Beetlejuice Beetlejuice

Director: Tim Burton
Starring: Michael Keaton, Winona Ryder, Catherine O' Hara, Jenna Ortega, Justin Theroux, Monica Bellucci, Willem Dafoe, Arthur Conti, Santiago Cabrera, Danny DeVito, Nick Kellington
Running Time: 104 min.
Rating: PG-13

★★★ (out of ★★★★)

There's always this tendency to assume the worst when a beloved property like Beetlejuice is resurrected decades after the original's release. Years of rumors and false starts weigh on fans who can only hope it's not just a cash grab and some creative thought went into continuing the original's legacy. This concern is especially real with Tim Burton's intended sequel, which seemed perpetually stuck in pre-production since the early 90's. 

As time passes, expectations fall, which is why it comes as such a relief that Beetlejuice Beetlejuice resembles the kind of follow-up audiences wanted but didn't think they'd ever get. Signaling a welcome return to form for Burton, it rekindles flickers of his former glory throughout, while still looking and feeling like the Beetlejuice we know. The director's recent work on Netflix's Wednesday, could almost be seen as a prelude to this in that his twisted imagination is once again freed up to run amok with fewer boundaries.

It's 2024 and Lydia Deetz (Winona Ryder) is now a psychic medium hosting her own supernatural talk show, Ghost House, where she contacts the dead. But her sullenly skeptical teen daughter Astrid (Jenna Ortega) isn't interested, still harboring grief and resentment over the death of Lydia's husband and her father, Richard (Santiago Cabrera). And as Lydia's slimy TV producer boyfriend Rory (Justin Theroux) prepares to take their relationship to another level, professional artist and Deetz matriarch Delia (Catherine O' Hara) breaks the news to Lydia that her father Charles (played by Jeffrey Jones in the original) just died in a horrific accident. 

With the family reconvening in Winter River for Charles' funeral and preparing to sell their old home, Astrid falls for local teen Jeremy Frazier (Arthur Conti) while Lydia finds out the hard way that Beetlejuice (Michael Keaton) isn't done with her yet. Now working as an "Afterlife Manager" on the other side, he's being stalked by ex-wife Dolores (Monica Belucci), a murderous soul sucking cult member being hunted by action star turned ghost detective Wolf Jackson (Willem Dafoe). But when Lydia realizes Astrid's in danger and only Beetlejuice can help, she's reminded that any deal with this mischievous demon comes at a high price.

Recognizing there's such a thing as overkill, Burton strategically uses the Beetlejuice character, both in terms of screen time and his overall purpose. Of course, we all know he's keeping Keaton in his back pocket until the ghoul's ready to unleash his goofy madness, or more accurately, has a reason to. And writers Alfred Gough and Miles Millar come up with a good one, putting the now middle-aged Lydia at a place in life that makes sense given her past and tumultuous connection to Beetlejuice. 

Now a famous TV star, Lydia's addicted to pills, dating a creep and unable to connect with daughter Astrid on any level, particularly when it comes to discussing the latter's deceased dad. And if there's a benefit to have waited this long for a sequel, it's that Ryder's now old enough for her character to struggle parenting a version of her rebellious younger self. That she's played by a perfectly cast Ortega is only icing on the cake. 

While Keaton and Ryder have publicly expressed their desire to reprise these roles for a while, it's no secret the addition of Ortega is what finally got this greenlit. As strong a match for Astrid as Ryder originally was for Lydia, the pair's natural chemistry consistently shines through in every scene they share as mother and daughter. And though this iteration mostly plays it safe, Ortega's Astrid is given the film's bleakest, most compelling subplot, serving as the primary catalyst for Lydia and her stripe suited nemesis's reunion. 

Catherine O' Hara delightfully hams it up as Delia, spending most of the running length in hysterics over Charles' death, while also remaining strangely unfazed by it, keeping with Burton's quirky, bemused take on the macabre that's punctuated much of his previous work. And while there was no chance of Jeffrey Jones returning as Charles, it's a treat watching how brilliantly Burton works around it, using photos, paintings and an extremely clever animated stop-motion sequence to help make him an even bigger presence dead than alive.

Once Beetlejuice is fully involved, Keaton runs with it, and if family drama justifiably monopolizes the film's early goings, he dictates the rest by recapturing Juice's brand of sarcastic quips and physical comedy. The plot involving his murderous ex Dolores is probably the script's weakest, but it's still well executed, notable for a brief but memorable black-and-white flashback depicting the couples' sordid history. And when the action shifts into the Afterlife and takes all the characters along, it picks up steam before arriving at a wacky, divisive ending that really flies off the rails without veering far from the franchise's roots. 

This doesn't approach prime Beetlejuice or Edward Scissorhands territory, but it's fun seeing everyone slide back into their roles as we revisit a universe that hasn't changed much at all. Between Danny Elfman's score, the similar production design and a continued emphasis on practical effects, Burton clears the toughest hurdle by recognizing any legacy sequel's biggest competition is its own nostalgia. By effectively tailoring the story to present day, he forgoes cheap fan service, instead crafting a worthy successor that will leave viewers wanting even more.

The Flash

Director: Andrew Muschietti 
Starring: Ezra Miller, Sasha Calle, Michael Shannon, Ron Livingston, Maribel Verdú, Kiersey Clemons, Antje Traue, Michael Keaton, George Clooney, Jeremy Irons, Temuera Morrison, Saoirse-Monica Jackson, Rudy Mancuso 
Running Time: 144 min.
Rating: PG-13

**The Following Review Contains Major Plot Spoilers For 'The 'Flash' **

★★ ½ (out of ★★★★) 

Contained within director Andrew Muschietti's The Flash are glimpses of the project Warner Bros. hoped could give DC's Extended Universe the ammunition it needed to redefine an overexposed genre and finally compete with Marvel. And despite roadblocks like its lead star's highly publicized legal troubles and the announcement of this as a closing chapter of the current DCEU, a genuine sense of optimism did surround that very real belief.

Using the 2011 comic crossover "Flashpoint" for inspiration, this was touted as a sci-fi driven time travel story marking the triumphant return of Michael Keaton as Batman, as well as a handful of other familiar faces. It's also a tale of two movies, as its emotionally resonant central plot is derailed by what sometimes feels like committee-approved fan service. That would be its biggest flaw, if not for the spotty visual effects that take over a memorable final act bustling with AI generated cameos of legends past. 

While there are still some really good ideas in here, it probably comes as little surprise that the film's biggest assets aren't a pair of bickering Barry Allens around which the majority of the action revolves, but Keaton's Batman and an impressive new Supergirl. It might be worth seeing just for their performances, even if each would be better served by a standalone entry of their own. But now, given The Flash's underwhelming reception and a misjudged ending, it's possible neither actor gets an opportunity to play these characters again. And that's the biggest disappointment in what turns out to be a fascinatingly mixed bag. 

