BATMAN: THE MOTION PICTURE ANTHOLOGY 1989-1997 (Warner Bros.)

[Lexmark3200]

This is going to be a long, tough one to analyze and review because I have to do it disc by disc as I find the time; I watched the first two Burton helmed films last night, and I will share my results on those after some analysis of the history of this franchise and the coming of age for this particular box set.

First of all, let's get the packaging out of the way right now: the box Warner has put this new set in is absolutely stunning in my opinion (released just yesterday)...the very top of the box lifts off to expose the four discs inside the box, and then closes to complete the 3-D-like Batman logo effect on the front; REALLY nice job by Warner here. Now, I KNOW most everyone in here -- and probably in the world -- will say that Batman Begins is the definitive (or should have been) look at this dark comic hero, but I cannot comment on it because I have not yet seen it (if you can believe that); what I CAN say is that I do believe Tim Burton nailed it in the original film -- IN MY OPINION ONLY, Michael Keaton was a PERFECT Bruce Wayne and Batman; there is a particular scene in the first film where he's holding Nicholson up (before he becomes the Joker) and as he is setting him down Nicholson says "nice outfit..." and Keaton just has that perfect Batman "sneer" down from behind the mask --look for it closely. Val Kilmer and George Clooney NEVER came close to duplicating this performance. Now, I do not want to get into a bickering session here with members regarding Bale's performance in Begins because I have not yet seen it -- I am regulating this review to the originally-launched Dark Knight motion picture series.

Since the release of those awful snapper-cased bundled discs in the last Batman Collection set Warner put out, fans have been calling for something better because, to be truthful, those transfers and their subsequent Dolby Digital soundtracks were far from impressive. I personally held off buying that set because I knew this remastered set was coming; this happened a lot to me with purchases -- GoodFellas, Scarface, The Rocky Anthology, John Carpenter's Escape From New York -- as soon as there was rumor of a remastered version on its way, I held off and did not purchase the original pressings of these.

And so, with that said, Warner Brothers waited until the franchise was taken in a new direction in this frenzy of comic book films we are in now through Begins and released a remastered collection of the original films, each in two disc Special Editions, and each also available separately. The package, as I have said, is itself gorgeous, and EASILY makes up for the cheap, slapped-together packaging of the first box set. I sat through the first two Burton-helmed films last night and here's my take on THOSE; I will get to the last two (my G-d were those bad, especially the last with Arnie) as soon as I am finished watching and analyzing them.

BATMAN: TWO-DISC SPECIAL EDITION

Let me tell you something: while MANY disagree, it is my opinion that Keaton nailed this role and looked awesome under the cape and mask, and I believe, to date, there is no more psychotic comic villain than Jack Nicholson's Joker. Tim Burton filmed this original in a very dark fashion, creating a bleak Gotham City that, although argued heavily by Batman Begins fans, just worked I thought. The only thing that didn't work for me here -- and which was cleared up and fixed easily with Batman Begins -- was the fact that unlike Sam Raimi's Spider-Man films, Burton rushed right into things, never explaining the roots of the Caped Crusader and instead focusing right in on him taking out a couple of thugs in an alleyway. The subject of how Bruce's parents were killed by Nicholson's Jack Napier character is explored a little, but the development of his powers and training never was -- that's what Batman Begins was for, I guess. But it always rubbed me the wrong way how Raimi was able to explain the pre-power history of Peter Parker in the first film and yet Burton chose to go right for the throat and show our hero already taking out criminals in Gotham without explanation of how or why he comes a vigilante or how he trained in Ninja format. I still need to see Batman Begins, I know, I know....

I thought characterization was spot-on here; the film opens with a couple and their kid getting mugged in an alleyway of Gotham City, when the Dark Knight takes them out and hisses to one of the men: "I'm not going to kill you.....I want you to do me a favor....I want you to tell all your friends about me.....I'm Batman...." The line, for some reason, still sends chills up my spine as I just think Keaton's "voice" from behind the mask simply works -- as Kilmer and Clooney's simply didn't. Burton sets the action in motion very quickly here, setting up our villain-to-be as well, in the form of Jack Nicholson, working as a criminal under the payroll of a corrupt police lieutenant and a crime boss, played by Jack Palance. The problem is, Nicholson has been sleeping with the sexy mistress of Palance, and once Palance finds out, he has Nicholson set up by calling in the police to raid him and his men at Axis Chemical plant. But Batman arrives as well, to take out this dangerous Jack Napier (Nicholson) and his henchmen, but during a firefight with the cops, Keaton drops Nicholson into a vat of acidic chemicals, transforming him into "The Joker," a demented madman hell-bent on ruining Gotham and taking out the Caped Crusader.

Nicholson's performance is so over the top here, it's downright hysterical in places. His one-liners are horribly copied by all the other villains in the remaining Batman films, but they just don't work like they do on The Joker. I still find myself muttering the wisecracks spoken by Nicholson's Joker to this day. There are just so many perfect punch lines here from Jack that it's hard to just pinpoint one or a few and quote them. Once becoming The Joker, Batman has his hands full, as this new villain in Gotham and his henchmen create a shopping product scare, tampering with products that kill people and turn them into grinning versions of himself. In this first film, we are also introduced to the Vicki (or was it Vicky?) Vale character (a lovely Kim Bassinger) and Alexander Knox, a reporter for a local newspaper covering the Batman story. As the two of them try and nail down the Bat and his antics, Keaton and Bassinger fall in love and then, like always, Bassinger finds out who Bruce really is when Alfred lets her into the Bat cave. But Bruce Wayne has made some discoveries of his own: he realizes, after Nicholson pays a surprise visit to Bassinger's apartment while he is there and mutters "Did you ever dance with the devil by the pale moonlight?", that it was indeed this "Jack Napier" who killed his parents when he was a kid right in front of him -- way before he was even The Joker. As Batman prepares to do whatever it takes to stop The Joker and his gang from taking over Gotham, a final battle ensues where Nicholson takes control of an anniversary celebration for the city, dumping money on the crowd and promising a hand to hand fight with him and Batman; instead, Nicholson and his men dump poisonous gas on the crowd to kill them when Batman arrives in time by air, but for some odd reason, misses shooting down Nicholson even though he is targeted in his Bat Plane's scope. The Joker ends up shooting Batman's plane down, which crashes into the steps of a church, and the final sequence of the film begins. Nicholson takes Bassinger hostage to lure Keaton up to the top of the church, where The Joker's henchmen try to take the Caped Crusader out one by one while Nicholson, in a twisted fashion, dances with Bassinger outside on the ledge. Of course, Nicholson's men have their asses handed to them by Batman, and The Joker is forced to face the Caped Crusader on his own, where Batman admits to him that he knows it was him who killed his parents. We all know how the film ends from there, after Batman pretty much kicks the **** out of The Joker for anger over his parents, with Nicholson trying to get away by helicopter as Batman and Vale hang by a ledge of the church, and the Caped Crusader shoots a string around Nicholson's leg, attaching him to a gargoyle on the church while he is still attached to the escape helicopter's ladder. The ultimately leads to his death, as he plunges right down to the street below, some hundreds of feet beneath. Police Commissioner Gordon of Gotham City now announces there is a new hero in town, and all they need to do when they need his help is give the signal -- the bat signal, that is, into the sky.

Something that always bothered me about this: Harvey Dent, played by Billy Dee Williams in this first film, eventually becomes "Two Face" doesn’t he? But Two Face is played by Tommy Lee Jones in Batman Forever; an odd choice of actor changing here. Then again, the role of Batman and Bruce Wayne was changed twice from here, so what are you going to do...

At the end of the day -- and this is ONLY MY PERSONAL OPINION -- Burton, Keaton and Nicholson came together to perfectly transform this story from comic pages to the screen -- and I am saying this well aware of the fact that I have not yet seen Batman Begins and that in this particular forum, there are fans who will argue the exact opposite and feel the franchise has turned into a totally different direction only for the good, ESPECIALLY after Batman and Robin.

VIDEO SPECIFICATIONS:
NEW DIGITAL TRANSFER -- WIDESCREEN VERSION PRESENTED IN A "MATTED" WIDESCREEN FORMAT PRESERVING THE ASPECT SCOPE RATIO OF ITS ORIGINAL THEATRICAL EXHIBITION; ENHANCED FOR WIDESCREEN TVs

Warner Speak, once again, in terms of their video delivery. With no letterboxing on my screen, this was a gorgeous re-minting of the original Tim Burton film that's light years ahead of Warner's original snapper cased version. Batman, honestly, never looked so good. A razor-sharp image from beginning to end that really lived up to the studio's marketing labels this time around when they claimed to "remaster" these prints. I was able to make out things here I NEVER was able to on older VHS copies of the title or even the previous DVD release.

AUDIO SPECIFICATIONS:
DISC ONE: ENGLISH DOLBY DIGITAL 5.1, ENGLISH DTS; FRENCH LANGUAGE TRACK; SUBTITLES IN ENGLISH, FRENCH & SPANISH

Here's where I had some problems. The original release of this DVD had a Dolby Digital mix that was absolutely far from stellar. Expecting the heat to be turned up with the addition of the DTS track, I was disappointed yet again. The biggest letdown was the sound of gunshots, which are aplenty on this track, which came through extremely dated and hollow sounding with no punch or life. From the moment Danny Elfman's score hits the speakers, there IS indication that this soundtrack has been cleaned up a bit -- but there is a disappointing lack of dynamics in certain spots and an overall lack of volume to the mix. Of course, we need to take into consideration the fact that this was a film from 1989 and there was probably only so much Warner could do with the original audio stems here. While undoubtedly active -- you WILL hear near-constant surround activity, such as bats flying through the cave or the roar of the Batmobile from surround channels to the front soundstage in a rush -- the track itself as a whole was not that hot; as I said, gunshots came across as weak and non-impactful and that was disappointing to me; the shots didn’t even make it into the surrounds most of the time -- if at all. There is a hefty addition of LFE to this DTS track as compared to the Dolby variant from the previous release, as the roar of the Batmobile is accompanied by a nice bass punch, not excessively deep, but there. In all, I did not find the DTS track to be much different or exciting than the Dolby Digital version of the soundtrack.

One thing I did notice was some nice rich surround activity during the "Partyman" song by Prince, playing when Nicholson and his goons are destroying the museum. The audio wraps around the soundstage nicely and there's some good use of the subwoofer channel here for such an old title.

But.....the video transfer sure looked nice....

Also, a rather dated looking and sounding original trailer came on the first disc, as did a commentary track by Burton.

DISC TWO contained the special features fans have been waiting for, such as:
ON THE SET WITH BOB KANE
LEGENDS OF THE DARK KNIGHT: THE HISTORY OF BATMAN
SHADOWS OF THE BAT: THE CINEMATIC SAGA OF THE DARK KNIGHT PARTS 1-3
BEYOND BATMAN DOCUMENTARY GALLERY
MUSIC VIDEOS BY PRINCE
THE HEROES AND THE VILLIANS PROFILE GALLERIES
BATMAN: THE COMPLETE ROBIN STORYBOARD SEQUENCE


BATMAN RETURNS: TWO-DISC SPECIAL EDITION
THE BAT. THE CAT. THE PENGUIN.

Burton returned to the director's chair to helm the inevitable sequel, wearing a much more clever title than the rather boring Spider-Man 2; at any rate, taking over Burgess Meredith's role from the original TV series, Danny DeVito was hired on to play Batman's next villain, The Penguin, as this sequel introduced another villain the Caped Crusader faced: Catwoman, played by Michelle Pfeiffer. Something interesting I always found about comparing the villains from Batman and Spider-Man was that Batman's enemies always seemed to have a group of "cronies" that followed them around to do their dirty work while there was never much hand to hand combat between the Caped Crusader and his adversaries -- Spidey, on the other hand, fought physically powerful villains usually one-on-one to the death. Just an interesting note.

