75 years ago, during this month
in the year of 1939, DC Comics introduced the character of Batman in Issue #27
of Detective Comics. Since then, Batman has gone on to become one of the most
iconic comic book superheroes of all time, if not arguably the most famous.
He’s been one of the main heroes of the DC universe and as far as his
franchise’s films are concerned, he’s had the most successful run out of all of
DC’s heroes (and possibly every other comic book superhero, for that matter).
And today, to honor the 75th Anniversary of the Dark Knight’s first
appearance, it’s time for a Batman film retrospective. Now I was originally
going to save this for when the upcoming ‘Batman vs. Superman’ was to come out
in 2015. But, as we now know, that has gotten pushed back to May 6th,
2016. Basically, I figured that now would be a good time to do it just for the
occasion of the Caped Crusader’s 75th Anniversary. This is the first
half of a two-part retrospective, and today’s entry will encompass all of the
live-action Batman feature films, from the film adaptation of the 1960’s TV
series to the Christopher Nolan ‘Dark Knight’ trilogy. ‘Part 2’ of this
retrospective will cover a select few of the animated Batman films.
BATMAN (1966)
Technically, Batman made his first on-screen appearance in
two separate serials, 1943’s ‘Batman’ and 1949’s ‘Batman and Robin’. But we’re
starting off this retrospective with the 1966 film ‘Batman’ (AKA ‘Batman: The
Movie’), the first feature length film that the character starred in and the
film adaptation of the 60’s television series of the same name starring Adam
West as Batman and Burt Ward as Robin. For those who haven’t seen this show
before, let me start by saying this… this show is very, very campy. This was
way before the darker ‘Batman’ films that we’ve seen in the years since this
film came out. Need proof of that? In one scene, a shark is grabbing onto
Batman’s leg and Batman defeats it by spraying it with ‘Bat Shark Repellant’. The
shark then proceeds to blow up once it hits the water. Yeah, this is a very
goofy movie. But for what it’s worth, compared to a certain film that we’ll get
to in a bit, this is a good kind of campy. It’s clear here that everyone
involved was able to roll with this film’s silliness and that’s really the
reason why this film is so entertaining; it’s campy 60’s fun with an enthusiastic
cast. One of the best scenes in the entire movie (and quite possibly one of the
funniest scenes ever put on film) is when Batman is trying to get rid of a bomb
but he finds that he has a lot of trouble just finding a spot to put it. It’s
like they say, ‘Some days, you just can’t get rid of a bomb…’ Overall, if
you’re able to accept this film’s corny tone, then you’ll find that it’s a
pretty fun superhero film. It may not be the Batman that you’re expecting, but
it certainly captured the essence of the show it was based on.
Rating: 4/5
BATMAN (1989)
But for some, the 60’s ‘Batman’ was not the kind of Batman film
that they wanted… and they eventually got their wish in 1989 with director Tim
Burton’s ‘Batman’. Even after all of the Batman films that have come out since
this was released to theaters, the 1989 film is still one of the best in the
entire franchise. Granted, though, it has aged a bit, namely in regards to some
of the designs and the soundtrack (which features songs by Prince). Despite
that, this film is still a solid superhero film that perfectly captures the
dark tone of the character of Batman. Basically at the end of the day, Burton,
known for his dark and gothic style, was a great choice to direct the film.
However, most people weren’t in support of the casting of Michael Keaton in the
role of Batman, mainly because of his previous work as a comedic actor. In
other words, this was pretty similar to the reaction that Ben Affleck got when
he was cast as Batman for the upcoming ‘Batman vs. Superman’, only this was way
before that ever happened. This was WAY before the time of social media and the
internet.
However, in the end, Keaton was fantastic in the role and
out of all of the actors who have ever played Batman in a live-action film he
is perhaps the best in portraying both Bruce Wayne and Batman, whereas other
actors have done better as Bruce Wayne then they had as Batman. He has a great
presence as Batman but as Bruce Wayne, he is effectively unsuspecting. You
would never guess that this guy was Batman, which is pretty ironic considering
that this was exactly the reason why many people were against having him in the
role and yet that’s why he was so damn good in the film. But of course it is Jack
Nicholson who steals the show as ‘The Joker’. What else can I say? It’s just
Jack Nicholson at his finest. The ‘hero-villain’ relationship between the
Batman and Joker of this film is one of the best in any superhero film, mainly
because they each were responsible for making the other who they were today. We
see that it was the Joker, back when he was just a criminal by the name of Jack
Napier, who killed Bruce’s parents and Bruce, as Batman, was responsible for
Jack falling into a vat of chemicals, effectively turning him into the Joker. With
an excellent cast, a great production design, and one of the best film scores
of all time by Danny Elfman, 1989’s ‘Batman’, though rather dated by today’s
standards, is still one of the high marks of the superhero film genre.
