Comic book movies were practically non-existent. Superman was it, and there was never any good reason to compare Superman to Batman, really. Again, the better comparison is to the contemporary action movies of the time. Comparing a "modern" movie to 60s television is going to make 90% of all movies look dark and…

Batman was already dark in the comics by that point. Frank Miller had left his mark. And compared to other action movies of the time Batman was downright campy. Gothic camp is Burton's whole deal. You could compare just about any action movie of the 80s to television of the 60s and it would appear dark and violent.…

Compared to other action movies of the time it doesn't even rate for grittiness. It was gothic camp, like most of Burton's movies. If you compare any action movie to television shows from the 60s they're going to look dark by comparison.

Well, that's a pretty dumb comparison to make. Compared to what came out in the 60s, everything is dark and gritty. Compared to the comics at the time and the action movies of the time Batman doesn't even come close to the over-the-top violence or dark tone set by its contemporaries. Batman was gothic camp, not gritty…

You're pigeonholing it. It was an action movie, of which superhero movies are but one niche subgenre. One that was barely existent at the time.

Its contemporaries were action movies of the 80s, most of which were far more over-the-top violent and gritty than Batman. Batman was gothic and campy, not gritty.

Eh, it was gothic, but not really dark or gritty. Even the violence was pretty understated for the most part, especially for the ultra-violent action movies of the 80's. Compared to the standard action movie of the day Batman was campy as hell.

My benchmark was Batman comics. Even so, Burton's Batman wasn't grim or gritty. It was gothic and campy.

No it wasn't. It was gothic, but not grim. It was, in fact, campy as hell. It just doesn't seem so when you unfairly compare it to one of the campiest television shows of all time.

It was gothic, but it wasn't gritty. It was campy as hell, actually.

Burton's Batman was dark and gritty?

Hunger Games ain't no Gone with the Wind.

I thought the first one was fun. The second one was one of the worst movies I've ever seen.

Which is weird, because it was "pulling an X-files" when Lost did it.

LotR is a modern Star Wars. A trilogy of great adventure movies followed and subsequently diminished by the director with a trilogy of lackluster prequels that didn't really understand what was so great about the originals in the first place.

Superheroes are approaching their hundred year anniversary. If this fad was going to blow over, it would have done so a loooonnng time ago.

It got praised for simply not being a comedy like the '66 series, but it was equally ridiculous and over-the-top.

Nope. Only Hulk-specific movies.

And yet it has more great exclusives than both the other consoles combined.

Unless the home runs have been deemed illegal and no longer count, I don't see how that matters.