I like all the Batman films.
They're all of their time. The Batman and film of '89, Batman and film of '92, Batman and film of '95, the Batman and film of '97, the Batman and film of '05 and the Batman and film of '08. You really wouldn't have one without the other. An example would be the transition from
Batman and Robin to
Batman Begins and those long 8 years without a Batman on the silver screen.
Like the comics, each film represents a different vision of Batman so I don't see what the problem is.
Batman
In '89 you had the beginning of it all. Hype, promotion and a great film. Initially people didn't believe in it but the film really has a legacy that completely changed, not only the character but the superhero genre itself. It was the first serious take and pushed a few boundaries that are pretty unlimited today. It set the standard for great comic book flicks.
If there are any criticisms against it, it's time. People change, they get older, time elapses. I think that's the case with backlash against the film now. It really is a classic in it's own right. Fans expected another Adam West Batman but instead it took Batman back to it's roots.
It's funny how other criticisms against it really have no merit. I can think of three main ones that are absolutely hollow. Alfred letting Vicki Vale enter the Batcave, Jack Napier being the murderer of the Wayne's and Batman taking lives.
1.) Vicki Vale
clearly knew that Bruce was Batman. It's hilarious how these people that find all those "deep" meanings of TDK or Begins don't understand that maybe, just maybe Vicki Vale went to Wayne Manor and told Alfred that "she knows".
I guess it's the same people that want everything shown to them, except a Joker somehow leaving a high rise, pent house party.
2.) What a great twist. Say what you will but as a one shot film deal, making "the Joker" the killer of Batman's parents is pretty brilliant, so much so that the creator (well partial creator, I know all about poor Finger) wished he came up with it.
It makes the symbolism of Batman and the Joker, mirrors of each other all the more special. "I made you, you made me first". Whereas TDK metaphorically has Joker being created by Batman and the likes of criminals like the Joker creating Batman (which is FANTASTIC in it's own right) '89 LITERALLY says that they created each other. It's pure Batman vs. The Joker just like TDK is pure Batman vs. The Joker. It doesn't really get much better.
The look on Wayne's face when he figures out that he killed them is one of many great scenes in these Batman films. Especially the build up of him going back looking at those files (and missing the fact that the young Jack Napier mug shot was RIGHT there next to his latest one) in front of that haunting computer monitor.
3.) Batman killed in the early comics, intentionally and out right. It's just a fact. If any fan or comic enthusiast believes that the first and early comics of Batman aren't "real" then they're nuts.
Batman Returns
Batman Returns was highly anticipated. I think alot of people were disappointed because they were expecting a "Batman 2" and it wasn't that, it was something more. It's bold and more stylized. I think it's the least comic book Batman film to date and I think that's a big turn off for some people.
You have a film that was essentially promoted as a summer blockbuster but it was anything but. It delved too deep inside to be some run off the mill popcorn extravaganza.
Say what you will about the change of style and direction, but to this day it still looks and feels fresh. I know comic purists have a fit (even though most if it is pretty accurate to what was seen in the comics) but it's not just a typical comic book flick and it never set out to be that.
It took things to another level.
For me, it's a hidden gem. As a kid I liked it, but during Begins/TDK I literally hated it for all the wrong reasons. I missed the point, I missed the messages.
You wrap your head and embrace things like baby Oswald being abandoned and thrown into the sewers, becoming an almost sympathetic monster or Selina Kyle being an emotionally abused secretary longing to break free and seeking revenge for those that mistreated her or The Dark Knight himself "returning" in the most operatic and stoic way imaginable and it really is great. The Bat, The Cat and the Penguin. Tortured souls like Penguin and Catwoman being what Batman could be and ultimately become.
Batman Forever
Again, people seem to forget what a big deal this film was back in '95. Nobody takes the time to look back, they only see it for what that DVD or blu ray has presented to them on their screen.
