Batman: Mask of the Phantasm Retrospective


So there’s a new Batman film on the horizon, if you haven’t heard. It’s the new Zack Snyder flick that follows up his mediocre Superman reboot, and pits two acclaimed heroes against each other. On the heels of the previous trilogy of Batman films by Christopher Nolan, this seems gimmicky and crude. In Nolan’s films we got to see Bruce Wayne explore what it takes to become Batman. This delving into pathos was more than we had seen compared to the films that had come before, such as the mid-nineties tripe of Batman Forever and Batman & Robin. Even Tim Burton’s films gave cursory attention to Batman’s past, though the Gothic nature of those films made them timeless in their own rights. But what of that *other* Batman feature film? The one that bombed at the box office, but still garners acclaim to this very day?

Released in 1993, Batman: Mask of the Phantasm was supposed to be the vehicle that brought the well-regarded kids TV show wider notice. At only 76 minutes, it barely qualified as a feature film. It’s animation was spruced up a bit for the theaters, and it got to show a little bit of blood here and there. The question, however, is: is this enough to warrant giving Batman: Mask of the Phantasm such glowing acclaim?

The short answer is a resounding YES.

Now for the long answer.

The film is based on the wildly successful Batman: The Animated Series, which has since been renamed more times than I can count. At the time, the show was riding on the coattails of Burton’s films, but it’s safe to say that the series reinvented itself apart from those films admirably. While taking certain cues from them here and there, such as the darker tone and a disfigured looking Penguin, the series displayed a Gotham City we haven’t seen since, an Art Deco playground for good and evil. Even thought the series launched in 1992, a film was arranged originally for direct-to-video, but was then pushed into theaters where it didn’t fare all that well.

Still it was a critical darling, and ironically it rivals even Christopher Nolan’s films in depth and complexity despite only taking up a fraction of the screen time.


Plot is important to a film. Unlike television which can take seasons and years to tell a story, you only have minutes to do so in film before people lose interest. Surprisingly, even though the film lasts barely over an hour, it fluidly manages flashbacks and different plots without seeming rushed or incoherent. The bulk of the film is a classic murder mystery, which echoes the film noir influences the series adopted so adeptly.

Batman is framed for murder while a mysterious new vigilante in on the loose. Though this figure is also targeting known criminals, Batman must navigate law enforcement who assumes he is the culprit, the criminals themselves, the mysterious new figure, and finally and old adversary.  While all this is going on Bruce Wayne is reminded of his past when an old flame comes to town. Andrea Beaumont is the woman you’ve never ever heard of before who single-handedly nearly aborted the Batman before he ever donned the mask. Sharing similar tragic pasts, they bonded and even mended each other with a romance that started to change Bruce’s pessimistic views into more rosy-tinted ones.

Then there are the criminals themselves, who have their ties to a certain district attorney, one who has eyes for Andrea and the end of Batman. Eventually, his roots are traced to the Joker himself, probably Batman’s greatest foe, other than the memories of romance that appear in this film.

Tying all of this together, we find that Andrea is the Phantasm, that she has been seeking revenge with plans to face off against the Joker herself. As it turns out, she and Bruce have much more in common than they realize, donning masks to fight crime, but Andrea has unfortunately become a twisted reflection of Batman, seeking petty revenge whereas Batman seeks to exercise justice.

Other films have crumbled under much less, but Mask of the Phantasm bears it all easily. The themes of romance, morality, and even nostalgia thread the stories together. At some point in the film, almost every character laments his current state, pining for something more, and looking to the past for comfort. As he should, Batman is the paragon in these matters, but the cost is heavy, as it is poignantly displayed between Alfred and Bruce in the end.


The cast is the other half of what sells an animated feature. If the voice acting is sub par, no amount of animated wizardry  can make up the deficit. Voice Director Andrea Romano struck gold with his cast. Kevin Conroy is the voice of Batman like no screen actor could ever be. Unlike Christian Bale’s raspy drivel, Conroy can serve pleasantness with Bruce Wayne, and immediately dish out ferocious intensity as Batman. Future Desperate Housewife Dana Delaney also shines in her role as Bruce’s former lover. Then, of course, there is Mark Hamill as the Joker. I spent years of my childhood watching Star Wars and Batman, never once thinking that pious Luke Skywalker and devious Joker were characters from the same actor.

These actors among the rest sell the film better than A-listers like Val Kilmer, George Clooney, and others who floundered in showing even less depth as real people than the two-dimensional did figures in this film.

