or Connect
CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › The Franchises › Batman Forever vs. Batman and Robin
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Batman Forever vs. Batman and Robin - Page 10

Poll Results: More Entertaining Bad Bat Film?

 
  • 76% (165)
    Batman Forever
  • 23% (52)
    Batman & Robin
217 Total Votes  
post #451 of 493


The more important question: Why does Val Kilmer have a lisp?

 

"Tell me doctor, do you like the thircuth?"

post #452 of 493

Dammit, people! Batman killing Two-Face was an accident! And he killed him by accident in your precious "The Dark Knight" too. I'm sure if he'd had time to throw the guy a rope, he would have. Get your facts straight. cool.gif

post #453 of 493

Batman had just saved two people, because...he's like...two different guys...or something (which I suppose is a metaphor for his being bisexual? I'll have to investigate further). I'm sure one or both of those guys could have saved Two-Face in time, I mean he was falling in slow-motion.

 

 

 

post #454 of 493

Has any movie ever had the hero facing that issue ("You can only save one!") and NOT had the hero just save everyone?

post #455 of 493

Batman isn't a hypocritical dick because he has to be, it's because he chooses to be.

post #456 of 493
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabe T View Post

Has any movie ever had the hero facing that issue ("You can only save one!") and NOT had the hero just save everyone?



 

tdk_1528.jpg

 

 

"So...you chose the wrong address? You're fucking with me, right?"

 

 

post #457 of 493
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabe T View Post

Has any movie ever had the hero facing that issue ("You can only save one!") and NOT had the hero just save everyone?


But the hero has to do something to outmaneuver the villain, even if it's just good karma a la the New Yawkers interfering in Spiderman.  But Batman literally just dives headfirst into the deathtrap and saves everyone because apparently the villain couldn't think his way through designing two separate tubes.

post #458 of 493
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwartz View Post



Quote:
Originally Posted by Gabe T View Post

Has any movie ever had the hero facing that issue ("You can only save one!") and NOT had the hero just save everyone?


But the hero has to do something to outmaneuver the villain, even if it's just good karma a la the New Yawkers interfering in Spiderman.  But Batman literally just dives headfirst into the deathtrap and saves everyone because apparently the villain couldn't think his way through designing two separate tubes.


Thing is sadly sometimes directors can get up in the concept of a hero. By concept:
They make the story so crazy and the odds so insurmountable that the grasp on reality is lost. Joel Scumacher was also a studio tool.

Oh and that one video is better than the new Garfield version, which I will eat lasagna at.
post #459 of 493
Quote:
Originally Posted by Art Decade View Post

Between the deaths of The Joker, Two-Face, & The Penguin in the early Bat-films, it would seem that "execution by gravity" is the one loophole in Batman's "Do not kill" playbook.



Letting a villain fall to his death is the superhero equivalent of the standard action movie trope where the hero really wants to kill the bad guy, then doesn't because he's better than that ("He ain't worth it, man!"), but then the bad guy pulls a hold-out gun and the hero has to shoot the bad guy. The audience gets closure, while the hero isn't sullied by straight-up killing a motherfucker who clearly has it coming.

 

The tragic irony of "The Dark Knight" is that Batman lets the Joker live, when it could have gone something like Batman '89-- and meanwhile it's Dent who gets knocked off of a building. The wrong one of those actors would have been available for a sequel, as it turned out.

 

And I'm sure it's been pointed out before, but Returns has the most egregious violations of the "no kill" rule, and the Batman mythos altogether. Even so, it was the best time I ever had watching a Batman picture in the theater (excepting "Mask of the Phantasm"). Between Daniel Waters and Christopher  Walken it remains the most quotable of the franchise, at least. I routinely trot out Max Shreck's line (in Walken voice): "If my life has a meaning... That's the meaning!"

post #460 of 493
I imagine Burton's Batman grinning when he saw that the Penguin had resorted to deploying flightless waterfowl with missiles on their backs. Finally, someone had raised the threat level to a point where using his own missile arsenal was justified. He could just fire them all and it would be alright. He'd still be the hero.
post #461 of 493

That's called "conquering you fear - but moreso". Penguins are the "bats of the sea", after all.

post #462 of 493

I missed out on alot of great discussion.  My feelings about the series boils down thusly:

 

Batman 89 - terrible movie.  Lots of great ideas and moments thrown into a blender of mediocre construction.  The performances are great though.  Loved it as a kid (I was 9 when it came out), but I see it for what it is now.

