• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

What Don't You Like About "Batman Forever"?

I remember the joy and relief everyone felt after Returns which nobody liked. If it was not for the internet I would not even know a person that liked Returns.
Then you should get better friends. :p

Naw I think you guys need to get better friends and lighten up a bit with the rest of the world. But everyone today is too busy loving vampires, and wanna be anti heroes to see any good stuff. Forever owns Returns by a lot. Batman was a phenom so it is in a class by itself.
 
I like Forever, but it is really only better than the mess that followed Batman and Robin. Everything that was wrong with the Riddler, Two Face and Gotham in Forever was shown in the animated series which portrayed them so much better.

Its not just the darkness but the style that the animated show captured. Schumacher was just the wrong choice and his style vision more akin to the camp 60's show. Though I liked that too as a child, I like most of the movie going audience at the time, was ready for a more mature version of batman. Especially after the first two films.

It was still fun at times to watch. I still love the little bit with TwoFace teaching the riddler how to punch a guy in the face, using the jewelry store guards as targets.

"Ball up your fist....lean way back..and /assert/ yourself! *WHAP!*...then riddler's attempt is um..shall we say less than successful :p

Vons
 
My favorite ridiculous scene is where the batmobile is driving down a road and then 2 seconds later is driving across a bridge that is five stories above. that scene confused the hell out of me and my friends when we watched the movie recently. we couldn't help but laugh at the absurdity.
 
Before i start, i have to admit i am no expert on the Batman comics

Well, let me just say that with the following statement...

But with that caveat i think the main problem with Batman Forever is that its creative team made the incorrect assumption that if something is based on a comic, it cannot be played seriously.

...you have proven that you know far more about Batman, and the way Batman movies should be made, than anyone involved with either of the Schumacher movies. :techman:
 
Aw, I love "Batman Forever."

"Batman and Robin," on the other hand, is a different story.
BF is just sort of forgettable. Batman & Robin, however, cannot be forgotten!:rommie: It takes us back to 60's camp- and I actually LIKED it!!! Ahnult was hi-larious!:guffaw:
 
That is why Forever was such a huge flop after the greatest of Returns, oh wait....it was the other way around.
 
I've caught bits and pieces of Batman Forever when it aired on AMC. I admit to really liking this film when it came out. But I was also a teenager when this film came out, so my tastes probably weren't quite as developed as they are now. The film really is tacky. Schumacher's take on the Batman universe is just all wrong. I understand that it's based on a comic series, but that doesn't mean the film itself has to play like a cartoon. Everything is over-the-top and exaggerated. The acting, the music, the set design, the costumes, the props, the lighting. The humor is bad. They really go for the cliches. I don't think there is a single moment in the entire film that's rooted in reality. Jim Carrey is basically playing himself, just in a silly costume. Tommy Lee Jones is completely wasted here, and looks like a caricature. I don't hate Val Kilmer's performance, but he doesn't do anything interesting, either. After Tim Burton's two entries, Batman Forever just takes a radical left turn down the wrong road.
 
I do think The Shadow works alright, certainly much better than Schumacher's Batman films, as a film that veers between serious story and lightness/self-parody.
 
It's interesting how much people's opinions on this movie vary-- I wonder if it makes a big difference whether people saw them in the theater when they were first coming out or if they saw them all later on TV or video.

The first Batman movie I saw in the theater was Batman Begins, which is still my favorite of the bunch.

I found the earlier movies disappointing after seeing that, though I enjoyed Batman Returns for the atmosphere and feeling it created.

I thought that Batman & Robin was terrible, and I was surprised to find that Batman Forever wasn't much better.

