RECENT WATCHES: The Batman (2022)

Since busting onto the pop culture scene over eighty years ago, Batman has made countless cinematic appearances. From the high camp of the Adam West days to the gothic fantasies of Tim Burton’s films, the Dark Knight has explored just about every tone imaginable on-screen. Yet, discounting his occasional appearances as a Lego mini-fig, it seems the Caped Crusader’s films have been stuck in “dark and gritty” mode for the last seventeen years. Christopher Nolan’s trilogy was so focused on realism that it sometimes seemed actively ashamed of its comic book roots. Zack Snyder’s Batman was a hyper-violent fascist. So when the trailers for “The Batman” appeared, I was a little exhausted by what looked to be another grim and gritty take on Gotham’s favorite vigilante. Ya know, I just wanted a Batman movie that was a little fun, that had a little color in it. I went into the theaters a skeptic but I’m happy to say Matt Reeves’ bat-epic won me over. 

For two years now, billionaire orphan Bruce Wayne has been operating as the vigilante Batman. His brutal tactics terrify the criminals of Gotham City but seem to have done little to lower the crime rate. His obsessive one-man crusade has lead to an unsteady truce with the city’s police, especially Lt. James Gordon. When the mayor is murdered in his own home, and the killer leaves a note for the Batman, the two team up to investigate. The killer taunts the police and calls himself The Riddler, leaving elaborate clues and striking again and again. Bruce Wayne digs into the corrupt heart of Gotham City, encountering crime bosses and a cat woman and a penguin, as he unravel a mystery that is closer to home than initially expected. 

Each new cinematic iteration of Batman promises to bring something new to the table. While Reeves’ film does seem indebted to Nolan’s work to some degree, it ultimately finds a tone all its own. Batman’s status as the World’s Greatest Detective is emphasized. The film actually does devote long stretches of its runtime to Bruce Wayne digging through old documents, trying to unravel clues, and following leads. For the first time in any film, you feel like Batman actually does the detective work necessary to earn his title. A neo-noir atmosphere is built around the detective angle, with a plot that focuses on corruption in a filthy, hopeless city. There are times when the superhero action theatrics feel secondary to involving the viewer in the mystery and creating thrills. 

“The Batman’s” story veers towards convoluted at times but it’s twisted web of villains and vigilantes coheres in a clever way. All of these masked figures, it turns out, have some pretty serious Daddy Issues. Batman’s crusade is explicitly characterized as one of vengeance for his dead parents. Catwoman, we soon discover, is looking to uncover the deadbeat dad that abandoned her. The Riddler, meanwhile, is also motivated by the murder of his father and the injustice he felt as an orphan. The reveal that Thomas Wayne, usually depicted as nothing but a saintly patriarch, might have something to do with this is a much needed one. No dad is perfect — lots of them are bad people — and making Bruce’s father a flawed figure makes his own story more nuanced. Meanwhile, the figure of the mayor’s orphaned son repeatedly appears, reminding everyone of the loss of innocence that triggers these issues. By rooting everyone’s motivation in a broken childhood, “The Batman” adds some appreciated complexity to the Dark Knight’s story. And all of that without another tedious visit to Crime Alley or a splintering pearl necklace. 

What most impressed me about “The Batman” is that Bruce Wayne gets a character arc that isn’t based in him overcoming a villain or building up his heroic persona. In his first scene, Batman beats a goon so brutally that the person he rescued is more scared of him than the attackers. He talks over and over again about “vengeance,” obsessed with reordering a chaotic, corrupt world into something that makes sense for him. Yet, as the story goes on, Bruce sees how deeply rooted these problems are in Gotham City. He discovers a police force that is not just complacent but actively participating in the destruction of their own city. He grows as a person, realizing vengeance alone isn’t enough to resolve these problems. This isn’t a narrative origin for Batman but a psychological, philosophical one. And that’s something I’m genuinely not sure we’ve seen before. 

Stepping into the bat-suit this time is Robert Pattinson. While Pattinson has done everything he can in the last decade to distance himself from his “Twilight” beginnings, working with respected auteurs in aggressively weird independent films, I’ll admit I still hadn’t shaken my image of him as blandly brooding Edward Cullen. Well, it finally happened. Pattinson supposedly didn’t bathe while in his superhero costume and that grunginess is palatable on-screen. This is a Bruce Wayne that doesn’t sleep. He’s pale and seems constantly exhausted. Through Pattinson’s voiceover narration, we get a peek at his truly obsessive thoughts. Never before have you so keenly felt how much Bruce Wayne’s quest is molded by his childhood trauma. When he has to do things like inject himself with adrenaline or make a desperate escape from the police station, you even get the distinct impression that this Batman is more unhealthy than an unstoppable ubermensch. It is, somehow, a new take on the character, at least in the movies. 

While Reeves’ movie is a lot closer aesthetically to “Batman Begins” than “Batman Returns,” I’m happy to say this movie has one thing in common with Burton’s films. Burton’s sequel operated on a barely contained lust, the characters seemingly addressing their sex drives through violence and kinky costumes. Reeves happily returns to these hormones. Pattinson’s Batman is a voyeur, watching Zoe Kravitz’ Selina Kyle slip out of her work clothes and into her Catwoman suit. The next scene has the two wrestling in a way that seems more than a little suggestive. Kravtiz’ Catwoman, while never underselling the character’s complex personality and back story, still purrs with sensuality. These two are extremely into each other and always seem minutes away from consummating their relationship. But their twisted personalities sublimates these desires into their obsessive quests. This is the first superhero movie I’ve seen in a while where it seems like people actually have sex. And that is much appreciated. 

Something else Reeves' film has in common with Burton's is a grand, gothic soundtrack. Michael Giacchino provides tolling bells, shrieking strings, and an immediately recognizable four note motif for the main character .These combine to make a theatrical and memorable musical soundscape. It matches a moody, grungy depiction of Gotham City. David Fincher seems to be the main inspiration here, as we're dropped into a city where everything is dirty, overcast or cold. Darkness and foreboding red are the main colors on display here, creating a truly hellish setting.

Another thing that made me skeptical about this movie is the Riddler being the villain. I’ve always found the Riddler to be the goofiest of Batman’s A-list rogues and the idea of reinventing him as a conniving serial killer struck me as a deeply boring choice. Yet the film ultimately makes it work. First off, unlike some in-name-only versions of classic villains we’ve gotten, the film still respects the character’s central gimmick. This Riddler still tells riddles. In fact, patterning his elaborate game after the Zodiac Killer’s ciphers works better in execution than I would’ve thought. This Riddler is also clearly influenced by Jigsaw, with the deadly trap he sticks his victims in, and “Seven’s” John Doe, with his twisted modus operandi and cramped apartment full of notebooks. 

Mostly, what makes this Riddler work for me is Paul Dano. Dano plays the villain as a master manipulator second and a huge fucking nerd first. He laughs awkwardly. His body language is never comfortable. His voice breaks during his villainous monologues. His motivations are ultimately petty and frustrated. And, like all nerds, he looks up to Batman. I was pleased to see the film successfully reinvent the character as a serious threat while keeping his most important qualities intact. 

