This is an archive of Batman-News.com from 2010 to 2025. For the latest news, check out BatmanNews.com
The Premier Source For All Things Batman and DC
Tim Burton’s Batman and Batman Returns Come to Theaters in Dolby
Once again, Gotham calls — and this time, it's in Dolby.Tim Burton’s Batman (1989) and Batman Returns (1992) are suiting up for one more night in theaters on August 25, 2025. But don’t expect a dusty revival screening. These aren’t your old VHS copies dragged back from a garage sale. For the first time ever, both films will be presented in Dolby Vision and Dolby Atmos, remastered to a level that might even impress Bruce Wayne’s home theater system — assuming he doesn’t already have a Bat-projector rigged to the Moon.This one-night-only event will play exclusively in over 160 Dolby Cinema at AMC Theatres locations across the US. The idea is simple: Take two of the most visually stylized and operatically weird Batman films ever made, polish them with today's bleeding-edge audio-visual tech, and let them loose on the big screen again like it’s 1989 and Prince is still topping the charts. If that doesn’t feel like justice, what does?Michael Keaton’s brooding, barely blinking Batman. Jack Nicholson’s smile should come with a parental warning. Michelle Pfeiffer’s peerless Catwoman and Danny DeVito’s grotesque Penguin — all of them get the Dolby glow-up. According to Tim Burton himself, watching these films again in this format made them feel “new and exciting.” That’s a rare statement from a director who typically makes “haunting and surreal” his daily coffee order.It’s also a bit of full-circle poetic justice. Batman Returns was the first feature film ever released in Dolby Digital back in 1992. Now, more than 30 years later, the films are being resurrected with Dolby’s modern tech marvels, Dolby Vision and Dolby Atmos. Translation: deeper blacks, richer soundscapes, and all the Danny Elfman your nervous system can physically withstand.Whether you’re a die-hard fan, a nostalgic parent, or just someone tired of gritty Batman movies that forgot what “gothic” actually means, this is your shot. Tickets are on sale now — and yes, even in Dolby, you’ll still believe a man can wear rubber and win an Oscar.Buy tickets for Batman (1989) | Buy tickets for Batman Returns (1992)
This is an archive of Batman-News.com from 2010 to 2025. For the latest news, check out BatmanNews.com
33 comments
love both movies, but I always thought the second one was a tad overrated when people say that is superior to the first one. Batman 89 was, for me, a more cohesive and a better Batman movie than Returns, where Burton made more of a "Burton" movie than a Batman one
Returns jumps the shark for me. 89 has Joker taking down the Batwing with a pistol but Returns has so many more ridiculous things going on.
yeah, but for me the worst thing is that there's almost no Batman in Returns and, as much as I like the rest of characters, it is still a bad thing there's so little of the main character
I like that, personally. Too much Batman in a Batman movie can have the unintended consequence of making the character feel mundane and common. It's counterintuitive, but a light touch maximizes the screen presence. At a certain point in The Batman, I got bored with the same old delivery and everything from Pattinson. It started to become banal.
Not every pitch should be the fastball.
Not that I disagree with you, but he should've been sprinkled a tad more throughout the movie, as it was in TDK or BvS (TDKR has the same problem as Returns for me)
One difference there is that while Batman is scarce in The Dark Knight Rises, Bruce Wayne is all over it. It's a Bruce Wayne movie. Batman Returns is driven by Selina/Catwoman more so than Bruce/Batman. All opinions on that approach are valid, people like what they like. Burton has talked about it before and said, for him, Bruce/Batman was in it just enough for his tastes, because, as a character, he wants to be as hidden as possible.
