The Dark Knight Rises (2012)

"Eight years on, a new terrorist leader, Bane, overwhelms Gotham's finest, and the Dark Knight resurfaces to protect a city that has branded him an enemy."

After running out of time last weekend because I'd completely underestimated the length of the last two "Batman" films, it took me another four days before I got chance to see the final part of the trilogy. Although it was unfortunate that I couldn't watch them all back to back as I'd intended, at least the break allowed me some time to reflect on what I'd seen, what I'd hated, and what I hoped would improve in "The Dark Knight Rises".

I'm the first to admit that I know nothing about Bane. I think he was a minor character in one of the Joel Schumacher "Batman" movies, but I have no idea which one (although it's likely to be the one I didn't review, "Batman & Robin"). All the fanboys were going wild over this character, but I wasn't all that impressed by some fat Scottish bloke in a mask. Wasn't he supposed to be a Mexican in the comic books who had some superpowers from a potion injected into him?

I also wasn't impressed by the amount of lag in "The Dark Knight Rises". The story really dragged, pacing was ludicrous, and, when something important happened, it was rushed. This is a bit spoilery, but, seriously, can a broken spine be cured by punching the vertebrae back in and hanging from a rope for a couple of minutes? Wasn't there enough time to do it properly in a film nearly three hours long?

Of course, I only wanted to see "The Dark Knight Rises" for the new Catwoman as played by Anne Hathaway. The Sunmaid Raisins girl was definitely pretty enough for the role, but she didn't exactly light up the screen with her presence. Selina Kyle wasn't even referred to as "Catwoman" and, more disappointingly, she had no cats either. Oh, but she was a "cat burglar" to make up for it. Big hairy deal.

I did like the few moments that Bruce Wayne shared with Selina, but there wasn't any chemistry there or the sexiness of Michelle Pfeiffer's equivalent even when she was at her most nerdy. This "catwoman" was just a little bit too cynical and misanthropic for her own good.

The guy who played Tosh in "Torchwood" (and was in one episode of "Eastenders" with Phil Daniels) was in this too but I barely recognised him. I didn't recognise Tom Conti at all as the prisoner who helped Bruce Wayne until I looked up the cast list. I suppose that's to their credit as both were cast slightly against type.

The casting has always sucked in Christopher Nolan's "Batman" movies though. For some reason, he loves Cillian Murphy almost as much as aerial photography and making Batman stand on the edge of really tall buildings for no reason. Why was Cillian Murphy even in this? Was it just so he could rework that 50 year old joke about "death by ungabunga" into what should have been a more serious moment? Pretty lame stuff.

With both Commissioner Gordon and Batman out of the main spectacles of SWAT teams and more police running around than were entirely necessary, this was all about the previously mentioned Bane and his antics. What was he meant to be? A hybrid of Darth Vader, the "Predator" alien and a Teletubby? I've seen fake wrestlers on Saturday afternoon TV in better shape.

A really ridiculous moment (which stood out even more than Alfred's 180 degree turn into character inconsistency) was when Batman and Bane were fighting and they were knocking lumps of concrete out of buildings with their punches. All it needed was some onscreen "Kapow!" and "Biff!" balloons.

I won't spoil the ending for you too much, but be prepared for it to come at you completely out of left field just like "Kill Bill" with an unhealthy dollop of "Armageddon" thrown in. There's a third film which the ending borrows even more from, but I won't name it.

Well, that's my review of "The Dark Knight Rises" over just like the franchise. I honestly wanted this to be the best "Batman" movie ever to make up for the other two and prove to me that Christopher Nolan wasn't just a hack, but it was very disappointing.

I don't particularly like superhero movies or reviewing anything outside of the horror genre, but I started doing this because everyone else was. No, I wouldn't jump off a bridge if they did, but I thought they had found some treasure which I hadn't. I was misled.

My genre of choice will always be horror, that's what I know most about, and that's what still interests me. As long as Christopher Nolan keeps away from my favourite genre, everything will be fine.

