This week, the highly anticipated DC Comics film "Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice" is released in theaters. It is one of many comic book films that are set to be released this year. With that in mind, it is hard to think how even a decade or two ago, comic book films were never really that well regarded in the film industry. Today, I am going to look back at a film that I see as a tipping point for comic book films. It is a film that you would never generally think about as a tipping point for the genre. But once you look the film over, you see that comic book films changed for the better after it was released.
The film in question that I am talking about? 1997's "Batman and Robin"
To me, Batman & Robin was one of the most important comic book films ever.
Now I know what you are thinking: That is an incredibly stupid thing to say. Batman & Robin is a terrible movie. Many fans and critics have often named it one of the worst comic book films ever. The actors in the film have even dissed it. George Clooney was often quoted at the time as saying that he personally "killed the franchise."
But film is an art, and just because a film is hated doesn't mean that it cannot be a turning point for change. I believe that Batman & Robin represented an end of an era for superhero films. The film's failure meant that comic book films could no longer be just empty action films or just be used solely for actors needing a box office hit. The studios realized that comic book fans are a passionate bunch. If you make a great comic book film, the fans will support it and potentially help make it a hit. Or sometimes, like in the case of Batman & Robin, they can hate the movie so much that they sink any chance of it making money. That is the case with this particular Batman film here.
In 1995, Warner Bros. released Batman Forever. The film was a massive success for the studio. It was the second highest grossing film in the U.S. that year. The reaction to the film was mixed but the studio considered it a huge success. Warners made no secret that they thought the previous film in the series, Batman Returns directed by Tim Burton, was way too dark and that it should have made more money. Armed with complaints from critics and parents, Warners asked Tim Burton to step down as director and to just simply produce the next film in the series. They did however let him approve the next director to take over the series. The man Burton and Warner Bros. picked to direct the film? Joel Schumacher.
Schumacher had been a very successful director at the time. He had directed a variety of films that included social subjects (Falling Down), vampires (The Lost Boys), and doctors dealing with death (Flatliners). He had a visual flair that Warners thought would be perfect for Batman. Despite on-set problems with lead actors Val Klimer and Tommy Lee Jones, he helped guide Batman Forever to become the massive success that it became. Warners immediately signed him up for the next sequel.
At the time of it's release, many people saw problems with Batman Forever. Most notably that the film was way over the top. That the sets and the action scenes were way too gaudy and that the costumes were way too homo-erotic. I questioned at the time, why did the costumes had to have nipples on them? Why did they have close up shots of butts in the movie?
Instead of looking to improve on the sequel, Schumacher seemed embolden to become way more over the top. He mentions that going into Batman & Robin that he was inspired by the 1960's Batman TV series and that he wanted the film to have a broad camp style to it. Right here is where I think the film went completely off the rails.
If you think about it, one of the reasons why everyone was so excited about the 1989 Batman was because they were finally going to treat the character seriously. People enjoy the 1960's Batman TV series, but in no way is Adam West's version of Batman considered the true version of Batman at all. The character of Batman and the world he lives in is dark. This is a character who as a young child watched his parents die in front of him when they were both shot. This event has always haunted Batman ever since. For Schumacher to go full camp and to say that the film should, in his words, "be a cartoon," was a massive mistake on his part.
Early on in Batman & Robin, you can just tell that the film is in trouble. The open shots of the film are close ups of both Batman and Robin putting on their costumes. We see up close shots of nipples and butts. Why Schumacher thought this was appropriate to show in a "family friendly" film is beyond me. From there we go to the film's opening action set piece. It takes place in an museum that has been turned to ice by the film's villain, Mr. Freeze. The whole thing is just too much. You have random ice skating villains. Both Batman and Robin seem to have the right random gadgets at just the right times. It's just terrible.
The film only got worse from there. Between the characters Poison Ivy and Bane and the unneeded introduction of Batgirl, the film just makes no sense. It is all set pieces without any point to them. Chris O'Donnell, who played Robin in the film, has the best quote on the film. "It just felt like everything got a little soft the second time. On Batman Forever, I felt like I was making a movie. The second time, I felt like I was making a kid's toy commercial." That quote perfectly sums up the movie. Batman & Robin is a toy commercial where all the products Schumacher is trying to sell us suck.