I know people don't consider it a "reboot" but I think for '95 it was, we just didn't have that term for a "re visioned" film yet. Like Begins and TDK, Forever was a fresh take. You have to remember that, even though Returns was a hit and made it's budget back with a profit, Warner Bros expected more financially while fans expected more from the character.
Forever is like Begins in a way, it changed things up for a new fresh take that hadn't been done. We saw "dark and mysterious", after two films people got the idea now it was time to brighten it up. Disregarding the crucial deleted scenes (which were cut because they were too psychological and dark, something the studio FELT was unneeded at this point) it's just a fun spewing popcorn flick. What point is there in despising it when it's harmless.
There's ham and wackiness, okay, but what exactly is wrong with that? Batman or his villians has never been portrayed as such? C'mon. Tommy Lee and Carrey always come under fire,
today and I'm not sure why.
I also don't like unfair criticisms made for this one. Just say you don't like this interpretation and be done with it. When people grasp for staws and say "that scene with Batman and Alfred and drive thrus and sandwich is horrible" I say that's a retarded statement. I guess in reality father and son figures don't have humor. God forbid Alfred make sarcastic puns or jokes. "Will you be wantin da batpawd sew, much mowre subtle", oh wait.... To me, it's just like criticizing the Batmobile for going up walls when other Batman films have it shooting grappling hooks to make sharp turns, hidden turntables to make it tun a ridiculous 360 degrees or DRIVING ON ____ING ROOFTOPS.
Anyway, the film is exactly what it is and when it was released it was accepted and enjoyed. It was a hit. It was borderline camp and borderline serious. There's nothing wrong with a "safe" and marketable Batman film. It didn't tread into the dark abyss, it didn't make you think, it wasn't excessively corny but it never took it self
too,
too seriously.
Batman and Robin
If it ain't broke, don't fix it. In Batman and Robin's case they (everyone involved) took what worked great with Batman Forever but "electrified it" times a million. The mentality was, "Batman is HUGE, it's a hit, let's pump it out and make tons of $$$ again".
Everyone wanted a piece of the action (Studios, Actors, Toy companies etc.) and it just got too big and fat to support itself.
Think about it. Most of the Batman films have been three years apart. Batman and Robin literally was busted out in less than two.
Yeah, yeah it's bad, the worst of them no doubt but who cares? If anything it's INFAMOUSLY bad. All things have highs and lows, yings and yangs. I think it's great that you have a franchise that has this much range. You have films like Begins or '89 Batman that are so good then you have, well Batman and Robin, the lowest of lows.
I don't see why fans feel offended. "They ruined MY Batman" (or scarier, "OUR Batman"). It was just a movie. People involved fessed up, apologized (why did they have to apologize?) and moved on yet some fans take it pretty personally.
As with anything, there's merit to be had in it. It is comical (even though that wasn't the intention). You can't always have a "butt hurt, dark Batman", that would get boring. Keep in mind that Batman and co. have actually been depicted like this. Anyone comic fan that proclaims that any of these movies aren't "ACCURATE TO THE SOURCE" are idiots.
There are two things that people miss about Batman and Robin. One it evolved into, and ultimately became Batman Begins (yeah, like it or not, disregarding "teh canon" it's one big franchise, atleast in WB's eyes. Batman and Robin passed the baton to a new version), a much, much better film. Two it might be the most talked about Batman film, maybe moreso than Batman and The Dark Knight.
Remember infamously bad? That IS something.
Batman Begins
I don't know about other people, but I really think that the events that led up to Batman Begins were pretty important mile stones in all of these Batman films. It was 8 long years. I still remember all of those horrible throws like "BATMAN BEYOND: LIVE ACTION", "BATMAN YEAR ONE: LETS MAKE BRUCE WAYNE A STREET KID" and all that crap.
There was really no where to go but up after Batman and Robin. After all these bad attempts at reinventing the franchise here comes "Intimidation Game" or Batman Begins.