Fans feel this was the last of the good Batman films because Burton was at the helm. And they are right. From here, the franchise became neon-lit cartoonish garbage, ESPECIALLY Batman and Robin with Alicia Silverstone as Batgirl and George Clooney as Bruce Wayne.....give me a break. Anyway, this sequel is just as "dark" as the original, giving Gotham that bleak, Christmas-time look that seems to be lifted right from the pages of the comic. Michael Keaton signed back on as Bruce Wayne, and this time around, he fights a small adversary known only as The Penguin -- a disfigured man who was rejected as a child by his parents and thrown into a river where he was raised by penguins and who ultimately returns to Gotham's society where he wants to reclaim his birth right and become mayor with the help of Max Shreck (Christopher Walken), a shrewd corporate shark who owns a massive company in Gotham. While Gotham is being swindled into believing this "Penguin" (who learns his real name is "Oswald Cobblepot") is a "man of the people" working with Max Shreck and eliminating the "circus gangs" that are terrorizing the city (but are ultimately being run by The Penguin), a new villain comes to town in the form of Catwoman -- Max Shreck's secretary who was murdered by him but comes back to life by some cats eating away at her body (I don’t know if ANY of this follows the comic lure, but if anyone was a diehard Batman comic fan, please feel free to comment on this) and who now suddenly has superhuman powers and a long whip she uses on people. Penguin and Catwoman get together to hatch a plan which will frame the Caped Crusader, first making the people of Gotham believe that he himself killed the tree lighting girl at a Christmas ceremony in town, and then turning his Batmobile into an out-of-control "H Bomb on Wheels" as it plows down helpless people in the street. Now, Batman knows he is dealing with a deranged criminal and psychopath, much like The Joker, and that he must be stopped -- especially because of the fact that The Penguin plans on "punishing" the first-born sons of Gotham by launching missiles strapped to penguins' backs to destroy the city.

DeVito plays the villain in a MUCH different fashion than Burgess Meredith did -- in this motion picture version, he is a tiny, fat, horribly disfigured creature with lots of special effects makeup on him -- but to me, it pretty much worked. I mean, who else were they going to get for the role? Nowhere as scary or deranged as Nicholson's Joker, DeVito's Penguin poses a good threat to the Caped Crusader but again robs some "one-liners" from Nicholson's Joker character in the first film -- doesn't rob them line-for-line, but you can see where Burton was trying to give the two villains similar wisecracking remark statements. What's most ineffective about this -- and the original -- is the aforementioned lack of physical interaction between the hero and villain as in Spider-Man; Batman's villains, while getting physical with him during some brief fighting sequences, are more psychologically testing, and it makes for films that ask "where are the FIGHTS?" The end sequence when Batman whacks The Penguin and knocks him into his icy grave at the zoo as the missiles launch off the penguins' backs and the bats fly out to surround DeVito and ultimately kill him, is probably the most exciting physical fight scene in the film; although, admittingly, there are some cool scenes where Batman is simply taking out all of DeVito's "circus henchmen" with punch after punch and kicking them out the way. This is still not Spider-Man vs. The Green Goblin or Doc Ock in hand-to-hand combat....

Michelle Pfeiffer as Catwoman? I don’t know. Seemed unnecessary to me, as did Batgirl and possibly even Robin for these films, but we have her nonetheless.

The biggest problem I had with the film was the "legend" of the Penguin character/creature; what was this thing? Was he really dumped as a baby into the Gotham basin? How was he "raised" by Penguins exactly? Was he human or not? Perhaps this is something diehard fans can explain to me in greater detail, or something I can get from the second disc of extras on this Special Edition, but it feels like Burton kind of rushed into things here again with trying to explain the origins of this villain. My biggest question is, as not that diehard of a fan of the comics is, does all this ring true to the DC story?

VIDEO SPECIFICATIONS:
NEW DIGITAL TRANSFER -- WIDESCREEN VERSION PRESENTED IN A "MATTED" WIDESCREEN FORMAT PRESERVING THE ASPECT RATIO OF ITS ORIGINAL THEATRICAL EXHIBITION, ENHANCED FOR WIDESCREEN TVs

As with the first film, this sequel has been cleaned up to look nothing like previous incarnations, either on VHS or DVD. There were EXTREMELY slight, brief moments of grain I noticed in SOME scenes which took away from the overall start-to-finish smooth look both the first and this second film portrayed....grain I did not notice at all on the original's transfer. But that was fine, as Batman Returns looked great overall, with no letterboxing on my screen due to Warner's "matting" scheme and rhetoric.

AUDIO SPECIFICATIONS:
ENGLISH DOLBY DIGITAL 5.1, ENGLISH DTS; FRENCH LANGUAGE TRACK; SUBTITLES IN ENGLISH, FRENCH & SPANISH

From the moment you start up this disc's DTS track, you can sense where the volume and decibel recording levels were pushed up beyond the original's soundtrack --- everything here is louder, brighter and encompasses the soundstage better. If I am not mistaken, Batman Returns was the first theatrical title to utilize the Dolby Digital system in theaters; at any rate, the DTS mix I sampled was livelier in dynamic range, output and even LFE than on the first film. Still, there were some slight problems. Dialogue seemed to be mixed much lower than the rest of the channels, requiring me to constantly play with my receiver's volume control on the remote throughout the whole film. This got annoying after awhile. It did not seem like levels were mixed "evenly" throughout this soundtrack, although those positive qualities that I mentioned DID exist, such as the louder volume output as compared to the first film and the richer surround experience we get here. But the track goes back and forth at times; almost any time DeVito is speaking on screen, the center channel seems a bit hard to hear and some lines even get muffled. This may have been a problem stemming from the original audio files of this title Warner was working with. There was an "uneven-ness" about the track, as aggressive as it seemed at times (with bats flying into the surrounds and explosions ripping around the stage) whereby dialog would get dated and a bit low and then suddenly score or action would rip from that quiet and create an uncomfortable level that would have to be lowered, or, constantly raised. It got tiring after awhile.

But overall, Batman Returns, from the moment you begin its newly minted DTS track, sounds louder, crisper and more dynamic than the DTS mix on Batman.

Please stand by as I prepare to add the last two titles to this review....

Worth the $60 I paid for the set? Don't have an answer -- a CONCRETE answer -- to that yet......... :wink:

[L.J.]

I can't wait to do a comparison. I only have the original first two. I was hoping the DTS would be a huge improvement for Batman. My wife loves prince, so any improvement in that department is great.

I purchased all 4 SE myself, but through Columbia House. I got Batman Begins for $22.95, which gave my the 4 SE for only $10.48 each. All with free shipping. I figured I could watch the second 2 with my kid. I'm sure the cartoonish style will appeal to him. He loves comics as much as me. You should see his room.

[Lexmark3200]

I can't wait to do a comparison. I only have the original first two. I was hoping the DTS would be a huge improvement for Batman. My wife loves prince, so any improvement in that department is great.

I purchased all 4 SE myself, but through Columbia House. I got Batman Begins for $22.95, which gave my the 4 SE for only $10.48 each. All with free shipping. I figured I could watch the second 2 with my kid. I'm sure the cartoonish style will appeal to him. He loves comics as much as me. You should see his room.

Well, the video improvement alone is well worth the upgrade from those original snapper case versions on these new Special Editions; and unfortunately, yes, I found the DTS to be less than a "Huge" improvement; there are still some "hollow" areas to the audio, especially during shoot out sequences as the gunfire delivery is on the weak side.

The last two, while appealing to younger audiences as you mention, simply fall flat when compared to Burton's first two installments. Batman & Robin in particular was HORRIBLE, and even Joel Schumaker makes a comment on the commentary track apologizing for delivering such a dissapointing film to fans, and also apologizes for things like the nipple marks on the bat suit and other ridiculous trappings this film had. The acting was awful, the costuming was off, Alicia Silverstone and Arnold Shwarzannegger were simply unnecessary and George Clooney was just NOWHERE NEAR right for the role of Bruce Wayne.

[L.J.]

Well, the video improvement alone is well worth the upgrade from those original snapper case versions

What's with that? I hate those cases.

So you haven't seen Begins yet?

[Lexmark3200]

What's with that? I hate those cases.

So you haven't seen Begins yet?

LJ,

Those snapper cases have been an ongoing complaint from DVD fanatics for YEARS; hop on to home theater forum.com and look at all the complaints about the Warner Brothers snapper cases for their discs. They are slowly doing away with them, when they put out Special Editions and on titles like Exorcist: The Beginning and Constantine, which received regular keepcases. I have e mailed Warner Brothers multiple times on this directly to their public relations people. If enough people complain, they may eliminate them altogether.

No, I have not seen BEGINS yet.....hope to rent it after I finish reviewing the Anthology set......

Thanks for reading the review, man!

[vxaudio]

nice review. however i do find it mind blowing that you havent seen batman begins. its weird, but ever since the newsies, i have really liked Christian Bale and I thought his performance blew keaton out of the water. I have always been a huge batman fan and it is weird to see begins vs. the burton ones. they are so cool in their own way, but i have to think that begins was a perfect hit for what it set out to do. anyways, good luck with the rest of the reviews, and you might want to save time and skip Mr. Freeze.

[Lexmark3200]

BATMAN FOREVER: TWO-DISC SPECIAL EDITION

Here's where the franchise went downhill in many folks' opinions; you can sense -- from the very moments the film begins -- just how different this vision was compared to Burton's. Schumacher starts off with a neon-infused bang here, taking Butron's dark, gloomy look of the series into a flashy, color-drenched world, complete with glow in the dark wheels for the now odd-looking Batmobile. Now, rumor has it (and please someone correct me if I am wrong) that Keaton simply wanted too much money to return in the lead role and Warner Brothers turned him down, instead opting to cast Val Kilmer in the role (I PRAY this doesn't happen with Spider-Man) and he is just AWFUL behind the mask -- something is completely off about him playing Bruce Wayne, but I guess nowhere as bad as George Clooney was.

Much like the first two Batman films, the action starts rather quickly here, and I did not care for Schumacher's style of "rushing" the two villains in this film into our faces -- especially Tommy Lee Jones' demented Two-Face. First of all, let's get this horrible fact out of the way first: in an opening sequence regarding Alfred and Kilmer in the Bat Cave, there is a horrible dialogue exchange that sounds like an advertisement for a fast food chain: Alfred says to Kilmer "Can I persuade you to take a sandwich with you sir?" and Kilmer says, from behind the mask, "I'll get drive through" as he races off in the Batmobile. What? This was the best Schumacher could come up with for starting the third film in the franchise? We are then introduced to former Gotham District Attorney Harvey Dent (played here by Tommy Lee Jones but played by Billy Dee Williams in the original which never made any sense to me in terms of cohesiveness) who has been transformed into a murderous villain called "Two-Face" because of acid thrown on him during a court trial of a Mafia boss; Harvey blames Batman for the accident even though Batman tried to save him from the acid hitting his face and is hell bent on bringing the Caped Crusader down, as are all of Batman's enemies. There's no time wasted introducing this villain, with no real "background" as to why he is split down the middle with two different physical and psychological personalities (until later in the film when we see a news clip of what happened to Harvey in the courtroom with the acid accident) as he has taken a safe deposit guard hostage, tied him up and waits for the Dark Knight to come and try and rescue this guard while he makes off with money along with him and his cronies (who always seem to be right behind every single Batman villain, and it's never explained how). When the plot to kill Batman fails, Two-Face is enraged even more (on a side note, Tommy Lee Jones plays a particularly demented role here, bordering the performance Nicholson gave as the Joker -- NOWHERE NEAR as powerful but bordering on the same demented personality exhibition) as Batman is suddenly introduced to the very sexy Doctor Chase Meridian (Nicole Kidman), a new psychologist in Gotham helping the police catch Two-Face. A sub plot develops here, as Gotham's most eligible bachelor, Bruce Wayne, again gets a girlfriend (it was Kim Bassinger in the first one, then Michelle Pfeiffer in the sequel) who seems to be in love with both Batman and Bruce Wayne.....yaaaaaawn (does this remind anyone of, say, Spider-Man 2?).

Now, I had a BIG problem with the way the second villain our Dark Knight faces in this film is developed, introduced and subsequently acted out. Jim Carrey was signed on to play the infamous Riddler, but something is totally out of place here.....I don't know if it's his short orange hair, or his ridiculous performance as a Wayne Enterprises scientist before he becomes The Riddler or the manner in which he "becomes" The Riddler (by sitting in front of a computer screen and going through possible "costumes" he can wear to make himself a villain while a mechanical statue sits in a plastic box wearing the infamous green suit with the question marks all over it; the whole thing was RIDICULOUSLY silly) but something was totally not handled right by Schumacher here in the development of this important villain. You would think Carrey would make for a great Riddler given his comedic panache, but something was definitely wrong in the role. Some may disagree, but that's my stance; the problem begins when Edward Nygma (Carrey) is working for Wayne Enterprises in the science department when his project work is rejected by Kilmer (Wayne). He then becomes hell bent on bringing Wayne down and developing a special brainwave device that sucks the mental images from people's minds into his own; the whole thing was just ridiculous. He then begins sending Kilmer "riddles" to figure out, hence giving himself the name The Riddler and donning his green suit with the black question marks all over it. Suddenly, too, Carrey is sporting short orange hair and a ridiculous looking mask; this definitely was nothing like the darkness of the first two Burton films (Burton stayed on for Batman Forever to help produce, however).

