Batman and Robin

Hey I know this is entirely too specific, but I recently caught a few minutes of this on TV and it's just been eating my brain for a few days now.

Batman and Robin is a worse movie than if you took the worst movie of all times and then replaced all the female characters with Kristen Stewart and all the male characters with that walking thing of Tofu you get for beating the B side of Resident Evil 2.

I mean. It actually causes my jaw to unhinge and roll out across the floor like one of those cartoon characters. It's so bad that when I watch it I have concerns that my eyes and ears are going to jump ship and never return for putting them through such slop.

__________________
www.catchasegnome.blogspot.com

Batman Forever was decidely lighter than Burtons take (hard not to be), but it was balanced enuff, and the origin story of nightwing (robin) mostly worked.

Batman and Robin though...yeah looked like a straight up homage to teh adam west days.

__________________
"The greatest danger for most of us is not that our aim is too high and we miss it, but that it is too low and we reach it." - Michelangelo.

The homage take might have worked if they hadn't made everything so dark. You had a script covered in fun satirical writing sitting on top of dark-but-stupid visuals. The whole thing was just a mess.

Batman and Robin is fabulous. Tim Burton gets too much credit for his two Batman movies. I tried watching the 1989 Batman a couple of years ago again (I saw it at the movies when it came out and several times afterwards, then a long period of never seeing it) -- it's stupid as hell. And I've never cared for Batman Returns. Danny DeVito's Penquin never appealed to me and neither did Christopher Walken's character. If those movies were made now, I'm sure Johnny Depp would be Batman and Helena Bonham Carter would be Catwoman. Yikes.

Batman Forever is okay, but Batman and Robin is more enjoyable, I say. I love Arnold Schwarzenegger and Uma Thurman as the villains. Uma's Poison Ivy is so campy.

How dare you have a different opinion than me!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Burton set the tone for the entire Batman Franchise with his take on the story. All Schumacher did was kill the credibility of going gothic in the first place.

It's odd though how Schumacher went all neon lights and luminous graffiti when he was carrying on from Burton's work.
Why he did it, I can't say but it made the entire thing completely worthless.
They'd have been better off just redoing those two movies as stand alone Batman films rather than making them as sequels to Burton.

I'm talking not just about Batman And Robin, I'm on about Batman Forever too.
Change of actors yet still trying to keep the franchise going? As I said, they should have just made the film as a new take on the Bat rather than sequels.

The other thing is, I really can't see Michael Keaton's Batman having a sidekick, let alone two sidekicks. So that's another duff point from Schumacher.

George Clooney is also a terrible actor for Batman.
He's like Adam West, but, Clooney was blind to the fact he was making a pile of poo, at least Adam West knew what he was making.

Add to that: bad story writing, bad continuity, bad dialogue, bad screenplay, terrible acting, bad humour writing, bad Batmobile and...


... Batsuit Nipples.

This is why my most recent review in my thread only included Batman and Batman Returns. I refuse to acknowledge these two films as part of Burton's original work. Mainly because they're not. Not really.

__________________

I like you Rodent! I am henceforth going to picture you as the Rat King from the Turtles toon.

I'm more like Master Splinter...

They're not Burton's work. Not at all. Thank God.

Personally, I hate Burton's gothic aesthetic sense of things. It makes me feel physically depressed. I don't want to go to the movies and feel that way, frankly. I would much rather be bedazzled by the wonders of Joel Schumacher, who has done a lot of more spiritually vibrant material, like The Lost Boys. I'd rather take Schumacher's gay issues, which are very obvious in his films, than Burton's "woe is me, I'm dying, blackness everywhere" prescription for life.

Schumacher spruced up the Batman series and made it something to laugh with. Note the inclusion of Jim Carrey in Batman Forever -- this was during Jim's big heyday, after Ace Ventura made him big. Danny DeVito, though funny, was trapped in the doldrums of Burton's dark, neurotic psyche. Jack Nicholson is iconic as The Joker, but the movie feels like complete crap to me now. Arnold and Uma were ridiculous, but that, in my opinion, makes Batman and Robin. Arnold Schwarzenegger actually is a very funny guy and Uma's Poison Ivy is a true original.

why he did it?

because Warner wanted to get toy sales a rockin, and Burtons Returns, was decidedly not for kids.

.. And no they are not continuations of Burtons work. Why would they be?

I still think they should have made those two as a new take on the story. Rather than as sequels to Burton's films.
Like SC said, they're not Burton's work and I totally agree, they're not. So why did they tie them into Burton's work?

It treads on Burton's two movies and makes a mockery of the Schumacher's two films at the same time.

If the two neon lit outings for Batman had been a fresh take on the Batman universe, it would give them a whole lot more weight and probably wouldn't have made a laughing stock of everyone involved.
Sadly, we're treated to, well, I refer to my first post..


Also totally agree with SC about Schumacher though. He's a top director and has made some iconic movies in his time.
I just can't help but wonder what he was smoking when he decided to make these two monstrosities.

And why does everyone remember the batsuit nipples?

It isn't just that -- it's the whole thing. Schumacher's movies do the whole thing where you watch Batman, Robin and Batgirl put on their costumes and all you see is a montage of them putting on the various pieces, zipping up, flashing rubber suited asses and breasts, etc.

So what? It's fetish material. What? Only Catwoman from Batman Returns is allowed to be sexy and knows it? Batman and the gang are sexy, too, Schumacher says. You don't have to be evil to be sexy -- you can be the superhero. I commend Schumacher for doing this. While you guys have that annoying Catwoman and her whip, I've got Batman and Robin suiting up for me, playfully. I am allowed to be aroused, too, and that is something self centered little nerd Burton doesn't want me to be. And I'm not the only person who feels this way -- other gay men I know are enraged that Burton is keeping Johnny Depp covered from head to toe in Hot Topic makeup.

Schu didnt tie them into Burtons work though.

So why are there repeated roles from returning actors? Michael Gough as Alfred and Pat Hingle as Gordon?


EDIT Addition: And there's the flashback scene in Batman Forever with a shadowy figure in the same vein as Jack/Joker from Burton's films when Bruce's parents died.

It's the 1990's, the other movies weren't that old and the remake and reboot thing hadn't started yet. It wasn't in the air. The studio probably felt like keeping the town of Gotham looking about the same just for continuity's sake. Same goes with the same actors being used -- it gets people who saw the first two movies back to see more. To feel at home. Even though home has new tenants with better taste.

Let 'em tread. Burton got painted over. He must not be that worthy of respect.

Legalize whatever it is and send me some.

Are u serious?

how dare he make allusions to the Joker and the killen of Waynes parents. ..sheesh thats only the heartbeat of teh entire character.

You mean Burton changing the circumstances of the Wayne parents murder?

I agree, I said in my reviews about the plot changes and how it was controversial and not needed, but it's still carried over into Schumacher's movies. Joker isn't mentioned by name, but the flashback is there and his speech to Robin about revenge is a big pointer.
Then there's the returning actors.

You said Schumacher didn't tie them into the original two. He clearly did.

This is my whole argument. They should have just started fresh with the new look rather than making a mockery of the whole lot with bad continuity.
Not just the new look warranting a fresh start either... the change of lead actor alone should have.

This thread has caused some very respectful and engaging conversation! I have enjoyed reading through your posts, everyone!