DC's Film Franchise a Lukewarm Start--But Hope for the Future?

The "DC Extended Universe" (DCEU) has gotten off to a surprisingly rocky start, perhaps as much as the anticipation that preceded it. What with the releases of this year's Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice and Suicide Squad, the rival studio to Marvel has showcased some of the latest examples of blockbusters that represent a gap between critical and audience reception (or in some cases, a comparison of both). In fact, both films hold a 20 percent vicinity score on Rotten Tomatoes.

What is the reason then? Could these films really be poor in quality? Did critics and/or audiences each respectfully fail to understand the filmmakers' visions? Were the filmmakers too ambitious or too ahead of their time? Were they breaking new ground with stories that have relevance in today's culture? Did the studios reportedly interfere and demand cuts for these films (leading to extended director's cuts on home video later)? Is it just art and action for their own sake, or is there actually substance behind it or added to it? Or maybe it's all of these things, one way or another. 

There certainly has been a long history of films that have met with lukewarm or poor reception upon their initial release, only to be met in later years with universal acclaim. Such examples include Citizen Kane, Fantasia, and 2001: A Space Odyssey. (WatchMojo.com has an interesting YouTube video on the subject.) Now, I'm not saying that history may eventually warm up to the ultimate duel between DC's most iconic heroes and their well-known rogue's gallery. For now, though, it's easy to see why audiences and critics continue to be divisive on these films.

Dawn of the Justice League in Batman v Superman

In retrospect, the "Extended Universe" for DC films began in 2013, one year after director Christopher Nolan concluded his highly-regarded Batman trilogy with The Dark Knight Rises. Director Zack Snyder's Man of Steel rebooted Superman's origin story in the same way Nolan and company did, by grounding the titular character in reality and setting him in a grittier world. What was different about Snyder's (and co-writer David S. Goyer's) take, while engrossing and well-meaning, was how grim and destructive it got, especially during the film's climax.

Snyder returned to the director's chair with the follow-up, Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. Set two years after the climactic events of the previous film, Superman is viewed as a threat and alternatively as a hero by the world. Bruce Wayne a.k.a. the Caped Crusader (Ben Affleck, in surprisingly fine form) views him as the former, and a clash of worldviews ensues in one of the year's most debatable and provocative films. Snyder's DC films (as well as the 2009 big-screen adaptation of the graphic novel Watchmen) have been criticized for being too dark and serious, much like Tim Burton's Batman movies from 1989 and 1992. According to Rotten Tomatoes, the film "smothers a potentially powerful story - and some of America's most iconic superheroes - in a grim whirlwind of effects-driven action."

To be sure, there certainly is a lot of action, CGI destruction, and much incoherence in the film's plot and execution -- at least according to views of the theatrical release. (An "ultimate edition" just released on video this past summer was praised even more than the initial release, with one reviewer on Amazon.com commending said version for filling significant plotholes and even discussing the film's philosophical and ethical undertones in meticulous detail.) Alongside Affleck, viewers got to see the scene-stealing feature debut of Diana Prince a.k.a. Wonder Woman (Fast & Furious's Gal Gadot), as well as fleeting cameos from future DC heroes.

Suicide Squad's rogues gallery

Suicide Squad is essentially an ensemble of DC supervillains, including the Joker, Harley Quinn, Deadshot, and Killer Croc. Having seen the theatrical cut, what starts out intriguing (with snippets of key characters and dark humor, not to mention an engaging soundtrack) becomes incoherent, lacking in character (much of Jared Leto's scenes as the Joker were left on the cutting room floor), and disappointingly conventional of superhero movies (i.e., a "save the world from total destruction" scenario). According to the consensus on Rotten Tomatoes, the film "boasts a talented cast and a little more humor than previous DCEU efforts, but they aren't enough to save the disappointing end result from a muddled plot, thinly written characters, and choppy directing."

On August 11 last month, an alleged former employee of Warner Bros. reportedly wrote an open letter to the respective studio executives, criticizing the studio's slate of theatrical releases since 2013, including DC's films. Despite these criticisms, the latter movies have made a lot of money at the box-office, and stand as two of the top ten highest-grossing films of 2016 worldwide. In addition, the folks at Warner Bros. and DC have taken steps to ensure that they're get back on the right track with their slate of future releases (read here), which will continue next year with the highly anticipated solo outing Wonder Woman and the equally anticipated ensemble Justice League.

