Burton Batman Films ('Batman' & 'Batman Returns')

The bomb gag actually happens in the middle of the flick. However, at the very beginning he does this rather elaborate trick...

Apologist Puncher wrote:Even though, at the BEGINNING OF THE FILM NO LESS, he changed personalities from the first film? Really?

Batman in B89 doesn't get lethal until after he realizes the Joker killed his parents. Sure, there are rumors and stories about Batman but it's all second or third hand, nothing substantial.

Intentionally or not, I think there's a character going there... and you could even go so far as Batman Forever resolves it. But from the above moment in B89, he's lethal. By the time of BR, he's basically desensitized to taking life... and maybe gets a thrill out of it sometimes. By the time he realizes Selina (A) is Catwoman and (B) is dead serious about putting Shreck down for good, he sees himself in her... including his blood lust... hence his insistence that Max go to jail rather than snapping his neck and running off with Selina. He not only recognizes his own transformation, he sees Selina going through the same thing. Saving her means stepping back from it himself.

The above aside, I could No Prize the above by saying the majority of kills in both movies are either self-defense or else possibly not even kills anyway (the fire-breather Batman lights up at the beginning of BR could easily have survived).

All those things aside, I'm obviously cool with a Batman who kills so this really isn't much of a problem for me.

It's Burton adopting that "Batman is just as crazy as the bad guys" interpretation, it's a theme he loves to toy with but doesn't quite give it its due or he just intentionally leaves it vague enough to give it some sort of mystique. It sort of carries over in FOREVER (which he produced) but it's given more of a payoff with Batman becoming more heroic and leaving that dark side behind.

thecolorsblend wrote:Batman in B89 doesn't get lethal until after he realizes the Joker killed his parents. Sure, there are rumors and stories about Batman but it's all second or third hand, nothing substantial.

As you already pointed out, remember the "Johnny Gobbs" story those thief's talked about? Seemed pretty specific to be a "rumor" or "story".

The above aside, I could No Prize the above by saying the majority of kills in both movies are either self-defense or else possibly not even kills anyway (the fire-breather Batman lights up at the beginning of BR could easily have survived).

All those things aside, I'm obviously cool with a Batman who kills so this really isn't much of a problem for me.

Bull Hurley's death was NOT in self-defense. Batman sought it out, and found it. How about him "killing" Catwoman? What happened didn't call for lethal force. And the Penguin? Did Batman REALLY need to have him "shock & awed" to death?

The blood-lust Batman had in 'Returns' was just too much, even to a young teenager. Still is to me today.