In present day, forensic investigator and Justice League member Barry Allen/The Flash (Miller) still carries the trauma over his father Henry's (Ron Livingston) wrongful imprisonment for the murder of his mother Nora (Maribel Verdú) when he was young. Desperately trying to clear his dad's name, a conversation with former college crush and current journalist Iris West (Kiersey Clemons) gives Barry the idea to use the Speed Force to travel back in time and prevent his mom's death. Dismissing dire warnings from friend Bruce Wayne/Batman (Ben Affleck) that changing this could carry disastrous consequences, he goes anyway, attempting to save her in the least disruptive way possible to the timeline. 

Barry's trip is wrought with complications, as he's suddenly stuck in an alternate 2013 with mother Nora still alive, but coming face-to-face with his college-aged self the day he gained the Flash powers. Trapped in an alternate universe without the Justice League, both Barrys must work together to thwart General Zod's (Michael Shannon) invasion of Earth. But they'll need help, which may come from an older version of Bruce Wayne/Batman (Keaton), who they coax out of retirement in hopes of locating Superman. But after instead discovering his imprisoned cousin, Kara Zor-El/Supergirl (Sasha Calle), all four must work together to topple Zod and undo the catastrophic damage Barry accidentally caused.

There are definite parallels to what Marvel recently did with 2021's Spider-Man: No Way Home in incorporating multiverses and various versions of canonical characters. But in some sense, this contrasts what Marvel usually gets right, with DC buckling under the pressure to adopt that model rather than chart a different course. But while this plot draws from a highly regarded comic, a more noticeable influence is Back To The Future, or more directly, the paradoxical Part II. And even as the screenplay fully acknowledges its debt to the trilogy with a number of shout outs and a clever gag involving the aborted casting of Eric Stoltz, we're reminded just how high a bar this is trying to clear.

That Barry's well-intentioned quest involves a parent's death only compounds the butterfly effect, adding personal weight to Batman's involvement since it's a tragedy he knows all too well. Where problems arise are in execution, or rather the mind-numbing interaction between the two Barrys, which becomes the definition of beating a good joke into the ground. The idea of current day Barry showing his reckless and irresponsible younger counterpart the ropes after losing the powers his past self gains does work in principle. But present Barry must have the patience of a saint since this kid's unhinged behavior really tests the nerves, turning a situation initially ripe for comic possibility into the lost Multiplicity sequel no one wanted.

Though Miller excels at playing both and it's the least jarring effects work in the picture, you'll still be counting down the minutes until Keaton arrives. Until then, get used to seeing Barry stuffing his face with calories to maintain his super speed and arguing with the older doppelganger. And there's a nauseating amount of running inside, outside and everywhere else before the two arrive at Wayne Manor to find a reclusive, unkempt Bruce, who clearly hasn't seen much crimefighting since 1992. Initially showing little interest in donning the cape and cowl once more, his change of heart is unusually sudden, but welcome, since the over 70 year-old Keaton slides back into this iconic role as if no time passed at all. 

Not only does the entire film temporarily improve ten-fold with Keaton's arrival, the feuding Barrys become more tolerable when he subtly steps in as a mediator and guiding force. The best scenes take place within in the desolate batcave as the three formulate a plan to retrieve Superman in Siberia and restore older Barry's powers. Of course, it all provides the opportunity to again witness Keaton believably kick ass in the batsuit, putting to shame Affleck's sleepy performance from earlier. 

Michael Shannon looks bored to tears, possibly because the Zod plot feels shoehorned in as an excuse to tie the DC universe together and bring in auxiliary characters. Thankfully, we have Supergirl, played by an actress who redefines the big screen presentation of Kara. From the short pixie cut to that stone cold death stare, Sasha Calle is a real find, conveying an ideal combination of grit and vulnerability, more than proving herself deserving of another shot at this. Unfortunately, due the film's performance and DC's pigheaded future plans to recast every role in sight, she may not get it.

The visual effects do few favors for anyone, but as insane as the last act is, it at least differs from your usual 40 to 45 minute CGI superhero slugfest by centering around an Edge of Tomorrow-like time loop. And it might be fun to poll fans still sore over Luke Skywalker's treatment in The Last Jedi to find out if they're just as disgruntled about how Keaton's arc wraps. It's unlikely they'll care since anything that happens (or doesn't) in superhero multiverses can usually just be wiped out in the blink of an eye. Let's hope that's the case with this Batman and Supergirl, possibly keeping the door open for future appearances after all.

When Barry regains his powers and reenters the Speed Force alongside his 2013 self, this hurls toward a trippy ending that speaks to obsessing over what wasn't. Put in an unenviable position of accepting the lowest moment of his life in order to selflessly prevent worse, the two Barrys get a whirlwind tour of DC's past. This includes the likes of George Reeves and Christopher Reeve's Superman, Helen Slater's Supergirl, Adam West's Batman, audio samplings from Cesar Romero and Jack Nicholson's Joker, and in the deepest cut, Nicolas Cage's Superman from Tim Burton's unproduced Superman Lives. 

Though a few of these appearances bring back bad deepfake memories of Princess Leia in Rogue One, the technology has improved since, with the noticeable exception of a scarily de-aged Cage. Still, it's a moment, in addition to the powerful one Barry shares with his mom that shows how involving this story is when staying the course. The final scene exemplifies that mishmash of tones, with the filmmakers going for a self-referential joke that's not quite as amusing as they think. Supposedly, the original plan was for Keaton to step out of that car instead of Clooney, which would have resulted in a far more satisfying payoff. But at least the latter makes the most of his admittedly goofy Bruce Wayne cameo.

It may be messy, but Keaton and Calle shine, which isn't a knock on Ezra Miller, who excels in a tricky dual role that the writers go comically overboard with. And you start to wonder if those accusations about DC's lack of direction are true and whether this was worth the studio suffering through all that bad press. Superhero fatigue or not, the stakes seemed higher than usual, reinforcing how difficult it is to unlock an event movie's fullest potential. Extended portions of The Flash come close, providing a valuable look at what could have been under better circumstances.                                                      

Worth

Director: Sara Colangelo
Starring: Michael Keaton, Stanley Tucci, Amy Ryan, Tate Donovan, Shunori Ramanthan, Laura Benanti, Talia Balsam, Marc Maron, Chris Tardio, Victor Slezak
Running Time: 118 min.
Rating: PG-13 

★★★ (out of ★★★★) 

For the longest time any discussion about a movies focusing on 9/11 would revolve around one question: "Too soon?" But as years passed and more were released, those concerns eventually faded into the background, replaced with conversations about how accurately and tastefully this particular part of history would be handled. Paul Greengrass' United 93 set the gold standard in 2006, with most others that followed falling short, even occasionally using the tragedy as mere window dressing to tell another story altogether. With Worth, director Sara Colangelo takes a slightly different approach, zeroing in on a controversial aspect of its aftermath that's never been this exhaustively dramatized. The legalities and ethics related to the September 11th Victim Compensation Fund is fertile territory, with many still somewhat unaware of the exact complications and challenges surrounding it. And you'd be hard-pressed to find a more accurate title for the film than Worth, as it most definitely addresses the many meanings and implications that word carries. 