Here's hoping they'll be more exciting and entertaining, and less grim and bleak. (Well, let the following teaser trailers give you some assurance.)

REVIEW: "The Light Between Oceans" (2016)

When it comes to romance dramas, most people will think of Nicholas Sparks novels. Others may think of Stephanie Meyer's "Twilight" series, while others may recall Patrick Swayze and Demi Moore romancing to pottery. And then there are the romance dramas that exceed such mere fleeting emotions as love-at-first-sight and encompass the universal realities, joys and heartaches of love. 

"The Light Between Oceans," based on the novel by M.L. Stedman (and written for the screen by director Derek Cianfrance) tells the powerful and heartbreaking story of a Post-World War I married couple who live on an island overseeing the lighthouse off the coast of Western Australia. Tom Sherbourne and Isabel Graysmark (the extraordinary Michael Fassbender and Alicia Vikander) have experienced many a tragedy in their lives and are looking to settle not only as husband and wife, but also (and hopefully) as mother and father. But after a few miscarriages, the couple begin to lose hope. Until they hear cries coming from an adrift rowboat offshore, which carries a baby girl and her deceased father. Was this a coincidence? Was this destined? Should they report to the authorities (as Tom believes they rightfully should) or should they claim the baby as their own (as Isabel pleads, out of desperation), all by the insistence of one small lie? 

Alicia Vikander

This may all sound weepy and sentimental, like a Sparks novel or Lifetime flick. But Cianfrance is not one to go with such conventions. As he demonstrated in his previous films "Blue Valentine" (2010) and "The Place Beyond the Pines" (2012), sentimentality works more effectively (if more powerfully-wrenching) when it's bare-boned and shaken to its core. And only actors as good and accomplished as Fassbender and Vikander could make us believe in, empathize, and even question these characters' motives, doubts, self-conflicts, and questions of forgiveness, especially when they meet the little girl's biological mother (a stellar Rachel Weisz) years later. The same could be said for the film's structure, which is a little unnerving to sit through at times. But it ultimately pays off in a poetic and compelling story of raw emotion, tender yet complex love, and ultimate forgiveness. 

Standout Films of the Decade: 2010s

Yours truly, a reel FilmFreeQ

The BBC recently assembled a group of 177 film critics to rank what they consider to be the best films of the 21st century so far. As most critics tend to do, their choices consisted of incredible artistic and filmmaking merit. Yet a large majority of them are films with bleak worldviews or stories, including The Dark Knight (Christopher Nolan's unprecedented sequel featuring Batman against his famous nemesis, the Joker, from 2008), top pick Mulholland Dr. (David Lynch's haunting, surreal Hollywood thriller from 2001), and There Will Be Blood (Paul Thomas Anderson's dark version of late-1800s to early-1900s America, with an Oscar-winning performance by Daniel Day-Lewis, from 2007). Yet, a few other films managed to lighten up the list, including four Pixar animated features that have become instant classics (2003's Finding Nemo, 2015's Inside Out, 2007's Ratatouille, and 2008's WALL*E).

For the following list, I've picked four films from this decade so far (you can read my lists under the title of "Standout Films of the Decade," of which the following summaries come from). For me, these films not only encompass a sense of longevity and timelessness. They are also artistic, with both moral and spiritual merit. To be fair, these films do have some difficult (even some depressive) subject matter in their contexts, yet these are films that have universal significance and deal with experiencing life anew. (Click on film titles to read my respective full reviews.)

4. Gravity
A breathtaking, harrowing, and visceral (3D) experience like never before. Director/co-writer Alfonso Cuaron, co-writer (and son) Jonas Cuaron, and cinematographer Emmanuel Lubezki immerse moviegoers into the beautiful and mysterious atmosphere of space and never let go. Sandra Bullock is a tour-de-force as an astronaut in a universal story of adversities, life, death, and rebirth.

3. Room
No other film last year has shaken me nor moved me as much as this one. Based on the bestselling novel by Emma Donoghue (who also wrote the screenplay), Room is hard to watch at times, due to its strong subject matter. But at its heart, it’s a powerful and loving story of a mother and child who escape captivity and discover the world. Brie Larson and Jacob Tremblay are remarkable, heartbreaking, and thoroughly engaging. A unique portrait of childhood innocence, family heartache and drama, and unbreakable love.

