Another day, another Batman movie. No, just kidding, I am very, very excited about the Dark Knight.The rule of thumb for what makes fantasy/science fiction/superhero films and stories good is that the audience is asked to suspend their disbelief for one or two fantastic elements, and as long as everything else around the fantastic elements follows naturally, the story can be considered a good story. So, for instance, in Christopher Nolan's Gotham city, police, criminals, assistant district attorneys, and faithful butlers react as you might expect them to when confronted with a man dressed as a bat.
And then there's the movie pictured above. Which goes in....a bit of a different direction.
Let me be clear here. I love the 1960s "Batman" show. When I was a kid, we lived in the boonies and got three or so channels. When we went to Ft. Worth to visit grandparents, we were flabbergasted by over ten channels! Ten! And on one of those channels, in the afternoons they would show reruns of "ba-da-da-da-da-da-da-da-Batman!" I can count on one hand how many times I saw both parts of a two part adventure, but that was a minor quibble. There he was, on screen, driving the Batmobile, flinging Bat-a-rangs, and answering the phone from Commissioner Gordon. It was (intentionally) comic books come to life.
It catches a lot of grief these days from people who prefer their Batman to be a grim avenger. But this show came out during the heavily censored era of comic books, when Batman and Superman were best buddies, and when he had a dog named Ace, the Bat-Hound. The next big media adaptation of the "Dark Knight" would be on Superfriends. It wasn't until the '80s that a certain Frank Miller brought Batman wholly back to his pulp era roots (though others had helped take the first steps). Until "Batman Begins" everyone else has tried for a mish-mash approach, blending the camp of the early days with the grit of the present (and the very, very early days, when Batman would occasionally push people out of windows) with varying degrees of success. But there is no mish-mash to 1960s-era "Batman."
As a kid, I loved this show. And one day my dad came home with "Batman" - the movie! The first feature length Batman film, it was originally released in 1966, after the first season of the TV show. But for me, it was brand new. It had the Joker, Penguin, Riddler, and Catwoman - all together! They team up with a gadget that dehydrates humans into dust, and they decide to hold the "World Security Council" for ransom. (Not a bad plan, actually.) It features a whole lot of Bam! Pow! Zap! action, a Navy surplus submarine, a very funny scene where Batman is trying desperately to get rid of a bomb and keeps running into nuns, women with baby carriages, puppies, etc., and the infamous "Bat-shark-repellent." I got to see the whole adventure - no "to-be continued" no "same Bat-time, same Bat-channel." It was the greatest thing since Batman and Robin teamed up with Scooby Doo and Shaggy. It was completely ridiculous - and it was great.
I could read at the time, and had some 80's era Batman comics, including part of Miller's "Year One." They were quite different from the televised Batman. But in my childlike innocence I could more clearly see and celebrate the similarities (Batman - on screen!) than criticize the differences.
So, here's to the Batman in all his varieties - whether driving a Tumbler or a sweet red and black number with tailfins, whether "old chum" or "dark knight." Long may your Bat-Signal shine!
P.S. My sister reminded me of the denouement of the "Batman with a lit bomb scene" - the priceless line, "Sometimes you just can't get rid of a bomb!"
