Was this movie really that bad? I was about 12 years old when I first saw this in the cinema and yes I did hate it. It was almost as dissapointing as another massively hyped Warner Bros film from around that time, "Wild wild west". I caught it again last week on tv and whilst the story, one liners and even set design are in general horrible, some of the action sequences and "look" (all the neon lights etc..) are still quite charming. I know its very family friendly and nothing like the first 2 films, but it wasn't hurrendous like I remembered it. At least the first 4 Batman films are somewhat differentt enough to stand apart from eachother.

Yes Clooney was wrong for the role, and expressionless hunk Chris o Donnel brings nothing to his dialogue (not that its great to begin with to be fair), but I still found it brainlessly enjoyable, which is no bad thing.

Whilst Arnie was atrocious, his costume, and the costumes in the movie in general, were excellent. I didn't like Batmans costume in "Batman begins". Looks abit cheap LOL. Particually Batmans filmsy looking mask.

I still prefer "Batman and Robin" to say "Wild wild west", but it would of been interesting if the supposed scrapped followup to this film (called "Batman Triumphant") would of bene anything like "Batman and robin"?

Oh and I forgot how cute Alicia Silverstone was in the movie. So at least there was some eye candy (no offence Uma).

[Edited 10/5/10 17:24pm]

It.was.horrible.

Vendetta1 said:

If I ever see Joel Schumacher..I'm going to kick him in the balls, jack him the fuck up and demand my $7 back.....with interest for making me sit through that shit!

[Edited 10/5/10 17:27pm]

Bulldog said:

If I ever see Joel Schumacher..I'm going to kick him in the balls, jack him the fuck up and demand my $7 back.....with interest for making me sit through that shit!

[Edited 10/5/10 17:27pm]

Vendetta1 said:

It.was.horrible.

Neon, blacklight and nipples on suits. I really hate the 3rd and 4th installments pretty equally, though. Now I just watch the first two and the last two.

[Edited 10/5/10 17:38pm]

Bulldog said:

If I ever see Joel Schumacher..I'm going to kick him in the balls, jack him the fuck up and demand my $7 back.....with interest for making me sit through that shit!

[Edited 10/5/10 17:27pm]

But what about the costume design? The nipples LOL.

And Arnie.

Look at how the costume got worse AFTER "Batman and Robin":-

VS

No contest, Clooney looks better. Bale's costume looks flimsy and cheap.

I mean really, did we need to see a close up of Batman's ass!!!

Bulldog said:

I mean really, did we need to see a close up of Batman's ass!!!

LOL. I like Bale as an actor, but he looks abit "Jowly" for a lack of a better word. Again I think his suit is worse then Clooneys and the guys before him. Just looks abit ropey.

Bulldog said:

If I ever see Joel Schumacher..I'm going to kick him in the balls, jack him the fuck up and demand my $7 back.....with interest for making me sit through that shit!

[Edited 10/5/10 17:27pm]

Co-sign. That hack nearly killed the Batman franchise with Batman Forever and Batman on Ice. Pure shit.

This movie is beyond redemption. I was 12 too when I saw it and I felt it was a HORRIBLE film that destroyed the legacy of the first Batman film...

Some thoughts:

-It's campy and silly like the 60s TV show. I guess some Hollywood execs are just stupid: that TV series was clearly cheap...but Batman & Robin's budget was $120 million. Do you really want/need to spend $120 to produce and promote a BAD movie?

-Many people say that this film is completely different than the Batman comics. Well, not exactly: this movie pays homage to the Batman comics of the 50s, which were sci-fi oriented, campy, friendly and impossible, just like this film. [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/w...r_Age[/url]

Why some Hollywood execs decided to bring back the essence of the forgotten Batman comics of the 50s is beyond me...

-George Clooney was a wrong choice, bland and boring, and the batsuit highlights the least attractive part of his face: the wide chin and the thin lips...

-the nipples and the gay jokes were silly and unnecessary. I can accept silly jokes in a Spiderman movie, but not in a Batman film...the suits were fuckin' awful. Period. And the credit-card gag? Please, kill me

-Mr.Freeze is an over-the-top villian, and he's nearly impossible to portray in a live action film. Of course, Arnold and his dull accent/acting didn't help either..."let's-kick-some... ICE!"

-The dialogue was just a bunch of exposition and many puns and one-liner jokes...I've seen bad comedies or cheap horror films with better dialogue than B&R, really...

-Uma Thurman was ok, but her performance was ruined with those one-liner jokes and the clumsy final fight with Batgirl...and the Pink Flamingos make-up didn't help either

On the other hand, Silverstone made a decent Batgirl, but Robin lost the edge of the previous film...that was Schumacher's fault, not O'Donnell's...

