Batman

March 31, 2016

Trying to make sense of Batman V Superman

tgfgfgI did not enjoy Batman V Superman: Dawn of Justice. There are things to like about it, but overall this is not a good time at the movies (something you kind of expect when you sit down to watch one of these things).

Anyways, beyond trying to figure out just what the hell was going on in this movie, I’m also trying to make sense of the titular heroes and what the character arcs were exactly. If the characters are compelling, you can forgive a lot when it comes to plot. But if they’re badly written? That’s when you start asking all the questions the filmmakers would rather have you ignore.

So as an experiment, I’m gonna list out all the major things that happen to a bunch of the characters in this movie to see if their motivations and actions are consistent, or at least understandable. This is gonna be all SPOILERS so don’t read if you haven’t seen the movie (and I honestly don’t recommend it unless you’re a hardcore DC fan):

Batman/Bruce Wayne…

  • arrives in Metropolis during the Superman/Zod fight from Man of Steel
  • saves an employee (Wally) who’s trapped under some wreckage
  • sees the destruction that Superman is capable of for the first time
  • searches for a large sample of kryptonite found from the wreckage of the giant thingy Superman busted in the Indian Ocean in Man of Steel
  • brands a low-level criminal with the bat symbol, which a news report tells us will get the criminal beaten to death in prison
  • has a conversation with Alfred where he expresses his extreme viewpoint on Superman: “If we believe there’s even a 1% chance that he is our enemy then we have to take it as an absolute certainty, and we have to destroy him.”
  • gets the cheques he’s been sending to Wally (who lost his legs) returned to him with guilt-tripping messages written on them
  • watches the Senate hearing on TV where Superman arrives to respond to all the bad shit he’s supposedly done and be confronted by Wally, who blows up the building and kills everyone inside (except Supes obviously)
  • steals the kryptonite from Lex
  • exercises
  • sets traps and signals for Superman to come fight him
  • fights Superman with kryptonite weapons
  • is about to kill Superman but Superman mentions the name Martha (referring to Martha Kent, but Batman’s mom was also named Martha)
  • stops fighting and goes to rescue Martha Kent (who’s been kidnapped)
  • realizes only kryptonite can kill the newly created Doomsday; lures Doomsday back to Gotham so he can get the kryptonite spear he left there.
  • witnesses Superman sacrifice himself to kill Doomsday
  • threatens Lex, who warns of a coming evil thing
  • vows to find other metahumans so they can fight future evil
  • believes “men are still good” at the end

Written out like this, Batman’s actions appear to be pretty consistent and his hatred of Superman generally makes sense. Even his speech at the end kind of works since this is a veteran Batman whose decades of crimefighting seems to have turned him into a murderer, and seeing Superman’s sacrifice would snap him out of that. What irks me is that the World’s Greatest Detective doesn’t think it’s the least bit suspicious that Superman apparently killed a bunch of people in Africa and is complicit in the Senate hearing bombing while at the same time he’s been flying all over the world saving people, presumably for the last 18 months. Any chance someone may be trying to frame him, Bats?

Superman/Clark Kent…

  • saves Lois in Africa by charging a guy through a freaking wall
  • sees one news report about Batman; wants Batman dead (but not “dead,” dead)
  • does a few actually heroic things
  • sees people on TV debate whether he should be hero-ing; gets very, very sad
  • talks to Lois about how shitty people are being to him, thinks the idea of Superman is dumb
  • arrives at Senate hearing; doesn’t notice suicide wheelchair before it goes off
  • goes off to the mountains to have useless conversation with his Ghost Dad
  • saves Lois from Lex
  • gets blackmailed by Lex into fighting Batman
  • tries for approximately 10 seconds to explain the situation to Batman, then gives up and starts throwing him through buildings
  • almost gets killed before hilariously blurting out “save Marthaaaaaaaa”
  • goes back to Lex; stands there while Lex puts finishing touches on Doomsday
  • flies Doomsday out into space; gets hit by nuke
  • shakes it off, flies back down to fight Doomsday
  • saves Lois; decides ‘this is my world’
  • sacrifices himself to kill Doomsday
  • gets buried
  • is obviously not gonna stay dead

This has got to be the single worst characterization of Superman on the big screen. Zack Snyder and his screenwriters have managed to turn a pop icon, a symbol of inspiration and hope, who helps people because it’s the right thing to do, into a mopey prick who’s seriously conflicted about whether or not he should be helping anyone because some people don’t like him. That is actually what he’s struggling with in the movie. And that would’ve been fine if something in the story convinced him that humanity is worth saving, like maybe some sage advice from his goodhearted parents? Oh wait, the living one tells him he doesn’t owe humanity shit, and the dead one’s lesson implies that he shouldn’t help people because all actions have consequences.

