Jump to content



Sign up for a free account to remove the pop-up ads

Signing up for an account is fast and free. As a member you can join in the conversation, enter contests and remove the pop-up ads that guests get. Click here to create your free account.

Photo
Blu-ray Reviews

HTF BLU-RAY REVIEW: Batman: The Motion Picture Anthology 1989-1997



  • You cannot start a new topic
  • Please log in to reply
25 replies to this topic

#1 of 26 OFFLINE   Matt Hough

Matt Hough

    Executive Producer



  • 12,327 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 24 2006
  • LocationCharlotte, NC

Posted March 04 2009 - 02:54 PM



#2 of 26 OFFLINE   Ensign Eddie

Ensign Eddie

    Stunt Coordinator



  • 165 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 02 2006

Posted March 05 2009 - 05:48 AM

Matt, thanks for the review. Just to be clear, there are no new features (except the digital copy) that weren't in the last DVD set? If so, I will probably just hang on to them.

#3 of 26 OFFLINE   Matt Hough

Matt Hough

    Executive Producer



  • 12,327 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 24 2006
  • LocationCharlotte, NC

Posted March 05 2009 - 08:49 AM

No, no new features that I found (other than, as you say, the digital copy of the first film).

#4 of 26 OFFLINE   Ernie tr

Ernie tr

    Auditioning



  • 10 posts
  • Join Date: May 30 2006

Posted March 05 2009 - 01:56 PM

are the films in regular blu-ray cases or slim cases?

#5 of 26 OFFLINE   Matt Hough

Matt Hough

    Executive Producer



  • 12,327 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 24 2006
  • LocationCharlotte, NC

Posted March 05 2009 - 03:03 PM

They're in slim cases.

#6 of 26 OFFLINE   Eric F

Eric F

    Screenwriter



  • 1,810 posts
  • Join Date: Sep 05 1999

Posted March 05 2009 - 04:17 PM

Really? I mean Really? You gave Batman Returns only a 3.5 for content and Batman Forever a 3?Posted Image I strongly disagree here. I think the last two movies are mediocre-poor, with the first two being good-excellent. I think you'll find this to be the general all around consensus.

#7 of 26 OFFLINE   Nicholas Martin

Nicholas Martin

    Screenwriter



  • 2,683 posts
  • Join Date: Mar 18 2003

Posted March 05 2009 - 05:42 PM

If that's his view of them, that's his view. The A/V quality is the real reason these reviews are as vital as they are. I'm obviously not of the consensus, because I've seen Returns simply too much...I'll likely never watch it again. Not only that, I hold Forever in very high regard. Always have.

#8 of 26 OFFLINE   TheBat

TheBat

    Producer



  • 3,040 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 02 1999

Posted March 06 2009 - 12:33 AM

I have the import of batman returns. it looks fine to me. Jacob

#9 of 26 OFFLINE   cafink

cafink

    Producer



  • 3,045 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 19 1999

Posted March 06 2009 - 09:52 AM

I agree that's the general consensus regarding the relative merits of each film, but I don't see why a critic or reviewer should be concerned about the general consensus. If I'm reading a review, I want to know what the reviewer thinks. And for what it's worth, noted film critic Roger Ebert actually gave Batman Forever a higher rating than any of the other three films--2.5 stars for Batman Forever, 2 apiece for the others. That's right, he rated Batman and Robin just as highly as Batman and Batman Returns. And I know I'm the only person in the world who feels this way, but I rather liked Batman and Robin. The Burton films were great, too, but Batman and Robin really evoked the campy feeling of the '60s television series, for which I've always had a soft spot. Ebert even noted the similarity in his review. I'm surprised more folks don't dig Batman and Robin for the same reason.
 

 


#10 of 26 OFFLINE   Chris S

Chris S

    Screenwriter



  • 2,528 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 09 2000
  • Real Name:Chris S

Posted March 06 2009 - 01:02 PM

Thanks for the very lengthy review! As to the PQ of the original Batman... I always recalled it looking rather soft even in the theater. Granted that was now sometime ago but I wouldn't have ever said it was "sharp" or had high levels of detail. That could have been due to director's intentions or simply a matter of the filming process (ie. film stock, etc), I don't know. In the end I'll be passing on the Anthology release and will instead be picking up the single release of Batman on May 5th.
DVD & Blu-ray - It's all about the movies!

#11 of 26 OFFLINE   Stephen Brooks

Stephen Brooks

    Second Unit



  • 406 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 19 2003
  • Real Name:Stephen
  • LocationBrownsburg, IN

Posted March 07 2009 - 02:32 AM

I have a hard time considering Batman Returns a Batman movie. It's Tim Burton indulging his weirdness in a black comedy with a few action sequences, that just so happens to have characters from a comic book called "Batman". There is nothing wrong with dark movies as long as they are still fun to watch.....Batman Returns was just downright uncomfortable. I'm not sure even Ledger's Joker would get a kick out of drowning babies in toxic sludge. Batman Forever, while I initially hated it, has grown on me over the years. If you don't think of it as a sequel to the Burton films, but just as a single, stand-alone Batman story, it's a fairly enjoyable little flick. Not a definative Batman movie by any means but a nice diversion. If you've ever read the novelization, this actually started out as a much more serious Batman story than what ended up on screen. It would be nice if we got to see that director's cut they keep talking about one day. Overall, I think both directors had a pretty good first attempt at a Batman movie and fell apart on the second.
IMPERIAL OFFICER: Lord Vader, I can't find the Central Navigational Network!

