Bat Movies Part 3: Batman & Mask of the Phantasm

Gordon Terry

Movies Gordon, Jr. enjoys . . . I hope you guys do Batman vs Dracula!!!! (Sage Stallone; we miss you)

Jul 19 - 06:11 PM

Justin D.

Bruce Timm truly reinvented the DC universe with Batman the Animated Series (followed soon after by Superman). He wrote a children's action cartoon that wasn't afraid to let adults know they could watch it too. Mask of the Phantasm threw away what little family friendly fare the series had out the window and focused solely on telling a gritty Batman story that just happened to be animated. I stand by my claim that Mark Hamill and Heath Ledger are tied in portraying the most inventive and twisted versions of the Joker seen on film or television.

Jul 19 - 06:15 PM

Captain Terror

I'm going to speak up for the Adam West era here. The genius of that show is that as a 60s TV comedy I'd rank it up there with Get Smart and others. And yet, when I was a child in the 70s it completely worked as a superhero show as well. I wasn't totally unaware that it was meant to be tongue-in-cheek, but it was the only place outside of Superfriends cartoons where you could actually see supervillains on tv. We had live-action Hulk, Spidey, Shazam & Wonder Woman shows, but none of them ever fought anyone worse than jewel thieves or crooked politicians or whatever. Hell, even Reeve's Superman fought a leisure-suited Lex Luthor. So the show tends to get short-changed (like in this article), but for a lot of us it was the bomb.

(And the Tumbler isn't fit to suck the '66 Batmobile's tailpipe!!)

Jul 19 - 07:09 PM

Marco Miceli

yes some Phantasm love. by that i mean i loved the movie and watched it one rand over and over as a kid. still think its great. rewatched it last night.

Jul 19 - 08:43 PM

Chris Moore

MOTP is one of my picks for the most underrated animated theatrical films of all time. An awesome movie.

Jul 19 - 09:17 PM

Christopher Kulik

I also need to put in some commentary on the '60s show as our dear Alex missed the boat, evidently because he ate really shitty cereal back in the day.

In the commentary for BATMAN: THE MOVIE, Adam West notes that he "recently" (late '90s, we're talking about, but whatever) read an article which boasted that in the 1960s, there were The Three B's: Beatles, Bond & Batman. Even though I didn't catch the show until twenty years after its debut in re-runs, from all the past testimony I was informed through written sources and recounted by relatives/baby boomers, BATMAN was a pretty HUGE deal in the summer of 1966, the peak of the show's popularity.

Contrary to popular belief, when BATMAN was first launched in January of 1966 it wasn't the extremely campy show we recognize it as today. The first two episodes (Hi Diddle Diddle/Smack in the Middle) with the Riddler as the first to be introduced in the Rogues Gallery of Villains, the camp humor was minimal and the show actually boasted a semi-serious tone--the cliffhanger has the Riddler about to operate on Robin's brain while's the boy is unconscious. In fact, it wasn't until the second season in which the camp factor was cranked up to 11--but it was all intentional. West & Ward have this magic chemistry which bat-zookas into hilarity more often than not. The show was also blessed by some good actors like Burgess Meredith (as the Penguin), Cesar Romero (as the Joker, the role Frank Sinatra lobbied for), George Sanders/Eli Wallach/Otto Preminger (as Mr. Freeze), Cliff Robertson as Shane, etc.

Best of all, though, is Frank Gorshin as the Riddler and I'm grateful he was included among the quartet of villains in THE MOVIE. Few remember that he actually received an Emmy nomination for his performance as the Riddler in the first two Batman episodes. While he appeared three or four more times in Season One, Gorshin would only come back for a third-season solo episode; something about contract disputes is what I read, though I wouldn't be surprised if Gorshin left because he had disliked how increasingly campy the show was getting. The Riddler only appeared once in Season 2, and he was played by John Astin the original Gomez Addams; another two-part story of the Riddler was filmed, however he was modified just prior to shooting, turning into The Puzzler played by Maurice Evans (???).