Carrey teams up with Two-Face to bring Batman down, as Carrey launches his own company, NygmaTech, introducing these mind-sapping machines into homes all throughout Gotham. Between him and Two-Face, they suck the brainwaves dry of all the citizens of the city, but the whole concept and notion of this, which carries most of the film, just downright sucks and is stupid. Where Jack Nicholson played an awesome opponent to the Caped Crusader in the first film, these two villains, in my opinion, just don't work, and it gets even sillier and dumber with Batman and Robin.

Add to the mix, of course, Batman's sidekick Robin, who comes in the form of Chris O'Donnell, and the film gets even sillier. It seems one night Kilmer takes Kidman to the Gotham Circus, where O'Donnell and his family are performing as acrobats; Two-Face and his goons take over the circus, demanding that the crowd hand over Batman because he believes him to be in the audience. He launches an orb filled with 200 sticks of dynamite, set to explode in two minutes exactly, unless someone gives up Batman....in the meantime, O'Donnell and his family try and stop the bombing of the circus but as O'Donnell manages, on his own, to get the explosive orb out of the ceiling of the circus and into the river, he looks down into the top of the ceiling and notices that his whole family has been killed. He wants revenge, much like Bruce Wayne did for HIS parents being murdered.

Kilmer takes O'Donnell in, because he has nowhere else to go, and after discovering who Bruce Wayne is, he demands that he become is sidekick and partner. Kilmer refuses, but Alfred and O'Donnell create a costume for the Caped Crusader's new partner (never explained again, how exactly Robin's metallic-looking costume is made) and Batman agrees that Two-Face and The Riddler can make a quite dangerous duo and hence takes on O'Donnell as his new partner.

Before any of this happens, however, on Halloween night, The Riddler and Two-Face show up at Wayne Mansion, knock Alfred out, take Kidman hostage and Carrey destroys the Bat Cave and everything in it after learning who Bruce Wayne is by one of his "brainwave sucking" machines. In response, Kilmer dons the only Bat Suit left that wasn’t destroyed by Carrey -- a prototype metallic-looking outfit that just made this franchise go downhill and looks nothing like the original suit Keaton wore in the first film -- and joins with O'Donnell in going after Jones and Carrey, who still have Kidman hostage.

The final sequence of this film was utterly ridiculous, with Carrey somehow managing to reside in a giant moving "island tower" of some kind with question marks lit up all over it, set as a trap for Batman and Robin -- where did he find the time to build this? How did he build it? I know we have to "go along" with comic book films, but I think Sam Raimi did a much better job "explaining" a bit more of a villain’s background as Schumacher doesn't seem to have any idea as to what he's doing with this material.

Then, there's the problem of the Robin character: is it just me, or does he just seem absolutely useless to Batman? Robin gets in trouble and captured by villains more than he actually HELPS Batman and the Caped Crusader actually needs to get HIM out of trouble along with himself most of the time. It's ridiculous to me. The film concludes with Two-Face accidentally killing himself because of Batman who throws coins in the air to make Jones stumble off a ledge to his death, while Batman destroys The Riddler's powerplant for his brain-sucking device, causing him to go completely insane and sent to the Arkum Asylum. Of course, Batman and Robin are show running out of the darkness at the very end, suggesting what's to come in the next absolutely horrid entry into this franchise.....

VIDEO SPECIFICATIONS:
NEW DIGITAL TRANSFER -- WIDESCREEN VERSION PRESENTED IN A "MATTED" WIDESCREEN FORMAT PRESERVING THE ASPECT SCOPE RATIO OF ITS ORIGINAL THEATRICAL EXHIBITION; ENHANCED FOR WIDESCREEN TVs.

This was another flawless all-new transfer from Warner Brothers with no letterboxing on the screen. There was really nothing much to say about it; like the first two films in this new box set, the picture looked absolutely stunning, with no dirt or grain and the greens of Carrey's Riddler suit simply jumping off the screen. No problem to report in the video section.

AUDIO SPECIFICATIONS:
ENGLISH DOLBY DIGITAL 5.1, ENGLISH DTS, FRENCH LANGUAGE TRACK; SUBTITLES IN ENGLISH, FRENCH & SPANISH; OPTIONAL COMMENTARY BY DIRECTOR JOEL SCHUMACHER

Now THIS was the best-sounding DTS mix of the series so far; wow. From the moment this track begins, your subwoofer will be rumbling and your walls will be shaking with a wallop of LFE on hand and awesome directional effects hitting the surrounds, fronts and center. Most eye-opening was the initial title sequence, where the names of the actors are flying around the screen -- in DTS, you can hear the whipping effect of the names right behind you in the surrounds and it's awesome. From there, the track remains bright, aggressive and thunderous -- thuds of LFE attack at times, and directionality is just brilliant. Score fills all channels. Another memorable scene is when Kilmer is flying through that tube tunnel to reach the Bat Cave; in DTS, this effect was stunning -- whipping the sounds aggressively and loudly into the surrounds and back to the front, creating a VERY realistic environment and making you feel as though you yourself were flying through the tunnel with Wayne. The end sequence where the water surface mines are exploding as Two-Face and The Riddler are attempting to blow up Robin's speedboat was memorable as well, utilizing a loud, aggressive soundscape with a great deal of LFE. Really nice job on this Special Edition's DTS mix. It's unfortunate that one of the least-enjoyed films in the franchise received better audio than the first two good ones.

SPECIAL FEATURES on DISC TWO included:

ADDITIONAL SCENES
RIDDLE ME THIS: WHY IS BATMAN FOREVER?
SHADOWS OF THE BAT: THE CINEMATIC SAGA OF THE DARK KNIGHT PART 5
BEYOND BATMAN DOCUMENTARY GALLERY
KISS FROM A ROSE MUSIC VIDEO BY SEAL
THE HEROES AND THE VILLAINS PROFILE GALLERIES

A pretty cool theatrical trailer was on DISC ONE, as well.

Please stand by as I get set to review the last travesty in this series, Batman and Robin........

[Lexmark3200]

nice review. however i do find it mind blowing that you havent seen batman begins. its weird, but ever since the newsies, i have really liked Christian Bale and I thought his performance blew keaton out of the water. I have always been a huge batman fan and it is weird to see begins vs. the burton ones. they are so cool in their own way, but i have to think that begins was a perfect hit for what it set out to do. anyways, good luck with the rest of the reviews, and you might want to save time and skip Mr. Freeze.

Thanks for the kind words, VX.....appreciate you reading the review. I am unfortunately gonna sit through that last horrid entry into the series tonight; and you are right --- I AM ashamed that I did not get a chance to see Batman Begins.....I am definitely going to rent it this weekend.

[Woochifer]

Here's where I had some problems. The original release of this DVD had a Dolby Digital mix that was absolutely far from stellar. Expecting the heat to be turned up with the addition of the DTS track, I was disappointed yet again. The biggest letdown was the sound of gunshots, which are aplenty on this track, which came through extremely dated and hollow sounding with no punch or life. From the moment Danny Elfman's score hits the speakers, there IS indication that this soundtrack has been cleaned up a bit -- but there is a disappointing lack of dynamics in certain spots and an overall lack of volume to the mix. Of course, we need to take into consideration the fact that this was a film from 1989 and there was probably only so much Warner could do with the original audio stems here. While undoubtedly active -- you WILL hear near-constant surround activity, such as bats flying through the cave or the roar of the Batmobile from surround channels to the front soundstage in a rush -- the track itself as a whole was not that hot; as I said, gunshots came across as weak and non-impactful and that was disappointing to me; the shots didn’t even make it into the surrounds most of the time -- if at all. There is a hefty addition of LFE to this DTS track as compared to the Dolby variant from the previous release, as the roar of the Batmobile is accompanied by a nice bass punch, not excessively deep, but there. In all, I did not find the DTS track to be much different or exciting than the Dolby Digital version of the soundtrack.

Did you compare the original DD track with the DD track included with the new version? The original DVD used a 384k bitrate DD track, while the new DVD bumps up the DD resolution to a 448k bitrate. Big difference in the imaging coherency and the perceived size of the soundfield. It's not just about the amount of surround activity, but in how it all sounds when put together. And this soundtrack does a very good job with connecting the front and surround soundfields, and includes some directional dialog.

I don't know why you would expect that the DTS track would sound "hot" compared to the DD track, if both of them are getting transferred from the same master source. The overall fidelity of the DD and DTS tracks is what it is -- typical of a soundtrack that dates back to 1989. It's reminiscent of what I recall from watching Batman in 70mm six-track at the showcase Mann Village theater in L.A. many times that summer. The only way that the soundtrack would sound "hotter" with the gunfights that you focus on would be punch up or rerecord the effects.


From the moment you start up this disc's DTS track, you can sense where the volume and decibel recording levels were pushed up beyond the original's soundtrack --- everything here is louder, brighter and encompasses the soundstage better. If I am not mistaken, Batman Returns was the first theatrical title to utilize the Dolby Digital system in theaters; at any rate, the DTS mix I sampled was livelier in dynamic range, output and even LFE than on the first film. Still, there were some slight problems. Dialogue seemed to be mixed much lower than the rest of the channels, requiring me to constantly play with my receiver's volume control on the remote throughout the whole film. This got annoying after awhile. It did not seem like levels were mixed "evenly" throughout this soundtrack, although those positive qualities that I mentioned DID exist, such as the louder volume output as compared to the first film and the richer surround experience we get here. But the track goes back and forth at times; almost any time DeVito is speaking on screen, the center channel seems a bit hard to hear and some lines even get muffled. This may have been a problem stemming from the original audio files of this title Warner was working with. There was an "uneven-ness" about the track, as aggressive as it seemed at times (with bats flying into the surrounds and explosions ripping around the stage) whereby dialog would get dated and a bit low and then suddenly score or action would rip from that quiet and create an uncomfortable level that would have to be lowered, or, constantly raised. It got tiring after awhile.

Indeed this was the first movie that went to the theatrical Dolby Digital system, but my impression of the theatrical audio was not especially positive, since the theater where I saw Batman Returns regularly featured 70mm presentations (with six-track mag striping, which until digital formats became the norm, was the only way to see movies in full bandwidth multichannel audio) and had also screened other movies using Kodak's short-lived CDS format, which featured uncompressed 5.1 digital audio. By comparison, the DD track sounded harsher and less coherent.

On the DVD, the soundtrack sounds much smoother than how I recall the theatrical version sounding. It definitely improves over the first movie's soundtrack in every facet. More usage of the LFE track, tighter coherency in the soundfield, and better balance and integration between the different sound elements. I did not detect any issues with the dialog on the DTS track no matter how high or low I set the volume. The dialog in Batman Returns is more anchored to the center channel, unlike Batman which did not have the dialog as firmly anchored towards the middle. Maybe you need to recalibrate your center channel level or timbre match the center speaker. I didn't have to adjust the volume at all to understand the dialog.

[Lexmark3200]

"Did you compare the original DD track with the DD track included with the new version?"

Yes, thats why I made the comments about the original's release sounding, well, "less than stellar".....

"The original DVD used a 384k bitrate DD track, while the new DVD bumps up the DD resolution to a 448k bitrate. Big difference in the imaging coherency and the perceived size of the soundfield. It's not just about the amount of surround activity, but in how it all sounds when put together. And this soundtrack does a very good job with connecting the front and surround soundfields, and includes some directional dialog."

After a few moments of watching this Two Disc Special Edition with the Dolby Digital track running, I switched over to the DTS mix because that was one of the selling points of this box set for me, so I have no comments on Batman's Dolby Digital response.

"I don't know why you would expect that the DTS track would sound "hot" compared to the DD track, if both of them are getting transferred from the same master source."

Why do you think Warner put the choice of these tracks on there? I WAS, as were other fans, expecting the DTS mix to "brighten up" this rather dated-sounding mix, yes, otherwise WHY introduce the OPTION of the DTS track if not to superiorize itself over the Dolby variant?

"The overall fidelity of the DD and DTS tracks is what it is -- typical of a soundtrack that dates back to 1989."

I noted this in the review -- I guess you missed that part --- where I said "But we cant forget what we're working with here, a film dating back from 1989" as I talked about the audio stems Warner had to work with.