And if this Riddler is a huge nerd, he’s also extremely online. Another influence on this version of the character is the cult of Q-Anon. He posts his ranting videos online and has a devoted group of followers, who repeat his catchphrases and follow his lead. At about the two hour mark, “The Batman’s” story seems just about resolved… Until it launches into an additional fourth act, that brings this element to the forefront. The Riddler then becomes a symbol of domestic terrorism and mass shootings in the new millennium, invoking a world where angry young men are radicalized into killers by enflamed online rhetoric. Whether or not it’s tasteful for a superhero movie to knowingly draw comparisons to real life acts of violence — or if this movie needed to be three hours long — are debatable. Yet at least “The Batman” wants to actually comment on the world, however vaguely, instead of just being escapist entertainment. 

As much as "The Batman" is focused on the psychological state of its characters and diving deep into its conspiracy, this is still a thrilling action movie. The standout action sequence is a freeway chase between the Penguin's getaway car and the souped-up muscle car Batmobile. The vehicles swerve in and around traffic, flames shooting from the engine as eighteen wheelers crash around them. Another equally tense moment has Pattinson ascending a staircase out of the police building before swooping off the roof in a flight suit, something he's clearly never done before and isn't sure if it'll work. Reeves dots the film with exciting moments like that, such as a hail of gunfire in a darkened hallway or an acrobatic brawl in a staircase. Yet the most exciting scene in the film features relatively fewer pyrotechnics. It instead involves Batman trying to talk a panicked victim of the Riddler through a series of questions before the bomb strapped to his neck goes off.

"The Batman" squeezes in a lot over its three hour runtime. This includes a number of meaty roles for established members of the Batman supporting cast. Jeffrey Wright makes for a memorably pragmatic Jim Gordon. He plays well off of Pattinson's brooding Dark Knight, even get some of the movie's funnier moments. John Turturro appears as Carmine Falcone, the crime boss pulling many of the story's strings. Turturro is certainly capable of hamming it up as an unhinged villain but instead goes in the opposite direction. His Falcone is calm, collected, observant, a slow and careful speaker. This makes it all the more intimidating when he does lash out in violence. I do wish Andy Serkis was given a little more to do as Alfred. Outside the obligatory scene where he establishes himself as Bruce's real father figure and a couple of moments of banter, he's mostly in the background. And I don't know why they cast Colin Feral as the Penguin, only to make him totally unrecognizable with make-up, but his palooka minor mafioso take on the famous bird-themed villain is memorable nevertheless. 

"The Batman" still has its flaws. It's definitely too long, the story feeling more-or-less over before the disaster-filled bonus finale begins. That's kind of an odd structure, even if it mostly works. I'm also not a huge fan of the goofy mask Catwoman wears in a few scenes. Reeves mostly avoids the sequel hooks and Easter eggs you associate with modern superhero movies... Save for the seriously unpromising teasing of Batman's most famous enemy, a character I think I've had my fill of. (Reeves claims this isn't a sequel hook but I don't believe him.) Despite those issues, I still found "The Batman" to be an extremely well made contribution to the character's cinematic legacy. Somehow, it manages to find new things to say about a superhero we're all very familiar, putting a thrilling and insight take on Gotham and the hero who protects it. [8/10]

Christmas 2021: December 10th

Silent Night, Deadly Night 4: Initiation (1990)

It's been a few years since I've reviewed a "Silent Night, Deadly Night" movie. You can credit this to my inability to get a Christmas marathon rolling and not because I don't enjoy these movies. I actually love the first one and the second film is, if nothing else, wildly entertaining. "Silent Night, Deadly Night 3: Better Watch Out" does represent the tedious low-point of the series. Yet it must've sold well on video, as a fourth installment in the Christmas horror series would arrive in 1990, the very next year... Sort of. Let us attempt to unravel the case of "Silent Night, Deadly Night 4: Initiation," another challenger for the title of strangest sequel in a long-running slasher movie franchise. 

A woman bursts into flames above a Chinese butcher shop and jumps to her death. Kim, who is stuck editing personal ads for the the Los Angeles Eye, wants to write a story about the event. When her boss —  as well as her boyfriend, who also works for the paper — discourage her from investigating, she does it in her own. She comes across Fima, a woman who runs an occult book store and leads an all-women cult of Lilith worshippers. As Christmas draws closer, Kim is pulled into the cult and forced to participate in disturbing rituals... Which involves enormous bugs and a murderous transient. 

You'll notice that the above plot description has nothing to do with past "Silent Night, Deadly Night" movies. Part three had already abandoned the controversial Santa killer angle and "Initiation" strays even further. Clint Howard plays a character named Ricky, the mentally ill homeless man that acts as the witch's servant. Whether he's meant to be the same Ricky that Bill Moseley and Eric Freeman played is not clear. The only reference to the previous films is when Clint watches a clip of the third movie on television. In fact, Christmas plays only a small role in the sequel. "Initiation" was directed by Brian Yunza right after he made "Society." Rumors persist that the film's script was actually salvaged from an unmade sequel to that movie. This has never been confirmed but the story here, of a secret circle that does bizarre body-bending, certainly has more in common with "Society" than "Silent Night, Deadly Night." The disconnect with the other entries is such that this was released under the title "Bugs" in the U.K. 

If "Initiation" isn't a "Silent Night, Deadly Night" sequel, what is it? This is a kinky, gross-out horror movie that contains a number of interesting ideas. Kim and Doug, her boyfriend, are introduced having enthusiastic sex. Yet sex is the only way he can relate to her. Similarly, none of the staff at the newspaper take her seriously, strictly because of her gender. Fima's coven, meanwhile, is built for woman, by women. They worship Lilith and special attention is drawn to Adam's first wife's refusal to lay under him during sex. Naturally, this foreshadows a later scene where Kim ties up Doug and jumps on top. 

This is far from the only way these pagan themes influence the story. Spirals, the oldest of all human symbols, reoccur throughout the film. Kim was raised Jewish and, when she points out to Doug's very Christian dad that Christmas rituals are based on pagan ones, he's extremely offended. Fima — whose name sounds like "feminist" — seems to harbor some lesbian attraction to Kim. All this suggest "Initiation" is a movie all about women breaking free from the regressive, patriarchal, and explicitly Christian traditions of American society to embrace older beliefs that actually value women. 

If all of that sounds a little ambitious for a low budget, quickie horror sequel, it is. "Initiation" does not blend these ideas into a coherent whole. Doug is, at best, an insensitive boyfriend. His dad is a real asshole and ends up strangled with Christmas lights, during one of the more traditional "Silent Night, Deadly Night" moments. Yet the coven converting Kim are still the movie's villains. They manipulate Kim's mind and inflict all sorts of horrifying rituals on her. The worst of which has Ricky donning a phallic mask and raping Kim. I'm not quite sure what that has to do with the coven's feminist beliefs. The film's themes are confused and its story is frequently incoherent, as the scenes of Ricky killing people and the spontaneous human combustion seemed tossed in. 