Some people think Burton just wasn't interested in Batman. But that's actually just the way in which Burton found him interesting, by keeping him as mysterious as possible.
well, I think he achieved it, but too much in the end XD
However I have to disagree with you about one thing: In TDKR, I think Bruce Wayne is also diluted and other characters receive much more time and attention than him, especially Blake. Bruce Wayne/Batman just spends too much time out of the action, first because he's retired and second because he's imprisoned. I don't know, but I would've made him appear in Gotham much sooner after Bane's takeout and just act like this urban legend as he's supposed to be before going against Bane/Talia
Burton only ever wanted to give a sense of insight into Bruce Wayne's psyche. It's the basic fundamentals in '89, we "discover" the tragedy which is driving him through Vicki Vale's investigation of him. Batman Returns is giving us a look into Bruce by proxy, through Selina/Catwoman, whose character development is made analogous to Bruce in Keaton's only real speech in either movie. Most of the character work is on Keaton's performance, the looks he gives, and the personality in some scenes along with the brooding in others. I think the way he makes up for what's not in the script - by design - is a big reason for his popularity in the role.
In The Dark Knight Rises, Bale had almost 50 minutes of screentime, between Batman and Bruce Wayne. John Blake was on screen for ~20 minutes. He was an important character (mostly for Bruce's arc), but I wouldn't say Bruce Wayne took a backseat to him. As Nolan said, The Dark Knight was an ending to Batman's career, so they had to be diligent in how they assigned weight to that. But the movie is about how Bruce Wayne was frozen in time in the absence of Batman, his psychological need for that outlet to the extent where he'd rather have an excuse to die as Batman than continue an existence as Bruce Wayne, and regaining his strength of spirit through growing beyond that.
I agree with your Keaton analysis, it's totally that and yeah a big part of his appeal, although I wouldn't dismiss his iconic suit and batmobile as part of that appeal.
About TDKR, I must admit I never want to find out how much a character is on screen, because for me it just tarnish the magic when you discover how little that big character is in its movie (like Vito Corleone or Darth Vader in A New Hope). Anyway, as you already stated the times, I'll play along ;p
50 minutes for his last movie, a movie that lasts almost 3 hours, is still very little screetime for the main character, more so for someone as big as Batman. And about Blake, those 20 minutes feel a lot more, at least for me. He ecplised Wayne in many scenes where I think Batman should've been there. In my opinion of course.
Screentime is generally just a measure of how big someone's role in a movie is. It's just a metric. I wouldn't say that Blake seemed to overshadow Bruce in the movie, at all. That wasn't my read on it. His was another 3rd person perspective by which the movie examined Bruce Wayne/Batman. His whole story in the movie is about Batman, what it meant to him as a teenager, what it means to him as a cop, and his expectations of what Bruce Wayne should be. John Blake is a perspective on Batman.
~50 minutes of screentime for an actor is quite a lot, actually. Bale had 35 minutes of screentime in The Dark Knight, which has a runtime only 13 minutes shorter than its sequel. So Bale had a higher percentage of screentime in The Dark Knight Rises than he did in The Dark Knight.
yeah, but the difference is that in TDK, all the scenes with Batman were peppered throughout the movie, so it looked like it was more Batman, if you get what I mean.
Anyway, I like the way you see it, I really do, but I still think those two movies needed more Batman
Fair enough. I'd never say someone shouldn't want more Batman in a Batman movie. I just have my own way of looking at it based on what the movie is, as a movie, beyond just being a Batman movie, and the needs of the story it's telling. And the purpose of supporting characters is part of that.
For example, Harvey Dent basically takes on a protagonist role in The Dark Knight (as Bruce/Batman is a static character). But the purpose is to show the contrast between Harvey, a good man who CAN be broken and corrupted and turn against his own values, and Bruce Wayne, who cannot be broken as the movie demonstrates. The viewer doesn't even necessarily realize that's what's happening on their first viewing until the end, but we see Bruce shoulder the very thing that (quite understandably) breaks Harvey, and it's an insight into the strength of character and force of will that being Batman possesses. So the movie, which you realize in the end, is about defining Batman's purpose in Gotham City as "The Dark Knight" and the uncommon resilience it takes to fulfill that. And it does that by deftly utilizing the supporting cast's perspective on that character.
can't say I disagree with you and your points, it's just that I needed a tad more in those movies, eapecially TDKR, which was the grandiose finale of the trilogy.
Nice discussion btw ;)
Unless you can throw that fastball an average of 101.5 mph like Ben Joyce of the Angels.