So his arc is that he goes from basically hating mankind because they complain about him sometimes (so much so that he straight up leaves for the mountains before Lois gets kidnapped again), to resigning himself to killing someone if they can’t be reasoned with, to willing to sacrifice himself because he loves the world? Can you connect the dots with a pencil if they’re on separate sheets of paper in different rooms?

Perry White…

  • chastises Clark Kent for prioritizing reporting on Batman’s vigilantism over sports
  • allows Lois Lane to do whatever the hell she wants

Lois Lane…

  • gets taken hostage in Africa; gets saved by Superman
  • investigates weird bullets used by bad guys in Africa
  • gets kidnapped by Lex Luthor; gets saved by Superman
  • goes to help Superman before Batman kills him; takes kryptonite spear and throws it into some water
  • realizes only kryptonite can kill the newly created Doomsday (absolutely no way she can know this); goes back to water to retrieve spear she threw away
  • almost drowns; gets saved by Superman

Lois Lane’s purpose in the movie is to be rescued. Nothing else she does matters in any way.

Martha Kent…

  • tells Clark to either be the hero and symbol for hope that humanity needs or tell humanity to go fuck itself
  • gets kidnapped by Lex Luthor’s hired goons; gets saved by Batman

Ghost Jonathan Kent…

  • tells Clark a story, the moral of which is basically “if you do a good thing, bad things will happen as a result”

Clark really needed to be protected from these people when he was a boy.

Wonder Woman…

  • borrows a device Bruce Wayne was using to steal encrypted info from Lex Luthor
  • returns said device
  • sees Doomsday on TV; goes to fight Doomsday

Actually maybe this is the most consistent character arc in the movie.

Lex Luthor…

  • finds kryptonite
  • “lures” Superman to Africa because Lois was there; has a bunch of people killed to frame him?
  • talks some guy (way too easily) into giving him full access to Zod’s ship and Zod’s body
  • gains a ton of knowledge from Zod’s talking ship?
  • returns Bruce Wayne’s cheques to Wally back to him with guilt-tripping messages because he somehow knows Wayne is Batman?
  • coerces Wally into blowing up Senate hearing to frame Superman even more?
  • uses Zod’s body to create Doomsday monster
  • kidnaps Martha Kent
  • kidnaps Lois Lane for the express purpose of pushing her off a building just so Superman will come save her
  • blackmails Superman into fighting Batman
  • unleashes Doomsday
  • disappears from the movie until he somehow lands in jail
  • apparently loses his mind

You’ll notice that I don’t seem very sure about Lex Luthor’s actions in the movie. That’s because I’m not, and that’s because they don’t make any damn sense.

How does having a bunch of people in Africa SHOT BY GUNS make it look like Superman did it?
Why does Lex seem to be losing his mind before he starts talking to the Kryptonian ship (I mean, if it starts happening afterwards at least you can connect those dots into something plausible)
Why does he blow up the Senate hearing? The news immediately reports that Wally is the one who set off the bomb so there’s no way it could look like Superman did it, so WTF?
What’s his problem with Batman?
What the hell is his plan if Doomsday successfully kills Superman?

Since we’re talking about character motivation, let’s not forget the reason Lex hates Superman so much is because he wasn’t around when his dad hit him or something.

And in case you were worried the big fight with Doomsday was gonna result in even more dead bodies and destruction, Anderson Cooper helpfully points out on the news that the work day is over and therefore ALL of downtown is empty.

This movie is insane.

July 7, 2015

Batman: Arkham Knight

A LOT of thoughts here so we should just jump right in. I played Batman: Arkham Knight on PlayStation 4, and completed 100% of the Story mode.

Narrative has never been the high point of the Arkham games. I always looked at the cutscenes and dialogue exchanges as thin tissue that connected one objective to the next, and while Arkham Knight tells the best story of Rocksteady’s trilogy, like its predecessors, it makes some major missteps in its ambitious attempt to blow players’ minds. The series’ approach to the character’s mythology and its stickiness to the Arkham name has also become more problematic as it’s continued.

Spoilers on the identity of the Arkham Knight follow.

At first, the Jason Todd reveal felt like a cheat, redressing an established character (who had already been resurrected with a new alter ego years ago in the comics) and claiming he was completely original. But after thinking about it, what irked me most wasn’t the reveal itself, but how blatantly telegraphed it was, and the fact that it ended up having no effect on Batman’s arc or the larger story the game was trying to tell, which as it turns out, was another Batman-Joker story.

Or I should say, the conclusion to the Batman-Joker story that was first introduced in Arkham Asylum. And while I’m a little confused about the details that set this final, deeply internalized conflict into motion (I thought Batman cured his Joker blood infection at the end of Arkham City), the way Rocksteady brought Joker back into the game worked beautifully, as did the game’s climax, a real head trip that shows how good the developer is at playing with players’ perception and gaming mechanics themselves.

