The Hood vs The Cowl...

Comics today, but specifically the moving pictures variety. I had the opportunity to watch Batman: Under the Red Hood recently and I was very pleasantly surprised. Not that I actually had a much of an opinion one way or another (I have read the comic version already...), but I had been putting it off because I hadn't really heard much of anything about it at all. I am very glad I gave it a chance and here's hoping you will too...

A little back story: Semi-way back in comic book history, Dick Grayson retired as Robin to become Nightwing and a contender in his own right (a very acceptable and logical character move...), but Batman ended up needing a Robin to back him up. Enter Jason Todd: a spunky kid from the streets Batman took in to prevent him from entering a life of crime. However, it is shown very early on that, since Jason grew up hard on the streets, even at his young age, he did not have the remorseful drive that Grayson or Wayne has. He is far more reckless and got into more trouble than he solved. Flashforward many issues: The Joker kidnaps Jason in a building a beats him nearly to death with a crowbar (very brutal even by most Joker standards...), then leaves him to die in a warehouse that is about to explode. Here's the tricky part: the public voted on whether Jason Todd was to live or die (he was never as popular as the original Robin...). The public voted death, so the second Robin died in an exploding warehouse; just another ghost to follow Batman around...

SPOILERSSPOILERSSPOILERSSPOILERSSPOILERSSPOILERSSPOILERSSPOILERSSPOILERSSPOILERS

Flashforward again: This time, we are very near the present and within the confines of the 'Red Hood' story. A new vigilante enters the scene, calling himself the Red Hood (side note: that was also the first 'moniker' of the Joker...). He runs amok within Gotham's criminal underbelly, but kills the bad guys rather than helping the police lock them up. Batman (with Nightwing in tow...) scour the city in search of this deadly hoodlum. Meanwhile, he kidnaps the Joker and severely beats him with a crowbar (Symbolism, thy name is...) but doesn't kill him. Chases upon chases abound when finally Batman has the Red Hood cornered. We then see who the Red Hood really is: a resurrected Jason Todd (a cosmic calamity brought him back; i.e. Superboy punched the multiverse [ugh...]...). The final showdown happens with Jason giving Batman the choice of either shooting the Joker or shooting his former (dead...) partner to save the Joker. Batman gets out of it, everybody lives, and the bad guys escape. Hey, it's a comic book...

As far as the movie is concerned, it actually a very, very faithful adaptation of the story. The violence level is about on par (some toning down is expected...), even if a lot of it is off screen. It isn't implied that Joker beats Jason with a crowbar; we here sound effects and see shadows of the act as well as more blood than usual. Similarly, one of the cyber-bad guys head explodes and another thug gets immolated on screen. A serious cartoon for a serious audience. The action is well paced and I would imagine it is more of an exciting surprise if you don't know Red Hood's secret (though the toon is self contained, rather than a decade’s long waiting period like in the books...). The voices are also a very solid addition, though I still wanted Kevin Conroy as the Batman. John DiMaggio did a really good job, even if I could tell he was kind of channeling Mark Hamill (check the laugh...) as the Joker. Even the comically frustrated Black Mask worked for me...

Even if you have no feelings toward the Jason Todd character or have little knowledge of who he is, the story itself should be compelling to most who want a little twist into the Batman mythos. Even Batman, who is often the most human of supers, can't seem to die. But to have an actual, on-screen death affects him directly and impacts him in a lasting, meaningful way (like his parents, but much more 'in your face'...), makes the character seem more fallible. And this is important to the continued intrigue of the character. He's not Superman who can shrug off everything and save the day. At the end of the night, Batman is still a man, and it's one of the reasons we dig him so much...

Grade: A+ and the wish that more animated comic book experiences were like this one...

It can be truly said, that I have a bat in my belfry...

Day 2 and a late one at that. For this post, I have decided to compare the performances of the Joker given to us by Jack Nicholson, Heath Ledger, and Mark Hamill (I honestly give little thought to the late great Caesar Romero...). Each actor has given us his own unique spin on the Clown Prince of Crime and each has seemed fresh and has been a delight to watch, time and time again. Seeing each on the screen, big or small, causes us to watch the film (or tv series as the case may be...) over and over...

