This was the first review I wrote as part of a line of reviews for the Batman films in 2011…I only completed this one, the first sequel, and the last Batman film made, “The Dark Knight Rises.”
Batman is a 1989 superhero film based on the DC Comics character of the same name, directed by Tim Burton. The film stars Michael Keaton in the title role, as well as Jack Nicholson, Kim Basinger, Robert Wuhl and Jack Palance. The film, in which Batman deals with the rise of a costumed criminal known as “The Joker”, is the first installment of Warner Bros.’ Batman film series.
Ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batman_%281989_film%29
GREG’S REVIEW:
“…I’m Batman.”
There are a lot of people who laugh at those of us who enjoy comic books. We’re thought of as “nerds,” “losers,” “geeks,” etc. Whatever 80’s cliche term that can be used, that’s what’s used. But what I’ve always found hysterical is that people think I’m a comic book fan; that I own hundreds of comic books, but the simple fact is that I own maybe ten…and they’re all Batman. Sure, I enjoy all superheroes and will go to about every comic book movie released, but at the end of the day, Batman is certainly my favorite, and for a number of reasons: He’s brooding and slightly psychotic (he wears a suit to look like a bat…come on), he has arguably the best villain set (what is referred to as the “Rogue’s Gallery,” which is what I’ll call if from now on), and some of the best stories, especially of DC Comics. Just read “The Dark Knight Returns,” “The Long Halloween,” or even “The Killing Joke,” and tell me those aren’t good stories. But I’m getting ahead of myself.
After the success of Warner Brother’s “Superman” in 1978, it seemed that there was a way to make serious superhero movies. And as much as I enjoy the Superman films…well, the first two, and even “Superman Returns”…it has to be fairly admitted that they are fairly cheesy, to a degree. They carry that same Golden Age comic mentality, much like the old Superman television series, filling everything with that sense of child-like wonder. But “Superman” set the precedent. It showed that comic book films could be made, and be made believable, as the tagline said: “You will believe a man can fly.” I did. But if “Superman” proved comic book films could be made, eleven years later, “Batman” proved that comic book films could be lucrative. Before 1989, the only references to Batman people had were either the old 1940s serials (which were pretty awful due to the costumes and the inherent racism against Asians, which was still fresh during and after World War II) or the immensely popular, but ultimately comedic, 1960s Batman television series, and 1966 movie, with Adam West as the Dark Knight and Burt Ward as Robin. Of course, the 1960s series was reflective of the Batman in the comic books, which were geared toward children. With the 1970s, however, Batman comics were treading back into the dark territory that began in 1939 when Bob Kane, Batman’s creator, first began inking the comics. Villains were finally threatening again, and not the idiotic buffoons that Batman could easily defeat in battle, whether it be physical or mental. During the time after the release of “Superman,” ideas and scripts were tossed around about the Dark Knight, and how to put him on screen. There were certainly risks involved with the film’s conception. A director was needed, of course, and at the time, Tim Burton must have been a difficult choice. Sure, now, he’s beloved for his dark films with interesting characters and twisted imagery, but in the 80s, he only had a few films under his belt. A former animator for Disney Studios, Burton moved on his own after short films such as “Vincent” and “Frankenweenie” with his first major film “Pee-Wee’s Big Adventure.” But in retrospect, Burton seems a perfect, suitable choice to take on Batman. What came next, however, was incredibly controversial for its time: who would play Batman? Most people, and even the producers, wanted a chiseled, muscular action star to play the character. But Burton was adamant about casting the title character from his previous film “Beetlejuice,” comedian Michael Keaton. Batman fans were outraged (thank God the internet didn’t exist then, or else forums everywhere would have been filled to the brim with whining). Of course, I can see their point: A slender man, about 5’9″, who’s played in films like “Mr. Mom” as Batman? It sounds ludicrous! But, as Burton has said, Keaton seemed to be one of the only people who looked or seemed crazy enough to run around in a bat suit…and he’s right. And with Batman cast, the filmmakers needed a villain. When most people think of a hero, they think of an arch-nemesis. For Superman, it’s Lex Luthor. For Spider-Man, it’s the Green Goblin. For Batman, it has to be the Joker. The Joker is Batman’s polar opposite, the yin to his yang. Batman is dark, yet heroic. The Joker is brightly colored, but devilish. And as the rumors and stories go, the filmmakers had only one choice in mind for Batman’s opponent, an actor known for his shark-like grin: Jack Nicholson. With these pieces in place, and a script by Sam Hamm and even Bob Kane as a creative consultant, Batman’s first serious foray into film began.
