Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊

[Film] Batman (1989)



Stat Brother

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 11, 2003
73,734
West west west Sussex
Last night I thought I'd show the kids this massive blockbuster film, from the last year of my teens.

I remember it being absolutely fantastic, 'the' film, marketed to within an inch of it's life, all action with the bestest car ever.


30 years later and it turns out Batman (1989) is shitehouse.


Anyhoo, the point for the thread is that the special effects were anything but special.
Begging the question:-

What can we expect from cinema in just 30 years time and how bad will the current crop of 'blue screen brilliant films' look?
 




Kalimantan Gull

Well-known member
Aug 13, 2003
12,924
Central Borneo / the Lizard
Last night I thought I'd show the kids this massive blockbuster film, from the last year of my teens.

I remember it being absolutely fantastic, 'the' film, marketed to within an inch of it's life, all action with the bestest car ever.


30 years later and it turns out Batman (1989) is shitehouse.


Anyhoo, the point for the thread is that the special effects were anything but special.
Begging the question:-

What can we expect from cinema in just 30 years time and how bad will the current crop of 'blue screen brilliant films' look?

I think its hit a point where its hard to wow anymore, because absolutely anything can be produced in screen using visual effects. Remember how amazing and real the first Jurassic Park was, but that wow factor hasn't been the same in the subsequent films. Disaster movies would always push the envelope and produce something new and novel, but then 2012 came along and did absolutely everything, earthquake, volcano, tsunami and at a scale that can't really be beaten. How to do a diasaster movie now.

Batman was great though, as a completely kitsch film with its tongue firmly in its cheek. Forget the special effects. The Nolan ones took themselves too seriously.
 




TheJasperCo

Well-known member
Jan 20, 2012
4,596
Exeter
Which is perfect, as they now need to write a ****ing story worth telling.

It is an interesting point though. I haven't properly got my teeth into a good film for some years now, and the same goes with novels. I just lost that spark, that imagination from my childhood and it means that plotlines and stories don't have the same impact on me any more.

It's different with TV dramas though: could binge on a good TV series until the middle of the next century.
 






DumLum

Well-known member
Oct 24, 2009
3,772
West, West, West Sussex.
Last night I thought I'd show the kids this massive blockbuster film, from the last year of my teens.

I remember it being absolutely fantastic, 'the' film, marketed to within an inch of it's life, all action with the bestest car ever.


30 years later and it turns out Batman (1989) is shitehouse.


Anyhoo, the point for the thread is that the special effects were anything but special.
Begging the question:-

What can we expect from cinema in just 30 years time and how bad will the current crop of 'blue screen brilliant films' look?

This has happened to me many times recently.
Times have moved on, we are getting old or both.
 




Stat Brother

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 11, 2003
73,734
West west west Sussex
This has happened to me many times recently.
Times have moved on, we are getting old or both.

It was so painfully slow.
The film must have taken a good 30 minutes before Nicholson took his acid bath.

But as said the most eye opening part of the film was the not so special effects.

What was jaw dropping now looks like 'The Land That Time Forgot'.
 




Pevenseagull

Anti-greed coalition
Jul 20, 2003
19,636
Everything is so formulaic now.

Typical story :

Some goodies are in peril having been captured as part of some dastardly outfits evil plan.
A misfit team are put together including some brash older cynic and a fresh faced hero.
The team journey through a dangerous landscape and put together a daring raid against the odds.
Someone who betrayed them has a personal epiphany.
With seconds to spare out heroes close the portal/ blow something up.


Utter tripe.


Give me a decent film like 'Bridge On The River Kwai'.
 


MattBackHome

Well-known member
Jul 7, 2003
11,729
It was so painfully slow.
The film must have taken a good 30 minutes before Nicholson took his acid bath.

But as said the most eye opening part of the film was the not so special effects.

What was jaw dropping now looks like 'The Land That Time Forgot'.

Was the bit where Joker's goons spray paint the art gallery and interrupt their date as good as I remember it was though?

Or the 'Love That Joker' advert - that was good as well.

I haven't seen it since the 90's.
 


Stat Brother

Well-known member
NSC Patron
Jul 11, 2003
73,734
West west west Sussex
It depends on whether you equate good with toe curling.

Jnr did let out a half laugh half 'cool' of approval when the Batplane needlessly popped through the clouds to be silhouetted by the moon.
 




Easy 10

Brain dead MUG SHEEP
Jul 5, 2003
61,772
Location Location
In terms of special effects and their evolution, I think I have only been genuinely "wowed" 4 times.

Star Wars - that scene when the massive Death Star Destroyer arrives on the screen flying over your heads was absolutely jaw-dropping, and still stands up to todays standards IMO. In that one moment, you knew you were about to see something very, very special.

Terminator 2 - the liquid metal CGI baddie. That was thrilling and mesmerising.

Jurassic Park - just an astounding leap forward in CGI, and again, it still stands up to todays standards. Utterly spectacular when I saw it the first time.

