That just proves the point I was trying to make. The majority of TDK reviews make the point about the film “rising above its comic book roots”, but rarely acknowledging actual that some Batman comics are just as good (if not better) than the film. As much respect as TDK got, the source material still gets blown off as incidental pap. Even in reviews for Watchmen, references to the comic being “the best ever comic ever” are sort of played off as “Oh those wacky fanboys love their silly little funnybooks!”.

Even if every comic-related movie that comes out from now on achieves the near-universal Dark Knight level praise, it’s all going to be “Thank God for Christopher Nolan to make a piece of art out of this crap.” The stigma is – realistically – always gonna stick, and that sucks, but there’s nothing anyone can do about it. The non-comic reading world has made up their minds about it. And unfortunately, for every TDK, there are three Catwomen, and that just makes the hurt worse.

So, somehow, it’s source material is, yet again, something to rise above. Looking at the best examples of Batman in print over the years, there’s nothing to “rise above”… Batman Begins and TDK are two splendid films that prove how great and enduring Batman (and the Bat-mythos) is if handled correctly. By handled correctly” I mean being faithful to the comics roots.

There’s a great deal Batman to choose from, of course, but assuming you don’t want to delve back into the cheesiness of the 1950′s/60′s Batman, I think it’s pretty easy to look at the what’s worked best over the years, what stories and concepts work best, and use those aspects to base a movie upon.

It’s respect for the material, and taking it seriously. Even Iron Man, which had a great deal of humor in it, still took the character and material seriously. They didn’t try to radically change it all, or act apologetic for being a comic book first, or do it all with a wink and a nod. That’s when those kinds of movies generally work.