin. His use of puns, bad one liners and amusing dance routines genuinely made people laugh, and unfortunately reinforced the idea that the Batman was nothing more than a wierd man in a costume, masquerading around town with his teenage pals.

A man named Michael Uslan had been trying for years, as one of his life's pursuits, to awaken to the world a different vision of Batman, in his opinion, and many others, the real vision of Batman, as a Dark Guardian of his city, striking terror into the hearts of criminals as he stalked the city rooftops, protecting the innocent.
Finally, with the help of a well funded producer, and the creator of Batman himself, Bob Kane, Michael Uslan managed to get Warner Bros. to accept the possibility of making a serious Batman film.

And so the great wheel began to turn, towards a date in 1989 when the world rediscovered a hero.

Fast forward to the summer of 1989 and you'll find thousands of fans, dressed in Batman tshirts and hats, waiting to see this mega-blockbuster movie.

The first Batman movie portrays the Dark Knight as Adam West never could, opening the eyes of people everywhere to a stoic, avenging man whose quest to defeat evil in his city has lead him to become a terrifying creature of the night, The Batman. Micheal Keaton uses his talents to portray Batman as a driven man, one who masquerades as just a social billionaire in the daytime, all the while waiting to descend into another life, the one he truly wants to live. Dark and mysterious, Tim Burton's vision of the Batman encompasses the best of the comics that inspired him, portraying an avenging guardian angel, whose only purpose is to defend the weak and innocent people of his city.

Jack Nicholson portrays an insane, but brilliant madman, the Joker, who terrorizes the citizens of Gotham with his cruel and deadly jokes.

Tim Burton redefines all the elements of Batman's world, and brings them to the big screen in a way never before seen by audiences. An engaging, twisting and turning plot drives the characters and the film to a satisfying ending that will have you wishing it was Halloween, so you too could put on the cape and cowl of the Batman.

All in all, the first Batman movie is by far one of the best, and it captures Batman as he was always meant to be captured, as the Dark Knight we all know today.

Batman is one of the most pivotal comic book characters ever. From his humble beginnings Batman was a dark and grim character, and through the years we have seen him go into a lighter image on screen with the cartoons and television shows. It's like the average person on the street never really got to know the true Batman until now. I had so much hope for this movie, but ultimately it was a let down. While the imagery, soundtrack and special effects were superb other aspects of script and production made this more than just a mixed bad. It was a mess.

Lets first talk about the good stuff like the backdrop and designs for this movie. Gotham city never looked cooler. That goes the same for batman. When you see him first appear in the shadows you definitely get the idea of what Batman was supposed to really be like. There is an interesting use of color, lighting and shadow that give the movie a very stylized and comic book feel to it. Other designs like the Batmobile, the Batcave and Batman's various gadgets are equally impressive and are definitely things I wouldn't mind having... if I knew how to use them properly. And as if to only top off the spellbinding design of the movie you get what has become one of the most grand and memorable soundtracks of any superhero show. What more could you want?

Plenty. You would think Tim Burton would do a full out grim and gritty Batman like the true fans of the character were looking for. As a matter of fact for the first 30 minutes we got that to the hilt. In that first half hour the movie is an amazing combination of all that design style as well as the perfect feeling of Batman being the ultimate crime fighter. What happens after that changes the tone of the movie into something that falls between gritty and camp. Instead of continuing the coolness and mystery of the Dark Knight you get stuff that seems more appropriate from the 60's television show... only done darker. Yeah you can say it's because that's how The Joker was written. Well he was written wrong in my eyes and seems more like an aloof copout in the script-writing department. From then on the movie slips into just another Hollywood plot placating to the crowd, giving up all opportunities they had to truly stand out.

The acting is pretty good, but I can't help but think the choice of actors was strange. Keaton seemed an odd choice but he did do the part admirably. He just didn't really look the part. Jack Nicholson as The Joker? I don't think so. Instead of getting the type of Joker I know from the books and previous shows we get... well... Jack Nicholson. He might as well be calling himself Jack instead of Joker. I didn't even think Jack Palance, whom I love as an actor, fit well in this movie. Actually I can't think of any actor in this film other than the guy who played Alfred the butler and the police chief who really fit here.

