tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15742539.post1842300757189240407..comments2024-03-28T03:10:19.013-07:00Comments on Fraggmented: The Insanometer: Batman and RobinJohn Seaveyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07530526320973807452noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15742539.post-4984407032909111982011-03-04T09:23:40.145-08:002011-03-04T09:23:40.145-08:00DC Comics in general had been pretty much rendered...DC Comics in general had been pretty much rendered a corny joke by the early 1960s--especially alongside the burgeoning 'Marvel Age'; the Batman television series could in no ways have made matters worse for the comics at that point. Even the oft-maligned (and <i>unfairly</i> maligned) Charlton and Gold Key companies fared better quality-wise alongside the majority of DC titles throughout the '60s--especially after Gil Kane moved onto independent work (e.g., <i>His Name is...Savage</i>) and gradually took up residence at Marvel.R. W. Watkinshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14660716315419914578noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15742539.post-55157657014604791252010-10-08T10:44:16.617-07:002010-10-08T10:44:16.617-07:00I'm with Eric on this. I've often heard th...I'm with Eric on this. I've often heard the accusation that the old Batman tv series set back the public perception of the character for years, but honestly, I don't see the evidence of it, especially in light of how insanely bizarre the comics, themselves, were (seriously, every other week Batman was fighting an alien). Actually, I sort of credit the Adam West series for bringing back a classic rogues gallery.<br /><br />Besides which, if it were true, then why did Tim Burton do such a dark film and why, of all of Batman films, was that the hugest smash hit? Why did the comics themselves progressively become more and more gritty starting in the 60s? Why was Batman: TAS so mature?<br /><br />You really have nobody to blame for Batman & Robin beyond Joel Schumacher. It's arguable he would have made the exact same film even without the prior existence of the Adam West Batman.<br /><br />As to Batman & Robin, I think your review is pretty much dead on, and it's not surprising that this film is absolutely loathed by everybody, judging by the 3.5 average rating on the IMDb. <br /><br />The thing that bothered me about the film is that all three of these villains had been handled about a gazillion times better in Batman: TAS--a kids show. Yet when employed in a film that was meant to be enjoyed by all ages, the characterization dropped to the bottom of the Saturday Morning Cartoon barrel. I'd have been embarrassed by the quality of that writing when I was six.Justin Garrett Blumhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15137911263603130588noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15742539.post-40257082382756226282010-10-07T19:24:17.497-07:002010-10-07T19:24:17.497-07:00I've already stated that I will not defend the...I've already stated that I will not defend the depths to which the program sank, but blaming the show for the public's perception of comics when comics were perpetuating that perception very well for years seems excessive to me.<br /><br />Hollywood releases bad campy movies every few years, believing that the "joke" will cover up the lack of quality. Batman and Robin also features action and plotting right out of the Michael Bay school-of-spectacle. Would you blame Revenge of the Fallen on the Batman TV show, as well?<br /><br />The argument that the TV show is solely to blame for Schumaker's travesty ignores the existence of Batman 89 and Batman Returns, which in many ways effectively disconnected Batman from the TV show. Remember that Burton's "dark vision," which is miles removed from the show, took over the box office in 1989. Had someone of Nolan's caliber taken over in 94/5 instead of Schumaker, we might very well have had Returns, Robin, and Triumphant turn out to be very good movies.<br /><br />Instead, we got what we got. Did the TV show have something to do with it? Maybe. But I'd argue that even more than the TV show itself--the core idea of which I will still defend as smart, funny, and multi-leveled--the MENTALITY that led to the show's demise was also to blame for Schumaker's ascendance. Someone in Hollywood always wants to go for the cheap gags, the guest stars, the pointless spectacle, instead of aiming at the heart of the central concept. The long, long list of putrid movies Hollywood has produced that have very little to do with Batman testifies to the ubiquitous nature of this weakness. The show and the movie suffer from this weakness in parallel ways, not in causal ways.<br /><br />Comics' reputation certainly had more to do with the shoddiness of Golden Age and many Silver Age stories, Wertham's influence, and a general rejection of "picture storytelling" as serious art than it did with the show, specifically.<br /><br />I'd also argue that the idea of consistently taking superheroes remotely seriously really only starts post-Batman and Robin with moderately coherent hit movies like X-Men and Spider-Man. In fact, I see Batman and Robin as the last hurrah of any of the old fetters of "comics are for kids" that lingered from the 20th century. I think we're living in a new age of comics as a "legitimate" form of media which will be soullessly cannibalized by Hollywood on an equal opportunity basis, and not on a ghettoized basis.<br /><br />So I am forced to disagree with your application of the dictionary definition of "pernicious," because I don't believe any lasting effects of the show *caused* any harm for B&R, nor was the show's effect insidious or ruinous.<br /><br />Had the Murray/Murphy Batman and Robin been made, now THAT I would have blamed on the show...Eric Qel-Dromahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08768499983501308136noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15742539.post-80949400623732085192010-10-07T04:55:27.115-07:002010-10-07T04:55:27.115-07:00No, I think that "pernicious" is exactly...No, I think that "pernicious" is exactly the right word. Consider the dictionary definition: "causing insidious harm or ruin; ruinous; injurious; hurtful."<br /><br />Now consider the fact that even in 1997, after "The Killing Joke" and "The Dark Knight Returns" and "Year One" and the entire Denny O'Neil run, to say nothing of "Maus" and "Sandman" and "Preacher" and "Cerebus" and a host of comics written by and for grown-ups in the time between 1968 and the premiere of the "Batman and Robin"...<br /><br />A major Hollywood director and the entire studio backing him made a $140 million dollar movie predicated on the notion that a Batman story cannot be anything other than a brightly-colored camp-fest filled with deliberately terrible acting and deliberately nonsensical scripts, pitched at the approximate intellectual level of a six-year-old.<br /><br />That's the pernicious effect of the 60s Batman series: It near-permanently relegated comics to a child's medium in the public eye, even though the medium itself has proven to be far more versatile. Comics are, in the public consciousness, "Biff!" "Pow!" "Zonk!" "Don't worry, old chum!" "Holy stupid catchphrase, Batman!" and so on, ad nauseum. That makes it a lot harder to get people to take comics seriously.<br /><br />See where I'm coming from, there?John Seaveyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07530526320973807452noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-15742539.post-85041572267908397262010-10-06T18:31:30.288-07:002010-10-06T18:31:30.288-07:00John, come on. Calling the 60's series "...John, come on. Calling the 60's series "pernicious" is stretching it, don't you think? Considering the shape that Batman comics were in at the time and the sheer insanity of the sci-fi Batman stories of the 50's, the TV show started out well.<br /><br />I won't defend the depths to which it sank, but it was smart and funny for the first half of the first season, at the very least. And it did absolutely no damage to a children's character. I love Batman in large part because of the show. I was also able to accept that the character wasn't limited to the camp portrayal, as were many fans.<br /><br />It's perfectly fair not to like it, of course, but come on...Eric Qel-Dromahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08768499983501308136noreply@blogger.com