The Dark Knight (2008)

"When Batman, Gordon and Harvey Dent launch an assault on the mob, they let the clown out of the box, the Joker, bent on turning Gotham on itself and bringing any heroes down to his level."

I've heard a lot of people say that "The Dark Knight" is one of the must-have Blu-rays should you ever upgrade to the format. I haven't got a Blu-ray player, probably won't buy one either, and my copy of "The Dark Knight" is the 2-disc "Special Edition" which I bought from the pawn shop along with "Batman Begins". Obviously, someone else upgraded or they didn't think much of these movies either.

Yes, you've guessed it, I didn't like "The Dark Knight". In fact, I didn't even like "The Dark Knight" as much as "Batman Begins". Out of the two of them, I'd say that "Batman Begins" was a lot better and, mercifully, it was also 12 minutes shorter.

Turning a comic book into live action with a more realistic setting is Christopher Nolan's thing, but it just doesn't work for me. "The Dark Knight" felt like yet another contrived cops and robbers drama but with Batman in it.

I know everybody raved about Heath Ledger as The Joker, and, while I can admit that he was the most entertaining part of "The Dark Knight", he wasn't as good as Jack Nicholson or even Cesar Romero. He just came across as a nutter who kept licking his lips. I didn't get any sense of menace from him, and, basically, if it came to a fight, I could take him.

The other big thing in "The Dark Knight" was the entire career of Harvey Dent. I didn't like the character, the prosthetic/CGI half of his face looked too fake and was completely unrealistic as far as the facial movements were concerned, and, well, that whole part of the story sucked. The last time I tried to watch "The Dark Knight", I didn't make it to the end so I had no idea what happened to Two-Face or Batman.

All the usual Christopher Nolan excesses were in this again. There were way too many shots of high-rise buildings which made me feel giddy, there was some pretty awful acting here and there especially from Maggie Gyllenhaal and Gary Oldman, and, the music was only slightly less annoying. I suppose Michael Caine was okay, but he was Cockneying-up his part too unintelligibly. I'm British and I almost had to turn the subtitles on!

One thing which really infuriated me was when Batman didn't kill The Joker. Is this a thing in the Batman universe which I'm supposed to know about? In "Batman" (1989), Michael Keaton's Batman couldn't kill him from 100 feet away with a load of rockets but destroyed the Batplane in the process. In "The Dark Knight", Batman couldn't run the same character over with the Batbike, but managed to destroy that and injure himself too.

I'll definitely never watch "The Dark Knight" again.

Batman Begins (2005)

"Bruce Wayne loses his philanthropic parents to a senseless crime, and years later becomes the Batman to save the crime-ridden Gotham City on the verge of destruction by an ancient order."

Last week, in preparation for "The Dark Knight Rises", I watched a marathon of "Batman" movies. Unfortunately, I ran out of time to review them all during my "Batweekend". I might have made my deadline if it hadn't been for the length of Christopher Nolan's versions of the Dark Knight.

There are two things I cannot abide. The first is any movie which is over two hours in length. Some of us need the toilet quite regularly and having to hold it in at a movie theatre doesn't make for a very enjoyable experience. The second is any movie starring Cillian Murphy.

So can you possibly guess how thrilled I was to watch a two-hours and ten minutes long movie starring, among others, Cillian Murphy? This was torture! At least it was on DVD and I could pause it and go to the toilet whenever I wanted.

Of course, I'm not going to spend much time reviewing "Batman Begins". I'm not a huge Batman fan, I've never read any of the comics, and my "Batman" (if I had to choose one) was Adam West not Christian Bale.

It's easy for me to find things which I hated about 'Batman Begins". I hated having every single detail of how Batman came to be explained, I hated the vertigo-inducing helicopter shots of New York, I hated the music being cued inappropriately, and I hated the way the movie looked.

Finding things I did like is even easier because there weren't that many of them. I liked the way the story was quite self-contained and tied-up things from the beginning at the end. In particular, I'd forgotten all about Ra's al Ghul and the vapour from the blue flower which caused hallucinations. I also liked the clever way that Bruce Wayne turned the tables on Earle (Rutger Hauer).