Basically this version of Batman is quite a departure from the mythos that was known before it. Tim Burton was pretty open about that, but the problem I have is it's too different and ultimately didn't entertain me. If you have no previous conceptions of Batman or are open minded enough to see a very different rendition of that story then you might end up enjoying this. If you were hungrily waiting for a truly nail-biting and serious Batman movie then look at the more recent Batman Begins.

Well, I've had this tape for a couple of years and just got finished watching it half an hour ago for probably the third time. I'd have to say (because I still find it interesting) that constitutes the movie being art.

PROS:
1. Ok writing, that's a star.
2. Ok acting and at times a little better, that's a star.
3. Ok directing and that's a star.
4. Neat idea handle ok, sometimes better. That's another star.
5. Neat modeling, music (for the Batman scenes) right on target, that's a star.

CONS:
1. The truth is, I and anybody else could pick this and most movies apart and suggest changes, additions, subtractions or out and right distruction or run it up the flag pole and see who salutes. In this case it is a popcorn movie and not to be take as serious as Casablanca. Therefore I see no reason to chop or pick it apart. The only real question is, is Batman entertaining? Was it interesting enough to see a couple more times? If so, then it did its duty enough to be called art, (provided it is original).

Batman is art. It isn't on the same level as Casablanca, but what is! It's a popcorn movie and because it came out, and had such a big reception, the industry tried to make other Batman type and style movies.

My favorite scenes? Fast-forward until the girl gets into the Batmobile
and watch that thunderbolt go down the road progressively faster, and the music was perfect for that scene. I think the scene should have lasted another ten to twenty seconds longer and the Batmobile should have gotten progressively even faster. But in the beginning, when they were driving through the forest road (with all the fallen leaves) it looked as if they were only going fourty miles per hour. (I know it was only a gas powered model). By the time they hit that last stretch the Batmobile couldn't have been doing over 100. I know that's fast even for a model in scale miles per hour BUT...well, its is a jet powered car. You know a real race car at the Indie 500 start off at 200 mph just to qualify. The Batmobile is Jet powered...and it's just a model and just a movie...I wish you guys had--you know--got it up there where a bowshock pressure wave had been visible.

Oh well, so what.

I still like the movie despite a few flaws. The Joker gave a fine performance no matter what anybody says, and the other Jack played his part well--Palance always has (I hope I spelled that right). So, I give this popcorn popper a five star rating and recommend it to all of us who still haven't sold out our taste.

One last thing...the real Batman never kills.

Bye!

The other reviews contained here seem to divide into preferring Burton's original "Batman" vs the new "Batman Begins". I have some thoughts on this.

First, let me say I much prefer Burton's film. I find it's baroque theatricality far more interesting and entertaining than "Begins" attempt to shoehorn Bruce Wayne/Batman into something like the real world. It always seemed to me the approach on "Batman" was to ask "what kind of world could have created these people?". "Begins" approach is to ask "what would these people be like in the real world?". I suspect that the "Begins" franchise may run into significant problems as it tries to reconcile some of Batman's more exotic villains into that reality.

Despite having no super powers, Batman is a mythic character. He doesn't belong in everyday reality. None of Burton's films are set in reality. Like myths and fairy-tales, they exist in a parallel reality that informs our own.

The last point I'll include here is the CHARACTER of Batman himself (not the actors or their performances: they're both excellent).
By the end of "Begins" he has pretty much overcome his childhood traumas (bats & loss of parents) and the decision to become/remain Batman is a conscious, rational choice. (What a swell guy.)
That's OK, but not nearly as interesting as what they did in "Batman". In Burton's films he is almost like a drug addict. There is no altruism here. He MUST be Batman to deal with his inner demons. Repression creates perversion and 'Batman' is what has oozed out of the cracks in Bruce Wayne's psyche. Anyone who has to create as elaborate a coping mechanism as Batman must be really screwed up. Wayne must be Batman or go mad. Perhaps he has done both. Burton's version of Batman may be less "real" but it is far more human.