When the film was released on June 20th 1997, reaction to the film was very negative to say the least. Everyone hated the family friendly approach to the film. The one liners. The nipples. Nothing about the film worked. Although the film did well box office wise in the first weekend, by the second weekend it fell 63% at the box office. The proposed sequel that seemed certain to be released in 1999 was cancelled soon after. The film was so bad, it was not until 2005 when director Christopher Nolan released his rebooted version of Batman with Batman Begins, that the franchise got back on track.
Begins is a great film. It is everything a Batman film should be. But I think Nolan was able to make a true Batman film only because of the failure of Batman & Robin. In fact, the 1997 film represented an end of an era for superhero films. For one thing, I think it made filmmakers and studios have to think different about the films they were adapting. Before 1997, if you made a comic book film, you were mostly ripping off the production design of the 1989 Batman film.
In fact, if you look at the films that came after Batman, most of them had the same ascetic to them. They were always in an bleak urban environment and they had a very operatic feel to them. In some cases, they even had a retro 1940's feel to them like the '89 Batman had. Examples of this would be films like Dick Tracy, Darkman, The Rocketeer, The Shadow, and The Crow. Some of those films are very good, but they all really had the same feel to them for sure. Heck, two of the films I just listed have the same composer (Danny Elfman) so even the music sounded the same at times.
After 1997, films based on comic books got progressively better. In fact, this trend actually started in 1998 with the release of Blade, a film based on the Marvel comic series. It was a hit at the box office and audiences really enjoyed the film.
In fact, if you look at the films that came after Batman, most of them had the same ascetic to them. They were always in an bleak urban environment and they had a very operatic feel to them. In some cases, they even had a retro 1940's feel to them like the '89 Batman had. Examples of this would be films like Dick Tracy, Darkman, The Rocketeer, The Shadow, and The Crow. Some of those films are very good, but they all really had the same feel to them for sure. Heck, two of the films I just listed have the same composer (Danny Elfman) so even the music sounded the same at times.
After 1997, films based on comic books got progressively better. In fact, this trend actually started in 1998 with the release of Blade, a film based on the Marvel comic series. It was a hit at the box office and audiences really enjoyed the film.
Blade was really the beginning. It set a standard for comic book films and it showed a couple of things. First off that, remaining loyal to the tone or the style of the source material is not a bad thing and that it makes audiences appreciate the film more. And it showed that the films themselves can booster an actors career. Blade at the time did wonders for Snipes career. It probably is his most well known role when people think of the actor.
Two years after Blade, we got X-Men. The 2000 Marvel film was based off a very popular series of comic books. The comic series had given us cartoons and even an arcade game that I played a lot of when I was a little kid. The film proved very popular with audiences, becoming one of the biggest hits of 2000 and has now spawned five sequels and two spin-off films. The newest entry in the series, X-Men Apocalypse, is set to be released this May.
From X-Men on, the vast number of comic book films that studios made became enormous. Some becoming huge hits, others tanking at the box office. But it is clear that from 1998 on, comic book films have become a huge part of Hollywood and how they make money. They have refined the genre and improved it to where now pretty much any film is bound to get maximum exposure on television and the internet.
And yet, without the failure of Batman & Robin, it might not have ever happened. Studios might not have learned their lesson and tried to make the comic book movie in a way that is right for each film. We might not have ever gotten a great Deadpool film with Ryan Reynolds. We might not have ever gotten a shared Marvel universe that included the Avengers and the Guardians of the Galaxy. We might not even be getting the Batman/Superman team up that is coming out this weekend that we never thought we would get.
Batman & Robin is a film we always need to remember for how bad the comic book film can get when it is not properly handled. Joel Schumacher is a good director but he was so not right for directing a Batman film. The same goes for all the actors in the film, all of whom were very miscast. We may want to forget about the film, but it always is good to know that even if Batman v Superman is a terrible film, it will contain anything near as a bad as the sight of bat-nipples or of Arnold Schwarzenegger in a light up outfit giving out ice puns.
- Hash