2. Toy Story 3
Third time proves the rarest charm in this third outing in the popular Pixar series of toys coming to life when owners aren't looking. With owner Andy off to college soon, the remaining toys question what will become of them, and accidentally get shipped to a day care center, headed by the tyrannical Lots'O Huggin' Bear. The results are an amalgamation of different genres, childhood memories, and themes of ownership, independence, death, and life. A great ensemble cast of characters in a truly universal story.

1. The Tree of Life
Director Terrence Malick's ambitious project on the creation of life (a la 2001: A Space Odyssey) juxtaposed with a Texas family in the 1950s didn’t play well in theaters (its non-linear direction reportedly caused several walkouts, as well as several boos at the Cannes Film Festival, where it ironically won the top-prize Palme D’or award). Rotten Tomatoes says it very well: “Terrence Malick's singularly deliberate style may prove unrewarding for some, but for patient viewers, Tree of Life is an emotional as well as visual treat.”

Twisted Adult Animation Resurfaces in Seth Rogen Comedy

August 21, 2016

The (red band) teaser trailer for the recently-released CGI comedy Sausage Party (which premiered back in March) finds a group of grocery food items as they discover the shocking truth of their existence. Bizarre, over-the-top, and unbelievably subliminal, writers Seth Rogen and Evan Goldberg (the same guys responsible for such raunchy comedies as Pineapple Express and This Is the End) deliver the latest example of twisted, hard-R adult animation, joining the likes of such fare as South Park and Family Guy. (A green brand trailer was released a few months later, and while a little tame, it's still pretty crazy.)

This isn't the first time animation has been made strictly for adults, despite the medium's universal appeal thanks to the likes of Disney and Pixar. And let's not forget Warner Bros. track record of memorable Looney Tunes cartoons. But in the last quarter-century, several films and T.V. shows have taken daring and provocative turns, from such animators and/or directors as Ralph Baskhi (1972's X-rated Fritz the Cat, 1992's Cool World), Matt Groening (The Simpsons), Trey Parker & Matt Stone (South Park), and Seth McFarlane (Family Guy). They have showcased subtle adult references and/or content out of bounds for the youngest of viewers, thereby challenging the mere notion that the medium is just for little tikes. Now I'm all for the fact that animation can be used to tell any kind of story whether for adults or children--hey, even directors known for live-action features, such as Richard Linklater [2001's Waking Life], Wes Anderson [2009's Fantastic Mr. Fox], and Charlie Kaufman [last year's Anomalisa] have shown their knack for the medium--I do have to scratch my head when it comes to R-rated content, or content that sneaks it's way into other film fare, whether G-, PG-, or PG-13-rated. The following are examples of animated films for audiences and critics to ask specifically if these kinds of projects (or just their content) are really necessary. 

Who Framed Roger Rabbit (1988)
First things first, there's no denying this live-action/animated Disney-produced feature is a cinematic marvel. The filmmakers deserve every accolade they've received for bringing cartoon characters to life in the real world. And the writing and homages are very clever and creative. Unfortunately, when promiscuous sexual content (mostly in the form of an unbelievably cleavage-bearing femme fetale) and often intense and violent situations (some scary and unpleasant) get added in, the result is an experience that is intriguing for some adults but problematic and bizarre for others. In fact, Michael Eisner, co-president of the Disney studio at the time, considered the film "too risque" to be released under the Disney brand, and recommended it be released under the studio's Touchstone Pictures banner, which had been releasing more adult-oriented films like The Color of Money, Three Men and a Baby, and Ruthless People.

Beavis and Butt-head Do America (1996)
The two dim-witted metal-head teenagers from creator Mike Judge's popular and controversial MTV series from the Nineties end up in a cross-country man-hunt after their T.V. is stolen. The two mistake a murder hire for possible sexual escapades and pervade the entire film with, according to the MPAA, "continuous crude and sexual humor".

Antz (1998)
PDI/DreamWork's first computer-animated feature (and only the second of its kind, following 1995's Toy Story) features an all-star cast, including Woody Allen, Sharon Stone, Sylvester Stallone, and Gene Hackman, as well as some impressive visuals. It was also the first of the studio's early features that were more adult-oriented, with an A-list voice cast and subtle crude gags, as well as language to make it more "permissible" for adults. DreamWorks would subtly continue this trend in their next few features, particularly the Shrek films (2001, 2004, 2007, 2010) and Shark Tale (2004). (Fortunately, that wouldn't last long.)