Oh, yeah. Also- Danny Elfman's score rocks and the Batmobile in "Begins" sucks!

This film holds a special place in my heart. It's really the film that got me into comic books and solidified Batman as my all-time favorite superhero. That being said I realized it was probably over a decade since I last watched this film. I've pretty much every line of this film memorized since I watched it so much as a kid, but whenever I talked about the film with friends it was always through those rose-colored glasses of nostalgia. After watching this new 2-disc DVD and the recent film Batma Begins I have to say Batman Begins is indeed a better film--but only slightly. Burton's Batman set a stylized reality for Batman on film, but Nolan's version gave Batman something Burton's lacked: plausibility. Now, some people may say plausibility has no business in a superhero film, but I disagree. I think the more realistic you can make the characters and their problems the more the audience will be able to connect with them and the story.

What Burton's films lack in plausibility it makes up for in style. There are a few points in the film that don't hold up so well to the trained filmgoer's eye, honed on years of sophisticated CGI pampering since this films initial release in 1989. In case you forgot, BATMAN used all models and at least two scenes use obvious (and inexplicably unnecessary) cell animation. The Acme Chemical plant and Joker's chopper are the two most obvious and cheesy models used in the film, but the rest are gorgeous and nearly seamless. Plus the Batmobile scenes are breathtaking. The 1989 Batmobile has to be one of the coolest cars ever designed.

And let's not forget performances. I absolutely love, love, love Jack Nicholson's Joker. It's classic. A lot of reviewers criticized it as over the top and hammy, but that's exactly what the Joker is! Keaton doesn't say much, but he doesn't have to: his eyes say it all. And Bassinger as Vicki Vale is just the right amount of scared and confused.

The DVD extras on this new 2 disc edition are the best of all the Btaman DVDs I've seen. We get a new 3-part in-depth documentary with new interviews from all the key players (except for Keaton--they just use footage from an older interview) plus other great featurettes including one on the making of the Batmobile. An Tim Burton who usually gives yawn inspiring commentaries manages to be insightful and informative with his Batman commentary.

This was a great movie. Flowed perfectly from one scene to the next. It had a strong humorous element as well! I believe this is the best one in the entire series. Jack Nicholson stole the show, he was phenomenal as the Joker!

Before the frachise hit rock-bottom with the ill-fated "Batman Forever" and "Batman & Robin" and before it was gloriously revived with the spectacular "Batman Begins" (which in my humble opinion is even better than this film), there was Tim Burton's "Batman." Utilizing a huge market campaign and boasting top-name stars such as Jack Nicholson and Kim Basinger, the film became one of 1989's biggest hits, earning over $251 million domestically. A lot of people loved this film (and quite a few of them still do today), but when I first saw it when I was a kid I really didn't care for it. But as I'm much older, I've warmed up to it.

The film boasts an impressive production design (which earned a well-deserved Oscar) with casts Gotham as a moody, Gothic place in the mold of the twenty-first century, with distinct 1940s and 1980s flavor. The score by Danny Elfman is a wonderful orchestral score that has some of the heroism of John Williams's "Superman" theme but with a moody and oppressive tone to it. And the acting is fairly good -- Michael Keaton makes for a quiet, unassuming Bruce Wayne (but unimpressive Batman), Jack Nicholson makes for a wonderfully loony and twisted Joker and Michael Gough makes for a homely, well-mannered Alfred.

However, the film is immensely flawed. The plot doesn't detail about how Bruce Wayne became Batman (save for one or two flashbacks) and the backstory of who kills Bruce Wayne's parents is dramatically altered to focus on the villain. And Batman's entrances were always too dramatic, such as the opening scene where he frightens off the robbers by just raising his cape and the scene where he rescues Vicki Vale by crashing in through the skylight. (I always pictured Batman as a less dramatic and more scary superhero who catches his victims completely off guard, like in the Timm/Dini animated series or in 2005's "Batman Begins".) And while Jack Nicholson is indeed great as the Joker, he hogs too much screentime and relegates Keaton as a supporting character and not the leading character as the film's title asserts. And let's not forget Kim Basinger as Vicki Vale -- while Basinger is certainly very beautiful, the script requires her character to scream often (probably took a cue from Kate Capshaw in "Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom", but Basinger does have a great scream) and the script just renders her two-dimensional. Nevertheless, the movie is entertaining to a fault and while it isn't one of the finest superhero movies ever made, it is responsible for reviving comic-book superhero movies up into the mid-90s where "Batman & Robin" ran the Batman franchise into the ground.

