UHD Review Batman UHD Review (1 Viewer)

[CRW]

There's a comedic undertow to the film that undercuts the more dramatic scenes and that says "this is just a comic book movie and the stakes aren't real." Contrast that with the "The Dark Knight" and the Joker and every action in that film has consequences, sometimes fatal ones. The stakes are very real in "DK".

 

[Colin Jacobson]

We'll never know how audiences would have responded to a darker knight. Maybe they would have accepted that version, maybe not. We do know that Burton had Samm Hamm's original script rewritten and put in line with Burton's sensibilities. (Hamm's script was closer in tone to Miller's graphic novels.) A hero is only as good as his villain and its hard to make a Joker a serious threat who capers around to the tune of Prince's "Batdance."

The song "Batdance" never appears in the film. "Partyman" appears during the museum sequence, and "Trust" plays during the parade...

 

[Carlo_M]

Well, remember at the time that the '89 film was considered surprisingly dark compared to what the general public knew of the character, which was primarily the '66 TV show. Comic book fans knew about Miller's work with the character, but even that was only a couple of years old when the film went into production. There's no way that a realistic take on the character, like Nolan's, would have been a success in 1989. We wouldn't have even gotten Nolan's take on Batman had the '89 film not been a massive success with a general audience. While Superman in 1978 started the ball rolling for treating Superheroes as modern mythology, the '89 Batman film really brought about a cultural re-evaluation of the Batman character and the depiction of Superheroes on film, directly leading to the last decade of dominance by Superhero films at the box office.

For as much as the 1989 Batman is regarded as rather silly these days in comparison to modern Superhero films, its importance as a touchstone in cinema history can't be denied.

I agree (and said it slightly differently earlier in the thread). Everything needs to be judged in the context of the time it was released. It's easy to look at The Beatles (especially the early albums) and Elvis right now as simple pop/rock. But they were very controversial/edgy at the time because American sensibilities in the 60s was very different than what it is today.

While Burton's Batmans may not have aged well for me, I don't think they owe anyone an apology or explanation for what they were at the time they were released, which was a stark departure from any previous screen depiction of the titular character. Even though I prefer now the Nolan films, I can unabashedly admit I enjoyed the heck out of them in my teens and early twenties.

 

[English Invader]

Comic book fans knew about Miller's work with the character, but even that was only a couple of years old when the film went into production. There's no way that a realistic take on the character, like Nolan's, would have been a success in 1989.

There is also Alan Moore's The Killing Joke which is where I rest my case for those who say comic books aren't a true art form. A Death in the Family shouldn't be overlooked either.

 

[Brian Kidd]

I agree (and said it slightly differently earlier in the thread). Everything needs to be judged in the context of the time it was released. It's easy to look at The Beatles (especially the early albums) and Elvis right now as simple pop/rock. But they were very controversial/edgy at the time because American sensibilities in the 60s was very different than what it is today.

While Burton's Batmans may not have aged well for me, I don't think they owe anyone an apology or explanation for what they were at the time they were released, which was a stark departure from any previous screen depiction of the titular character. Even though I prefer now the Nolan films, I can unabashedly admit I enjoyed the heck out of them in my teens and early twenties.

Agreed. I much prefer Nolan's films, as well. In my opinion, he's a far-more-talented director than Burton is. (Though I still consider much of Burton's early work to be wonderful.) I look at the late-80's/early-90's Batman films in the context of the time when they were made and how they affected me as a young adult when they were released. Certainly, my opinions of the films are influenced by Nostalgia Goggles, but watching them now, I feel like there is much to appreciate about the talents of the people who made them and how they continue to work as mass-market entertainment that had more thought put into them than the typical blockbuster. Well, maybe 2.25 of them. Batman Forever has some aspects that I appreciate and enjoy, though it was really obvious, even back then, that the series was making a massive tonal shift from the two films that had come before. I didn't even bother to see Bat Nipple-palooza when it was released because I had heard it was so terrible. When I finally caught up with it on home video, I saw that I hadn't missed anything. That film was so insulting to my intelligence that, to this day, the sight of Akiva Goldsman's name on a screenplay makes me shudder. I also used to kind of like Joel Schumacher's films up to that point because, though they weren't Art, he had an off-kilter sensibility that tended to make the end result more entertaining than it might have been if handled by a more-conventional director. I gave up on him after Batman & Robin, though. His output since then hasn't given me any reason to change my mind.

 

[Tino]

Anyone else notice color differences with the new transfer?


I compared the vudu HDX stream to the iTunes 4K stream and there’s definitely some color differences. I just took these two shots very unscientifically with my iPhone off my OLED.

The top is iTunes.

 

[Josh Steinberg]

Vudu generally does not upgrade masters at lower resolutions when they get a new higher resolution master. iTunes does.

So for example: Warner makes a new 4K master of Batman. iTunes will provide that master to anyone viewing at any resolution. Vudu only adds the new 4K master for viewers actually watching in 4K; they leave the old HD master in place.

I was never happy with the older version. Setting aside screenshots, I didn’t like how it looked in playback. It wasn’t particularly sharp or detailed and looked to my eyes more like video than film. The new master is sharper, more detailed and has a more film-like look to it.

 

[Todd Erwin]

Vudu generally does not upgrade masters at lower resolutions when they get a new higher resolution master. iTunes does.

So for example: Warner makes a new 4K master of Batman. iTunes will provide that master to anyone viewing at any resolution. Vudu only adds the new 4K master for viewers actually watching in 4K; they leave the old HD master in place.

I was never happy with the older version. Setting aside screenshots, I didn’t like how it looked in playback. It wasn’t particularly sharp or detailed and looked to my eyes more like video than film. The new master is sharper, more detailed and has a more film-like look to it.

And was approved by the director.....

 

[WinstonCely]

I just watched a Youtube review of this new 4K release, and they noted the horrible blue/teal look that's been added to the 4K release. In fact, when I was looking at comparison footage, it doesn't looke like a good job of the blue/teal look. More like they slapped a LUT on the whole thing and didn't adjust it properly. Ugh. Why can't they just let films be presented in the color timing they originally had? It's one of the few flaws of Blade Runner: The Final Cut. This whole blue/teal craze needs to be terminated with extreme prejudice.

 

[Osato]

I thought all of the new transfers for the anthology set looked great. Love the new audio mixes too!

time for another watch if all 4!