A Seriously Disjointed Analysis of Tim Burton's Batman
by bunz
Can someone please explain to me: Did Batman intentionally drop the
Joker in the chemicals? As we know of Burton's Batmnan, he definitely has no
qualms with straight up murder. And as I watch that scene, I can't tell
whether the differing looks on Batman's face, from the first look of obvious
struggle, to what seems like a deep confusion/panic then to what appears to
me as a realization akin to "Why the hell am I sitting here struggling to
save this piece of shit? Im Batman because I want to stop bastards like this
he's hypothetically if not potentially the criminal who murdered my parents.
(Heeeeey!)" so he let's go. Then stands there looking down going "Shit. . .
maybe not the best way to have handled that. Did anyone see that. . .Ah shit
. ." Otherwise, it's like--Come on! We've seen Batman lift two different
guys, both who look heavier than Bruce Wayne himself, several inches over
his own head.
How was he struggling with holding up Jack Napier? I've thought about
the gloves factor, the lack of friction between Joker's and Batmnan's gloves
(gaaaaaaaaayyyy, j/k) but still, that's stupid. Batman's later dangling from
one arm from the top of a building, using the other arm to catch and save a
falling woman....Come on. Not to mention he had to swing another arm around,
use that arm to get a grappling gun, etc.
That's why I think Keaton's Batman is so brilliant. He fucks someth-
ing up nearly every scene hes in (his first scene has him shot to the ground
within seconds of revealing himself to the criminal element. . .almost like
he forgot the two guys who just robbed a couple at gun point might be armed).
He’s then attacked by Joker’s goons and beaten to the ground. He
there playing possum, and luckily for Vicki Vale’s stupidit (and desire for
wealth and fame), the goons are distracted (just before they take off his
mask!) long enough for him to get some good punches in.
Despite these blunders, he never makes you doubt him as Batman, even
while he's actively doubting himself as Bruce Wayne. As Batman he's fearless,
unshakeable, and relentless. As Bruce Wayne, it's as if he's simply caught
between dealing with his life as Batman, or trying to reconcile being "just
a man" (with all its faults, fears, insecurities, vulnerabilities and compro-
mises [in other words, the attributes he has attached to the little boy who
watched helpless as his parents were murdered before him]) a.k.a. Bruce Wayne
with that of his identity as Batman (the identity created as the antithesis
to that freightened little boy (strong, fearless, free of worry, self-doubt).
It's like Michael Keaton's Bruce Wayne realizes deep down that he's
not Batman because he wants to help people, that's the version he tells him-
self so he doesn't have to truly confront the ugly truth of his life: he's
Batman out of a profound insecurity and shame that he feels he must both
hide from and atone for (both literally and figuratively).But Bruce Wayne the
MAN does have his own qualities, his own abilities, his own value, and there-
fore a Bruce Wayne who was as unintelligent and/or unaware as to completely
fool himself into believing his own lies to himself would not be a convincing
or compelling hero, let alone character.
So you can also see the struggle that Keaton's Bruce Wayne has with
"being Batman", not that he's trying to reconcile the fact that hes a man who
dresses up in a bat costume and stalks criminals at night; that's not the
cause of exasperation in his attempts at revealing his alter-ego to both
Vicki Vale and Selina Kyle--It's that faint echo from his subconscious perco-
lating into an attempt at recognition of those psychic phantoms that bar the
gates to self-realization, to knowing himself, not an idea of himself. He
runs from that truth, namely: that he cannot stand on his own without Batman,
doesn't have an identity without Batman, and that Batman is both the only
thing giving his dismal and lonely life meaning but also the very thing prev-
enting him from creating and nurturing an identity outside of his unreconcil-
ed feelings towards his parents murder and the psychological armor he created
to cope with it.
After all, people's parents get murdered everyday, not only in their
presence but also in much much uglier and brutal ways than Bruce Wayne's par-
ents, and to boot they have to then go on without a trust fund, without even
a single loving and constant human being in their life (Alfred), without even
Bruce's good looks and intelligence, and thus face life severely handicapped,
neither the time nor inclination to even mentally masturbate oneself with th-
oughts of fighting crime.
That's what makes Batman interesting. The motivation of his dead par-
ents is not convincing in of itself as a reason someoene would go to the len-
gths Bruce has gone to deal with it or "make it right." Sure, people in real
life who've had similar things happen might still be affected enough,15 years
later, to say. . .become a lawyer, or. . .detective, or fireman, etc. . .
It is not even so amazing that Bruce's reaction was so singular and
obsessive, what IS interesting is that his reaction to every subsequent event
after his parents deaths only solidified this particular mania, not the asso-
ciated feelings.
With most of us,something big and ugly like that happens and fucks us
up, certainly causes severe psychological trauma and neuroses most definitely
makes it harder to find inner peace and happiness in our life, but what happ-
ens is that we have things happen to us that ar NOT like that traumatic expe-
rience, and we react to those experiences and either reinforce our intitial
feelings or allow ourselves to see potential to feel/see/conceive/perceive a
life contrary to those powerful and consuming emotions, but most likely a tug
and pull between the two that may never find resolution.