If this has a deficit, it's that some may find it clinical or dry in how it hits the same note repeatedly, albeit in slightly different ways. Luckily, that's offset by not only how elegantly and efficiently that note is struck, but a compelling lead performance that helps in juggling such a sensitive topic. This just so happens to echo the ethical dilemma its protagonist is faced with, attempting to quantify something so steeped in human emotion that any decision he makes will at least feel wrong. What's the monetary value of a human life? That's the big question, and whatever formula he and his legal team can come up with to please the powers that be simply won't hold in this scenario. It's only when he truly comes around to acknowledge and listen to the victims' families and their needs that some kind of path to justice can be forged. The story's best when focusing directly on that, walking us through the messy, uncomfortable process of eventually getting there.

Selected by the Attorney General to serve as special master to disseminate funds to the families and victims directly impacted by the 9/11 attack, lawyer Kenneth Feinberg (Michael Keaton) eagerly accepts the appointment, believing his extensive experience in dispute resolution make him an ideal fit for the position. But the primary purpose of the fund is for the government to avoid the inevitable barrage of impending lawsuits that would potentially cripple major industries and destroy the economy. Working pro bono with co-counsel Camille Biros (Amy Ryan) and the rest of his assembled team, Feinberg must determine proper compensation using a fairly inflexible plan he's objectively devised based on variety of socio-economic factors and circumstances under the law. 

Feinberg's given a limited amount of leeway from the government as he's faced with an almost impossibly tight deadline to get these families on board. After a chilly start that sees him scientifically discounting any emotion from his stringent equation, he draws the ire of Charles Wolf (Stanley Tucci), whose wife died in the north tower.  Becoming the program's harshest critic, he creates the web site, "Fix The Fund," but it isn't until Feinberg stops calculating and actually listens that he wakes up to the true enormity and purpose of the job put in front of him.    

Sitting on the shelf for over a year before finally dropping on Netflix, this is noticeably more intelligent and restrained than anyone could expect given its extended post-production history. Keaton's in nearly every scene, sporting a noticeably thick Massachusetts accent for what's probably his most prominent leading turn since 2015's criminally underrated The Founder, even as the material's likelier to remind audiences of Spotlight. But more like the former, he's again inhabiting a character on shaky moral ground throughout, regardless of his intentions. It's a tricky part, but one that again benefits from the actor's fast-talking edginess, as Feinberg constantly straddles that line between hero and villain while still remaining relatably human. On one hand, he can be viewed as a dedicated public servant, taking on a Herculean task no one in their right mind would dream of signing up for. Then again, must of that is quickly erased once we realize how he's going about it, which marks him early on as another disimpassioned bureaucrat looking to cut corners just to save a buck.

Keaton excels at conveying Feinberg's lack of self-awareness, plowing through his formula while displaying little regard for the mitigating factors involved. It's not that he doesn't care, it's that he cares in the wrong way, and it isn't until Charles Wolf enters the picture that he starts second-guessing his entire approach. Tucci's plays Wolf refreshingly against type, his character approaching the situation with common sense and respect rather than hostility. He aims to meet Feinberg on a certain level as opposed to merely reprimanding him and it works since the attorney doesn't have much of a choice. He's taking a pounding from all sides, whether it's the families, the government or the airline industry. 

Keaton's most memorable moment finds him in front of a room of distraught, grieving families attempting to explain his plan, soon looking as if he's about to crawl into a hole after unintentionally offending everyone with his business-like demeanor and condescending word choices. An unexpected phone call from President Bush sarcastically and almost comically "congratulating" him lets the lawyer know exactly what he's gotten into. There are also some strong supporting performances from Laura Benanti and Chris Tardio as the surviving wife and brother of a firefighter who died in the tower, Tate Donovan as an opposing lawyer looking to launch a class action suit and Shunori Ramanthan as a member of Feinberg's team with a personal connection to the attacks.

Max Borenstein's screenplay suceeds in making the realizations that Feinberg reaches seem as organic as possible, even if it's due mostly to Keaton's mastery at juggling a complicated range of emotions and reactions that sell an ending that may seem a little too pat for some. But it works, largely because Colangelo (no stranger to challenging material having directed The Kindergarten Teacher) ackowledges there's little about this fund that will ever be celebrated given the context, managing to strike an appropriate tone that stops short of over-sentimentality. She also wisely refrains from using reenactments, choosing instead to sparingly intersperse actual news footage when it's called for.  As an overlooked corner of the 9/11 story that hasn't properly been given its due, Worth proves to be a low-key, eye-opening examination of those who were left to pick up the pieces of what happened that day. 

The Trial of the Chicago 7

Director: Aaron Sorkin
Starring: Eddie Redmayne, Alex Sharp, Sacha Baron Cohen, Jeremy Strong, John Carroll Lynch, Noah Robbins, Daniel Flaherty, Yahya Abdul-Mateen II, Kelvin Harrison Jr., Mark Rylance, Ben Shenkman, Joseph Gordon-Levitt, J.C. MacKenzie, Frank Langella, Michael Keaton 
Running Time: 130 min.
Rating: R 

★★★ ½ (out of ★★★★)

If it's become customary to refer to any controversial or contested trial that captivates the public's imagination as a "circus," 1969's trial of a group of seven anti-Vietnam protesters charged with conspiracy and crossing state lines with the intention of inciting a riot at the Democratic National Convention feels like the starting point. That Netflix's The Trial of the Chicago 7 is written and directed by Aaron Sorkin pretty much insures that we won't be subjected to a dry, biographical history lesson recounting the timeline of events surrounding this pivotal event. But there's this feeling that even if he did take that more conventional approach, the material would still be inescapably compelling and entertaining enough on its own merits. But this is Sorkin we're talking about so it's not like anyone is expecting the writer behind The Social Network and The West Wing to phone it in. And sure enough, he doesn't.

Better recognized for having other filmmakers adapt his sometimes polarizing perspectives, there was a question mark surrounding how Sorkin's decisions behind the camera would affect this material given that this is only the Oscar-winning screenwriter's second directorial feature. So while we'll never know how his script could have turned out in other hands, it's tough to care when the version we do get leaves this much of an impression. With an all-star cast at his disposal, he manages to give this multi-faceted, politically and ethically complicated true story the dramatic heft it deserves while expertly balancing many of its comedic, absurdist moments. And there's no doubt that this trial is absurd on every possible level, made that much more remarkable by the fact that much of what we see did actually happen, if you give or take some details and grant the usual degree of creative license.