And what about those giant bugs? Fima believes that Lilith was the serpent in the Garden of Eden, which makes her the patron spirit of everything that creeps and crawls. No snakes appear in the movie but it's loaded with slimy beetles and grubs of varying size. The film seems obsessed with shoving its oversized creepy crawlers in and around people's face. Kim eats a beetle, vomits it up, and later gives birth to an enormous worm through her mouth. Screaming Mad George provides the vivid special effects, creating twitching giant larva and crawling huge beetles. Later, slime gushes from Kim's womb, encasing her legs in a cocoon that bends her body like rubber. The finale features a "Society"-like moment where fingers become tendrils. It's creative and disgusting. As someone with a slight bug phobia and hang-ups about food, a moment involving worms and spaghetti triggered my gag reflex. "Initiation" definitely earns points for its creative application of rubber, latex, and slime. 

The cast is decent too. Neith Hunter is a creditable lead, Maud Adams is convincing as Fima, and Clint Howard is appropriately unhinged as Ricky. "Silent Night, Deadly Night 4" has long disappointed fans looking for more ho-ho-homicide. Being set in L.A., there's not even any snow on the ground. But unsurprisingly, its feminist themes have won it some reappraisals in recent years. I would say the movie is absolutely a mess. The gross-out feels self-serving sometimes. Yet it's definitely interesting, with lots of wild ideas on its mind. If nothing else, it's certainly more compelling than the sleep-inducing third film in the series. Ambition and creativity count for something, even if "Initiation" can not assemble its themes into a coherent whole. [6/10]

The New Batman Adventures: Holiday Knights

I think, every time I've tried to do one of these Christmas marathons, I always include a piece of Batman-related media. I can't help it that, as a child of the nineties whose first exposure to the Dark Knight was through “Batman Returns,” I associate DC Comics' Caped Crusader with the holidays. I'm not the only one, as the beloved “Batman: The Animated Series” did several Christmas-themed episodes throughout its run. In 1997, the show would be relaunched for the Warner Brothers network, changing its name to “The New Batman Adventures” and shifting to more exaggerated character designs. Though it was still recognizably the same program, with most of the cast and crew returning. The very first episode of this slightly new “Batman” cartoon was Christmas themed, the series kicking off with “Holiday Knights.”

“The New Batman Adventures” wanted to focus just as much on the wider Bat-Family as it does Bruce Wayne himself, which is probably why “Holiday Knights” actually tells three stories. The first, set on December 22nd, has Harley Quinn and Poison Ivy sneaking into a Christmas party at Wayne Manor. Under the mistletoe, Ivy plants a mind-controlling kiss on Bruce, forcing him to take the girls on a holiday shopping spree. On December 24th, Barbara Gordon runs into Harvey Bullock and Renee Montoya at a department store, who are tracking a holiday shoplifter. When the crook is revealed to be Clayface, Gordon slips into her Batgirl costume to help out. Finally, on December 31st, the Joker plans to activated a deadly sonic-based weapon in the center of Gotham as soon as the bell strikes midnight. Batman and Robin sweep in to save the New Year.

Harley Quinn is about as overexposed as a comic character can be right now. And her bisexual relationship with Poison Ivy is also front-and-center these days. “Holiday Knights” was an early step in both of these phenomena. It reminds me why both were so delightful. Harley's wacky personality compliments Ivy's eco-terrorist habits. Here, she has a minor rant about Christmas trees. And there's no denying that there's a fun, sexy, energy to the mischief they get up to here. The episode makes sure to include a montage of them trying on different outfits. (And introduces both of them in their pajamas.) This is certainly emphasized by the stylized direction. They might break the law but nobody really gets hurt and they sure have a lot of fun doing it.

The second segment is not as much fun, though it's not bad either. Bullock as a grouchy Santa Claus, forced to interact with kids, produces several funny moments. Such as his conversation with a girl whose dad is in prison. The way Clayface reveals himself, having been disguised as four separate little boys that combine into his single form, is pretty cool. The light-hearted sexiness from the first story also continues here, as Renee Montoya wears an elf costume with a very short skirt and Barbara changes into her costume in the middle of the store. The action scenes are creatively animated though the way Clayface is defeated is kind of underwhelming.

The final segment includes a starring role for Mark Hamill's Joker, who is as fantastically entertaining as always. Since the show was under less strict censorship demands on WB, compared to Fox, the Joker actually gets to murder people and wield a realistic gun. His scheme, handing out Joker masks to everyone in the crowd, and his mime-like henchmen are nice touch. I wish Batman and Robin had more to do in the actual story, besides just participate in the token action scene. The final scene, where Batman and Commissioner Gordon meet in a dinner, is wonderful though. “Holiday Knights” is a bit uneven but still a pretty amusing bit of superhero-influenced holiday cheer. [7/10]

OSCARS 2020: Joker (2019)

It only came out last October and I'm already sick of talking about “Joker.” From the moment the trailer debuted, the Discourse started to roar and has never stopped. From the way the marketing seemed to be courting the most toxic corners of nerd fandom, which lead to (ultimately unfounded) fears of mass violence, to the unending debates surrounding the actual merits of the final film, “Joker” is easily the most talked about movie of 2019. Now, it seems the Academy has decided to weigh in. And they were apparently impressed. Todd Philips' DC Comics inspired “violent loner” flick received more Oscar nominations than any other movie this year. That's despite a lot of really smart people thinking the movie is actually bad. Yet “Joker” has attracted passionate fans too and not just among edgelord film bros. (Though there are plenty of those.)  Now I guess it's my turn to reflect on last year's most endlessly discussed motion picture.

Breaking significantly from DC Comics tradition, this “Joker” begins in 1980s Gotham City, overrun with crime and waste from a garbage man's strike. We focus in on a wannabe comedian and struggling clown named Arthur Fleck. Arthur suffers from a neurological condition that causes uncontrollable laughing and that's really just one factor in his miserable life, which is mostly spent living with his sickly mom. (Who harbors an obsession with millionaire and would-be politician Thomas Wayne.) After loosing his job, Arthur – while still in his make-up – is attacked on the subway by three Wall Street types, which he then shoots to death. Thus begins Fleck's slow slide into insanity and nihilism on his way towards becoming a supervillain named Joker.

Upon seeing it for the first time last fall, the thing that bugged me the most about “Joker” is how totally divorced from its source material it is. That is to be expected, since an definitive origin story is totally antithetical to the comic book Joker's entire existence. This version of Gotham City doesn't resemble any previous one much. Instead of presenting us with a Joker, the master villain that commits crimes ranging from the mischievous to the truly vile strictly because it amuses him, we meet... Arthur Fleck, a pathetic and mentally ill man who violently rises up against the society we live in. That's because Todd Philips and his film have nothing but contempt for actual comic book lore. Instead, his “Joker” is glorified Martin Scorsese fanfiction, remixing elements from “The King of Comedy,” “Taxi Driver” and “Goodfellas” without really understanding the themes behind any of them.

Philips is another filmmaker best known for comedy who decided to make a hard break for legitimacy, the Academy being more than happy to take the bait. Philips really wants us to know how serious he is. “Joker”  is largely a miserablist drama set in a world totally without love. Everyone in this film is awful, selfish, vulgar, and ugly, up to and including Arthur. For most of its run time, “Joker” is devoted to showing how terrible its protagonist's life is. That this climaxes in a refrigerator assisted suicide attempt and eventual violence is not surprising. However, there's no actual depth to this endless misery. “Joker” seems to be saying that the world sucks and humanity sucks but with no insight beyond that, like an edgy teenager scrawling an anarchy symbol on his notebook because he thinks it's cool. (Considering the underlying disgust for humanity seen in Philips' comedies, the film's nihilism is simply the director coming clean with how he really feels.)