 

Batman Returns - better than the first one, but not much of an improvement. 

 

Batman Forever - another one I loved as a kid, but see it for what it is now...terrible with some decent popcorn moments.  

 

Batman and Robin - haven't seen it yet, never got around to it, stayed away because the reviews were so bad.

 

It's funny how the earlier bat films are totally indicative of the men who made them...Burton's quirky, emo like darkness and Schumacher's flaming tendencies.

 

The animated series is the only one that nailed it.  Honestly I don't think we've ever seen a worthy live action bat film.   Burton and Schumacher's films are too weird, and Nolan takes it way too seriously IMO.  There is a perfect middle ground that has not been reached yet.  

 

A comic book movie that I think nailed the perfect balance of realism and comic campiness is the original Blade.  I would love to see Norrington tackle the next round of bat films, that is, if he's still in the business.

post #463 of 493

Yeah, I still think BLADE gets shafted in a lot of "best comic movies" lists and references. Dodgy CGI at the end notwithstanding, the film holds up really, really well. Pre-Nolan, in a lot of ways it's a better Batman film than any of the Burton/Schumacher flicks.

post #464 of 493

I wonder if Snipes will get another Blade movie when he gets out?

post #465 of 493

The few times I've stopped to watch Batman Forever, I usually lose interest after a few minutes. The beginning always loses me with, "Boiling acid!" Something about that security guard. I just want Batman to drop him. I think, on the whole, I find Batman Forever more irritating.

 

Batman and Robin though I can sit through. It's a collection of wrong decisions and horrible mistakes. All over the top. It fails in spectacular fashion. Not because anything went wrong...but because everything happened the way they meant it to.  No one's questioning the mad man in charge, they're all going off the cliff with him at full speed and that's why I can watch this movie.  

 

I'm kind of glad I saw this in the theater, but at the time, I was crushed. Saw it with a friend in high school and leaving the theater we were both left speechless. Literally. It was kind of like the end of Deliverance, neither of us wanted to talk about it...that would be admitting it happened.

 

I don't think I've watched it all the way through since, but I'll stop on it if its on and watch large chunks of it. 

 

I still love the Burton ones, but they're hardly perfect movies. Returns is maybe my favorite, but the ending is weak. 11 year old me did NOT think watching Batman struggle to beat up a 300lb 4ft tall man (who obviously has some genetic deficiencies) was a suitably climatic battle. I never cared much for any Bat-Vehicle that wasn't the Batmobile or Batwing, so watching him speed through the sewers in that speedboat thing while talking to Alfred was horribly boring. 11 year old me is the reason any not physically imposing villain needs a capable henchman.

post #466 of 493

I also take issue with those who say Keaton's "squirrely weirdo" take on Wayne doesn't work. 

 

I think it does, and I don't think he's a squirrely weirdo most of the time.  Take the scene where he meets Vale and Knox in his armory room.  He's pleasant, charming and is obviously hiding something and that conflict comes across in the performance.  Keaton's performance I think is great because he was the only one doing something interesting with Wayne.  Kilmer and Bale were mediocre Waynes to me.  Kilmer played it too straight (which is boring), I haven't seen B&R so can't comment on Clooney, but I'm assuming he played it similar to Kilmer.  And Bale's Wayne is dour and boring.  I look at Keaton's Wayne and I know I'm seeing a disturbed individual actually conflicted about something major, (which he obviously is).  I look at the others and I don't see disturbed individuals, I just see pretty rich boys whining about something they can't seem to get over.  Maybe that's the way he is in the comics, but it makes for boring cinema IMO.  So I think Keaton did the best job with Wayne overall.

post #467 of 493

I like Keaton's version too, but I still prefer Bale's. He seems to have quite a bit of fun playing the spoiled, rich, playboy Wayne. Plus, I think his banter with Alfred is arguably the best thing about Nolan's films.

post #468 of 493

Wayne, as presented in BEGINS, is the most fully realized he's been on film yet, and Bale does a solid job in the role.  I do like Keaton in the role, too. I just wish it was in service to better movies (and ones that had aged better).

post #469 of 493
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambler View Post

 

I haven't seen B&R so can't comment on Clooney, but I'm assuming he played it similar to Kilmer.

