Batman: Return of the Caped Crusaders (2016)

[Slash Man]

I'm glad that DC decided to revive the 60s Batman brand. The series stagnated in the decades following, but the renewed popularity in light of the home video release has been astounding. The comic continued the stories, and now this series is the closest we can get to continuing where Adam West and Burt Ward left off. Very happy to see this.

I like the animation style chosen. It's stylized, but you can still make out the distinguishable characteristics of West and Ward. It's almost weird to see them in action without limitations. I was half expecting the Dick Sprang-style that we saw in the show's opening.

Which while authentic in its own right, does not resemble the actors. West and Ward more closely resembled the art of Carmine Infantino, which may or may not have been intentional. Which could have been another route for the art direction. Either way, I think they found a good solution.

[phantom stranger]

I saw this yesterday. Here's a brief review:

Pros:

-- There is one line that I never thought I'd hear Adam West say. It's great! You'll know it when you hear it.

-- The plot was much better than I expected. Kind of made me wish it was done in the original show, although there's no way they had the budget to properly do many of the action scenes.

-- Animation looked amazing. And the voicework was stellar. The Romero/Gorshin impersonators in particular did a great job.

-- It captures the general look and feel of the TV show. Everything from the original show is here, albeit with a few modifications (Dinosaur in the Batcave, etc.).


(Minor) Cons:

-- I don't think they had a narrator, which was surprising since Dozier's voice was such a large part of the show.

-- I would've liked to hear more of the music from the original show. Before BTAS, this was the show that gave every Batman villain their own leitmotif. I'm not sure if there were legal problems, but for the most part I heard music similar to the '66 show, but not the actual musical themes.

-- No Batgirl.


Ultimately, I loved it and can't wait for the sequel (with William Shatner as Two-Face).

[johnnygobbs]

I saw a headline that described it as the 'default best Batman film of the year'.

Anyway, I can't wait to see it, or the sequel with William Shatner as Two-Face.

[The Dark Knight]

I saw this yesterday. Here's a brief review:

It's been a while, but here's my thoughts.

I liked it. It's not amazing, but it's worthwhile.

The voice acting is fine. Adam West is 88 years old, and he sounds like an 88 year old. That's not a complaint, but a fact. I don't understand how some fans constantly whine about it though. It's called ageing. Nobody can stop it and that's how the man sounds now. It was good to have him back in the role.

The animation was pretty good. Not the best, but not terrible either.

The story is good. I think the 'Batman gone bad' angle is the real strength of the film. The TV show presents a man with a heart of gold. Batman deviates from that after being posioned by Catwoman. It opens up some rather interesting things to think about.

Is West's Batman restraining his inner desires a lot of the time?

After his poisoning, he beats up Joker, Riddler and Penguin with added force. He berates O'Hara and Gordon for being ineffective. He puts a nosy Aunt Harriet in her place, and even fires Alfred because of it.

The poisoned Batman states he likes grabbing attention and has an ego - which could be an in-universe explanation for the blue and grey costume he wears, which isn't really threatening to criminals as a symbol.

So I think all that is legitimate. But the antidote AMPLIFIES those inner desires to the point he loses himself. Case in point using a replication ray to create clones of himself to do all the jobs in Gotham, because he thinks everyone else is incompetent. He puts Robin and Catwoman into a death trap. He starts laughing like the Joker.

The serum pushed seemingly hidden urges into another category. He became a villain. Without drugs, West's Batman wouldn't ever become this. I can imagine West's Batman has an ego, but he also truly believes in cooperation, rehabilitation and doing good. That part isn't an act.

So I appreciated this plotline. It shows Adam West's Batman is a very disciplined man. He's different from Keaton and Affleck given his bright knight reputation, and because of this, any hint of brutality is even more apparent. But it's still under the surface. He's not without these urges.

It's also a great plotline because at the heart, this is somewhat of a love story. Catwoman knows Batman and her are not going to be an item as long as she's a criminal. So she makes Batman a criminal. But he goes too far. Thus she agrees to help Robin turn him back to his old self. So I liked that side of things as well.