It's August 1968 when Students for a Democratic Society (SDS) president Tom Hayden (Eddie Redmayne) and community organizer Rennie Davis (Alex Sharp), Youth International Party (Yippie) founders Abbie Hoffman (Sacha Baron Cohen) and Jerry Rubin (Jeremy Strong), along with Vietnam mobilization leader (MOBE) David Dellinger (John Carroll Lynch) and anti-war activists Lee Weiner (Noah Robbins) and John Froines (Daniel Flaherty) protest at the Democratic Convention in Chicago, kicking off a chain of events that results in violent rioting. Five months later, all of them, in addition to an eighth defendant, Black Panther party co-founder Bobby Seale (Yahya Abdul-Mateen II), are charged and eventually put on trial, with the Attorney General appointing young, idealstic lawyer Richard Schultz (Joseph Gordon-Levitt) and veteran litigator Tom Foran (J.C. MacKenzie) as prosecutors for the case. 

With the extremely prejudiced Judge Julius Hoffman (Frank Langella) on the bench, defense attorneys William Kunstler (Mark Rylance) and Leonard Weinglass (Ben Shankman) attempt to represent their rather uncontrollable clients, most notably the disruptive Abbie Hoffman and self-professed non-client Seale, who forgoes legal counsel to instead receive advice from Illinois Black Panther chapter chairman Fred Hampton (Kelvin Harrison Jr.) in court. With the events of that summer coming into clearer view through key witness testimony, the proceedings soon careen out of control, with Judge Hoffman's controversial, biased rulings making it impossible for the defendants to receive a fair trial, exposing the flaws within the government, judicial system, and further opening the wounds of political and racial unrest throughout the country. 

As far as the nation's most ridiculous trials go, this one's right up there, as the film starts in an almost jarringly scattershot montage style, introducing us to the key principle players in court, while interspersing often uproariously comical legal scenes with the fateful events that took place in Chicago. Tonally, this isn't the easiest balancing act, but Sorkin masters it, establishing all of their out-sized personalities and motivations, with Cohen's Abbie Hoffman and Strong's Jerry Rubin being the most radicalized of the group, easily getting under the quick-tempered, frustratingly illogical judge's skin. An early highlight sees Judge Hoffman constantly interrupting Schultz's opening statement to reiterate that there's "no relation" between he and the defendant. If ever there was a mix-up no one would ever make, it's that. 

This entire film really belongs to an award-worthy Langella, who just nails the staggering incompetence of a man who makes Judge Lance Ito look like RBG. Senile, racist and mind-blowingly ignorant, his actions are hilariously inept until it's obvious the stakes have gotten too high and, we're left to process the immense consequences of this eventual verdict, along with all the potential ramifications surrounding that. It's funny until it isn't, and that line's very visible once it's crossed. Much of the turmoil concerns the eighth defendent, Bobby Seals, who besides probably not even deserving of being there, is shut down in escalatingly humiliating ways by the judge, reaching a fever pitch toward the trial's end. You almost lose track of how many charges of contempt are laid down, especially on Mark Rylance's defense attorney, who eventually has enough. 

Everyone's had enough, with some faring better than others at hiding it. The two bedrocks who seem incapable of breaking are Redmayne's logically level-headed Tom Hayden and JGL's Schultz, the latter of whom isn't ignorant to the shenanigans unfolding while still retaining his loyalty to the law. A park encounter midway through with him and Hoffman and Rubin truly reveals what type of a person he is, conistent with his character in court and a reminder that boths sides are being professionally and personally victimized by this sham of a trial, regardless of how much weight the charges carry. There's also a brief, but great performance from Michael Keaton as former Attorney General Ramsey Clark, who may or may not turn out to be the star witness the defense is banking on.

The flashbacks to the actual riots are powerfully filmed by Sorkin, especially revealing in terms of what it says about Hayden, who is intentionally portrayed as kind of a milquetoast character up to that point. This changes in a major way toward the end, leading into an over-the-top, but still immensely satisfying resolution that seems completely called for whether or not that's how things exactly unfolded in reality. It works for this film, which is really all that matters. 

The elephant in the room is that the timing couldn't be appropriate or strangely uncomfortable, reminding us just how little has actually changed in the decades since. It's no longer a question of whether something like this could happen again, or even worse. It has and is. That thought never really leaves you as these events unfold, holding up a mirror to a very specific time and place in our culture and political climate that still very much resonates. It's an unpredictably wild trip, and even if you know how it all pans out, it's difficult to still not become enraptured in the proceedings and eventual fallout for these characters. Of course, so much of that impact stems from the fact that it's wrestling with issues still haven't been fully resolved over half a century later.

The Founder

Director: John Lee Hancock
Starring: Michael Keaton, Nick Offerman, John Carroll Lynch, Linda Cardellini, Patrick Wilson, B.J. Novak, Laura Dern
Running Time: 115 min.
Rating: PG-13

★★★★ (out of ★★★★)

When we first meet Ray Kroc, a failed traveling salesman in his early fifties from Illinois, he's peddling industrial milkshake mixers to uninterested restaurant owners. That is until he meets the McDonald brothers, the only two guys crazy enough to buy from him. What happens when Ray goes out to their San Bernadino, California diner in 1954 is not only one of the most memorable sequences in John Lee Hancock's The Founder and the story's catalyst, but a love letter to the power of creativity and amazement. If it was hard to grasp just how revolutionary the concept of McDonald's was at the time, Ray's reaction to getting his burger in 30 seconds in disposable wrapping as families enjoy their meals next to him, tells you all there is to know. You can see and feel exactly why he's so bowled over by it, and watching the scene, you'd be forgiven for thinking it's the greatest idea that ever was. At the time, and even today, there's a lot of truth in that. But an idea is just that until it becomes something more. Something bigger. Ray Kroc liked to think big and after years of hawking bad products, he knew a sure bet when he saw it. What he lacked in creativity he made up for ten times over in persistence and business savvy. A visionary who saw the limitless potential in someone else's concept, he ran with it in a way they couldn't, morality and consequences be damned.

At its core, The Founder really boils down to one question: At what point does an idea become so great that it needs to be shared with the world? And once it is, what's the cost? The answer to that casts a shadow over the film that completely reframes Ray's aforementioned visit to McDonald's Burgers in San Bernardino and his contagious enthusiasm. He was right to do whatever it took to push this through just as the McDonald brothers were in fighting to preserve the integrity of their creation every step of the way. And just as he was wrong to screw them out of what was rightfully theirs, an equally strong case can be made for their inflexibility and resistance to change. And yet the man we see at the end, as ethically compromised as he is, still strangely remains very much the same one we met at the beginning. That's the true genius in Michael Keaton's complicated, unfairly overlooked performance, which already seems destined to go down as one of the most underappreciated of his career.