Gameplay has always been the series’ greatest strength. Before Arkham Asylum was released in 2009, no game had ever been able to capture the feeling of being Batman, and as the series progressed, Rocksteady has refined its formula to extraordinary results (with one caveat that we’ll get to in a bit). Controls feel as responsive as ever, which is critical considering that combat has gotten more challenging. The sheer number of gadgets and abilities Batman has at his disposal is overwhelming, so much so that I would recommend that newcomers play one of the earlier games first before diving in. All of them are worth playing, but Arkham City, to which Knight is a direct sequel, is the best of the earlier games from a gameplay perspective, and will put much of Knight‘s story in proper context for non-Batman fans.

One of the criticisms against the game has to do with side missions, with critics and players complaining that the series has turned into an Assassin’s Creed style of open world game, with a map riddled (no pun, I swear) with icons denoting so much content that playing the game starts to feel like checking boxes off of a to-do-list.

There are two sides to this. On the one hand, playing side missions (known as Most Wanted missions in the game) is the best way to gain the XP needed to buy upgrades, many of which are key to the whole “Be the Batman” thing this series has been pushing from the start.

Next, and most egregiously, a certain number of side missions have to be completed in order to activate the “Knightfall Protocol,” which is essentially a second ending. Then, if you want to see the FULL ending, you have to complete 100% of the side missions, meaning collecting every single Riddler trophy scattered throughout Gotham City.

This is a mistake. Instead of earning some additional reward for being a completionist, players are being punished for not completing the entire campaign. Suddenly, the so-called “side” missions, a term that’s always been used to describe an optional objective, don’t feel optional to players who only want to experience the story without having to track down all 243(!) riddles, or disable watchtower-like checkpoints throughout the city, or battle an endless number of unmanned tanks in the Batmobile.

Fortunately, there’s an easy solution to this problem, and those who don’t have the time or the patience to make it to 100% should feel no guilt about it: watch the full ending on YouTube. Not only will it save you time, but you’ll find solace in discovering that this final cutscene really isn’t worth the effort.

On the other hand, Arkham Knight does a good job of parceling out side missions in such a way that it never feels overwhelming. Not every mission is accessible at the same time, and they all play out in stages so you can’t simply play them from start to finish in one go. This may seem like a bad thing, but it helps in mixing up gameplay and keeping one type of mission (whether it’s combat, predator, Batmobile-related, etc.) from becoming stale. So any complaints that the world map has too much stuff on it is unfounded. If anything, the game’s missions are structured in such a way that it actually feels more like Arkham Asylum than Assassin’s Creed or Grand Theft Auto.

Now let’s talk Batmobile. The biggest new addition to the franchise, and a polarizing one at that. Batman’s iconic car comes in two flavors: pursuit mode and tank mode, and there’s definitely a learning curve. The control scheme takes some getting used to, and I think it took me a good dozen laps around the Riddler’s first racing course before driving started to feel good, and I wasn’t instinctively hitting the left trigger to brake/reverse. There’s an alternate control scheme that is eventually accessible in the pause menu, but I found it to be even more awkward than the default.

Tank mode seems to be the biggest point of contention among players, and while I agree that the whole concept feels out of place for the character, I still found tank battles to be a fun, arcade-y minigame that added some variety to the campaign. The problem is that these tank battles seem to get more and more frequent as the campaign goes on, and there are sections where you’re forced to “stealthily” come up behind certain enemy vehicles in order to attack them. It’s nonsensical and the complete opposite of fun.

So overall, I think the good parts of the Batmobile (including using it as a gadget to solve puzzles and being able to control it remotely) outweigh the bad, but the thing that straight up made me angry concerns a side mission that’s introduced late in the campaign (Spoilers, I guess):

After defeating the Arkham Knight, his militia forces are overtaken by Deathstroke, who’s returning from Arkham Origins to exact revenge. The Deathstroke boss fight in that game is my favorite boss battle of the entire series (yes, I like it more than the Mr. Freeze fight in City), and instead of taking that duel and refining it with a Rocksteady-level of polish, defeating Deathstroke comes down to yet another tank battle. It’s the single biggest missed opportunity in the game, and there really is no excuse for it. Deathstroke is one of the deadliest assassins in the DC Universe and you put him in a tank?

But while we’re on the subject of Arkham Origins, I was pleasantly surprised by how often the events of that game were referenced in Knight, since Rocksteady’s PR seemed to be going out of its way to ignore its existence and refer to the Arkham games as a trilogy. Knight even borrows mechanics that were introduced in that game (i.e. the crime scene reconstruction). It’s good to know that Origins is an officially recognized part of canon because, and I’m sure I’m in the minority here, if I were to rank the Arkham games based purely on narrative, I would put Origins in first place, the reasons for which I’ve talked about on this blog before. WB Games Montreal, who developed Origins, wrote a solid prequel story that does something that Rocksteady’s games have not been very good at doing: putting things in context.