South Park: Bigger, Longer & Uncut (1999)
Possibly the adult animation movie to end all adult animation movies, Parker & Stone satirize (and push the boundaries of) censorship, parenting issues, war, race, and religion. They ultimately turn each on themselves, as Cartman, Kenny, Kyle and Stan sneak into an R-rated Canadian movie, repeat everything they hear and outrage their parents, who in turn declare war on Canada. Throw in Satan and Saddam Hussein as villains, and the most language in an animated movie (at a running time of 81 minutes). Cassette cases for VHS sales and rentals included a parental warning "that 'South Park' is intended for mature audiences."

Adam Sandler's Eight Crazy Nights (2002)
Essentially a feature-length version of Sandler's ever-popular "Hanukkah Song," the SNL-veteran brings his silly, crude schtick to this raunchy, often mean-spirited, holiday comedy about a town delinquent who is put on probation with an underappreciated basketball referee and his quirky sister.

The Simpsons Movie (2007)
America's popular dysfunctional family from Fox's long-running animated sitcom hits the big screen as Homer causes havoc in Springfield and forces his family to go on the run from angry mobs and government agents. Though it featured family-friendly trailers like Alvin and the Chipmunks and Horton Hears a Who during it's theatrical release, the rating's description ("irreverent humor throughout") should be taken seriously.

Rango (2011)
An Oscar-winning and visually-eye-popping animated feature (the first from George Lucas' effects company Industrial Light and Magic) about a thespian chameleon who winds up in a western town and becomes a local hero after inadvertently killing a villainous hawk. Despite being backed by Paramount and Nickelodeon as a family feature, the film's story and various references (from Chinatown to Dirty Harry and even Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas) will easily fly over the youngest of kids' heads while causing parents to scratch theirs. 

$UCCESSFU! FILMS SERIES: "Home Alone" (1990)

There's a scene in the 1989 John Candy vehicle Uncle Buck where Macaulay Culkin peaks through a mail slot and interrogates a potential babysitter. This scene reportedly inspired writer-director John Hughes (who had been transitioning from teenage comedies, like Sixteen Candles [1984] and Ferris Bueller's Day Off [1986], to adult comedies, like Planes, Trains & Automobiles [1987] and She's Having a Baby [1988]) to pen and produce another family vehicle, this time with Culkin in mind as an eight-year-old boy who is accidentally left behind by his family when they head to Paris for Christmas vacation and proceeds to defend his house from two bumbling burglars. This high-concept plot that became Home Alone soon became a wildly commercial success and a pop-culture phenomenon when it was released in November of 1990. (For the record, it stayed in the top ten at the box-office for 12 straight weeks following its initial release, and it has since held its place as the highest-grossing live-action comedy of all-time.) The rest is history.

Grounded to the third floor the night before his family leaves, Kevin wishes he didn't have a family. Despite his mother’s near-warning, Kevin avoids the “be-careful-what-you-wish-for” notion. From the opening credits, this juxtaposition of a scary atmosphere (the idea of being left home alone) mixed with the holidays is a bit creepy at times. It’s as if we’re being told a scary ghost story, as well as a funny and amusing one. There’s even the subplot involving the possible murderer-neighbor next door. (One scene, in particular, used to scare me as a kid. Or maybe it was just Culkin’s reaction in this scene that did so. The advertisements with Culkin’s famous scream a la Edward Munch's aptly-named painting certainly gave me the creeps.)

Yet, unlike director Chris Columbus's previous cult classic Gremlins (1984), this one isn't mean-spirited or nightmarish in terms of it's holiday setting. In fact, the themes here have more to do with holiday memories and the importance of family rather than commercialism or consumerism. In addition, Culkin is agreeably half the reason the film struck a chord with audiences. With enough emphasis on the joys of having a house to himself and eventually realizing that he does miss his family, Culkin carries the film splendidly. Sure, it’s implausible that a kid could do all the things Kevin does, but we still feel for him in a way.

With the holidays in mind, I credit this film for introducing me to several holiday traditions as a child. Certain variations of Christmas songs, such as Chuck Berry’s “Run Run, Rudolph,” Brenda Lee’s “Rockin’ Around the Christmas Tree,” The Drifter’s “White Christmas,” “O Holy Night,” and John Williams' memorable "Somewhere In My Memory," as well as images of the animated version of the Grinch, trigger certain scenes. Such moments include the front yard statue that keeps getting knocked over by the pizza delivery guy, Kevin's mannequin diversion (complete with a life-sized cardboard replica of Michael Jordan) and the bathroom scene complete with the film's iconic image. And as with just about every one of Hughes’ films, his characters break the fourth wall and address the audience (“I made my family disappear,” “This is it! Don’t get scared now.”) Then, of course, there are the famous booby traps.