Of course, “Joker” does believe in some things. The movie wants us to think its about how cruelly the mentally ill – or anyone who is different – are treated by this nebulous thing we call society. Arthur even screams about this, just as he begins his proper transformation into the Joker. And the film comes ever so close to touching on something profound there, with how Fleck's insurance is taken away or a key phrase he scribbles in his notebook of madness. The suggestion is that, if anyone had just shown Arthur some love or kindness, his turn towards evil might've been avoided. But that's hard to take seriously when the film's entire world is so cartoonishly selfish and vile. No, the only thing the movie seems to actually believe is that this violent loner's rampage is totally justified and that women – ranging from his mother to the pretty woman down the hall, the subjects of the film's most insulting plot twists – deserve some of the blame.

“Joker's” total emptiness is most apparent in its vacant provocations towards our modern political hellscape. Even though it makes no sense for a city apparently so rife with crime – surely these murders wouldn't warrant anymore media attention than all the others? – but Arthur's subway slayings inspire a public protest against the rich. This is clearly meant to invoke the modern Occupy Wall Street and anti-fascist movement in America. Yet Arthur himself repeatedly clarifies that he has no political motivations at all. This feeling is furthered by the film's depiction of Thomas Wayne as neither evil millionaire nor generous philanthropist. The movie isn't actually saying anything about antifa or the Alt-Right or Trump or James Holmes any of that shit. It just introduces elements vaguely reminiscent of these real world issues in an attempt to look like it's saying something about modern America. Even though a minute's reading reveals it clearly isn't. (That organized, presumably anti-capitalist protesters would hail a multiple murderer as a hero also strikes me as unlikely but, oops, I just put more thought into this than the actual writers did.)

And yet for all its obvious problems, and obviously problematic elements, there is something undeniably compelling about “Joker.” A lot of this is owed to Joaquin Phoenix, who does indeed give an incredible performance. Emaciated, brooding, cackling, totally pathetic one minute and completely unhinged the next, he is a truly frightening cinematic villain. The decision to have Phoenix break out in interpretive dance, the first moment of catharsis the character has felt in his entire life, is inspired. Those scenes are the movie's best. (The film is so much Phoenix's, that the rest of the cast really blend into the background. Though Brett Cullen does a pretty good Alec Baldwin impersonation as Thomas Wayne.) It must be said that “Joker” is a well-produced film. Lawrence Sher's cinematography is frequently incredible. The movie's relentlessly grimy world is put together convincingly. Hildur Guðnadóttir's rumbling, disharmonic score is impressive.

From a narrative perspective, “Joker” isn't even that well constructed. It meanders considerably in its first half and has three goddamn endings for some reason. Still, I can't help but admit that “Joker” is, at the very least, a somewhat interesting motion picture. Even though it has pretty much nothing to do with the comic books that ostensibly inspired it, I'm still sort of blown away that a movie this nastily noncommercial was a major tent pole release based on some of pop culture's most well known characters. For all its empty-headed edginess, certain moments in “Joker's” last third do hit like a sledgehammer. This could've been a truly good film, if it had bothered to build any sort of actual viewpoint behind its endless ugliness. We are going to be debating the merits of “Joker” until the planet is finally consumed in fire, which is a real bummer as it really doesn't deserve that much analysis. Yet I guess I'm glad it exists, to prove that a comic book movie can be about truly anything. [6/10]

RECENT WATCHES: Batman Vs. Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles (2019)

Because of the insular quality of the comics industry, it’s a lot easier for various properties to get together and make oddball crossovers happen. This is, after all, the medium that brought us “Alien vs. Predator,” “Ape Nation,” and “Archie Meets the Punisher.” In recent years, IDW Publishing has created a number of truly unexpected crossovers. The company has allowed “Star Trek” to meet “Doctor Who;” “Ghostbusters” to meet “Transformers,” the Rocketeer to meet the Spirit, and G.I. Joe to meet Cthulhu. One of the company's crossovers was “Batman Meets Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles.” This mini-series was so successful, IDW and DC has published several follow-ups. That popularity prompted WB Animation – who have been putting out direct-to-video animated films based on the DC superheros for years – and Nickelodeon to get together and turn “Batman vs. Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles” into a feature film. What a time to be alive.

Loosely adapted from the first mini-series, an alliance between the Shredder's Foot Clan and Ra's al Ghul's League of Shadows brings the Ninja Turtles to Gotham City. Batman initially blames the Turtles for these crimes, leading to their inevitable confrontation, before they work out their differences and team-up to fight the baddies together.  In actuality, the story is just an excuse to match-up various complimenting elements from both franchises. So the Party Van and the Batmobile race together. Donnie nerds out over the Bat-Computer. Batman's rogue gallery is transformed via mutagen, leading to such sights as Polar Bear Mr. Freeze or Plant Monster Poison Ivy. Those are just some choice examples, the filmmakers' nerdy glee showing in each mash-up.

Aside from both being a source of nostalgia for nineties kids, what do Batman and the Ninja Turtles have in common? Well, there's a shared affinity for martial arts and stealth attacks. The wide differences between the two cast provides much of the fun factor to “Batman Vs. Ninja Turtles.” Bruce immediately sees something of a kindred spirit in the serious, studious Leonardo... But the young, inexperienced turtle has fears, which the Scarecrow's fear gas utilize. Similarly, Raphael and Damian Wayne bond over their mutual status as gruff outsiders. Donnie and Batgirl end up doing machines and science together, a fun set-up. The goofiest of these interactions is Michaelango's pizza obsession and skateboard habit inconveniencing Alfred. The film cannot resist the fun factor in getting Batman involved with this either, having him eventually consume Italian cheese/sauce bread and shout surfer slang.

There is a downside to the film though. A big problem with WB's series of DC animated features is that they all look very similar. I've seen a bunch of them and they all tend to blend together in my brain, on account of having an identical style. Since the Turtles naturally look a little more exaggerated than the Batman crew, that requires slightly cartoonier character designs. Otherwise, it's the same bland approach we're used to. “Batman vs. Ninja Turtles” even features some lousy CGI, when weightless looking cargo crates are tossed into the air. This line of animated films also sometimes double-down on edgy violence, in an attempt to prove how PG-13 they are. Despite obviously appealing to a younger audience, “Batman Vs. Ninja Turtles” does this too. Did we really need to see Ra's al Ghul cut heads off or the Shredder shove his claws through some random guy's chest?

Ultimately though, films like this are for the fans. Since “Batman” and “TMNT” both have long histories, there's lots of in-jokes that are sprinkled throughout. Fittingly, since it aired around the same time as the original "Turtles" cartoon, the film has several shout-outs to “Batman: The Animated Series.” Like those awesome crime blimps. While no one from either original series is in this movie, the voice cast is full of soundalikes. A campy fight scene with the Penguin recalls the Adam West “Batman” series. “TMNT” lore dominates the shout-outs. Shredder's entrance recalls his slow-mo descend in the first live action movie. Baxter Stockman appears as a delightfully grotesque fly humanoid. Theme songs and catchphrases are reprised. For fans of both   series, it's fun to catch this stuff.

