Batman '89

Batman '89 #1-6

by Sam Hamm (Writer), Joe Quiñones (Illustrator), Leonardo Ito (Colorist)

Continuing the adventures of the Dark Knight from Tim Burton's classic movie Batman, Batman '89 pulls on a number of threads left dangling by that film while continuing in the tradition of DC's very successful Batman '66 series.

In 1989 moviegoers were amazed at the new vision of the Dark Knight brought to the screen by filmmaker Tim Burton, starring Michael Keaton as Batman and Jack Nicholson as The Joker. Now, in the tradition of DC's very successful Batman '66 series, Batman '89 is set in a truly gothic Gotham City and features colorful villains including The Joker, Two-Face, and many more.

Collects: Batman '89 #1-6.

Genres: Comics, Graphic Novels, Batman, Dc Comics, Fiction, Superheroes, Graphic Novels Comics

152 pages, Hardcover

First published August 30, 2022

About the author

Sam Hamm is an American screenwriter, perhaps best known for writing the screenplay for Tim Burton's Batman and an unused screenplay for the sequel. As a result of his work, he was invited to write for the Batman comic. The result was Batman: Blind Justice, which introduced Bruce Wayne's mentor, Henri Ducard, who later appeared in Batman Begins. Hamm's other screen credits include Never Cry Wolf and Monkeybone. He also wrote unused drafts for Planet of the Apes and Watchmen adaptations.

Reviews

[Jayson · Rating 3 out of 5]

(B+) 76% | Good
Notes: TV movie feel albeit likenesses appeal, slow to build its adversary, plodding social commentary, overall too ordinary.

*Progress updates: Preamble ◦ Issues #1-3 ◦ Issues #4-6

[Khurram · Rating 5 out of 5]

They nailed it completely. If they made a third movie to the original Batman trilogy, this would have been the perfect trilogy ending. If I was really looking for something to complain about it is the fact that this book is set a year after Batman Returns, but Bruce seems to have aged 10 years where as all the other characters have not. However, I do understand why an older Bruce works better in this story.

Batman has been active in Gotham for a while now, but what has actually changed. Ambitious DA Harvey Dent has had enough, but is his bid for power and a new crusade going more pain? There are two ways this could possibly go. I also like the new hero that Gotham needs.

I really like how the book brings in classic Batman characters and put the movies spin on them. I love everything about the book. The story and artwork are great. The touches of making the hardcover look like VHS tape, and using 80-90s technology all has a great nostalgic feel to it. The book finishes with a characters' sketch gallery and variant covers gallery.

[Scott · Rating 1 out of 5]

"Alfred. What the hell? What the hell, Alfred?" -- the quotable Bruce Wayne, sharing my views

Although meant to be a sequel or continuation to the notable Tim Burton helmed- and Michael Keaton headlined-blockbusters Batman (1989) and Batman Returns (1992) from back in the day, the disappointing Batman '89 instead offers some trendy post-modernist or needless updating of the well-known Dark Knight narrative. While occasionally a few of the storied characters resemble their silver-screen counterparts - such as Michelle Pfeiffer as Catwoman and Billy Dee Williams as Harvey Dent, for example - it still felt like there was a jarring disconnect to the movies' haunting style, and everything was pushed face-first into a contemporary attitude. While I understand that the writers wanted to take a different direction to seem relevant, this just seemed like a lot of nonsense.

[Subham · Rating 3 out of 5]

This was fun I guess!

So yeah we get the story continued from the movie if this had continued and we get the origins of Two face again albeit a different version and I love the way it happens. How Harvey becomes this famous guy of sorts and running for Governor positions and what happens that leads him to embrace his dual side and the writer captures that perfectly and his relationship with Barbara Gordon and mainly dealing with Bruce aka Batman and how he responds to it and I love the new Robin, Drake and he has a kick-ass Robin costume design which was awesome and the face-off between Batman and Two-face is different than you usually imagine but its so good and the role of Selina here good too and also there is enough material for a sequel and the setting of which seems so exciting!