For the few who have never at least heard of “Batman,” I’ll give you a rundown of the plot: Gotham City is rampant with crime and violence. The police force as a whole is corrupt, most of them in the pocket of powerful mob boss Carl Grissom (Palance). Despite the best efforts of Commissioner Jim Gordon (Pat Hingle), District Attorney Harvey Dent (Billy Dee Williams), and Mayor Borg (Lee Wallace), the city continues to descend into darkness. By the time the film begins, a vigilante has been attacking criminals at night, spreading fear among the criminal element, all of whom tell stories of “a giant bat.” Police scoff at these stories, but reporter Alexander Knox (Wuhl) is determined to find the so-called “Batman.” Knox is soon joined by photojournalist Vicki Vale (Basinger), who has traveled to Gotham in a personal quest to find the Batman herself. Both of them travel to the mansion of Bruce Wayne (Keaton) in order to gather more for their story on Batman, but end up meeting the mysterious Wayne and his loyal butler, Alfred Pennyworth; Vicki becomes enamored with Bruce. At the same time, Grissom’s right-hand, Jack Napier (Nicholson), a vain and borderline psychotic, is set up by his boss to be killed after Grissom learns of Napier’s affair with his lover, sending his corrupt officer Eckhardt (William Hootkins) to lead the sting at Axis Chemicals, one of Grissom’s many fronts. Napier nearly escapes the police only to run afoul of the Batman, whose existence is finally revealed Commissioner Gordon. After a short confrontation, Napier’s face is scarred and he falls into a vat of chemicals, and therefore thought to be dead. Soon, however, Napier resurfaces to attack Grissom and take over his operation, dubbing himself “The Joker” due to his horrific appearance, with green hair, white skin, and a permanently rigid grin. Soon, the Joker sets his sights on Vicki, as well as Gotham itself, and begins an escalating battle with Batman, who tries to juggle his personal life with Vicki and his self-imposed duty to protect Gotham’s citizens from the Joker’s maniacal wrath.
Batman became more of a cultural phenomenon as opposed to an actual film. Its 1989 release was the 50th anniversary of Batman’s creation, and all the hype behind seeing the hero taken seriously on the big screen led to an almost overwhelming excitement for people worldwide. The film didn’t disappoint. All in all, to me, the film hinged on the performances of the two main characters. Keaton’s Batman is still, honestly, my favorite Batman. Yes, I’m sure that opinion isn’t really popular, but it’s how I feel. He was quiet and threatening (no offense to Christian Bale, who I also enjoy, but Keaton didn’t scream or growl all the time). His Bruce Wayne, who we never learn much about aside from the usual staples of Batman lore, is humorous, awkward, and just by watching him, we can see he is disturbed by tragic events. He doesn’t seem as determined or driven as some other incarnations of the character, but this Batman is portrayed more as a creature than an actual person, which I appreciated. To a degree, it’s how I view Batman. And Nicholson’s Joker is still one of the best incarnations. Burton claimed that “The Killing Joke” was his main inspiration behind this film. For those who don’t know, “The Killing Joke” is a short comic by Alan Moore (“Watchmen,” “V For Vendetta”) that details one of the many back stories for the Joker, who has a number of conflicting origin stories (a concept touched upon in “The Dark Knight”). The story depicts the Joker as a failed comedian who, in a bid to make money to support his wife, takes up a job with some mobsters to rob a chemical plant, dressed in a disguise known as the Red Hood, a moniker used by a number of criminals. However, Batman interrupts the robbery and causes the comedian to fall into acid and emerge as the Joker. The Joker uses this idea, that one bad day can drive anyone insane, to attempt to drive Commissioner Gordon mad. Of course, instead of a comedian, the Joker was made into a gangster named Jack Napier, but portions of the origin remain. For the time, Nicholson embodied what the Joker was: a maniacal criminal with a penchant for killing people just for the sake of a joke. He was more of a “killer uncle” with crazy gags as opposed to the now legendary Heath Ledger interpretation as a chaos-hungry sociopath. Nicholson obviously relished the part and had fun, chewing every piece of scenery with malice and his black humor. All in all, both actors brought their own talents to the table, and did not disappoint. And Burton’s group brought the dynamic to the forefront between this hero and villain, namely what Burton called the “duel of the freaks.” He envisioned Batman and the Joker both as freaks, Batman more internally and the Joker externally, obviously, and both are essentially responsible for the creation of the other…it was an interesting idea, and to me, is the core of the film.