Rating: 4.5/5
BATMAN RETURNS (1992)
Following the success of ‘Batman’, Burton was brought back
for the sequel and this time, he was given far more creative control than he
had during the last film. However… maybe that wasn’t the best idea that Warner
Bros. had made. For the record, I’m not saying that ‘Returns’ is a bad
superhero film… far from it, in fact. It’s just this is a very notable case of
when you give a director too much free reign to do whatever he wants. This is
very much a Tim Burton film, but far darker than that of its predecessor.
Stylistically, it’s not a big problem and you can really admire the film for
its atmosphere and look. However, for a film that was generally aimed at a
younger audience, it wasn’t the best move. It’s so dark and sometimes
disturbing to the point where it could potentially give kids nightmares. It’s
also sometimes a bit too adult at times, like during the scene where Catwoman
meets with Penguin for the first time and the Penguin’s dialogue mostly
consists of innuendos (‘Just the pussy I wanted to see’… need I say more?). You
know… for kids!!!
Also, this film showcases a rather noticeable problem in how
the character of Batman is portrayed in Burton’s films. This is not the fault
of Michael Keaton, who is once again fantastic in the role. It’s just that it’s
very clear that in these movies, particularly here, Burton focuses more on the
villains than Batman. In fact, for the previous film, it was Jack Nicholson who
got top billing as the Joker. It was fine there because in that film, Keaton
still had a very substantial role that was solidly balanced against Nicholson’s.
Here, he’s not even in the Batman suit for the majority of the film. He’s still
in the film, but the character of Batman basically disappears from the film
altogether for large periods of time. As for the villains, this film’s
portrayal of the Penguin is a far contrast from what the comics were like.
Instead of being a sophisticated criminal, this Penguin is far more sadistic
and frightening in this film (like I said, this is potential nightmare fuel). He’s
portrayed to be a misfit (a common theme in Burton’s films) but because he’s a
despicable character, we can’t really sympathize with him and yet the movie is
trying to make us do so. Despite all that, Danny DeVito does do a very good job
in the role as it was written. It’s Michelle Pfeiffer, however, who truly steals
the show as Catwoman; she really captures the dual personality of the character
quite well. Finally, we have a third villain, businessman Max Shreck, played by
Christopher Walken… simply put, it’s Christopher Walken. That’s all I need to
say about that.
Ultimately, ‘Batman Returns’ is not a bad film, as it is a
solid follow-up to its predecessor. However, it’s clear that Burton was given
way too much creative control on this film. It’s very much a Burton film, but
as a Batman film, it’s way too dark when compared to the other films in the
franchise. Also, this one really doesn’t give Batman much to do here to the
point where the villains are the main characters in the film. Again, keep in
mind that the best of the Batman films are known for their dark atmospheres and
tone, but this was a case where the film was just way too dark (figuratively,
not literally), especially when considering that it’s basically being marketed
to a younger crowd. And now it’s clear why Warner Bros decided to go in a
different direction for the next film. Again, this one’s entertaining, but I
can’t say that it’s one of my favorites.
Rating: 3.5/5
BATMAN FOREVER (1995)
Because of the controversy surrounding ‘Returns’ for its
darker tone, the film wasn’t as big of a hit at the box office as Warner Bros
had hoped for; this led to them to make a few changes for the next film,
‘Batman Forever’. In the position of director, Tim Burton was replaced by Joel
Schumacher, though Burton did stay on as a producer for this film. This was
also the first film to not have Michael Keaton in the role of Batman. Here, he
was replaced by Val Kilmer but he would not return for the following film.
Simply put, ‘Forever’ is, without a doubt, a far different kind of film than
the two Burton films that came before it. Schumacher took his inspiration from
the older Batman comics from the 50’s as well as the 60’s television series.