As far as the acting went, it was good. The effects and action scenes were okay. The background music was horrible. The cinematography might have been great on a big screen or on Blu-ray with a massive HDTV, but, for me, with the DVD and a 42" LCD TV, I thought it was too dark, colourless and kind of grainy in that horrible CSI-style which was so popular at the time. Maybe it's just my setup though.

I've got the 2-disc "Deluxe Edition" on DVD and have no interest in any of the special features so that's all I have to say about "Batman Begins". I highly doubt that I'll never watch it again.

Batman Forever (1995)

"Batman must battle Two-Face and The Riddler with help of an amourous psychologist and a young circus acrobat who becomes his sidekick, Robin."

Three years after the success of "Batman Returns", for some reason unknown to me, Warner Brothers decided to replace the director of the Batman franchise with Joel Schumacher. It wasn't as if Tim Burton was doing anything else at the time so I'm sure that hiring the director of such classics as "The Lost Boys", "Flatliners" and "Dying Young" seemed to be a brilliant choice. Yes, I'm being sarcastic.

Of course, this change of directors meant a change of style. Arguably, although Tim Burton must have had some say in this movie as a producer, this is where things started going wrong. Maybe the fanbase were moving on anyway, but the throwback to '80s-style action-comedy had a lot to do with it too.

I wanted to switch my VHS copy of "Batman Forever" off as soon as the cheap "Xara 3D" titles appeared, but they were too quick for me. Within seconds, I was treated to a minor aristeia, a lingering shot of the new Batmobile, and a comedic line being growled by the new Batman. I feared the worst, but I was hooked again. It's not just chicks who dig the car.

Things moved pretty quickly over the ground at the start of this movie, action scenes abounded, Harvey Dent was once again a disfigured white guy, Edward Nygma was even more manic than Ace Ventura, and Nicole Kidman was some awesome (if somewhat pointless) eyecandy.

I will also give Val Kilmer some credit for really looking the part as Bruce Wayne. His Batman was a little bit too pretty, but I suppose he couldn't help having a purty girlie mouth.

At first I wasn't sure about Bruce Wayne needing to see a psychiatrist rather than continuing to work things out by donning a rubber suit and punching bad guys, but the scenes with Dr. Chase Meridian were pretty hot. This was the first time in any "Batman" movie which I've seen where the love interest involved some chemistry and believable physical attraction. Not to put too fine a point on it, breathless Nicole Kidman looked like she was gagging for some rumpy-pumpy.

The trouble with "Batman Forever" was that as soon as Chris O'Donnell joined in the fun as Robin, the pace of the movie changed and things started to lag. It wasn't even Chris O'Donnell's fault. The flaw was in the screenplay which gave him far too much time on screen. Robin has never been a very interesting character for me, but I grudgingly admit that I did enjoy seeing more of Michael Gough as Alfred in the scenes they shared.

When Robin went off on his own just like Patroklos in Homer's "Iliad", I knew it was going to end badly, Batman would have to rescue him, and I'd be forced to endure watching even more of them together. The whole Batman mentoring Robin thing bored the crap out of me (not only figuratively).

I did enjoy all the scenes where Jim Carrey and Tommy Lee Jones were playing off each other. Jim Carrey was almost perfect in his excessively camp role as The Riddler, and I was amazed at how good Tommy Lee Jones was as Two-Face. I'm not a big fan of either of them outside of this movie. Strangely, neither of them really stole the show from Val Kilmer and I'm still trying to figure out why. Maybe, just maybe, he had a more sympathetic character than theirs.

I know that it's a bit of a cop-out, but, for once, I think the IMDb rating of 5.4 is right for "Batman Forever". While it didn't look as good as either of the previous installments, there was enough in it to keep me entertained. Of course, I would have preferred it if Batman had let Robin die and only saved Nicole Kidman since that's what I would have done in the same situation.

