Yes Joel Schumacher made Batman gay! (Why is that a bad thing?)

I don’t mean Gay as in how a 12 year old would use it. I mean actually homosexual, Joel Schumacher’s Batman is a Gay man. This has often been used as a criticism but, those takes lack nuance and call the recently departed director a bad director. He’s won a few Razzies but some of that comes off as political. Joel Schumacher was one of the first openly gay directors to be given a major franchise. The struggles he may have faced during his life informed his films and that subtext should be looked at with open minds. 

Joel Schumacher started making movies before he came out as gay, and some of them are now fascinating with hindsight. His first theatrically released is DC Cab (also known as Street Fleet) starring Mr T. A film about male cabbies and their friendship as co-workers. Now it’s mostly an unremarkable Police Academy copy but with the knowledge the Schumacher wrote and directed it one scene leaps out. The boys (except Mr T) are hanging out in a red light district and complain at women for going into a bar with the Chippendales. Then to convince the women to stay outside they “put on the show for free”. Joel Schumacher had 4 men (one of whom is a young Stephen Baldwin or Jayne from Firefly) dancing shirtless with lots of gyration on top of their Taxi cabs. 

Schumacher’s second and third films I shall refer to as the Sexy Sax films (as they both feature men playing Saxophones). Rob Lowe’s characters story in St Elmo’s fire goes nowhere but he does play the sax; and Lost Boys has a cameo from Timmy Cappello (Tina Turner’s Saxophone player who is also known for not wearing a shirt). Schumacher’s influence on Lost Boys was to have a new writer in Jeffrey Boam added to project for rewrites to make it “sexier”. But St Elmo’s Fire (the earlier of the two films) was said by Schumacher himself to be “Semi-Autobiographical” and the main plot is a love triangle. A love Triangle where one of the boys in it is mistaken for gay by the girl. 

But you didn’t click on this blog for his earlier movies, it’s time to talk about the “Bat-nipples”. Tim Burton in 1989 made the first modern Batman movie, deliberately steering away from the Adam West series and making something more gothic. He made a sequel called Batman Returns and was dropped as director for the third because McDonalds refused to do a tie-in promotion. Schumacher was brought on to replace Burton as director and the whole movie was reworked and mostly recast. Burton was to have Michael Keaton return as Batman/Bruce Wayne, Billy Dee Williams as Harvey Dent/Two Face and introduce Will Wheaton as Robin/Dick Grayson and Robin Williams as The Riddler. William’s version of the Riddler was to take on characteristics of the Superman villain the Toyman and Green Arrow’s Foe the Clock King. As a kindly old man diagnosed with a terminal disease with a love of games and puzzles who just wants to share his love with the rest of Gotham but Harvey Dent keeps tampering with them. This story was scrapped and Burton went on to try and make a Superman movie for Warner Bros that only resulted in a life long enemy of Kevin Smith.

Joel Schumacher took over with his cast Val Kilmer as Batman, Chris O’Donnell as Robin, Tommy Lee Jones as Two Face and Jim Carey as The Riddler. Now Batman Forever is awful, the only thing that got me through a re-watch of it was thinking about the subtext. Think about it, what is the Riddlers great evil scheme, to expose Batman (well something to do with putting blenders on TV’s). But he wants to reveal to the world that Bruce Wayne is Batman a secret that would destroy his life. Like how coming out might’ve affected Joel’s career as Hollywood is not as progressive as conservative media will claim. How does Batman overcome this conflict? by sharing his secret with his close male friend. Surprisingly Two-Face a conflicted man who is half pink doesn’t fit into this narrative very well.

Batman Forever was a massive success and even had a scene in the film that effortlessly advertised fast food. So Warner Bros commissioned another Batman, this time Batman & Robin. 

Batman & Robin despite its reputation is so much better than Batman Forever. I think why it’s hated so much is that it’s not the Batman people wanted. Batman is thought of as the pinnacle of manliness like Clint Eastwood or James Bond or John Wayne. But as anyone who has seen Midnight Cowboy will tell you “John Wayne was a fag” (their words not mine). The corruption of Batman’s hetero-normality challenges men and makes them second guess their own sexuality. They want to be Batman but they don’t want to bum Robin. Midnight Cowboy did something similar by having John Voight wander around in a cowboy outfit thinking he was so butch and cool. But New Yorkers didn’t have the same view of cowboys as he did, (which is where the John Wayne line comes into the film). 

The idea of a non-heterosexual Batman was not invented by Joel Schumacher. Frederick Wertham in his book the corruption of the innocent actually called Batman and Robin a “Homosexual fantasy”. In response to this accusation most Batman media has run away from this idea. Batman 66 despite how its misremembered is definitely not a gay Batman. It’s campy fun, but camp is not gay. The Adam West Batman is a swinger, he may not drink or smoke but he womanises. He flirts with all the women but due to broadcast rules they never put him in a situation where he’d need to use the Bat-condoms. 