The result is a far more ‘family-friendly’ film than Returns and while I can’t
say it’s good as something like the 89 film or Nolan’s ‘Dark Knight Trilogy’, I
have to admit that, in some ways, I actually think that this is a better film
than ‘Returns’. In other words, I feel that it’s actually a little underrated.
For the record, it’s still not the best in the series. Just
like its immediate successor, this film is very bright and flashy in regards to
its look and tone, resulting in a film that can be quite loud and bombastic at
times. However, Schumacher does do a few things here in this entry that work
better here than they did in ‘Returns’; namely giving the character of Bruce
Wayne a far more substantial amount of development than in the previous film as
in this one, he battles his inner demons and begins to question his act of
vengeance as Batman. Val Kilmer does a pretty good job as Bruce Wayne but as
Batman, he sort of stumbles. It’s not really his fault, though, as in this film
he’s mainly stuck with just quoting one-liners (“It’s the car, right? Chicks
dig the car!”). If this were more along the lines of how Keaton’s version of
the character was written in the Burton films, then Kilmer would have arguably
been one of the best to have ever been in the role but as is, he’s just not as
good as either Keaton or Christian Bale.
This film also introduces the character of Robin (who was
originally supposed to be in ‘Returns’ played by Marlon Wayans but was then cut
due to an overabundance of characters). While he does come off a bit whiny at
times, this film does give him a pretty solid character arc as we see his
journey to avenge his family after they are murdered, which almost directly parallels
how Bruce looked to avenge his parents’ death many years earlier. For what it’s
worth, Chris O’Donnell does a good job in this film. As for the villains, we
have a good one… and a bad one. As the Riddler, Jim Carrey may just be Jim
Carrey playing… Jim Carrey, but he is easily the scene-stealer of the film.
It’s clear that he’s channeling Frank Gorshin’s performance in the role from the
60’s show and in that regard he does succeed in doing so. Tommy Lee Jones, on
the other hand, just comes off as way too cheesy in the role of Two-Face.
That’s rather sad because if in a different movie, he would have been a great
choice to play Two-Face but here, he’s just as campy as Carrey as the Riddler
though in Carrey’s case, that worked out much better for him. So overall, I’m
not saying ‘Forever’ is a ‘great’ film as it is still a very campy film and sometimes
a little too goofy. However, some of the good things in this movie turn out really
good, namely Bruce Wayne’s character arc. If anything else, it’s better than
the next Batman film that Schumacher did.
Rating: 4/5
BATMAN AND ROBIN (1997)
I don’t think I need to go into this one that much because
everyone else has, but if for some reason you haven’t seen or heard of this
film yet, here’s the rundown. ‘Batman and Robin’ is not only the worst Batman
film ever, but one of the worst superhero films period. The campiness factor is
through the roof on this one. The sets and designs are ridiculous, the villains
are terrible, the acting is just as bad from all involved, and the script
consists of nothing but one-liners, especially from Arnold Schwarzenegger as
Mr. Freeze. As much as I (along with many others) love Arnold for being one of the
best at spewing one-liners, this was a case of a huge miscast. Uma Thurman as
Poison Ivy actually could have worked… if in a different movie. As for the main
characters, George Clooney as Bruce Wayne/Batman is just… that; George Clooney
as Bruce Wayne/Batman. Chris O’Donnell’s Robin gets way too whiny in this one,
and Alicia Silverstone as Batgirl is basically just an afterthought. Also, what
the hell did they do to Bane?
But with all of that said, is this the absolute worst
superhero film of all time? Actually, it isn’t; don’t get me wrong, this is
still a terrible film but I’ve seen far worse in this genre, like 1990’s
‘Captain America’, ‘Catwoman’, and ‘Superman IV’ which, like this film, killed
its franchise for many years. However, unlike ‘Superman IV’, there is actually
somewhat of an ‘entertainment value’ to this film because it’s so bad. Like
‘The Room’ or ‘Troll 2’, it’s one of those ‘so bad, it’s good’ movies whether
it’s because of all of Mr. Freeze’s ice-related puns or the infamous Bat Credit
Card. As a result, it’s not really the absolute worst thing ever. Though, as a
Batman film, it’s definitely an ‘epic fail’. This effectively killed the
franchise for years (a fifth film, ‘Batman Triumphant’ was canceled because of
this film’s terrible reception) until Christopher Nolan brought it back to
prominence 8 years later and thank god he did.