The Matrix - brought something brand new to the CGI table with that revolving "bullet-time" camera, that was really cool.

Special effects have inevitably plateau'd out these days, to the point where they're often quite dull and boring (I just can't sit through another Transformers movie, its like watching someone playing a computer game). I guess the only room for another giant technological leap forward in movies is if they find a way to make properly convincing TRUE 3D. I've always been fairly underwhelmed by it so far.
 


MattBackHome

Well-known member
Jul 7, 2003
11,729
It depends on whether you equate good with toe curling.

Jnr did let out a half laugh half 'cool' of approval when the Batplane needlessly popped through the clouds to be silhouetted by the moon.

I'm not having that.

What about Jack Nicholson doing his Jack Palance impression? That was a good bit as well.
 






hans kraay fan club

The voice of reason.
Helpful Moderator
Mar 16, 2005
61,338
Chandlers Ford
Everything is so formulaic now.

Typical story :

Some goodies are in peril having been captured as part of some dastardly outfits evil plan.
A misfit team are put together including some brash older cynic and a fresh faced hero.
The team journey through a dangerous landscape and put together a daring raid against the odds.
Someone who betrayed them has a personal epiphany.
With seconds to spare out heroes close the portal/ blow something up.


Utter tripe.


Give me a decent film like 'Bridge On The River Kwai'.

:jester:
 


Uh_huh_him

Well-known member
Sep 28, 2011
10,685
I love Batman/Tim Burton/Jack Nicholson and Michael Keaton.
The hype was extraordinary. The expectation was high, but the film was a bit shit.

Special effects don't bother me too much, unless they are shockingly bad.
As long as the story holds together and the actors put in decent performances.

The story for Batman was weak and didn't add anything to the Batman universe.

Nicholson clearly was just taking the cheque.
The Joker is a fantastic character and should have been an opportunity for him to really steal the show.
However he just phoned in a sub standard "mad Jack" performance.
 


Sompting_Seagull

Well-known member
Jun 8, 2011
2,143
North Stand
In terms of special effects and their evolution, I think I have only been genuinely "wowed" 4 times.

Star Wars - that scene when the massive Death Star Destroyer arrives on the screen flying over your heads was absolutely jaw-dropping, and still stands up to todays standards IMO. In that one moment, you knew you were about to see something very, very special.

Terminator 2 - the liquid metal CGI baddie. That was thrilling and mesmerising.

Jurassic Park - just an astounding leap forward in CGI, and again, it still stands up to todays standards. Utterly spectacular when I saw it the first time.

The Matrix - brought something brand new to the CGI table with that revolving "bullet-time" camera, that was really cool.

Special effects have inevitably plateau'd out these days, to the point where they're often quite dull and boring (I just can't sit through another Transformers movie, its like watching someone playing a computer game). I guess the only room for another giant technological leap forward in movies is if they find a way to make properly convincing TRUE 3D. I've always been fairly underwhelmed by it so far.

This....and then I’d add then came Avatar in 3D at the cinema....visually stunning.

Seeing as James Cameron has been working on Avatar 2, 3, 4 and 5 since I’m expecting big things from them!
 


Dick Head

⭐⭐⭐⭐⭐
Jan 3, 2010
13,632
Quaxxann
Last night I thought I'd show the kids this massive blockbuster film, from the last year of my teens.

I remember it being absolutely fantastic, 'the' film, marketed to within an inch of it's life, all action with the bestest car ever.


30 years later and it turns out Batman (1989) is shitehouse.


Anyhoo, the point for the thread is that the special effects were anything but special.
Begging the question:-

What can we expect from cinema in just 30 years time and how bad will the current crop of 'blue screen brilliant films' look?

Was that the one with the shark repellent?

 
Last edited:




Harry Wilson's tackle

Harry Wilson's Tackle
NSC Patron
Oct 8, 2003
50,133
Faversham
I remember watching a great film where a car drives off a cliff - and then the curtains drew for an interlude! I was really wowed. The film was Chitty Chitty Bang Bang. I was ten.

I haven't seen this film since but suspect that 50 years may have taken the shine off it.

Called 'getting old'.
 


AmexRuislip

Trainee Spy 🕵️‍♂️
Feb 2, 2014
33,822
Ruislip
Last night I thought I'd show the kids this massive blockbuster film, from the last year of my teens.

I remember it being absolutely fantastic, 'the' film, marketed to within an inch of it's life, all action with the bestest car ever.


30 years later and it turns out Batman (1989) is shitehouse.


Anyhoo, the point for the thread is that the special effects were anything but special.
Begging the question:-

What can we expect from cinema in just 30 years time and how bad will the current crop of 'blue screen brilliant films' look?

f681d95348b722df29fa9d674e096efb.jpg

Has let himself go lately!
 


Albion and Premier League latest from Sky Sports


Top
Link Here