Tagged with Robin

My Favorite Superhero Films. #11: Batman: Under the Red Hood (2010)

#11: Batman: Under the Red Hood (2010)

It’s actually nearly impossible to believe Batman: Under the Red Hood was a direct-to-DVD release. It had a cinematic quality that would’ve made it excellent to experience in the theaters. This film is actually an excellent example of the fact that DC Comics’ animated features show much more fidelity to their characters than their live action versions, and arguably are just better films in general.

Batman: Under the Red Hood adapts both the similarly-titled Under the Hood and the one Batman storyline I never thought I’d see any medium of adaptation try to touch: A Death in the Family. I actually like this film’s version of Jason Todd’s return much better than Under the Hood‘s. While the essential elements were the same, and the conclusion is similar, it’s much more streamlined both structurally and in terms of the actual story.

The production values here are as impressive as they’ve ever been for the DC Universe’s animated features, and Christopher Drake turns in arguably his best performance as soundtrack composer. I was surprised by the choice to recast many of the voices for this film as I think the original voice actors would’ve been excellent reprising their roles, but I can hardly argue with who they got to replace them. Bruce Greenwood (as Batman) and Neil Patrick Harris (as Nightwing) bring serious Hollywood prestige to the cast, while veteran voice actor John DiMaggio (as the Joker) is, as ever, impressive.

The quality of this film stands out even among other DC Universe Animated Original Movies, which have been with few exceptions consistently excellent. I would love to see more major Batman storylines told in a similar vein. I’d love to see a (probably at least two-part) adaptation of Knightfall and Knightsend, largely glossing over Knightquest, and definitely a sequel adapting Prodigal. The Long Halloween and Dark Victory (still the best interpretation of Dick Grayson’s origin story ever) would be spectacular as well.

So far, though, the only additional storyline they’ve used is Year One (which was okay but not great), and there’s a forthcoming two-part adaptation of The Dark Knight Returns, which I must confess I’m not especially looking forward to. But then, my bias has always been for more exploration of the “Batman Family,” a concept which modern interpretations of Batman have largely tried to ignore. Under the Red Hood, on the other hand, plays into my prejudices by heavily featuring Bruce’s relationship with both Dick Grayson and Jason Todd. This is really what I’d like to see more of, just throw in some Barbara Gordon and Tim Drake and we’ll be all set.

Tagged , , , , , , ,

My Least Favorite Superhero Films. #14: Batman & Robin (1997)

Parallel to my countdown of favorite superhero films (though not perfectly so as there are far fewer noteworthy in this category), I will also be counting down my least favorite superhero films. As with the other list, the only “rules” for what constitutes a superhero film will be that it reasonably seems like a superhero film. I won’t be applying any ridiculous standards that end up making Batman not a superhero because he has no super powers, or anything like that.

~-~-~

#14: Batman & Robin (1997)

I ended yesterday’s (partial) defense of Batman Forever with the comment that aside from the fact that it was kind of mediocre and had some fairly substantial problems, I think the main reason most people actually hate Batman Forever is that they conflate it with Batman & Robin, and that I think that’s a pretty serious mistake. Batman & Robin is a terrible film. Much worse than Batman Forever. Batman Forever wasn’t exactly cinematic brilliance in the first place, but Batman & Robin actually pulled off the neat trick of ruining three (three) of my favorite villains in the same film. And Batgirl. They also ruined Batgirl. Because you know, why not?

The things that make Batman & Robin so bad are actually much simpler than the things that mitigate Batman Forever‘s badness and led me to defend it. While Batman Forever has Dick Grayson’s anguish over his parents’ death, Bruce’s relating to that and taking him under his wing, the complicated development of a relationship between the two, and Bruce’s own psychological recovery going for it, Batman & Robin has… nothing.

Where Batman Forever was occasionally marred by hints of the nails-on-chalkboard awful dialogue we’d rather see throughout the entirety of Batman & Robin, they were just that: hints. Large segments of Batman Forever involved legitimately interesting character-building and relationship dynamics. Batman & Robin throws a completely superficial conflict between Batman and Robin at us that’s so forced it doesn’t make either of their characters more interesting. The closest thing this film has to “something going for it” is Robin chafing under Batman’s leadership (and one can’t help but wonder if the fact that his Robin costume is already starting to resemble Nightwing’s was hinting at something), and that wasn’t given enough attention to really count as a strongpoint.

