James Gunn has been a popular name ever since he brought The Guardians of the Galaxy to the silver screen in 2014. That was a bottom-of-the-barrel team that nobody other than comic fans knew about and it was a complete success. Gunn's popularity waxed and waned since its release. Fans promptly trusted him with their favorite characters and wanted to see more. It gave him the opportunity to direct the GOTG sequel and put him on the path to writing and directing the third and final installment in the Guardians of the Galaxy trilogy. That was, however, until some off-color tweets of his surfaced, prompting Disney to part ways with the filmmaker.
After writing and directing some projects for Marvel's longtime competitor, DC, Disney welcomed the Guardians of the Galaxy director back to finish what he started before returning him to DC permanently. Well, Gunn is back in the hot seat; this time, it's over his comments about the world's greatest detective. More specifically, Tim Burton's 1989 Batman film. To be fair, Batman fans rarely handle criticism of the Caped Crusader well. Gunn's comments come at an awkward time since he's in charge of future Batman movies. However, his opinion on the matter isn't completely out of pocket.
James Gunn's Past Comments on Batman (1989)
James Gunn, the co-CEO of DC Studios, appears to be no fan of Tim Burton's 1989 Batman movie starring Michael Keaton. In some resurfaced Facebook comments, Gunn has some choice words about the '80s comic book movie. The context of his comments isn't entirely clear since the screenshots lack the original post that he's responding to, but that doesn't exactly change anything he says.
In his first comment, the director writes:
Keaton DID have a ridiculous voice. That said, I'd rather put up with a ridiculous voice than with horrible action sequences and acting barely worthy of the Batman TV show.
It's clear this is in response to a comparison of Christian Bale's popularly criticized voice he used for his portrayal of Batman. The second part of Gunn's comment goes on to state:
I have no idea how you can think that the Burton Batman has more similarities with Moore or Miller's Batman (and Joker) than Nolan's does. And, listen, I have problems with both of Nolan's films - I don't think either one is classic, and I don't even really think Batman Begins is good. But they're far superior to the first Batman.
It appears to be a debate shortly after The Dark Knight's release, with somebody arguing that Keaton played a better Batman than Bale or Burton's Batman is superior to Nolan's.
None of your defenses get by the fact that, despite being the first cinematic dark take on Batman (so what? Stallone's Judge Dredd was the first dark take on Judge Dredd), the movie is awful.
Why did he have to bring Judge Dredd into this? Gunn also claimed that Jack Nicholson simply played his character from The Shining but with clown makeup. Gunn's harshest and most in-depth analysis of Burton's film comes in his final comment.
The Tim Burton Batman is poorly written, the soundtrack is the worst work of everyone involved, and it is absolutely one of the most boring films ever. Not only that, but the reveal of the Joker as the killer of Bruce Wayne's parents spits in the face of Batman's origin, and is a nullification of the bottomless thirst for vengeance that necessarily drives Batman. It pretends not to be campy, but is completely so. And, on top of everything, the dark creature of the night can't even move his *** neck. Give me a *** break. It's a ridiculous, awful film. Burton's Planet of the Apes is genius in comparison.
James Gunn is Entitled to His Opinion
It's important to remember that everyone's entitled to their own opinion about anything. At least James Gunn supports his opinion with examples, which is a lost art at this point amongst most social media users. No matter how much one disagrees with his views, all art is subjective. Getting an entire audience to agree unanimously about movies, TV, or comic book storylines is impossible. For example, a large group of fans enjoyed Spider-Man's "One More Day" story.
Some fans have lost faith in Gunn as co-CEO of DC Studios because of his past comments, but that should instill more faith if anything. He's critical and passionate about movies. Those kinds of comments prove that he wants the absolute best for audiences. It's better to have someone capable of critiquing flaws in cinema be in charge of a cinematic universe's future than somebody who simply agrees with the masses. Somebody who goes against the grain is exactly what DC movies need.
James Gunn Isn't Necessarily Wrong About Batman
There's no denying the significant role Batman '89 played in a lot of childhoods, creating lifelong fans of the character. Before Burton put Michael Keaton in that suit, there wasn't a serious take of the character on either the silver or small screen. Lewis Wilson, Robert Lowry, and Adam West's iterations were all campy takes, a far cry from the Batman fans know and love today. It's difficult for fans to hear, but Gunn makes some valid points in his decade-old comments. Keaton did have just as ridiculous of a Batman voice as Bale.
Additionally, Jack Nicholson's acting as the Joker wasn't memorable. Even his character's name was Jack. It's okay to enjoy his portrayal of the character for nostalgic reasons, but his take doesn't hold a candle to Heath Ledger's version or Mark Hamill's.
Gunn's also not wrong about Joker killing Bruce's parents nullifying "the bottomless thirst for vengeance that necessarily drives Batman" because Batman kills Joker by the end of the film. He finishes his job at that point. It's arguable (which is what opinions are) that fans can say the same about Joe Chill in Batman Begins, but that's a flawed argument. Bruce didn't kill Joe Chill, refusing him any personal resolution. Secondly, Nolan's movie successfully explains why Bruce continues his crusade.
In comparison to Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, Batman's action sequences were subpar. They failed to show the master martial artist that Bruce is supposed to be and his movements looked clumsy since Keaton couldn't move his neck. There was also a fair amount of campiness reverberating through every scene, but that's Burton's style.
The point stands that Gunn's opinion of the movie isn't as far off base as social media is making it out to be. It's important to keep in mind that he went out of his way to appear edgy back in the day and if he were to share his opinion of the matter now, he'd be more diplomatic.