"It's reminiscent of what I recall from watching Batman in 70mm six-track at the showcase Mann Village theater in L.A. many times that summer. The only way that the soundtrack would sound "hotter" with the gunfights that you focus on would be punch up or rerecord the effects."

Well, perhaps something should have been done because DTS WAS offered on this Special Edition, and the gunshots were still brittle, harsh and weak in delivery. It was rather dissapointing.

"Indeed this was the first movie that went to the theatrical Dolby Digital system"

What I suspected.

"On the DVD, the soundtrack sounds much smoother than how I recall the theatrical version sounding."

As I said, and thank you for adding your thoughts about the Dolby version, I hadn't really given the Dolby track a full workout; perhaps I will do that when I get another chance. I still need to analyze Batman and Robin, Lord help me.

"It definitely improves over the first movie's soundtrack in every facet. More usage of the LFE track, tighter coherency in the soundfield, and better balance and integration between the different sound elements."

Again, I reviewed the DTS mix for the analysis.

"I did not detect any issues with the dialog on the DTS track no matter how high or low I set the volume. The dialog in Batman Returns is more anchored to the center channel, unlike Batman which did not have the dialog as firmly anchored towards the middle. Maybe you need to recalibrate your center channel level or timbre match the center speaker. I didn't have to adjust the volume at all to understand the dialog."

Interesting.....I found DeVito's voice -- in particular -- to be difficult to understand at times, as was always the case with my VHS incarnations; perhaps these are characteristic differences between our center channels. And its funny----I did NOT in any way, shape, or form find the dialogue on the first Batman's DTS track to stray from the center position; there was a "dated" sound to some of it, yes, especially front-anchored gunshots as we have been discussing, but no problem with dialogue "bleeding" from the center.....

As for recalibrating my center channel, no such adjustment is necessary. It's perfectly calibrated, as a matter of fact, running a couple of decibels hotter than the other channels in the system, so the dialogue difficulty is actually a head scratcher to me, and leads me to believe this was a nuance missed on Warner's part.

[Woochifer]

After a few moments of watching this Two Disc Special Edition with the Dolby Digital track running, I switched over to the DTS mix because that was one of the selling points of this box set for me, so I have no comments on Batman's Dolby Digital response.

If you do the comparison, you'd find that the DD track on the new version makes just as marked an improvement over the previous DD track as the DTS track does.


Why do you think Warner put the choice of these tracks on there? I WAS, as were other fans, expecting the DTS mix to "brighten up" this rather dated-sounding mix, yes, otherwise WHY introduce the OPTION of the DTS track if not to superiorize itself over the Dolby variant?

DTS cannot magically transform a dated soundtrack into something that it's not. The only alternative would be to do a lot of rerecording and remixing with the sound effects. Warner put the DTS option on all of the Anthology DVDs, and the degree to which the DTS track improves upon the DD track varies from disc to disc. Warner allocated enough space to fit a half bitrate DTS track onto all four Batman movies, so why not include it. More noticeable with Batman Returns, but the audio fidelity of that soundtrack in general is a step above Batman.


Well, perhaps something should have been done because DTS WAS offered on this Special Edition, and the gunshots were still brittle, harsh and weak in delivery. It was rather dissapointing.

But, those gunshot effects were no different than other movies from that era. (e.g. Die Hard and Lethal Weapon) Overall, the soundtrack composition was typical of that era, and I see nothing wrong with preserving the original soundtrack as closely as possible. Soundtracks that get tinkered with too much can sound ridiculous because you're mixing newer more dynamic sound elements with older elements that were done in an entirely different way.


As for recalibrating my center channel, no such adjustment is necessary. It's perfectly calibrated, as a matter of fact, running a couple of decibels hotter than the other channels in the system, so the dialogue difficulty is actually a head scratcher to me, and leads me to believe this was a nuance missed on Warner's part.

Running with the level setting a couple of decibels higher, or as measured on a SPL meter? My system has the center channel at +3.5db and a 1 ms delay, but that's the setting that I need in order to match the actual center speaker output to the main speakers. Dialog difficulty could also emanate from using a nonmatched center speaker. No way to tell if it's Warner's doing until the front soundstage is timbre matched.

[Lexmark3200]

"If you do the comparison, you'd find that the DD track on the new version makes just as marked an improvement over the previous DD track as the DTS track does."

The DTS track makes perhaps -- and PERHAPS is being emphasized here -- a very slight improvement on opening up this soundtrack's stage from the original snapper-cased incarnation in Dolby Digital. The soundscape is still kind of hollow, no doubt in my mind.

"DTS cannot magically transform a dated soundtrack into something that it's not. The only alternative would be to do a lot of rerecording and remixing with the sound effects. Warner put the DTS option on all of the Anthology DVDs, and the degree to which the DTS track improves upon the DD track varies from disc to disc. Warner allocated enough space to fit a half bitrate DTS track onto all four Batman movies, so why not include it. More noticeable with Batman Returns, but the audio fidelity of that soundtrack in general is a step above Batman."

I understand that, but your statement of "they allocated enough space on the disc so why not include it" baffles me; Im not saying that DTS can magically transform a dated soundtrack into something it is not, but why do you think there is so much marketing rhetoric exolted on DTS materials? Shouldn't the DTS breathing treatment and bitrate algorithms have some kind of affect over the Dolby Digital tracks? Are they there just to eat up real estate on the disc? There SHOULD be some kind of sonic improvement --- Warner Brothers even PROMISES this on the press kit they sent out to journalists for this set; they swear the DTS tracks improve the fidelity of these mixes -- I didnt sense it on the first Batman, the second one stood out a bit more if you read the review, and I dont know why its such a problem for me to simply POINT OUT that the DTS mix on FOREVER was hot and aggressive; Im just pointing out what I heard; at any rate, I am happy you at least agree that the DTS effect is more noticeable with FOREVER; that's all I was trying to get at -- is that the DTS experience opened WAY up once you got to the third disc.

"But, those gunshot effects were no different than other movies from that era. (e.g. Die Hard and Lethal Weapon) Overall, the soundtrack composition was typical of that era, and I see nothing wrong with preserving the original soundtrack as closely as possible. Soundtracks that get tinkered with too much can sound ridiculous because you're mixing newer more dynamic sound elements with older elements that were done in an entirely different way."

I still can POINT OUT that the gunshots were hollow and weak and didn't reach any surround channels at any point. I see what you're saying about mixing the elements to make them sound ridiculous as they flux between modern and old sounds, but more work could have been done to this DTS mix for the FIRST film, and that's my stance. To me, the gunshots in the original Die Hard made more of an impact in DTS (in the box set series) than on Batman.

"Running with the level setting a couple of decibels higher, or as measured on a SPL meter?"

Measured and running higher due to results.

"My system has the center channel at +3.5db and a 1 ms delay, but that's the setting that I need in order to match the actual center speaker output to the main speakers. Dialog difficulty could also emanate from using a nonmatched center speaker. No way to tell if it's Warner's doing until the front soundstage is timbre matched."

All speakers in the system are timbre matched and create a cohesive, seamless soundstage, as told to me by professional installers who contribute to a few publications I freelance for who dropped by the house; irrespective of that, I have NO problems with so many other films as trucks whip across the front soundstage perfectly, or bombs explode through the center channel expertly --- so all of a sudden, I put in Batman in DTS, and my soundstage is not timbre matched?

The RTis are a perfect match for the CSi center.

[Woochifer]

The DTS track makes perhaps -- and PERHAPS is being emphasized here -- a very slight improvement on opening up this soundtrack's stage from the original snapper-cased incarnation in Dolby Digital. The soundscape is still kind of hollow, no doubt in my mind.

The imaging coherency and tightness of the soundfield is much improved on both the DD and DTS tracks on the newer version. The 384k bitrate DD soundtracks tend to fatten up surround effect because they channel join at 10 kHz, which is well within normal hearing range and still in the range of a lot of sound elements on a soundtrack. Just moving from a 384k DD track to a 448k DD track alone would constitute a notable improvement with the sound with more discrete separation between the channels, regardless of whether DTS is also included.

Batman has a lot of very good directional cues in the mix. The only gripe that I would bring up is that some effects sound overly abrupt and close in. Not hollow, just obvious that some sounds were close miked in a studio while others were done on location.


I understand that, but your statement of "they allocated enough space on the disc so why not include it" baffles me; Im not saying that DTS can magically transform a dated soundtrack into something it is not, but why do you think there is so much marketing rhetoric exolted on DTS materials? Shouldn't the DTS breathing treatment and bitrate algorithms have some kind of affect over the Dolby Digital tracks?

Not if the original soundtrack has constrained fidelity to begin with. The higher the quality of the soundtrack, the more noticeable the benefits of DTS become.


Are they there just to eat up real estate on the disc? There SHOULD be some kind of sonic improvement --- Warner Brothers even PROMISES this on the press kit they sent out to journalists for this set; they swear the DTS tracks improve the fidelity of these mixes -- I didnt sense it on the first Batman, the second one stood out a bit more if you read the review, and I dont know why its such a problem for me to simply POINT OUT that the DTS mix on FOREVER was hot and aggressive; Im just pointing out what I heard; at any rate, I am happy you at least agree that the DTS effect is more noticeable with FOREVER; that's all I was trying to get at -- is that the DTS experience opened WAY up once you got to the third disc.

Warner's trying to sell bushel loads of the Anthology set. They've already loaded up on the extras, the commentary tracks, and created that Shadows of the Bat documentary that spans across all of the Batman movies. The DTS tracks are just another enticement to add to the mix. Personally, I don't see much benefit to the DTS track on the first Batman, but other consumers who buy the disc will definitely hear something different, because unlike Lethal Weapon or Twister which used comparable levels with the DD and DTS tracks, the DTS tracks on the Batman Anthology I measured about 5-6 db higher than the DD tracks. Only people that are careful about level matching when doing comparative listenings will notice that the DD and DTS tracks sound very similar on that disc. Keep in mind that Warner's asking people to shell out about $60 for a DVD set that INCLUDES Batman and Robin, so they need to pull out all the stops.


All speakers in the system are timbre matched and create a cohesive, seamless soundstage, as told to me by professional installers who contribute to a few publications I freelance for who dropped by the house; irrespective of that, I have NO problems with so many other films as trucks whip across the front soundstage perfectly, or bombs explode through the center channel expertly --- so all of a sudden, I put in Batman in DTS, and my soundstage is not timbre matched?

Big difference between bombs exploding and trucks whipping around, and the dialog issues that you're complaining about. Like I said, I did not have any problems with the dialog levels even though Batman Begins is recorded very differently from Batman.

[Lexmark3200]

"The imaging coherency and tightness of the soundfield is much improved on both the DD and DTS tracks on the newer version."

I'm SURE it's much improved over the ultra-mediocre track that came with the original snapper cased version (the Dolby mix, that is)....I was simply not "wowed" by the DTS mix of the first Batman in this new set.

"Batman has a lot of very good directional cues in the mix."

Yes; not necessarily disputing that -- just saying the overall effect was not panty-wetting, nor was the overall track overtly "hot" to my ears.

"The only gripe that I would bring up is that some effects sound overly abrupt and close in. Not hollow, just obvious that some sounds were close miked in a studio while others were done on location."

This could be said, too, but I still felt the gunshots were the biggest letdown; they were like....I dont know.....unlocalized and "wimpy."

"Not if the original soundtrack has constrained fidelity to begin with. The higher the quality of the soundtrack, the more noticeable the benefits of DTS become."

I still say Warner should have done something more with the track on that first disc, which is a classic in the series -- even if they had to strike a new track from scratch for the DTS algorithm, much like Saving Private Ryan or Gladiator.

"Warner's trying to sell bushel loads of the Anthology set. They've already loaded up on the extras, the commentary tracks, and created that Shadows of the Bat documentary that spans across all of the Batman movies. The DTS tracks are just another enticement to add to the mix."

That has nothing to do with the fact that the inclusion of a DTS track usually means "better quality audio" -- I mean, why the CHOICE then? Just for enticement? I have to believe there was more than that.

"Personally, I don't see much benefit to the DTS track on the first Batman, but other consumers who buy the disc will definitely hear something different"

There didn't seem like there was much benefit to the DTS mix on the first Batman, that's what I was saying.....it actually sounded like a very re-worked Dolby track if anything,

"The DTS tracks on the Batman Anthology I measured about 5-6 db higher than the DD tracks. Only people that are careful about level matching when doing comparative listenings will notice that the DD and DTS tracks sound very similar on that disc. Keep in mind that Warner's asking people to shell out about $60 for a DVD set that INCLUDES Batman and Robin, so they need to pull out all the stops."