Clooney plays both Batman and Bruce Wayne as George Clooney with a hint of Adam West.

post #470 of 493

the first few minutes of B&R should give it the edge over any other Bat-instalment. 

 

Gordon appears on the Batmobile steering wheel announcing that there is a new villain in town causing trouble at the library and he calls himself Mr Freeze, hows that for character development?

In Nolan We Trust could learn a thing or two watching this!!

Ace.

post #471 of 493
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ambler View Post

I also take issue with those who say Keaton's "squirrely weirdo" take on Wayne doesn't work. 

 

I think it does, and I don't think he's a squirrely weirdo most of the time.  Take the scene where he meets Vale and Knox in his armory room.  He's pleasant, charming and is obviously hiding something and that conflict comes across in the performance.  Keaton's performance I think is great because he was the only one doing something interesting with Wayne.  

 

Keaton's Wayne is also assertive and purposeful when the occasion demands-- witness his boardroom scene with Walken in "Returns", which is one of my favorites.  

 

But Bale does get a little of this quality down too, in his portrayal. He just doesn't have Keaton's charisma. Of course, my main problem with Bale hasn't been him out of the suit...

post #472 of 493
post #473 of 493

In the thread for "The Dark Knight Rises", I suggested that someone should make a porn movie with a character named "Luscious Fox". I thought I was so witty. Now, thanks to that site you linked, I've learned that someone is way ahead of me. About "Batbabe: The Dark Nightie":

Quote:
She's mentored by friend and confidante Luscious Foxx, while working alongside Commissioner Boredom and Henrietta Bent, the new bisexual District Attorney who flips coins to decide if she wants to sleep with guys or girls. (She also has incredibly unappealing flames tattooed on her nipples.)
When The Jerker comes to town and steals everyone's porn, it sends the citizens in to chaos and threatens the entire city. (Honestly, what's more likely to cause anarchy, blowing up a couple ships or taking away your access to Happy Fun Time.) 
Throw in Rachel Balls[...]and a cameo sex scene with underworld crime boss Salvatore MyBoney, and you can see it pretty much follows Christopher Nolan's THE DARK KNIGHT to a tee.

The names alone make this movie more impressively creative than "Batman & Robin". And the coin thing is seriously really clever. I was stunned by that opening sequence of "Batman & Robin" where Mr. Freeze is introduced by Gordon announcing "There's a new villain in town..." through the Batmobile TV screen. The laziness of the writing in Schumacher's Batman movies is really very upsetting.

 

And just like Two-Face in "Batman Forever", the villain doesn't even get an origin story in real time...just brief footage on a screen somewhere. This can be done effectively (see "Heart of Ice", the "Batman: The Animated Series" Mr. Freeze episode that this movie shamelessly and sloppily rips off, robbing it off all poignancy and plausibility), but not in these movies.

 

At least "Batman Forever" has an enjoyable performance from Jim Carrey. "Batman Forever" also has some mildly amusing lines that I still remember. The other day I was just thinking of the lines, "He is definitely a wacko." and "' 'Wacko'. Is that a technical term? " The Kidman/Kilmer relationship is decent. They have some nice banter, and by the end, it feels like she's really gotten close to Bruce emotionally and cares about him more than the women in the previous two films did.

post #474 of 493

Considering Batman Forever in the light of Dark Knight Rises, which I loved, I'm leaning toward the former in terms of what direction I'd like the cinematic Batman to take. 