89 has a big plot hole in the finale, considering the Joker broadcasts (literally) exactly where he will be and when, yet there's no police presence. They don't arrive until Batman is chasing the Joker up the cathedral.
Both are cartoonish, but I think Batman Returns is a little tighter. The only contrivance that springs to mind is "where did the Penguin get the Batmobile schematics" which is answerable with his "You flush it, I flaunt it" trope he shows off to Shreck early on. Otherwise, it's all about context. Rocket-pack penguins don't feel out of place in a cartoonish, fairy tale setting.
I say this as a fan whose favorite adaptation to date is Nolan's more grounded take.
I don’t recall the Joker gave details of the location where he’d be giving away his money.🤔
Batman Returns just has too many silly things. Signal mirrors on Wayne Manor, flying umbrellas, the Batmobile nonsense, mind controlled penguins, and the CD disc stretching thing to name just a few.
I like Returns but i wish we could have gotten a true sequel to 89 is tone and visuals.
Yeah, it was the 200th Anniversary Parade for Gotham. The Joker said he'd be there with $20M in cash for the crowd. Paraded down the street with balloons, floats, and everything...
I don't have any issues with any of that in Batman Returns. The signal mirror makes for an aesthetically awesome shot. Penguin with a helicopter umbrella is right out of the comics, in a good way. It's not "uncool".
I remember him saying that we would be giving money away that night but did he specify that he would be parading down Main Street?
Cops turning up too late is a movie trope. At least in Batman they turned up while the action was ongoing and not just after it was wrapped up.☺️The mirrors look cool, but make no sense. Anyone driving up to Wayne manor couldn’t help but noticed giant mirrors with bat emblems sitting on the roof.
The umbrella IS cool, but it does veer a little into the ridiculous. I would keep the umbrella but delete the Batmobile hacking and mind controlled, rocked firing penguins.
It was the standard parade route, though. All the people knew where they'd be. Knox and Vicki knew where they'd be, to cover it. Always kinda stuck out to me. I don't really mind it, it's not ruinous, it's just kinda funny.
The batsymbols on the mirrors, which are actually small on the house, aren't visible unless they're lit up (and you're at that height). Plus, I don't think he's getting any unscheduled visitors...
Kevin Smith had this observation on Batman Returns, in the scene where Batman is piloting the "Batskiboat" down the sewers towards Penguin's lair, and two rocket pack penguins pop out and shoot at him, he sees it and avoids it, etc. And the "blink and you'll miss it" facial expression Keaton has afterwards encapsulates that world and why people like it. "Wtf, I almost just got killed by penguins shooting missiles at me. This my life." Yeah, it's absurd, but it's also fittingly absurd, and the movie both knows and revels in that. I don't think it betrays it, it becomes part of the appeal.
You take away Penguin's RC takeover of the Batmobile, you take away another great scene. Danny's performance in that scene, the Batmobile destroying other cars, etc. I don't think it makes the movie better to make it more normal.
Was it? Did they?
Joker never even said he was throwing a parade, did he? Everyone in the immediate area just turned out when the floats started going by.I don’t think that’s true at all. They would be very noticeable in the day from the ground. Trust me, you you can pick out details like roofing tiles, gargoyles, and chimney pots you can recognise giant mirrors with Bat symbols.
Agree to disagree. You delete some of the camp, tighten up the story, and you make a better movie. But to each her own.
They paraded right by City Hall. One would presume that a 200th Anniversary parade would include City Hall along its route. Joker even said they'd dump money on the crowd at midnight. There were news vans there. I'm not sure how the cops would be the last to show...
I'm not sure who'd see it, considering he's a recluse in a mansion in the middle of the woods on the outskirts of the city, but I don't think they activate until the signal comes on. But whatever.
If I ever had a point here, it's that it's a tight movie. It's certainly whimsical, in a darker way, but there's no subplots going nowhere or major plot developments contingent on contrivances. Every scene and element is purposeful within the narrative. Ultimately, it's an aesthetics movie, but I can totally see radio controlled Penguins threatening Gotham City as a Golden or Silver Age Batman comic book plot - which are the primary inspirations behind those movies (according to Michael Uslan).