I was one of those people who discerned very little difference between the DD and DTS tracks on Batman -- after going back and forth for awhile. I was just not "floored" by the DTS presentation on the first film -- Im not saying it was bad in any way, it just didn't "feel" like DTS to me, and I have a second sense about that. If the DTS track was five to six decibels louder than the Dolby track, it sure didn't sound like it. And I don't think putting Batman and Robin in the collection (which they had to do because it was simply part of it) was Warner's justfication for adding DTS mixes.

"Big difference between bombs exploding and trucks whipping around, and the dialog issues that you're complaining about. Like I said, I did not have any problems with the dialog levels even though Batman Begins is recorded very differently from Batman."

I dont have Batman Begins to compare to Batman, so I cannot comment....what I will say is that even on OTHER DISCS in my collection that are solely dialogue driven, there are some which exhibit beautiful, in-your-face dialogue and speech delivery.....I did not find this on the first two Batmans, so it cannot be my equipment. I tried scenes over and over and over again, and each and every time, DeVito's voice sounded a little "lost" in the overall mix as he struggles with the Penguin voice.

[Woochifer]

I'm SURE it's much improved over the ultra-mediocre track that came with the original snapper cased version (the Dolby mix, that is)....I was simply not "wowed" by the DTS mix of the first Batman in this new set.

Yes; not necessarily disputing that -- just saying the overall effect was not panty-wetting, nor was the overall track overtly "hot" to my ears.


And the existing elements probably don't allow for what you're looking for without extensive rerecording or repurposing of the sound elements. You seem to expect that an older film would have the same emphases as newer soundtracks, but that's just not possible without completely reworking the soundtrack.

For a 1989 film, the surround effect is surprisingly cohesive.

"
This could be said, too, but I still felt the gunshots were the biggest letdown; they were like....I dont know.....unlocalized and "wimpy."

And not a whole lot of films from that era had the kinds of impactful gunshots that you want.


I still say Warner should have done something more with the track on that first disc, which is a classic in the series -- even if they had to strike a new track from scratch for the DTS algorithm, much like Saving Private Ryan or Gladiator.

And those two examples are of newer movies that were recorded with much more aggressive sound elements from the beginning using more current digital equipment. And they did not have to optimize anything for the analog optical presentations that dominated in 1989. Can't expect a DTS transfer to have the same effect with Batman as with a newer soundtrack because the fidelity of the older soundtrack simply isn't as revealing. Just take a listen to the DD and DTS tracks for Lawrence of Arabia or The Guns of Navarone -- barely any audible difference between the tracks.


That has nothing to do with the fact that the inclusion of a DTS track usually means "better quality audio" -- I mean, why the CHOICE then? Just for enticement? I have to believe there was more than that.

Because people like you who get worked up over demanding that studios include DTS tracks will be more inclined to shell out your $60 to buy the Batman Anthology if it includes the DTS option. Who cares about why the DTS tracks were included in the first place? The fact is they are included, and that was apparently one reason that you bought the set.

Given that Warner is trying to entice people to repurchase a set of titles that have been out since the birth of the DVD format, they obviously need to provide as many reasons as possible for people to double-dip or buy for the first time. For you, the DTS track represents better audio quality, to others, the bonus features and documentaries matter the most and the DTS track is neither here nor there. Remastered video and audio, new DTS tracks, and four sets of bonus discs -- seems like they've got something for everybody.


There didn't seem like there was much benefit to the DTS mix on the first Batman, that's what I was saying.....it actually sounded like a very re-worked Dolby track if anything,

Sounds to me like they were simply transferred from the same master source.


I was one of those people who discerned very little difference between the DD and DTS tracks on Batman -- after going back and forth for awhile. I was just not "floored" by the DTS presentation on the first film -- Im not saying it was bad in any way, it just didn't "feel" like DTS to me, and I have a second sense about that. If the DTS track was five to six decibels louder than the Dolby track, it sure didn't sound like it. And I don't think putting Batman and Robin in the collection (which they had to do because it was simply part of it) was Warner's justfication for adding DTS mixes.

The levels definitely sounded different to me, and I confirmed it with my SPL meter. On the entire anthology, the soundtracks can be changed on the fly without going into the setup menu, so it's easy to hear this for yourself. You don't have to take my word on the level differences, a simple measurement will confirm that it's there.

Because of the dialog normalization offset that's normally used on DD tracks, it's pretty much a given that the DTS tracks will sound about 4 db louder than the DD tracks most of the time. Don't need a second sense to pick up on that. How can something "feel" like DTS, if the DD and DTS tracks are working off the same limited range master source? Try comparing the DD and DTS tracks from an older movie sometime -- in a level matched comparison, you won't discern much of a difference.


I dont have Batman Begins to compare to Batman, so I cannot comment....what I will say is that even on OTHER DISCS in my collection that are solely dialogue driven, there are some which exhibit beautiful, in-your-face dialogue and speech delivery.....I did not find this on the first two Batmans, so it cannot be my equipment. I tried scenes over and over and over again, and each and every time, DeVito's voice sounded a little "lost" in the overall mix as he struggles with the Penguin voice.

I meant to say Batman Returns, since that soundtrack was done very differently from Batman.

Like I said, I did not notice any dialog problems when I watched the movie last night, and my system is level matched and timbre matched.

[Lexmark3200]

Anyway,

I got through about 20 minutes of Batman and Robin, the last film in the box set series, before having to shut it off....man was this bad, as I always remembered it. From the moment Chris O'Donnell says in the beginning in the Bat Cave "I want a car! Can I have a car?" I knew it was all over. This was somehow worse than Val Kilmer's opening line of "I'll get drive through" in the previous film. Then, Schumacher again starts the action very early with unnecessary up-close shots of the Dark Night's (George Clooney now) rear end in his new metallic-like suit, plus shots of Chris O'Donnell (Robin) in HIS new metallic suit; the whole thing was just so not the vision that Burton originally had and it sucked. And suddenly --- just suddenly out of the blue -- Commissioner Gordon gets on the "Bat Screen" and says "Batman! There's a new villain in the city! He's calling himself Mr. Freeze!"; the whole thing was just awful, right down to Clooney's facial gestures behind the mask, his delivery as Bruce Wayne and oh so much more. Arnold's rendition of Mr. Freeze and his ridiculous lines he mutters when the Caped Crusader and Robin attack him in the museum he is freezing in the beginning is just stupid and ludicrous, and can't hold a candle to Nicholson's performance as The Joker in the first film.

At any rate, the video was on par with all the other transfers in this set, which is to say, just about perfect, with Schumacher's neon-lit Gotham streets jumping off the screen. The DTS audio was a hoot, too, just as aggressive as on Batman Forever and even moreso in certain spots. This was a constantly active mix that was probably the best in the set, unfortunately for such a bad film. The opening title sequences again, like in the previous film, sounded absolutely AWESOME in DTS, where the actors' names are flying toward the screen and over the listener's head into the surrounds very aggressively; this was a nice job by Warner.

[Lexmark3200]

"And the existing elements probably don't allow for what you're looking for without extensive rerecording or repurposing of the sound elements. You seem to expect that an older film would have the same emphases as newer soundtracks, but that's just not possible without completely reworking the soundtrack."

Never disputed that. Just expected better as a reviewer, as did Maureen Jensen of Home Theater who I discussed the disc collection with.

"For a 1989 film, the surround effect is surprisingly cohesive."

It wasnt bad; just dated in some places, and I was pointing that out which you seem to have a hard time separating from what my "demands" are which are false accusations on their own.

"And not a whole lot of films from that era had the kinds of impactful gunshots that you want."

How do you know? I've heard them before --- I said Die Hard made more of an impact to my ears than did the shots in Batman ever did.

"And those two examples are of newer movies that were recorded with much more aggressive sound elements from the beginning using more current digital equipment. And they did not have to optimize anything for the analog optical presentations that dominated in 1989. Can't expect a DTS transfer to have the same effect with Batman as with a newer soundtrack because the fidelity of the older soundtrack simply isn't as revealing. Just take a listen to the DD and DTS tracks for Lawrence of Arabia or The Guns of Navarone -- barely any audible difference between the tracks."

Again, I am just saying that the DTS mix on the first disc wasn't that jaw dropping. Observations, that's all.

"Because people like you who get worked up over demanding that studios include DTS tracks will be more inclined to shell out your $60 to buy the Batman Anthology if it includes the DTS option. Who cares about why the DTS tracks were included in the first place? The fact is they are included, and that was apparently one reason that you bought the set."

LOL----you are so far off the mark here it borders on hysterical----"people like me"----LOL-----I didn't buy this set for the DTS tracks, for your inspired information, I bought the set because I knew Warner was coming out with this to replace the previous set with the snapper case packages wherein those transfers audio and video wise were FAR from impressive; I knew ANYTHING they were doing to remaster this series was going to be an improvement. I CARE why Warner included the DTS tracks if they're not going to floor me in comparison to the Dolby variants, even though YOU say who cares----thats just your opinion, like anyone else's.

"Given that Warner is trying to entice people to repurchase a set of titles that have been out since the birth of the DVD format, they obviously need to provide as many reasons as possible for people to double-dip or buy for the first time. For you, the DTS track represents better audio quality, to others, the bonus features and documentaries matter the most and the DTS track is neither here nor there. Remastered video and audio, new DTS tracks, and four sets of bonus discs -- seems like they've got something for everybody."

And so whats your point? I already said I purchased this set not for the DTS mixes alone --- I waited for this being a Bat fan of sorts (not diehard) knowing that Warner was replacing the original snapper cased set with these Special Editions, and I KNEW at least the video portions were going to be cleaned up. It was really the video initially that I was more interested in, as I can recall the original release looking way less than optimal.

"The levels definitely sounded different to me, and I confirmed it with my SPL meter. On the entire anthology, the soundtracks can be changed on the fly without going into the setup menu, so it's easy to hear this for yourself. You don't have to take my word on the level differences, a simple measurement will confirm that it's there."

The DTS track sounded no hotter to me than did the Dolby variant on this new disc, and Im sticking with my findings, but perhaps a bit better than the Dolby Digital track we received on the first release which was compressed and anemic.

"Because of the dialog normalization offset that's normally used on DD tracks, it's pretty much a given that the DTS tracks will sound about 4 db louder than the DD tracks most of the time. Don't need a second sense to pick up on that. How can something "feel" like DTS"

This was a figure of speech....jeez.....

"if the DD and DTS tracks are working off the same limited range master source? Try comparing the DD and DTS tracks from an older movie sometime -- in a level matched comparison, you won't discern much of a difference."

Again, the DTS track on Batman to ME did NOT sound four decibels or so higher than the Dolby track. Im sticking with it and advising others of the same results; and there are others, believe it or not, who actually agree with me on this after sampling the disc, that the DTS track wasn't that hot --- THAT was our overall consensus in the office.

"I meant to say Batman Returns, since that soundtrack was done very differently from Batman. "

What do you mean "done differently"? What was so different about it -- it was still supervised by Elfman (the score) and engineered by the same team, was it not?

"Like I said, I did not notice any dialog problems when I watched the movie last night, and my system is level matched and timbre matched."

Good for you and your system; I heard DeVito's voice getting lost and grumbled in the mix at times, even at louder volume levels.

[Woochifer]

nice review. however i do find it mind blowing that you havent seen batman begins. its weird, but ever since the newsies, i have really liked Christian Bale and I thought his performance blew keaton out of the water. I have always been a huge batman fan and it is weird to see begins vs. the burton ones. they are so cool in their own way, but i have to think that begins was a perfect hit for what it set out to do. anyways, good luck with the rest of the reviews, and you might want to save time and skip Mr. Freeze.

After watching the other Batman movies from the 1989-1997 Anthology series, I saw Batman Begins again last night, and it's amazing how that movie has an entirely different feel to it. After watching Nolan's reinvention of Batman, it's now plainly obvious how the series needed a complete reboot. Now that it's been reestablished on a solid footing, I can't wait to see where it goes next.

I'd have to agree that Bale is now the definitive movie Batman. If anything, he and Keaton played Batman equally well (though Bale has more of a menacing edge as the Dark Knight and is probably more physically suited to the part than Keaton was), but Bale has a decided edge in how he interpreted the Bruce Wayne character.