VADER (points to control panel): This......is CNN.

#12 of 26 OFFLINE   Brian Borst

Brian Borst

    Screenwriter



  • 1,137 posts
  • Join Date: May 15 2008

Posted March 07 2009 - 03:04 AM

I think it's weird that Tim Burton gets slack for having free reign with a sequel, and Christopher Nolan gets applauded for it. Both The Dark Knight and Batman Returns aren't that close to the comic books (I heard a lot of people say that TDK could very well be a regular crime movie, if they removed Batman, The Joker and Harvey Dent). Of course you could take liberties from the comics, but one film gets attacked for it, and the other one doesn't.
Never go out with anyone who thinks Fellini is a type of cheese

My Blu-Ray/DVD Collection

#13 of 26 OFFLINE   TheBat

TheBat

    Producer



  • 3,040 posts
  • Join Date: Aug 02 1999

Posted March 07 2009 - 03:28 AM

batman begins and dark knight get a pass on everything.. its very unfair. both burtons films are fine movies. dark knight could have easily been a crime movie.. it was more that then a real batman movie. Jacob

#14 of 26 OFFLINE   Larry Sutliff

Larry Sutliff

    Screenwriter



  • 2,861 posts
  • Join Date: Jun 17 2000

Posted March 07 2009 - 04:30 AM

That's because, whatever their deviations from the source material(and they are more faithful in most regards than the previous 4 films), they are well written and well acted. The Batman series before Nolan had poor writing and little character development, though the Burton films had other things to hold interest(production design, music, etc.).

#15 of 26 OFFLINE   Bryan Ri

Bryan Ri

    Screenwriter



  • 1,664 posts
  • Join Date: Jan 31 2004

Posted March 08 2009 - 01:43 AM

Are the covers the same as the previous release, or are they the same as the international release?

#16 of 26 OFFLINE   Matt Hough

Matt Hough

    Executive Producer



  • 12,327 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 24 2006
  • LocationCharlotte, NC

Posted March 08 2009 - 03:00 AM

I don't know what the international release covers looked like, but the individual Blu-ray covers for each film do NOT look like their DVD counterparts.

#17 of 26 OFFLINE   cafink

cafink

    Producer



  • 3,045 posts
  • Join Date: Apr 19 1999

Posted March 08 2009 - 03:08 AM

Except for the hideous and incongruous typeface used for the titles, I really liked the international covers of the Batman special edition DVDs. They were basically just the Batman emblem for each movie against a black field--the traditional yellow-and-black oval for Batman, the silvery version for Returns, the green "question mark" version for Forever, and the red "double" version for Batman & Robin. They looked kind of classy and really great.
 

 


#18 of 26 OFFLINE   RobertR

RobertR

    Lead Actor



  • 9,605 posts
  • Join Date: Dec 19 1998

Posted March 08 2009 - 03:47 AM

I think you meant flack.

#19 of 26 OFFLINE   Stephen Brooks

Stephen Brooks

    Second Unit



  • 406 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 19 2003
  • Real Name:Stephen
  • LocationBrownsburg, IN

Posted March 08 2009 - 05:39 AM

Batman '89 was basically a "crime movie" too, up until the introduction of a flamboyant villain with a crazy scheme of poisioning people with cosmetics about halfway through. And I think it worked just fine. I LOVE Batman '89 and always felt that we got cheated out of a true sequel to that film. If you watch the documentaries Burton freely admits that neither staying true to the comics nor pleasing the fans were even factors that they considered when making Returns. Its just my personal opinion that he shouldn't have been allowed to make a Batman film that way. I'm curious as to what parts of Batman Begins and The Dark Knight are supposedly so far removed from the comics. Aside from dropping some of the more fantasy elements such as Ra's al Ghul being immortal from regular dips in the Lazarus Pits or Joker surviving a fall into acid but being bleached to look perfectly like a clown, I think it's very true to the style and tone of SOME of the comics (which has changed more over the years in Batman than possibly any other comic series). The only major change i noticed was the way Two-Face recieved his scarring (which was also changed in the venerated Animanted Series).
IMPERIAL OFFICER: Lord Vader, I can't find the Central Navigational Network!

VADER (points to control panel): This......is CNN.

#20 of 26 OFFLINE   Stephen Brooks

Stephen Brooks

    Second Unit



  • 406 posts
  • Join Date: Nov 19 2003
  • Real Name:Stephen
  • LocationBrownsburg, IN

Posted March 08 2009 - 05:42 AM

To steer back towards the Blu-ray for a moment, am I correct that there is no way to upconvert standard def material that is actually encoded on a BD disc? So if I buy this set, the extras will actually look worse than when I watch them on upconverted DVD?
IMPERIAL OFFICER: Lord Vader, I can't find the Central Navigational Network!

VADER (points to control panel): This......is CNN.





Also tagged with one or more of these keywords: Blu-ray Reviews

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users