Let’s use Arkham City as an example. As a longtime Batman fan, I got why Batman felt so strongly about saving Talia al Ghul (while disregarding all the other lives at stake), but for casual fans and newcomers, who may not know who the hell Talia is and why she’s important, understanding Batman’s motives requires a lot of additional reading. This is one of the Arkham series’ problems as a whole. It pulls from so many different parts of the mythology – mostly from the comics but from the animated series as well – that you could easily end up getting lost when it comes to following this Batman’s story. Hell, the fact that Jason Todd even existed in this canon* doesn’t come up until midway through Arkham Knight, and this late addition to the story just undermines the mystery of the Arkham Knight’s identity (because seriously, there’s no one else it could possibly be, and you don’t need to be a hardcore Batfan to figure that out during Knight‘s campaign).

*Yes, Jason Todd is referenced in a few easter eggs hidden throughout the games, and they’re cool, but only confuse matters further.

The criticism surrounding the treatment of the game’s female characters is… well, it’s justified. There are four major female characters in the game, three of whom share the same body type and highly sexualized/impractical fashion sense, and Barbara Gordon has been cast as the game’s go-to victim, who isn’t allowed at any point to save herself even though she was once a superhero. Hopefully the forthcoming Batgirl DLC will be able to make up for at least some of the game’s problems.

Well, I’ve been pretty negative up to this point so let me say that despite all of these problems, Arkham Knight really is the best in the series – the ultimate Batman game. Gotham City is absolutely gorgeous – a rain-soaked, neon wonderland. It feels like every street corner and every building contains some hidden easter egg that really brings the city to life, that gives it a sense of history – something I rarely think or care about in open world games, even ones based in real places. The dual play battles are so much fun that I wish there was more of them. The game contains more jump scares than most horror games, which is a hell of a feat (I freaked out during Man-Bat’s introduction). And again, the way Joker is used during the game is ingenious, giving the campaign a feeling of momentum that most open world games simply don’t have since you’re the one setting the pace.

My personal philosophy on game sequels is they’re rarely ever meant to be all that different from their predecessors. They’re the next step in the iteration process. Developers are trying to refine their ideas, not transform them. It’s one of the reasons you see so many HD remasters out there right now. A game sequel shouldn’t be held to the same standard as a movie sequel, where a phrase like “more of the same” is a pejorative. I want more of the same gameplay. It’s the tech being used to build said gameplay that should be different. As a story, Arkham Knight is deeply flawed, but as a gaming experience, it’s almost perfect, and most of the things that make it so fun to play couldn’t have been possible on last-gen hardware. We needed an asylum, a city, and their origins to get to this knight, and the team at Rocksteady can rest easy knowing that their ultimate goal has been achieved. I was the Batman.

FInal, random thoughts:

  • It made sense in Asylum, and even City, but there is absolutely NO reason this game needs to take place during ONE night. There’s at least 12 hours of gameplay here, it doesn’t make any damn sense!
  • As stated previously, the whole Arkham Knight mystery was a bust from the start, and that whole part of the story was really just an adaptation of the “Under the Hood” arc from the comics, but because the game had to have the word Arkham in its name for some reason, this “new” character was conceived.
  • As a character, the Arkham Knight is a whiny brat, not a menacing threat.
  • John Noble was fantastic as the Scarecrow, though it does kind of suck that Batman was able to defeat him in pretty much the same way he did in Arkham Asylum.
  • A lot of good voice performances all around, from Mark Hamill’s triumphant return to Jonathan Banks’ turn as Gordon, but if I’m being honest, Kevin Conroy just didn’t do it for me this time around. Maybe it was his dialogue, or the fact that Batman was just a straight up jerk throughout the whole game, but there was little nuance to his performance here.
September 23, 2014

Pilot Review: ‘Gotham’ (FOX)

gothamWhile overseeing the beating of a man in an alleyway, a thug asks a young Jim Gordon (Ben McKenzie), “How do you like Gotham so far?” Jim replies, “Well enough.”

That’s how I felt about the pilot for FOX’s ‘Gotham.’

Written and developed by ‘Rome’ and ‘The Mentalist’ creator Bruno Heller (two shows I never watched so I can’t speak to his talents), ‘Gotham’ is being described all over as a Batman story without Batman, but as the title implies, what it really is (or what I’m hoping it will be) is the story of the city itself. The pilot, directed by Danny Cannon, is an intriguing and never boring hour of TV that’s unfortunately saddled with the unenviable task of introducing a lot of characters and backstory – which it does in ways that, for the most part, feel forced and unnatural. But because this is a big network TV pilot that needs to appeal to as wide an audience as possible, this is a necessary evil that, if dispensed with quickly, can hopefully make way for something more subtle and nuanced later on. For that reason, and because Heller has stated in interviews that it will be toned down going forward, I’m willing to accept the early heavy exposition, knowing that this show isn’t in a position to be written like the first episode of ‘The Wire,’ which threw you head first into a world with little to no explanation for what was happening or why.