Like so much comic book-adapted media, this ends on a blatant sequel hook. While the four-color crossover prompted three sequels, it's hard to say if the various corporate agreements that allowed this film to happen will last through to a continuation. But I would watch it, if it got made. “Batman vs. Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles” is ultimately a trifle, a light-weight and fluffy snack that doesn't even approach the more meaningful layers of either franchise. The animation if forgettable and the story is nonsense. Yet seeing your childhood toy box play sessions realized in animation does provide a thrill or two. [7/10]

Christmas 2018: December 14th

Silent Night, Deadly Night 3: You Better Watch Out! (1989)

I can't imagine a film as ridiculous as “Silent Night, Deadly Night Part 2” making much money at the box office. At the same time, a movie that's 40% stock footage probably didn't have to earn much to become a financial success. Yet the booming video market in the late eighties and early nineties allowed all sorts of horror films to bloom into full-blown franchises. If “Sleepaway Camp” and “Prom Night” could make it to three movies, and beyond, “Silent Night, Deadly Night” could obviously reach the same goal. The sequel even seemed to score a major coup when Monte Hellman, critically acclaimed director of “The Shooting” and “Two-Lane Blacktop,” agreed to direct. Was that enough to distinguish the sequel from the Santa slashers that went before it? What do you think?

Turns out, traumatized orphan and murderous Santa Ricky Caldwell was not shot to death by police at the end of “Silent Night, Deadly Night Part 2.” He merely fell into a coma, scientists reconstructing his brain with a translucent dome device. Since then, Dr. Newbury has been trying to reach the comatose killer. His latest scheme is to have blind, teenage psychic Laura make contact with Ricky. The psychic connection with the deranged murderer upsets Laura, so she leaves to spend Christmas with her brother at her grandmother's house. The telepathetic link awakens Ricky and gives him a new desire to hunt Laura down. The revived killer murders people as he goes over the river, through the woods, and to grandmother's house. His doctor and a detective are on the trail, hoping to get to Laura and her family first.

“Silent Night, Deadly Night Part 2” was characterized by a likely unintentional streak of absurd humor. At times, you wonder if part three was also going for laughs. The decision to replace the top of Ricky's skull with a clear dome – that looks like a salad bowl, with some electronic junk glued to it – makes him impossible to take seriously. There's a howler of a scene where Ricky attempts to hitchhike, despite looking like he does and wearing a hospital gown. He gets a ride within minutes. Later, his left arm slams through a door to grabbed a surprised victim. When that doesn't work, his right arm breaks through as well! That moment almost seems like an intentional subversion of typical monster movie antics.

For the most part though, “Silent Night, Deadly Night 3” is painfully dull. This is among the sleepiest slasher movies I've ever seen. All the murders take place off-screen. The few times blood is on-screen – spraying onto a desk – it looks like ketchup. Hellman seems utterly uninterested in generating thrills. When big jump scares happen, they are delivered limply and with zero impact. Moreover, very little actually happens in “You Better Watch Out!” An entire subplot is devoted to the doctor and the detective driving to Laura's grandmother's house, the two shooting the shit. At one point, they even begin discussing cellular phones. The action at grandma's house is just as uninteresting. Laura's brother and his girlfriend take a bath together or wander around outside, talking. Even after Ricky starts to attack them, everyone seems so relaxed and lackadaisical. There's absolutely no tension. It feels like the filmmakers were just trying to fill time.

One of the few interesting things about “Silent Night, Deadly Night 3” is that the cast features three actors associated with David Lynch. Eric Da Re, who plays Laura's brother, and Richard Beymer, who plays her doctor, would both appear in “Twin Peaks.” Laura Harring, as the girlfriend, would star in “Mulholland Dr.” much later on. None of them especially distinguish themselves. In fact, the cast in “You Better Watch Out!” is as sleepy as the pacing. Samantha Scully plays Laura. It's one of three credits for the actress, whose performance is blank and unconvincing. Once the beefy Eric Freeman, his years in a coma has presumably whittled Ricky down to a scrawny Bill Moseley. (Yet he has no problems getting up and walking right after waking up.) While Moseley is famous for manic and unhinged characters, this film sticks him in the part of a largely silent and somnolent brute. The only actor who seems engaged is Robert Culp as the excessively sarcastic detective. 

“Silent Night, Deadly Night 3” also seems somewhat ashamed of the series' killer Santa roots. There's some light Christmas atmosphere and Ricky's psychosis is triggered by festive items – a Santa hat, an ugly Christmas sweater, presents under the tree – but he's just dressed like a guy otherwise. The sequel does continue the series tradition of stock footage, throwing in some scenes from the first movie. The problem is it seems to conflate the first film's Billy with the second's Ricky, among other continuity errors. Apparently, Monte Hellman wrote the whole movie in a week, shot it in a month, and had it screening at festivals a few weeks later. He's proud of getting the whole movie done so quickly. Which I guess is an accomplishment. Yet “Silent Night, Deadly Night 3” is a deathly boring film, especially when compared to the sleazy or ludicrous heights of the last two. [4/10]

Batman: The Animated Series: A Bullet for Bollock

As I’ve said before, Batman and Christmas are irrevocably connected in my mind. What makes a better contrast against the Dark Knight than the holly, jolly holidays? The creators of “Batman: The Animated Series,” of course, did a proper Christmas episode with season one’s “Christmas with the Joker.” They would return to December with season four’s “A Bullet for Bullock,” adapted from a comic story by Chuck Dixon. It involves Harvey Bullock, Gotham’s most hard boiled cop. He’s been receiving death threats and has seen two attempts on his life. Knowing there’s a long list of potential suspects, he asks Batman for assistance. The two reluctantly work together, eventually tracking down a newly released drug lord.

All of “B:TAS” took cues from film noir but “A Bullet for Bullock” is especially noir flavored. The episode features a fantastically jazzy score, even throwing in a variation on the show’s beloved theme song at the end. The focus is really on Bullock’s slovenly lifestyle. The dude’s apartment is decorated with roaches and huge tears in his walls. He’s not often seen without some junk food. Alfred compares him to “an unmade bed.” He’s belligerent to almost everyone around, even the people trying to save his life. But that doesn’t make him unlikable. In fact, there’s something appealing about Bulock’s griminess. Such as a funny line he has about his laundry.

The critical praise the show had received by this point is also evident in this episode’s content. “A Bullet for Bullock” gets away with stuff most kids cartoons couldn’t touch. There’s a lot of realistic firearm action. A drug kingpin eventually emerges as the episode’s primary antagonist and there’s even mention of crack houses. The conclusion is fantastically comical but still fits the cynical, noir tone. And, as always, the voice cast is phenomenal. You might have to squint to notice the Christmas content. There’s snow all around but only one shot of decorations being taken down. Nevertheless, I really enjoyed this one. [8/10]

Halloween 2018: October 22

We're are headed into the home stretch of Halloween now. Welcome to the penultimate week of the Six Weeks! I realized recently that I forgot to share with you pictures of this year's Halloween Mood Table, a tradition started by Dinosaur Dracula. This year's centerpiece is a bitching carnivorous plant prop I bought from Michael's back in August. Naturally, I added lots of toys, books, DVDs, and nick-nacks to it as well. Perhaps I've done better work in the past but I think it turned out pretty well. Anyway, on with the reviews!