So yeah I definitely recommend it. Its a very fun series and yeah not the best Batman stuff but still a good read and considering its written by the same guy who wrote the movie its a perfect read for sure. Also I like the way they use the 90s noir setting here and the coming of Internet then and Selina here is quite the tech-whiz which you normally don't see so that was fun to witness here and also her relationship with Bruce.. seems like Bat vs Cat next. The art btw is fantastic and captures the look and feel perfectly!

[Rod Brown · Rating 2 out of 5]

Sam Hamm, who contributed to the script and story for Tim Burton's two Batman movies, spins an alternate sequel to replace the generally reviled Batman Forever and Batman & Robin.

Michael Keaton's very white Bruce Wayne flounders around in a story about race relations and police brutality that sees Billy Dee Williams' Harvey Dent finally getting his chance to be Two-Face (Nuts to you, Tommy Lee Jones!) when some white supremacists wearing Batman logos commit arson. Batman spends more time dogging after the Michelle Pfeiffer Catwoman than chasing Two-Face, but that's okay, because there's a new Robin on hand to carry the weight, and he sure isn't Chris O'Donnell.

The story is a boring muddle -- and I really could have done without a couple of severely stupid dream sequences -- but a project like this really hangs on capturing the likenesses of the original actors and the design aesthetic of Burton's Gotham, and while Joe Quinones gets close, he doesn't quite clinch the job.

[Robert · Rating 2 out of 5]

Nice as it is to see the REAL Harvey Dent get his due, the story is burdened with racial and social commentary that just has no place in Burton-Batman land, making it an unworthy sequel to the two films.

[Joshuaramesar · Rating 1 out of 5]

Being a big fan of Batman 1989 and returns I came into this expecting an expansion of that universe and a continuation of those characters. I was disappointed. One of The main draws of the burton verse is the unique visual style and that style is not present in these comics. The art style was okay but not great. The comic draws too heavily from the Batman animated series (which is not a bad place to take inspiration from) but I picked up this comic because it was advertised as a return to the burton verse. The characters are also slightly off in their representation at times. Instead of a continuation of the Tim burton universe, Batman 89 feels like a Batman story in another universe with caricatures of the Batman 89 cast. All in all, I would say this is not worth picking up in my opinion.

[Shaun Stanley · Rating 3 out of 5]

Batman ‘89 collects issues 1-6 of the DC Comics series written by Sam Hamm and art by Joe Quinones.

Set after the events of the movies Batman and Batman Returns, Harvey Dent has set his goals on improving Gotham City. This catches the eyes of the political elite who want to set Harvey up to be the next Governor.

Even though this book is written by the same writer as Batman and Batman Returns, it doesn’t feel like the Tim Burton movies. The gothic Art Deco style is missing which I think is what really defines Burton’s style for Batman. The story itself is pretty good, but I just don’t see this as what could have been the third Batman movie. It feels way more political than anything Burton would have done. The art is similar to the Superman 77’ series in which there is a not quite there likeness for Michael Keaton and Billy Dee Williams but that is where the likenesses end. Overall I would say this is pretty good Batman book, but will probably be largely forgettable.

[Robert · Rating 4 out of 5]

This was great fun, and gives us Bat-fans of a certain vintage the Harvey Dent story we always wanted.

[Gerry Kramer · Rating 1 out of 5]

I don't post reviews mostly because, well, I'm not a writer. But let me tell you... BATMAN89 this sure ain't. While I recognize the large difference between graphic novel vs. film, this was marketed as a sequel to Tim Burton's two Batman films. So, the hard work was kind of done because the writer (Sam Hamm, who wrote the original movie screenplay) merely had to piggyback off what came before. Instead of doing that, the author seems too focused on corruption in Gotham and racial injustice... which are great ideas but they need to be done subtly and not in the overstuffed preachy way they are here.

The most interesting aspect could have been the deconstruction of the characters, a thing which I think you could argue that Tim Burton was pretty good at. Here it's almost the least interesting part. Two-Face, a role Billy Dee Williams never got to explore, at one point actually says to Batman, "I can't serve in heaven, but I can rule in hell." and then attempts to blow himself up. Wtf. And Michael Keaton's Batman? Well here he is somehow more one-dimensional than he was in the films. In the movies Keaton always used what he had to work with (which I thought was very little) and tried to make Bruce Wayne/Batman compelling. Pfeiffer's Catwoman (who had great chemistry with Keaton onscreen) is lacking that characterization which made her fun to watch fall down the rabbit hole of madness. Getting back at her abuser is what drove her on in Batman Returns, and whatever her motives are here they just make little to no sense. Don't even get me started on Robin. Sigh.