Home Alone was only the third highest-grossing film worldwide at the time, behind Star Wars (1977) and E.T. (1982), respectfully. Like the previous year’s box-office champ, Batman, the film garnered mixed reviews from critics, and furthermore represented an exponential trend in mass entertainment that would dominate the second-half of the nineties with films like Independence Day (1996) and Star Wars: Episode I--The Phantom Menace (1999).

The film's slapstick emphasis, while memorable and often funny, became more extreme in the 1992 sequel, Home Alone 2: Lost in New York, which many critics bashed as being too “cartoonish” and “sadistic.” I don’t blame them. The sequel, after all, is basically an over-the-top and unnecessary rehash of the first movie. This trend also seemed to suggest that slapstick comedy was a fool-proof formula for box-office success. In fact, Hughes would repeatedly use this formula in many of his later-penned family-comedies throughout the Nineties, particularly Dennis the Menace (1993), Baby’s Day Out (1994), the second sequel Home Alone 3 (1997), and even his remakes of Disney's 101 Dalmatians (1996) and Flubber (1997).

Taking recent tragedies into account, the fake movie-within-the-movie, "Angels With Filthy Souls" (along with Kevin blasting a Red Ryder-style BB gun a la Ralphie Parker) is kind of disturbing. Quotes film critic Leonard Maltin, “the violence (even for a cartoonish farce) is a bit extreme.” Indeed, some of the booby traps (specifically the pasted nail, blow torch, and the heated doorknob) test the film’s PG-rating. Some parents were reportedly upset about such levels of violence, and the stamped “Parental Guidance Suggested” label in poster advertisements was rightfully deserved.

This is not a great movie or a masterpiece, by any means. It does suffer from a few drags, such as when the mom tries to get a flight back home, but always seems to be blocked by full flights. On the other hand, it does remain a classic piece of Nineties nostalgia.

REVIEW: "The Tree of Life" (2011)

In The Tree of Life, acclaimed writer-director Terrence Malick (Days of Heaven, 1978; The Thin Red Line, 1998; The New World, 2006) presents a film experience not so much story-centered as it is emotion-centered. Although, each visual does suggest or evoke a certain story or an idea. On one hand, there is a series of images (some, like myself, may call them captured moments) of an American family in Texas in the 1950s. These moments are juxtaposed, on the other hand, with equally-“captured” images of the creation of the universe (a la 2001: A Space Odyssey), as well as images of dinosaurs, nature/naturalism, the modern world, and so many others that evoke feelings and memories. 

Jack is the central character, with apparently conflicting influences from his mother (Jessica Chastain) and father (Brad Pitt), respectfully. Upon hearing of the death of his younger brother as the film opens, an older Jack (Sean Penn) recalls his life growing up, including the innocence, angst, confusions, expectations, and self-interests he goes through, similar to the questions we carry as children/young adults into adulthood. On a spiritual level, the film also opens with a passage from the Book of Job (“Where were you when I laid the earth’s foundation?”), and is referenced throughout the film, such as in a scene at a church service where a priest gives a sermon on how Job, according to scripture, was very godly and knew it was God who gives and takes away. The same goes for the meditative and spiritual snippets of narration from various characters throughout (Young jack, Old Jack, Mother, Father). This also plays into the central theme of what nature expects and what grace doesn’t. 

With that in mind, many of these stream-of-consciousness images, once again, poetically suggest something. And the imagery (shot by Emmanuel Lubezki) is thoroughly engaging. One scene shows a room underwater, with a boy emerging through what looks like a cellar door, possibly a parallel of a baby’s emergence from a mother’s womb. A few other moments show a little boy and/or a tall man (father and son?) in a brown, wooden attic with sunlight through the lone window. And there’s the powerful and stunning sequence (titled, “Lacrimosa”) showcasing the creation of the universe and of life, with shots of space, volcanic lava, meteor explosions (one that arguably and strangely looks like the silhouette of a person’s face), and waves from underwater. The ethereal score by composer Alexandre Desplat adds a classical, haunting and beautiful touch. 

