Batman: Year One (2011)

I love Batman.  I love Batman so much that when I finished the first draft to my dissertation - focused on the remediation of style in comics and film - I got a Batman tattoo.  When I was a kid, Tim Burton's Batman (1989) and The Animated Series (1992-1995) got me into comics.  When I was a teenager and moved away from comics, the Batman titles were the only ones I still kept tabs on...and then I eventually stopped reading them (there were not a lot of comic book stores in Port Washington, Wisconsin).  When I got back into comics in college, after some heckling from my friends Neal and Will, I started back up with Batman.  I read Batman:  The Long Halloween (1996-1997) and Arkham Asylum:  A Serious House on Serious Earth (1989) before I was handed a copy of Frank Miller and David Mazzucchelli's Batman:  Year One (1987).  



I've always liked Year One and ranked it among the top ten Batman arcs ever produced; I even prefer it to The Dark Knight Returns (1986).  Needless to say, after spending a week playing Batman:  Arkham City (2011), I was looking forward to watching Lauren Montgomery and Sam Liu's animated adaptation.  The conditions were perfect for me to be swept away; I love the character, the title, and the creative team (it was produced by the talent behind The Animated Series and has Bryan Cranston as Jim Gordon!).  Regardless of these variables however, I haven't been this disappointed in a Batman title since All-Star Batman and Robin the Boy Wonder (2005-2008).  Batman:  Year One fails because it is an incredibly faithful adaptation - I know my friends in academia will roll their eyes at that one - wrapped in an unfaithful aesthetic.  


The film begins as Bruce Wayne (Benjamin McKenzie) and Jim Gordon (Cranston) arrive in Gotham City, separately, hoping to make a change in the once innovative city that has been rusted away by decay.  The film, like Miller's comic, draws a parallel between Wayne and Gordon:  both wish to make a change but only one is willing to break the law to do so, which sets up moral questions about which stance is more efficient.  Bruce Wayne trains himself and gradually dons the cowl to take on the Falcone mob family (headed by Godfather alum Alex Rocco) while Gordon attempts to free the Gotham Police Department from the corruptive influence of Falcone and Commissioner Loeb (Jon Polito).  The film hits nearly every story beat and captures the tone of the book perfectly.  


There are several, smaller, problems with the film worth noting before moving onto the biggest offender.  First, McKenzie does not have the chops to pull off young Bruce Wayne/Batman.  His delivery lacks gravitas.  This wouldn't be as blatantly obvious if the creative team hadn't cast Bryan Cranston, whose seasoned Gordon steals the show, thanks to a certain world weary delivery that has some emotionally realistic cracks (a scene in which he saves some children and attempts to lift their spirits by offering them sticks of gum comes to mind).  That said, because of the short running time (just around an hour), the Gordon subplot with a female colleague (Katee Sackhoff) feels rushed, particularly so when we see how little Mrs. Gordon (Grey DeLisle) is given to do.  This was also problematic in the comic but, because of the expanded length, it was not as obvious.  


Yet, the artwork is where the film falters.  Yes, the film's narrative is almost identical to the book's.  Similarly, the film's dialogue has that gritty Frank Miller edge.  The directors attempt to bring a similar concern for fidelity to their representations of Mazzucchelli by mimicking his framing and compositions but, despite their admiration, something is off.  The color palette is brown and dark, just like Mazzucchelli's.  The suit is simplified and pragmatic, just like Mazzucchelli's.  Where did the animators go wrong?  The textures.  Mazzucchelli's book is known for having a universally gritty aesthetic that extends from the palette to the character designs and the textures (see the below image).  

The film captures the former qualities but supplements them with smooth, minimalist, texture work.  Cars look like blocks of the same color, faces smooth to the point of being doll like.  In turn, the seedy side of Gotham City looks more like Las Vegas than the mean streets of Taxi Driver (1976).  

Yes, Batman:  Year One is a faithful adaptation if one favors narrative and plot over style.  However, it's a weak replacement for the book.  Cranston aside, there isn't much to see here and that is disappointing, particularly given WB Animation's track record in the past (between The Animated Series and Batman:  Under the Red Hood).  In this respect, it is a lot like Batman:  Gotham Knight (2008); worth a watch but underwhelming.