Oh! And tone. Let's talk about tone. The violence and bizarre nature of Burton's films actually feels almost completely missing. Although, the people of Gotham still don't like Batman... I guess that's because they think he killed the Ice Princess during the events of Batman Returns. Hamm's plot never really addresses that point outright, but maybe that's the excuse he used to make Batman seem non-existent in this story.

What began as a book I wanted to like and to love turned into an obligatory read by the time I got to the end. I felt aimless and uninvolved, because that's what the story is. It's nice to look at, even if it doesn’t capture the look of the cinematic source material, but worst of all it’s just dull, and that's the last thing a Batman comic should be.

[Anthony · Rating 3 out of 5]

Not bad. I like what they did with Robin and Two-Face, but there wasn’t much Batman throughout this. The artwork is pretty nice, the characters look a lot like their film counter parts.

[Scott Rhee · Rating 5 out of 5]

Let me preface this review by saying that I hate Batman. Which is not to say that I have always hated Batman. It’s a fairly recent thing. Probably whenever Ben Affleck was hired on to play Batman, but, honestly, it was long before that. It was around the time that George Clooney played Batman in that god-awful piece of shit movie “Batman and Robin”. Clooney was awful, but Chris O’Donnell (the most boring actor in the world) was a pretty atrocious Robin, it must be noted. That film destroyed the franchise for me.

(To be fair, I liked the Christopher Nolan films, but I actually don’t like to consider them Batman movies. They are action/adventure crime thrillers that happen to feature Batman.)

The last Batman movie I loved was Tim Burton’s 1992 “Batman Returns”, partly because of Michelle Pfeiffer, who looked great in a leather skintight Catwoman suit. She and Michael Keaton also had way more sexy chemistry than he and Kim Basinger ever had in the first Burton film. Pfeiffer is, also, hands-down the best Catwoman to date. She got royally screwed out of a spin-off movie.

A third Burton Batman film was never meant to be, but in the wonderful world of “what-if?”, DC recently came out with a six-issue run entitled “Batman ’89”. Writer Sam Hamm (who wrote the original Burton films) was given the chance to write the third installment of the Burton series in the form of a comic book.

Returning as Batman, of course, is Michael Keaton. Also returning is Billy Dee Williams as Harvey Dent. Sadly, few people recall Williams’s (too brief) part in the first film, a storyline that was clearly meant to be concluded in another film.

Thankfully, Two-Face gets his origin story in this one.

Also returning is Catwoman, although artist Joe Quinones’s Michelle Pfeiffer isn’t all that Michelle Pfeiffer-ish. It’s close but no cigar. Minor quibble, though.

This is not only the first Batman comic book I’ve read in about 20 years, it’s the first I’ve wanted to read, and it’s one that I actually liked. A lot.

I still hate Batman, though. Unless Michael Keaton decides to come back as Batman in the next film. That would be awesome…

[BIGnick BIGnick · Rating 1 out of 5]

I feel bad ‘cause the illustrations are beautiful (though sometimes too dark and unclear as to what’s happening). I’m tired of popular IP’s being used to push political narratives and this story is unfortunately one of those. I was looking forward to some simple heartfelt escapism, a genuine sequel to the Tim Burton Batman movies; they got the actors likenesses down, the environment is there, they even brought back the same screenwriter from the first two Batman films! Instead what I got was a “modern” story about “modern” issues and once more the main protagonist—the hero, is incompetent, oblivious and everyone around him who isn’t a straight white male knows what’s REALLY going on and how to fix it. In short this is another DC dumpster fire.

On a less serious (but equally annoyed) note if I were to become president all filmmakers would be required to read all three volumes of The Gulag Archipelago before they dare produce a single reel of film. Vote for me in 2055!