All in all, they did a good job.

[Silver Nemesis]

As someone who hasn't cared much for the most recent DC animated movies, I found I enjoyed this one more than I was expecting. West and Newmar's advanced years are detectable in their voices, as was the case with James Earl Jones in Rogue One. But in all three instances, I'd rather have the original actors play the roles while they're still able than have imitators impersonate them. Burt Ward, on the other hand, sounds almost exactly like he did when he was younger. I'd say Robin was the highlight of the film for me and delivered most of its funniest moments. I thought the animation was pleasantly vibrant, and the quality was an improvement over last year's The Killing Joke.

We're used to seeing references to the sixties Batman in later films, but here it was amusing to see the sixties Batman reference his successors: West saying "You wanna get nuts? Let's get nut"; Robin saying that they could "lose Batman forever"; a little dig at The Dark Knight Rises where Catwoman suggests she and Batman could retire to France, and Robin remarking "Holy unsatisfying ending!" These were all nice touches. There were also some fun nods to the comics, such as the penguin-shaped blimp.

On the downside, I do wish Gordon had more closely resembled the Neil Hamilton version. And some of the humour was a bit out of place with the established tone of the series. Most notably the Joker breaking wind at Batman and Robin, and the subplot about Aunt Harriet suspecting a gay relationship between Bruce and Dick. A big part of Aunt Harriet's character in the original show was her innocence and naiveté regarding Batman and Robin's double life, so that aspect felt a little off to me. Some other hallmarks of the series were regrettably absent, such as the iconic music, the spinning bat-logo transitions between scenes and Joker's moustache. But these are minor quibbles when measured against the film's strengths.

Overall I thought it was a satisfying tribute to the sixties Batman and the best animated DC movie since The Dark Knight Returns. Now I'm looking forward to seeing West's Batman take on Shatner in the sequel.

[The Dark Knight]

On the downside, I do wish Gordon had more closely resembled the Neil Hamilton version.

Agree.

And some of the humour was a bit out of place with the established tone of the series. Most notably the Joker breaking wind at Batman and Robin, and the subplot about Aunt Harriet suspecting a gay relationship between Bruce and Dick. A big part of Aunt Harriet's character in the original show was her innocence and naiveté regarding Batman and Robin's double life, so that aspect felt a little off to me.

Again, I agree. The Joker's flatulence didn't work for me at all. It's just something that didn't fit in, and I couldn't see Romero's Joker doing it. If he used a whoopee cushion gadget to make the sound, then sure. But he didn't.

The aunt Harriet content was one of the film's major downsides for me too. They were just a little too clever for their own good in the execution. As you say, Harriet did not suspect anything other than perhaps the two of them should relax more and chill out. Harriet was not suspicious or 'going along with their secret'. The animated movie introduced an element which simply would not have featured on the TV show. Period.

I also hope to see more daytime action in the sequel. B66 wasn't always sunshine and rainbows, but they had a little too much night time content in the animated movie for my liking. The humor of the show remained in full force, but I suspect they introduced a darker palette to even things out. I could be wrong, but I don't think I am.

But yes, the film does more right than wrong.

[Silver Nemesis]

I also hope to see more daytime action in the sequel. B66 wasn't always sunshine and rainbows, but they had a little too much night time content in the animated movie for my liking. The humor of the show remained in full force, but I suspect they introduced a darker palette to even things out. I could be wrong, but I don't think I am.

I hadn't given this much thought until you mentioned it, but it does seem as if they were trying to mix the aesthetics of the sixties TV show with the darker look of a more conventional Batman film. Perhaps they thought this would expand its appeal amongst viewers who aren't keen on the sixties TV show. If that's the case, it's a bit pointless. People who hate the sixties Batman aren't going to buy the DVD in the first place, so there's no use pandering to them. Hopefully Gotham will look a little sunnier in the next film.

