Joel Schumacher's Batman: 6 Things He Did Better Than Nolan

3. The Final Shots Of Batman Forever And Batman And Robin

batman-forever-batsignal (2) If you were given the task of interpreting visually the heroism of Batman how would you do it? How would you go about capturing both the triumphant weight of duty contrasted with the burden of dark vigilantism inherent to the character? I would be surprised if anyone could do better than what Joel Schumacher achieved in his two Batman films. The end coda he directs for his two Batman movies, that of the caped crusader and his partner(s) running toward the screen silhouetted against the darkness with their only illumination being the bat signal is one of the great images in superhero films not to mention all of cinema. It so perfectly captures in an emotionally stylized way what it means to be Batman. Sadly such stylization and emotive storytelling is passé in today's ultra realistic film world, which works out well for Christopher Nolan seeing as his labored dark naturalistic aesthetic could never compare to Joel Schumacher's ultra stylized approach in his two Batman films. Viewers were fooled into believing that Nolan's lazy visuals and muddled philosophies were important cinema when in reality it was Schumacher who delivered the most dynamic emotional cinematic representation of what it means to be Batman. To quote Rouben Mamoulian the great director of Hollywood's Golden Age:
What attracts me to films is not the dialogue It's the imagery, the magic of the camera. And I've always believed in stylization and poetry. If you preserved the psychological truth of the emotions and thoughts of the actors, and combine that with the physical expression that is utterly stylized and that couldn't happen in real life the impact upon the audience is one of greater reality. Perhaps that's why they call it surrealism. This becomes more real to the audience than if you had done it in a realistic manner. Done correctly, stylization carries greater reality in its impact on the audience than everyday kitchen naturalism ever can achieve.
Tim Burton understood this... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=feR_YQ75Maw Joel Schumacher understood this... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3vUVvtizLO8 Nolan clearly didn't... http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oL7PSlUuWPs Even at his worst Joel Schumacher still has better chops as a cinematic stylist than Christopher Nolan. Watch anyone of Joel Schumacher films and you'll see the work of a born cinematic stylist: you'll see someone who uses all the tools of filmmaking at his disposal to make bold, unique and artistic movies. Watch one of Christopher Nolan's films and you'll see a man who, to quote film critic Armond White, "doesn't have a born filmmaker€™s natural gift for detail, composition and movement". Nolan failed completely at capturing the essence of what it means to be Batman (and a hero in general). All he could do was load down the audience with lame visuals and dull repetitive nihilism and then try to be theatrical and cinematic by tying everything together with a lame contrived ending. People can say whatever they want to about Schumacher's but they must admit he was better able than Nolan to capture the essence of what it means to be the Dark Knight in cinematic form. At least for one glorious shot.
Contributor
Contributor

Raymond Woods is too busy watching movies to give you a decent bio. If he wasn't too busy watching movies and reading books about movies and listening to podcasts about movies, this is what he'd tell you. "I know more about film than you. Accept this as a fact and we might be able to talk."