Movies IN ONE GO! - "Batman" Film Anthology (1989-1997)

Welcome to the very first episode of a new monthly segment on this blog where we'll talk about movie franchises IN ONE GO..

Today is officially BATMAN DAY (July 23) and what better way to celebrate than to discuss the movie franchise that defined the term blockbuster and redefined superhero movies both good and bad..

So it turns out back when the first film of the series has yet to start production, there were already several scripts and treatments written that the studio too cheesy and campy. Why so? It was mainly because of the success of the more darker Batman comic books, specifically The Dark Knight Returns and The Killing Joke. Director Tim Burton was never really a comic book fan and the casting of comedian Michael Keaton for the lead role has stirred some controversy among fans. See? reactions like these existed even before the internet.

So how did the movie turned out? Well let's find out..

Batman (1989)

You can imagine that the pressure was high on this one, but believe me it did deliver. While it isn't the most quintessential representation of Batman, Director Tim Burton perfectly captures the feel and tone of the Batman comic books at that time. It was dark, brooding, has that twisted feel from every Tim Burton movie, but not too much like you'd expect. Michael Keaton, at that time, was great as Batman. People can argue he didn't have the built, but it was his performance that won the hearts of many to make them believe that he is Batman, and believe me when he is Batman, he IS Batman. Even as Bruce Wayne he did a great job of portraying. But it's undeniable that it was Jack Nicholson's performance as The Joker that dominated this movie, even as far as overshadowing Batman. It was mainly because of how mysteriously Batman was written, keeping his origin story in flashbacks and giving us the impression of the less you know about him, the better. Overall, it was the Batman movie everyone needed and everyone deserved in 1989. Also, that Danny Elfman's score? Stunning and timeless. But please, those Prince songs are just whimsical. 

Score: B

Batman Returns (1992)

Judging by the title, I'm guessing you already have an idea what this movie is about. This film marks as the last time Michael Keaton ever put on the cap and cowl on the big screen, also serving as Director Tim Burton's farewell to the franchise, why? We'll get more into that, or perhaps I should say it right now. This is straight out a Tim Burton movie. From the set pieces, the production value, the performances, the writing, the score, you can definitely tell Burton had more confidence of adapting to his style more in this film than the last one. Everything is just dark, brooding and silly through and through. Even the film terribly slowed down somewhere in the middle. But nevertheless, performances by Michael Keaton, Michelle Pfieffer and Danny DeVito as Batman, Catwoman and Penguin respectively, are all phenomenal. All of them perfectly capturing Tim Burton's vision of those characters, which to me is the downside of those characters. This may not be the least faithful to the comics in the franchise, but when you're someone who knows the Batman mythos from the comics in a heartbeat, chances are, it will be hard for you to swallow this movie. But it's not a bad movie after all, just not the movie you'd expect to love. 

Score: C+

Batman Forever (1995)

Well, as Owl City said once in his..

"..this is the beginning, this isn't the end"

Beginning of what? This franchise' doomsday, that's what. So Michael Keaton's out, what a bummer. Danny Elfman's out, what? C'mon! Tim Burton's out, well maybe this means we'll have a better Batman movie, well sorry to burst your bubbles, the studio hiring Director Joel Schumacher to helm the project should have given it away for you. This is like a Tim Burton movie added with Crayola..

Well not really like that movie, but imagine Batman Returns added with bright majestic colors, both literally and figuratively. This film almost felt like Joel was trying to rip-off Tim Burton and has no idea about Batman except the 60's TV series and just made a very 90's version of it. This movie is like a Batman Saturday morning cartoon with ADHD. The filmmakers of this film must be ashamed that a cartoon (Batman: The Animated Series) is doing an overall better job on telling a quintessential Batman story than they ever did, but considering the fact that this movie is a success at the box office, I don't really think they do. Keaton's replacement Val Kilmer's performance as the Cape Crusader is the best thing about this movie. Everything else is just silly. Tommy Lee Jones' Two-Face is dumb, Jim Carrey's The Riddler is silly, Chris O'Donnell's Dick Grayson/Robin is annoying, everything is just off. This is Batman dumb down to fit into the 90's, and believe me that's not the worst. 

Score: E+

Batman & Robin (1997)

It's early in the morning here, you can tell my brain just turned into a mashed potato at this point. So basically that means I am now officially as dumb as this movie. I'm not going from head to toe about this movie, WE ALL KNOW IT'S BAD. So I'm just going to post these two videos I found on YouTube that I thought you'd like to see in light of our topic.

If that's enough for you, good. If not, well here's my quick thoughts.

Director Joel Schumacher was pressured by the studio to make this movie like cooking hot-dog. And, on a perspective this isn't entirely his fault, he was pressured by everyone and in that way he didn't have enough thought process. That act of greediness just exploded into a cinematic atrocity. The story is dumb, the visuals is eye-soar, the acting is just simply hilariously pathetic. This is the definition of rock bottom, and thank goodness Christopher Nolan saved this franchise. But seriously, Bat-nipples? Bat-credit card!? REALLY!?

Score: F

This film franchise has undeniably made a HUGE impact on it's genre. It has covered everything from how to make a good movie to how to make a bad movie. Truly it's out dated, but without these movies Batman would never be the same. 

Subscribe to my BLOG

Follow me on Twitter

Check me out on Moviepilot

"Captain America: The First Avenger" - LATE MOVIE REVIEW

The Review

If you're going to make movies for several Marvel characters which will eventually have (almost) all of the most recognizable characters team up in the very first superhero ensemble flick, it's only practical you make a movie about the leader of the group itself, Captain America. Growing up seeing re-runs of the 60's cartoon back at the early late 90's and early 2000's when it still a routine for small kids to catch Saturday morning cartoons. Until you started reading Captain America comics as a teenager, you really have no idea who Captain America is and what it's like to be a part of his universe. Consider this film an introductory of the character to the wider audience who's lazy enough to even pick up a comic book. Because knows heaven we shall never speak of the 90's disaster movie which stared what's-his-face-again as the titular character, it's best dive into this film instead. 

