TO THE BATPOLES #212: That’s no bat, boy, that’s Captain Nice!

[bat-rss]

When Batman hit in early 1966, it set a trend of superheroes in pop culture that many rushed to emulate. By the time many of these bat-mimics were ready for public consumption, the trend was on its way out. One such wave-rider was Captain Nice, created by Buck Henry, and repeating some gags from Henry’s hit Get Smart. While Captain Nice brought some really funny moments, it failed to catch on with audiences. Was this simply because the bat-bubble had burst? Or was it that Henry wasn’t the right person to grab the lightning in a bottle that Lorenzo Semple, Jr., had captured? We look at the strengths and weaknesses of the show, the possible reasons for its failure, and whether Captain Nice was meant to be a bat-clone, or a conventional sitcom starring a superhero.

Listen here

[clavierankh]

I remember Roger Ramjet. "I'll just take one of my proton energy pills. They give me the strength of twenty atom bombe for the period of twenty seconds!" I think chemical powered superheroes in the sixties was because of the way we viewed science then. Science was making great breakthroughs. Scientists were portrayed as benign geniuses working alone or for all American government agencies. Working to improve our are lives especially with medical advancements. Today scientists are portrayed as working for evil corporations or shadowy government agencies. Science has a bad image these days.

I think Captain Nice was the better of the two, Nice and Terrific. The problem was the characters never evolved beyond caricatures, Plus some good recurring villains might have helped. I think both series decided, as apparently did the writers of Batman by that time, that humor was what made the series. I think one thing that made Batman was the adventures that kids could take seriously. Neither Nice or Terrific had that. They were both straight sitcoms.

Looking foreword to your thoughts on Mr. Terrific

[BATWINGED HORNET]

Fascinating analysis of a...well, horrible show, guys, and yes, I've punished myself by watching a couple of episodes thanks to my friend who bought a VHS of a few episodes at a comic convention in the '90s!

While Captain Nice brought some really funny moments, it failed to catch on with audiences. Was this simply because the bat-bubble had burst? Or was it that Henry wasn’t the right person to grab the lightning in a bottle that Lorenzo Semple, Jr., had captured? We look at the strengths and weaknesses of the show, the possible reasons for its failure, and whether Captain Nice was meant to be a bat-clone, or a conventional sitcom starring a superhero.

The failure of Captain Nice stems from hubris on the part of Henry--being arrogant enough to assume something along the lines of, "That superhero stuff is nothing but camp--a joke, so i'm going to play it as a flat-out farce!", which means he took only a scant glance at Batman and purposely ignored the early, action/adventure tone of the series, where the humorous moments were just that--moments, not the entire drive and feel of the show. Typical of comedians (or comedic writers), instead of capturing the subtleties and ironies of an idea which are still familiar with audiences, but funny if tuned on their ear, so to speak, comedians go overboard in trying to mock the idea, as if its inherent nature was fit to be ridiculed (see: Saturday Night Live, which can count around three, random seasons out of 49 which were somewhat funny).

Unfortunately, the motivation behind creating Captain Nice reminds me of some Batman fans who--in a rejection of any serious/dark elements to the character and his world--really cheer for or talk up the third season of the Dozier show, as if that was the intent of the series all along (and by extent, a true representation of the character). Its Henry's kind of thinking--and the low points of Batman's second and 3rd season that convinced Hollywood that superheroes were silly, kiddie nonsense never to be taken seriously, and it was all like Captain Nice and Batman's third season. Undoubtedly, that belief guided Hanna-Barbera's production of the buffoon-ish Legends of the Super Heroes specials in 1979.

Thankfully, in that same decade, a producer such as Kenneth Johnson would only accept developing The Incredible Hulk if had the promise that it was not going to be like--you guessed it--Dozier's Batman, which Johnson cited by name numerous times.