 

Forever's plot is just about the most faithful to the comics of any of the movies in terms of plot. Consider this: Batman is well established and has a working relationship with the police. He has a nemesis in Two-Face, and their confrontations have been numerous over (two) years. Batman knows martial arts and has dynamic fights (even if they are still a struggle in the rubber). Batman is brilliant and uses his powers of deduction (even if the Riddler's clues are ridiculous). He has many gadgets and pulls off superhuman feats, but is still fallible and can be hurt. Dick Grayson, meanwhile, is introduced in the classic scenario but is closer to college age. Gotham City is ornate and hyper-real, whereas Arkham looks like a gothic castle.

 

Unfortunately, we all know about the neon lights and bizarre directorial choices. Even though the actors give it their best, the dialogue is atrocious (although I do love Bruce's speech to Dick about how killing one villain is never enough). I don't mind a little bit of camp in my Batman, and would get a kick if the next movie started with a fight on a giant typewriter, but whereas the '60s TV show fondly lampoons the comics while being in on the joke, Forever (and, more egregiously, Batman & Robin) is making a joke of the comics. 

 

Tone is the key. Take a story along these same lines, allowing a world in which monsters and weirdos can exist, but respect the material. The Animated Series, and by extension the Arkham Games (with a less Insane Clown Posse-esque aesthetic), should be the inspiration. Most importantly, please in Batman's case make him more Caped Crusader and less Dark Knight. The comics have suffered for 25 years with Frank Miller's jerk of a Batman, a guy that bosses his friends around and treats everyone like they're beneath him. He doesn't need to be calling people "old chum", but let him crack a joke or two. The Denny O'Neil Batman, and by extension Paul Dini's version, had a biting sense of humor. 

post #475 of 493

To that end, Bale's Batman is much less of a dick than in other portrayals, especially compared to Arkham City.

 

His relationships with the other good guys in TDKR, trying not to spoil here, are pretty human.  As grim and gritty as the series may be, Batman is pretty darn non-dickish.


Edited by neoolong - 7/28/12 at 2:10pm
post #476 of 493

It occurred to me the other day that in "Batman Forever," Robin actually brings nothing to the table in the third act and in fact makes things more complicated for Batman.

 

Consider:

 

- Robin hits a depth charge while piloting the Bat-boat and has to be rescued by Batman from Two-Face's scuba-diving henchmen.

- Instead of allowing Two-Face to die, Robin saves him, completing his character arc, but in doing so, he's immediately captured.

- Robin is used as part of an elaborate death trap to force Batman to choose between saving his sidekick or his shrink.

- Batman saves Robin (for the second time in ten minutes!) and Chase, then finds himself staring down the barrel of Two-Face's gun.

- So, Batman throws a bunch of loose change at Two-Face, which I guess he brought along because of course he did, as Robin just sort of stands there glowering.

 

I like to think of myself as a Robin apologist, but Jesus, the kid really is a heel in his debut.

post #477 of 493

Him essentially firing Alfred in Rises was a very Miller moment, but I agree the Nolan Batman does know how to be a team player.

post #478 of 493
I watched Batman and Robin for the first time in a couple of years, and I think I'm going to have to agree with my prior opinion that this is one of the worst movies ever made. Extra points go to the sound designers for using a whimsical slide whistle to denote the flying diamond hockey pucks during the opening scene.
post #479 of 493
Quote:
To that end, Bale's Batman is much less of a dick than in other portrayals, especially compared to Arkham City.

 

 

Seriously..

 

Batman in Arkham City is General Butthole.

post #480 of 493

The Rewatchability podcast just did an episode devoted to these 2. Apparently Marlon Wayans was supposed to be Robin. He went through costume fittings and was actually paid and still gets residual checks for it and the same goes for when they fired Billy Dee. They brought him in with the promise that he would get to play two face one day and then fired him but still has to pay his contract out.

 

http://rewatchability.com/ 

post #481 of 493
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bartleby_Scriven View Post

Him essentially firing Alfred in Rises was a very Miller moment, but I agree the Nolan Batman does know how to be a team player.

 

But... Alfred leaves... he's the one who essentially says, "If you want to be Batman, I'm gone."

post #482 of 493
Quote:
Originally Posted by The Dark Shape View Post

 

But... Alfred leaves... he's the one who essentially says, "If you want to be Batman, I'm gone."