[Bill · Rating 1 out of 5]

Having recently watched both Michael Keaton Batman films again this looked like a good read. On the plus side there is some decent artwork, but the story never comes to life despite the appearance of some iconic villains. Forget reading Batman'89 & get a copy of Superman '78 instead. It's far superior in so many ways.

[Guilherme Smee · Rating 4 out of 5]

Batman'89 dá continuidade à trama desenvolvida nos filmes de Tim Burton e é escrita pelo mesmo roteirista, Sam Hamm. Os desenhos são de Joe Quinones e são muito legais. No começo, achei a primeira edição muito chata, muita ação e pouco desenvolvimento. Mas aos poucos fui me afeiçoando com o desenvolvimento dos personagens, do arco que o Duas-Caras, um homem negro, cumpre e também o arco que o Robin, também um menino negro, desenvolve. São dois personagens bem estruturados nesta HQ, que garanto, daria um filme muito melhor do que foi Batman Eternamente, o terceiro filme do Batman nos anos 1990. O Batman também é bem trabalhado aqui, assim como a Mulher-Gato e os Gordons. Uma coisa que não gostei são as sequencias de sonho e de "realidades alternativas" que o Duas-Caras elocubra, achei que destoa de um tom cinematográfico. Fora isso, achei bem interessante e fiquei curioso pela versão de Superman'78 que não vi até agora nas bancas de Porto Alegre.

[Jesse A · Rating 2 out of 5]

Super meh

[Vinicius · Rating 3 out of 5]

Estava curioso para realizar essa leitura e descobrir como o Batkeaton seguiu sua jornada após os 2 filmes que ele gravou. Confesso que eu esperava mais, porém não é um quadrinho ruim, ele é mediano e faz um arroz com feijão bacana.

Na trama, temos o foco do universo de 89 em explorar o Harvey Dent e sua posterior transformação em Duas Caras. O vilão não é um dos meus favoritos do Batman, mas em boas mãos, alguns roteiristas conseguem explorar o personagem e extrair boas histórias.

No caso desse gibi, foi criada uma nova origem para ele, que eu até achei interessante, pois possui um viés social no Harvey, e a questão dele ser negro. Entretanto, achei massante depois toda a questão da dualidade dele sendo aplicada no conceito de diversos universos de possibilidades. Não me entendam mal, no começo, achei criativo, mas em alguns momentos de tensão ou que a narrativa precisava de uma fluidez, o Harvey ficava refletindo em suas escolhas e travava a trama.

Além do Harvey, a HQ também apresenta o leitor ao Robin desse universo, que no caso já é o Tim Drake. E sendo bem sincero, achei bem legal a personalidade do personagem e as questões sociais que o permeiam. Acredito que ele tem muito potencial nesse universo, há um bom desenvolvimento que pode ser feito.

Contudo, fico com uma ressalva quanto ao gancho que ficou no final em relação a Selina e a imagem que ela enviou para a policia. Fiquei com um pé atrás sobre isso, mas vamos ver o que irá acontecer em uma continuação.

[Rik · Rating 1 out of 5]

Absolute disaster! As somebody that was raised on the 2 Tim Burton Batman films i had high hopes for this. It's nothing like the source material at all, the superficial rendition of batsuit and the actors likeness' is all that there is to tie it to the films and nothing else. The atmosphere is non existent, the story is mediocre and the art is dull. Also, it's ridiculously woke, it's as is the writers of the MCU's phase 4 have had a hand....batman/Bruce Wayne confronting his priveledge is at the heart of the limp story and the oppression of others by elites and the police is the driving force of the other main players. Absolute bollocks! 'Batman Forever' was an masterpiece of a successor to the Burton films by comparison!

[Patrick · Rating 2 out of 5]

Good artwork. I honestly didn't think the story felt like a continuation of the Burton films. Just my opinion. Very let down by this.

[Donovan · Rating 3 out of 5]

Lacking the pacing and Danny Elfman score of the movies, it’s solid but leaves you wanting for something a bit extra.

[Chase B · Rating 4 out of 5]

If you know me, you know I am a huge Batman fan. You also know I am huge fan of the Batman films by Tim Burton. All that bias is on show for my review haha.

