#super jarring with Adam being played by the guy who plays Harvey Dent in dark knight soooo

[awestruck-atrophy]

watched i frankenstein and it wasn’t great I could do better

[spaceorphan18]

Spaceorphan’s Movie Reviews: Batman (1989)

Before settling down to watch (and rewatch) all the films related to Marvel properties, I thought it’d be fun to take a look back over at DC.  Batman was probably the first superhero I was aware of? Since he (and Superman to a lesser extent) were the most well-known superheroes in the cultural zeitgeist.  I still say DC’s merchandising is far more prominent among children than Marvel, so of course, even in the late 80s, when I was a very young little person, I knew who Batman was.  

Of course, before 1989, there were other iterations of the character, most notably the Adam West series (and TV movies) of the 60s.  I remember catching those old episodes when it reran on Nick-at-Nite in during the 80s - I mean they were ridiculously campy, which of course also makes them family friendly, and so we had them on all the time.    Then Tim Burton came along and updated Batman to be dark and gritty.  (Like the comics! Actually, I have no idea, I’ve never read any Batman comics, so I can’t actually comment on that.)  Of course, being six at the time of theatrical release, I didn’t know what a big deal this would be.  

I don’t remember when I first watched the film.  It wasn’t in the theaters (I was too young - but not too young to see the sequel!), but I did see it a lot once it came out on VHS.  And I’ll be honest with you, it straight up scared me as a kid.  The Burton-esque imagery, mixed with dark cinematography, and the horror-esque elements of the film really seared into my young brain.  It wasn’t a film I sought out (though I don’t remember my parents watching it either, even though we owned it, I wonder if my brother watched it) but it was one that had a lasting impression, much like Ghostbusters and Back to the Future - it’s a film that I vividly remember from my childhood.  

The interesting thing (to me) is that I haven’t seen it (until now) since I was a kid.  I can think of no time as an actual adult that I’ve had the chance to pop it in again and watch it.  But, interestingly, there wasn’t a single moment of the film that I had forgotten - watching it again after, maybe, fifteen-twenty years, I really do remember every beat of this film.  However, maybe for the first time, I really understand the film as it’s intended - cause, yeah, it’s not a kids’ film (even if there was a ton of merchandising for kids - which there was, we had a toy batmobile and batwing).  

So, how does this film hold up all these years later? Surprisingly well - for what it is.  

So, maybe this is the analytical person in me, but I think this film is, maybe, more fun to talk about than to actually watch.  Of all the super fascinating things going on - the plot is the least interesting part of it, even the film itself seems to loosely hinge on the random things The Joker decides to do and is a little, meh, don’t think too hard about it.   To sum it up quickly - Gotham is being run by a crime ring and mob bosses and Batman is single handedly taking them down.  Meanwhile, The Joker is a crazed guy who wants to be bigger than the mob bosses who whole him back, and after he nearly dies in a vat of acid - he decides to become even more of a psychopathic killer and tries to kill everyone.  Because why not?

First, standing out to me much more as an adult, is all the Tim Burton-ishness about it.  Which I don’t say as a bad thing.  He has a certain Gothic, horror, cartoon-ish style, which I may say, is slightly toned down in this film than a lot of others.  Visually, I think he was a good choice of director, I think the film has such a captivating stylized look that it holds my attention when the plot doesn’t.  I think what stood out to me the most was that Burton went a drearily dark, with an occasional splash of white that made the whole film almost seem like it was in black and white - which was purposefully contrasting to the colorfulness of The Joker.  I mean, Burton is purposely giving artistry to the cinematography in a way that I don’t necessarily see in superhero films anymore, and I think that’s kind of cool.  There are times when the film is, maybe, too (literally) dark - but I feel like had the technology been just a bit better, it would have helped.  

Burton also seems to be aware of the special effects limitations of the time, because at no point was I taken out by how cheesy the graphics looked (it helps that there weren’t very man), and some of the scarier images from when I was a kid, like when The Joker kills the guy by incinerating him, hold up pretty well.  Some of the fight scenes seem weaker and stiff, not helped by the fact that I don’t think Michael Keaton could move much in that suit, but the action isn’t overdone.  The action sequences aren’t what they are today, by any means, but I think they work fine given the era of the film - I don’t really judge them for that.  

So - Michael Keaton’s Batman.  Does he do a good job? I say mostly.  As Bruce Wayne, I completely buy him.  He’s a bit charming, a bit reserved, a bit mysterious, and a bit crazy - and when Keaton is actually allowed to do something with the character, he comes alive pretty well.  The unfortunate thing is that this film really isn’t about Batman - it’s about The Joker (which I’ll get to in a moment) and therefore we don’t get to see much of Bruce Wayne doing anything - except staring off into the distance thinking about things.  I get The Joker is iconic and everything, but Keaton has made Bruce Wayne interesting enough that I do wish there had been more - because his character doesn’t get to move much beyond ‘brooding about my parents; murder thirty years ago’.  