The pilot opens with the murder of Bruce Wayne’s (David Mazouz) parents, which everyone has seen about a thousand times before in comics, films and cartoons. What makes this version stand out is the frank depiction of the violence, blood included. The twist here is that the fresh-on-the-job Gordon (and his partner Harvey Bullock, played by Donal Logue) is the detective assigned to the case. The investigation leads to encounters with a number of characters who will definitely maybe become supervillains someday, including Ed Nygma (Cory Michael Smith), Oswald Cobblepot (Robin Lord Taylor) and Selina Kyle (Camren Bicondova). The pilot also introduces crime boss Fish Mooney, a character created specifically for the show and played by Jada Pinkett Smith, who’s clearly having a lot of fun.

To get more specific than that would be spoiling some of the more interesting aspects of this new interpretation. Gotham City has been depicted in the past (most notably in Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight trilogy) as a town ruled by crime and corruption, but usually at a point where Bruce Wayne is in a position to do something about it. What interests me most about ‘Gotham’ is seeing what Gordon—intent on cleaning up the city—does that ultimately makes things even worse. He’s always been depicted as the last honest cop in the city, and I like the idea that by the time Bruce puts on the cape and cowl that he’s become as jaded and cynical as Bullock as a result of his failure to save the city.

That’s a pretty dark way to go, but I think the fact that the show is even dancing with the idea is an achievement. There’s a palpable sense of potential and possibility in this pilot. Seeds have been planted that could pay off handsomely during the season. By the end of the hour, Gordon has already made some choices that will no doubt come back to bite him in the ass. For a moment, I was briefly reminded of the pilot for ‘The Shield,’ which is probably the highest compliment I can pay to the show. I’m hoping the writers can generate some serious tension by having Gordon (and Bullock) get into trouble, make some questionable (but not stupid) decisions and compromises, and then figure out clever ways to get out of it. I also hope that everything in between—like anything involving future villains or Barbara or young Bruce—is interesting enough that it doesn’t just feel like the show is including these elements because it feels obligated to.

While we’re on the subject of the Batman-ness of it all, any and all nods to what forensic scientist Nygma and low-level grunt Cobblepot become in the future were awful and completely unnecessary, expressed in cringe-inducing dialogue that didn’t sound the least bit natural. Dialogue was easily one of the pilot’s weakest links. I didn’t keep a running count but I’m pretty sure Gordon introduced himself as James or Jim Gordon to every single person he came in contact with throughout the episode.

But the casting is top notch, regardless. As protagonist and audience surrogate, McKenzie is rock solid as the future Police Commissioner. He maintains a soldier-like demeanor and speaking tone that makes me wish Heller didn’t tell us that Gordon was a war hero, and instead allowed us to infer that from McKenzie’s performance. Tiny nitpick aside, Gordon provides ample contrast to the rest of the characters, specifically Logue’s gruff and weathered Harvey Bullock. The actors playing villains or future villains are going a little broader, which may put some off but should be expected when watching anything related to the Batman universe.

On the technical side, ‘Gotham’ looks good, with the visual influences ranging from The French Connection to Seven to Blade Runner, and as such there’s a timeless quality to the look of the show that is probably the right way to go with a project like this. The pilot also takes advantage of shooting in New York, as it feels like the action is actually taking place in a city and not just a series of sets. There are a touch too many sweeping shots of skyscrapers, and a couple of dolly shots (I think) of McKenzie during a chase sequence that were distracting, and immediately reminded me of a similar chase from the ‘Arrow’ pilot.

Flaws aside, I’m cautiously optimistic that ‘Gotham’ could become a tremendously entertaining cop drama. The 75 years of comic book mythology provides the necessary pieces to put together a fascinating world that would be worth visiting every week. My only fear is that Heller draws too much from said mythology too often, introducing characters from the comics too soon or who serve no purpose other than to remind you what’s coming in the future (a future we’ll most likely never get to see onscreen). I’m also hoping that Heller has a plan in place for the more tired elements that he’s already brought into the show, namely young Bruce and Barbara (Erin Richards), who I’m already worried is going to suffer from what I’ll call the Laurel Lance problem – being a love interest who can’t sustain a compelling subplot on her own. In order for ‘Gotham’ to really shine it’ll have to find a way to make all of this work and not just half of it because, as another cop show I mentioned earlier proved so well so often, all the pieces matter.

July 23, 2014

A look back at the Batman: Arkham games

I meant to have my post about Batman on TV up before this one but since I’m still working on it, and because today is Batman Day, I’m putting this one up a little early.

Yes, there have been numerous Batman video games over the past couple of decades, but really, this series is the only one that matters. Nothing else comes close. And as gamers everywhere anticipate the Dark Knight’s next-gen debut in 2015 with Arkham Knight, let’s take a look back at this series, starting with the first game to actually make you feel like you were Batman.