A few questions several viewers may have (and they will) could include as follows. 

1. Memories of Jack’s late brother seem to be coming back to him? Why now, as an adult, when his brother died as a child? 

2. The moments where Old Jack is out in some sort of rocky valley. Are these moments representative of his current state of mind? His confusion? 

3. Does one particular shot of a sting ray (or of dinosaurs) suggest the birth of consciousness?

4. What of the “tree” in the film’s title? There are many images of trees in this film, including forests. 

5. What of the film’s ending?

This film is very experimental and unconventional, and caused a lot of walkouts and outrages during its initial release in 2011. Such criticisms included several “boos” at the Cannes Film Festival that same year, where it won the coveted Palme D’or award (the equivalent to the Best Picture Academy Award). In recent years, however, several critics, including the late Roger Ebert, have declared the film a masterpiece. It stands as an impressionistic achievement, as well as a genuine work of art, on the influences of life, physically, emotionally and spiritually. This is a film that can inspire, influence and challenge moviegoers in terms of how images/pictures can tell a transcending and universal story, much like Man with a Movie Camera (1929), Fantasia (1940), and 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) before it. 

Wearing a Mask: A Cine-Thematic and Provocative Retrospect of the Dark Knight

Ben Affleck in Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

This weekend's release of the highly-anticipated Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice has already become one of this year's most debatable movies. Most of the reviews have been negative, citing the film as too brooding and dark, not to mention lacking a sense of fun. The film presents a grittier interpretation of two of DC Comics' most iconic characters--Clark Kent a.k.a. the Man of Steel, and Bruce Wayne a.k.a. the Caped Crusader--as they clash over opposing worldviews following the events that occurred during the climax of the former's recent cinematic outing (2013's Man of Steel). This portrayal of Batman (from Ben Affleck) is the latest in a long-list of many roles the character has filled, and not just for the actors who've played him over the years. And like his super-strength counterpart on screen, Batman is certainly no stranger to controversy. He has always been an equally compelling, provocative, and brooding character--at least the way creators Bob Kane and Bill Finger intended him to be in the comics. Here is a recap on some of the significant live-action outings (including their controversies as well as their thematic undertones) in the Caped Crusader's filmography. 

Michael Keaton and Jack Nicholson in Batman

Batman (1989) 

Director Tim Burton's (Pee-Wee's Big Adventure, Beetlejuice) dark-yet-highly-engrossing adaptation was the first that brought the character and world of Gotham City out of the campy setting that pervaded the classic 1960s T.V. series starring Adam West and Burt Ward. And although it spends most of its time with Jack Nicholson's interpretation of the Joker, the film does (more than the others in the original series) tap into the enigma of Bruce Wayne and why he does what he does. The making of the film was a ten-year odyssey, facing several roadblocks including backlash towards casting (Michael Keaton, in particular) and controversial revealings of the murderer of Bruce Wayne's parents. There is also a provocative and compelling visual motif of the difference between heroes and villains, as well as which one makes the other. 

(Top to bottom) Michael Keaton, Michelle Pfeiffer, and Danny DeVito
in a striking poster for Batman Returns

Batman Returns (1992) 

It seems Burton was given complete creative control for this even darker and more violent tale of characters with animal-like instincts and misguided ambitions in an equally dark and violent world. Easily the most neo-noir, grotesque, and disturbing of the original films (definitely not one for children or families), there are still intriguing themes and character studies of Batman/Bruce Wayne (Keaton), the Penguin (Danny DeVito), and Catwoman/Selina Kyle (Michelle Pfeiffer). If only they could have given Keaton more screen time.

(Clockwise from top): Val Kilmer, Chris O'Donnell, Nicole Kidman,
Tommy Lee Jones, and Jim Carrey in Batman Forever

Batman Forever (1995)
Steering from the nightmarish nature of the previous film, Warner Brothers sought to lighten the tone of the Batman universe. Burton was replaced by director Joel Schumacher (The Client, A Time to Kill), who brought a new level of excitement and intrigue, and Keaton was replaced by Val Kilmer, who made the title role all his own, but with sex appeal. The subplots involving his duel pursuit of a psychiatrist (Nicole Kidman), his mentoring of Robin/Dick Greyson (Chris O'Donnell), and his battle with Two-Face/Harvey Dent (Tommy Lee Jones) and especially the Riddler (Jim Carrey). This latter villain represents the film's motif of characters with multiple personalities. A surprise box-office hit, the film did, however, face backlash for the inclusion of rubber nipples on the batsuit, and arguably some questionable sexuality. And these were just a few elements, along with mind-blowing, razzle-dazzle action sequences and special effects, that made the widely-disregarded follow-up, Batman & Robin (1997), a disappointment.