First up, good old Jack Nicholson from the 1989 Batman film. Mr. Nicholson started the role as a on-the-edge gangster and became the Joker after a toxic accident involving the Dark Knight (very close to the Joker's actual origin...). In this version, a younger pre-Joker killed Batman's parents, in effect causing him to become the Joker X-ty years later (not exactly meshing with the books, but I'll take it. Jack plays the Joker closer to the Silver Age version of the comic character (with a bit of the sinister borrowed from the Bronze Age...) what with the outlandish get-ups, the sadistic joke props, and the lethally playful nature his exhibits when destroying the world around him. His every delight is to make the world around him as mad and terrifying as he is and will sacrifice everything, from objects of his affections to his henchmen to the entire populace of Gotham itself, to reach this end. He's obsessive, psychotic, deranged, and suitably warped and I love it. Jack Nicholson, while not a suprising choice for the role (he DOES do crazy well...), was a more than appropriate choice for the role and it's a large reason I keep this film near the top of my favorite lists. If only they hadn't killed him at the end of the movie (DAMN YOU AND THE PRECEDENT YOU SET, TIM BURTON!)...

Now for the oddly wonderful performance by Mark Hamill in the 90's animated Batman series, as well as the occasional cameo in film and video games. Of all the actors to take on the role, Mark has done it the longest and in more things than anyone else. To be honest, I didn't learn that the Joker was Luke Skywalker until the animated series was on the decline and I caught his credit in Mask of the Phantasm (it's a pretty damn good movie, animated or not...). Up until this point, I always wondered what Mark managed to do after Star Wars and I'm glad it ended up being something that comes close to the pop culture appeal of Skywalker. Mark added something to the Joker that both Nicholson and Romero were missing (to one degree or another...): that large dash of anarchist crazy the Joker should always have. Sure, he had more of the gimmicks of previous incarnations, but he was just as happy blowing up buildings for no reason than following some plan. And that ever changing laugh! Jack was good but he was no Mark Hamill in this department. Further, each time they ask Mark to do the Joker in a video game, it's always a delight to hear that voice again (it's a generational thing...). If I could get one voice down pat, it'd be Mark's Joker (Lord knows I've tried...).

Last (but certainly not least...) is the late Heath Ledger's performance in The Dark Knight. I'll admit it (even if you won't..) that I was nervous when I heard that the dude from Roar and A Knight's Tale was going to be The Joker. No way that was going to work out good for anyone. We were all wrong. Ledger turned Joker from the Clown Prince of Crime to a serial force of anarchy whose only goal is to destroy. He managed to channel pieces of past Joker performances (Jack's affinity for gangsters and chemicals, Mark's ever changing laugh, some of the gaudiness of Romero...) and keep the role fresh and new. Despite Heath's passing, it is this role that kept (and still keeps..) the audience coming back for more. Watching the Joker just bring Gotham down around Batman's ears is beyond a delight. Like any good Batman media piece, the villain (in the end...) is always more interesting and fun than the hero himself. Me, I was sold after the 'magic trick' (That Was AWESOME...) on the fact that this was going to be one hell of a ride, all the way to the end. My hat's off to Mr. Ledger and it's a shame that he passed before we could see more of what he could do with the Joker...

So who wins? Who takes the cake with the poison Joker gas inside? It's a tough one objectively; each actor gave something to the role that each other could not give. Do I stick with the older, crazed gangster clown who 'created' The Batman? Or should it be the animated criminal with the higher body count than his other cartoon brethren? Perhaps it should be the mutilated chaos bringer with a knack for bombs? As I write this, the Jack Joker just shot Bruce in Vicki's apartment and left as a plane farting, so it's hard to be completely detached. Let's do this: The 'Most Faithful Award' goes to Mark Hamill as he embodied all aspects of the comic version at one time or another. The 'Crazy but Effective Award' goes to Heath for dismantling the mob, blowing up banks and hospitals, and creating Two-Face (also not true to the comics, but whatever...). Finally, Jack gets the 'Mastermind Award' for, despite being dropped into toxic waste, took over the mob, created elaborate schemes to kill everyone in Gotham (twice...), and his awesome henchmen (I'm looking at you ninja blade feet, bald guy with a boombox, and Bob...). Did I pick a favorite? Nope. Will I ever? Doubt it. I'm strangely comfortable with that fact...