Arkham Asylum (2009)

I was on vacation in the States when Arkham Asylum came out. I remember walking into an HMV with the intention of simply checking out the game box. I couldn’t do that, because they were sold out. When I came back home, it was sold out. Everywhere. It stayed that way for at least a few weeks, and when I finally got my hands on the game, it didn’t take long to understand why. This was the Batman game I’d been waiting for. A dark, atmospheric descent into Gotham City’s favorite nuthouse, Arkham Asylum allowed me to do so many of the things I’d seen the Caped Crusader do in film and animation. I had the grapple gun, I could glide for long distances with my cape, I beat down a room full of enemies in one sustained freeflow of movement (a brilliant in-game example of the character’s gracefulness and brutality). I struck fear into the hearts of the cowardly and superstitious (I’m not just using that turn of phrase – enemies actually got scared), I analyzed clues, followed evidence trails, solved riddles, and I confronted my nemesis and my demons.

And I actually wasn’t even all that impressed by the game’s story (despite the fact that it was written by the great Paul Dini), which speaks to how strong the game was on the gameplay side. The story functioned well enough as a means of allowing me to do Bat-things and encounter some familiar bad guys, and the game did so many things right that I was able to overlook weaker moments, such as walking (slowly) through a maze of sewer tunnels and fighting a mutant-sized Joker at the end. What an anticlimax that was.

It didn’t matter. The rest of Arkham Asylum was such a blast to play and sold so well that a sequel was inevitable. I wasn’t sure how Rocksteady Studios would be able to top it.

Arkham City (2011)

I’ve already described the many ways in which Arkham Asylum allowed you to be Batman, but that was all within the confines of an island separate from the rest of the city, and really, what’s Batman without Gotham City? Rocksteady’s next game was an attempt to drop the Dark Knight into an open world setting in the form of a walled off section of the city where criminals were imprisoned, but free to do as they wished. After a fantastic opening sequence that sees Bruce Wayne intentionally getting himself thrown into this prison (from which the game’s title takes its name), you too are free to do as you wish. Despite the map not being as outright massive as a Liberty City or Italy in the 16th century, there is plenty to do in Arkham City, and if I haven’t mentioned this enough times already, you do it as the Batman.

Arkham City felt like a natural next step for the series, one that didn’t see any significant changes to the way you played as Batman, but refined all the things I loved about the first one. The combat system was fleshed out and made deeper and better, the expanded setting allowed for a lot more traversal which was a joy, and the boss battles were improved (mostly — there were still some stinkers in there). However, the story once again proved to be a disappointment. In Hugo Strange we had an intriguing villain whose master plan was shrouded in mystery, and that turned out to be a good thing, because when said plan was set in motion and the “real” bad guy revealed, I was not impressed. And the disparate story threads failed to come together in any meaningful way. The most memorable thing about the story was the ending, but it didn’t feel particularly well earned, done more for the shock value than because it was the right ending to this story.

But this shouldn’t dissuade you from playing Arkham City, which functions beautifully as a game if not as a great Batman tale. I spent a lot of time playing this game. It offers as complete a package as you can find for a single player experience, and it’s one of the few games I still return to every now and then if I feel like beating up some thugs or just taking a nighttime glide.

Arkham Origins (2013)

There was a lot of disappointment on the interwebs following the announcement that the next game in the Arkham series wasn’t being developed by Rocksteady. Almost immediately gamers had decided that Arkham Origins, a prequel in the series’ timeline, wouldn’t be as good as its predecessors, which had set the bar pretty damn high. I actually wrote a post on another blog noting the ways in which the switch in developer did not mean instant doom, and the reasons why we should have been excited for its arrival.

Did the game live up to expectations? Yes and no.

In terms of gameplay, Origins was almost identical to Arkham City, which at times gave the game an overly familiar feeling, but the tweaks and additions the team at Warner Bros. Montreal made hindered my overall enjoyment. Combat felt ever so slightly off. The new crime scene investigations were half-baked; a neat way of playing a sequence that could’ve been a simple cutscene, but a disappointment because they did all the work for me. Navigating certain environments felt repetitive because many rooms looked the same. And there were several bugs and glitches, which was especially noticeable because the earlier games had been so polished. All the things I loved about the previous Arkham titles I loved a little less. The game was still fun to play, but could also be a little frustrating this time around.

