To be honest, as much as I love the Caped Crusader, I’ve never really been a fan of these movies.
Oh, I’ve enjoyed so many things they’ve inspired, like Danny Elfman’s original score, The Animated Series, the roller coasters, the stunt shows, etc., but the Burton/Schumacher series of films never did much for me as movies.
However, since I’ve seemingly reviewed every other live-action Batman movie except for the Adam West one, and also reviewed the greatest Batman movie of its generation, Mask of the Phantasm, it only seems fitting to give these a once over, too.
Bombs away.
1989.
A Number.
Another Summer.
The biggest movie summer ever by many estimations.
After all, you had, in order: new Indiana Jones, new Star Trek, new Ghost Busters, new Karate Kid, new Lethal Weapon, new James Bond, and both new Jason and Freddy, all in the same summer. Not to mention successful original films like Dead Poets Society, When Harry Met Sally, Turner & Hooch, Parenthood, The Abyss, Uncle Buck, and, of course, UHF (just kidding, it bombed; but it’s still worth watching).
Into this drops Tim Burton’s Batman, and, other than Indiana Jones and the Last Crusade in the worldwide box office, it dominates and out-grosses all comers.
Why? Heck, I don’t know. I’d no sooner put Tim Burton in charge of Batman then I’d put Sam Raimi in charge of Spider-Man; but then I’m not a cocaine-addled Hollywood executive.
In all seriousness though, in the wake of the Christopher Reeve Superman movies, and seeing that a comic book figure could be eminently successful on the silver screen, I think Dark Knight fans were just eager for their first taste of live-action Batman since 1968.
And, to be fair, the first twenty-five minutes are quite good; the misdirect introduction down Crime Alley is a good starting point, and the movie sets up like it’s going to great places, but, once the shooting starts at Axis Chemicals, the warts really come to light.
For one, the action is clumsy, and second, the script is some major weak sauce. I’ve heard the screenplay was being written as they were shooting, but what was the story they wanted to tell? As far as I can see, the last ninety minutes basically consist of two men fighting over a woman. That’s your superhero movie? A romantic comedy in Halloween costumes? Not to mention none of the one-liners other than “I’m Batman” have any punch. Also, making things personal with The Joker is a hack move. That was already cliche by 1981 (and still cliche in 2015).
Speaking of, couldn’t they have named Jack Nicholson’s character something other than “Jack”; I mean, what is this, a sitcom? I admit, I’m a little biased because to me he’s Jack Nicholson in every movie; sometimes it works (often, actually), sometimes it doesn’t, but to me he feels like the wrong choice here. I just see Jack Nicholson imitating Cesar Romero and I don’t find it special.
And another thing, while there is a good amount of investigating in this film, barely any of it is done by Batman. You know, that guy? The World’s Greatest Detective?
Now, to be positive, the Bat costume and Bat vehicles are unquestionably iconic, and I think Michael Keaton is fine in the “lead”, though largely wasted. And it’s no secret that Danny Elfman’s score holds the movie on its shoulders like Atlas, but the Prince songs stick out like a sore thumb as they don’t match the aesthetic of the film at all.
One last thing, as much as I ordinarily love and champion the use of miniatures, this movie is not the effects team’s finest hour.
All-in-all, not unlike Top Gun, Batman is one of those Eighties movies that’s culturally iconic, but when you look past the veneer, it’s really not very good; and as a Batman fan, I find it even more disappointing.
Rating: ★★☆☆☆
Did you know that Tim Burton is really into misfits, losers, and freaks?
Did you?
Did you know that?
I’d compare both of Tim Burton’s Batman films to Gareth Edwards’ Godzilla, in that he seems deeply uninterested in Batman and would rather devote screen time to telling literally any other story (or stories, plural).
In the case of Batman Returns, he gets one thing right though: Catwoman.
Michelle Pfeiffer is great. She absolutely nails her role and may very well give the best individual performance of any of these four films.
Beyond that, this movie pushes things into fairy tale fantasy land, which might be okay if it was fun, or bright, or colorful, but it’s Burton’s dark fairy land, with all the black-and-white spirals and Elfman “la-la-la-la” score.
Despite the in-universe continuity, it may as well be totally unrelated to the previous film, but it’s no improvement either way.
Rating: ★★☆☆☆
I mean, If you’re going to go comic book, you may as well go for it.
Out with Burton, Keaton, and Elfman; in with Schumacher (God rest him), Kilmer (who would have made a fine Dark Knight from the beginning), and Goldenthal (who created an admirable B-theme to Elfman’s A-theme for the Caped Crusader).
So, this movie has obvious problems, and, like Batman Returns, it’s over-laden with characters, but at least it takes an interest in its hero; and, while it’s somewhat annoying to have yet another movie with yet another romantic subplot, it’s nice to see Bruce Wayne actually care about someone else other than Alfred and the belle du jour.
Of course, I’m talking about Chris O’Donnell’s character of Dick Grayson AKA Robin. In fact, his whole introduction is one of the best parts of the movie, and his arc and how it affects Batman gives the film some much-needed heart. I would have loved to have seen Keaton handle this sort of material in either of the first two, but it just wasn’t there for him.
That said, the movie is no masterpiece. Jim Carrey is hit-or-miss as The Riddler, and I’m not sure Tommy Lee Jones had any real idea what he was doing as Two-Face.
But, we get more of a sense of scale from Gotham City compared to the Burton films, and many of the effects benefit from advances in technology, but also just execution.
Still, I don’t really give it a general recommendation.
Rating: ★★½ (out of five)
I remembered this movie being bad.
I didn’t remember it being this bad.
There are moments that are funny-bad (you can find super-cuts of them on YouTube), but this isn’t a movie like The Room. It doesn’t even earn that much kudos, in no small part because it’s TWO HOURS LONG.
To give it a modicum of praise, I think Uma Thurman realized what level of schlock she was in, and she does her best to have fun with it, but even so much of what she has to work with is just groan-worthy.
It’s a punishing slog; that’s it.
Rating: ★☆☆☆☆
P.S.
Even though I didn’t love any of these movies, I still loved spending time at The Mahoning Drive-In Theater. It may have been a little wet on Friday night, but the show carried on just fine. They truly are a beacon in these dark times.