In case you're wondering, I'm not going to review "Batman & Robin" (1997) now because I don't have a copy of it on VHS or DVD and it's just too awful. I saw it at the cinema with a girlfriend who had no taste in movies whatsoever because she had a thing for George Clooney. So do I and it's called the compost heap at the bottom of my garden.

Since I've run out of time today, I'll be reviewing Christopher Nolan's "Batman" trilogy next Baturday.

Batman Returns (1992)

"When a corrupt businessman and the grotesque Penguin plot to take control of Gotham City, only Batman can stop them, while the Catwoman has her own agenda."

As much as I wanted to quit this Batman movie marathon after the last one, I remembered "Batman Returns" as being a little bit better so decided to press on regardless. I thought, "Surely, it couldn't be as crappy as the first Tim Burton "Batman" movie."

Just so you know, this is the only Nintendo generation "Batman" movie which I own on DVD. I have "Batman" (1989) and "Batman Forever" (1995) on VHS because I don't feel the slightest need to upgrade them. If the tapes snap or wear out, I won't miss their loss. I don't own a copy of "Batman & Robin" (1997) at all because, as far as I'm concerned, that movie was such a worthless load of crap that it doesn't even exist in my world. I shouldn't need to tell you that I haven't seen any of the "Batman" cartoons either (but, obviously, I just have).

Why did I only buy "Batman Returns" on DVD? Catwoman, the "Nosferatu" reference via Christopher Walken's character name, and because it was cheap. I know that you now can get the "4 Film Favorites" pack of "Batman" movies for $9.99 or less new, but why would I want to waste another $7.50? I hadn't even watched this DVD, and I bought it three years ago.

Beginning with a baby being thrown into the sewer was a great start which was only ruined by having "A Tim Burton Movie" appear in the titles which followed. Ugh! Usually, as soon as I see that name, I press the "off" button. Fortunately, as a Classicist and heartless human being, I applaud the choice of leaving deformed babies to fend for themselves or die rather than being a drain on the rest of society so I was immediately intrigued.

"Make-up effects by Stan Winston" promised something special from the late master of horror creatures, and "Music by Danny Eflman" was kind of a given. At least, there was no mention of Prince or "Squiggle" this time.

With the baby basket having floated downstream throughout the titles until finally coming to rest in front of a group of penguins, I thought only one thing, "Are there really penguins living in the sewer?" There are no prizes for guessing who the baby would grow up to be.

Jumping thirty-three years on, "Batman Returns" was apparently set around Christmas with all the fake snow and happy-looking Gothamites which Tim Burton could muster. I applauded that too since I was still dying in 90 degree weather with 87% humidity. Ah, coolness! What a pity that it was only on the telly.

Don't worry, I'm not going to go through the entire movie from arche to telos, but I thought highlighting the beginning would be a good way to show how some movies can hook me in the first few minutes and others can't.

You probably know everything about "Batman Returns" already; that it's really all about The Penguin, Max Schreck and Catwoman with Batman turning up occasionally to be all wooden and stiff or to use some clever gadget which couldn't work in the real world and doesn't work properly in this fantasy one either. (I still haven't forgotten how the original Batplane in the previous movie was equipped with machine guns and rocket launchers yet couldn't hit The Joker from 100 feet away. Being brought down with a single shot from The Joker's pis-rifle was icing on the cake. Stuff like that sticks especially when you're watching a sequel.)

There was quite a lot of horror in "Batman Returns" though which still deserves a mention. No, I'm not talking about Christopher Walken's hair or even Selina Kyle chopping up a beautiful leather coat to make a badly stitched-together cat costume. Seriously, just the look of Danny DeVito as Oswald Cobblepot (aka The Penguin) with blood or green goo dripping out of his mouth was the stuff of nightmares.

"Batman Returns" really pushed the limits of the PG-13 rating with the level of violence: clowns fired machine guns into crowds, two guys were set on fire (one of them by Batman!), Selina got pushed through the window of a tall building, The Penguin bit a guy's nose off, pedestrians got run over... I could go on, but you get the picture. For some reason the censors didn't though, so that's one small mercy. It was also considerably more adult when it came to sexual innuendo and swearing. Yay for both!