On the other hand, Arkham Origins managed to correct pretty much everything I didn’t like about the previous games, starting with the story. This turned out to be a strong early-career Batman tale, depicting a younger and less refined Batman and his first encounters with a number of key figures in the mythology, including the Joker. I’m not the biggest fan of cutscenes in games. If I’m not interested in a story, I tend to check out during cutscenes. That didn’t happen my first time playing Arkham Origins. The meetings between Batman and Joker, Batman and Gordon, and scenes between Batman and Alfred were given the weight you should expect from such moments, and even though such encounters have been depicted in the past, they felt fresh here, because they were connected by an honest-to-goodness character arc. Batman’s stubbornness and reluctance to trust anyone is the throughline of the game’s campaign, and as events play out, he comes to the realization that in order to accomplish his mission, he’s going to need help. It’s simple but it’s clear, and the game never forgets that.

It’s the little details that allow Arkham Origins to rise above its flaws. The opening cutscene reflects a photo of young Bruce and his parents in a dinner tray cover. Alfred calls in while you’re on patrol to wish you a Merry Christmas (the game takes place on Christmas Eve). There’s a great sequence in the middle of the game that takes you into the Joker’s mind after he first meets Batman. Even the game’s trophies contain references to important parts of Batman lore. I consider the score composed by Christopher Drake (who’s done the music for a number of animated Batman films) to be the best of the series. Another improvement over earlier games is the boss battles, with the best being an early duel between Batman and Deathstroke that tests your timing and reflexes.

If only the controls and other gameplay additions were as well modulated as they were in Arkham City. As it stands, Arkham Origins is absolutely still worth playing for Batman fans, and I enjoyed my time with it despite its quirks.

Oh, and there’s also multiplayer. It’s crap.

July 16, 2014

A look back at Batman’s big screen adventures

In honor of the 75th anniversary of the Bat-Man’s comic book debut (in the pages of Detective Comics in 1939), and because he’s my favorite superhero ever, I’m devoting the next several blog posts to a retrospective on some of the Caped Crusader’s most iconic appearances in film, television, and gaming. One of the reasons the character has endured for so long is because he’s proven to be incredibly adaptable to every form of media. In the comics, he started out as a vigilante (who killed people), then became less murder-y and more campy, then turned dark again along with a healthy dose of brooding. My introduction to Batman began in film and TV before I started reading comics, and while I haven’t kept up with that in recent years, I have sampled most, if not all of his big and small screen adventures. In this post, I look back on the Dark Knight’s career in movies:

Batman (1966)

Come on, how can you not love a movie in which Batman fends off a rubber shark using Shark-repellent Bat Spray? The movie version of the 1966 Batman TV series isn’t much more than a double-length episode of the show, and that was more than okay with me. As a kid, I enjoyed the movie mostly because there were dudes with masks and capes punching bad guys. As an adult, I was able to appreciate the comedy and the joyfully over-the-top nature of the performances. The movie is hilarious and fun in the same way that Batman & Robin (more on that below) is hilarious and un-fun.

Favorite moment: It always makes me laugh when Robin deduces that Catwoman is a member of a newly formed gang of rogues (that also includes Joker, Penguin and the Riddler) because the early shark attack happened at sea (“Sea? C for Catwoman!”), but by far the best moment is this one:

Batman (1989)

I revisited the film recently in honor of the 25th anniversary of its theatrical release and I was struck by just how bizarre the whole thing is, but not in a, “What was I thinking liking this movie?” kind of way. Half of what happens in the movie doesn’t make any sense, but it remains fast paced and highly watchable. Many people were quick to dismiss what Jack Nicholson did in this movie when The Dark Knight came out, but it’s an entertainingly hammy performance, nicely offset by Michael Keaton’s mostly internalized approach. I had no trouble at all getting into the film; it’s mostly responsible for my love for the character.

Oh, and that Danny Elfman score. Absolutely perfect.

Favorite moment: I love Joker’s redecorating of the Flugelheim Museum set to Prince’s “Partyman,” but the most badass moment occurs just before this clip, in which two freaked out thugs shoot Batman seemingly dead, only to turn and see him stand right back up.

Batman Returns (1992)

By the time Batman Returns came around, Tim Burton had pretty much abandoned any attempt to ground this series in anything resembling reality. Between the deformed boy being raised by penguins and the dead woman being nursed back to life by cats, it became pretty clear early on that Burton saw Gotham City as some grotesque gothic playground – a world in which a bunch of supremely damaged individuals could only survive by wearing the skins of other creatures.

Batman Returns is really unlike any Batman film out there, but it’s easily one of the most entertaining. The whole thing is just so weird, and I love that.

Favorite moment: After Selina Kyle survives getting pushed out a window by her boss, she returns to her apartment and proceeds to go insane. Awesomely:

Batman: Mask of the Phantasm (1993)

The most overlooked movie here, Mask of the Phantasm was originally meant to be a direct-to-video release, but because the Animated Series (on which the movie is based) was such a success, Warner Bros. decided to release it in theatres, where it died a quick and undeserved death. It’s a shame because before Christopher Nolan’s films, it was the best Batman movie ever made, and I still hold it in pretty high regard. Set up as a murder mystery involving a brand new villain, Mask of the Phantasm tells a story from Bruce Wayne’s past that may have had a bigger impact on his decision to become Batman than even the death of his parents. Instead of the same origin story which even at this point everyone knew, we got something surprising and surprisingly effective: a love story.