Halloween (2018)

It's 2018 and we've got a new “Halloween” movie. As production on the new film rolled forward, it's as if the universe was intentionally trying to keep me from getting too hyped. Blumhouse producing the movie certainly made sense from a financial perspective but that studio does not always produce quality art. David Gordon Green directing was a bit of a question mark, as the naturalistic drama/stoner comedy auteur had little experience with horror. The decision to remove all the sequels from continuity was potentially freeing but also somewhat frustrating. Jaime Lee Curtis returning to star was certainly neat but also threatened to make the new movie a re-trend of “Halloween H20,” one of the better sequels. Okay, John Carpenter doing the score was a big deal. Or maybe I was just telling myself these things so I wouldn't get overly excited. Well, the movie's out now and I can make up my mind.

Green's “Halloween” includes a few shout-outs to some of the sequels but it really does act as if nothing after Carpenter's original film happened. It's been forty years since Michael Myers rampaged through Haddonfield on Halloween night. The Shape has spent all that time in an institution, unresponsive. In all that time, Laurie Strode has been married and divorced twice, mothered a child, become a grandmother, and alienated everyone around her with her paranoid, survivalist habits. On the 40th anniversary of his crime, Michael is being transported to a new facility. That's when the bus crushes. The evil is free and, just as Laurie has feared all these years,  he comes after her daughter and granddaughter.

Early within 2018's “Halloween,” there's a shot of Michael Myers' shadow cast huge on a wall. This is fitting, as the new “Halloween” is really all about the shadow Myers has cast on the lives of those around him. The violence of that October night ruined Laurie Strode's life, causing her to retreat into her trauma and build literal and psychological defenses around herself.  This, in turn, traumatized her daughter, Karen, who has never really connected with her mom. Myers' new doctor, Dr. Sartain, has become obsessed with understand Myers' evil. Even a group of true crime podcasters, a potentially interesting subplot that just ends up padding the body count, have clearly become obsessed with the crime. The ripples of the Halloween massacre are still felt forty years later, the trauma of those wounds never truly healing.

The sequel/reboot is also about three generations of Strode women. Jamie Lee Curtis brings a different approach to depicting Laurie's PTSD than she did in “H20.” She has weaponized her trauma, becoming a cold survivalist that prioritizes defense over every thing else. Curtis is commanding, intimidating, and even turns into an effective action star by the end. Judy Greer, who is practically typecasted as supporting moms in flashy genre films, plays Karen as a more practical woman. Her attempts to reach out to her mom have failed so many times over the years that she's given up. Yet Greer also makes it clear that she loves her mom. Greer even gets a fantastically satisfying action heroine moment to herself. Andi Matichak, a relative newcomer, plays Allyson, the granddaughter. Matichak has a likable, mischievous side, making for a convincing every-teen that the audience can root for. If it wasn't immediately apparent, the film's final shot makes it obvious that this “Halloween” is as much about healing the broken familial bonds between the three women as it is Michael Myers' latest rampage.

I've yet to catch up with David Gordon Green's earlier works, only being familiar with his pot-fueled comedies. (From what I've read, “Undertow” sounds like the most direct stylistic precedence to this film.) Green and his co-conspirator, most notably co-writer Danny McBride, are obviously fans of the original. Green works to recreate Carpenter's autumnal warmth and colors. He also replicates the infamous steady-cam shots, in effective long takes that focus on Michael Myers grabbing the nearest weapon and exterminating the closest target. Over all, Green directs towards a grim atmosphere. Myers is often seen lurking in the background of shots, committing violent shots just out of ear and eye shot. Aside from a few ill advised lapses into shakycam, it's an effectively directed movie.

Unlike many of the sequels, 2018's “Halloween” is clearly more focused on suspense than elaborate death scenes. There are many moments of drawn-out tension. Michael attacking a young woman in a bathroom is a sequence that builds suspense via repetition. Alyson being stalked though the backstreets of Haddonfield is well done. This is most apparent in the brilliant last act, where Laurie searches her fortified home for Michael. In-between the creaking floorboards, jumping at shadows, and the ominously placed mannequins, it's a fantastically orchestrated conclusion. For you gore-hounds: Don't worry, the film does indulge in some splattery specials effects, thanks to a stomped head.

If Green's “Halloween” has a major flaw, it's the film's inability to make us care about many of Michael's new victims. Alyson's friends are a thinly sketched lot. There's the horny baby sitter, her dopey boyfriend, Alyson's asshole boyfriend, and his chubbier brother. Though I like many of the sequences they star in, especially one involving a motion activated floodlight, they are not especially involving characters. The attempts to make the teens relatable and quirky come off as overdone. You could remove their scenes from the movie and loose very little. Green and McBride's comic relief is sometimes feel out-of-place as well, though the smart-mouthed kid Vicky is babysitting steals the few scenes he's in.

After the grotesque excesses and wild divergences from series lore of Rob Zombie's films, this is exactly the kind of movie the “Halloween” series needed. The countless in-jokes and call-backs – which includes Carpenter's naturally excellent score - remind people of the “Halloween” they've always loved. The movie around those callbacks is well-done, a handsome affair that is effective, even if it doesn't do anything especially new or interesting. The new film leaves the door wide open for further sequels. It's already made a boatload of money, making that continuation very likely. If this film's success leads to a wave of similarly respectful, if slightly unambitious, reboots of other seventies/eighties slasher franchises, that would be just fine for me. [7/10]

The Ghost of Yotsuya (1959)
Tokaido Yotsuya kaidan

I regret to inform you, dear readers, that Halloween is almost here and I haven't watched a single Japanese film yet. Time to change that! And what's more Japanese than the spooky ghost girl with long black hair? This archetype has a mythological precedence, the onyro or yurei, but was popularized in the modern age by a play called “The Ghost of Yotsuya.” Enormously successful upon debuting on stage in 1825, this popularity would not end with the rise of cinema. Since 1912, the play has been adapted to film at least 24 times. The most highly regarded of these adaptation seems to be the 1959 version, produced by Shintoho Studios and directed by Nobuo Nakagawa. I previously enjoyed Nakagawa's “Jigoku,” so decided to give his earlier horror pictures a look.

Set during the feudal period, “The Ghost of Yotsuya” follows a ronin named Iemon. He wants to marry a woman named Oiwa. When her father refuses, he murders her. However, after being married to Oiwa for a short time, he grows bored. Sick of being poor, he begins to pursue Ume Ito, the daughter of a rich lord. Before he can marry into the prosperous family, he must deal with his current wife. He poisons Oiwa, with a concoction that brutally deforms her face too. He also murders Takuetsu, a masseur who had a crush on Oiwa. On his wedding night to Ito, Iemon is haunted by the ghosts of Oiwa and Takuetsu. They will have their revenge.