Batman Begins had humble beginnings until it exploded into The Dark Knight. Fans and casual viewers alike didn't know what to expect. I really, REALLY like that about it. It was small in scale but large in scope, almost like an independent film. I remember having little to no interest in "another Batman film" despite being a hardcore Batman fan.
I didn't care about new pictures (in fact, things like the Tumbler turned me off) and not once spoiled myself even after the leaked script.
A few weeks before it came out I saw that great teaser for it with Bruce Wayne narrating the monster that was essentially himself. That got me pumped, but it was a different kind of excitment.
I saw it and loved it. This reinvention worked unlike those horrid attempts before this and after Batman and Robin. The "realism" was fresh, the film took me in. It was actually something that I never witnessed before.
Like Batman Returns, I enjoyed the fact that it wasn't blown out of proportion media or fan wise. It was good, that's all that needed to be said.
Batman was back the way most people, myself including, wanted him to be shown.
The Dark Knight
Ah, the culmination of everything so far.
Essentially this is modern Batman film. "Realism", seriousness, etc. Disregard the actual film for a second and it was all about the hype and the anticipation FOR the film. You had the announcement of the Joker and the announcement of who was playing him. You had backlash. All of these mixed emotions in a span of a few months, the biggest being the death of Heath Ledger. It was exhilarating, for me and I know others. It kept you on edge and made you want more.
It really was fun. It was 1966 and 1989 Batmania all over again. There will never be thing quite like it no matter what delusions people come up with. The film itself was just as good and extremely well received. There's really no point in covering more because what has been said has been said and unlike the others does not need to be reemphasized again.
However, the thing I dislike about it is what it has ultimately become. The obsessions, the debates, you all know what I'm talking about. It sure has set standards but I feel it has in a negative way.
People are more critical because of it and they damn well have higher expectations and cynical views more than ever before.
I love the movie, but I hate what it became basically. It feels bloated and at times murky. People, fans specifically, just take the damn thing too seriously (missing the cautious tagline: Why So Serious) and for this I blame the internet.
The great thing about Batman is that he can be portrayed in different ways. You want to bend and shape him into a grinning, banquet attending, badge wearing do-gooder with a plethora of bat-related items who fights crime for justice and fun? Go ahead, it works. How about a brooding, psychologically tortured, hard nosed no-nonsense vigilante? Yep. How about the middle road, the honor based, serious and realistic portrayal?
That seems to be the current favorite flavor with TDK. When it gets "old" like the other films in the franchise, and hollow criticisms emerge. I'll be there to defend it, just like I've done here.
In closing, I like them all. Yeah I have favorites be it quality or sheer nostalgia but that's bound to happen. It's more about the feelings for me than the reasons why.
If you really want to Look no further than the Bat-emblems/logos used to promote the films,
Batman had this classic, iconic logo, it summed up what you were going to see. Each film has this specific look and feel to them that makes film from the franchise stand out on their own.
And like it or not, you can find ties and similarities in all of them. Batman and TDK having the most common between them.
I can safely say that I'm more of a fan of Batman through the film and animated medium than I am of the comics, though I respect that the comics are the source of all these great stories/characters.
Keaton was the only Bats for me 
Totally agree. I see Begins as the perfect batman movie. Dark Knight, as much as i love it, feels like an Elseworlds story. I dont really despise Forever, i just find it pretty uninteresting generally. I cant stand Jim Carrey as the Riddler. It just seems like he's running around being Ace Ventura most of the time. Two Face was kind of meh. I thought his outfits were cool, didnt like the make up though. And i liked the fact that he really had to use the coin to make his decisions. I thought the sonar suit was kinda cool, especially with the big bat across the chest, but didnt like how grey/silvery it looked. But on the whole, the film is just too silly and camp. Thats fine if people enjoy their batman like that, just means there's something for everyone. But i've tried watching it and just cant help but find fault in it at every turn. 