Eventually,it seems Batman finally reconciles himself to the fact that
the life he has chosen has at least Batman as his choice of occupation and al-
lows himself respite from the assumed obligatory loneliness,and also no longer
sees human contact/relationships as a means of escaping Batman.
The choice to become Batman is obviously a highly emotional and reacti-
ve decision, not the product of someone who has found love,peace and purpose in
their life. And that's also why, despite it going completely against one of the
defining characteristics of Batman, Batman's choice to murder the Joker was
believable and authentic. If you're confronting the person who sneeringly murd-
ered your parents,not as the weak and insecure self you'd been in your previous
encounter (where, as a final metaphorical footnote to your tragedy and a punct-
uation to your former impotence, you are yourself "murdered"), but instead as
the confident and indomitable Batman, you'd more than likely do the same, not
fallback on a code of ethics so dubious that it is can be summed up in two
words: "No killing." This is an aspect of what defines and sets Batman apart f-
rom his foes,as he is certainly not above using their own means/methods against
them, but in analysis "no killing" becomes more of a severe discipline and com-
mittment than it seems at first glance.
Because realistically, not ideally (aka delusionally, most of the time),
someone who is put in and/or has placed themselves in a position to inflict the-
ir will on their fellow man with impunity, free of consequence, and not just in-
discriminately but onto they or them who have specifically caused you deep and
lasting pain. . .There would literally be no one standing between you and the
choice, either way (in so much as you never get caught AS your alterego). AND
THAT decision could not be one based on reactive albeit powerful emotions. It
would truly be a choice that literally sets you apart from the majority of peop-
le and thus makes you authentic. Because "no killing" doesn't just mean you no
longer allow your emotions to dominate your choices and actions, or that you no
longer react to criminals with disregard for their life, it means you may in fact
have to actively work towards not just "not killing", but "not letting be killed"
as Batman attempts with the Joker.
That's why I like that scene. Batman manages to catch Jack out of mere
reflex, because like most humans he instinctively acknowledges and values human
life. But again, if it was Vicki Vale and not Jack Napier, you can pretty much
guarantee the outcome of Batman's handling and/or reaction to that event would
have been significantly different.He hasn't yet reconciled his identity as Batman
much more than his nebulous and conceited attempt to "rid the city of the evil
that took his parents lives," again, a bluntly selfish motive almost completely
devoid of altruistic sentiment. And hence his arbitrary disregard for criminal's
lives, neither intent on murdering them nor set otherwise.
It is also telling that Bruce Wayne is seemingly itching to stop deluding
himself the moment he finds anything worthwhile that exists outside his identity
as Batman and gives him a taste of the sweetness of life's potential, like the
soft touch of a woman. It is also an excuse to then AGAIN shift the responsibili-
ty, shame, and compulsion that fuels his need to be Batman to someone else, like
Vicki or Selina, who he knows, or hopes, would not really be down with his double
life, and would eventually if not abruptly make him "stop all that foolishness,"
and thus free him of the burden of being Batman.
This thesis proves itself more so when Bruce Wayne is uniquely confronted
with a situation he'd 99% of the time be experiencing as Batman, but instead is
experiencing as Bruce Wayne: his unfortunate timing at Vicki Vale's apartment.The
Joker shows up, and Bruce's in a shit position: he can't just run off and become
Batman and come back and "save the day", he's forced to confront this situation
without the psychological armor he has as Batman, nay, not even the lesser crutch
of it as a potential. And what does he do, as most every profoundly insecure man
does when confronted with a situation in which he must be shown a glimpse of who
he really is: merely a phantom tenuously held together with theatricality and
(self-)deception? He gets angry, he freaks out and acts out (in a rather psycho
yet also genius manner). He didn't have a plan, you can tell he's winging it just
like he always does (hence why he fucks up so much), [running into battle without
even considering whether or not the criminals he's stalking are armed...?], in
fact turning it around completely by being he one who CAUSES the fear, actively
trying to reverse the tables and make the criminals experience instead what he
once felt.
Keaton's decision to approach the character of Batman from the techniques
used by actors in silent film was brilliant. Coming off the heels of the only ma-
jor theatrical representation of Batman, that of the loquacious Adam West, with
his campy and often laughable portryal of the Dark Knight Detective.
*3 A good point another video made was that in Batman Returns, the first
we see of Bruce Wayne is of him being awoken by the light of the Bat-Signal from
his solitary brooding amongst the darkened expanse of Wayne Manor, as if he did
nothing else but sit around waiting to jump into costume.
*12 (something that sounds cool on paper, in practice, even if you ARE
saving the innocent, you're still a nutjob and no one is inviting you to dinner),
that is merely one layer covering the truth of himself)