Joker didn’t say he would be throwing a parade though, only that he’d e dumping cash upon the crowds. Gotham City is bustling with people at all hours of the night and at various locations. Gotham city cops are lazy and corrupt. They were probably eating donuts and taking bribes elsewhere until Gordon kicked them into gear.
Who knows, perhaps Joker created a distraction elsewhere? The fact that the film doesn’t stop to provide expositional dislodge isn’t a plot hole and probably isn’t something most people even think about on the first viewing.Paper boys. Milk men. The gas man. Heck, Wayne threw a party at the mansion in the first movie and invites his dates over in both.
You can clearly see the symbol unlit just before it lights up. It’s not completely blanked out.I though Michael said Returns was more inspired by the 80’s and 90’s era of comic books, the darker stuff and the Golden Age.
He said the festival was on, but I don't want to keep harping on it.
I don't think the paper boy or milk man makes it that far out. I think Alfred goes to town and gets all the provisions (which is how we find him in the movie). I also doubt they're sending someone to the house to read the gas meter. The rich live a little differently. There'd be a meter station somewhere off-site. You're not getting through a billionaire's property to read the meter on their house. Bruce also didn't have those installed on Wayne Manor until after Batman '89, as the ending of that movie is when he gave them the batsignal. And I think one's a projector and one's a mirror.
I've only ever seen Uslan's speak specifically to the first one, where he said he only showed Burton the 1939-1940s comics - though I think Burton also looked at The Killing Joke, but more in terms of artistry and tone than for the plot, though you'd think otherwise. But the Joker's origin in '89 was more inspired by Detective Comics #27 and Batman #168. They also looked at and nodded to The Dark Knight Returns, which was enormously popular at the time, with the Corto Maltese nod.
There's a few things I've looked at, trope-wise, which Batman Returns seems to be twisting from the Golden and Silver Age. The Penguin's high tech trick umbrellas, using giant cages to hold prisoners, Catwoman being a sympathetic, middle-class working woman (plus the amnesia/head injury angle of her origin), etc. There was even an unused take of Batman holding the phone upside down like the Golden Age version.
Little kids trick or treat at Wayne Manor in Batman Forever. And of course people are still coming around Gordon, Dick, Chase etc…
Face it, there’s no way to defend such a cool but stupid design☺️I don't know that it makes sense to use "kids" trick or treating in Batman Forever to demonstrate a design flaw in Wayne Manor alerting Bruce Wayne to the batsignal in Batman Returns...
It’s the same continuity. If little kids are coming by, it means Bruce has neighbours. And they can all see the dishes on the roof lighting up with the Batsymbol.
Even if you consider it the same continuity - which I don't, and apparently WB/DC doesn't either - that's not Batman Returns' problem. Wayne Manor wasn't envisioned within a subdivision by those filmmakers. It was a lonely, old castle up on a hill, well out of town and gated. No unannounced guests.
WB did consider the movie to be in the same continuity when it was made and for years afterwards. They even bundled all for films in the same box set.
Selina visited the house in Batman Returns.Selina was invited.
Batman Returns is generally considered a better movie, and the purer "Tim Burton movie", but Batman was the more "action/adventure" of the two. So I think it's more popular with comic book fans looking for a comic book movie over an art house movie, whereas the word on Returns was "this is a great Batman movie for people who hate Batman". I wouldn't go that far, I love it, but I also am just a fan of Tim Burton's movies. Couldn't be more different from the guy, never been inside a Hot Topic in my life, but I love me some Tim Burton.
No teal? Let’s go!
Bought my ticket but was hoping this was going to be a double feature. Looks like it's just one or the other depending on what's being offered at each theater. In my case they just had Batman and Batman Returns was not an option. The next closest theater would be too far to make it in time, unless of course I had a Batmobile 🦇
That’s strange. All the theaters near me are doing the double feature.
Browse By Topic
Browse By Year
This is an archive of Batman-News.com from 2010 to 2025. For the latest news, check out BatmanNews.com