Joel Schumacher’s Batman and Robin is not inspired by 66 (despite claims made by the Nostalgia Critic) but they share an influence. They’re both influenced by the Dick Sprang era of the comics. Batman 66 is knowingly a parody of Superhero comics but Batman and Robin thinks its cool. Dick Sprang’s lasting impact on Batman is the rogue’s gallery. Before him all Batman villains were mostly one and done, but he made them even more cartoony and obsessed with gimmicks. His most notable creation was The Riddler but he reintroduced ones from earlier. The Architecture of Sprang’s Gotham is elaborate, and Schumacher took note. In Sprang’s Batman comics every factory has a giant version of what it makes on the roof (and usually fully functioning) encounters with villains happen in museums with Batman and Robin using the exhibits in the fight (so the opening of the film). Whilst Batman 66 is a normal city with lots of abandoned warehouses that are slowly sinking on one side. 

I wish it were clever of me to point out the Poison Ivy is a Honeypot trap but she actually says that. But thats what she is, Bane is the idea of what a man should be, strong and unfeeling and Mr Freeze is the cruel unfeeling world. Poison Ivy wants to break them up and prove they’re not as united as they thought even claiming that it’s unnatural. The Villains of the Schumacher films are homophobes. 

And as a closing remark, why are more fans willing to accept Frank Miller’s Batman that espouses fascist ideology than a gay Batman? Think about it and if you use gay as an insult grow the fuck up.

The Author fan relationship needs to change!

Comic book writers have this power over fans. Fans often want to write the adventures of their favourite heroes, I myself have planned out runs with various storylines for The Fantastic Four, Dr Strange, Superman, Wonder Woman, The X-men, The Justice League and more. Just sat there imagining new obstacles and great moments of triumph for Superheroes. But the only ways into the industry as a writer is knowing another writers and Editors or having writing success elsewhere. The second wave of Marvel writers were the fanboys who hung out in the lobby.

Because of this writers have the ability to exploit fans, this was also prevalent with rock stars in the 60’s and 70’s. But the Rock groupies only wanted a song or a story to tell their friends about Ringo Starr’s penis. The groomed aspiring comic’s writer wants more and has this assumed level of friendship. The writer is making the girl think it’s her ideas and writing skill he’s interested in not her ass. This is a form of deception, even if it does happen to older women who should know better.

Kelly Sue Decconick has offered a solution which is to make Comic book writers more anonymous, like we’re reading Superman not Grant Morrison’s Superman. Now to comic book fans writers are a big deal, they have the power to lift a series to new heights or have it plummet to it’s lowest ever. To the younger or more casual fan Spider-man is Spider-man even if it’s not being written by Stan Lee. But why do we even know who they are, a screen-writer for TV isn’t necessarily known, with some exceptions the head writer of Doctor Who is generally known by the more engaged parts of the fanbase, but not the rest which caused fans to blame Stephen Moffett for the Kill The Moon episode that he didn’t write (Peter Harness wrote it). But there is one big difference between Comics and television, and thats the audience buys it every time. A bad episode of a TV show comes on and your wallet isn’t lighter, you’ve just wasted an hour of your life on Netflix which could’ve been better spent. But a Trade Paperback you buy a new volume of Batman and read it, but how do you know this is the Batman for you? Batman varies wildly, superheroes aren’t that consistent, Captain America’s politics vary from run to run. Do I want Leftist Captain America who punches Nazi’s or do I want one who says “that protesting the Nazi’s is as bad as Nazi’s” (yes that is a real moment).

Comics like Novels are sold by Authors, these Authors become brands, and some Authors don’t actually write their own books like James Patterson (well there is a lot of contradictory evidence of this). But Superhero comic’s weren’t original sold by the writers, the first writer to be a selling point is probably the most famous Stan Lee. Marvel was sold as all being the brain-child of Stan and the universe was all connected so The Fantastic Four could meet the Hulk. This was actually a lie, Marvel’s style of editing was that the artist would come up with an idea and draw it then the writer would put what they thought were the appropriate words in the panels. Stan did some of this, but so did his brother Larry who had the pen name Stan Lee. Larry has since been given retroactive credit for his work on The Mighty Thor but it’s still to us outsider’s if Stan wrote everything and in his own words “[Stan] would steal any credit that wasn’t nailed down”. Because marvel had a standard writer, artists didn’t have to copy each other, at DC Bob Kane made every artist emulate his art style until his departure. Bob would also trace other artists panels when he did do artwork on Batman and with them being in his style nobody could tell (unless they went back into the back issues and checked if that panel was the same). But after artist got the green light to be themselves, writers started getting credit.

And this is the problem, writers deserve credit for what they write. But nobody should laud their power over others or try and use their position to create a quid-pro-quo arrangement with fans with ambitions. So how do you solve it?