Being my first blog entry, I'll take the time to quickly say what my blog will consist of. For the most part, I'll be reviewing movies. Sometimes I'll throw in a video game review or a review of a tv show, but for the most part the subject of this blog will be films. With that said, my reviews will not be an in-depth critical analysis. What I will aim to do with my reviews is decide if the films are entertaining, if they accomplish what they set out to do, if they engage the audience, and so on.
So with that said...
Batman quickly became a popular character once he came on the scene in 1939, so there was no doubt that a production company would bring Batman to the big screen very soon. By the time the first Batman serial made it to the big screen, the Golden Age Batman was long gone.
For Batman's first year of existence, his Golden Age, he was a dark creature of the night, like we know him to be now. Only differences is that Batman in his original incarnation worked solo, was a murderer who gleefully killed criminals, and even carried a gun.
By the beginning of the 1940s, several changes were in place. Batman had gained a sidekick in Robin (a move that increased comic sales), Batman was no longer restricted to Detective Comics & was given his own comic book, and it was in the very first issue of Batman #1 that 2 of Batman's most famous & popular villains, The Joker and Catwoman, were introduced.
But amongst all these additions, Batman & Batman comics were stripped of the darkness brought in Batman's first year. Batman was no longer a killer, and the comics got considerably lighter, in favor of protraying Batman as a respectable citizen. This image of Batman would last for most of the '40s, the decade that brought the first 2 instances of Batman on film, in Batman (1943) and Batman & Robin (1949).
These first 2 trips for Batman to the big screen were done in the style of a movie serial. Basically, every week people would make the trips to the theater to watch a 15-25 minute episode of the serial, which would always end on a cliff hanger, which would continue next week, for several weeks.
The plot of Batman (1943) delt with a Japanese scientist named Dr. Daka who has a giant lazer that destroys walls, an alligator pit, and can turn men into zombies to do his bidding. The plot of Batman & Robin (1949) is something of a who-is-it, as they battle the mysterious Wizard.
If my plot summaries sound indifferent or lazy, it's because I honestly couldn't care anyless about either of these films. Neither is technically well made, and neither is very exciting at all.
One of my first thoughts while watching either of these is why would you include such boring villains as Daka and The Wizard (who were created for these serials), when more visually interesting villains like The Joker & Catwoman are at your fingertips? Daka is no more than propaganda, and The Wizard is just flatout boring.
The cliffhanger endings leave a lot to be desired. Aside from the fact that there is obviously no way that either Batman or Robin is going to die in either of their crashes, explosions, etc., the serials often cheat the viewer, cutting out parts or showing altering shots of the cliffhangers that seem to imply a dreadful end for our heroes, only to have them come back next week having escaped from doom by a stroke of luck. The ability for our heroes to escape these parells don't come from within themselves, it comes from the hands of our lazy film makers.
In fact, in the cliffhanger of episode 10 of Batman (1943), Batman finds himslf trapped in a plane that ends up crashing, with absolutely no way for Batman to escape. So what's the conclusion at the beginning of episode 11? Batman walks away from the crash unharmed and only slightly dazed. When your hero is able to survive a plane crash with not a single scratch on him, without any logical explanation, then whatever potential the serial had to thrill you & keep you on the edge of your seat is gone. The film makers have completely cheated on this one, so who knows if they'll cheat again. All possible danger for our heroes & their allies has disappearred, so why should we even continue watching this?
While it's kinda cool seeing a Batman that's not all flash & all the heart you'd expect from the character, it means absolutely nothing when it becomes very clear that these are serials where Batman & Robin have nothing to loose and everything to gain.
On a smaller note, not much good can be said about the technical aspects of the film. Continuity isn't good, special effets aren't good, and the costuming is very bad and looks very cheap.
So...is there anything good about these serials?
Not really. And while Batman & Robin (1949) has no redeeming values, Batman (1943) on the other hand is a very important serial to the Batman mythos. Not only did Batman (1943) provide what is the bare bones prototype for the Batmobile (it's just a regular car, if you're wondering), but it also turned Alfred, who is an fat amatuer detective in the comics at the time, into the butler we know of today, but Batman (1943) also provided us with the Batcave.
So really, while neither film is entertaining enough or well written or technically well made, Batman (1943)'s significant contributions to the Batman mythos can't go unnoticed, so it deserves a rating of some sort.