The first Batman now looks dated because it seemed more tied to late-80s sensibilities and pop culture. In its time though, it was a phenomenon at so many levels, and even now has a certain coolness and sense of flair about it that Batman Begins deliberately avoids. It set the bar for the other Batman movies, and unfortunately, the subsequent movies took the formula and simply threw more of everything into the mix -- more outrageous set pieces, more baddies, more love interests, more gadgets, more sidekicks, more one-liners, etc. -- rather than simply putting together a compelling narrative and building up from there.

Batman Begins seems to be more rooted in a realistic world, yet divorced from contemporary pop culture; and the movie is more about creating a mythology around the Batman character than bringing the audience into a warped cartoon-like world. Plus, I thought that the movie had a much stronger story arc and coherent narrative than any of the other Batman movies. Even though it's clearly a big budget summer blockbuster, Batman Begins didn't feel like it had a lot of over-the-top excess, which eventually overwhelmed the previous Batman series. It's just a lean and well directed exploration of Batman's world, with a good story and a strong cast backing it up.

[Lexmark3200]

After watching the other Batman movies from the 1989-1997 Anthology series, I saw Batman Begins again last night, and it's amazing how that movie has an entirely different feel to it. After watching Nolan's reinvention of Batman, it's now plainly obvious how the series needed a complete reboot. Now that it's been reestablished on a solid footing, I can't wait to see where it goes next.

I'd have to agree that Bale is now the definitive movie Batman. If anything, he and Keaton played Batman equally well (though Bale has more of a menacing edge as the Dark Knight and is probably more physically suited to the part than Keaton was), but Bale has a decided edge in how he interpreted the Bruce Wayne character.

The first Batman now looks dated because it seemed more tied to late-80s sensibilities and pop culture. In its time though, it was a phenomenon at so many levels, and even now has a certain coolness and sense of flair about it that Batman Begins deliberately avoids. It set the bar for the other Batman movies, and unfortunately, the subsequent movies took the formula and simply threw more of everything into the mix -- more outrageous set pieces, more baddies, more love interests, more gadgets, more sidekicks, more one-liners, etc. -- rather than simply putting together a compelling narrative and building up from there.

Batman Begins seems to be more rooted in a realistic world, yet divorced from contemporary pop culture; and the movie is more about creating a mythology around the Batman character than bringing the audience into a warped cartoon-like world. Plus, I thought that the movie had a much stronger story arc and coherent narrative than any of the other Batman movies. Even though it's clearly a big budget summer blockbuster, Batman Begins didn't feel like it had a lot of over-the-top excess, which eventually overwhelmed the previous Batman series. It's just a lean and well directed exploration of Batman's world, with a good story and a strong cast backing it up.

Damn......I REALLY REALLY need to rent this film this weekend because Im hearing NOTHING but good things about it.

[Woochifer]

Never disputed that. Just expected better as a reviewer, as did Maureen Jensen of Home Theater who I discussed the disc collection with.

Why would any reviewer expect a 1989 film to have sound effects rerecorded for DVD? Are you reviewing a DVD, or second guessing decisions made by the director and sound designers?


It wasnt bad; just dated in some places, and I was pointing that out which you seem to have a hard time separating from what my "demands" are which are false accusations on their own.

No false accusations. You were the one who's griping about the gunshot effects, and inferring that the soundtrack should have been rerecorded.


How do you know? I've heard them before --- I said Die Hard made more of an impact to my ears than did the shots in Batman ever did.

It may have had more of an impact than Batman, but does that mean that they're comparable to what you typically hear mixed nowadays?


And so whats your point? I already said I purchased this set not for the DTS mixes alone --- I waited for this being a Bat fan of sorts (not diehard) knowing that Warner was replacing the original snapper cased set with these Special Editions, and I KNEW at least the video portions were going to be cleaned up. It was really the video initially that I was more interested in, as I can recall the original release looking way less than optimal.

You were wondering why the DTS tracks were included, and I simply said that it constituted one reason among many to entice people to either buy for the first time or repurchase it. You were questioning why Warner would include a DTS track if it made so little difference from the DD track, and I said that without level matching the tracks, people doing a comparison might conclude that the DTS track indeed sounds different. To some consumers, the DTS track is a huge factor in their purchasing decisions, and Warner's pulling out all of the stops to give as many reasons as possible for people who might already own the Batman DVDs to do a double dip. Obviously, they provided enough reasons for you because you shelled out your $60 to buy the set.


The DTS track sounded no hotter to me than did the Dolby variant on this new disc, and Im sticking with my findings, but perhaps a bit better than the Dolby Digital track we received on the first release which was compressed and anemic.

You have a SPL meter, right? (After all, you said that your center speaker is level matched) Do the measurement yourself if you think that there's no difference. An average 5-6 db differential is clearly audible and verifiable with a simple measurement.


Again, the DTS track on Batman to ME did NOT sound four decibels or so higher than the Dolby track. Im sticking with it and advising others of the same results; and there are others, believe it or not, who actually agree with me on this after sampling the disc, that the DTS track wasn't that hot --- THAT was our overall consensus in the office.

Like I said, it's easy enough to verify the level difference for yourself. I observed it, and confirmed it with a SPL measurement. Once you level match the tracks, then there's minimal difference in how they sound. But, the levels when using an identical volume setting are clearly different.

Are you saying that the "consensus in the office" is that the levels are the same? Did anybody "in the office" do a measurement with a SPL meter? Hard to believe that nobody at Home Theater would own a SPL meter.


What do you mean "done differently"?

Just give the soundtracks as a whole a listen. The sequel has much more consistency with how all of the sounds were placed within the soundfield. The original had some sounds that sounded much more close-miked than others, and when mixed together, it did not create as cohesive a soundfield because of the disparity between how close and how far certain sound elements seemed.


What was so different about it -- it was still supervised by Elfman (the score) and engineered by the same team, was it not?

Nope, completely different sound production teams.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0096895/fullcredits
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0103776/fullcredits

[Woochifer]

Damn......I REALLY REALLY need to rent this film this weekend because Im hearing NOTHING but good things about it.

Yup, and especially so if you bought the Anthology set and sat through Batman and Robin. Batman Begins has totally reset the bar for the Batman series.

[Lexmark3200]

"Why would any reviewer expect a 1989 film to have sound effects rerecorded for DVD?"

Why NOT? It has been done before. I can't believe you didn't know that.

"Are you reviewing a DVD, or second guessing decisions made by the director and sound designers?"

You answer that. I'm making observations on the sound I heard. Plain and simple. I have nothing to do with Warner's people.

"No false accusations. You were the one who's griping about the gunshot effects, and inferring that the soundtrack should have been rerecorded."

No I am not. Im simply saying some "work" should have been done to spice this soundtrack up a bit if Warner is promising DTS surround activity on the title. And I'm not "griping"; I am simply stating, whether you want to continue getting your panties in a bunch about this or not, that the gunshot effects sounded dated and hollow. Simple. Done. Over. Others I have discussed this with agreed totally.

"It may have had more of an impact than Batman, but does that mean that they're comparable to what you typically hear mixed nowadays? "

What?

"You were wondering why the DTS tracks were included, and I simply said that it constituted one reason among many to entice people to either buy for the first time or repurchase it. You were questioning why Warner would include a DTS track if it made so little difference from the DD track, and I said that without level matching the tracks, people doing a comparison might conclude that the DTS track indeed sounds different. To some consumers, the DTS track is a huge factor in their purchasing decisions, and Warner's pulling out all of the stops to give as many reasons as possible for people who might already own the Batman DVDs to do a double dip. Obviously, they provided enough reasons for you because you shelled out your $60 to buy the set."

Again, read carefully, I did not buy the set SOLELY for the DTS tracks but because I did not own this set and knew they were coming out with a remastered Special Edition collection; after seeing the less than stellar transfers from the first releases, I knew I was going to wait for this. You can bicker with me back and forth all you want and try to convince me of whatever it is you are attempting to, but at the end of the day, I am here to tell consumers that the DTS mix on the original Batman wasn't all that great-sounding, and that the audio got increasingly better as the series went on, as blatant as this may seem to many.

"You have a SPL meter, right? (After all, you said that your center speaker is level matched) Do the measurement yourself if you think that there's no difference. An average 5-6 db differential is clearly audible and verifiable with a simple measurement."

Wasn't to my ears, and that's what I go by to report to folks. From what I understand, that's all that matters TO THEM according to feedback I get on DVD Talk.com.

"Like I said, it's easy enough to verify the level difference for yourself. I observed it, and confirmed it with a SPL measurement. Once you level match the tracks, then there's minimal difference in how they sound. But, the levels when using an identical volume setting are clearly different."

Not to me they weren't.

"Are you saying that the "consensus in the office" is that the levels are the same? Did anybody "in the office" do a measurement with a SPL meter? Hard to believe that nobody at Home Theater would own a SPL meter."

Yes, "people at the office" as much as you want to poke fun at this notion and it bothers me none, who review in columns, all agreed that the DTS track on the first Batman film sounded nearly identical to the Dolby Digital variant. Even the Convergence Editor of the magazine made a comment to me in an e mail that yes, Batman "doesn't sound that mind blowing" in its DTS version...

"Just give the soundtracks as a whole a listen. The sequel has much more consistency with how all of the sounds were placed within the soundfield."

I agree with that and STATED IT IN THE REVIEW of Batman Returns -- reread that,

"The original had some sounds that sounded much more close-miked than others, and when mixed together, it did not create as cohesive a soundfield because of the disparity between how close and how far certain sound elements seemed."

That could be true; I reported that what stood out TO ME were the hollow-sounding gunshot effects; when something "rubs me the wrong way" on a soundtrack, I report on it. And that rubbed me the wrong way.

[Lexmark3200]

Yup, and especially so if you bought the Anthology set and sat through Batman and Robin. Batman Begins has totally reset the bar for the Batman series.

You make it sound like this was my first experience with the Batman series, my friend....that couldn't be farther from the truth. I have seen all these countless times, and Im well aware that Batman and Robin was the joke of the bunch since its theatrical release. I did not buy the Anthology set to merely "sit through" these again, let alone Batman and Robin....I bought it to have them in their best incarnations to date and because I am a completist (hence why I purchased the Rocky Anthology set).

As I said, I have been hearing nothing but great things about Batman Begins and how this is going to take the franchise in a whole new direction. I am looking forward to renting it.

Any input on the DVD's soundtrack? I heard that it only carries a Dolby 5.1 mix --- how does it sound? Did you sample it in surround yet?

[L.J.]

Yup, and especially so if you bought the Anthology set and sat through Batman and Robin. Batman Begins has totally reset the bar for the Batman series.

Still waiting for mine in the mail. I did see it at the theater and agree that this is better than all the rest. I was wondering would it be a mistake or not to try and reintroduce Robin. I've always like him as a character.

[Lexmark3200]

Still waiting for mine in the mail. I did see it at the theater and agree that this is better than all the rest. I was wondering would it be a mistake or not to try and reintroduce Robin. I've always like him as a character.

I think it would be a mistake.....it seems like the Dark Knight just does so much better on his own, doesn't it? I mean look at all the times Kilmer and Clooney had to pull O'Donnell to safety in the films because he just ****ed up the mission they were on; I know Robin was part of the comic history and TV show, but I think he's totally a waste of time in the film series. The Bat can kick some serious ass without a sidekick's help.

[L.J.]

I think it would be a mistake.....it seems like the Dark Knight just does so much better on his own, doesn't it? I mean look at all the times Kilmer and Clooney had to pull O'Donnell to safety in the films because he just ****ed up the mission they were on; I know Robin was part of the comic history and TV show, but I think he's totally a waste of time in the film series. The Bat can kick some serious ass without a sidekick's help.

One thing I hated about the second two besides all the previous comments is what happened to the vengeful edge he had. I've always liked that name "Dark Knight". Everyone is right. The series is definitely going in the right direction.

You guys are starting to make me think about returning those last two. If anything I'm sure my kids gonna love em.

[Woochifer]

You make it sound like this was my first experience with the Batman series, my friend....that couldn't be farther from the truth. I have seen all these countless times, and Im well aware that Batman and Robin was the joke of the bunch since its theatrical release. I did not buy the Anthology set to merely "sit through" these again, let alone Batman and Robin....I bought it to have them in their best incarnations to date and because I am a completist (hence why I purchased the Rocky Anthology set).

I meant that Batman Begins should be required viewing for anyone who has recently seen the Batman Anthology. The contrast after a fresh viewing of the first four movies will be quite startling. I saw Batman Begins three times over the summer, and only after seeing the Anthology movies again this week did I realize just how dramatically different a direction Christopher Nolan has taken the series. All of the over-the-top set design and thematic music from the previous series have been jetisoned in favor of a more grounded and contemporary look, and IMO brilliantly minimalist score (obviously a Hans Zimmer score, but a lot more restrained than what he typically writes).