The arrival of Ray Kroc (Keaton) at McDonald's Burgers represents for Dick (Nick Offerman) and Mac (John Carroll Lynch) and Mac McDonald to correct an opportunity they let slip through their fingers once before. An unsuccessful previous attempt to franchise out their revolutionary fast food burger joint was marred by the challenge of maintaining the same high level of customer service and food quality throughout the chain. Enter Kroc. The brothers are approached, and actually somewhat stalked, by the Prince Castle salesman who's so impressed with their unique business model emphasizing a speedy food delivery service that keeps costs down, he wants to hear their story. And it's a pretty amazing one, as they tell him how they started out in the movie industry before eventually landing in the food service business, which they thought was in serious need of some tweaking. Chalk diagrams on a tennis court provided the blueprints for what would become McDonald's kitchen, with each station serving a specific function in getting quality food to the customer as quickly as possible. No more waiting at drive-ins.

While Dick's heavily skeptical of Ray's interest from the onset, Mac's convinced they finally found the guy that understands their product and can help them fulfill their dreams of expansion. After appealing to their sense of patriotism, envisioning the golden arches side by side with American flags and church steeples across the nation, they reluctantly agree to a deal.  And while it initially does seem to be the perfect match for all involved and Ray makes some smart decisions, the brothers' traditional approach soon clashes with his towering ambition. Mortgaging his home while sacrificing his marriage to wife Ethel (Laura Dern), he continues expansion at a rapid rate, soon realizing this will never work unless he hires the right people and gets out from under the thumb of the brothers, who have him locked in a contract mandating them final say on any new idea he has. In order to succeed Ray will have to get creative, even if the morally questionable moves he makes in the name of business could forever taint his claim as the true "founder" of McDonald's.  

If Ray sees dollar signs the first time he lays eyes on the brothers' establishment, there's also a certain admiration and respect for what they created, as well as a desire to prove to everyone he isn't the failure they believe him to be by shepherding it to greater success. While he likes the brothers, he also knows they're gullible and not businessmen, which could explain why they were presumably taken for a ride in their last attempt to franchise. They need him just as much as he needs them if there's any desire in the brothers to build on their creation. And Ray isn't kidding himself on his own prospects either. He's at an age where this is clearly his last shot and he's already looked at as a joke by he and his wife's country club contemporaries, who can't wait to get in on the action when they realize his latest dream could actually bare financial fruit.

Ray's complete rejection of these rich, retired country clubbers' investment in this franchising when he recognizes their laziness and lack of commitment is probably his finest hour. Seeing him outside the restaurant on his hand and knees cleaning up the trash, more determined than ever to hire those who work and care about quality is the strongest case to be made for him as a decent human being. That, and his willingness to hire anyone from any walk of life (sometimes right off the street) he feels will do a good job is another feather in his cap. And yet Ray is also one of the worst candidates to accumulate such success and wealth at this rapid a rate because he's been beaten down so long. With a chip on his shoulder and something to prove, he's like a kid in a candy store when given just a taste of it. Not only does he roll over the McDonald brothers, he basically discards Ethel at the first sight of Joan (Linda Cardellini), the captivating wife of a franchisee (Patrick Wilson).

Despite knowing the terms when he signed, you could see how the brothers' dismissal of every one of Ray's ideas as crass commercialism or off-brand send him over the deep end. Ray definitely doesn't play fair and surely doesn't care, but while even his more Machiavellian methods could be defended as necessary to getting McDonald's where it needs to go, it doesn't explain the lack of credit or compensation for them once it gets there. He'd explain it away by saying it was business but you can't help but think back to Dick's statement that they "let a wolf in the hen house." Toward the third act of the picture it becomes clear that they may have actually franchised out their company and lives to someone whose business ethics are more closely aligned with Daniel Plainview's from There Will Be a Blood.

The casting of Keaton as Kroc is nothing short of a masterstroke. He's so inherently likable as a scrappy underdog that it could seem incomprehensible he'd take the actions he does later if not for the fact that this is an actor equally skilled at going to those darker, unlikable places. John Lee Hancock (director of The Blind Side and writer of 1993's A Perfect World) hasn't necessarily made a dark film here, but against the bright, nostalgic hue of 1950's America gorgeously photographed by cinematographer John Schwartzman and memorably scored by Carter Burwell, is this undercurrent of greed and avarice. Most of that is provided by Keaton, who has to simultaneously juggle multiple balls in the air playing someone who could have easily been categorized as one-note meglomaniacal businessman in the hands of a lesser performer. We don't sense your typical "transformation," because what happens is exactly what Ray wanted to have happen the second he saw McDonald's Burgers.

That gleam in Keaton's eye was there when he stepped on the lot and it's up to audiences to reconcile that with what comes later. While a specifically memorable shot in the film directly references a key moment in Citizen Kane and while it shares similar themes, a better comparison might be The Social Network, as a rejected outcast finally gets the opportunity to prove himself, hurting those around him on his way to the top. This is Keaton's movie, as it should completely be, but Nick Offerman really shines in his best big screen role to date as the doubting Dick McDonald, who ends up getting sucked into this anyway despite all his initial misgivings about how it could adversely affect his brother's health.

Released with such little promotion and fanfare that few knew it existed at all, it almost seems fitting that the studio behind The Founder is embroiled in a lawsuit over how mismanaged its release actually was, potentially costing Keaton another shot at an Oscar, this time for a performance that certainly would have otherwise gotten awards attention. Someone dropped the ball, which is a shame considering it's exactly the kind of film we need right now, and one of a select few this year that says as much about the times we live in now as the seemingly bygone era during which it took place. Hate or love Ray Kroc, there's no denying that what he did worked and had a serious effect on consumerism and branding all over the world, with its ripples still very much being felt today. How he did it should continue to be fodder for debate. You could say he drank the McDonald brothers' milkshake. And as an added insult, he used powdered milk.
                        

Spotlight

 
Director: Tom McCarthy
Starring: Mark Ruffalo, Michael Keaton, Rachel McAdams, Liev Schreiber, John Slattery, Stanley Tucci, Brian d'Arcy James, Billy Crudup, Jamey Sheridan
Rating: R
Running Time: 129 min.

★★★ ½ (out of ★★★★)

Spotlight is a very specific kind of film in that it's a meat and potatoes procedural that doesn't wallow in emotions or dwell in the moment. Director Tom McCarthy's characters are on a deadline, back when the phrase "on a deadline" was a thing. When it carried a sense of urgency because print journalism was still alive and kicking. For those who remember that phrase, used it, or relished watching characters in movies that did, this story is yours. What it's actually about is another issue altogether, depicting the true events of 2001, when The Boston Globe uncovered a massive child molestation scandal and cover-up within the local Catholic Archdiocese. And it reveals the "how" in painstaking detail. Step-by-step. Witness-by-witness. Clearly and concisely. There's little doubt it's a tight film, but also operating on an entirely different level in depicting where journalism was then as opposed to now. 