Christian Bale in Batman Begins

Batman Begins (2005)
Fans and critics were given a surprise as director Christopher Nolan (Memento, Insomnia) brought them a gritty and intense reboot of the franchise, promising a more grounded-in-reality story that gave Batman new life and meaning, and made both groups forget the previous outing that reportedly killed the series. Boy, were their expectations exceeded! Nolan, co-writer David S. Goyer, and star Christian Bale set a new bar for backstory, character study, and intense action as Bruce Wayne's origins are traced back to his childhood all the way through his motivations for dressing up as a creature of the night, and setting an influence on Gotham City.

Heath Ledger, Christian Bale, and Aaron Eckhart in The Dark Knight

The Dark Knight (2008)
Widely regarded as the greatest comic book movie ever made, Nolan delivers a more-engrossing yet ultimately-tragic tale of Batman's (Bale) quest to rid Gotham City of crime, and his ultimate showdown with the character of the Joker (an unforgettable Heath Ledger), questioning the role of the former as hero or villain. The examinations of these characters, as well as Harvey Dent (Aaron Eckhart) and Jim Gordon (Gary Oldman), are thoroughly riveting, and the direction of the story is constantly gripping and grim. In fact, several viewers felt the tone was far darker than it needed to be, and that the overall effect was (according to some) "nihilistic" and "violent". According to Nolan, in an interview with Newsweek in 2008, "Yeah, it is grim. But Batman is a grim character. It's a grim world. And that's part of the fun of it--it's operatic. It's exciting. But it's definitely grim." Although I do find the film thrilling and engrossing (and seen as an ensemble piece), I'm not as keen as Nolan is on calling it an entertaining film, nor am I content with all the publicity that the late Ledger (who tragically died of an overdose in January of 2008) has gotten for all the film's credit.

Anne Hathaway, Christian Bale, and Tom Hardy in The Dark Knight Rises

The Dark Knight Rises (2012)
Set eight years after the events of the last film, Rises finds Bruce Wayne as a bruised-and-beaten man who's hung up his cape and cowl. And then, a masked vigilante named Bane (Tom Hardy) and a mysterious woman named Selina Kyle enter the picture. What follows are character studies of people in masks, experiences of pain, a city on the brink of destruction, and the hero's journey to rid it of crime and bring life back to it. Shot with the most IMAX footage at the time, and featuring tremendous action sequences, the release of this film was only undermined by a real-life tragic shooting at a movie theater in Colorado opening weekend. Also, some fans found the third film didn't live up to the bar set in the previous installment. Nevertheless, it is a thrilling a well-made conclusion to Nolan's now-famous Dark Knight trilogy, which inspired co-writer Goyer to pen a more grounded-in-reality version of Superman.

Ben Affleck and Henry Cavill in Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice

Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice (2016)
Actor Ben Affleck faced similar controversy, as Keaton did, when he was cast in director Zack Snyder's (300, Watchmen) follow-up to Man of Steel (and the second installment in the up-and-coming cinematic DC universe). Even Affleck had doubts about the role, until Snyder convinced him with the direction the film was going, and especially the take on Bruce Wayne he was going for. This risk pays off as Affleck portrays an older, more grim Wayne, who views the "Man of Steel" as a threat to mankind--ironic in how both represent opposing worldviews and provocative perceptions of what a hero is, how everything has a consequence, and how the world has fallen despite their well-meaning but misguided actions.

According to the current consensus on Rotten Tomatoes, the film "smothers a potentially powerful story--and some of America's most iconic superheroes--in a grim whirlwind of effects-driven action." To be fair, the film does suffer at times with its overbearing action and special-effects (a criticism that Man of Steel faced, regarding its destruction 45-minute climax), and the overall story is uneven and a bit convoluted from an initial viewing. Then again, so were Burton's films, as well as Nolan's predominant features, regarding the latter. Batman v Superman is still open for debate (as is the character himself). Yet it goes to show that there's no one way to interpret a classic character, and that everybody has their own take on him.