Greg Cox wrote:
Well, Burton did produce Batman Forever
, at least, so it's kind of a transitional piece.
ComicsAlliance did a great series of reviews of the Batman movies, often offering some surprising perspectives, and they argued pretty effectively that Batman & Robin
was actually the most cohesive of the four Burton/Schumacher movies, the one that has the clearest sense of what kind of movie it is (a goofy, ridiculous one), what story it wants to tell, and what the characters' motivations are. (Although they hated Silverstone's Batgirl.) Here's the review (Part One
, Part Two
), and links to their reviews of the previous three films are at the end of Part Two. (They also went on to review Catwoman
, the '66 Batman
feature, Mask of the Phantasm
, and the Nolan films, then did the Blade
trilogy, and they've just finished working through the Reeve Superman films and Supergirl
. They'll be starting in on Superman Returns
this Monday, unless they've managed to obtain a copy of Steel
in the interim.)
Gov Kodos wrote:
I liked 'Batman Forever' and even enjoyed a lot about 'Batman and Robin' even with the cringe worthy batcredit cards and such silliness. I prefer them to Nolan's films, but that may be in part my enjoyment of the camp Adam West show to the modern serious Batman. What can I say, I also enjoy 'Howard the Duck'.
I actually like Schumacher films more than the Burton films. I cut my teeth on the Adam West version and I see the Schumacher films as an homage to the 60s series.
I actually watched Batman & Robin last night and while it is silly and over the top and campy there is a good story in there along with some good character development.
I think comic book movies should have an element of fun to them. I do like Nolan's take on Batman and am enjoying the series but The Dark Knight, while a well made movie went on too long was too complicated and in the end a joyless movie that I don't re-watch too often.
I would rather watch the Adam West or Schumacher Batman because they're fun!