-this film definitely "tanked" due to negative word of mouth, and that's sayin' something. Oh yeah, it was considered a box office success, but it didn't make the $400 million that Warners wanted, so the fifth film was cancelled. The critical consensus was the film SUCKS. It sucked in 1997, and stills sucks now... And the DVD/Blu-Ray sales have been average, at best...

Thank God for Batman Begins. You now, at least B&R killed the old franchise and brought us something fresh, more interesting and "certainly" better. Returns was boring and bizarre, and Forever was watchable, but uneven and overblown. B&R was clearly the end of the road...a fifth film with Batman, Robin & Batgirl fighting another over-the-top villian would have been a terminal disaster...even Warners knew that...

worst mainstream film of 1997 and one of the worst films of all time, and probably the worst superhero movie of all time...

[Edited 10/5/10 18:38pm]

uPtoWnNY said:

Bulldog said:

If I ever see Joel Schumacher..I'm going to kick him in the balls, jack him the fuck up and demand my $7 back.....with interest for making me sit through that shit!

[Edited 10/5/10 17:27pm]

Co-sign. That hack nearly killed the Batman franchise with Batman Forever and Batman on Ice. Pure shit.

I totally agree! I didn't see the movie in the theaters, but I did catch it once on TNT, and it was horrible compared to the earlier Batman movies. I know a lot of people blame George Clooney for almost killing the Batman franchise, but I think he could have been an awesome Bruce Wayne if he'd been allowed to act like himself and not given a hackneyed script with horrible dialogue and wacked out scenarios like using staellites to beam sunrays over a frozen city to melt the ice which was presumably three feet thick. Actually, Batman Forever was nearly as bad as this steaming pile of crap, and the only thing that saved that movie from being a total disaster was Jim Carrey's awesome performance as The Riddler.

728huey said:

uPtoWnNY said:

Co-sign. That hack nearly killed the Batman franchise with Batman Forever and Batman on Ice. Pure shit.

I totally agree! I didn't see the movie in the theaters, but I did catch it once on TNT, and it was horrible compared to the earlier Batman movies. I know a lot of people blame George Clooney for almost killing the Batman franchise, but I think he could have been an awesome Bruce Wayne if he'd been allowed to act like himself and not given a hackneyed script with horrible dialogue and wacked out scenarios like using staellites to beam sunrays over a frozen city to melt the ice which was presumably three feet thick. Actually, Batman Forever was nearly as bad as this steaming pile of crap, and the only thing that saved that movie from being a total disaster was Jim Carrey's awesome performance as The Riddler.

Yes. I havn't seen it in years but "Batman forever" was indeed saved by Carey. Tommy Lee Jones was miscast. He was just dull. Totally upstaged by a then still growing Jim Carrey.

As for Kilmer? I thought he did good actually. Not as good as Keaton, but still good.

thesexofit said:

As for Kilmer? I thought he did good actually. Not as good as Keaton, but still good.

I agree. Totally dug him as Batman. But I really didn't like that movie at all.

thesexofit said:

728huey said:

I totally agree! I didn't see the movie in the theaters, but I did catch it once on TNT, and it was horrible compared to the earlier Batman movies. I know a lot of people blame George Clooney for almost killing the Batman franchise, but I think he could have been an awesome Bruce Wayne if he'd been allowed to act like himself and not given a hackneyed script with horrible dialogue and wacked out scenarios like using staellites to beam sunrays over a frozen city to melt the ice which was presumably three feet thick. Actually, Batman Forever was nearly as bad as this steaming pile of crap, and the only thing that saved that movie from being a total disaster was Jim Carrey's awesome performance as The Riddler.

Yes. I havn't seen it in years but "Batman forever" was indeed saved by Carey. Tommy Lee Jones was miscast. He was just dull. Totally upstaged by a then still growing Jim Carrey.

As for Kilmer? I thought he did good actually. Not as good as Keaton, but still good.

I always thought Kilmer had more of what I imagined to be a Bruce Wayne look than Keaton did.

After 10 minutes I walked out of the movie and went over to George Clooney's house and kicked the living shit out of him. I told him never ever make another movie about me again.

Yes, it was a really bad movie! I looooovvvveeee me some George Clooney, but I knew he was not right for the role, and the storyline stunk. I loved Michael Keaton's take on Batman alot as well as Val Kilmer. The tv show is classic fun camp, and never get tired of it. Christian Bale doesn't register strongly either way.

thesexofit said:

Was this movie really that bad? I was about 12 years old when I first saw this in the cinema and yes I did hate it. It was almost as dissapointing as another massively hyped Warner Bros film from around that time, "Wild wild west". I caught it again last week on tv and whilst the story, one liners and even set design are in general horrible, some of the action sequences and "look" (all the neon lights etc..) are still quite charming. I know its very family friendly and nothing like the first 2 films, but it wasn't hurrendous like I remembered it. At least the first 4 Batman films are somewhat differentt enough to stand apart from eachother.