This was just a fun little run that I thoroughly enjoyed. Billy Dee Williams returning as Harvey Dent and eventually Two-Face was amazing and I imagined this being portrayed directly to film and I would have loved it most likely had that happened. Seeing Keaton as the Dark Knight and Pfeiffer as Catwoman again was a sight to behold.

The story is definitely Harvey Dent focused and tries to dive more into his mind than other attempts try to go (most just say "He's got a split personality," the end but this one tries to make you comprehend what that could be like. Whether it's accurate or not, I'm not sure but I appreciate the attempt). A new Robin was refreshing even with a different origin. While the social commentary is pretty up front, I do not mind it and enjoyed it. It's refreshing to see more diversity in comics and long overdue.

I can see how people who may not be big fans of the films may not be too into it and how hardcore fans could be disappointed but overall, I really, really liked this...a lot.

[Mike Gutierrez · Rating 5 out of 5]

An excellent companion to the Tim Burton movies. It fills on a few holes the movies left & the story has some twists that are unexpected. A very good read.

[Gabriel Maracle · Rating 4 out of 5]

Kind of short but a lot of fun. Definitely gets the aesthetic of the movies correct.

[Chris Robertson · Rating 2 out of 5]

So disappointing. This was very close to being great, but a few misplaced elements derailed my enjoyment.

I am against tokenization. Young Rippa (check out his YouTube) laid this issue bare for me, explaining how having characters of other races assume the mantle of an established hero or villain is actually insulting. Rather than rising on his or her own merit, they are given sloppy seconds and trapped in a legacy they cannot rise above. I think Sam Wilson is the saddest example….already a cool hero in his own right, he is now used as a tool to tear down a beloved character. Sure, the writers push him hard as a better version of Cap, but it is laughable and unrealistic when there is a literal mountain of Steve Rogers material refuting this amateur idea.

So, in this story we have some race-swapping with Two Face and Robin. I read that this story was written by the original script writer for the Burton Bat films, and that years ago they actually paid a Wayans brother to play Robin in a Bat film, so I get that the wheels were in motion already for this. Billy Dee was already in the first movie as Dent, yes, I know. I just think both of these actors deserve more than being saddled with legacy characters, which invite inevitable comparisons and even hostile responses. Would it be so hard to craft a new character, giving them a chance to forge new ground?

I actually could have swallowed all this in Batman 89, if it weren’t for my second, more serious gripe: the need to insert social justice in this story. I was tracking fine with the story until it started becoming a seminar in racial injustice, even playing the systemic card. It is woefully out of place in a story supposedly set in the Burton era storyline. This is why comics sales are in the toilet right now. Entertainment is supposed to be an escape, not a series of leftist talking points.

Burton’s Batman was known to take second place behind the villains, and this is no different, with it being mostly Dent’s story. Keaton-Bat is also quirky, and this quality is retained, but he seems older, inept. So predictable: legacy characters must be shown in this light so their replacements can shine brighter. Who do you think bests Batman in a scuffle and later rescues him when he is cornered by the police?

The art isn’t bad, with most effort going into Two Face, who looks fantastic. Sadly, I could not appreciate the good because social justice warriors can’t help themselves…..such heavy handed preaching is going to be the doom of both Marvel and DC.

[Matthew Kresal · Rating 5 out of 5]

For a generation, the character of Batman was defined not by comics but by cinema. A cultural juggernaut on its 1989 release, Tim Burton's Batman established Michael Keaton as the Dark Knight as firmly as Richard Donner did Christopher Reeve the previous decade. Yet ever since both men departed the franchise after 1992's Batman Returns, fans have wondered what a third Burton/Keaton film might have been. Thanks to DC Comics Batman '89 series, we have a good idea after three decades.

Written by Sam Hamm, screenwriter of the 1989 film and co-writer of its 1992 sequel, Batman '89 picks up on threads left hanging from those films. Among the most exciting are the Billy Dee Williams Harvey Dent meeting his inevitable destiny, the introduction of additional characters from Batman lore, and references to Batman comics of the eighties and nineties. Thematically, there are some echoes of 1995's Batman Forever, perhaps due to having versions of the same character appear in both stories, but how Hamm handles them is very much its own thing. There's also less emphasis on the kookier aspects of Burton's aesthetic, which feels plausible given reactions to Batman Returns.

