Is Batman Returns still the darkest movie of the entire franchise?

[Dagenspear]

There was a video by some YouTuber called Jeremy Jahns who did a review looking on BR, and he made this strange claim that Catwoman's behaviour was promiscuous, for a lack of a better word. I don't think he was paying much attention if he truly believed that.

Catwoman was a rebellious vigilante who used sexuality as a weapon, taunting men for being impotent e.g. the mall cops at the Shreck convenience store, and seducing Batman to exploit the chinks in his armour and stab him. I guess one can claim that Catwoman's outfit and violence is a disturbing metaphor for bondage, but it's beyond me how Jahns could think she was a promiscuous.

Sounds like some millenial nolanite with a single functioning brain cell who's incapable of scratching (no pun intended) anything beyond it's very surface, let alone looking deeply enough to grasp anything as deep as Michelle's Catwoman. What a simple minded juvenile observation. He needs to be fed a laughing fish.

Calling someone simple minded and juvenile over this doesn't make sense to me. Why is that necessary? It's not a real person he's talking about. Her being promiscuous either way doesn't negate the depth of the character at all. That's not thinking through the situation. I don't know why the character being called that is a bad thing character wise. Have a very great day!

God bless you all!

[The Laughing Fish]

Sounds like some millenial nolanite with a single functioning brain cell who's incapable of scratching (no pun intended) anything beyond it's very surface, let alone looking deeply enough to grasp anything as deep as Michelle's Catwoman. What a simple minded juvenile observation. He needs to be fed a laughing fish.

From what I've heard about Jeremy Jahns, he does appear to be a Nolan fan, so your suspicion is spot on.

I'm not a fan of any of these YouTube critics. They tend to be very young "millenials" (I hate using that term), usually review only popcorn blockbusters, and they're quite shallow when it comes analysis. That includes the geek channels like Collider and Screen Junkies. I'd love to see how these people get by once Hollywood stops making comic book films.

After her transformation, Michellewoman didn't suppress herself in any way. But Michellewoman's focus was on Max. She wanted to destroy his company and finally kill him. Batman represented an obstacle against her crusade, so she needed him out of the way too. When she discovered Batman was Bruce Wayne her opposition to him was confused. But ultimately that didn't matter as much. She chose her hatred of Max over her love of Bruce. That's why she suited up in the first place.

It's certainly an even darker contrast to B89. Revenge was a theme in the first film too, but not quite as intimate compared to in Returns. Once Batman avenges his parents, he continues on his crusade, but he still seems empty and unfulfilled. Not even with Vicki by his side, and she eventually leaves him.
In Returns, he meets Selina who he shares a lot more in common in terms of duality, loneliness, quirkiness, and revenge. And ironically, revenge gets in the way of their romance. Hence, the bittersweet ending.

[thecolorsblend]

It's certainly an even darker contrast to B89. Revenge was a theme in the first film too, but not quite as intimate compared to in Returns. Once Batman avenges his parents, he continues on his crusade, but he still seems empty and unfulfilled.

Heh, well revenge is the stock motivation for a lot of comic book movies. But you are right, it does permeate a lot of BR.

But then, the movie does suggest that it's possible for revenge to be subsumed.

Catwoman was able to do it during the Penguin's press conference. She wasn't there for Max at that moment; she was there for the Penguin. But she backed off because... Batman wrecks the Penguin's s**t. After that, it's almost like she never gives the Penguin another thought. She goes back to wanting revenge on Max.

The Penguin is able to subsume his own desire for revenge, though it was temporary. When it looked like he'd become the mayor, he wasn't as bloodthirsty as he had been. But Batman gets revenge on the Penguin so the Penguin in turn goes back to wanting revenge against... well, the whole world, I guess.

Assuming there even is a moral to any of it, I guess it's that revenge never truly satisfies and is never truly satisfied. The anger that feeds revenge is the real drug and Batman, Catwoman and the Penguin are most definitely addicts.

[JokerMeThis]

I think Batman Returns is the darkest Batman movie I've ever seen. Also the darkest family movie I've ever seen.