Rating: 1/5 (Film),
3/5
(as far as Entertainment value is concerned…)
BATMAN BEGINS (2005)
Following the debacle that was ‘Batman and Robin’, there were
numerous attempts to get the franchise rolling again, including a potential
crossover with Superman that is actually now getting made, just years later
with a different cast and crew. Ultimately, it was director Christopher Nolan
who brought the franchise back from extinction with ‘Batman Begins’. It
effectively returned the franchise to its darker roots and did an excellent job
at detailing the origin story of Bruce Wayne, an origin story which we haven’t
really seen before. I mean, we all know about the moment when his parents are murdered,
but this goes beyond that as we see how Bruce Wayne truly became ‘The Batman’,
part of which includes his vigilante-style training with the ‘League of
Shadows’. Christian Bale is excellent as Bruce Wayne, as he is given some of
the best material that any actor has ever gotten in this role. He does a pretty
good job as Batman too, as he has a very nice intimidating presence and as for
that highly controversial gruff voice that he uses… I’m not too bothered by it,
mainly because it’s just so fun to imitate (‘WHERE ARE THEY!!??’).
Overall, out of all Nolan’s Batman films, this one is
perhaps the closest to the comic books, though that is sort of up for debate.
Now, with this trilogy, Nolan’s intent was to make a superhero film that was
much more grounded in reality. On that note, he does that very well, but he
still sort of maintains the atmosphere and lore of the comics. The only problem
in this one, though, is that the camerawork and editing during the fight scenes
is, well, kind of bad. It’s one of those films where the action is shot close
up and the editing is very fast, meaning that it’s sometimes rather hard to see
just what is going on during the action sequences. However, I attribute that
more to the fact that this was Nolan’s first full-fledged action film.
Thankfully, this aspect of the films improved with its sequel but as is,
‘Batman Begins’ is a rock-solid superhero film that we can very much thank for
making the character of Batman prominent once again.
Rating: 4.5/5
THE DARK KNIGHT (2008)
Like ‘Batman and Robin’, this is another entry that I don’t
really need to delve into that much given that pretty much everyone else has.
But where ‘Batman and Robin’ was universally despised, ‘The Dark Knight’ is
universally acclaimed and for good reason as it truly is an excellent film.
Coming off of ‘Begins’, Nolan takes the superhero genre to a whole new level
with this film, giving us a really effective and compelling story where Batman is pushed to
his limits by the Joker and I’m just going to come out and say it; Heath
Ledger’s Joker is the best live-action portrayal of the character to date. It’s
nothing against Jack Nicholson, but Ledger’s Joker is a much more fascinating
character; an ‘agent of chaos’ who’s ‘ahead of the curve’. He serves as a great
foil to Batman just as the character always has been in the comics, other
movies, and various television shows. In many ways, he’s far more frightening
than Nicholson’s Joker, who mainly came off as being rather creepy. It was
rightfully fitting that, following Ledger’s tragic death on January 22, 2008 he
was awarded the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor for what truly was one of the
best performances of this past decade.
But while Ledger has basically gotten the bulk of the film’s
praise for his work, another member of the cast who is fantastic in this, just
as much as Ledger, is Aaron Eckhart as Harvey Dent. Like the Joker, Nolan does
a fantastic job in portraying Dent’s rise and fall where he eventually becomes
the criminal Two-Face though he sort of ends the character’s story a bit too
early by having him killed off at the end of the film but I think that the
implications of what will happen to Gotham because of what he did and the
decision that Batman makes to deal with this problem serve as an excellent
set-up for the following film. There’s
not much else I can say except… if you haven’t seen this movie yet, where have
you been?
Rating: 5/5!
THE DARK KNIGHT RISES (2012)
This film is apparently becoming a case of what I like to
call the ‘Phantom Menace effect’. By that I am referring to a film that is
highly anticipated, perhaps more so than usual, but ends up disappointing a lot
of people. Now, this is not entirely the same case as ‘Phantom Menace’. This
film did get very good reviews from critics and, like its predecessor, it grossed
a billion at the box office. However, I find that many people have expressed a
lot of disappointment towards this film, specifically more recently. There were
some detractors of the film when it first came out (and those detractors more
than likely received death-threats from Nolan ‘fan boys’), but apparently after
a few more viewings, some are beginning to change their minds about the film.
