Posted by fústar in 
Was in HMV the other day and noticed that Batman: The Movie (a full-length theatrical spin-off of the '60s series) has undergone something of a transformation.
First, we had the jolly VHS version. All colourful & kitsch family fun.
Then came the DVD. Still vibrant and cartoony, but with just a hint of tough guy cool.
Now check out 2008's Blu-ray "Special Edition"…
Holy revisionist Bat-Repackaging, Batman! Adam West's Caped (and camp) Crusader has been forced aboard the (yawn!) Miller/Nolan gravy train and reimagined as a gritty, po-faced Dark Knight.
Out with the Gee Whizz-ing of Burt Ward's Robin. In with the billowing cloaks and sombre (urban gothic) palette. Expect plenty of confused parents and disappointed ("What the hell's this goofy shit?") young fellas this Christmas.
Ah,yes…this one has been a favourite in our house for some time.I’m particularly fond of the scene where one of Peguin’s pirate goons greets the (undercover)Catwoman with an “Ahoy Catwoman” delivered in (to my ear anyway) a pure Limerick scobe accent.
This film is class from start to finish.Rubber sharks ( and shark repelling batspray)to Cesar Romero’s painted over ‘tache)
Somedays you just can’t get rid of a bomb.
Why would anyone sit through a film as humourless, nonsensical, and unpleasant as The Dark Shite (I bet nobody’s ever made that joke before!) when they can watch this instead? The VHS version definitely captures the true spirit. Ker-plow!
Marketing it as of interest to fans of the Nolan Batman is a bit rich!
Besides, give me Adam West over Bale any day. Haven’t seen Dark Knight (and don’t plan to) but couldn’t stand the first film. Overblown, pretentious, pseudo-serious, joyless and everything else that made 90s comics (those that came in the wake of Miller) so bloody awful.
Oh and everyone looked (Bugsy Malone style) like they were about 12.
P.S: Agree wholeheartedly with Doubtful Egg. Missed his comment as I was writing mine (above) at the same time.
Yes, Dark Knight is exactly as you described the first film, but it’s also as totally preposterous and detached from reality as shark-repellent batspray. At least the sixties series is fun to watch; Dark Knight is as entertaining as herpes.
The first film was clearly designed to appeal to pseuds who think comics are childish nonsense. In that, I suppose, it was quite successful.
The same was pretty much true of the abysmal Superman Returns – a wretched turkey that some broadsheet critics were bizarrely fond of. At least Sam Raimi (for Spidey 1 & 2, if not 3) captured the joy and verve of Marvel without feeling the need to pander or apologise.
Over here, the newly darkified Adam West with his photoshopped pecs and abs is relegated to the back cover of the new DVD. The front cover looks more like they’re trying to tie it to the first Tim Burton film, which misses the point in a different way.
It’s always amusing when contemporary comics fans moan about Adam West not being true to the dark, brooding nature of Batman. In fact, the West show and film are pretty darn accurate reflections of the comics as they were at the time, but with more absurdity. They’re actually much more faithful than what’s coming out now.
On the subject of bat-absurdity, check out this
Jason, RE: The American cover – it’s even more misleading if anything. Cool/clean lines, a black (as opposed to psychedelic) background and a vanished Adam West. About as distanced from the actual content as it’s possible to get.
Completely agree with your 2nd point. Doubtful Egg’s link proves that Bats was pretty…bats (and fun) well before the TV series aired.
People who tell you their favourite comic book is Batman because it’s “dark”, aren’t much of a cut above those who claim to love (*shudder*) Oasis because they’re “raw”.
Yeah, as Bat-Baby amply demonstrates, the comics were actually even more insane before Adam West came along. There was a relatively brief bout of blandness when Julie Schwarz came along and jettisoned Bat-Mite, Ace the Bat-Hound, space/time travel, sensory deprivation hallucinations, and Batman transforming into babies and apes every other month. Thankfully the crazy came back with the TV series. I’m working my way through a collection of comics from that period right now, and I have to say that some of it’s completely bonkers.
There’s also a new book out called Bat-Manga containing English translations of Japanese Batman comics from the 60s, in which he fights aliens, robots, and dinosaurs. I highly recommend it.