As for Batman himself, he’s… fine.  I don’t really have any complaints, but he feels incredibly limited - more so because of the suit, and the constricting ability to do much while wearing it than anything in Keaton’s performance.  It makes sense that Batman would be a near silent warrior, but not being able to see Keaton’s expressive face holds this version back a bit.  

Meanwhile… The Joker.  Before I rented the film again, I was looking through some old reviews - and many of them mentioned that this film seemed to be more about The Joker than Batman.  And I was a bit taken aback.  I hadn’t remembered it that way.  However, it wasn’t like I was paying that much attention as a kid.  But yes, it’s true, this film really is not Batman’s film.  It’s The Joker’s.  And I understand why - The Joker is possibly one of the most intriguing characters and villains in all of literature.  He’s a character who merges tragedy, comedy, and psychopathy all in one - and yes all three are in this film.  I’m sure there are hundreds of think-pieces on The Joker as a character - understandably so.  So, I guess I shouldn’t be surprised at how much of the film he takes up.  

I’m not invested enough to say who played The Joker the best, I hardly think comparisons are necessary (even if inevitable), but I really like Jack Nicholson in the role.  More so now than what I remembered.  Nicholson really embodies that whole crazed-lunatic pretty well, and I think he’s captivating enough that he does steal the show from Batman himself.  I feel like there are so many people who discuss The Joker, much better than I can, that I won’t elaborate much more.  But yes, Jack Nicholson’s Joker is pretty amazing, and I think it holds up relatively well.  

Rounding out the limited cast is Kim Basinger’s Vicki Vale.  And, well, she’s… there.  Despite being the literal stand-in for the audience during most of the craziness - an outsider coming into Gotham and being a conduit between Batman and The Joker.  She doesn’t get much to do and is the pretty standard obligatory love interest.  Keaton and Basinger don’t have that much chemistry - but I don’t blame them, they really only have one big scene to sell the romance, and for me, that’s just not enough.  You just really aren’t given any reason why these people would like each other more than they’re supposed to.  

Meanwhile - during the scene where The Joker is dancing around with Vicki - I kept think about that one test where if the woman is replaced with a lamp, would it change the scene?  And no - no it really wouldn’t.  I get the time period of the film, and how the ‘romance’ angle is kind of beat by beat what you would find in most films around this time, so I’m not judging too harshly.  But still, she’s almost third wheel to the more entertaining and layered dance Batman and The Joker are having throughout the film.  

Smaller Thoughts: 

Prince was the official artist of this films’ soundtrack - and I’m not entirely sure how I feel about it.  The film has such a 40s-esque feel about it that when something slams it into the modern 80s, it feels a little jarring.  At the same time, the dirtiness of 80s New York, and the cultural materialism is all over this film, so the Prince songs fit nicely in.  It’s a weird dichotomy.  

Music, in general, is also what sells this film - and keeps it at ‘Classic’ level.  Danny Elfman (Tim Burton’s go to director, and a personal favorite of mine) does amazing things with the score - and helps deliver the atmosphere Burton is going for.  

I have a soft spot for Alfred - even if he weirdly decides to bring Vicki to the Batcave unannounced.   She’ll disappear next film anyway - so ultimately it won’t matter. 

I kind of enjoy the fact that Jack Nicholson insisted the actor who played Bob be in the film - and that Bob is unceremoniously and somewhat randomly killed off.  

This film is very murdery - even Batman is murdery.  He tries to kill off The Joker whenever he gets the chance.  

Billy Dee Williams is here as Harvey Dent - so that’s a super interesting thread that was never pulled on again.  

Most of the government/police force was kind of meh - and I couldn’t even really tell who Commissioner Gordon was.  

I did really like the flashback to Bruce Wayne’s parents’ deaths.  That guy who they had play a young Jack Nicholson? Spot on.  

There’s a lot of mask symbolism throughout the film.  Again, I’m impressed by Burton as an artist - and as someone who’s willing to tell a more layered film within a superhero film.   

Things that scared me as a kid: The mimes, the parade floats, The Joker’s girlfriend wearing that mask, the two dead models, the dead mob guy being burnt to a crisp, The Joker’s grin, The Joker’s laugh, really every time Jack Nicholson was on screen, and that laugh box that kept going after The Joker had died.  This film really did use to scare me.  

Final Thoughts: This film was incredibly interesting and enjoyable to come back to as an adult.  I don’t think it’s entirely rewatchable - it’s plodding along at a snail’s pace during some sequences, and I don’t think the plot is that engaging.  But I do think there’s a lot of artistry here given to us by Burton, and worth coming back to every now and then to see a film that would inspire superhero films for decades to come.