This is only the second of Nakagawa's films I've seen but themes are starting to emerge. Like “Jigoku,” “The Ghost of Yotsuya” is a simple morality tale. Iemon, played by a steely Shigeru Amachi, spends the entire movie being a huge asshole to everyone around him. After murdering Oiwa's father, he's prompted by his sleazy friend Naosuke to murder his future brother-in-law. From there, he immediately goes about treating Oiwa awful. When she asks if he'd remarry were she to die, he answers bluntly in the affirmative. This is the kind of guy that has no problem plotting to marry another woman when his wife is at home but still gets jealous about her having a male friend. He's a scumbag and the supernatural punishment that's visited upon him by the film's end is more than deserved. This theme of deserved revenge runs throughout all of “The Ghost of Yotsuya,” as Iemon and Naosuke are constantly promising to avenge the murders they committed. Even the ghost of a snake he killed earlier in the movie comes back to haunt him.

It takes a while for the film to get to the haunting, as Iemon's crimes must be depicted. However, the wait is worth it.  “The Ghost of Yotsuya” is a surprisingly grisly film. While murdering Takuetsu, Iemon chops off the man's arm. Oiwa's scarred face, starring between stringy hair, is nasty to look at. At one point, the ghost's corpses emerge from a river, turning all the water to blood. The sequence where Oiwa appears on Iemon's wedding night, her eerie voice proceeding her appearance, puts a creepy spin on that cliché of a ghost tricking someone into attack the living. The image of her ghostly form, clinging to the roof of his bedroom, is a spooky sight.

Nakagawa's direction turns the story's stage roots into an advantage, setting the film primarily around interior rooms. These tight rooms and locations make the hauntings more intimate. Filmed in Technicolor, “The Ghost of Yotsuya” is surprisingly warm at times, such as in a scene where Iemon and Naosuke plotting before a glowing sunset. As the haunting becomes more intense, Nakagawa's direction bets more creative.  At one point, while a ghostly red sheet floats in the air, Iemon stumbles into a room totally composed of doors. Oiwa and Takuetsu swing suddenly into frame, still tied to the sliding door. The colors get turned way up in these scenes, Nakagawa employing the same extreme greens and reds he would use next in “Jigoku.”

I'm not an expert in Japanese culture so can only speculate why this story had such a powerful grip on the country's imagination. (Or why this particular type of ghost would become so wide spread.) I have no familiarity with the many other versions of this story. However, Nakagawa's rendition would be hard to top. The film creates many spooky images, such as Oiwa's ghost walking through a misty swamp or cradling her child in a foggy landscape. The film has perhaps too many subplots, as Naosuke's storyline is mostly unnecessary. However, I found this to be an effectively eerie ghost story. [7/10]

Batman: The Brave and the Bold: Shadow of the Bat

The association between Batman and Halloween is inescapable. Being among the most popular superheroes, he's also a perennially popular Halloween costume. Beyond that, with his demonic appearance and frequently Gothic adventures, he's among the spookiest of the mainstream superheroes. He's associated with bats, obviously, and bats are associated with vampires. So there have been a number of stories where Batman fights vampires or even becomes one. “Shadow of the Bat,” the second episode of “Batman: The Brave and the Bold's” third season,  pays homage to many of these stories. While out hunting Dala with Jason Blood, Batman is bitten. He soon becomes an extremely powerful and evil vampire himself. The now corrupted Dark Knight soon begins to hunt his Justice League friends aboard the Watchtower Satellite.

Though not an official Halloween episode, “Shadow of the Bat” is definitely among “Brave and the Bold's” spookiest moments. Minutes after turning into a vampire, Batman begins to feed on the supervillain, Black Mask, who is also appropriate for the Halloween season. Upon entering the Satellite, he invites the Justice League – the Justice League International line-up, by the way – to a Dracula-esque dinner. Afterwards, the Dracula connection is continued, when he scales the outside of the ship's hull. Among Batman's new powers is the ability to turn into mist, a horde of rats, a giant wolf, and a grotesque bat monster. Most of the Justice League are transformed into zombie-like minions, who proceed to tear Martian Manhunter apart. We even see his dismembered arm tossed across the room! I can imagine this scaring the piss out of really young kids.

Aside from the spooky vampire element, this episode is worth seeing for the way this version of the Justice League interacts. Fire and Ice have a super cute moment as they're going to bed, Ice admitting she has a crush on Aquaman specifically because he smells like fish. This always outrageous version of Aquaman gets a bad-ass moment, when the alien fish aboard the ship tell him something is wrong with Batman. Booster Gold is a bragging asshole but in a delightful way. Martian Manhunter ends up saving the day, when he changes the Satellite's orbit to rotate into the sun's path, melting Batman and the his ghouls. There's also a very effective flashback, when Batman enters J'onn's mind and we see how his wife and daughter died.

Over all, this is a pretty kindertraumatic episode, I'd say. The ending does wuss out, of course. Batman really hasn't been turned into a vampire and then burned to ash, along with the rest of the Justice League. It was a horrible nightmare, caused by Dala's vampiric (but not contiguous) bite. Still, this is definitely a fun and off-beat episode of easily the most fun and off-beat animated version of this characters. The opening segment, by the way, features Batman and Robin in Tarzan-style loincloths and the appearance of Bat-Ape, so it's awesome too. [8/10]

Alone Time (2014)

Here's another horror short recommended to me by the internet algorithm. “Alone Time” follows Ann, a young woman working in New York City. Her office job is soul-crushing. She feels isolated in her tiny apartment. So, for the weekend, she decides to go on a hiking trip. She buys an instant camera from a gas station on the way. Getting in touch with nature, being out in the wild, is calming for her. She loves the serenity of the lake and forest. When she returns home and has her photos developed, she witnesses something terrifying.

“Alone Time” is about as simple as a short film can get. There's no real dialogue, the protagonist's name only being revealed in the end credits. The story is told entirely visually. Through simple shots of her lonely apartment, or her tense trips on the subway, we get a sense of the woman's isolation. Similarly, through an excellent use of sound design, comparing the noiseless forest with the congested city, we get a sense of how relaxing her trip is. “Alone Time” saves its sole horrific element until the very end but it's a good one, expertly depicting the violation of safety and privacy that the title hints at. Scarier yet, “Alone Time's” opening seconds informs us that this short is based on a true story. Director Rob Blackhurst has made a number of other shorts and two features as well, which I think I'll have to check out now. [7/10]

Christmas 2016: December 15

Merry Christmas, Mr. Lawrence (1983)

I first heard about “Merry Christmas, Mr. Lawrence” in a Snopes.com article about the odd ways Japan has absorbed the Western tradition of Christmas. The article, which revolved around the rumors that a crucified Santa Claus was once seen in a Japanese shop window, claimed that a movie called “Merry Christmas, Mr. Lawrence” is often shown on Japanese TV around December. Despite the title, it's a bleak war movie with little to do with the holiday, another example of how the country doesn't totally understand Christmas. After looking the movie up, I was surprised to see it starred David Bowie. I hadn't seen the film sooner because it was out-of-print for years, though Criterion eventually pick it up. Considering Bowie's passing still hangs over 2016, this Christmas seems like the year to finally watch the movie.