What the hell is Bat-Mite? Some kind of crime-busting flea in a tiny bat costume, leaving blotchy red bites on evildoers everywhere? Do I want to know?
Yes, if there’s one thing the current crop of drearily over-serious Batman films sorely lack, it’s a hefty dose of “the crazy”. (In this regard, I think Batman and Robin was a step in the right direction – it certainly can’t be accused of taking itself seriously – although it was still pretty dreadful in every other way.)
Snipping that fragment out is unfair to you I know, but I bet nobody’s ever written those exact words before!
I actually saw Batman Forever & Waterworld one after the other in the cinema back in ‘95. The experience almost left me a broken man…
I still find it hard to go into large dark rooms.
Thanks for the Bat-Manga link, Jason. One quick glance and I love it already.
Batman and Robin is, by any standard, a steaming pile of offal, and pretty unbearable to watch, but whenever I’m confronted by a Dark Knight/ brooding Batman fan who says silly things about Manichaeism, I do like to defend it just to see the look on their faces. It’s like Kryptonite to them…
I still feel that Schumacher was trying to recapture the feeling of the sixties show rather the Tim Burton gothic vibe, but he failed miserably, and there’s few things more intolerable than self-conscious kitsch.
Waterworld and Batman Forever in one sitting? Dear God!
Stubbornly defending something unworthy is always fun.
I used to enjoy sticking up for The Phantom Menace (no, seriously) on the basis that while it was undoubtedly pretty awful, it was awful in original and interesting ways.
Most terrible films these days are by-the-numbers, formulaic efforts that merely want to give an audience what it’s perceived to want.
The Phantom Menace, on the other hand, seems almost wilfully perverse. From depictions of the intricacies of trade federations and a galactic senate, to cod philosophy, to Jar Jar Fucking Binks, the whole thing feels like it’s intentionally antagonising, boring and irritating its audience!
Well said. I always felt that The Phantom Menace was a gigantic joke on the part of George Lucas, along the lines of: “How bad do I have to make this film before Star Wars fans will stop defending it?” It’s like an anti-film: it takes everything that makes traditional action/sci-fi films work (a tight, linear plot, likeable characters, a clearly defined villain, quest, and threat) and does the exact opposite.
I leave the explaining to Robin. There’s no way I could say it any better.
I think I prefer your interpretation.
You really nailed the main failing of Batman & Robin. Intentional camp is a really difficult thing to do, and it usually fails miserably. In fact, the 60s Batman show and film are rare examples of it actually working, and I think the main reason they work is because of Adam West’s commendably straight-faced performance, which offsets the absurdity all around him beautifully. If West were encouraged to ham it up like the guest villains, the whole enterprise would probably have been a bit too too arch to actually amuse.
Schumacher obviously didn’t get that, what with Clooney breaking the fourth wall to pitch the Bat credit card. There’s also some confusing of ’silly comic book plot’ with ‘brazenly idiotic plot’ going on, too. Basically, it’s an almost-unwatchable mess, but it’s the kind of mess that’s perversely fascinating, because you can’t believe that it got made and distributed as is. You just don’t see a lot of bad movies like that nowadays.
Absolutely. See the tedious & unfunny Mars Attacks for details.
This is true of “spoofs” in general I suppose. Airplane both initiated the contemporary spoof wave and set the bar pretty damn high.
Very few attempts have been as successful (or anywhere near as hilarious). I still can’t watch Airport ‘77 (for example) without pissing myself. If that’s not the sign of a nailed-on spoof I don’t know what is.
Po-faced Bat-fan pseuds would have you believe that West was simply acting as well as he knew how and that any hilarity caused by his straight-facedness was unintentional.
This, of course, is complete bollocks and part & parcel of a view that sees “old stuff” as inherently charming & naive (those qualities being its only values).
Neal Hefti, who’s probably best known for his 60s “Batman” theme {da na, Na na, NA na, Na na…}, died last month.
I’d trade every Batman film, including Heath Ledger’s fine turn as the Joker in an otherwise balls fillum, for a mere ten seconds of this on the silver screen.