Re: Batman Returns
Dean: I think we acknowledge that there's cool ideas in the script. But I can't put a bunch of raw beef and wheat stalks on a plate and call it a burger, no matter how premium the beef is.
Penguin's a dark mirror of Batman in being alone in the world and seen as a freak by society. Okay, and what do we learn about Batman through that? Nothing, as far as I know. Shit, the penguin frames him for murder and, having hacked the Batmobile, takes Batman on a wild rampage through town. So Batman's going to experience being reviled by Gotham for circumstances beyond his control, right?
Well, no. Actually aside from using what Penguin says to him during said rampage to thwart Penguin's political aspirations in their infancy (dude's not even on a ballot yet), you could've cut that entire "framed for murder and reckless driving" section out of the movie, since we never see Batman treated any differently by the city, and his goals are in no way hindered by those events. In fact within 24 hours they're throwing up the Batsignal again, like nothing happened.
Likewise, Catwoman is a crazy person in a costume like him, taking advantage of the freedom of anonymity and empowerment to wreak havoc. But Batman is never tempted to abuse his power or otherwise wrestle with the "splinter" of himself she represents.
Shreck, same deal. They're both rich guys and in exactly one scene does that comes up. Shreck offers him an opportunity to sacrifice his principles for money, he says no without a moment's hesitation, and that's over.
I think there's way LESS going on here than you're giving it credit for. You're seeing missed opportunities for thematic depth but giving the film credit as if it actually leveraged them.