You know what? I’m going to say it. Chris O’Donnell as Robin was the only worthwhile thing about this film. I actually really enjoyed his performance. This film could’ve been replaced by 125 minutes of Chris O’Donnell beating bad guys up and it would’ve been a much better film.

George Clooney? I… actually think he might be the worst Batman ever. That might be largely indicative of the script’s failures, but I’m not sure I could’ve bought Clooney as Batman even in a more well-constructed film. That seems like it should serve as the worst possible indictment of the film, but we haven’t even gotten close to the worst parts.

As I alluded to earlier, this film pulled off the shockingly impressive trifecta of ruining three of my favorite (and most fans’ favorite) supervillains of all time, and threw Batgirl in for good measure. To start things off, let’s look at Uma Thurman as Poison Ivy. Ivy is a fan-favorite Batman villain because of her enigmatic nature, and the awkward romantic tension between her and Batman in their various incarnations. Ivy has been portrayed as a temptress, and her connection with nature made her an obvious choice to channel feminists influences into the Batman series. The ultimate depiction of this character is probably in The Animated Series, where she is depicted as subtle but incredibly deadly.

Batman & Robin‘s depiction of the character incorporates some of those elements… in the sense that a few vaguely superficial mockeries of feminist and environmentalist themes are briefly mentioned in Ivy’s psychopathic rant immediately after being transformed and never mentioned again. Oh, and that “subtlety” thing from the other versions of the character? Not so much. She basically parades around in revealing costumes and seems much more sexually available than any other version of her character. (Hey, Schumacher had to distract audiences from the homosexual overtones somehow… right?)

The funny thing is, Ivy might be the least ruined villain in this film. The other major villain of the film is Mr. Freeze. Though Freeze was always noted for having a more “serious” tone than many other Batman villains even in his early days, it was Batman: The Animated Series that gave him the tragic origin story of a fatally ill wife whom he cryogenically preserves in order to protect her until he can find a cure. This depiction was so seminal, it resulted in his comic book incarnations being altered to fit this new origin story, and the episode that introduced this new origin won the Daytime Emmy Award for Outstanding Writing in an Animated Program in 1993. As a result, the character has a melancholy nature, and is moreover a seriously driven character.

Batman & Robin‘s version of the character is pretty much the worst reinterpretation anyone could’ve come up with. The utter stupidity of this film’s characterization defies all reason. Schumacher opts to keep Freeze’s tragic backstory, but depict him as a beyond-campy, pun-spouting, shallow caricature played by Arnold Schwarzenegger. It is virtually impossible to overstate how completely wrong this character is.

And he isn’t even the worst one. Linked to Ivy (for reasons passing understanding) throughout the film is Bane. Fans of the Batman comics will remember Bane from the Knightfall arc, during which he proved to be a physical and intellectual equal to Batman, eventually actually defeating the Dark Knight and knocking him out of commission completely for over a year. That’s not in-story time, that’s real-world time. There was a year of comic books published during which Bruce Wayne was crippled and someone else was Batman.

What many later interpretations failed to “get” about Bane, even The Animated Series, is that his awesome strength isn’t his biggest asset, it’s his incredible intellect. His plan to take down Batman is ruthlessly brilliant. Seriously, if you aren’t planning on reading Knightfall, just read this summary. It’s one of the best Batman storylines of all time. The thing is… as lacking as every attempt to reinterpret Bane into other continuities has been, Batman & Robin was unquestionably the absolute worst. Did it fail to make him an intimidating criminal mastermind? You could say that. Batman & Robin reimagines Bane as a petty criminal who becomes super-strong only because of Venom. Calling him Ivy’s henchman would be giving him too much credit: he’s her slave. And for most of the film, he seems incapable of speech.

Ill-content to merely ruin the film’s villains, Schumacher next turned his attention to Barbara Gordon… no, wait, I’m sorry, we’re calling her “Barbara Wilson” here. Because, for no apparent reason, Barbara is now Alfred Pennyworth’s niece. She’s played (badly; you had to see that coming by now, right?) by Alicia Silverstone. She rides motorcycles (so she can identify with Robin and get in a really stupid motorcycle race that’s one of the film’s worst scenes) and is said to be a computer expert (so the film can allude to her comic exploits as the Oracle without doing any actual work.) Everything she ever does with or says about computers in the film makes absolutely no sense, and would make someone with an even rudimentary understanding of computers feel vaguely violent. The hints of romantic tension between her and Dick Grayson in this version come off as more than a little creepy since Alfred basically functions as Dick’s uncle.

