Green Goblin Reviews Batman: Return of the Caped Crusaders
After the double-whammy of disappointment that was Batman V Superman and Suicide Squad, I’ve taken to different DC ventures to wash the taste out of my mouth. The first was finally jumping on the bandwagon and checking out Arrow (I know now why people wish to keep the TV universe separate from the films). The second was my anticipation of Batman: Return of the Caped Crusaders, a love-letter to the campy writing and implausible set-pieces of the Silver Age comics and 1960s TV Show. With the doubling down on the dark and brooding, socially-maladjusted take on Batman that remains in the spotlight, this film comes along as a perfect palate cleanser. And you get about what’s on the box.
Now, let me preface this review with one undeniable truth that folks really need to acknowledge every once in a while: Batman is a silly concept. It’s ALWAYS been a silly concept. A man with wealth who strives to fight the crime of decay in his city by dressing up like a bat and beating up criminals (instead of investing into the wealth of his city and fighting crime effectively: through economics)? Yeah, that’s silly. And when you set your world up to allow such a concept to not only be accepted, but to thrive, then you have one of two options to go with:
1) Try to damage control the concept, by imposing realistic setbacks on his vigilante’s crusade, while beefing up his arsenal with futuristic (yet, seemingly plausible) gadgets and handwaving contradictions with a script that tries to downplay them (though it helps if your characters are also written well, Snyder…)
2) Full-on acknowledge that a world in which Batman is accepted would be pretty damn silly regardless and just roll with it.
See, option two is usually the best option for Batman. Yes, Nolan was able to make option one work 2 1/2 times (I still think the Dark Knight Rises wasn’t TERRIBLE), but Batman tends to just be better written when the world just sort of acknowledges that vigilantes and supervillains are a thing and continue about their routine. For those who never saw the original television run of Batman, what Caped Crusaders (and by extension, the original tv show) does is take option two and crank that shit up to 11. Not only do Batman and Robin come out during the day and fight crime in public, but they have a direct line of communication with Commissioner Gordon who calls them routinely. Not only do supervillains use character themes and costumes for theatricality, but they also announce the start of their diabolical plan on live TV. Every once in a while, you have to remember that Batman is a character that was originally written for kids, ya know?
So this plot starts our vaguely reminiscent of the original 1966 film: the Joker, the Riddler, Penguin and Catwoman have all teamed up to steal a matter replicator ray gun and set off to commit the largest heist in mankind’s history and it’s up to the Dynamic Duo to stop them. Now that set up is pretty by-the-numbers, but you don’t watch this film for the plot. You watch it for the character interactions, the humor, the cheap pops and all the onomatopoeia you can handle (my personal favorite being “SPORK!!!”). The film gets back the remaining cast of the TV series, with Adam West, Burt Ward and Julie Newmar returning to their roles as Batman, Robin and Catwoman respectively and each actor feels like they just slid into their respective characters without missing a beat, not unlike Kevin Conroy or Mark Hamill.
During said calamity, the Caped Crusader is corrupted by Catwoman’s cognizance-contorting chemical (there’s a LOT of alliteration in this movie) and finds himself slowly becoming more ruthless, as the film progresses. It’s actually sort of funny, looking back in retrospect that the ruthless version of Adam West’s Batman is basically just a Batman that is comfortable leaving villains in traction, without breaking a sweat. But because you’ve gotten a chance to get use to his more peaceful old-timey way of taking down criminals, when it finally does happen, you’re actually kind of taken aback. As far as palate cleansers go, getting shocked when Batman breaks someone’s bones is a slate that’s cleaner than I thought it ever could be.
Now, that being said, the films not without its. The second act of the film chugs a little, when one key plot point switches to another (though, the change is welcome at this point). And while most toss-ups land a bullseye (“You wanna get nuts? C’mon!! Let’s get nuts!!”) some of the jokes are a bit TOO on the nose. For example, I totally forgot Aunt Harriet existed and her role in the film is actually what most fans mistook her for originally, to the point where she damn near calls it out to Alfred. A little awkward, but not a deal-breaker. And though the whole joke of Batman being prepared for anything has been with the character since way back when (shark repellent, utility belt, etc.), sometimes it feels a little forced.
Your level of annoyance may vary from minute to grating, but it’s still a strong enough showing for me to give it a solid recommendation. ESPECIALLY with how little good Batman work we have at the moment (still not ready to watch Gotham again anytime soon). It’s even sadder that this film went under a lot of people’s radar. If you like ANY form of Batman (yes, even if you ONLY like him when he’s dark and brooding), this film is worth a watch.
8 out of 10. We NEED more good Batman