web stats

CSBG Archive

Theory: Christian Bale’s Batman = Adam West’s Batman

Thanks to The Hub, I’ve been treated to an episode of the brilliant 1960s Batman TV show just about every night of the week. It’s been a long, long time since I’ve seen many of these stories, and I’m positively delighted to experience them once again. Being a tenth-level geek, however, has the back of my mind spinning, weaving together connections between the campy pop series and later Bat-lore. The inspiration it provided the Tim Burton and Joel Schumacher films seems readily apparent– Batman Returns borrows a plot from a Penguin episode, Schwarzenegger’s Mr. Freeze may as well be Otto Preminger’s, etc– but what could 60s Batman possibly have in common with the grim avenger from the current Bat-flicks? Why, quite a bit, actually.

You see, I’ve determined that Christopher Nolan’s Bat-films take place in the same continuity as the Adam West-led series. Yes– they are prequels, and I can prove it!

Their masks both include furrowed brows!

The first thing a nerdy obsessive like you or me might notice about Batman ’66, as it shall hence be called, is that it can’t be bothered with a whole lot of backstory. As the series begins, Batman and Robin are already in business and battling a regular rotation of rogues, almost all of whom already exist as known quantities within the Bat-universe, even characters who were created wholesale for the TV series, like King Tut and the Bookworm. Conversely, the animated series from the ’90s spent a lot of time introducing its villains, aside from those that carried over from the Burton films. The ’60s villains already exist, independent of the show, a priori style, having spent quite a bit of time building their reputations before we ever got a peek into their universe.

Therefore, the history of Bruce Wayne, Dick Grayson, Batman, Robin, Gotham City, and all the rest remains unexplored in Batman ’66. Bruce very rarely mentions his parents’ tragic deaths at the hands of a criminal, and no explanation is given for Dick Grayson and Harriet Cooper’s presence in Stately Wayne Manor– at least, not in the heaping pile of episodes I’ve watched over these past several months, aside from continual references to the young master Grayson as Bruce Wayne’s “youthful ward”. Could Batman’s origins be explained somewhere else, say, in films directed by Christopher Nolan, four decades later? Indeed! It seems Nolan has made an effort to adhere to the continuity of Adam West.

As we’ve seen, Nolan’s Bruce Wayne, as played by Christian Bale, loses his parents at a young age, receives an Ivy League education (or most of one), develops worldly experience through his travels, undergoes ninja training to develop uber-competent fighting skills, and returns to Gotham as a vengeful creature of the night. He forges an alliance with James Gordon, listens to sage advice from butler and father figure Alfred, accrues a large amount of ludicrous technology he puts to use in his war on crime, and makes life miserable for any mobsters or ninja assassins guilds that cause trouble in Gotham City. Sound familiar?

“But,” you cry, starting a sentence with a conjunction, which is totally bad form, “Bale’s Batman is a grim, gritty, gravelly-voiced dark knight, and Adam West is a day-glo, velvet-throated caped crusader who seems to prefer fighting crime on Saturday afternoons!” You’d be right, surely, but you’d also be forgetting one key component in Batman’s development and transformation: Robin.

Nolan seems hesitant to include Robin in his more serious-minded take on the character, but only because he knows what will happen to Batman when Robin enters the picture– he’ll lighten up, segueing from the Goddamn Batman to a family-friendly, network TV folk hero. Nolan’s Batman is a man who suffers constant loss– his parents, his love, his hope for a normal life. When he takes Dick Grayson under his wing, however, he sees an opportunity to prevent the creation of another Bruce Wayne. He becomes a father, an older brother, who can nurture Dick into becoming a healthier, more wholesome crimefighter– because hey, crime is still out there to be fought, but now Batman has a friend, and a partner. Just like Robin’s creation turned the darker, bloodier Batman of the Golden Age into a lighter and fluffier character, so too would it happen here.

Story continues below

A lot can happen in the ten years between Batman Begins’ just-turned-30 Bruce and the clearly-pushing-40 Bruce of the ’60s series. Just as Batman strips down to a less bulky, more maneuverable suit from Batman Begins to the Dark Knight, so too does he continue this trend, down to the simple spandex-and-a-cape duds he wears in Batman ’66, colored more brightly to match the livelier hues of the Boy Wonder. Millionaire Bruce Wayne rebuilds Stately Wayne Manor after the events of Begins, replenishes the Batcave with brand-new, high-tech equipment, including an atomic pile to power the place, and commissions a new Batmobile. He continues to use his company’s research and development department to provide him with a new gadget for every occasion, including a prototype Batzooka and an experimental shark repellent. Batman soothes his relationship with the public, and the police, and becomes the revered masked manhunter we know Adam West’s Batman to be. Batman changes from a surly, vengeful adolescent to a confident, well-adjusted adult. On advice from his physician, he relaxes his vocal chords.