Final Grades
Batman (1943): 2.5/10, Batman & Robin (1949): 0/10
Next week, I take a look at a significantly better movie in Batman: The Movie (1966).
So with that said...
Batman quickly became a popular character once he came on the scene in 1939, so there was no doubt that a production company would bring Batman to the big screen very soon. By the time the first Batman serial made it to the big screen, the Golden Age Batman was long gone.
For Batman's first year of existence, his Golden Age, he was a dark creature of the night, like we know him to be now. Only differences is that Batman in his original incarnation worked solo, was a murderer who gleefully killed criminals, and even carried a gun.
By the beginning of the 1940s, several changes were in place. Batman had gained a sidekick in Robin (a move that increased comic sales), Batman was no longer restricted to Detective Comics & was given his own comic book, and it was in the very first issue of Batman #1 that 2 of Batman's most famous & popular villains, The Joker and Catwoman, were introduced.
But amongst all these additions, Batman & Batman comics were stripped of the darkness brought in Batman's first year. Batman was no longer a killer, and the comics got considerably lighter, in favor of protraying Batman as a respectable citizen. This image of Batman would last for most of the '40s, the decade that brought the first 2 instances of Batman on film, in Batman (1943) and Batman & Robin (1949).
These first 2 trips for Batman to the big screen were done in the style of a movie serial. Basically, every week people would make the trips to the theater to watch a 15-25 minute episode of the serial, which would always end on a cliff hanger, which would continue next week, for several weeks.
The plot of Batman (1943) delt with a Japanese scientist named Dr. Daka who has a giant lazer that destroys walls, an alligator pit, and can turn men into zombies to do his bidding. The plot of Batman & Robin (1949) is something of a who-is-it, as they battle the mysterious Wizard.
If my plot summaries sound indifferent or lazy, it's because I honestly couldn't care anyless about either of these films. Neither is technically well made, and neither is very exciting at all.
One of my first thoughts while watching either of these is why would you include such boring villains as Daka and The Wizard (who were created for these serials), when more visually interesting villains like The Joker & Catwoman are at your fingertips? Daka is no more than propaganda, and The Wizard is just flatout boring.
The cliffhanger endings leave a lot to be desired. Aside from the fact that there is obviously no way that either Batman or Robin is going to die in either of their crashes, explosions, etc., the serials often cheat the viewer, cutting out parts or showing altering shots of the cliffhangers that seem to imply a dreadful end for our heroes, only to have them come back next week having escaped from doom by a stroke of luck. The ability for our heroes to escape these parells don't come from within themselves, it comes from the hands of our lazy film makers.
In fact, in the cliffhanger of episode 10 of Batman (1943), Batman finds himslf trapped in a plane that ends up crashing, with absolutely no way for Batman to escape. So what's the conclusion at the beginning of episode 11? Batman walks away from the crash unharmed and only slightly dazed. When your hero is able to survive a plane crash with not a single scratch on him, without any logical explanation, then whatever potential the serial had to thrill you & keep you on the edge of your seat is gone. The film makers have completely cheated on this one, so who knows if they'll cheat again. All possible danger for our heroes & their allies has disappearred, so why should we even continue watching this?
While it's kinda cool seeing a Batman that's not all flash & all the heart you'd expect from the character, it means absolutely nothing when it becomes very clear that these are serials where Batman & Robin have nothing to loose and everything to gain.
On a smaller note, not much good can be said about the technical aspects of the film. Continuity isn't good, special effets aren't good, and the costuming is very bad and looks very cheap.
So...is there anything good about these serials?
Not really. And while Batman & Robin (1949) has no redeeming values, Batman (1943) on the other hand is a very important serial to the Batman mythos. Not only did Batman (1943) provide what is the bare bones prototype for the Batmobile (it's just a regular car, if you're wondering), but it also turned Alfred, who is an fat amatuer detective in the comics at the time, into the butler we know of today, but Batman (1943) also provided us with the Batcave.
So really, while neither film is entertaining enough or well written or technically well made, Batman (1943)'s significant contributions to the Batman mythos can't go unnoticed, so it deserves a rating of some sort.
Final Grades
Batman (1943): 2.5/10, Batman & Robin (1949): 0/10
Next week, I take a look at a significantly better movie in Batman: The Movie (1966).
It really disturbs me that a villain who has a laser gun, an alligator pit, AND the ability to turn people into zombie slaves can be boring.
ReplyDelete