During World War II, four men share a strange connection inside a Japanese prisoners of war camp. Mr. Lawrence, an English soldier fluent in Japanese, tries to keep peace between the prisoners and the guards. Sergeant Hara inflicts cruel punishments on the Allies soldiers but remains oddly friendly towards Lawrence. Major Jack Celliers arrives in the camp and immediately sets about challenging the rules of his captors. Captain Yonoi, the overseer of the prison, develops an obsession with Celliers, equally intrigued by him and determined to break his spirit. As Christmas approaches, the conflict between the four men come to a head.

Any time a film is made about the atrocities of World War II, there's always a concern the story will become “misery porn.” As in an overly maudlin movie that shovels on tragic events to depress the audience, usually in the service of some life affirming moral. “Merry Christmas, Mr. Lawrence” takes a more even-handed approach. Yes, there is brutality in the film. In the opening scene, a prisoner is struck. Vicious canings happen repeatedly throughout the film. Characters are often dragged off-screen to be beaten. A Korean soldier is forced to commit seppuku. Those that displease the warden are left to freeze in snowy pins. Yet there's a nonchalant presentation to the violence. It's not lingered on or exploitative. Instead, the cruelty occurs suddenly and quickly, as in real life.

“Merry Christmas, Mr. Lawrence” focuses more on the internal turmoil of its protagonists then on their physical agony. Regrets hang heavily in the air. Jack Celliers is haunted by memories of abandoning his little brother to be attacked by school bullies. He could have intervene but intentionally did not. In his dreams, he still visits his brother, apologizing for what he did. Captain Yonoi, meanwhile, was nearly a part of February 26 Incident. His entire military career has been motivated by missing that chance to die in shining glory. The movie carries a tone of regret, of memories and hopeless speculations about what could have been. The haunting atmosphere hangs over the viewer even after the film ends.

“Merry Christmas, Mr. Lawrence” is about war, in the sense that it's about conflicts between different cultures. Lawrence, as a translator, attempts to bridge the differences between the English and the Japanese. Yet communication often breaks down and, more then once, it results in someone getting hurt. It's heavily implied throughout the film that Yonoi's obsession with Celliers is romantic in nature. When Jack calls the captain on this, Yonoi has a breakdown. Homosexuality is a reoccurring theme in the film. Early on, a Korean man and a Dutch prisoner are punished for sleeping together. As the Korean dies, he cries out for his lover. Hana condemns such relationships, which is interesting considering the history of homosexuality in Japan. At the end, Hana and Lawrence are reunited, their situations switched. Only then can they admit they're friends. The film seems to be saying that most conflicts could be resolved if people talked openly and actually said what they were really feeling.

The film balances a tricky number of concepts but its cast goes a long way of grounding the loftier ideas. Though Bowie gets top billing, Tom Conti stars as Lawrence. Conti is very good at projecting a sense of calm while making the storm inside apparent. When those emotions boil over, it has an effect on the audience. Bowie is well-cast as a mysterious man observant of people's secrets, wants and flaws. Yet the film also gives him some surprisingly vulnerable moments, which the rock legend is equally good at playing up. Bowie isn't the only pop star in the film. Ryuichi Sakamoto, better known as an electronic musician, plays Yonoi. Sakamoto gives an intentionally mannered performance, playing a military man strict in every way, even his passions. Takeshi Kitano, a well-known face to fans of Japanese cinema, is very good as Sergeant Hara, a man who can crack jokes one minute and turn incredibly violent the next. Kitano humanizes the character with his sense of humor.

Sakamoto also provides the film's score, a haunting collection of songs powered by chiming piano notes and a churning electronic background. “Merry Christmas, Mr. Lawrence” doesn't seem to be director Nagisa Oshima's most highly regarded film, as he also made the controversial “In the Realm of the Senses.” I, however, found it be an interesting and frequently powerful experience. For the record, two of the film's most important scenes take place around Christmas, though it's still probably not ideal holiday viewing for most folks. [8/10]

Batman: The Animated Series: Christmas with the Joker

I've written before about how Batman and Christmas are irrevocably linked in my mind. I'm not the only one. Though “Batman Returns” is the most prominent example, plenty of other stories have contrasted the holly jolly holiday with Gotham's grim dark knight. Such as “Christmas with the Joker,” the second produced episode of “Batman: The Animated Series.” Dick Grayson is trying to get Bruce Wayne to unwind on Christmas, urging him to stay home and watch “It's a Wonderful Life.” Bruce is reluctant, knowing that crime never takes a holiday. He's right. The Joker escapes from Arkham Asylum and broadcasts a twisted Christmas special to the whole city. He's kidnapped Commissioner Gordon, Det. Bullock, and some other lady, threatening to kill them all unless Batman can stop him.

Here in 2016, “Batman: The Animated Series” has become one of the most highly regarded versions of the character. The show's high quality animation and sharp writing was unexpected for a Saturday morning cartoon in 1992. The series' art deco artwork and character designs would be highly influential, yet still remains distinctive. As good as “Batman: The Animated Series” was, one must still remember that it was, deep down, a kid's show. The plot for “Christmas with the Joker” is simple. A villain kidnapping some victims, forcing the hero to play his twisted games, is a standard superhero plot. Construction wise, “Christmas with the Joker” isn't much more then a series of action scenes, Batman and Robin encountering different traps before confronting the Joker.

I'm not necessarily complaining. Sometimes simple is good. “Christmas with the Joker” fills its half-hour with small, but distinctive, character moments. Such as Dick's urging that even criminals take it easy on Christmas. Or Batman admitting he's never seen “It's a Wonderful Life” because he couldn't get pass the title. Both of these moments pay off nicely, when Batman prepares to stop a mugging before realizing it's actually an act of kindness. After watching the Frank Capra classic, Wayne reluctantly admits that it is occasionally a wonderful life. Batman claims, and the Joker later points this out, that he has no fondness for Christmas because he hasn't had a family in years. Yet, when he gathers around the TV with Grayson and Alfred, it becomes apparent he does have a family of sorts.

Clever writing aside, the real reason to check this episode out is the titular villain. Mark Hamill's Joker remains my favorite incarnation of the infamous bad guy. Hamill and “B:TAS'” writing team get the Joker. He's not a determined agent of chaos or a Hot Topic scene kid. He's the Clown Prince of Crime, who alternatively commits mischievous or horrifying acts simply because they amuse him. In “Christmas with the Joker,” he nearly murders three people, blows up a bridge, converts a conservatory telescope into a cannon, and attacks Batman with giant robotic tin soldiers. And what is the villain's final objective? To throw a cream pie in Batman's face. This balance, between the psychotic and the absurd, is what makes the Joker such a great adversary. Naturally, Hamill's vocal performance is amazing, his crazy laugh still unmatched twenty-four years later.

Hamill isn't the only iconic casting choice, as Kevin Conroy's Batman is equally pitch perfect. The action is sometimes goofy but endearing in a comic book kind of way. This is the first time I've watched this episode in years but, I've got to say, “Christmas with the Joker” holds up pretty well. It's ideal seasonal viewing for any fan of superhero shenanigans. [8/10]