“Okay,” you’re saying now, resigned to the apparent length of this article, “maybe I could buy all that, but it’s still all conjecture. Where’s the proof, Reed? You said you had proof!” You’re right, I did say that. Let us turn once again to Batman’s enemies.

I'm seeing double! Four Jokers!

Gordon: And what about escalation?
: Escalation?
We start carrying semi-automatics, they buy automatics. We start wearing Kevlar, they buy armor-piercing rounds.
: And?
: And you’re wearing a mask … and jumping off rooftops.

Batman ’66 presents a world where this escalation (quoted from Batman Begins) has continued, but also one in which the stakes have drastically lowered. New baddies sprout up to battle Batman, but these villains would rather pull off wacky crimes than blow up hospitals. As Batman escalates, so do they! But they also decelerate along with him. In this way, Batman actually becomes effective– he makes Gotham a safer place. You’ll note that neither Harvey Dent nor Two-Face exist in Batman ’66. The events at the conclusion of The Dark Knight explain exactly why.

Our key piece of evidence, however, lies with the Joker. Clearly, Heath Ledger’s Joker is the same character as Cesar Romero’s. As Grant Morrison has shown us, the Joker changes along with Batman, and so he evolves– or devolves?– from lunatic terrorist to clown prince of crime. The Joker’s appearance serves as the primary link between Batman ’66 and Batman ’05. Ledger’s Joker isn’t a man with chalk white skin, but a guy wearing “war paint,” clown-like fright make-up and hair dye. Romero’s Joker is much the same. Look at his wrist in the above picture– his skin is a perfectly normal tone! “Oh my God,” you say, “you’re right! And hey, wait a minute! He’s clearly slathering white makeup over his mustache! At last, an explanation!” As stated in The Dark Knight, the Joker wants to play this game with Batman forever, and he does so by becoming Cesar Romero, smearing on the war paint time and again to match wits and fists with Batman at his own game, be it a black, serious one or a light, madcap one.

Nolan has been covering his bases all along, adhering to the existing continuity of the 1960s Batman television show without anyone noticing… until now. Is your mind suitably blown? Mine sure is. Admittedly, The Dark Knight Rises may blow this theory to hell, but I also won’t be surprised if Anne Hathaway’s Catwoman seems eerily reminiscent of a certain feline femme fatale played by Julie Newmar.

Phew! Sorry for being so long-winded, folks. I thought this would be a quick gag post, and it turned into a full-fledged Fridays… with Bill Reed (on Sunday). I hereby rest my case. Let’s see a Professional Batmanologist top this!

What further evidence do you espy, faithful reader? What other connections exist between the two series?


The Chicago Manual of Style completely supports the usage of “but” to start a sentence — even preferable to “however” — under the condition that the sentence in question has an idea that is contrary to or questions the one that came before.

Just sayin’.

LOL I think the gauntlet has been thrown down. Chris Sims, the ball is in your court now… Nice theory Bill. It a little out there but you do make good points….

And thank you Hub..not only for this, but also for Batman Beyond, Men In Black, and the personally underestimated G.I.Joe Renegades….

In a better society you’d be given an award for this, Bill. Or executed. One of the two.

Today, I really really love you, Bill Reed.

Bravo, sir.

You blew this thing wide open.

The evidence is irrefutable. Despite being diametrically opposed, one surely leads into the other. The Joker treatment clinches it.

And the use of Ra’s, Bane, and the League of Shadows won’t contradict a thing.

(Gasp. A conjunction at the start of a sentence…!)

If only you’d waited twenty-six days like the rest of the world….

Yeah… I’m not seeing it. You make some decent points, but overall, I think that the two properties are just too different. Also, what about the change in Alfred? Or James Gordan? You can’t merely say that just because villains are introduced in Nolan’s films and not introduced in ’66 that they are connected.

Gordon mellows with age, and his wife makes him shave off the mustache. As for Alfred, he’s pretty much exactly the same in the ’60s series as he is in his guise as Michael Caine. He even has a swordfight with the Joker in one episode, mirroring the geriatric-but-kickass nature of Caine’s Alfred.

Oh man, don’t take that, Chris Sims!

Quick, somebody call an ambulance for Ziah Grace; that level of humour impairment could prove fatal!


Batman 1966= original Star Wars Trilogy

Nolan’s films= Star Wars Prequels

Considering how much more I like the top two over the bottom two, I can agree with this.

Action Ace: except that Batman 66 is still something you can watch without getting all sad, or annoyed that the “proper” version is only available in a notably crappier version than the one where De Vito-style mutant-Penguin makeup was digitally applied to Burgess Meredith years after the fact.

Second use of the word “version” should be “format” above. Sorry.