Of course, "Batman Returns" was and still is a beautiful looking film. The camerawork, lighting, set design, costumes, make-up, and all the other smoke and mirrors which enhanced the cinematography were excellent for the time. Even the acting was only a little bit short of being excellent.

I think the main difference between "Batman Returns" and "Batman" (1989) was that a lot more work went into the characterisation. Michael Keaton's Bruce Wayne was much more brooding and he apparently learned to be considerably more badass as Batman in spite of the limitations of the costume. He was still a bit stiff though and blander than the villains.

The relationship between Batman/Bruce Wayne and Catwoman/Selina Kyle was extremely well scripted and tied the narrative back together every time it was in danger of getting too confused or lagging. I'm not going to say anything about the lack of chemistry there since Michelle Pfeiffer had more than enough sexiness back then to camouflage the failings of a dozen people whether they still looked like dweebs or not.

The only place where the story briefly went wrong was in the last 20 minutes. The penguin army with rockets strapped to them was ridiculous. Tim Burton's biggest failing nowadays is that he always has to turn an otherwise great story into some stupidly childish fairytale, and this was, undoubtedly, where that annoying habit started.

Surprisingly, I really enjoyed rewatching "Batman Returns" for the first time in twenty-years. It held up very well indeed, wasn't at all dated, and, I'm tempted to say that it will remain the best "Batman" movie for a long time to come.

Batman (1989)

"The Dark Knight of Gotham City begins his war on crime with his first major enemy being the clownishly homicidal Joker."

Back in 1989, when this movie was being shown theatrically, I had more important things on my mind such as girlfriends, boozing every weekend, and studying for my first year of University exams. I had no interest in stupid superhero movies meant for little kids, had no idea who Michael Keaton or Tim Burton were, and really didn't have much knowledge about Jack Nicholson except that he was a big name as a Hollywood actor.

It was probably at least another three years before I saw this version of "Batman" for the first time on television. I wasn't overly impressed by it either; in fact, it bored me. I tried to concentrate on it, tried to enjoy Jack Nicholson as The Joker, but, alas, I just wrote it off as a load of old crap.

Having rewatched it this afternoon, I'm still not overly impressed by Tim Burton's "Batman". Given that it's supposed to be a darker and more gothic version of the comic book, it failed miserably at being either.

For a start, Michael Keaton was all wrong for the role. I think any fool could dress up in the stiff, rubber Batman costume and make that part work, but Michael Keaton was way too inconsistent as Bruce Wayne. One minute, he was all jokey and comedic; the next, he was supposed to be resourceful and tough. There's no brooding, no sense of grief about him, and he wasn't very attractive either even for the late '80s. He looked like a dweeb.

Many people have said over the years that "Batman" was really Jack Nicholson's show all the way with Michael Keaton being little more than a supporting player. While there was an element of truth in that, the poorly worked love story between Bruce Wayne and Vicky Vale was supposed to even the balance. Michael Keaton seemed to have as much time on screen as Jack Nicholson, but, because of the lack of chemistry between him and the rather plain-looking Kim Basinger, none of it was particularly memorable. The Joker's side of the story (and his character) was simply a lot more interesting.

Apart from the quite powerful music by Danny Elfman and the look of the movie, there really wasn't a lot to praise in "Batman". Any of the other actors' performances were either too weak or too short to even notice. While Billy Dee Williams almost stood out in a bad way as a totally miscast Harvey Dent, Michael Gough as Alfred just got lost in the maelstrom of weirdness. I'm still not entirely sure what happened to Jerry Hall either.

Jack Nicholson's more horrific and psychotic moments nearly elevated my viewing pleasure to a more adult level, but then too much early Tim Burton-ness crept in and ruined it all. There was a definite lag in the middle of the movie from around the point where The Joker decided to terrorize Vicky Vale for no good reason right up until the useless Batplane scenes. All this, coupled with the shitty pop music by Prince, should have caused me to switch "Batman" off and never return to it. I would have done too if I hadn't wanted to write this review.