 

Technically that's true, but I got the sense Alfred was pushing hard to get Bruce to step away from the role. He was basically trying to shock Wayne into reality, and Wayne both refused to see and called his bluff. So, yeah, Alfred left, but it was within Bruce's power to keep him there.

post #483 of 493

Sure, but is it really Bruce being a dick in that instance?  He doesn't fire Alfred out of spite, Alfred leaves due to Bruce's choice to be Batman.  Even Bruce is shocked by the decision.  "You'd leave me?"

post #484 of 493

So Batman '89 was on tv this weekend, and reminded me of a scene I like, but never quite got. When Bruce has his speech/standoff with the Joker in Vale's apartment, what exactly was he hoping to accomplish?

 

It's a great moment for everyone, but it really seems like his plan was to do exactly what happened: Provoke the Joker into shooting him for some unknown reason.

 

I get that maybe the Joker's "dance with the devil" line threw him, but that was well after he should've attacked (if that was the plan). Even as a kid, that scene befuddled me.

post #485 of 493

I guess he was just trying to get Joker to shoot him and leave so that he himself could go suit up.

 

Which he doesn't do afterwards...? 

I forget.  Hahahaha

post #486 of 493
Quote:
Originally Posted by mcnooj82 View Post

I guess he was just trying to get Joker to shoot him and leave so that he himself could go suit up.

 

Which he doesn't do afterwards...? 

I forget.  Hahahaha

 

Hah, maybe all the concussions have given Bruce short term memory loss. Simply following the Joker would've cut the run time of that movie in half.

 

This scene is actually kinda similar to the party scene from TDK in that Batman/Bruce shows up, the Joker "disposes" of him, and then because of some weird code of honor, the Joker has to leave. Maybe Grant Morrison will reveal a hidden moment in their history where the two reach an agreement, "Hey, we've both invested a lot of money in these costumes, let's get our money's worth." From then on every encounter has been a carefully choreographed fight.

post #487 of 493
Quote:
Originally Posted by HypnoToad View Post

So Batman '89 was on tv this weekend, and reminded me of a scene I like, but never quite got. When Bruce has his speech/standoff with the Joker in Vale's apartment, what exactly was he hoping to accomplish?

 

It's a great moment for everyone, but it really seems like his plan was to do exactly what happened: Provoke the Joker into shooting him for some unknown reason.

 

I get that maybe the Joker's "dance with the devil" line threw him, but that was well after he should've attacked (if that was the plan). Even as a kid, that scene befuddled me.

 

I think he was afraid the Joker would throw acid on her face.

post #488 of 493
Quote:
Originally Posted by HypnoToad View Post

So Batman '89 was on tv this weekend, and reminded me of a scene I like, but never quite got. When Bruce has his speech/standoff with the Joker in Vale's apartment, what exactly was he hoping to accomplish?

 

It's a great moment for everyone, but it really seems like his plan was to do exactly what happened: Provoke the Joker into shooting him for some unknown reason.

 

I get that maybe the Joker's "dance with the devil" line threw him, but that was well after he should've attacked (if that was the plan). Even as a kid, that scene befuddled me.

 

I read it as he figured he'd get found out, one way or another, and wanted to control the terms it was on.

 

Alternately, he's face to face with the guy who killed his parents (ugh) and just lost it.

post #489 of 493

He didn't figure it out until he recalled the "pale moon light" line in the Batcave. 

post #490 of 493

But the line certainly struck a nerve in the moment.

post #491 of 493

It's best not to suss logic out of the those Batman '89 scenes. Burton himself admitted that he was just trying to hit those beats, hence the Vicki Vale/Batcave tour.

post #492 of 493

Yeah, he was having to deal with a coked out Jon Peters trying to control every aspect of the movie. I'm surprised the script is as coherent as it is.

post #493 of 493

We shouldn't question that which gave us:

 

New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: The Franchises
CHUD.com Community › Forums › SPECIFIC FILMS › The Franchises › Batman Forever vs. Batman and Robin