It's almost embarrassing to admit how effectively Spotlight takes us back to a simpler time since it dates any writer my age or older who'd agree it doesn't really feel like THAT long ago.  It was back when reporters were given slack to fact check big stories. When those in charge of major publications went to great lengths to insure the information disseminated to the public was accurate. When newspapers were not only trusted and respected, but even wielded some degree of prestige and power. This is essential because if these events occurred now, the entire film could be relegated to a tweet that appears on screen, truthful or not. And make no mistake that Spotlight is first and foremost about uncovering the truth. It's no wonder critics and writers have been going gaga over it since McCarthy's film not only makes this airtight case against these predators, but objectively rallies behind the type of journalism it took to nail them.

In 2001, new editor Marty Baron (Liev Schrieber) joins The Boston Globe, where he'll oversee the Spotlight team, a small group of journalists tasked with writing in-depth, investigative articles that often take months of research before finally going to press. After discovering an earlier Globe column about the Archbishop of Boston's potential knowledge of a priest sexually abusing children and the lawyer who tried prosecuting it, Marty urges editors Robby Robinson (Michael Keaton) and Ben Bradlee Jr. (John Slattery) to have their Spotlight team dig into it. 

Reporters Michael Rezendes (Mark Ruffalo), Sacha Pfeiffer (Rachel McAdams) and Matt Carroll (Brian d'Arcy James), track down and interview key witnesses before discovering that this entire scandal could be larger and travel higher up on the food chain than anyone imagined. But as they inch closer, they must wrestle with not only their own moral conflicts regarding these revelations, but those within the powerful Catholic Church determined to squash the story.

While this is primarily a process movie, it's littered with little moments within that process that transcend that material and turn it into something that cuts deeper. Whether it's the sudden realization by a Globe reporter that pedophiles almost literally live next door or another investigative team member coming face-to-face with a priest all too eager to not only admit his transgressions, but sickly and proudly rationalize them on the record. It's scenes like that, as well as the testimonials from a variety of different victims, witnesses and lawyers that run the gamut in terms of their experiences, giving the film its necessary emotional kick.

It's in the newsroom scenes where information is often gathered without today's unlimited reliance on the internet that will make these reporters' jobs virtually obsolete in only a few years. They go to the library for research. They physically haul books and records down the stairs. Notes are taken with only a pen and paper. For the team, most of whom grew up in this city that feels more like a close-knit neighborhood, they're tasked with exposing the corruption and sin they believed the Catholic Church was there to shelter them from.

Ruffalo's Mike Rezendes is most shaken by the revelations, but thankfully also the most stubborn, pushing lawyer Mitchell Garabedian (well played by Stanley Tucci) for any witnesses or evidence that could break a story that should have theoretically hit the presses years ago. Why it didn't and The Boston Globe's oblivious complicity in that serves to only heighten the film's statement that there's never a shortage of people willing to turn the other cheek for a variety of reasons, regardless of how heinous the crime. 

With a newsroom role that recalls his fantastic turn in Ron Howard's criminally overlooked The Paper, Michael Keaton shines as Robinson, the Spotlight editor torn between his close relationships within the Church, the editorial decisions of a new boss he may not necessarily agree with, and employees who often disagree with him. Keaton plays it straight down the middle, fairly and sensibly, reminding us that while he often excels at crazy, he's as equally skilled at subtlety. If last year was his comeback, now we're starting to reap the rewards. 

Schreiber's performance as Jewish outsider Marty Baron is so quietly commanding and natural it's sometimes easy to forget Barron's even in the room, much less controlling and guiding the entire investigation. We're prepared for a hotshot coming in to tell everyone how to do their jobs, but the actor makes an interesting choice in playing the Globe's new editor as a professional listener entirely cognizant of the fact there are two possible stories you can take to print. Only one will make the necessary impact. 

If the inclusion of John Slattery's Ben Bradlee, Jr. represents one of the picture's many tangent connections to All The President's Men, both the character and performance aren't all that far removed from Mad Men's Roger Sterling, which can never be a bad thing. It's somewhat perplexing that along with Ruffalo, the Academy chose to also honor Rachel McAdams' information-gathering turn as Sacha Pfeiffer with a nomination. It's not that there's anything especially wrong or underwhelming in what she does, but that it's difficult to recall what was done, as she's saddled with what's easily the least developed part of the major players, bringing little more than what's written on the page. If we are doling out an Oscar nod, either Schreiber, Ruffalo or Keaton would have been more worthy candidates.

For journalism junkies, watching this might rank as the cinematic equivalent of biting into a big, juicy steak, and if there are criticisms to be leveled, it's likely to come from more casual moviegoers looking for more sizzle than substance. It's easy to argue McCarthy is so justifiably enamored with the reporting procedures that we have to occasionally remind ourselves what the movie's actually about. And when we do, the realization sets it in that it's still all about journalism and the devolving newspaper industry before anything else. This includes the actual crimes, and at one point, even 9/11, which McCarthy presents as almost an unexpected obstacle on their way to obtaining sealed court documents for their story. Unlike the aforementioned All The President's Men or the more recent Zodiac, this isn't visually memorable or even all that inventively directed, but like both, it succeeds in taking us deep inside the newsroom and along for the ride. That something this flawlessly constructed only suffers when compared to those two behemoths has to be a good sign. In getting its story right, Spotlight proves to be as focused, thorough and determined as its characters.
   

Birdman

Director: Alejandro González Iñárritu
Starring: Michael Keaton, Zach Galifianakis, Edward Norton, Andrea Riseborough, Naomi Watts, Amy Ryan, Emma Stone
Running Time: 119 min.
Rating: R

★★★★ (out of ★★★★)

There's an early scene in Birdman or (The Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance) where washed-up Hollywood actor Riggan Thomson (Michael Keaton) runs down a list of potential names to replace an injured cast member in his ambitious Broadway mounting of Raymond Carver's "What We Talk About When We Talk About Love." And they're all actual big name stars whose commitments to their blockbuster superhero franchises make them unavailable, even if the underlying feeling is that they'd never do it anyway. Twenty years ago Riggan was one of them, riding high on the success of his iconic Birdman role in a franchise he milked for three movies before the word "franchise" even entered the cinematic lexicon. But Michael Keaton is no Riggan Thomson. Well, at least not in reality. He is in the sense that he completely inhabits the headspace of this strange, self-obsessed character in the throes of a mental breakdown. Keaton was the only choice for this role not because he once played a superhero, but because he managed to escape just in time. One or two more Batman movies and this could have easily been a different conversation.

By all accounts of the man, the performance Keaton gives here is actually a massive stretch, as he never seemed at all vain, hung up on public opinion, or insecurely protective of his legacy. And he certainly doesn't appear to be a nervous wreck. But boy has he been missed. It almost seems unfair to affix the "comeback" label onto a performer who has been working consistently, if under the radar, for years, but we're selfish like that. In a good way. It isn't wrong to see our favorite performers being given the best material that will bring them the most respect and adulation. One of the big takeaways to come from the this film's release over the past few weeks is seeing everyone come to the realization that there are few actors more deserving of it than Keaton. It's something we've always known, but never really publicly acknowledged until now. Besides being a fascinating and funny meta commentary on the entertainment business, Birdman works as a satirical tragicomedy about a man who not only craves that validation, but desperately needs it for his life to mean anything.

