Exploring the Pinewood Studios Gotham City Set from the 1989 Batman film...

[sallah]

Hey all! I posted this in the DX Keaton Batman thread, but after seeing a couple of suggestions for it to have its own thread, I decided to start one up. (Mods- Feel free to move or delete this if that isn't okay)

Recently, a gentleman named Mark Jones posted a large selection of pictures he took of the Gotham City set back in 1989. With his blessing, I have spent the last few days working the pictures into a "virtual tour" of Gotham- Identifying the different buildings, figuring out the layout of the set, and then working them into a cohesive "tour-map" blog post for my 89 Batman fansite. You can check it out here if you're interested:

1989Batman.com: The Pinewood Studios Gotham City Set

If you are a fan of the 1989 Batman film, its magnificent Gotham City set, or just a fan of old style filmmaking in general- Please take a moment and check it out!

Sallah

 

[rickrooster]

Wow!!! What an insight to an amazing set and film.

Great tour!

 

[Mr. EcKo]

I'm glad you gave this it's own thread. Definitely deserves it.

Thanks again for sharing. That was freaking awesome

 

[banthafett]

Thanks for making a separate thread, would have never seen it otherwise. Awesome pics, shows off what a brilliant design Batman 89 (and Returns) had.

 

[jimmie_dimmick]

I'm glad you gave this it's own thread. Definitely deserves it.

Thanks again for sharing. That was freaking awesome

 

[DarthDiggler]

I can never get enough of pics like those Burton set pics.

I would love to see more stuff like that for more recent films but they use so much green screen these days.

 

[BadMuthaDude]

That's awesome. Imagine actually walking the streets of Burton's Gotham!

 

[vodoun]

I can never get enough of pics like those Burton set pics.

I would love to see more stuff like that for more recent films but they use so much green screen these days.

Nor could I, even the magazines from the early 90s never revealed enough. Funny it took until 2013 to find this.


I had no idea the Cathedral was right around the corner of the Museum.

 

[Kal-El]

That's pretty kool

 

[Papasmoak]

A step back in time there.
Thanks for sharing this article.
Great photos.

 

[vodoun]

I had a book from the Returns movie and if I recall, nearly all of Returns was a huge model?

 

[tomk]

Thanks for taking the time to do this. It's a fascinating read.

 

[Chuck72586]

I've always loved the look of Burton's Gotham in the first Batman. However, it is pretty limited in size and scope. It's pretty much the same three streets used over and over again throughout the film.

 

[sallah]

Thanks everybody! I really appreciate all the kind words on the article. 1989 Batman is my all-time favorite movie (even named one of our kids Keaton because of it). So matching up all this stuff and breaking it down was work... but man was it fun work!

I've always loved the look of Burton's Gotham in the first Batman. However, it is pretty limited in size and scope. It's pretty much the same three streets used over and over again throughout the film.

I agree with the "loving the look" sentiment... but I totally disagree on it being limited in size and scope. Sure, we can now tell by the pictures that the enormous set constituted just a few different streets... But I could never tell that when watching the film since it was shot so incredibly well. And a set that was 95 acres in size... That is unheard of.

But either way- I'll take the 3 or 4 large streets of a Gotham City that actually looks like Gotham City come to life over green screen or location shooting in Chicago any day. '89 Gotham IS Gotham... everything else just seems like the Gotham named pasted over the existing city's name.

Sallah

 

[DarkMagic]

Great work with these photos and matching everything up with the film scenes.

I've always loved the look of Burton's Gotham in the first Batman. However, it is pretty limited in size and scope. It's pretty much the same three streets used over and over again throughout the film.

I agree with the "loving the look" sentiment... but I totally disagree on it being limited in size and scope. Sure, we can now tell by the pictures that the enormous set constituted just a few different streets... But I could never tell that when watching the film since it was shot so incredibly well. And a set that was 95 acres in size... That is unheard of.

But either way- I'll take the 3 or 4 large streets of a Gotham City that actually looks like Gotham City come to life over green screen or location shooting in Chicago any day. '89 Gotham IS Gotham... everything else just has the Gotham named pasted over the existing city's name.