The duel of the freaks.
“Batman” was one of the first films I remember seeing. I even went to the theater to see it…I was two years old. I don’t quite remember it, but I was told in the subsequent years by family that I really enjoyed it. However, until I began kindergarten, I had a ritual of watching a number of films almost every day, “Batman” included. I loved everything about it, played with all the Batman toys, recited lines, ran around with a cape and a batarang, etc. I was the ultimate Batman fan of that time for my age. I still watch and enjoy it to this day, though the older I get, the more things I see that I would’ve done differently had I been involved in the making of the film.
Sure, by today’s standards, Burton’s film is a bit dated. Some of the effects are a bit cartoonish, and some of the songs are a bit hokey to some (though Prince’s “Partyman” during the Joker’s attack on the museum is still iconic in my mind, and is as hysterical as it is psychotic), but there is plenty of enjoyment to be had. There is great acting by all involved, whether it be Nicholson’s gleefully homicidal Joker (chock full of Tim Burton’s trademark black humor), Keaton’s subtle and brooding performance as Batman, Basinger’s intelligent damsel (though her screaming can be a bit much at times), Wuhl’s smarmy and quick-witted Knox, Gough’s charming and refined Alfred, and, in my opinion one of the best performances in the film, the menace of Palance’s Grissom, though he’s hardly onscreen for five minutes. There’s also the set design by Anton Furst, combining German Expressionism (a staple of Burton’s) and Gothic architecture, the costumes by Bob Ringwood (his batsuit is still one of my favorites, even though the head can’t turn and the Bat symbol has two extra points near what would be the tail), and especially, Danny Elfman’s moody, dark, bombastic musical score which inadvertently made him the go-to composer for comic book movies (he also did “Spider-Man,” “Hulk,” “Hellboy II: The Golden Army,” and others). The only other gripe I have really is how the Joker was made into the murderer of Thomas and Martha Wayne. Now, for comic fans, or those who are just knowledgeable, Joker/Jack Napier was not Bruce’s parents’ killer; it was a petty criminal named Joe Chill. However, I can understand the motivation behind the filmmakers to make the Joker the killer. It makes sense from a story perspective to make the motivation for revenge more personal by making the Joker kill Bruce’s parents. I suppose I could also say that more could have been done to focus on Bruce Wayne as a person, which “Batman Begins” did sixteen years later. And die-hard Batman fans complain about Batman killing villains in this film, as well as the first sequel (which will be covered later). Here’s the thing: In the earliest comics, Batman did, indeed, kill. It was only sometime later that Batman instated his law that he would never kill anyone. Off and on with Batmans across all media, villains are killed or left to die…but they find ways to return, of course. To me, I didn’t have much of a problem with it, but, hell, to each their own.
Overall, this is still one of my favorite films ever made. It has flaws, but all films do. And I’m a bit biased because I’m a Batman fan anyway, and this film was one of my earliest memories. Those who are new to Batman films, I recommend this one first, so you can see where the serious Batman franchise began. And if you still haven’t seen it yet, take the time to watch it…I’m sure you’ll find something to enjoy. I’ve already named a great deal to like.
GREG’S SCORE- XXXXX
“If you gotta go, go with a smile!”
*All pictures are the property of Warner Bros.
Gregarious Views 