When the movie was first released on DVD in late 1997 as one of Warner Brothers's first titles to debut on the new home video format, without much in the way of extras and was a flipper disc (with open matte full-screen and anamorphic 1.85:1 widescreen transfers on either side), packaged in Warner's now-thankfully extinct snapper cases. With the impending arrival of "Batman Begins" on DVD in October 2005, Warner Brothers saw fit to give all four Batman movies a new digital transfer and provide quality extras for each film. And is the upgrade worth it? A resounding yes.

First off, the transfer. Compared to the 1997 DVD, the new 2005 digital transfer is a revelation. The 1997 DVD had boosted black levels, an unnaturally high level of film grain, and the low-lit scenes looked really murky. The 2005 transfer fixes all these problems -- the transfer is brighter, more natural-looking and much cleaner. Much of the unnecessary grain has been removed but enough has been left to maintain a good film-like texture. You can finally make out the details in the darker scenes and overall the video transfer is very pleasing. The disc still has the original Dolby Digital 5.1 remix from the old DVD, but a brand-new DTS mix is offered. The tracks sound good for their age, but are front-centric mainly, with some panning effects (like during the Batmobile chase) and occasional use of the surrounds, which make Elfman's score sound even better. The DTS track sounds a bit more robust and clearer than the Dolby track, but it's not the Batman film to show off your surround system (like "Batman Begins" or even "Batman & Robin"). An optional French stereo dub is provided, alongside optional subtitles in English, French or Spanish.

Now, the extras. We get a commentary from Burton and the then-highly anticipated theatrical trailer for the film on the first disc. The commentary is good, but Burton has the tendency to stop for long stretches of time and just watch the movie. A cast or crew member sitting with him could've made the commentary more engaging, but it's good for some of the information Burton tells us. The theatrical trailer is presented in anamorphic widescreen with stereo audio, but it's pretty dull for the most part (it's mostly large chunks of footage put together with Elfman's score in the background). Still, it's good for archival purposes. The movie is divided into 38 chapters, and the main menu is animated against a brief excerpt of Elfman's main title theme.

But the second disc is just exhaustive in terms of the quantity and quality of extras. There are three documentaries ("Legends of the Dark Knight", "Shadows of the Bat: The Cinematic History of the Dark Knight" and "Beyond Batman") -- most of which are divided into smaller chunks for easier access. Most of the documentaries feature new interviews with the cast and crew of "Batman", such as Tim Burton, Danny Elfman, Kim Basinger, Billy Dee Williams, Jack Nicholson, Sam Hamm and would-be Vicki Vale Sean Young. All of the new interviews provide some nice behind-the-scenes info about the movie and what happened after. Additionally, there are mini profiles about the main characters of the movie, most of them featuring new interviews with the cast ("Batman: The Heroes" and "Batman: The Villains") and a vintage 1989 featurette "On the Set with Bob Kane". As a nice touch, there's a storyboarded deleted scene featuring the voices of Kevin Conroy and Mark Hamill (who provide the voices for the Tim/Dini Batman animated series) and a collection of music videos Prince contributed to the film ("Partyman", "Scandalous" and "Batdance"). Still menus are offered on the second disc, although there's music on the main menu only.

This set is available separately or can be purchased as part of the "Complete Batman Anthology", which boxes up this edition along with the other special editions of the three successive Batman sequels. The 1997 disc is also available (for a much lower price than this edition), but I highly recommend this edition if you still haven't got a copy of this movie yet. The video transfer (and the fact that it's in a keep case) alone is worth the upgrade.