I understand your point of having Gotham have its own look rather than just using real life city as a stand-in but I agree with Chuck. These photos are great for showing us in detail how exactly how the set was laid out, but they aren't the primary reason the city in that film feels so tiny to me. When I first saw the film as a kid, I noticed the same buildings and landmarks popping up over and over again. In the first scene before the kid and his parents mugged we see the park and the theater, then later when they set up the location shot of the exterior of the museum/restaurant, the park and statue are prominent in the shot. That park / central square area shows up again during the Joker's parade and then again at the end when Vicki is saying bye to Knox. Even as a kid I thought "wow, that must be the most important part of Gotham since everything happens there".

The entire Batmobile chase scene felt like he was driving around the same block over and over to get away from the Joker goons and cops. Contrast that with the chase scenes in BB / TDK / TDKR where it felt like they were actually running amok over some distance on city streets (because they were). That said, the chase scene in BB is about the only scene in that movie that made me feel that the action was in a wide open space. The rest of outdoor action felt like a claustrophobic tight set, including when the Batmobile takes out the bridge. TDK felt larger and more open, at the expense of the set pieces that made BB have more of a Gotham "flavor". It's a trade-off...a heavily designed set is going to feel small but it will have exactly the mood the designer and director wants, while real city location filming is going to feel wide open--but often at the expense of the mood that the fictional city should have.

I think TDKR struck the best balance between making the city feel like Gotham and a wide open real city at the same time, especially in the final act with the battles in the streets and the Tumbler chase. But the very wide aerial shots of Manhattan really took me out of it.

 

[DiFabio]

I didn't like TDKR locations because I recognized the locations so well.

The final chase? They literally went in circles around the Saks Fifth Avenue in Pittsburgh. That area with Selina and the boy and the apple? Those scenes in LA aren't even a block away from each other from the other LA scenes.


'89 is smaller in comparison. Of course it is. But there's an honesty to it. Everything was hand built, sculpted, they used matte paintings and impressive models. It was a different time. It was the 80s. I don't think it could have been possible for them to build a bigger set, certainly not with the already impressive creative man power they had.

Look at Star Wars, they were running around the same small set of the halls of the Death Star. The Tantive IV hallways? Same deal.

Alien and Aliens is the same way. Not too many different locations, same sets.






I think I prefer the '89 and Begins Gotham for the design, mood, and sets alone.

 

[VintijDroidGutzz]

Thanks for sharing your link Sallah!

I've bookmarked it, & looking forward to reading through..

 

[agonistes86]

That was a great read! Thanks a lot.

 

[vito81]

Great job sallah!!!

 

[vodoun]

I didn't like TDKR locations because I recognized the locations so well.

The final chase? They literally went in circles around the Saks Fifth Avenue in Pittsburgh. That area with Selina and the boy and the apple? Those scenes in LA aren't even a block away from each other from the other LA scenes.

I didn't recognise all the parts but you just knew it wasn't Gotham. You knew it was America. Isn't Gotham City a place you're not supposed to recognise? and feel lost in. I'm actually surprised that the budget Nolan had he never went down the path of Bigatures.

Batman has come to America.

'89 is smaller in comparison. Of course it is. But there's an honesty to it. Everything was hand built, sculpted, they used matte paintings and impressive models. It was a different time. It was the 80s. I don't think it could have been possible for them to build a bigger set, certainly not with the already impressive creative man power they had.

Look at Star Wars, they were running around the same small set of the halls of the Death Star. The Tantive IV hallways? Same deal.

Alien and Aliens is the same way. Not too many different locations, same sets.






I think I prefer the '89 and Begins Gotham for the design, mood, and sets alone.

Thats why I love that grungy look of 89 Gotham and all the big pipes like it was Detroit with that Robocop mood. A place you really would not like to be.

Heh, https://www.propstore.com/product-Gotham-City-Rooftop-Miniature.htm

Tim Burtons Batman - Gotham City Miniature.

Suspended 'rise and fall' motion control rig designed and built by Peter Talbot for Gotham City model unit photography.

By Stefan the Cameraman

Establishing Shot of Gotham City.

A Brian Bishop painted canvas with some miniature flats in foreground. A big roll of shiny dustbin-bag like plastic (Astrolux?) on the floor for the river and a model road bridge crossing over it. The bridge had 'rope lights' along the roadway which were pulled along by hand to look like traffic. Derek Meddings retouched most of the paintings fro the final look.