[The Dark Knight]

Agreed. They also frequently used the raised cape pose too.

The TV show did as well, but not that often.

I was okay the Bat Rocket. Would it have appeared in the show? Probably not. But I think it fits the spirit of 'Batman has a vehicle and gadget for every occasion'. However it gives away their base of operations upon liftoff, which I don't like.

The security measures inside the batmobile tunnel were okay too, I guess. Again, it wouldn't have happened on the show for obvious budgetary reasons. And I honestly don't think the tunnel is that long. But...here's the thing. If you are doing a comic or animated movie, I think you take advantage of those mediums. So I'll let it slide.

[OutRiddled]

I did not like this one, as a huge fan of the 60s show, this was more like Batman:  The Brave and the Bold.  It works in live action, but as a cartoon it's just a cartoon.  Part of the fun is watching the actors, and this is taken away in animation.  And it's just not the same without Cesar Romero, Burgess Meredith, etc, and the surviving actors sound way too old.  It also doesn't have the spirit of the 1960s like the tv show did.

[thecolorsblend]

As someone who hasn't cared much for the most recent DC animated movies, I found I enjoyed this one more than I was expecting. West and Newmar's advanced years are detectable in their voices, as was the case with James Earl Jones in Rogue One. But in all three instances, I'd rather have the original actors play the roles while they're still able than have imitators impersonate them. Burt Ward, on the other hand, sounds almost exactly like he did when he was younger. I'd say Robin was the highlight of the film for me and delivered most of its funniest moments. I thought the animation was pleasantly vibrant, and the quality was an improvement over last year's The Killing Joke.

We're used to seeing references to the sixties Batman in later films, but here it was amusing to see the sixties Batman reference his successors: West saying "You wanna get nuts? Let's get nut"; Robin saying that they could "lose Batman forever"; a little dig at The Dark Knight Rises where Catwoman suggests she and Batman could retire to France, and Robin remarking "Holy unsatisfying ending!" These were all nice touches. There were also some fun nods to the comics, such as the penguin-shaped blimp.

On the downside, I do wish Gordon had more closely resembled the Neil Hamilton version. And some of the humour was a bit out of place with the established tone of the series. Most notably the Joker breaking wind at Batman and Robin, and the subplot about Aunt Harriet suspecting a gay relationship between Bruce and Dick. A big part of Aunt Harriet's character in the original show was her innocence and naiveté regarding Batman and Robin's double life, so that aspect felt a little off to me. Some other hallmarks of the series were regrettably absent, such as the iconic music, the spinning bat-logo transitions between scenes and Joker's moustache. But these are minor quibbles when measured against the film's strengths.

Overall I thought it was a satisfying tribute to the sixties Batman and the best animated DC movie since The Dark Knight Returns. Now I'm looking forward to seeing West's Batman take on Shatner in the sequel.

I finally saw the movie yesterday and echo the above. This was a fun romp and I seriously enjoyed how it showcased a lot of what made the TV show so much fun.

One thing the movie did, though, was prove just how important (and amazing) the music from the 60's show was. Because the music from ROTCC was a bit meh. It's similar in style, I guess. But the music from the show was so expressive and powerful whereas the music in the animated movie was a bit more paint by numbers. It's not bad; it's just not on the same level as the show.

The movie had a lot of constraints working against it. The plot had to be heavily centered on Catwoman because she's the only surviving big name villain from the show. It's obvious that all these decades have passed by but, as you say, it's more important that the original talent did as much as they could, their advancing years notwithstanding.

All in all, this seems like it was a fitting tribute to the show, made even more poignant by West's passing. What a way to say goodbye to his iteration of the character. I recognize that future animated Batman movies may be created and they may even be great. But there will always be a huge element missing without West. It's sad, yes, but I am grateful that we at least got this (and that Two Face thing) before he passed away.

The movie isn't perfect (the self-aware thing with Aunt Harriet is just inappropriate, IMHO) but it's really good and I highly recommend it.