On the surface, Riggan writing, directing and starring in a Raymond Carver adaptation appears to be a case of a faded movie star pathetically using Broadway to establish himself as a serious artist and gain credibility with the masses. Beneath the surface, that's also exactly what it is. And that deep, distinctive voice he keeps hearing in his head isn't afraid to tell him so. It's the voice of Birdman, telling him what a loser he is, and based on the evidence we have, he might not be far off. We find out he's already wrecked his marriage and career and now he's wrecking his play, produced by best friend and lawyer, Jake (Zach Galifianakis). His spunky, sarcastic daughter Sam (Emma Stone), fresh out of rehab, serves as his assistant while he's joined on stage by girlfriend Laura (Andrea Riseborough), first-time Broadway actress Lesley (Naomi Watts) and her boyfriend Mike Shiner (Edward Norton), called in as a last minute replacement.

With Mike, Riggan meets his match in a performer who proves to be even more self-absorbed than he is, and about ten times more difficult and obnoxious, hijacking the entire production to basically go into business for himself. But critics and audiences love him, which proves to be important as they struggle through previews and wait for the inevitable axe to fall from influential New York Times theater critic Tabitha Dickinson (Lindsay Duncan). It's make or break time for Riggan, who must also contend with the arrival of his ex-wife, Sylvia (Amy Ryan) and Birdman, who proves to not only be a voice in his head, but an actual superhero alter-ego with powers of telekinesis and levitation.

Form rarely informs function as it does here, with a technical approach that should generate as much discussion as the story or performances. Iñárritu's whole movie appears to have been filmed in one unbroken take, as scenes don't exactly end but rather bleed into each other as the camera follows the actors, swooping in (like a bird?) from one area of the theater to another, or even out onto the street when necessary. It'll be bizarre and sometimes off-putting for some, but there's no question it injects the action with this breakneck pace and makes us feel as if we're in the theater, backstage spectators to a train wreck we shouldn't be seeing. With most films there's at least a moment or two when you're taken out of it, made fully aware you're just engaging with a piece of entertainment. This shooting style makes such a moment of pause or reflection on the audience's part impossible. You're just completely lost in it, submerged too far down the rabbit hole to even contemplate the implications until the credits roll.

Hilariously sabotaging rehearsals and previews, without giving a second thought to that what's left of Riggan's career rests on a vanity project, Norton's Mike is a terror. If anything, he thinks he's doing him a solid by royally screwing with it. And it's sadder still that he could actually be right. We see many scenes from the play and even certain ones multiple times, but it's because of Norton that each one is more hilarious and energetic than the last. Whether Iñárritu's trying to play with the media's perception of Norton being "difficult" in the same way his script toys with Keaton's image, the actor far transcends that in-joke to deliver a performance that somehow, someway makes this unlikable jerk a relatable and complicated person. We anticipate every bit of mischief he causes since the movie feels most alive when he's sharing scenes with Keaton, who unlike his bizarro onscreen counterpart, has no problem ceding the spotlight to his co-star. Norton plays such a strong antagonist that the movie briefly suffers when he disappears and the third act kind of fly off the rails, if such a description can even apply to a project like this. Let's just say it doesn't fly off the rails the way you expect it to.

If the production's really all about Riggan, than the movie's all about Keaton, with the actor reminding us how equally adept he is at tackling anything thrown at him, whether it be comedic or dramatic. Here he gets the chance to do both, and a whole lot more, all at once. He's always been tough to categorize and even cast because of that flexibility, so this ends up being the perfect outlet for a performer whose onscreen persona always seemed a bit too crazy and dangerous to fit into the box of a conventional leading man. With this role, he finally doesn't have to be pigeonholed like that, given the opportunity to play a difficult, often unlikable protagonist wrestling with crippling fears and insecurities.

There are those trademark Keaton moments where he flies off the handle and gets that manic look in his eyes, but his best scenes are the quieter, brutally honest ones Riggan shares with his ex-wife and daughter, the latter played by Emma Stone as you've never seen her before. Noticeably thinner an paler with her giant eyes eating up every corner of the frame, it's about as far a departure for the actress as it gets, abandoning her "good girl" persona to embody the angry and bitingly sarcastic Sam, whose real job is mostly to keep her father's raging id in check. And that she does, even when he doesn't want to hear it, facing off with Keaton and Norton and more than holding her own in an edgy performance few probably thought she had in her. In less showier roles, Watts and Riseborough are destined to be underappreciated, especially Riseborough, who's a feisty wonder in her scenes opposite Keaton. And who thought Zalifiankis would ever play the most reasonable character in a comedy? 

This is a film that makes no bones about calling attention to itself at every turn and is completely in love with its strangeness, rarely hesitating to remind you of it in every scene. Tolerance for that unsubtle approach will vary, causing a debate as to whether all these techniques truly inform the story or Iñárritu's showing off. It's probably a little bit of both, but there's no denying those creative choices make for a far more intriguing experience than if it were presented as a relatively straightforward dramedy about an actor coming to terms with his past and ego. A performance showcase above all else, it can't be a coincidence that three stars of huge superhero movie franchises were cast in it, and as someone completely burnt out by the genre, it was thrilling to see it skewered, while still being dealt a compelling character study in the midst of the craziness. Birdman almost defies categorization, as it takes a while to really wrap your head around, assuming you're even intended to. And that's always a great thing.

Ranking The Batman Films (Worst To First)

After months of feverish anticipation, when The Dark Knight finally opens this Friday the big question likely won't be whether it's good, but HOW GOOD? Unfortunately, the hype is so out of control that anything less than a modern cinematic masterpiece would be considered disappointing. Me? I just want a great time.

Despite expectations being so high the good news for director Christopher Nolan is that all of the previous entries in the series (including his) are far from perfect and you could argue the definitive Batman film has yet to be made. Over the years the franchise has taken many forms and has had a rough history, proving to be a challenging character to efficiently translate to the big screen. So where will The Dark Knight rank? It could be at the top if Nolan avoids making the many mistakes listed below and sprinkled throughout various installments of the series. Of course, that’s easier said than done.

 
6. Batman and Robin (1997)
What Works:
Um…this is tough. Give me a second here. Well, Uma Thurman at least looks great in the Poison Ivy costume. I actually thought her performance wasn’t too bad either, and the casting of her and Arnold Schwarzenegger as Mr. Freeze made sense on paper. The special effects and set pieces are impressive and Michael Gough does his best work as Alfred here. I guess it’s possible you can view it as the guiltiest of guilty pleasures if you’re in the mood. The unintentionally hilarious casting of George Clooney as Batman is good for a couple of points. At least now we can laugh. Yeah, I know, I’m grasping at straws here.

