Comic Book Movies 101: Batman (1989)

• 16th Mar 2011

It can be argued that Tim Burton’s Batman was the biggest thing since Star Wars. Batman was huge in 1989. The merchandising was everywhere. You couldn’t walk down the streets without seeing that symbol, or shots of the Joker, Batman or Vicki Vale. Batman was back, but he was darker and much more serious than we’d seen before.

Yes, the story is thanks to Frank Miller’s re-invention of the character – we were now able to see the caped crusader in a better light than the camp 60s TV show. Batman had been reinvigorated and now it was the big screen’s time to take that role in one of Warner Brother’s highest grossing franchises. Like we said – Batman was as big as Star Wars in 89.

Now for the common cinemagoer, much like myself at the time, Batman was brilliant. But for comic geeks it was and still is seriously flawed. We won’t go too much into that now, but I do want to address something that has always bugged me about certain comic book heroes. Generally they have a rule of kill-the-baddies (Punisher, Daredevil) or never-kill-anyone (Superman, Batman, Spiderman). Now Batman breaks that rule in the Burton films. We can clearly see him in battle disposing of henchmen (examples: he straps a ticking bomb to a strong man in Batman Returns and drops him in a hole. And he sets rioters on fire with the jet flame from his car). This no-killing rule wasn’t addressed until the Nolan films (and in The Dark Knight the Joker gets him to break that rule by killing Harvey Dent – there’s no two ways about it folks, Batman is responsible for Dent’s death).

But this isn’t reality – we’re in fantasy, so a body count isn’t much of an issue. We’re treated to some wonderfully colourful violence, so the gadgets and vehicles are one of the many reasons why the franchise succumbed to the toy line.

Looking back this may be a flawed film, and perhaps is now looking a bit dated – but it has enough style to have retro appeal. In fact if anything – the Nolan pictures make the Burton ones look like the 60s movie.

Jack Nicholson stole the headlines in a role he would become notoriously connected to for years to come. And now after Heath Ledger’s portrayal of the same character people barely care to whisper Nicholson’s name. To be fair to Nicholson, it was a very fun and showy role he took on, and while he manages to embody the character with menace as well as laughs (and even a call back to Caesar Romero’s incarnation in places) he is still rather two dimensional. If it wasn’t for such wonderful dialogue it may have been a very different performance.

Vicki Vale is a product of her time in this film – and the big frizzy late 80s hair is evidence of it. A photographer and an artist in her own right? Well I think the Joker said it all when he thumbed through her work.

But let’s not forget perhaps the most undersold value of this and the next film – Michael Keaton. Few actors seem capable of managing to pull off a credible Bruce Wayne and Batman. Keaton’s Bruce Wayne looks quite terrifying – hardly a smooth talker, but he gets the tortured aspect of it across well. The billionaire aspect of his character is added to by Michael Gough’s – Alfred dashes around after Wayne at a party, picking up every empty glass he leaves behind him. This film is definitely not short on character.

How they deal with the titular character himself though is good. He’s already established in the underground whispers among criminals when the film begins. We get a glimpse into his origin as a flashback only. The fact that the character is already there helps the narrative move along nicely as well as eliminate a lot of exposition.

The plot turns a cog or two after the creation of the Joker. Of course this moment comes back to play with both Batman and the villain at the end as they’re both responsible for creating each other (another fanboy dispute). The middle section is full of random Joker moments as he seeks to build his empire and then bizarrely launch an attack on the public. The Joker is anything but predictable. He only seems to be thrown back in his pram when Batman is around to steal his press. Although he’s keen to find out more about this foe – and his wonderful toys – by the end he’s resolved to simply take it out on his lead henchman by shooting him with his own gun.

The end is typically dark and gothic as a contrived showdown atop of a cathedral takes place – finally seeing the battle-bruised hero saving the girl and sending the cackling prankster on a one way ticket back down to the ground.

Batman may not be perfect – but it’s still a benchmark film in every respect of Hollywood. This is for its financial impact and the implications the success would have on the quality of films to come; for the level of media coverage it got at the time; the level of merchandise in the stores; for creating iconic roles for both Keaton and Nicholson; and for the doors it opened for other films to be made.

Steven Hurst