Action Ace: except that Batman 66 is still something you can watch without getting all sad, or annoyed that the “proper” version is only available in a notably crappier version than the one where De Vito-style mutant-Penguin makeup was digitally applied to Burgess Meredith years after the fact.

For that analogy to work, you need to use an element from the Nolan films, not one from the Burton ones. Like Cesar Romero digitally altered to look like a greasy, shabby hobo.

Bill Reed …

You magnificent bastard!

This is a truly fantastic theory.

Fun theory you have there. But my geekiness forces me to ask, what about Batgirl? Gordon’s daughter as seen in Batman Begins is a baby, isn’t she?

BUT now that I think about it, do we ever hear the baby’s name? Maybe young Barbara is away at school or something. Damn, you have me doing it now!

And AND… the corrupt Gotham PD is obviously cleaned up by Gordon, and things become so light and campy for the villains in the city, that the cops become lazy and incompetent and always played for laughs in the old show. This is too much fun to not join in.

bernard the poet

March 7, 2011 at 11:21 am

Bill, if you’re right, does that mean that in the next film, we might see Batman wear a costume he can actually move in? Or even have a realistic and compelling fist fight with someone?

“For that analogy to work, you need to use an element from the Nolan films, not one from the Burton ones. Like Cesar Romero digitally altered to look like a greasy, shabby hobo.”

But that would make sense, and I was trying for something analogous to what LUCAS did.

Willie Everstop

March 8, 2011 at 12:08 am

Your theory is true! I have seen video evidence.


youre theory is totally true man, i am pretty sure catwoman will remain alive in tdkr and i bet bane and talia will die so youre theory remains even with more evidence!, now all we need is the 4th batman movie introducing robin and riddler and poison ivy and a 5th one introducing mr freeze

Awesome article. I love Nolan’s films and Bat ’66. I never thought of them in the same continuity but you’re damn right,they are the part of the same story. I guess Gordon decided to give Batman a police badge too to soften any anti vigilante stances taken by other cops and media.
On a side note,I think Frank Miller’s “All Star Batman and Robin the boy wonder” story bridges the gab between Batman ’66 and the Nolan films because in those stories,Batman is the dark violent mad man but by the end of it,he is shown hugging Robin at one point. Also in that book,the ’66 Batmobile is clearly seen in the bat cave among other bat vehicles identifiable by the red bats seen on the doors and the overall shape of the car.

This is an incredibly stupid article. All you’ve said is that it’s a prequel because it doesn’t introduce Robin and that Batman has the same origin as every single incarnation so far. I hate these stupid blogger-overthinking it to be clever “articles.” Basically because it does nothing to conflict with what’s established in the 60s Batman, it’s a prequel. Nothing more than an attempt at a ‘witty’, attention-grabbing article.

Ignore the cavils of the petty humor-impaired, Bill — this is a deliciously clever article!

On a more serious note, you also express the differences between Silver Age Batman and later interpretations of Batman better than has anyone else whom I have read:

Unlike the urban legend that terrifies the puerile bully at the heart of mobsters and murderers, the Silver Age Batman was written as a “folk hero” who enheartens common folk rather than frightening criminals.

The 1960s was an interesting hybrid of proto-postmodern camp and traditional tall tales about a folk hero called The Batman and not at all the hostile mockery of superheroes that many people accuse it of being.

Just imagine a good ol’ boy sitting by the fire one night telling everyone about his time in the Big City, spinning yarns about a powerful fighter dressed in a fearsome guise as a vampire bat trounced a snide banker type who waddled like a penguin and had a whole mess of wickedly dangerous umbrellas, or faced a slinky vamp who done thought herself a kitten and played cat-and-mouse with the men she done wrong, or brawled with a snake oil grifter painted up like a clown who laughed like a gladhands politician.

Then imagine his highly intelligent but irony-loving college boy nephew trying to tell the same stories at the university dorms but unable to resist exaggerating the eccentricities of the setting.

And you have Batman ’66.

It does seem to be a valid theory. Of course its possible that the TV series was so stuck in the subconscious of Nolan that these decisions were not made consciously. Also keep in mind that after years of being Batman, he would get a little screwed up in the head too. Though Adam always played Batman pretty serious, he did make some questionable decisions, perhaps the Bat was beginning to get a little tetched

What hapened to the Joker’s scars then?

Probably plastic surgery. The mustache under his makeup suggests he takes up a disguised secret identity… And as anyone knows who has seen Cesar Romero as Zorro’s uncle, he looks quite different without the makeup. In fact, he and Guy Williams’ Zorro could be ancestors of Romero & West’s characters… But I won’t go there. Just know, that’s the way I see it now. Matrilinear, hence the last names being different. And Wayne rhymes with Spain. I rest my case.

Leave a Comment



Review Copies

Comics Should Be Good accepts review copies. Anything sent to us will (for better or for worse) end up reviewed on the blog. See where to send the review copies.

Browse the Archives