When The Joker turned out to be the criminal who killed Bruce Wayne's parents, not only was it unbelievably clichéd, but I could feel my will to not kick the TV screen in slipping away. When the big clown balloons appeared looking like prototypes for things from "A Nightmare Before Christmas", I decided to start clipping my own toenails because I knew that would be more beneficial to me than what I was seeing on screen, and would also prevent me from doing what I really wanted to do with my feet.

Having stayed with it until the rather predictable and "Die Hard" inspired end, I feel like I deserve some kind of medal. I hated over 50% of "Batman" with every fibre of my being.

I hate Tim Burton, I hate Michael Keaton, I hate stupid rubber Batman suits which don't allow an actor to move his head, I hate the weather, and, most of all, right now, I really hate "Batman".

Batman: The Movie (1966)

"The Dynamic Duo faces four super-villains who plan to hold the world for ransom with the help of a secret invention that instantly dehydrates people."

Starting my Bat-weekend off with a load of camp crap such as the movie version of the "Batman" TV series seemed like a good idea at the time especially as the whole thing is available to watch in several places online including, of course, YouTube. I didn't even have to leave my computer to go and find the DVD which is always a good thing.

Unfortunately, although the movie was much the same as the TV series and used 99% of the same actors, the overall style was a little bit different especially when it came to the onscreen "Biff!", "Pow!", "Whap!" and "Thwack!" captions which didn't get used until almost the end. I won't say that this really hurt the movie all that much since it was still vibrant with colour, but it lacked the comic book feel of the TV episodes.

I still enjoyed the four "Super Criminals" even though none of them stood out as much as Lee Meriwether who had a dual role in this as The Catwoman and her disguise as a Russian journalist named Kitka. Lee Meriwether was pretty funny and ridiculously sexy yet I wish she'd been a little bit more evil with it. Possibly throwing her cat, Hecate, at Batman was the most evil thing she did in the entire farce.

The "Dynamic Duo" were the same as I remembered them. Adam West's Batman was an uber moral parody of puritanical and prohibition-era American values while Burt Ward was just a Dick (Grayson). I've always hated Robin more than any other superhero's sidekick. All that "Holy this" and "Holy that" bullshit while he punched his gloves together got on my nerves not to mention that the guy was "Captain Obvious" with his stupid comments.

I realise that this "Batman" was supposed to be a kind of satire, but if kids really bought into such antiquated values without knowing any better, I think it would be quite damaging to them. I had to keep telling myself that this was a bit of 1960s fun and I shouldn't take any of it too seriously.

They see me rollin', they hatin'

Seeing all the Bat-vehicles in action was a bit of a bonus. I didn't realise that the diecast Corgi toys were inspired by this movie even though the colours were completely wrong. My Corgi Batmobile was the later one with the towing hook rather than the flame that popped in and out. I don't believe that any of them had the red edges on their paintwork though. As for the Batcycle, Batcopter and Batboat, well, mine were just black and red with the dominant colour being black. If you ever had a bright blue Batboat, feel free to correct me if I'm wrong.

One moment which I found amusing (for personal reasons which I won't go into too much detail about right now) was when Batman couldn't dispose of a bomb because a Salvation Army band was in the way. For anyone, like me, who has ever had to endure the annoyance of their bellringing beggars in the run up to Christmas, that was such a wasted opportunity, Suffice it to say that I would've loved to have seen those hypocritical Chuggers blown straight to Hell where they belong.

The interaction between the various "Super Criminals" was okay for anyone with a particularly childish mind, but their on screen time and roles were greatly reduced by having so many of them. Cesar Romero was great as The Joker in the TV series and sadly underused here. I never could stand Burgess Meredith in anything so it annoyed me that his part was larger than Cesar Romero's and far more than it needed to be.

The tiny masks make all the difference if you're a costumed criminal.