[The Dark Knight]

Assuming there even is a moral to any of it, I guess it's that revenge never truly satisfies and is never truly satisfied. The anger that feeds revenge is the real drug and Batman, Catwoman and the Penguin are most definitely addicts.

Revenge is a natural reaction, consequence and conclusion for bad deeds. If you do the wrong thing, as James Brown sang, "get ready you mother, for the big payback". If someone keeps goading, they gotta be stomped. The moralists can say whatever they want, but revenge satisfies the soul. An evildoer walking away scot-free is what frustrates the soul.



Taking care of business doesn't make you the bad guy. People bring it on themselves, and then they're suddenly sorry.

[riddler]

Bruce spent decade with revenge on the mind and got it in the first film. I doubt he's seeking more in this film. Note that even when Catwoman and Penguin frame him, he remains resolved and doesn't show uncontrollable anger.

The first film showcases his anger where he seeks revenge; That may be why he confronts the Joker as Bruce instead of Batman in the 'lets get nuts' scene and why he reveals his identity in the cathedral. He doesn't just want to beat the Joker, he wants the Joker to know who is beating him.

[The Dark Knight]

Bruce spent decade with revenge on the mind and got it in the first film. I doubt he's seeking more in this film. Note that even when Catwoman and Penguin frame him, he remains resolved and doesn't show uncontrollable anger.

The first film showcases his anger where he seeks revenge; That may be why he confronts the Joker as Bruce instead of Batman in the 'lets get nuts' scene and why he reveals his identity in the cathedral. He doesn't just want to beat the Joker, he wants the Joker to know who is beating him.

I think you're right. In B89 it's deeply personal because he unintentionally found the man who killed his parents. It doesn't get any bigger than that. What I love about the cathedral sequence is how Burton had Joker play the scene. Does he really know who Bruce is? Does he remember killing the Waynes? Or does he just go along with it because Batman is fired up? I don't think we really know the definite answer to this. But either way, Bruce gets his revenge.

Batman is always going to have some degree of aggression, but I honestly think a lot of it dissipated after Napier fell from the cathedral. In BR the revenge connection just isn't as strong. Sure, he can sympathize with Oswald given the issue with his parents. But that's sympathy. He exposes Oswald for being a fraud, but as you say, it's done in a controlled and even humorous way. I think he's even smiling in the cave with Alfred. Keaton's Batman blew up the Strongman, but that's just how Burton rolled. I'm sure a hypothetical Batman III would've continued with these elements. Something like 'after being rejected by Selina, Batman returns to the shadows to continue his war on crime'.

[thecolorsblend]

I like the bit of taking Cobblepot down because I always got the idea that it was pure vengeance on his part. He had Cobblepot nailed cold on kidnapping, grand theft auto, vehicular assault, probably kidnapping, murder one and other things. He didn't have to destroy him so publicly that way. Just turning his video over to Gordon probably would've done the trick.

But no. He went a lot more personal with it.

It's probably fair to question how much responsibility Batman has in the reign of terror that the Penguin subsequently unleashed upon the city. If the job had been done right, the Penguin would've been cooling off in a cell rather than free to kidnap the children.

The reason I dig that is because the early Detective Comics issues, especially those written by Gardner Fox, showed a Batman with a vengeful streak in him. Yeah, he wants to do right and arrest criminals. But don't EVER forget that this is a personal thing for him. He's not above revenge by any stretch of the imagination. Tick him off and it's your @$$ on the line.

[The Dark Knight]

He didn't have to destroy him so publicly that way.

I think he did.

The reason I dig that is because the early Detective Comics issues, especially those written by Gardner Fox, showed a Batman with a vengeful streak in him. Yeah, he wants to do right and arrest criminals. But don't EVER forget that this is a personal thing for him. He's not above revenge by any stretch of the imagination. Tick him off and it's your @$$ on the line.

True.

[riddler]

Bruce didn't need to go through the law. That can be lengthy and it was critical he stop the Penguin before the election. Besides, hacking his microphone was a more effective way to take his power; turn HIM into the marter.