The strength of this film is that, despite its intentions for a young audience, it never sacrifices its integrity to appeal to children. Just like the cartoon series, Mask of the Phantasm relies on storytelling, quality voice acting, and consistent art direction to provide an experience that draws you in. While most adults, understandably, associate animation like cartoons and comics with children, Mask of the Phantasm is like a graphic novel in motion.

Even the soundtrack, by the late Shirley Walker, stands toe to toe with Danny Elfman’s work. It’s a soundtrack that rivals all the films, and is superior to most, even the newest. You also get a sweet little R&B ditty by Tia Carrere during the end credits that was common in the 90’s, and it actually is a better song that what most Pop Princesses are putting out nowadays.

While I did watch other shows of the time like Tiny Toons and The Animaniacs, the Batman series was a breath of mature air that truly stimulated my mind as well as my eyes. Batman: Mask of the Phantasm took that all one step further and provided a cinematic experience that is nearly incomparable with the rest of the Batman franchise. Even as a child I felt sadness at the forlorn Andrea as she stared into the sea alone. I felt relief that Batman did the right thing without succumbing to the darkness he fought almost nightly. I felt disgusted with the corruption among so many in Gotham that made the city so dangerous. And ultimately, I understood the tragedy which prevented both Bruce and Andrea from following their young hearts.

If a film can instill such complex emotions in a child who knows not even to search for these things, then what excuses do the other films have for providing less? Batman: Mask of the Phantasm is truly one of the best Batman films, and it doesn’t even need to rest on other installments in a trilogy to justify its existence.

Guardians of the Galaxy: A Stellar Review


Released in 2014, Guardians of the Galaxy is the new kid on Marvel’s block of comic book adaptations. Featuring a band of less than savory characters who become unlikely heroes, the film also is an unlikely success that managed to sidestep many pitfalls common to comic book films with slick presentation and cleverness.

First off, the cast is quite good. Going into this film, I was not one who was necessarily a fan of any of the actors, per se. It was more ambivalence than anything else, but I was surprised at how the actors won me over with their solid portrayals. Chris Pratt makes a dashing and charismatic leading man (and his famous transition from comedic fatty to svelte fox didn’t hurt). Zoe Saldana entertained me more in this film than any other role of hers, even more than as Uhura in Star Trek. Bradley Cooper stole the show as mutant raccoon Rocket, and he didn’t even have to rely on his good looks, which is a testament to his skills. Even Vin Diesel, with his minimal lines as Groot, brought to life a CGI character who added so much life and, dare I say, cuteness to the party.


Lee Pace also gave a great performance as the film’s villain, even if you didn’t recognize him under that makeup, which is just another addition to the many roles this underrated actor has played. Even Karen Gillan, of Doctor Who fame, was fun to watch, even if I missed her Scottish accent.

I’m glad that the characters were so engaging, because the plot of the film was probably the weakest point. It wasn’t bad, but it was pretty straight forward and I got the sense that there was an implied wink and nod that suggested, “just stick with it, we’ve got big plans for this stuff”. Of course, the plot was serviceable in that it provided the means for all the characters to act and interact, but I had figured out all the twists and revelations in the first half hour.

I suppose that I could chalk up my lack of surprise to the mythic nature that comic books and their stories tends to follow, and in that sense the film did very well. In fact, I even found myself wondering if this film was the next big Star Wars type thing, but we have yet to tell on that.

Further, the wink and nod tended to address the fact that much of the plot has that been there done that feel. In particular, one fight scene was humorously abbreviated by a character’s use of a secret weapon that has been hinted at all through the movie. It still conveyed his danger, but it didn’t burden us with too much unnecessary action. In general, the film didn’t *try* to take itself to seriously, which allowed it to deliver fun times and gorgeous special effects without leaving the audience to worry about the film meeting drastic expectations.

Marvel was also a little too obvious with its attempts to plug this movie into its current franchises. While assembling The Avengers together film by film has so far been a successful undertaking, I get the feeling they are going to do more later, and hopefully they don’t tarnish what Guardians of the Galaxy seems to be doing well all by itself so far.

The biggest risk, I think, with this film was tying pop culture into a science fiction story. Film history is replete with attempts to do this that come off as tacky and exploitative, but this movie nails it. Not only is the soundtrack fun and classy, it is also part of the back story. The risks this film took on all paid off because all of the elements synergized wonderfully.

