Why Batman is Cinema's Definitive Superhero

Scene from Batman

Quick. Name your favorite Batman movie or actor. Unlike the question posed on Monday about the best Superman actor, this is an answer that comes as a loaded, almost unanswerable question. Some people love the campy attitudes of Adam West; others the darker Michael Keaton; others the even darker Christian Bale (word is still out on Ben Affleck). The answer is impossible to agree unanimously on, which raises an interesting point in light of Fridays' Batman v. Superman: while it is possible for Superman to win in a fight, there's no denying that Batman is probably the most cinematic superhero character that has ever existed. There's not one definitive take, or even tone for that matter. He is a chameleon who changes with the times. While there's always been many superheroes, there's a reason that the caped crusader has remained a fixture to the point that even his supervillains have their own show called Gotham. While he may not be the best from a superpowers standpoint, he is the best as a plot device.

I am aware that the last sentence may seem blasphemous. What's also likely blasphemous is claiming that Batman isn't a superhero; or at least not in the way of Superman or The  Green Lantern. When one thinks of a superpower, one immediately goes to the row of skills only acquired in freak accidents. There's flying, levitation, even telekinesis. Batman has none of these features. What he does have is billions of dollars and the access to a variety of tools to make himself powerful. Much like Iron Man, his main appeal is that he knew how to spin his influence into saving the world without having any defect. This in itself makes for a compelling example of the rich helping the less fortunate, but doesn't necessarily help to create an image on an underdog coming to save the day. In fact, he mostly strikes at night, meaning half of the world's criminals can go about without fear.

This is only a broad analysis, as there has been many interpretations of Batman over his lifespan. However, there's one thing that should be noted. Unlike every other superhero out there, Batman hasn't really gone away. From his days in serials to the 1966 TV series and beyond, he has always been a fixture in our culture. The incessant chant of the Batman theme song remains one of the most iconic superhero themes. It is also why it seems like every time someone remakes the move and changes his character just slightly, there's a certain uproar over how he's depicted. For instance, there's an episode of The Simpsons where West discusses why he was better than Keaton's take (His reasoning? Batman doesn't dance anymore). Things continued up through modern years with many complaining about how Heath Ledger (who would win an Oscar for his performance) wasn't a good fit for The Joker after Jack Nicholson (a comment that mirrors Nicholson not being a suitable follow-up to Caesar Romero). The web is so intricate that one could easily suggest that Batman movie history repeats itself every decade - and that's pretty much a good thing.

The truth is that ideals when Batman started are far different/more innocent in pop culture than they were even in the 60's or late 80's. If West's take seems campy, it is in part owed to entertainment of the time where series like Rowan and Martin's Laugh-In and The Monkees preferred slapstick and bright colors. Considering the enviable guest stars that appeared on Batman, it's a time capsule of 60's optimism and the overall perception of what TV could be during that time. Considering that things would get slightly more serious (but not much more) with better production values in the 70's with Wonder Woman and The Incredible Hulk, the 1966 take isn't a disgrace to Batman culture but so much an evolution of how pop culture saw him at the time. In fact, one could argue that he wasn't taken "seriously" until Tim Burton's two film run, which had edges of campiness, but was more fit on a Fritz  Lang-ian Gotham City that highlighted a brooding core. Considering that Christopher Nolan would borrow Blade Runner elements for Batman Begins, nobody can fault the evolution of Gotham City's appearance over the decades. In fact, it likely is a production designer's dream - as even the godawful Batman Forever and Batman & Robin cannot be accused of not taking the visual appearance in a distinctive direction.

But what is Batman at his core? As the comics label that harbors Batman's property suggests, he is a piece of Detective Comics culture. Considering how many shows on TV are focused a round crime, it is easy to see the general appeal of someone fighting crime, sometimes even as a detective. The 1996 take was most reflective of this, as he would solve crimes in his Batcave against a row of villains on an episode-by-episode basis. While the later films would strengthen his character, the mystery of character as well as fighting for justice were always the perks of Batman's lasting impact. If anything, he can be The Big Sleep's Phillip Marlowe, but with a budget for gadgets. Much like Marlowe, he has been adapted to fit the times (see: The Long Goodbye as Marlowe reacting to the 70's) and is never pulled into one era. Considering that there's an entire series of crime shows dedicated to Chicago right now, Batman has no fear of becoming irrelevant - as long as crime is present.

In the most speculative part of this piece, one could make the argument that he also has the best villains - or at least the most recognizable. To the modern generation, The Joker in The Dark Knight is the epitome of supervillains despite being just as handicapped in the superpowers department. He is anarchic and surprising in ways that the additional villains such as The Scarecrow, The Penguin, and even Catwoman aren't. The further into the supernatural that we go, the less appealing they end up being. It is partially why films like Batman & Robin and The Dark Knight Rises get a certain blowback from fans who find their depiction of Bane, Poison Ivy, and Mr. Freeze to be problematic (though scripts are also to blame). 

Still, it explains why Nolan's take has been so revered and influential in modern superhero culture. For modern audiences, it doesn't seem likely that they remember the pre-2005 era when superhero films were livelier and more cartoonish and Batman was relegated to a joke. It's because of Batman Begins that things changed and the "gritty reboot" became something that still can be seen in the likes of Batman v. Superman, or even Zack Snyder's previous film Man of Steel. One can see a direct change in cinema that Marvel has initially been fighting, but has slowly given into the more dour attitude. Nolan brought a sense of realism to a character not often grounded in such things. It is also generally why, beyond script and director, Superman doesn't work quite as well in the gritty reboot world.

I suppose it is easy to say that there' a lot of superhero films nowadays that rival and maybe even surpass any of the Batman films (though The Dark Knight is tough to beat). I'm looking at Spider-Man 2 or The Avengers. I'm looking at a culture that is far more extraordinary in talents than Batman's mere ability to drive a Bat Tumbler. By some extent, he would lose in most bets if forced to fight. However, he continues to resonate because, to some extent, we can imagine a world with Batman in it. We want to believe that there is a Batman out there who will patrol the night and protect us from fiends like The Joker or The Penguin - who as far as villains go are probably some of comic books' most playful and intriguing takes. Even if 2016 Batman is distinguishable from 1966 Batman, there's a certain evolution that he represents in pop culture that cannot be found by anyone else (even Superman took a few decades off from movies). 

If there is one thing that should be taken away from this post, it isn't the argument that Batman is the best superhero from a skills standpoint, or even a comics standpoint (I cannot even begin to properly assess this). What I'm saying is that as a pop culture figure, he embodies a lot more to the layman who will likely never pick up "The Long Halloween." He is a symbol of hope that has managed to avoid being entirely seen as ridiculous like his equally old partner Superman. It is like James Bond in a sense. He adapts with the times, reflecting how we see our heroes. Maybe he doesn't always have the best movies, but there's a reason that someone could argue legitimately for whether West, Keaton, Bale, or now Affleck is the best actor for the job. It is only with a legacy like this that you become the  best, and it is why there will likely be Batman movies from now until the world blows up, even if The Avengers have far stronger characters.