logo Sign In

Batman (1989) 35mm Opportunity

Author
Time

you should never use a trailer as a reference to how a movie actually looked theatrically cause 9 times out of 10 the movie isn’t even completed yet when those teasers are made and not properly color timed yet

a lot insist on using trailers as reference but it’s never a good idea for that reason alone and just causes confusion

the 4K transfer itself as far as I know does match for the most part how the movie looked in theaters and it’s not tealed, it’s moreso a icy cold blue which is consistent with Burton’s other works

Raccoons

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I personally don’t have a problem with the 4K but still prefer the colors of the old BD.

Project creator and film enthusiast.

Author
Time

CloakedDragon97 said:

I personally don’t have a problem with the 4K but still prefer the colors of the old BD.

The 4K colors are really left to be desired IMO, but the restoration itself is pretty fantastic. I would personally replace the audio with the original theatrical mix tho

Author
Time
 (Edited)

I can see where you’re coming from. The more I think about it, the colors are a bit too vibrant for my tastes. That’s why I prefer the darker, desaturated look of the Blu-ray. However the 4K has more detail and has the 1.85 aspect ratio.

Project creator and film enthusiast.

Author
Time

The 4K release is fine, it’s the audio which I have issue with. Replaced foley for a lot of sounds. It’s the main reason why I haven’t sold the BDs of Batman (1989) and Batman Returns. All would be needed is color correcting of it to possibly appear similar to the BD or a 35mm print, and the original cinema audio track. I barely even watch the 4K of both Tim Burton Batman films due to what I and Venny typed.
Wonder if the OG cinema audio was on the Laserdisc at all, let alone the BD. I’m not knowledgable about this, even though I did see this in cinemas in 1989 when I was 10, of course I wouldn’t remember the sound mix.

Author
Time

God, how that notorious asshole sold a shit print for $1.2K I will never understand.

[ Scanning stuff since 2015 ]

Author
Time

RU.08 said:

God, how that notorious asshole sold a shit print for $1.2K I will never understand.

It’s a superhero movie. And one of the most influential superhero movies at that so it selling for over 1K makes sense as die-hard Batman fans would probably shell out the cash to buy it

Author
Time

Not about the movie Venny, the seller. “zontar2000”. His notoriety for dishonesty precedes him. Buy from that guy at your peril.

[ Scanning stuff since 2015 ]

Author
Time

I’ve done waaaaaayy too much research into the original Batfilms.

The gist of it is that WB finally did new transfers of all four and restored the darker look to the Burton films that was never before on video. The 2005 SE DVDs and 2008ish Blu-rays were a bit closer but still not there.

I’ve unfortunately only been able to see a studio held print of Returns as an adult. So on 89 all I can do is speculate. There is a tad bit of teal creeping in on the 1080p disc of the 4k master that on the UHD disc is very very minimized. The audio remix is filth.

Returns is the disc I have major issues with. They brought in the darkness but all the cold blues have gone full teal. This was never an issue before and negates the otherwise great work done. This teal look is nowhere to be found on WB’s own 1992 studio vault Fuji release print I saw a few years ago. Unfortunately whenever I bring this up people call me crazy in spite of stating my case politely and having a recent frame of reference of a vintage print properly projected.

In the Face to Face music video you can see brief clips of telecine footage with darkness and the correct dark blues.

So 89 seems largely okay but need the theatrical audio restored. Returns needs a full color regrading plus theatrical audio.

The audio is a bit complicated. On 89 the older pre-2005 discs have a bassier and warmer mix. The LD was Dolby surround and the flipper dvd upped that same mix to 5.1 discrete.
The 2005 SE DVD had dts and Dolby 5.1 with 89 having a touch more high end clarity at the cost of all that wonderful bassy warmth. This 2005 audio was ported to Blu-ray in TrueHD.
There is also apparently a mono mix floating around on 16mm prints.

Avoid the Atmos remix at all costs which painfully destroys the sonic identity of the film.

Returns was the premiere Dolby 5.1 film but most heard it in Dolby Stereo SR and 99% of prints were SR only. The print I saw was as well. The mixes are the same but the 5.1 gives you greater discrete clarity. Yet the 2.0 SR has nice warmth and an old school 1992 flavor.
The LD if you can find an non rotted copy preserves the theatrical 2.0 SR. The 5.1 on the flipper dvd sounds relatively the same as the 2005 Dolby/DTS and Blu-ray but I haven’t done a waveform comparison.

Avoid the Atmos remix at all costs.

Don’t get me started on how Forever has a better 2.0 surround mix than 5.1 mix.

VADER!? WHERE THE HELL IS MY MOCHA LATTE? -Palpy on a very bad day.
“George didn’t think there was any future in dead Han toys.”-Harrison Ford
YT channel:
https://www.youtube.com/c/DamnFoolIdealisticCrusader

Author
Time

RU.08 said:

Not about the movie Venny, the seller. “zontar2000”. His notoriety for dishonesty precedes him. Buy from that guy at your peril.

Yeah, I know zontar is a bad person to buy from, but not everyone knows that so people still buy these prints from him at these insanely high prices despite them not being as good as he advertises because they are popular films and films projectionists want to buy. It’s unfortunate, but zontar is listing prints of movies people desire.