My favourite male Batman villain was always The Riddler as played by Frank Goshin. I think John Astin played him a couple of times on TV, but it was never the same. Frank Gorshin really looked the part and was mischievous with it. Again, he was very underused in this movie as well.

As for the plot, who cares? Really, does it matter? I suppose the idea of combining the four rather inept escaped criminals in a plan to destroy the United Nations seemed good on paper, but, honestly, it took way too long for them to get to the punchline and it was predictable that they were never going to get away with it.

I wouldn't say any of the movie was "laugh out loud" funny, but it was entertaining even for a horror-addicted adult such as myself to watch. I perked up at the use of an Edgar Allan Poe poem at one point, and the very awkward date between Bruce Wayne and Kitka was priceless.

The ending was a big "Oops!" moment for Batman and the Boy Blunder which was kind of funny with its implications especially if you aren't a big fan of either of them.

It's Baturday! The Dark Knight Rises weekend

Since it's highly likely that I will be going to see "The Dark Knight Rises" at some point this weekend, I'm preparing myself for the experience with a marathon rewatching of all the previous Batman movies.

"Holy Crappy Movies, Batman!"

I must admit that if the TV series was available on DVD, I'd rather watch that again than any of the Christopher Nolan abominations. Blame it on my age, but I really used to enjoy Adam West's and Burt Ward's escapades when they were repeated for Saturday morning kids' TV in the '70s.

I had the Mego action figures and the Corgi Batmobile which I thought were great. We all had them even though none of us had ever read a Batman comic, had never heard of DC, and were destined to forget all about the caped crusader once "The Six Million Dollar Man", "Starsky and Hutch" or even "Monkey" came along. Yes, kids are fickle and I changed what I was into more often than my underpants. I could probably list another hundred TV shows which caught our imaginations and almost forced some parents into bankruptcy with the merchandising.



As an adult who occasionally suffers from bouts of nostalgia, I remember the theme tune and opening titles of the "Batman" TV show more than any of the episodes. As you can see from the YouTube video above, it was pretty much a series of cartoon graphics with a couple of poorly animated moments and which promised more of the same. I don't think there was ever a child on the planet who wasn't a little bit disappointed by the live action which followed.

Having said that, Adam West will always be my Batman. I more than disliked Robin, I really hated him, and, to be completely honest, there were several times when I hoped that the villains would get the better of the pair of them. The villains were always far more interesting than the heroes.

Unfortunately, apart from watching episodes on YouTube, the 1966 movie version of the TV series is the only DVD available. There have always been a lot of arguments going on behind the scenes as to who owns the rights to what so I highly doubt that the complete series will ever appear on DVD now.

Even though I've always felt that the movie was overlong and a little bit dull compared to the individual episodes, at least it combined the talents of the four best supervillains: The Joker (Cesar Romero), The Penguin (Burgess Meredith), The Riddler (Frank Gorshin) and, of course, The Catwoman (Lee Meriwether).

I haven't watched it for so many years that I'm quite looking forward to seeing it again. I'll be back later with a proper review.

The Dark Knight Rises (2012) HD Exclusive Featurette

Fascinating stuff, isn't it?

Yeah, I know it has nothing to do with horror but I didn't actually make it to the pawn shop yesterday to buy any more films to review so this is all I have to offer as a Sunday post.

I'm really looking forward to "The Dark Knight Rises". I'm a big fan of Batman, but an even bigger one of Catwoman (as you already know). Ah, who am I kidding? I just want to ogle Anne Hathaway like everyone else does.

Meow!!! Yeah, she makes my Dark Knight rise alright.

In other news, I've been updating "The Bloody Horror Store" which now has a graphical link to it in the side column. I added a few more horror items here and there which may interest you. You aren't even reading this though now that you've seen that big pic of Anne Hathaway, are you?

Tomorrow, I'll review something. I'm not sure what yet because I wanted to do a month of ghostie films and I'm not really in the mood for any of them.

Any suggestions for what I should review? Just leave them as a comment below.