Any input on the DVD's soundtrack? I heard that it only carries a Dolby 5.1 mix --- how does it sound? Did you sample it in surround yet?

Generally a very good soundtrack that falls a step short of reference quality. Very active usage of the surround tracks that conveys a good amount of directionality and coherency with the front channels. Did not sound like it was repurposed for home theater playback (few DVD soundtracks do). Dynamics are well balanced, and don't go totally overboard. The bass is strong but appropriately applied throughout the movie, and has some powerful LFE output in some of the action scenes. Only weakness might be the vocal timbre in some scenes.

[Lexmark3200]

One thing I hated about the second two besides all the previous comments is what happened to the vengeful edge he had. I've always liked that name "Dark Knight". Everyone is right. The series is definitely going in the right direction.

You guys are starting to make me think about returning those last two. If anything I'm sure my kids gonna love em.

LJ, your kids would probably love them if they never saw them before (the last two in the series I mean) because they are definitely cartoonish and colorful, but they completely LOSE what Batman was all about -- that DARKNESS that Burton expertly captured in the first one; this was a dark, vengeful superhero that Keaton expertly portrayed under the mask and cape in my personal opinion, but I cannot comment, again, on Bale's performance because I have not yet seen Batman Begins.

But you are right-----Keaton and the Dark Knight character had a very, very vengeful edge when he was out fighting the criminals in Gotham and THAT'S what Batman was all about --- NOT the neon-glowing world that the light-in-the-loafers Joel Schumacher created.

[Lexmark3200]

"I meant that Batman Begins should be required viewing for anyone who has recently seen the Batman Anthology. The contrast after a fresh viewing of the first four movies will be quite startling. I saw Batman Begins three times over the summer, and only after seeing the Anthology movies again this week did I realize just how dramatically different a direction Christopher Nolan has taken the series. All of the over-the-top set design and thematic music from the previous series have been jetisoned in favor of a more grounded and contemporary look, and IMO brilliantly minimalist score (obviously a Hans Zimmer score, but a lot more restrained than what he typically writes)."

Interesting. Makes me want to rent this even more now. I can't wait.

"Generally a very good soundtrack that falls a step short of reference quality. Very active usage of the surround tracks that conveys a good amount of directionality and coherency with the front channels. Did not sound like it was repurposed for home theater playback (few DVD soundtracks do). Dynamics are well balanced, and don't go totally overboard. The bass is strong but appropriately applied throughout the movie, and has some powerful LFE output in some of the action scenes. Only weakness might be the vocal timbre in some scenes."

Thanks for the background info; I'll have a review of it up once I demo it so we can discuss the audio some more....there was ONLY a Dolby 5.1 mix on board, correct, no DTS? When you say "did not sound like it was repurposed for home theater playback and few DVD soundtracks do" what do you mean exactly? Just curious because I think I feel the same way but perhaps on a different level --- but we may be thinking the exact same way.

[Kam]

One thing I hated about the second two besides all the previous comments is what happened to the vengeful edge he had. I've always liked that name "Dark Knight". Everyone is right. The series is definitely going in the right direction.

You guys are starting to make me think about returning those last two. If anything I'm sure my kids gonna love em.

can't say much about sound or video quality of the last two, i havent seen them again since the first viewings nor would i subject myself to that torture willingly. and am sure your kids could care less about those two factors as well (unless they're already video and audiophiles hehe) but as far as content goes, you are faaar better off getting Batman: The Movie with adam west as far as good comic fun goes which is FAAAR more enjoyable than the last two movies in the batman series, which, imo, are pure crap and no matter how great they may sound or look, it's still crap. shiny crap... is still crap. beautifully crisp dts audio on crappy dialogue... is still crappy dialogue. but Batman: The Movie, regardless of audio quality or video quality, is still good fun. i'd say, imo, return the last two and get the adam west batman for the kids.

[Lexmark3200]

Kam happens to be right when he calls the last two films in the series shiny crap; they really were; the performances were absolutely ridiculous --- especially from Alicia Silverstone, Schwarzanegger, and Clooney.....I mean, come on.....when "Batgirl" (completely unnecessary to introduce in my opinion) says to Poison Ivy "you're about to become composte....." I just almost vomited and wretched in my seat; these movies just SUCKED.

But I still think you should hold onto your box set for completist reasons, just to have them all incase your kids like the last two. Just my two cents.

[Lexmark3200]

"can't say much about sound or video quality of the last two"

They were stellar, and bordered on reference, in my opinion; well, maybe not that far, but the DTS tracks were hot, aggressive and loaded with LFE as well as highly directional, plus the video in their newly minted transfers looked great.

The films themselves sucked.

[L.J.]

can't say much about sound or video quality of the last two, i havent seen them again since the first viewings nor would i subject myself to that torture willingly. and am sure your kids could care less about those two factors as well (unless they're already video and audiophiles hehe) but as far as content goes, you are faaar better off getting Batman: The Movie with adam west as far as good comic fun goes which is FAAAR more enjoyable than the last two movies in the batman series, which, imo, are pure crap and no matter how great they may sound or look, it's still crap. shiny crap... is still crap. beautifully crisp dts audio on crappy dialogue... is still crappy dialogue. but Batman: The Movie, regardless of audio quality or video quality, is still good fun. i'd say, imo, return the last two and get the adam west batman for the kids.

I believe I saw that one. Is that the one when Batman fell into the water and came out with a shark attached to his leg? After checking his belt he luckily found his trusty shark repellant.

[Woochifer]

Why NOT? It has been done before. I can't believe you didn't know that.

I'm well aware that it's been done before and that's why I'm actually glad that Batman is more reminiscent of what I heard during the original theatrical run. Extensive rerecording of sound effects don't always improve a movie soundtrack.


No I am not. Im simply saying some "work" should have been done to spice this soundtrack up a bit if Warner is promising DTS surround activity on the title. And I'm not "griping"; I am simply stating, whether you want to continue getting your panties in a bunch about this or not, that the gunshot effects sounded dated and hollow. Simple. Done. Over. Others I have discussed this with agreed totally.

Warner's not promising anything other than the inclusion of a DTS track. Just because it's a DTS track does not guarantee that it will sound any different from the DD track. Whatever characteristics people want to ascribe to the DTS label, it's entirely their own assumption. If the DTS track was transferred simultaneously with the DD track, then any difference with a dated track like Batman would likely be subtle at best. If they "spice" the soundtrack up a bit, then why would they only do that with the DTS track and not with the DD track?


Wasn't to my ears, and that's what I go by to report to folks. From what I understand, that's all that matters TO THEM according to feedback I get on DVD Talk.com.

To your ears, huh? I guess that despite all your protestations, you still don't own a SPL meter. If you're at all concerned about the accuracy of what you report to people, shouldn't you verify the levels for yourself if someone else points out to you that they indeed are different? I'm going by my ears AND what the SPL meter shows.


Yes, "people at the office" as much as you want to poke fun at this notion and it bothers me none, who review in columns, all agreed that the DTS track on the first Batman film sounded nearly identical to the Dolby Digital variant. Even the Convergence Editor of the magazine made a comment to me in an e mail that yes, Batman "doesn't sound that mind blowing" in its DTS version...

And if you level match the tracks, then I would agree that the two tracks sound nearly identical. But, without level matching the tracks, there's a clear cut difference in how they sound because the DTS is verifiably louder than the DD track. I don't know why you dispute the existence of a level difference between the tracks, because it's simply there.

[Woochifer]

Thanks for the background info; I'll have a review of it up once I demo it so we can discuss the audio some more....there was ONLY a Dolby 5.1 mix on board, correct, no DTS? When you say "did not sound like it was repurposed for home theater playback and few DVD soundtracks do" what do you mean exactly? Just curious because I think I feel the same way but perhaps on a different level --- but we may be thinking the exact same way.

Yup, only DD 5.1 is on board, no DTS.

Examples of soundtracks that were (or very likely) repurposed for home theater playback include Master and Commander, Aladdin, and The Lion King. My understanding is that this is common practice with Disney's DVD releases. This means that the soundtrack, originally mixed on a dubbing stage for theatrical release, did not get a straight transfer, but instead got remixed inside a studio with a 5.1 monitoring setup rather than a large surround speaker array.

[Lexmark3200]

"I'm well aware that it's been done before and that's why I'm actually glad that Batman is more reminiscent of what I heard during the original theatrical run. Extensive rerecording of sound effects don't always improve a movie soundtrack."

I understand that, but in this case, I think more work could have been done to "unhollow" this a bit...

"Warner's not promising anything other than the inclusion of a DTS track."

That's not what Roger Stilmont at Warner's public relations office told me. Forget that for a moment --- what is the "promise" of a DTS track mean anyway? You mean to tell me that this is because there was allocated bitrate space? If a consumer is given the choice between Dolby Digital and DTS 5.1 soundtracks on a disc, there SHOULD be some kind of sonic improvement with the choice of the DTS mix made, I'm plainly sorry about this painful reality.

"Just because it's a DTS track does not guarantee that it will sound any different from the DD track."

I disagree.

"Whatever characteristics people want to ascribe to the DTS label, it's entirely their own assumption. If the DTS track was transferred simultaneously with the DD track, then any difference with a dated track like Batman would likely be subtle at best. If they "spice" the soundtrack up a bit, then why would they only do that with the DTS track and not with the DD track?"

That's simply not true about people ascribing their own characteristics to the DTS label; why is it included then? You still havent come up with any explanation other than "available bitrate space" and room on the disc. Impossible to believe. Sorry.

"To your ears, huh? I guess that despite all your protestations, you still don't own a SPL meter. If you're at all concerned about the accuracy of what you report to people, shouldn't you verify the levels for yourself if someone else points out to you that they indeed are different? I'm going by my ears AND what the SPL meter shows."

I'm impressed and happy for you. And I STILL say the DTS track, after doing A/B returns, sounded no more hotter than the Dolby mix. And that's what Im going to continue reporting to people. My columnist editor had absolutely no problem in me reporting that the track didnt sound so great to my ears. That's what Im here to tell people.

"And if you level match the tracks, then I would agree that the two tracks sound nearly identical. But, without level matching the tracks, there's a clear cut difference in how they sound because the DTS is verifiably louder than the DD track."

I absolutely disagree here. The DTS track was not louder than the DD mix.

"I don't know why you dispute the existence of a level difference between the tracks, because it's simply there."

Because I have things on the side of my head called ears.

[Kam]

I believe I saw that one. Is that the one when Batman fell into the water and came out with a shark attached to his leg? After checking his belt he luckily found his trusty shark repellant.

that'd be the one... not to mention this dubious riddle by the riddler:

What weighs six ounces, sits in a tree and is very dangerous?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
..
.
A sparrow with a machine gun.

(for the record, robin solved that riddle, that kid really is a boy wonder!)
now i gotta find this and watch it again. ya just can't beat this kind of fun.
:D

[Lexmark3200]

"Yup, only DD 5.1 is on board, no DTS"

Disheartening, as I was beginning to believe the only Warner titles that would be affixed with DTS tracks HAD to be remotely connected to a Morgan Creek project. Well, Batman Begins actually kind of supports that!!

I'm sure the Dolby track has plenty of activity, though; I'll analyze it this weekend.

[L.J.]

that'd be the one... not to mention this dubious riddle by the riddler:

What weighs six ounces, sits in a tree and is very dangerous?
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.

.
.
..
.
A sparrow with a machine gun.

(for the record, robin solved that riddle, that kid really is a boy wonder!)
now i gotta find this and watch it again. ya just can't beat this kind of fun.
:D


That's some good stuff. Classic Batman & Robin. I remember a scene where they were climing a building using ropes but you could totally tell they were walking but the camera was turned sideways giving the appearance of climbing. LOL :D

[Woochifer]

That's not what Roger Stilmont at Warner's public relations office told me. Forget that for a moment --- what is the "promise" of a DTS track mean anyway? You mean to tell me that this is because there was allocated bitrate space? If a consumer is given the choice between Dolby Digital and DTS 5.1 soundtracks on a disc, there SHOULD be some kind of sonic improvement with the choice of the DTS mix made, I'm plainly sorry about this painful reality.

The painful reality is that with DD and DTS soundtracks prepared identically, the differences will not be apparent with dated soundtracks. Like I said, why should the DD and DTS tracks be prepared differently?