Oh, yeah, speaking of her relationship with Alfred, here’s the best part: Alfred created a costume and gear for her and wrote a program in the Batcomputer just in case she ever needed to become Batgirl for no apparent reason, without Bruce knowing. You know. Bruce. Bruce Wayne. Batman. The incredibly paranoid guy who takes down criminal geniuses for a living. (Wait, no, I forgot: there aren’t any criminal geniuses in this version. My bad.)

Now… you could probably take all of these horribly, horribly butchered characters and actually write a pretty interesting movie about them, but as I already said, that didn’t happen. Dick Grayson’s introduction in Batman Forever is duplicated almost beat-for-beat in Barbara’s introduction, only without the orphaning and with a great deal more awkwardness and terrible acting. The “point” of the film seems to have been to introduce the “Batman Family,” but you can get a better introduction of that concept literally almost anywhere the concept has been depicted.

So, the obvious question. Why isn’t this higher on my list of least favorite superhero films of all time? Well, here’s where you’re going to want to throw stones at me again: I… actually kind of enjoy it. I’m not saying I enjoyed it when I was a kid, when I was supposed to enjoy it and didn’t know any better (although that also is true). I… actually still enjoy it to this day. Chris O’Donnell’s performance as Robin (probably aided by the fact that I have a serious crush on the character) remains compelling to me for some reason, and no matter how bad this film is, and no matter how thoroughly it butchered the characters and stories it ripped off… I can totally watch it as a guilty pleasure, which I can’t say about a lot of other films on this list.

You know what? Screw it. Let’s talk about the elephant in the room. Joel Schumacher is hardly the first person to look at Batman and go, “You know… that’s kinda gay.” He’s just the first one to make a lot of money off of it, and I kind of actually love him for that. I hate what he did to a lot of my favorite characters in the process, but I just can’t direct the kind of venom (no pun intended) at this film that others can. It’s bad. It’s awful. I acknowledge that it might very well be the worst superhero film of all time… but I can’t hate it as much as I’m supposed to.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Superhero Films I’m “Supposed” to Hate: Batman Forever (1995)

Tomorrow, I’m going to be posting my review of my 14th least favorite superhero film of all time, Batman & Robin. I’m expecting to catch quite a bit of flak for having this so low on the list, as Batman & Robin is nearly universally considered to be one of the worst (if not the worst) superhero films of all time. As long as I’m going to be in hot water anyway, let’s just lay it all on the table right now. So, if I told you Batman & Robin was my 14th least favorite superhero of all time, in addition to being shocked at how low on the list that is, you’d probably be thinking, “Wait. You have Batman Forever rated as worse than Batman & Robin?”

Nope.

Which, of course, means Batman Forever isn’t on this list at all. I’m unlikely to escape not including Batman Forever on a list of my 15 least favorite superhero films of all time without explanation, so with these two films being “brothers” due to being Joel Schumacher’s two entries into the Batman film universe, I may as well address Batman Forever first, to inform tomorrow’s criticism of Batman & Robin.

After Tim Burton’s early-90s Batman blockbusters ignited the decade’s comic books explosion, many inside and outside of Hollywood realized that Burton’s take on the Caped Crusader was exceptionally dark (and not in a Chris Nolan Dark Knight kind of way), and probably not the most appropriate thing in the world for kids, who were a huge part of Warner’s target audience. So despite the fact that Batman Returns is practically begging for a sequel (Batman Re-returns“?), the studio gave Burton the ax and turned the thing over to Joel Schumacher.

At this point, every Batman fan reading is already shuddering, having long ago equated “Schumacher” with “awful.” I now consider it my duty to stand up for the man. Joel Schumacher is actually a good filmmaker. Don’t believe me? Go watch The Client. You heard me. Go watch it. Now. Since you obviously listened to me and are already watching the film, at this point I can reveal that this adaptation of a John Grisham novel (prepare for unpleasant deja vu) is directed by Joel Schumacher and stars Tommy Lee Jones.

Here’s the thing: it works. It’s actually the best legal thriller I’ve ever seen. Yeah, you heard me: ever. I was so stunned by this film, it forced me to completely reevaluate everything I “knew” about Joel Schumacher. A quick glance at his filmography informed me that he directed the 2004 adaptation of Phantom of the Opera, which is one of the finest films I’ve ever seen and is certainly much more serious than his work on Batman. Further digging revealed that Batman Forever and Batman & Robin were not the Batman films he wanted to make at all. In fact, he wanted to make a much more serious film with darker themes based on Batman: Year One (if that sounds eerily familiar… yeah, we’re talking about basically what Chris Nolan did.) If Schumacher weren’t under heavy pressure from Warner Bros. to make a Batman film that would be primarily attractive to children and sell more action figures, it’s entirely possible we would remember him as the man to revitalize the Batman film franchise. It isn’t even really that far-fetched.