We start off with Steve Rogers, played by Chris Evans, a young man with a purest heart of gold who wanted to give his life to serve his country during the heat of World War II. The only problem is, Steve is tiny stick even thinner than a regular BBQ stick, you might feel pity to skim through his medical record. But then a government doctor, Dr. Albert Erskine, played by Stanley Tucci, has offered Steve a chance to serve the military, as long as he volunteers to undergo an experiment which would give him peak physical strength, speed, agility and a chance to look more like Chris Evans in his best days and less like Christian Bale from The Machinist. Now the man named Captain America has emerged. America's walking flag sent to every dangerous missions of the war wielding a powerful vibranium steel shield that gives the sport Frisbee and whole new name. With new found abilities, a superhero status, Steve Roger's wishes has been fulfilled, but his life will never be the same. 

Reading that, the movie itself sounded patriotic and inspiring, which at times it is. The movie itself has a very fun story to tell. The World War II setting sets it apart from the previous Marvel movies at that time. But if you're looking forward to a war movie with comic book characters in it, you have another thing coming. The movie by any means, is a treasure hunt film, much like the Indiana Jones movies. One of the key plots is the Tesseract, a (or the) Cosmic Cube, which is being used by Nazi's science division, H.Y.D.R.A. under the leader ship of the film's main antagonist, The Red Skull, played by Hugo Weaving. When our characters start fighting over the possession of the Cosmic Cube, the film itself steps away from the usual war film formula, as if these certain events takes place behind the public's eye. People knew who Captain America is, but they kinda didn't knew what he does. The action scenes are grand and epic in its scale, but damn are they cheesy. Captain America infiltrates a H.Y.D.R.A. prison and sets free and mob of US soldiers held captive without being spotted while doing so? That's something. The film has some crazy ups and downs when it comes to tonal variation that should have been done really well if not for the writing that wasn't thought through, it's kind of a bummer to be honest. 

The film itself has a pretty interesting cast. Chris Evans did a good job playing both Steve Rogers before his transformation and Steve Rogers as Captain America. You are fully convinced of his performance as a small New Yorker who doesn't want to get his new found status into his head and a character who wants to keep his pure heart until the end his days. But even with star studded cast, somehow no one really stood out to me other than Evans himself, though he didn't really steal the movie. Doesn't mean the film had bad acting though, I'm just saying.

The score composed by Alan Silvestri fits perfectly for the tone of this film, it's not Hans Zimmer/John Williams/Danny Elfman' level by any means, but still pretty epic and patriotic. The special effects are passable, but the set pieces are very astonishing. The editing, my gosh, the editing though, is friggin' lazy. Who edited this film? Looks like someone didn't bother to have a second look. 

The Final Veridct

The concept of Captain America himself is patriotic, heroic, epic and super cheesy. But Captain America: The First Avengers wears them like the titular character's armor and shield that not only made him look silly, but also iconic. Even if it's lacking, this is the Marvel movie that has a pure heart in it, like its titular character.

"RoboCop (1987)" LATE MOVIE REVIEW

The Review

As a kid, RoboCop was one of those movies my parents forbid for me to see till I was at my mid-teens. This movie has almost everything, the grit, the violence, the universal theme, and it's an 80's sci-fi film, which happens to be a really good one.

The one aspect who deserves the biggest share of the cake-of-praise is none other than RoboCop himself, played by Peter Weller. Before he was the RoboCop, he was the very likable and badass Officer Alex Murphy. He maybe seem average to some, he doesn't have that Han Solo charisma and looks, which makes his character more believable. He just happens to be really good at what he does, regardless of his appearance. Until he was gunned down, has a chunk of his head exploded, has his limbs removed and most of his body tissue replaced with robotic prosthetic and an on-board computer for a brain. Giving us the spectacular, action-packed, ass-kicking, living-action figure, Daft Punk's inspiration, Kristen Stewart's robo-grand dad, RoboCop. This gun slinging mechanical officer goes full brawn against every villain in the movie, complete with slow-robot movements and cheesy 80's one liners. Peter Weller has perfectly portrayed this two characters, making them completely different from one another. One is a fun character, the other is completely emotionless, lifeless, just like a robot. My only real gripe about this character is that they never really got the chance to explore more of Alex's human side. Flashbacks is the closest we can get to see his life as a father to a happy son and husband to a loving wife, that once was all his. 

Now it's hard to look beyond the story without being distracted with all of the over-the-top violence, the vulgarity, drugs, and a few sexual references. But it's themes of corruption, social displacement, authoritarianism and the heavy usage of the media (even going as far as featuring fictional TV commercials) makes these universe a plausible dystopian future for us as well. Of course, this movie has villains and other characters you'd expect from an 80's R-rated movie. With a small budget, they have also made some pretty special effects and flawless production designs of that time. Sure they look cheesy now but they are impressive.

Final Verdict

Just because this is the first part of a franchise that sells comics and toys, doesn't mean you should let 8 year-old kids see this movie. If you're the type of person who likes peace and prosperity, the fast-paced action and the in-your-face violence might pull you out of the movie altogether. But that is an integral part of the experience. To love this movie is to love the graphic violence. Plus, it has a pretty solid story backing it up. The action is front and center, and you might have to see the movie twice to fully understand the story. But this is one of those movies that grows into you the more you see it. RoboCop definitely earned its place as a classic.

And NO, I am not going to review the sequels, let's just pretend they never happened.