That's simply not true about people ascribing their own characteristics to the DTS label; why is it included then? You still havent come up with any explanation other than "available bitrate space" and room on the disc. Impossible to believe. Sorry.

The market reality is that people like having the DTS option on their DVDs. But, they also like their bonus features, commentary tracks, and better video quality. Rather than trade off one feature for another, Warner gave people every possible reason to upgrade. They're trying to sell you something, and DTS is just another inducement among many. It's that simple. Just because the DTS track more audibly improves upon the DD track with the third and fourth movies is no reason to not include the DTS track with the first two movies.

People DO ascribe their own characteristics to the DTS label. Just look at all the posts on this and other boards describing the huge night and day differences with DTS tracks, as if the DTS format itself is responsible for people hearing louder bass and higher surround channel levels on some soundtracks.


I'm impressed and happy for you. And I STILL say the DTS track, after doing A/B returns, sounded no more hotter than the Dolby mix. And that's what Im going to continue reporting to people. My columnist editor had absolutely no problem in me reporting that the track didnt sound so great to my ears. That's what Im here to tell people.

Then in the absence of an objective SPL meter measurement, you're going to continue reporting inaccurate information to people. And did you also tell your "columnist editor" that the levels on the DTS track are identical to the DD track?


Because I have things on the side of my head called ears.

... and you lack the SPL meter necessary to perform verifiable level measurements.

[Lexmark3200]

"The painful reality is that with DD and DTS soundtracks prepared identically, the differences will not be apparent with dated soundtracks. Like I said, why should the DD and DTS tracks be prepared differently?"

Why should they not? If they are splashing this moniker on the packaging, why not the "discipherable differences"?

"The market reality is that people like having the DTS option on their DVDs."

Thats not true for everyone, and a very blanketing statement; perhaps for DVD fanatics, but not for "people" as you like to call them.

"But, they also like their bonus features, commentary tracks, and better video quality. Rather than trade off one feature for another, Warner gave people every possible reason to upgrade. They're trying to sell you something, and DTS is just another inducement among many. It's that simple. Just because the DTS track more audibly improves upon the DD track with the third and fourth movies is no reason to not include the DTS track with the first two movies."

I never said DTS shouldnt be included in the first two titles; I was saying on the FIRST title the track didnt impress me.

"People DO ascribe their own characteristics to the DTS label. Just look at all the posts on this and other boards describing the huge night and day differences with DTS tracks, as if the DTS format itself is responsible for people hearing louder bass and higher surround channel levels on some soundtracks."

But that's not what I was talking about. It's OBVIOUS there are night and day differences between SOME DTS and DD tracked titles.

"Then in the absence of an objective SPL meter measurement"

You're ASSUMING this.

"you're going to continue reporting inaccurate information to people. And did you also tell your "columnist editor" that the levels on the DTS track are identical to the DD track?"

Not true. I am relating information as I HEAR it, which is all my editor asked me to do for the project -- you can quote me all you want and poke fun at what you think is untrue, but the truth of the matter is that I reported that the DTS track did NOT sound all that much hotter than the DD track and on a telephone conference meeting, even the Convergence Editor of the publication totally agreed with me. So quote me all you want.

"... and you lack the SPL meter necessary to perform verifiable level measurements."

Another incorrect assumption. But it sure is entertaining to hear you repeat yourself.

[Woochifer]

Why should they not? If they are splashing this moniker on the packaging, why not the "discipherable differences"?

Because all that the "moniker" means is that a soundtrack in a particular format is available on that disc title, nothing more. Any other benefits that you're ascribing or trying to fix onto the DTS label are outside of what the format itself offers. One way to create a "discipherable difference" would have simply been to port over the 384k DD track that was used on the previous version. Are you saying that people who use the DD soundtrack should be saddled with an inferior version just so that the DTS track can sound better? If improvements were made to the soundtrack, why not make them available to both the DD and DTS tracks?


Not true. I am relating information as I HEAR it, which is all my editor asked me to do for the project -- you can quote me all you want and poke fun at what you think is untrue, but the truth of the matter is that I reported that the DTS track did NOT sound all that much hotter than the DD track and on a telephone conference meeting, even the Convergence Editor of the publication totally agreed with me. So quote me all you want.

The truth of the matter is that you're arguing in circles, when all you need to do is break out a SPL meter and measure it for yourself. I heard the level difference for myself when toggling between the soundtracks. That's why I used the SPL meter to measure the volume changes that I needed to make in order to do a proper level matched comparison between the DD and DTS tracks.

So, which publication is reporting that the DD and DTS tracks did not have any differences in the levels? I'd love to read this and let them know what I've measured for myself. Links and references please.


"... and you lack the SPL meter necessary to perform verifiable level measurements."

Another incorrect assumption. But it sure is entertaining to hear you repeat yourself.

If you actually own a SPL meter, then your reporting is even emptier, because you actually have the means to verify what your ears are telling you (i.e. that the track levels are identical) yet you won't make use of it.

[Woochifer]

I believe I saw that one. Is that the one when Batman fell into the water and came out with a shark attached to his leg? After checking his belt he luckily found his trusty shark repellant.

Yup, and when that torpedo got launched towards them, some noble porpoise put itself in the path so our heroes were saved!

I almost don't even count the Adam West movie as part of the overall Batman legacy because it was so intentionally camped out and ridiculous. It has entertainment value in its own right though, in fact, a lot more than Batman & Robin. But, it's not really part of the continuum because it so intentionally disregards the origins of the character.

Several years ago, I saw the Adam West movie at the Nuart Theater in West L.A. on one of their improv nights, where the theater turns the soundtrack off and lets an improv troupe make up new dialog for the film as it goes along. It was freakin' hilarious! They normally only did this for Mystery Science Theater 3000ish movies like Plan 9 From Outer Space or Attack of the 50 Foot Woman, so obviously that Batman movie got lumped into the so-bad-it's-good category.

[Lexmark3200]

"Because all that the "moniker" means is that a soundtrack in a particular format is available on that disc title, nothing more."

So you actually believe -- in your mind -- there are no sonic benefits to the algorithm swaps?

"Any other benefits that you're ascribing or trying to fix"

I'm not trying to do anything.

"onto the DTS label are outside of what the format itself offers. One way to create a "discipherable difference" would have simply been to port over the 384k DD track that was used on the previous version. Are you saying that people who use the DD soundtrack should be saddled with an inferior version just so that the DTS track can sound better? If improvements were made to the soundtrack, why not make them available to both the DD and DTS tracks?"

Why not just offer a superior DTS track for that matter?

"The truth of the matter is that you're arguing in circles"

Arguing? I'm not arguing.

"when all you need to do is break out a SPL meter and measure it for yourself. I heard the level difference for myself when toggling between the soundtracks. That's why I used the SPL meter to measure the volume changes that I needed to make in order to do a proper level matched comparison between the DD and DTS tracks."

The DTS track was not hotter than the Dolby variant, and, again, editorial consultants in the field agreed with me upon listening with their ears which is what they wanted ME to do.

"So, which publication is reporting that the DD and DTS tracks did not have any differences in the levels? I'd love to read this and let them know what I've measured for myself. Links and references please."

What----do you honestly THINK they would answer your single, lone, solitary rebuttal about this in the Letters to the Editor section? Never would happen. I know the staff too well.

"If you actually own a SPL meter, then your reporting is even emptier, because you actually have the means to verify what your ears are telling you (i.e. that the track levels are identical) yet you won't make use of it."

The DTS track on Batman is not that hot, and I will continue to report that to whomever asks, requests a personal review of the title or if I get assigned another re-review of the box set.

[L.J.]

Yup, and when that torpedo got launched towards them, some noble porpoise put itself in the path so our heroes were saved!

I forgot about that scene. I'll have to rent that one for a good laugh.



Several years ago, I saw the Adam West movie at the Nuart Theater in West L.A. on one of their improv nights, where the theater turns the soundtrack off and lets an improv troupe make up new dialog for the film as it goes along. It was freakin' hilarious! They normally only did this for Mystery Science Theater 3000ish movies like Plan 9 From Outer Space or Attack of the 50 Foot Woman, so obviously that Batman movie got lumped into the so-bad-it's-good category.

That's funny. I could only imagine the lines these guys were coming up with. I used to love watching Mystery science theater on comedy central.

[Kam]

I forgot about that scene. I'll have to rent that one for a good laugh.




That's funny. I could only imagine the lines these guys were coming up with. I used to love watching Mystery science theater on comedy central.

you know it really makes you sympathize with the riddler. if i came up with such unbelievably esoteric and completely impossible riddles to solve that had NO logic to them whatsoever, and someone STILL managed to figure them out... i would be a sociopathic nutjob too... my alltime best example: After they crash land the helicopter on the unbelievably fortunate sighting of the rubber and/or mattress factory clearance sale, there is an explosion in the sky and a rocket writes the two riddles:

What goes up white but comes down yellow and white?
How do you devide 15 apples amongst 16 people?

That's it, those are all the clues the riddler gives to batman and robin. now... try and solve them. maybe, just maybe you can solve them individually... but can you do it with the amazing genius that batman did? i highly doubt it. this... my friends, is genius at work...


What goes up white, but comes down yellow and white? an egg.
How do you devive 15 apples amongst 16 people? make apple puree

(ok, fair enough, those are solveable, now comes the genius of batman's deductive and inductive reasoning combined)....
Batman:
"Right you are chum... now an egg... an egg is a container.. a container of all our hopes.. apple purree... is a unification.. a unification and a container of all our hopes... they're going after the United Nations!!"

how does he do it???!!!! the man is truly the greatest detective of all time!
hahaha :D

[Woochifer]

So you actually believe -- in your mind -- there are no sonic benefits to the algorithm swaps?

There are, but source material like the original Batman movie is not revealing enough, especially if both the DD and DTS tracks use the same source. Only with higher resolution sources do the advantages of DTS become more audible.


Why not just offer a superior DTS track for that matter?

The DD and DTS tracks already improve upon the original 384k DD transfer, what more do you want?


The DTS track was not hotter than the Dolby variant, and, again, editorial consultants in the field agreed with me upon listening with their ears which is what they wanted ME to do.

"So, which publication is reporting that the DD and DTS tracks did not have any differences in the levels? I'd love to read this and let them know what I've measured for myself. Links and references please."

What----do you honestly THINK they would answer your single, lone, solitary rebuttal about this in the Letters to the Editor section? Never would happen. I know the staff too well.

Again, which publication is agreeing with you that the DD and DTS levels match on the Batman DVD? If they've put this assertion into their comparison reviews, I would like to read it and respond with objective facts.

How would I know whether THEY would respond to my inquiry, if you're not even citing which editorial staff agrees with your subjective evaluation about no level differences between the two soundtracks. I'll gladly send them the SPL results and my calibration settings. Cite your references please.


The DTS track on Batman is not that hot, and I will continue to report that to whomever asks, requests a personal review of the title or if I get assigned another re-review of the box set.

But, you are asserting that there's no audible difference between the DD and DTS track, including the levels. Repeating yourself is simply repeating inaccurate information. If you actually have a SPL meter, it's easy enough to verify this for yourself. I've already stated that there is no clearly audible difference between the two tracks, but only after compensating for the level difference.

[L.J.]

you know it really makes you sympathize with the riddler. if i came up with such unbelievably esoteric and completely impossible riddles to solve that had NO logic to them whatsoever, and someone STILL managed to figure them out... i would be a sociopathic nutjob too... my alltime best example: After they crash land the helicopter on the unbelievably fortunate sighting of the rubber and/or mattress factory clearance sale, there is an explosion in the sky and a rocket writes the two riddles:

What goes up white but comes down yellow and white?
How do you devide 15 apples amongst 16 people?

That's it, those are all the clues the riddler gives to batman and robin. now... try and solve them. maybe, just maybe you can solve them individually... but can you do it with the amazing genius that batman did? i highly doubt it. this... my friends, is genius at work...


What goes up white, but comes down yellow and white? an egg.
How do you devive 15 apples amongst 16 people? make apple puree

(ok, fair enough, those are solveable, now comes the genius of batman's deductive and inductive reasoning combined)....
Batman:
"Right you are chum... now an egg... an egg is a container.. a container of all our hopes.. apple purree... is a unification.. a unification and a container of all our hopes... they're going after the United Nations!!"

how does he do it???!!!! the man is truly the greatest detective of all time!
hahaha :D

Lol. That's funny. I also remember the fighting scenes when a giant WHAM! or BANG! would pop up on the screen. How about using that bat brain to get out of every for sure death situation. The good ol days.