Im a bit pressed for time on todays blog, so Im going to review the most recent comic book movie Ive watched. Thanks to Netflix, Ive had a chance to revisit Tim Burtons 1989 Batman film, which I remembered hating the last time I saw it. Time to give it a new look and a fair review. Batman (1989) Directed By: Tim Burton Starring: Jack Nicholson, Michael Keaton, Kim Basinger, and Michael Gough Context is everything. When Tim Burtons Batman came out, it was a risky move by Warner Brothers studios. Comic books were hardly the proven commodity in Hollywood that they are today. Superman had been successful in the 1970s, but that was about it. The last time the Caped Crusader was in the mainstream publics eye was the super campy 1960s television show. So while this movie has not aged particularly well and comes across as cheesy, hokey and over the top by todays standards, its a gigantic improvement over what Batman *had* been presented as. In its own way, the movie proved that comic books could be taken a little more seriously. With that said, Im not a big fan of this movie. The best things for me are the set design and Danny Elfmans music. Gotham City looks amazing in this movie, especially after watching Chris Nolans trilogy where Gotham looks like every other major city. In the comics theres a feel to the city, the idea of progress clashing with dark history. The set design in this movie perfectly captures that. The costuming for me is a mixed bag: I like Batmans suit, but Jokers makeup and flannel pants ruin my ability to take him seriously. The acting is hit or miss for me. Most of the actors seem to be overacting (Nicholson) or underacting (Basinger and Keaton) and never really sticking out to me as believable. While that isnt necessarily a bad thing as the movie is meant to be escapism and borderline surrealism, it does leave me underwhelmed. I will say that Keaton has the best take on Batman of any actor to play him, at least in the suit. He is convincingly threatening without going over the top or having a grating, hokey voice. As Bruce Wayne...eh. I get what they were going for, trying to portray him as someone who is shy and socially awkward, and there are scenes that work. When hes being introspective about his parents or trying to tell Vicki Vale his secret, it works. But when hes putting on the rich playboy facade that Wayne puts on to keep people from thinking hes Batman, hes not that convincing. If I recall, hes much better at it in the second film, which Ill need to watch again sometime. Jack Nicholsons Joker is something that takes away from the film for me. I love Jack and I love the Joker, but I dont they fit well together. I never really bought him as the Joker... just Jack Nicholson in bad makeup acting like an idiot. The script does him no favors though; while hes convincingly violent and even funny at times, hes almost too human. We know his name (Jack Napier), we know who he was before he became the Joker and the accident motivates him to go on his crime spree. One of the worst, most contrived bits of the film is the reveal that Napier killed Bruce Waynes parents. This seems to be the inverse of how the dynamic should work: it gives Bruce a rational reason for hating Joker, whereas in the comics the Joker has always had an irrational obsessive hatred for Batman. Overall, I will say that this movie falls flat for me. The characterization is poor and one dimensional, cliche-ridden and contrived at a few points. The entire finale is an exercise in madness, ruining what could be a serious climax with such nonsense as the Batplane (made worse when Burton gets cute and has it pose in front of the moon like the bat signal) and Joker falling to his death. So really, its a typical Tim Burton film. The visuals and the atmosphere are incredible, but the characters arent interesting and ultimately provide an unsatisfying experience. I felt like I went to Wonderland and dont really want to come back. But while the film isnt what I think of when I think of Batman, I respect anybody who loves this film and can understand why. In many ways, it shouldnt be looked at as a definitive take on Batman, but rather one possible interpretation of Batman by a director who clearly had a vision for making a memorable movie. Even if it doesnt hold up as a classic, it left a mark on all future comic book movies and its an unforgettable film. Kind of like Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom. Final Rating: 7/10
Posted on: Wed, 19 Nov 2014 05:29:45 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015