Article: "DC Doesn't Understand Batman"

[The Laughing Fish]

DC Doesn't Understand Batman

August 04, 2014 / by Christian Holub / 0 Comment
Happy belated Batman Day! That's right, among the many idiosyncratic, uncelebrated semi-real holidays that dot America's hidden calendar, somewhere between Rat-catchers Day and National Tequila Day, there is apparently a day dedicated solely to celebrating the Dark Knight of Gotham City. Perhaps in recognition of this momentous annual occasion last week, Zack Snyder (director of the forthcoming, preposterously-named Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice) released another official photo of Ben Affleck in full Batman costume.

I must say, he looks rather haggard. That lines up nicely with what Snyder has already said about Affleck playing an "older Batman." An older, hardened Batman fighting Superman? Sure looks like Snyder's movie is going to be taking several cues from Frank Miller's seminal Dark Knight Returns comic, similar to how Christopher Nolan's Batman Begins adapted Miller's Batman: Year One.

At this rate, you'd think the only version of Batman that existed was the one drawn by Miller. Both Dark Knight Returns and Year One are amazing. Their gritty depictions of a hardened, soldier-like Batman fighting down-to-earth enemies helped erase memory of the campy 1960's TV show and re-energize the entire Batman concept. Anyone who loves Batman should be forever grateful to them for that. Of course,  they are far from the only Batman comics out there, though you wouldn't know it by listening to Hollywood.

As Vulture noted last week, Batman movies have always relied way too heavily on Miller's version of the character. Even Tim Burton's 1989 Batman movie was heavily influenced by the 1985 release of Dark Knight Returns, which is why Batman uncharacteristically kills people in Burton's version. With each Batman film ripping off Miller more shamelessly than the last, the casual audience member would perhaps be forgiven for forgetting the crazier sides of Batman: his colorful sidekicks, his insane enemies armed with freeze guns and mutant plants, his Batcave filled with T-Rexes and giant pennies. Batman has come to represent different things during different decades, and writer Grant Morrison's recent epic 10-year run of Batman comics drew a lot of storytelling fuel from the premise that all these different Batmans are in fact the same person (a person who, therefore, is batsh*t crazy). Those different versions of Batman have just as many interesting stories to tell as Miller's.  The movies make it seem like Batman is a one-dimensional character, when in fact he is the exact opposite, a hero with more twists and turns than anyone else in the DC Universe, maybe in all of comics. I'm not saying I want a movie adaptation of the comic where Batman briefly became a mermaid, but there are a wealth of stories out there that could make for great cinema without keeping Batman trapped in the "dark, gritty soldier" box.

Batman's not the only one suffering here. The biggest problem with Batman V Superman is that its name makes no sense (this is a superhero team-up movie, not a Supreme Court case), but the SECOND biggest problem is that it takes Miller's dark-and-gritty version of Batman and applies it to the entire DC Universe. Last weekend, at The Event Formerly Known as Comic-Con, Snyder followed up his Batfleck previews with a shot of Gal Gadot as Wonder Woman, eschewing her traditional red-white-and-blue getup for dark bronze armor. Yes! Because that's what everyone wants from a Wonder Woman movie! Grit and realism!

Ever since the beginning, DC has envied the Marvel superheroes for their realistic flaws and relatable personalities. Perhaps you can't blame their envy for taking over once again, as Marvel's cinematic empire continues to rake in billions and DC's non-Batman movies continue to flop harder than European soccer players (remember that Ryan Reynolds Green Lantern movie??). Unfortunately, DC seems woefully incognizant of the fact that their superheroes have their own strengths, and are at their best when capitalizing on these rather than pathetically imitating Marvel's down-to-earth style. To wit: DC's heroes are larger-than-life, mythic heroes – "supergods," as Grant Morrison called them. Spider-Man can make us laugh, but Batman and Superman can teach us things, no different from the world's other great legends. Nolan's films demonstrated that Batman, at least, could come to exist in a fairly realistic world, but even his Dark Knight Rises asks for several suspensions of belief. For these DC characters to really shine on the big screen, both their creators and audience will have to agree that nothing like this could ever happen in the quote unquote real world, and move on from there.

For the record, Miller himself agrees. He once said that superheroes "work best as the flamboyant fantasies they are. I don't need to see sweat patches under Superman's arms. I want to see him fly."

