Two disclaimers: firstly, this won’t be a review. If you want one, you’re better off with Marzgurl, Chris Stuckmann, Confused Matthew (whose review no longer exists), Geekvolution or, to a lesser extent, Doug Walker, as they’ve done so quite efficiently. Instead, this’ll be me sharing my general thoughts and why the movie doesn’t click with me like most. And secondly, there’ll be major spoilers. I can’t discuss it without them, so you’ve been warned.
To give a general overview, Batman: Mask of the Phantasm takes place in-continuity of the highly-acclaimed Batman: The Animated Series. It begins with a fight between Batman and some mobsters, only to turn deadly when their boss is killed while trying to escape by a shadowy assassin out for revenge. This assassin is targeting mobsters with a shared history, and, what’s worse, Batman’s being blamed for it. Complicating matters is the return of an old fling in Batman’s, aka Bruce Wayne’s, love-life, bringing back a flood of repressed memories of their doomed relationship. As Batman tries piecing together the links behind the hits, and Bruce Wayne tries understanding why his former lover, Andrea Beaumont, left him, it becomes clear that the connections are as close as the character’s dual identity.
Let's start with the positives: the story is really interesting. Not because it’s a dark mystery, that’s nothing new for Batman, or because it delves into Batman’s/Bruce Wayne’s past, that’s nothing new either, but because it touches on something never really explored in the Batman mythos to quite this extent: romance. Usually, Batman’s flings are either there to look pretty, get into trouble, or both. And in the case of the show, there’s the additional component of the love interests giving up because they see no future with him. But Andrea Beaumont gives a Batman story a chance for a real love angle to build off of. It’s not a perfect love angle, Confused Matthew’s review pointed out how dissimilar Bruce and Andrea are personality-wise, but it’s enough to feel fresh and interesting for a character who’s been around for so long that he’s been cited by detractors as “stale” and “overused”.
I love the music and art-style. On the former’s end, the late-Shirley Walker gives it her all, and it shows. Full-out, gothic-style orchestrations can be heard throughout the film’s 76-minute runtime, including gospel choir humming during flashbacks and Latin chants during the opening credits and the big finale, and they really add to the film’s epic nature. As for the latter? If these stills aren't already indicative, the art-deco style really gives the film a unique look, something complimented by the animation. I do have an issue with said animation…but we’ll get to that later.
And finally, this movie wonderfully balances funny and dramatic. I guess I shouldn’t be surprised, it’s DC’s animated division, but it keeps you on the edge of your seat with its twists, turns and bouts of feels and humour. Everything with the Joker is comedic gold, including his phone call with Batman in the third-act, while the more somber notes of Bruce’s relationship with his parents hit you where it hurts. And, of course, this movie is graphic! There’s blood and death galore, and while it’s never to the point of scarring…it’s intense. The Nostalgia Critic was right when he said that Batman: Mask of the Phantasm earns its PG-rating!
“Okay,” you’re thinking, “That doesn’t sound so bad. What could possibly warrant criticism?”
The first complaint has to do with execution. Remember how I said this is an interesting story? It doesn’t always present itself that way. For one, the pacing, particularly the first-act, is choppy. The film suffers from the same problem Batman Begins did, namely jumping back-and-forth between Bruce’s past and present to establish beats that’d come back into play in the finale. Except that it also rushes through major plot points for the sake of time. Details like Bruce’s romance with Andrea happen too fast, such that his proposal feels out of left-field and is lacking build-up. It doesn’t help that their break-off of the proposal is equally as quick and rushed, leaving little time for it to sink in.
On top of that, Bruce’s back-story has way too many conveniences for its own good. Am I really supposed to believe that Bruce would fall in-love with a girl he met at his parents’ grave three days earlier while she’d come to visit him in the backyard of his mansion? Or that their only romantic links are that they have dead parents and have taken martial arts classes? Or that Bruce proposes to Andrea at the same place he discovers a swarm of bats surfacing from what ends up becoming his Batcave? Or even that Andrea dumping him and him becoming Batman were supposed to be intertwined?
Actually, let’s zone-in on that last one: Bruce proposes to Andrea near the same rock that leads to the eventual Batcave, discovering its location because of a swarm of bats. Ignoring the on-the-nose symbolism, he goes investigating the cave, only to surface to a letter of rejection from Andrea. The next scene is him donning the guise of Batman for the first time, as if to suggest that Andrea’s rejection is what allowed that to happen. Do you realize how messed up that is? I remember Confused Matthew stating how dirty he felt that Bruce only became Batman because he broke up with a girl, but I felt that way long before that. Because it made Bruce out to be shallow, only doing what he did because “heartbreak”.
The movie’s contrivances don’t end there. For one, Andrea discovering that Batman and Bruce Wayne are the same guy is a real error in judgement on Batman’s part. He decides to visit his parents’ grave in costume while Andrea is at the cemetery, only to be noticed long enough for her to make the connection. And while I like that the Joker is in this movie, even though he takes over way too often whenever he’s on-screen, the way Bruce connects him to Andrea, smearing pink crayon over the mouth of a henchman in a photograph, is so ridiculous you’d have to be a complete idiot to not see it. I mean, really? Pink crayon?!
Speaking of which, the climax is unsatisfying. For one, Andrea, who at this point has been revealed to be The Phantasm, grabs the Joker and leaves right when the Smithsonian they’re in goes up into flames, stating that “it ends tonight”. It’s obvious that the Joker’s her last victim, but…what happens to him? He doesn’t die, as he returns in-show, but you never find out what Andrea had in mind. All you see is her on a boat with a mourner’s veil on, implying that she’s finally moved on, but when you factor in that Batman lets her go because she’s too similar to him…ugh, it’s confusing and annoying!
Finally, the animation and voice acting are a tad awkward. Batman: Mask of the Phantasm was originally supposed to be a TV movie, only becoming a theatrical release last-minute to capitalize on the success of the Tim Burton films, and it feels it. The animation is bounds better than the show, but it’s not quite film quality. It’s at times beautiful and others jarring, with character movements often clunky and hard to look at. And the voice acting is no different, coming off as too normal sounding for TV, yet too cartoony for film. It’s that imbalance that makes it hard to fully be engaged, which is a shame.
I get it: all these complaints can be waved with the justification of being a 76-minute film from a studio that’d never done something this ambitious. But I don’t buy that. 76-minutes might not seem like it, but that’s plenty of time to tell a compelling story in animation if properly-paced. Batman Beyond: Return of the Joker was also 76-minutes, and it told a wonderfully-paced story on the same budget. Even Batman & Mr. Freeze: Sub-Zero, which was 67-minutes long, managed to be tighter-written, and that’s an arguably weaker film! And let’s not forget DC animated films like Wonder Woman and Batman: Under the Red Hood, both of which were also 76-minutes long! Rushing to capitalize on a brand might explain Batman: Mask of the Phantasm’s problems, but it doesn’t excuse them, not when the same team would go on to do the aforementioned.
It’s also these sorts of problems that hold me back from liking this movie more than I do. Does this mean it’s not good? No, the points I mentioned at the beginning are more than enough for why you should check it out. Does I think it’s under-appreciated? Yes, especially when juxtaposed with The Dark Knight Trilogy. But I can’t call it anything higher than a 4/5 star film, and none of my multiple viewings have been able to convince me otherwise.
But I’d recommend checking it out anyway. The above is personal and subjective, so you might disagree with me. Besides, any opportunity to hear Mark Hamill as the Joker, even if it overshadows some of his equally terrific performances in other shows and movies, is a good one!
No comments:
Post a Comment