Ridley:Fantasy as Shumacher:Batman (Destiny)

by Harmanimus , Thursday, December 14, 2017, 11:35 (2615 days ago) @ Robot Chickens

This needs a stronger defense. I'm flabbergasted.

So, preface: Batman Hush is the best Batman comic. Most people don’t understand (or remember the important parts of) The Killing Joke. LEGO Batman is the most important Batman movie of all of them.

Now that I hbe that out of the way, here is a more elaborate explanation as to why Batman Forever is the best Live Action Batman film. Starting with notable pitfalls of Burton and Nolan Batman outings. Batman spoilers ahead?

Obviously for being childrens stories about a man with childhood PTSD growing up to dress up as a bat and pummel criminals and the criminally insane you have some very strange balancing acts to account for. In the same way that many people do not understand Superman as a character (Tarantino understands the character about as well as modern DC does, though Snyder actually gets pretty close) who Batman is gets frequently confused. A big part of that is Robin, and in a larger respect, the whole Batfamily. In many ways Burton gets the Cowl right (while wrong in others) in the same way that Nolan gets Bruce Wayne right (Christian Bale is always a convincing rich [explitive]) but wrong in others. Neither of them have the Batfamily, for one. Keatonbat over-emphasizes the crazy man who beats up criminals, and Nolan basically forgets that Batman is powerful because he is observant. Batman is powerful because he is prepared. Because he has done his research. He wins in a fight against Clark because he has already done the leg work a hundred times over. There is a reason he has a counter to every member of the JL going rogue except Diana. Because really unless you go Golden Age at which case her weakness is light bondage.

Now, the best parts of Batman stories aren’t him or the Batfamily. It is the Rogues Gallery. Now, while I would love to see Arkham Asylum: A serious House on a Serious Earth translated to film, I don’t think we’ll ever get that. So we have to consider the incarnations we do get on screen. Jack Nicholson dressed as a Gamgster Clown does not The Joker make. And I adore Ledger’s performance, but that is not The Joker, more of an Elseworlds incarnation. Great, but tangential. Catwoman is handled better by Nolan, so he gets points there, and Scarecrow is pretty much great theough the whole of TDK trilogy. However, Ra’s and the League of Shadows is wasted in a mundane setting. The Lazarus Pit prison is interesting, but feels like a cop out. Bane in TDKR is so high above his treatment in B&R, but making him a puppet is about as good for the character as Iron Man 3’s Mandarin hook. I might even say worse.

Now, The common “Batman doesn’t kill” thing comes up. Even though he does so in many incarnations, usually out of necessity. In this regard I am only going to touch on Batman Forever. So, back to the Batfamily and Rogues Gallery. Other than some costume choices, both Tommy Lee Jones and Jim Carrey actually find the characters they are playing. A perpetually conflicted fallen knight who resorts to chance to settle his internal conflicts between his inclinations. This is a factor used in the climax the allow Batman to save Robin from his own “one bad day.” He planned ahead for it, and called it out to ensure it would happen because of his knowledge of Dent. And The Riddler? He needs to be better than Batman, but moreover he needs Batman to know he is better. That is his central character thread which is explored in various ways through various media. But Jim Carrey captures. Bottles it and sells it.

This is not as well organized as I probably would like it to be. But here is the tl;dr - Batman Forever has the most “Batman” to it, while the other incarnations feel like alternate universes at best and often fail to capture essential aspects of the characters for the sake of presenting something different instead of as an exploration thereof. /babbling

Agreed, although LotR was a great treatment of the genre when it first hit the screens- regardless of how you feel of his editorial decisions.

I greatly appreciate what PJ did for LotR. I acknowledge the books influence, but think they are overrated tremendously compared to their quality as literature. The Hobbit is the only thing Tolkien wrote that has value as prose.

I'm now interested in the Dark Crystal. I admit that my exposure to 80's fantasy may be limited. I've only seen Ladyhawke, Willow, The Neverending Story, Legend, and a bunch of cable tv reruns in the 90's I can't remember. I can pass on all of the above. Princess Bride was super light and I'm not sure it fits the genre but I did enjoy it.

The Dark Crystal is unique in many ways, and there is a Netflix prequel in the works. It is definitely worth seeing, if for no other reason than seeing one of the greatest works of Jim Henson and Frank Oz. Princess Bride is light but includes monsters (shreiking eels, ROUS) magic/technology (Miracle Max, The Machine in the Pit of Despair) and Fantasy locations (The Cliffs of Insanity, Fire Swamp) which is why i call it Light Fantasy. All of the fantasy stuff it simple excuses to move the story forward.

Fair, although I'm not sure Tom Cruise's heart was in Legend judging by the acting.

I would blame that more on a combination of youth and that he was playing a forest hermit. I find the performance fitting, and for what it is I don’t think it is any worse than any of his performances contemporary to it. Admittedly I have seen those less recently.

Link wasn't wearing armor. I don't critique TC's opening outfit because it isn't supposed to be armor. Once he dons the mini-dress of protection though...

Circa A Link to the Past the Blue and Red tunics function explicitly as armor and do not grant Link pants.