Quote:
Originally Posted by dood
You would've been 3 years old when the original came out in theatres so you wouldn't remember how that film changed movie going experience, or appreciate the maturity of the second one until much later
Without those two films, Nolans Batman (which I am sure you hail as a masterpiece) wouldn't have a leg to stand on.
The 1989 Batman was a frenzy never seen before when it came to superhero movies
|
While what you say is true, about it being a frenzy before the film came out. What you said about Nolans films not gaving a leg to stand can be said about the Keaton films and Superman the movie. If Superman the movie hadn't started the Superhero movie trend, granted the sequels were less well recieved, there wouldn't have been a clamoring for other Superhero films like the 89 Batman.
Funny thing is I remember all the stuff that happened right around the 89 film but, even though they weren't Superhero films. A film going and marketing frenzy had really started after E.T. E.T. was friggin every where. I was three, I cried at the of the film. The next film I saw that for was Return Of The Jedi. Then the 89' Batman. I remember these things because I remember watching each film in the theater at a young age and wanting all the cups and toys and movie tie-ins.
So was it really Batman 89' or was it just the way large budget films were marketed? I can't say it changed the movie going experience either. Star wars and other films had already done that.
Nostalgia factors in a lot here, when it comes to the 89' film. I saw it in theaters at the age of 10. Blew me away...at 10. But dont't blame someone for seeing the imperfections in the film. Because its far from perfect. Returns even less so.
So yeah, he might be young, but his opinion is valid.