Skip to main content

Lego Batman Returns


          The fact that a movie about Legos is attracting large audiences is something that would have seemed absurd a few years ago. The fact that said Lego movie starring a famous comic book character would not only be great but better than a recent live-action movie starring that character, would have been even more ridiculous. And yet here we are.
          In The Lego Batman Movie, a spin-off of 2014’s The Lego Movie, Batman (Will Arnett) spends his nights saving Gotham City, and his days lounging around his house eating lobster thermidor and watching romantic comedies. But when The Joker (Zach Galifianakis) stirs up trouble to get his attention, Batman must spring into action while also dealing with the emotional consequences of accidentally adopting an orphan Dick Grayson (Michael Cera).
          Right out the gate where Batman provides commentary for the production logos, this movie is tremendously funny. It’s almost laugh-a-minute and the bulk of the jokes are great. The script, co-written by Seth Grahame-Smith and Community’s Chris McKenna is lively and intelligent, matched by great comedic voice-work, a consistently tongue-in-cheek tone, and excellent timing. And it’s done in the upbeat and very creative world we were exposed to in The Lego Movie. The animation is fast-paced and energized, but it’s never so much that it’s impossible to catch the tons of subtle jokes packed into any given scene. Like The Lego Movie, it’s very good animation, designed to look like stop-motion Lego videos in an environment made entirely of Lego bricks. This style is very appropriate considering director Chris McKay’s previous work on Robot Chicken. Like that show, this is a movie that’s very self-aware, spoofing the Batman mythos well, but so obviously made by people who love it.
          Will Arnett’s Batman is fantastic. The character (whom he voices as a raspier BoJack Horseman) is enjoyably vain, egotistical, and insane which is a comedy type we’ve seen for decades, but the Batman persona and the world he inhabits lends some funnier context to it. He’s such an over-the-top character it’s amazing how much mileage there is out of him doing mundane things, like microwaving a dinner. And Arnett gets half of the films’ funniest lines. Unlike spin-off characters like the Minions or the Penguins of Madagascar, Lego Batman proves he can carry his own movie. Galifianakis is a lot of fun as the Joker and legitimately makes for a good incarnation of the character, a throwback to the mad funnyman he used to be. Even as just the voice, he’s better than Jared Leto. Michael Cera is a good Robin to his Arrested Development co-star and very funny in his own right; and Rosario Dawson is the new police commissioner Barbara Gordon whose efforts to work with Batman come into conflict with his loner attitude. Ralph Fiennes is a delight as Alfred with a smart English wit and Jenny Slate voices Harley Quinn. Also like in The Lego Movie, be sure to listen for a number of cameos in the supporting voice cast.
          The theme of family plays a big part in Batman’s personal arc in this movie and though taken seriously, it’s actually pretty effective. It’s not moving or terribly original, we’ve seen Batman cope with these issues before, but I was pleasantly surprised it gelled with the rest of the film as well as it did.
          This movie is a cornucopia of references for Batman fans! There are in-jokes to every previous Batman film, the acclaimed Batman animated series of the ‘90’s, numerous DC comics, and the ‘60’s Adam West show -whose contrasting style to the darker Batman of recent years is a well the writers have particular fun with. There are a ton of nice touches and fan-service. For example, Billy Dee Williams voices Two-Face, the character he would have played had Tim Burton made Batman Forever. Just about all of Batman’s villains make an appearance in this movie by the way, supplying even more quick jokes, some at the expense of other DC comics films.
          If I had any complaints it would be that the story is pretty convoluted, but then that is exactly the point. It exists to service the characters and jokes, and by its very nature is satirizing the property it’s adapting. Plus where the story goes, though a little dumb, is world-building (an appropriate phrase for a Lego product) and provides for a lot of treats for the audience, fans and non-fans alike.
          In a weekend pitted against films as dull and abominable as Fifty Shades Darker, The Lego Batman Movie is an incredibly fun experience. Lego surprisingly enough is thriving as a film franchise, creating the kinds of great animated comedies we used to get out of DreamWorks. They know their brand and their sense of humour and have mastered both. And if the trailer for the new Lego Ninjago Movie in front of this one is any indicator, this great streak of theirs is not going to be ending in the near future.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Strange History of the American Spoof Movie

Parody movies have been around for a lot longer than we tend to think of them. Even from the earliest days of Hollywood there were movies meant to satirize a particular subject or genre. In the silent era, Buster Keaton was responsible for a few. And in the early sound era, almost as soon as the monster pictures took off did you see comic versions of them -Abbott and Costello hosting a few. But parody movies tended to be subtle for most of cinema history, or parody came in conjunction with another goal of the comedy. It really wasn’t until the 1980s and 90s that it took off and became popularly understood. And there is perhaps a line to be drawn to the counterculture comedy explosion that began in the 1970s through avenues like  Saturday Night Live , which frequently parodied from even its earliest years popular movies and cultural properties of the time. But that is still a way’s back. To my generation though, ‘parody movie’ is perhaps a less known term than the more blunt ‘s...

Notes on the Title Cards of The Lord of the Rings

It might be sacrilege for one who both considers The Lord of the Rings  trilogy to be one of the greatest triumphs of cinema and has been an avid lover of the films since adolescence, to declare that the original theatrical cuts of the films are better than the much beloved extended editions. Easily it’s my most controversial opinion regarding these movies. Don’t get me wrong, I do like the extended editions quite a lot, especially as someone who just enjoys spending time in that universe. They flesh it out more, add extra flavour, and in increasing the length by about an hour really emphasize the epic quality of these films. But I find that the original cuts are generally more cleanly paced, more seamlessly edited, and much more accessible to audiences. All the stuff there is to love about The Lord of the Rings  is there in the original versions, the plethora of new and extended scenes merely add to that for fans. And of those, they fall into three camps for me: 1....

A Stylish and Charmingly Reinvented David Copperfield

The Personal History, Adventures, Experience and Observation of David Copperfield the Younger of Blunderstone Rookery (Which He Never Meant to Publish on Any Account)  is the most important book Charles Dickens ever wrote. It is not the most famous or influential by any means (that would of course be A Christmas Carol ), but it is the book that is the purest expression of the authors’ style, identity, and worldview. It is his most personal work, semi-autobiographical in its story of the chronology from infancy to adulthood of a character who overcomes great loss and hardships to find a fulfilling life as a writer. To read David Copperfield  is to understand Dickens himself. Armando Iannucci knew this when he decided to make a new adaptation of the novel for a twenty-first century audience. He also knew that Dickens adaptations are ubiquitous at this point. Films are a bit rarer, but every few years a new television adaptation rears its head to keep the authors’ unique world an...