Sure, BATMAN had its outlandish cliffhangers, weird fetishes and other experimental indulgences, so much so you wonder how high the cast and crew really were (this WAS the mid-60s, all I'm saying). When you watch THE MOVIE the entire Miss Kitka subplot is packed with sexual innuendos, and I'm sure every single one were intentional on the part of screenwriter Lorenzo Semple, Jr (he later wrote the FLASH GORDON movie, love this guy!). At one point, you see a copy of the Gotham City Times contain a massive headline BRUCE WAYNE AND GIRL COMPANION KIDNAPPED; look quickly, as a smaller headline underneath reads "Attractive Girl Friend Seized in Brazen Snatch." How can this not be intentional??? Seriously?!

BATMAN 1966 is in a whole different league than the dark contemporary movie versions, with the exception of B&R, but that was made only to sell a shitload of toys--there was nothing witty or tongue-in-cheek about it. Some think RT shouldn't include THE MOVIE because it's so different, though this is really fan-boy speak for not 'taking its source material seriously'; this may be true, but that doesn't mean BATMAN has no respect for the source material. And, from what I understand, the series practically saved the character, who by this time was on life support, in the comics. (I'm sure that will spark a discussion, however if someone could give me a proper confirmation which lacks any vitriol, I would appreciate it!).

Bottom line is BATMAN the show and the movie gets a bad rap by contemporary audiences which I feel is unjustified. Sure, you have to realize this was made in well, maybe not more innocent, but simpler times. As I said, Batman was hardly a phenomenon at the time, quite the opposite; the exposure the character got is to be celebrated, as this was the first time he was seen live action in COLOR--again, hard to believe, but it was a massive deal at the time. Now if only Fox can get out this rights quagmire, we could have the show on DVD restored with special features. For me, it's one of the last--in fact, it MAY BE THE LAST, of the 'must-owns' yet to be released on DVD. And the studio knows it will make bank, so it's going to happen eventually even if it's watered down in terms of snipping cameo appearances or removing Neil Hefti's theme (the thought makes me wanna gnash my teeth).

"Holy Hallucination!"
"I wish it were Robin, but it's not---it's five dehydrated pirates, RE-HYDRATED!"

Jul 19 - 10:07 PM

Alberto Zeeky

Batman: The Movie taught me there is such things as exploding sharks.

Jul 19 - 10:11 PM

Frisby 2007

After this movie (Phantasm), NONE of the theatrical Batman movies were any good (even though Nolan's Batman movies are definitely better than the crap-ass Batman Forever, & Batman & Robin).

Jul 20 - 12:57 AM

Caddy Cadogan

Rises won't be as good as Phantasm. Calling it.

Jul 20 - 02:04 AM

joshua zimmer

God... I remember seeing this(Phantasm)with my mom who also liked it.And thats saying something

Jul 20 - 05:58 AM

Andrew Krauss

Phantasm is definitely enjoyable, there just happen to be about two-dozen episodes from TAS that were superior to it as far as story and pacing. At this point there are also several other animated direct to video features starring/co-starring Bats that I'd rank above it.

Jul 20 - 07:03 AM

King Simba

It's really interesting how Batman has seen so many widely different intereptations. The difference between Batman 1966 and The Dark Knight in tone is so great it's hard to believe that they feature the same character.

It's also interesting how all these different intereptations - excluding the Schumacher era - managed to work in their own way. Batman 1966 still remains by far the funniest Batman movie (Hand me the shark repellent Bat-Spray). Ironically, my biggest complaint was that the villain scenes were pretty dull compared to the scenes with Batman and Robin, something quite contrary to later Batman films, though I think that mainly has to do with me seeing the film after I had seen all of the other Batman films before it, which made it hard to watch the performances without thinking of the way actors like Ledger and Pffier completely stole the show portraying these villains (heck, in Ledger's case, he's made it hard to watch any other Joker performance period).

Jul 20 - 11:01 AM

Lloyd Griffin

I'm truly mystified by this writer's take on the Batman movies. Bat Man and Robin is a kitschy romp while Batman The Movie is crap? Batman and Robin was a uniquely horrible piece of guano with no redeeming qualities whatsoever. It's virtually unwatchable, no matter what level of controlled substances you've got in your system, and Batman Forever was only slightly less vile. Part of what made Batman and Robin so terrible is its attempt to invoke the sixties TV show. The makers of Batman The Movie set out to make a bad movie and succeeded with hilarious results, a feet that many have tried and most have failed.

Jul 20 - 03:13 PM

Jeffrey Thompson

The beginning of Mask of the Phantasm is EPIC! Thank you Shirly Walker, RIP.

Jul 20 - 05:03 PM