The icing on the cake is the artwork. Joe Quinones' penciling and Leonardo Ito's color choices wonderfully capture the likenesses of the established cinematic characters, particularly where Keaton and Williams are concerned. The new casting choices neatly pick up on real-world thoughts from the nineties, adding to the air of authenticity. Elsewhere, however, other characters feel like crosses between their cinematic and Batman: The Animated Series counterparts, including Commisioner Gordon and Alfred, which takes a bit away from the flavor but not fatally.

Indeed, if you're a fan of those Burton/Keaton Batman outings or simply ever wondered what their third film could have been, Batman '89 answers the question in superb fashion.

[It's just Deano · Rating 3 out of 5]

Being a huge fan of Batman, Tim Burton and the recent Superman '78 series - it figures I'd love this right?

I'll be honest... This one fell a little flat for me.

When I read Superman '78 I found it quite easy to envision it slotting into place within Richard Donner's cinematic world - sadly with Batman '89 I just didn't feel the Tim Burton atmosphere here. Because of this it constantly felt a little bit out of place and lacking the all important nostalgia.

That said, I do feel that the plot premise would have been a perfect one if Burton had ever made that fateful third movie!

I also found the art here lacking a little. Although Billy Dee Williams as Two-Face is very enjoyable, Keaton's representation seems off visually and his Batman persona just didn't feel like it was quite right either.

Overall, Batman '89 is a good effort to extend beyond Burton's two movies and the plot premise is definitely interesting. That said, the lack of atmosphere and strange characterisation choices seem to really hold this back.
___________________

My Score: 6/10
My Goodreads: ⭐⭐⭐
___________________

[Matt Vaughan · Rating 2 out of 5]

This didn't work for me. I was excited about the concept, but the execution is weird. Yes, most of the characters are depicted like they were in the 1989 Batman movie, but the story and general mood don't fit that at all.

I was sold 'it's like if there was another Batman movie in 1990-91 and it was a direct continuation of the first one, with Billy Dee Williams as Two-Face', but instead I got a comic series that feels very 2020s. It's fine for comics to address relevant issues, but this feels like a terrible fit. Gotham is corrupt? Are you sure you want to try to ground this story when the movie it is emerging from features a clown defacing a museum to Prince songs?

The covers are really nice, though.

(Might be closer to a 1.5/5.)

[Trevor Trujillo · Rating 4 out of 5]

The Michael Keaton/Tim Burton era of Batman finally gets its trilogy, paying off on characters that never made the A-List in the first two films.
Race and gentrification are front-and-center in this so-relevant-it-could-be-today storyline that allows the Burton Harvey Dent (in the first film played by Billy Dee Williams) to have his moment as the Proverbial Two-Face.
On the side of good we have an obviously-supposed-to-be-Winona-Ryder Barbara Gordon and supposed-to-be-Marlon-Wayans as Robin. Returning for another scratch at the post is the Catwoman made popular by Michelle Pfifer.
A great walk down memory lane, and a taste if things that never came to pass.

[Dominic Sedillo · Rating 2 out of 5]

Considering the team involved in creating this story (one being the original screenwriter of the Tim Burton “Batman” films) I expected this to be the sequel we never got.

In a way it was, but it doesn’t feel like it. Even though it’s supposed to take place in that universe it feels like it’s more of a Robin story and a story that is a bit too heavy-handed on the divisions of modern race relations in our country.

Although it’s nice to see what could have been if Billy Dee Williams got to play Two-Face, it’s kind of a confusing story on who really is the villain. Everyone’s hands are tainted somehow.

I don’t recommend.

[Roland Baldwin · Rating 5 out of 5]

We step back into the Burton-verse as if we had never left. Several characters not featured in the two movies make their debut here. It’s dark and broody and characters like Harvey Dent and Jim Gordon get some welcome fleshing out that was not done in the movies.
It also does not touch on the spiritual sequel to the original duo of movies which was the Bruce Timm series. A great alternative to the multiple mish mashes of Batman titles out there if you don’t want to be laden down by continuity