This is why DC superheroes have always translated so well to cartoons. When people ask who my favorite Batman is, I completely eschew Christian Bale and Val Kilmer and go straight for a perhaps unexpected answer: Kevin Conroy. Conroy voiced the animated Batman on an amazing sequence of cartoons from 1992-2006, starting with Batman: The Animated Series in 1992 and culminating gloriously 14 years later in Justice League Unlimited. This Batman manages to be dark, detective, and still cartoony, without ever facing the pressures of realism that go hand-in-hand with a live action depiction.

If DC really, truly wants to make a live-action Justice League movie, they would do well not to shamelessly ape the Avengers, a different team that works in a different world with different dynamics and (most importantly) represents different things. There are ways to make DC's stories emotionally believable and mythically relatable without forcing everyone to wear dark clothes and look mad all the time. The company should take the advice of one of their best creations and introduce a little chaos to their staid formula.

nationalave.com/2014/08/04/dc-doesnt-understand-batman/

Except for the idiotic garbage about Nolan putting Batman in a realistic world (and I think the author meant to say Nolan was influenced by Year One instead of adapting it), I'll admit that I do understand the complaints about Hollywood's obsession with Frank Miller's stories when it comes to adapting Batman on screen. Batman did have dark tales long before Miller wrote Year One and The Dark Knight Returns, but they do often get forgotten about. I guess one could argue that this obsession has prevented audiences from watching Batman demonstrating more detective skills and using his head to outsmart villains more often. That, and he works with other sidekicks, and he doesn't always brood. Only Schumacher attempted the latter, albeit arguably unsuccessfully.

The gist of this article has concerns about WB potentially trying to make all of their characters gritty for the sake of it. And while those concerns are legitimate for characters like Wonder Woman, I don't think anyone should jump the gun yet. So she might have dull-looking colours on her costume? Okay, but for all we know her personality could be bright and sunny compared to Batman. We don't know yet. Apart from being introduced to a Superman who was forced to come to terms to overcome his fear of persecution and save the planet from genocide, we don't really know what the other DC heroes will be like on screen. Only time will tell.

Off-topic: I don't get the passage of this article saying Burton's Batman killing villains was inspired by Dark Knight Returns. Apart from that one possible scene where Batman guns down a Mutant holding that toddler hostage, Batman didn't kill anyone in that book.

[Slash Man]

Batman was somewhat influenced by The Dark Knight Returns, but not to the point that the authors demonstrates. The biggest influence for that one was the original Bob Kane stories (hence why he was on hand during production). To further drive the point home, Michael Uslan was pitching the idea for the movie six years before The Dark Knight Returns came out. I somewhat agree with the article itself, but mistakes like claiming Batman was "a ripoff of The Dark Knight Returns" to any degree is off-putting. It was only after The Dark Knight Returns came out that Uslan's idea became marketable.

Overall, the trend is that Marvel tries to remain faithful to the comics and enjoys success, while DC constantly views them as needing to be more "grounded" and has a much more mixed record. Though I don't understand his beef with The Dark Knight Returns. Now that I think about it, no film really "ripped it of," although The Dark Knight Rises was the only movie that adapted some of its plot points. TDKR represented a tone that resonated with Batman fans, so filmmakers are looking to replicate that. It is no way "realistic" compared to any other Batman comic before it. So seeing a Batman movie inspired directly from it without the gritty compromises of the Nolan films is good news. As for the handling of Wonder Woman and Superman... that's out of my area of expertise.

[The Laughing Fish]

What parts of TDKR influence B89? The only examples I could think of are a reference to Corto Maltese, a couple of Action News TV scenes, Joker poisoning many people to death, a shot of Martha Wayne's pearls falling on the ground once she dies and perhaps Batman being ruthless when it's called for. 

I don't necessarily believe that the author has a problem with TDKR or Frank Miller for that matter. I think he's fed up with Hollywood directors always using his stories as an influence when they adapt Batman on the big screen. But I do agree that he has a lot of misinformation going on in this article. I don't like how his criticism against Batman v Superman is based on assumption either. For better or worse, it's made clear by now that there will be a conflict between the two heroes at some point in the film.

[Catwoman]

I like the part where it talks about Gal Gadot's Wonder Woman costume and the biting sarcasm of this line: "Because that's what everyone wants from a Wonder Woman movie! Grit and realism!"

So true for all of DC's movies. Part of my interest in superheroes is escaping the grim reality of our world. It's supposed to be a diversion. I don't mind the darkness so much as long as it doesn't go so dark that it hits an even bleaker note than the world around us. Make sense?

My problem is realism. This "gritty reality" stuff that is going around is sapping the fun out of it. Superheroes are about fantasy and imagination and color and the good guys kicking the bad guys' butts after they get a few kicks first. The movies are stripping all of that away, and there is no worse time for that than now with all the bad going on in the world. We need a diversion, not a portrait of this world with Halloween costumes.