Once again, this shows us that overhyping a film is never going to turn out
well. But at the end of the day, I still stand by this film. I mean, yes, it’s
not as good as ‘The Dark Knight’, but as we all know, that was an extremely
tough act to follow and for what it’s worth, this is one of the few great
superhero film ‘threequels’ out there.
So what is it that many are complaining about in this film?
Well, amongst some other things, the most common thing I’m hearing about this is
in regards to the film’s ‘plot holes’. They include, but are not limited to;
Why would Bruce avoid his responsibilities as Batman for eight whole years? How
did Bruce’s back get fixed after just being hung from a rope for a few hours?
How did Bruce get back in Gotham after it was put on lockdown by Bane? The list
apparently goes on and on. There are definitely a few more that I’ve heard
people mention, but these are the ones that are pretty much being brought up
the most. Overall, these have not really bothered me in the slightest, though I
did sort of find the back repair one to be a bit of a stretch. The one about
him getting back into Gotham is actually kind of plausible but then again, they
don’t really explain it either. He just shows up and the film moves on from
there. I do want to point out that plot holes in films are common all the time.
It’s just that this film just so happens to be one where the plot holes are
frequently talked about for some odd reason. Why? I don’t know…
There is more to the film than just that. What I really
admire about ‘Rises’ is its finality. This was truly intended to be the finale
of the ‘Dark Knight’ trilogy. It brings the story of Bruce Wayne to a close but
also ends in a way that, while it won’t be followed up upon (even though they
do bait us with the possibility of a sequel), does an excellent job at exemplifying
the character of Batman; a symbol that can’t be corrupted, as Bruce noted in
‘Batman Begins’. That is exactly the case as Joseph Gordon Levitt’s character
John Blake, whose real name is revealed to be Robin (not the actual character,
but still a very nice nod to the fans), discovers the Batcave, implying that he
will take over as the protector of Gotham City. It is also here where Christian
Bale gives his best performance as Bruce Wayne, who here is a shell of his
former self that must get back into action when his city is threatened. Also,
sort of like ‘Iron Man 3’, he may not exactly be in the Batman suit for long,
but like that film, it’s not much of a problem because this is very much a
Bruce Wayne story and as I always believe in regards to these superhero films,
the suit doesn’t make the man. The man makes the suit.
Of course, like in the previous Nolan films, he’s backed up
by an excellent supporting cast. All of the returning members, including Gary
Oldman, Morgan Freeman, and Michael Caine are fantastic once again. Caine is
not in the movie as much as the others, which is understandable considering how
the character of Alfred isn’t really necessary for this story, but he makes the
most out of his time on screen. The scene where he tells Bruce he is resigning
is one of the most effective and emotional character moments in any superhero
film I’ve ever seen. The newcomers to the cast are excellent as well. As the
main villain Bane, Tom Hardy makes the most out of having his face covered up
by a mask (like Batman, his muffled voice is fun to imitate) and as Selina
Kyle, Anne Hathaway is phenomenal taking over the role of Catwoman (without
ever being referred to by that name) from Michelle Pfeiffer. The only one
problem I do have with the entire film is how they handled the character of Talia
Al Ghul, played by Marion Cotillard. It’s not a problem with her as she does do
well in the role, but I feel that they should have introduced her character in
one of the previous Nolan films rather than being sort of hastily introduced in
this film especially when considering the relationship she has with Bruce in
the comics.
Still, ‘The Dark Knight Rises’ is one of only two ‘third
films’ in any superhero trilogy that I can think of that is truly excellent,
the other being ‘Iron Man 3’. No, it’s not as good as ‘The Dark Knight’ but it
doesn’t need to be. Instead, it is a solid finale to this trilogy and it ends
the series on a high note rather than a low one.
Rating: 5/5!
To end off this part
of the retrospective, here are my rankings for the live-action Batman films
(not counting the ’66 film because it’s its own thing).
1. The Dark Knight
2. The Dark Knight Rises
3. Batman (1989)
4. Batman Begins
5. Batman Forever
6. Batman Returns
7. Batman and Robin
Stay tuned for Part 2 of this Batman retrospective as we’ll
look at a few, not all, of the animated Batman films, including ‘Mask of the
Phantasm’ and ‘Under the Red Hood’.
No comments:
Post a Comment