What Doesn’t:
How much time do you have? First off, Clooney obviously. Though in his defense there isn’t an actor alive who could have saved this and it's to his credit that he’s needlessly taken responsibility for the film’s failure in interviews. But he was the wrong choice and you could argue it’s the worst casting decision in the franchise’s history, with Alicia Silverstone as Batgirl coming in at a close second. And when did that character become Alfred’s niece?

Arnold is just plain laughable as Mr. Freeze. Chris O’ Donnell is wasted this time around as Robin. The dialogue is embarrassing, the special effects are just too much, nipples on the bat suit, the whole movie is a toy commercial, Elle McPherson. Yeah, that about covers it.

Verdict:
We all should all thank Schumacher. If he didn’t make this disaster the Batman franchise would not be experiencing the creative resurgence it is now.


5. Batman Forever (1995)
What works:
Val Kilmer does a decent job when in costume. Chris O’ Donnell is a great fit as Robin and his introduction is handled surprisingly well. Jim Carrey as the The Riddler works and Nicole Kidman’s Dr. Chase Meridian is easily the best love interest in all the Batman films, even if that's faint praise. It’s a visual feast that moves along at a spry pace and features a great soundtrack.

What Doesn’t:
Tommy Lee Jones gives the worst performance of his career as Two-Face. Aaron Eckhart should have an easy job wiping that painful memory away. Kilmer is wooden as Bruce Wayne. Carrey is annoying as Edward E. Nigma and his back story is ridiculous. Schumacher manages to find precisely the wrong tone for the franchise-all style, no substance at all. And what’s with that silly title?

Verdict:
Having recently re-watched and reviewed this, I was surprised it had some positive attributes. It could almost be considered a good movie, if you shut your brain off and look at it at for what it is. That said, this was the wrong direction for the series to go in and its follow-up proved it.


4. Batman: The Movie (1966)
What Works:
Adam West and Burt Ward are perfect as Batman and Robin (at least within the context and time period they’re presented). Cesar Romero, Frank Gorshin and Burgess Meredith steal the show as Joker, Riddler, and Penguin respectively. Despite cramming all those villains in the story manages to be very entertaining while effortlessly capturing the energy and spirit of the campy 60’s TV series.

What Doesn’t:
NO JULIE NEWMAR AS CATWOMAN. Lee Meriwether steps in and does about as good a job as can be expected, but Newmar’s absence is really felt. In fact, she currently holds the title for best performance as a Batman villain in the franchise’s history. In her prime she could show up in the Nolan films (or any of the others on this list) and just kill it. She was that good. The film is overcrowded with villains, the screenplay jams too much in and its tone prevents it from being viewed as anything more than a fun diversion or goofy nostalgia.

Verdict:
It’s a joke, but unlike Schumacher’s films, it’s intended to be. Part of me wonders what would happen if they re-made the ‘60’s TV series in this style today with current actors in the roles. Interesting fact: Cesar Romero actually refused to shave his mustache to play the Joker in both the show and the movie so they were forced to actually apply the make-up over it. C'mon Cesar, why so serious?


3. Batman Returns (1992)
What Works:
It's by far the most visually impressive Batman film of them all. The costume and production design deserve to go down as the some of the most memorable of the 90’s. When people think of what best represents Tim Burton’s visual artistry as a director this is always mentioned alongside Edward Scissorhands and it should be.

Michelle Pfeiffer is fantastic as Catwoman, but I think Danny DeVito is even better as the grotesque Penguin. Michael Keaton excels once again as both Bruce Wayne and Batman. A crazed Chistopher Walken, Danny Elfman’s score, a cameo from Pee-Wee Herman! What’s not to like? It’s the rare sequel that not only doesn’t suck, but builds on everything that was special about its predecessor.

What Doesn’t:
The screenplay. The scenes with Catwoman work well, but any with mousy secretary Selena Kyle and her ridiculous backstory don’t. The movie suffers from having to split time between her and Penguin and as a result, both villains suffer. Each really needed a film apiece to convey the depth of their stories and adding Walken to the mix didn’t help their cause. It has a “been there, done that” feel to it because Burton essentially made the same film as his original, but inserted different villains.

Verdict:
A lot of people consider this their favorite Batman film and I can see why. Despite the writing flaws, it’s mostly terrific.


2. Batman Begins (2005)
What Works:
The best acting of any Batman film. Christian Bale, Liam Neeson, Gary Oldman, Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman, Tom Wilkinson, Ken Watanabe, Cillian Murphy. It doesn’t get any better than that. You can tell Christopher Nolan took the job of resuscitating this franchise seriously and the results clearly show on screen. It’s a tight origin story to re-establish the character and almost flawlessly directed. Like Keaton before him, Bale is awesome as Bruce Wayne AND Batman. If Schumacher found exactly the wrong tone, Nolan's feels just right.

What Doesn’t:
I'll give you a hint: She's married to Tom Cruise. All Maggie Gyllenhaal has to do is show up and she’ll likely make a better Rachel Dawes than Katie Holmes. It’s not so much that Holmes gives a bad performance per se, just that she adds nothing to the role and shared little chemistry with Bale. But in her defense the Rachel character is thanklessly written and poorly developed, so it’s hard to distinguish how much of this can actually be attributed to her.

While played exceptionally well by Neeson and Murphy, Ra’s al Ghul and Scarecrow just aren’t strong, recognizable villains. Also, having two or more major villains never works as well as having a single strong one. It's a mistake that’s been made repeatedly in the franchise’s history and a potential problem to watch out for in The Dark Knight.

Verdict:
Nolan deserves a standing ovation. This was incredibly difficult to pull off, but he did and the film benefits from being completely unlike any other on this list. It really is a re-imagining, but I think he's capable of even more.



1. Batman (1989)
What Works:
Strong screenplay, strong visuals, Elfman’s score, Keaton’s performance, and it features the best looks for the bat suit, the batmobile and the batcave. Nearly everything clicks. It also proves why there should only be one main villain in a Batman film. And boy is it that villain ever a strong one.

At risk of eating these words later, I hope that regardless of what Heath Ledger does with his Joker,  that it isn’t lost on current audiences that Jack Nicholson really shines here. And no, I’m not among those who feel he “upstaged” the film or Keaton. When I think of Batman or Bruce Wayne I still think of Keaton immediately and while Bale may have been the best actor to play the role, he hasn’t changed that in my mind. At least not yet.

What Doesn’t:
Kim Basinger’s Vicky Vale, who’s a very bland, flavor-of-the-week love interest in a film that deserves better. Basinger’s performance is fine, but the character is a throwaway. To be honest, all these films have serious problems portraying strong female characters and this definitely isn't an exception. The movie hasn’t aged as well as I thought it would and that’s mainly because Burton has spent his entire career re-making it over and over again (most recently with Sweeney Todd), thus lessening its impact. His Gothic universe is really starting to wear out its welcome.

Verdict:
A very close call but this edges out Batman Begins, if just barely. It still holds the top slot but its grip is slipping.