Comments on: Batman & Robin (1997)

By: Hal

Hal — Fri, 20 Jul 2012 23:10:39 +0000

I’m Baaack! Um, I used a different e-mail address (and device) for a comment that has been held for moderation, so I don’t know if it’ll appear. Or doesn’t WordPress like me any more?! Noooo! Whhhyyyy!
Anyway… You are spot-on with your observations, Jameson. Why is Bruce Wayne/Batman suddenly the smuggest smirkiest man on the planet?! Clooney must still have nightmares about Batman & Robin but he’s still terrible in it. As for Goldsman choosing to jam plot elements from Returns and Forever together, what in the wide, wide world of sports he thought he was doing there I cannot guess…
Nipple-crazy Joel somehow managed to make Uma Thurman look both hideous and ridiculous but then he was too concerned with those Batbutts-and-codpieces! Having said that, Uma was always on a hiding to nothing what with working from a dreadful script and facing the impossible task of competing with Michelle Pfeiffer’s Selina Kyle/Catwoman, as Michelle has never been sexier than in that role whilst giving a surprisingly good, free performance. However, good Anne Hathaway is, anyone who says she is as appealling and sexy as Selina as MP was is Mad, I tells ya, MAD!! .
None of the Batmovies are perfect but B & R is the barrel-scraping nadir. I can’t remember if I mentioned this in the other comment but I can’t imagine what possessed Schumacher to think that Ahnult should have been allowed within a million miles of Mr Freeze, Patrick Stewart? Yes. *The Austrian Oak*? That’d be a Big NO. Carrey and Tommy Lee were awful in Forever (with Tommy Lee coming off worse!) but Schwarzenegger was more appalling still. I must admit to feeling sorry for Alicia Silverstone, her character was poor and performance mediocre but the comments about her appearance at the time were uncalled for. Batman Returns was an enjoyable movie that deployed its cast well B & R on the other hand has a ridiculously unwieldy number of characters – badly written and poorly played, Michael Gough is, however, a saving grace as Alfred. Can’t wait for DKR review!

By: Hal

Hal — Fri, 20 Jul 2012 21:34:47 +0000

Hey, Jameson, I hope you’re keeping well. Batman & Robin, Batman & Robin, BATMAN & ROBIN… Ugh. Peeyew! Something smells bad in here (and for once it ain’t me!). Batman Forever had received an incomprehensible number of good reviews despite being pretty execrable and very annoying so it wasn’t a surprise that the “filmmakers” went even further in that cackhanded direction with B & R but the crap teally dud come home to roost with the resulting abomination. It was as if Schumacher and Hackiva (no that’s not a typo!) Goldsman actually set out to make the worst movie they possibly could…and succeeded beyond their wildest dreams! I have to didagree with SJV a little, they *were* aiming for Camp but camp is actually difficult to pull off, and if you fail you end up with dreck, hence this…thing. The ’60s Batman tv series was actually clever at its best that’s why it *works*, B & R on the other hand is a *truly* stupid picture made by arrogant people who thought they were being smart, or at least thought that the audience would eat up any old crap because hey, it’s just a comic book movie “and everybody knows comics are Stoopid”.

By: sjv

sjv — Fri, 20 Jul 2012 06:11:22 +0000

I know the Nolan movies haven’t pleased everyone… but anytime I hear a complaint, I remind them of the last two from this series.

I agree that it isn’t fair to compare this final movie to the 1960s era TV show. That 1960s TV show was camp, intentional camp… and it was well done camp. Sure, some don’t like Batman portrayed as camp.. but undeniably the TV show captured what it set out to capture. This movie, however, wasn’t trying to be camp. I’m not really sure what it was trying to be (although your suggestion that it was mainly meant to sell toys might be more accurate than even you wrote).

Sadly, all the actors in these final Bat-movies were far better than what they appeared on screen. Admittedly Ah-nold isn’t a master thespian, but he too is far more capable than this movie represents. You could easily see this movie and the previous one and think those were all B-movie actors with no future.

These movies (and Burton started it really with his 2nd picture) also pushed that nasty trend of trying to one-up in sequels that I think is hurting many movies now, even the good ones. I liked Spider-Man 3… more than most… but it followed in the footsteps of these Batman movies with trying to introduce as many characters as possible in the sequel. Spider-Man 3 is arguably 2 movies mashed into one. These Batman movies felt like 3 movies mashed into one, and I think that’s where the script/plot suffers the most. There was no room in a single movie to establish all of these characters in any meaningful way.