While Guardians of the Galaxy was not series I was previously familiar with, I am now eager to see what else is coming when they return.

Diablo 3: What A Difference A Day Makes…

Dinah Washington’s crooning version of this song comes to mind when I think of Diablo 3. What a difference a day does make. Or a year. Or indeed a decade. You see, I remember when the first Diablo released, and I played the dark and gothic first few levels in a shareware version (remember shareware?). I remember the collective joy at Diablo 2’s release that allowed us to traverse a vast and diverse landscape rather than just deep and dark dungeons, and the confusing finale in Lord of Destruction. I also remember Diablo 3’s seemingly troubled release.

I’ve given the game a break and have just recently returned to it, so let me first detail some of my initial impressions of this new game from Blizzard. I noticed the game lacked a great deal of substance compared to its predecessors, and its style departed from the gothic/horror feel to a more cinematic World of Warcraft-y feel.  There were also some things that stood out glaringly to me that I couldn’t ignore.

  • The Story

I found myself cringing, scoffing at the story. It seemed so corny, so reductive, so cliche that I felt torn from the game like someone waking me from a dream and thrusting me into bad television. What happened to the epic feel that the previous games had? Where was that horrific mystery, and the enticement to overcome my revulsion to the enemy and dark setting and forge ahead into darkness? And what of my character? He (or she) seems more like a henchman than a hero, making no decisions except which jewelry to wear while pwning undead faces.

It’s true that none of the Diablo games will ever be elected as the next great American novel, and my heroes in previous games were no less secondary to the story. Heck, in Diablo 2 my hero spent the majority of the game chasing the real main characters Marius, Diablo, and Baal, while I watched the true metastory play out in FMVs. So, there’s nothing novel about Diablo 3’s powerful characters being little more than hired muscle for the NPCs.

  • The Soundtrack

Yes, and I know it’s a nitpicky thing to have beef with. I never knew how integral the soundtracks were to the overall experience until I played Diablo 3 and barely noticed there was a soundtrack. I have distinct and specific memories from the previous games such as entering Tristram’s dungeon for the first time hearing the shrill chorus wail in holy terror while foreboding percussion echoed the footsteps of the undead legions below. My young mind was petrified by the distant sounds of painful moaning and crying babies.  Then there was when I entered the Harem beneath Lut Gholein to fight of demonic invaders while listening to a woman singing hauntingly beautiful Sanskrit lyrics with an industrial instrumental accompaniment. I have no memories such as this in Diablo 3, yet anyway.

In fact, having a strong soundtrack could probably have distracted me from the sometimes frustrating story. The previous games’ music could make a story about teddy bears fighting unicorns seem darkly interesting.

  • Always Online

This aspect bothers me in principle.  Diablo 3 at heart is a single player game with a multiplayer option (even though the multiplayer option is what really skyrocketed the previous games). Being forced into an internet connection is heavy-handed and unfair, and those who wish to play this game off the grid will be disappointed. However, I have played MMOs for years and am desensitized to this a bit. Even though I only play multiplayer only part of the time, I barely notice the online component, except for signing in. Again, the principle bothers me, but practically I don’t have much else to say.

So now, over a year after its release I’ve come back on the eve of its first expansion “Reaper of Souls”. It promises a few new features that somewhat excite me to explore, and there is even some possibility of more expansions. The Auction House feature, which utilizes in game and real world currency, is on its last couple days of existence as I write this. I never used it but I’m glad to see that the game itself will become the primary source of gear. And we have some new patches that are paving the way for the expansion.

Gameplay is smoother across the board now, in all ways. My hiatus has softened my negative opinions a bit, either because of better perspective or overall jadedness. I’m cringing less at the story, and I’m actually intrigued more now by all the little bits of reference to previous games that make the whole series seem more interconnected that just episodic.

As always, the skill system is just as satisfying as ever, and this is perhaps Diablo 3’s most notable feature. Gone are the days of regret and apprehension that came with spending your precious skill points irrevocably. Now you can switch out builds on the fly for that tricky fight, adjust your skills to fit your multiplayer party, or just shake things up when your skills get a bit stale. I’m even using Youtube less and less to play older Diablo music in an attempt to get used to the current soundtrack more (but that will be a long struggle).

Perhaps I needed a day or so, but I think I can take Diablo 3 for what it is, and with a new expansion coming, maybe my faith in this series will be restored.