I'm not saying everything should be Batman and Robin-y. A darker tone and a little less color is fine. But it needs to stir our imaginations and be fantastical. It's like the story says, we need freeze guns and mutant plants.

[Catwoman]

Damn. Kitty is feeling profound.

[Slash Man]

What parts of TDKR influence B89? The only examples I could think of are a reference to Corto Maltese, a couple of Action News TV scenes, Joker poisoning many people to death, a shot of Martha Wayne's pearls falling on the ground once she dies and perhaps Batman being ruthless when it's called for. 

Well, the Joker's poisoning and Batman's ruthlessness can be called more coincidental. The others seem to be added later to the script to add some kind of connection between the landmark comic and the film. If a Batman movie is "dark" it has to be a Frank Miller ripoff.

Being inspired by one adaption of a popular story over others is hardly new. Dracula, Frankenstein, and Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde were all based on the stage adaptions rather than the original novels. Miller's interpretation of the tale remains one of the most preferred visions of Batman in this day and age; if the story gets worn out, they'll stop using that as influence. Don't get me wrong, I'd be mad if in the future DC Batman series they adapt TDKR again, but using that story to jumpstart this new Batman is fine.

[riddler]

So true for all of DC's movies. Part of my interest in superheroes is escaping the grim reality of our world. It's supposed to be a diversion. I don't mind the darkness so much as long as it doesn't go so dark that it hits an even bleaker note than the world around us. Make sense?

My problem is realism. This "gritty reality" stuff that is going around is sapping the fun out of it. Superheroes are about fantasy and imagination and color and the good guys kicking the bad guys' butts after they get a few kicks first. The movies are stripping all of that away, and there is no worse time for that than now with all the bad going on in the world. We need a diversion, not a portrait of this world with Halloween costumes.

I'm not saying everything should be Batman and Robin-y. A darker tone and a little less color is fine. But it needs to stir our imaginations and be fantastical. It's like the story says, we need freeze guns and mutant plants.

I think you're preaching to the choir here. As dark as Burtons films were, they still got a happy ending with Batman Triumphing in the end. The only film which got a happy ending was Begins.

Other than the Waynes murder, there weren't a lot of tragic events  or good guys dying.

The Dark Knight rachel dies and Harvey turns bad and dies (as do millions of gothamites which Batman failed to save including Commissioner Loeb).

The Dark Knight Rises again has a lot of collateral damage and Batman himself dies.

[Catwoman]

I think you're preaching to the choir here.

I know. I just wanted to show yall I do have a brain lol.

[The Laughing Fish]

Technically I'd say that both endings of Burton's films were bittersweet, especially Returns. Batman may have saved the day in the second film, but he lost his chance to be with Catwoman in the process. You could argue that Selina Kyle was a much better fit for Bruce than Vicki Vale was because they were both damaged psyches. It makes Batman finding himself alone once again even more tragic.

The ending to TDK was thanks to Batman's utter stupidity. His stubborn refusal to use lethal force against the Joker got people killed, despite the fact the series shows him using lethal force against almost all of the major villains when the situation got dire. Dumb. And then the whole Dent cover-up not only contradicts his belief that people are capable of doing the right thing, but he risks the city tearing itself apart by lying about the whole thing. Which leads to TDKR...need I say more?

So true for all of DC's movies. Part of my interest in superheroes is escaping the grim reality of our world. It's supposed to be a diversion. I don't mind the darkness so much as long as it doesn't go so dark that it hits an even bleaker note than the world around us. Make sense?

My problem is realism. This "gritty reality" stuff that is going around is sapping the fun out of it. Superheroes are about fantasy and imagination and color and the good guys kicking the bad guys' butts after they get a few kicks first. The movies are stripping all of that away, and there is no worse time for that than now with all the bad going on in the world. We need a diversion, not a portrait of this world with Halloween costumes.

I'm not saying everything should be Batman and Robin-y. A darker tone and a little less color is fine. But it needs to stir our imaginations and be fantastical. It's like the story says, we need freeze guns and mutant plants.

Top post. Especially if the movie tries so hard to be realistic that it ends up being even more ludicrous than something like Guardians of the Galaxy.

[Grissom]

If you have a good subject material or some very good conflict in the source material,  by all means I think it can  be utilized. Batman is of course from the comic book and I also think that the filmmakers need story lines that are interesting and can work on the big screen.  There are many Batman stories told in the comics that may not translate well on the big screen.