Batman Returns (1990)

Batman Returns (1992)

HBO On Demand, Seattle, WA

April 20, 2008

This was not the first time I watched this movie.

** / ****

by Scott Muoio

Tim Burton has often been criticized as a director who deploys style over substance choosing to focus on flash instead of emotion and window dressing as a substitute for coherent storytelling. His detractors describe him as a director whose misguided focus clouds any chance at deep character meaning before it ever has a chance to begin. Watch a few of his lesser efforts (Planet of the Apes, in particular), and you’ll probably agree. But Burton, for all his obsessive style, is more than that. Burton is a man whose unmistakable visuals, fantastic characters, and wholly original settings are in a class all their own. And because his visuals are so dynamic and distinguishable, when his film’s plots teeter on the ridiculous, the incoherent, or the just plain stupid, he takes even more flack than he likely deserves. However, unlike the soup to nuts cinematic writer/director types, Burton does not write his own films, an interesting distinction that separates him from the typical cinematic “auteur.” Instead, Burton finds a script he enjoys and layers his oddities over the story like dressing on a Halloween skeleton creating that easily identifiable “Burtonesque” look and feel. And because his movies can sometimes leave you wishing for a bit of soul to go with his unique and recognizable style he is sort of a critic’s redheaded stepchild, always doomed to classification with directors of a wholly different mindset and execution. That’s not really fair, either, because Burton’s surreal visuals aren’t trying to mimic reality, but rather, create a completely alternate environment that doesn’t play by the same rules as our own. And that brings me to Burton’s second effort with the Batman franchise, 1992’s Batman Returns.

Batman Returns, the follow-up to Burton’s 1990 smash hit, Batman, is an instance where the critics are right: there is no soul behind Burton’s flash. And worse, Burton’s saving grace, his inimitable style, is so ridiculous, inconsistent, and just plain wrong in this film that what should have been an excellent movie is instead mediocre and misguided. This is not to say all Burton’s efforts fall this far off the tracks, but when you’ve got real life penguins with rockets strapped to their tiny backs attempting to take over a city, something is definitely wrong, wrong, WRONG! And no matter of surrealism is going to save rampaging, militaristic penguins, at least in my book.

So what is wrong with Batman Returns, other than the penguins, that left me wanting something, anything different than what Burton delivers?

1) Tone and Realism

2) Story

3) The Supporting Characters.

First off, the tone and realism in Batman Returns are all over the map. Here we have a millionaire bachelor (Michael Keaton) who lampoons as a crime-fighting masked vigilante and yet the world in which he inhabits makes no sense whatsoever. From one minute to the next Batman’s Gotham is scary, silly, decrepit, rejuvenated, wealthy, poor, or some combination, but certainly never consistent. While trying to be all things at different times it ends up being none and instead presents a very confusing setting and tone for a film that desperately needs a launching point. Batman is a complex man, and Michael Keaton is excellent at balancing his dark past with his own humanity and need to put things right. However, when forced to inhabit a world that has rules which are impossible to understand because Burton does whatever he thinks looks good at the moment we’re stuck with a film whose tone is a mish-mash of inconsistencies. This provides a sense that sometimes things are real, other times surreal, and still other times completely absurd. And that brings us to the story.

When it comes to story in Batman Returns, need I write more than “penguins wearing headsets and having rockets strapped to their backs?” Whoever thought that would be a good idea in any movie certainly isn’t in their right mind. And unfortunately, this penguin Armageddon scenario is where this whole thing is leading from the start. Gadzooks! If only there were a different thread to follow, another, more interesting story to pursue that didn’t involve a Disney theme park buried under a fake looking Gotham City. Oh wait, there is: Catwoman.

Michelle Pfeifer as the eccentric executive assistant pushed (literally!) to the brink of insanity is exquisite. She chews up the roll of Catwoman and spits out a sensual yet awkwardly delightful hot mess performance that is a joy to behold. Every time she shows up on screen the movies takes flight, especially when Ms. Pfeifer is paired with Michael Keaton. The two have dynamite awkward chemistry and if only they could have been given as much screen time as Jack Nicholson’s Joker in Batman, I dare say this movie could have been even better than that one. But alas, instead we are treated to a useless mayor character (Michael Murphy), a boring billionaire toxic waste dumper (Christopher Walken), an idiotic team of former circus employees / ninjas turned criminals, and Danny DeVito as the half-man / half-bird Penguin, a character who was both written and acted in the most lackluster of ways. Supporting characters have the opportunity to be dynamic, interesting, and enigmatic, and a supervillain should be maniacal, ruthless, vicious, unpredictable, and cunning, or at least one of those things. Instead, the supporting players are boring caricatures of boring miscreants and Penguin is just kind of interesting to look at, that is, if you haven’t already seen similar Goth-inspired weirdoes in all of Burton’s other films. And when one considers that the Penguin’s whole point of inclusion in the film is to look silly and be a foil rather than to inhabit his environment as a meaningful person, the character’s entire existence becomes obviously strained and without useful purpose. Ironically, the film gives Penguin so much background story that it becomes even more obvious how vacuous and one-dimensional the character has become. Not good.

Unlike the millions of Batman fanboys, I don’t expect and demand a certain style and substance from my caped crusader. No matter which Batman incarnation shows up on the scene, whether The Dark Knight, the goofy ‘60s camp version, or the Michael Keaton version from 1990, and whatever his situation or scenario, I have always enjoyed me some Batman. But when all versions are mixed together without a guiding light it makes for a character and film that is severely lacking. If only Batman Returns took one direction instead of taking all directions the few pleasant surprises, such as the outrageous sexuality on display between Batman, Catwoman, and Penguin, could have meant much, much more than the sketch pieces they become. Instead, the “we think it looks good, let’s put it in” mentality of Batman Returns yields a film that causes more shaking of the head than exhilaration, intrigue, or drama, a fact that is sure to disappoint every Batman fan.

There are better and worse Batman incarnations than Batman Returns. In the grand history of The Dark Knight, this film is smack dab in the middle: not the worst but definitely nowhere near the best.