Was Batman Forever entirely without missteps? Of course not. I mean… look at it. But with that in mind, my entire perception of the film changes. Why? Because I did like it when I was a kid. A lot. Schumacher did exactly what the studio asked him to do, he made a film that sold a ton of action figures and helped create a marketing empire. Given his artistic sensibilities (as demonstrated in other films) and desire for a more serious interpretation of the character, it’s unlikely Schumacher himself was satisfied with the end product. That being said, he did find a way to put his own mark on the franchise by making the film not only kid-friendly, but intentionally over-the-top and campy. And all those neon colors and “comic booky” aesthetic that everyone suddenly always hated? They fit right in with the campy atmosphere of the films, they wouldn’t have looked very out of place in a lot of other superhero movies, and I’m kind of confused as to where all of this universal hatred was in 1995.

And hey, here’s an interesting thing: as Movie Bob pointed out recently, Batman Forever actually has the only interesting character development of any 1990s Batman film with Bruce Wayne briefly giving up his career as the Caped Crusader, and later deciding to continue to be Batman “not because I have to, but because I choose to.” Wait, what? Closure? A sense of optimism? And (this can’t possibly be overlooked) having Robin in his life as a positive influence?

This is the kind of turn that Christopher Nolan’s series (as much as I like it much better than Schumacher’s work, and like it in general) will never make. The reason Nolan absolutely refuses to make more than three movies is because he has no story left to tell. His Batman can’t have this sort of psychologically-healthy epiphany, he can never move on from his parents’ deaths. (Unless he does in The Dark Knight Rises and I end up looking like a giant idiot.) Optimism? Not in my Batman! (Except, you know, the character has clearly been depicted in the past as not constantly being alone and in pain and it’s worked just fine. See: the comics, Batman: The Animated Series, the Adam West live-action series which was clearly a source of inspiration here, Batman: The Brave and the Bold…)

Can you imagine a series of halfway-decent films about a psychologically-healthy Batman? Where did we get this idea that Batman is always, always, always dark and serious? Okay, Schumacher’s take on the character was far from perfect, but what if someone came along who could combine how enormous of a badass Batman is with him actually getting over his parents’ deaths? (Yeah, that’s already happened in a lot of comic book and animated iterations, but a live-action one? Can we get that Batman for Warner’s lead-in to the inevitable Justice League film?)

Okay, I’m getting carried away here, let’s bring it back in. Am I going to argue that this is a great film? NO!!! Are you kidding me??? It’s Batman Forever!!!

It does have some great elements. How about the acting? Val Kilmer could’ve been a better Batman than Keaton had he been given a more serious take on the character, and was already pretty compelling with the already-mentioned psychological exploration of the character. Nicole Kidman did great with what she had to work with. Chris O’Donnell was probably a good choice as Robin, and frankly was the thing I loved about the film the most in my childhood.

How about the villains? Here’s the biggest difference between Batman Forever and Batman & Robin. Jim Carrey was absolutely fantastic as the Riddler in an interpretation that harkened back to the aforementioned Adam West television series. Tommy Lee Jones… well, yeah, okay: here’s where the first hints of where Batman & Robin was going to go horribly, horribly wrong came in. Tommy Lee Jones is absolutely hilarious in this film. He is an over-the-top, humorous villain who channels Silver Age villain personalities brilliant. What he isn’t… is Two-Face.

If Joel Schumacher had been able to cast Tommy Lee Jones as some random Silver Age villain (or an original villain based on Silver Age aesthetics), I would actually be able to make a pretty convincing argument that this is actually a good film. But in bowing to studio pressure to feature the popular villain (who didn’t fit the film’s tone at all), the film was ruined. Yeah, I know it sounds crazy, but a Batman film that was a little silly and featured a villain and armies of disposable henchmen actually could’ve worked.

Aside from the fact that it was admittedly kind of mediocre and had some fairly substantial problems, I think the main reason most people actually hate Batman Forever is that they conflate it with Batman & Robin, and I think that’s a pretty serious mistake. But let’s talk about that more tomorrow.

Tagged , , , , , , , , , ,
Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 27 other followers