Yes Clooney was wrong for the role, and expressionless hunk Chris o Donnel brings nothing to his dialogue (not that its great to begin with to be fair), but I still found it brainlessly enjoyable, which is no bad thing.

Whilst Arnie was atrocious, his costume, and the costumes in the movie in general, were excellent. I didn't like Batmans costume in "Batman begins". Looks abit cheap LOL. Particually Batmans filmsy looking mask.

I still prefer "Batman and Robin" to say "Wild wild west", but it would of been interesting if the supposed scrapped followup to this film (called "Batman Triumphant") would of bene anything like "Batman and robin"?

Oh and I forgot how cute Alicia Silverstone was in the movie. So at least there was some eye candy (no offence Uma).

[Edited 10/5/10 17:24pm]

Well, it was atrocious. Super atrocious. I liked it when it came out, and I didnt really when I got older. However, I still like it in general, even though its bad. Cloony fucking sucks balls and is way too jolly. But he has the most masculine facial structure to be Bruce/Batman and his all black costume (besides the nips) looked pretty awesome as hell. And I liked Chris O'Donnell as Robin, the anger and what not. Plus he had a Nightwing-ish costume. Of corse when being compared to the comics and other movies is horrible. But it is enjoyable, and the action scenes are cool.

Personally I'm waiting for someone to even put a dent in Michael Keaton's Batman. That man was the greatest, and my favorite actor since my childhood. Batman Returns is my favorite movie of all time.

But in general it seems that nearly everything has gone down in quality in todays culture. And B&R was a product of how things where getting at the time, with main focuses in marketing and "cool" things. They tried to leech much more money off children with that film than with any of the others.

I have a fan edit of this movie " Batman De-assified". It cuts all the bs out, and it runs about an hour! Google it

thesexofit said:

Bulldog said:

If I ever see Joel Schumacher..I'm going to kick him in the balls, jack him the fuck up and demand my $7 back.....with interest for making me sit through that shit!

[Edited 10/5/10 17:27pm]

But what about the costume design? The nipples LOL.

And Arnie.

Look at how the costume got worse AFTER "Batman and Robin":-

VS

No contest, Clooney looks better. Bale's costume looks flimsy and cheap.

Considering the Bale versions of Batman are earlier in his crime fighting days, shouldn't his equipment look less refined? It's not much different than the Batman Begins version of the Batmobile looking like an urban dune buggy rather than the sleek design most often associated with the Batmobile.

Also the 2 newest Batman movies are not the gospel. In general they are better than the past ones (except Batman 1989 and Returns) but Bales 'scary' voice is soooo awful man. And WTF Batman with bulky armor? Thats trash. And I'll take the Batman Forevers 2face any day over the new one who has no personality. And Cloony has the best Bruce Wayne face when being refrenced to the comics. Bruce wayne does have a damn manly chin and so on.

Plus his face is what was being used for the Arkham Asylum game

This was a good movie. I enjoyed it.

Although I prefer the Batman movie with Michael Keaton as Batman.

And the newer ones with Christian Bale as Batman rox

LayzieKiddZ said:

Also the 2 newest Batman movies are not the gospel. In general they are better than the past ones (except Batman 1989 and Returns) but Bales 'scary' voice is soooo awful man. And WTF Batman with bulky armor? Thats trash. And I'll take the Batman Forevers 2face any day over the new one who has no personality. And Cloony has the best Bruce Wayne face when being refrenced to the comics. Bruce wayne does have a damn manly chin and so on.

Plus his face is what was being used for the Arkham Asylum game

Agreed

wow, there were gay jokes. i haven't seen the movie in a long time...so i don't remember any. i love poison ivy costume, i would totally cosplay as her. my favorite movie from the batman series was the catwoman one..

Michael Keaton was the best. He had a fantastic face. The structure of his mouth/lips looked great in that mask, lol. Plus, his acting style made Batman/Bruce Wayne mysterious and captivating.

Christian Bale is excellent too in my opinion. He's one of my top favorite actors. In contrast to Keaton, I think Bale portrays Bruce Wayne's personality disorder(s) most accurately, and had the best stature and muscle tone.

Val Kilmer was ok. He's a good actor, but didn't really make any impact to me. Jim Carrey was the one who made his movie great.

George Clooney bored me, lol. I didn't find anything interesting about him as Batman, nor did I enjoy the storyline.

So I rank the movies like this:

1) Batman

2) Batman Returns

3) Batman Begins

4) Batman Forever

5) The Dark Knight

6) Batman and Robin ....

Uma stank in that film.

luv4u said:

This was a good movie. I enjoyed it.

Although I prefer the Batman movie with Michael Keaton as Batman.

And the newer ones with Christian Bale as Batman rox

I also prefer Michael as Batman-just always liked him But I did like the movie-it was okay.