Favorite moment: Young Bruce, standing before their grave, begs his parents for their permission to go back on his vow so that he can lead a normal life with the woman he loves:

Batman Forever (1995)

I watched all these movies when I was a kid, so I was unaware of anything going on behind the scenes or really noticing that anything was different onscreen. Batman was Batman no matter who was playing him, and a new Batman movie was going to be amazing whether it was actually any good or not.

So I loved Batman Forever when I first saw it, but now I’m aware of the sharp change in tone, and I see the film for what it really is: the beginning of the (first) end. As a sequel to Burton’s films, it’s a complete and utter failure, but given that Batman is now played by Val Kilmer, it’s not difficult to look at the film as its own separate thing, and if you’re willing to accept a campier and more colorful version that brings back memories of the Adam West era, it’s pretty watchable. You just have to know what you’re getting yourself into.

The “I’ll get drive-through” line really says it all.

Favorite moment: Though I still don’t understand why Batman needed to ask a riddle before destroying Riddler’s thought-sucking machine with a batarang, I do enjoy the subsequent leap Batman makes to save both love interest Chase Meridian and Robin.

Batman & Robin (1997)

And here we come to the film that killed a franchise for 8 years. I was able to accept Forever‘s attempt at a lighter Batman because it still played out as a real movie, whereas Batman & Robin simply doesn’t work on any basic level of filmmaking. It’s just two hours of puns, rubber nipples, puns, completely phoned in or just plain awful performances, and puns. It boggles my mind that the dude who wrote this script went on to win an Oscar. This should have precluded him from being eligible for any award. But probably the worst thing I can say about it is that it wasn’t even bad enough to kill the careers of anyone in the main cast. All of them survived and kept working. I have nothing else to say about Batman & Robin, except that it’s best enjoyed as something you laugh at and rip apart with your friends than as an actual movie.

Favorite moment: There’s just so many to choose from….fortunately someone was kind enough to edit them all together in one handy video:

Batman Begins (2005)

It’s pretty crazy to think about the difference in anticipation between this film when it first came out and its sequels. I recall the marketing machine wasn’t really going at 100%, and good seats were not hard to come by when my friends and I went to see it.

But we know what happened next. The movie turned out to be great and, for better or worse, was responsible for the subsequent flood of dark, serious, gritty reboots of other worn out franchises. I think it holds up very well, and does a fantastic job of tracing Bruce Wayne’s path from guilt-ridden and angry young man to hero.

Favorite moment: I stand by my belief that the chase between the Tumbler and the police is the best setpiece in Nolan’s trilogy, but the moment that made me realize this movie was special was this one (and look, there’s Joffrey Lannister!):

The Dark Knight (2008)

Plainly and simply, this is the best superhero movie ever made. All superhero stories are at its core about good vs. evil, and nowhere does that theme play out as starkly or tragically as it does here. Heath Ledger’s Joker is a creature of absolute chaos. That’s all he lives for. There is no reason or motivation and that just makes him more frightening. His schemes serve to place Batman in the most harrowing of moral quandaries, and it’s a testament to Christopher Nolan and his screenwriters’ that everything does not simply go back to normal when Batman defeats him. Both Batman and Jim Gordon had to make tough decisions in order to save their city, and when the film reaches its brutal end they’re forced to live with the consequences of those decisions.

I was completely shaken the first time I saw The Dark Knight, so much so that it’s easy for me to overlook the flaws that become apparent during subsequent viewings. Many will complain about plotholes (which is always hard to take seriously since anything and everything unexplained can be a plothole to people on the internet), and I’ll admit the editing of the action setpieces is not very good, but the film is working on a level that’s greater than the sum of its parts.

That’s what I love most about this movie. It’s a compelling crime film on its own, but there are much bigger ideas at play here that give it the kind of gravitas that’s reserved for the very best film has to offer.

Favorite moment: You can’t beat that ending:

The Dark Knight Rises (2012)

Okay, is it the best possible ending that it could have been? No. But it’s still an incredibly massive (in both scope and length) spectacle that manages to satisfactorily close out Nolan’s trilogy in a way that’s both emotionally resonant and surprisingly hopeful. I watched the film twice in theatres, the first time in IMAX, which was really something else. I do wish the seats I got weren’t so close, though.

Favorite moment: This hit hard the first time I saw it:

Side note: I never really understood why Nolan didn’t just have John Blake be the boy that Batman encounters in the first film. Sure, the boy might have been a tad too young, and Joseph Gordon-Levitt doesn’t look like Joffrey, but Maggie Gyllenhaal didn’t look like Katie Holmes. It would’ve made the connection between the first and third films much, much stronger.