I can understand that some enjoy Batman Forever's variety of silliness (though I think the 60s series and movie did it much, much better), but I don't understand why the people who do seem to hate Batman & Robin so much; the two movies seem pretty similar to me. Corny jokes, villains making tons of puns, flashy colors, impossible architecture-- very much a comic book feel.
 
but I don't understand why the people who do seem to hate Batman & Robin so much; the two movies seem pretty similar to me. Corny jokes, villains making tons of puns, flashy colors, impossible architecture-- very much a comic book feel.
I liked Clooney WAAAY better than Kilmer as Bruce Wayne, and the over-the-top wackyness was much more dealworthy in B&R than in BF IMO.
Plus, the idea of redemption in B&R was a welcome tiny treat after the shallow "evil peeps are just evil" riff from its predessesor.;)

I'm BATChrisisall:guffaw:
 
I have never seen much difference between this and the much-maligned Batman and Robin. The neon-and-smoke thing doesn't do much for me and it's sad watching Tommy Lee Jones trying to out-ham Jim Carrey.
 
I have never seen much difference between this and the much-maligned Batman and Robin. The neon-and-smoke thing doesn't do much for me and it's sad watching Tommy Lee Jones trying to out-ham Jim Carrey.

I thought (and still do) that it was hysterical. Jones is a lot better at camp than Carrey, but that's just me.

I still think Returns is the best of the franchise, but I have a feeling I'm pretty alone in that opinion.
 
I think it's a fun, stupid movie with a lot of visual flair. If I see it when I'm flipping channels, I'll usually stop and watch at least some of it.
 
It's interesting how much people's opinions on this movie vary-- I wonder if it makes a big difference whether people saw them in the theater when they were first coming out or if they saw them all later on TV or video.

The first Batman movie I saw in the theater was Batman Begins, which is still my favorite of the bunch.

I found the earlier movies disappointing after seeing that, though I enjoyed Batman Returns for the atmosphere and feeling it created.

I thought that Batman & Robin was terrible, and I was surprised to find that Batman Forever wasn't much better.

I can understand that some enjoy Batman Forever's variety of silliness (though I think the 60s series and movie did it much, much better), but I don't understand why the people who do seem to hate Batman & Robin so much; the two movies seem pretty similar to me. Corny jokes, villains making tons of puns, flashy colors, impossible architecture-- very much a comic book feel.

Most people dislike Batman and Robin because it is different and just bad. To this day I still don't see how they managed to make a bad Batman movie with George Clooney as Batman. I mean the guy is Bruce Wayne in real life. If you grew up in the 80's or 90's then this is not a Batman you would know. If you are older you will. I mean everything about B&R is wrong from Bane, to Poison Ivy to Mr. Freeze.

There is nothing wrong with Batman Forever except that visually it is different from what they know. As I said before I remember the relief and pleasure so many older people felt when Forever came out cause they disliked Returns so much. It was way too dark and weird for them, but for a lot of folks here that is what they like. It was not kid friendly which also made parents mad. To me Begins is just Forever but taking all the jokes away and Tommy Lee. Same kind of discovery story just with the jokes and the neon.
 
But how are the villains in Batman and Robin "wrong"? They seem to follow the exact same pattern as the villains in Batman Forever. Neither movie is particularly concerned with giving the villains a lot of complexity or treating them seriously the way that The Dark Knight tries to do with Two-Face (he doesn't even become Two-Face until the last third of the movie).

Two-Face in Batman Forever is just a guy who's obsessed with duality the same way that the Riddler is obsessed with riddles, Poison Ivy is obsessed with plants, and Freeze is obsessed with cold. They each take their theme to the greatest possible extreme without concern for plausibility; you're not supposed to ask how or when the Riddler built that gigantic question mark tower, for instance-- he has it because he's the Riddler!

I'm not saying that it's wrong to take that approach to Batman and his villains; it's just a matter of taste. But I don't see a significant difference between the villains in Batman Forever and Batman and Robin, at least in terms of how they are written. (If it's just a matter of not liking the performance as much, I can understand that; Schwarzenegger is pretty one-note as Freeze.)
 
(If it's just a matter of not liking the performance as much, I can understand that; Schwarzenegger is pretty one-note as Freeze.)

Well that is what I meant. They turned Bane into a bodyguard flunky. Batgirl, was wrong in every way you can imagine. Mr. Freeze actually turned out to be a different kind of bad guy which was different.

I mean you can't get mad about Batman villians, that is what they do even on the loved BTAS. The Joker is in it for laughs, Poison Ivy for the plants, Mr. Freeze deals out cold vengeance, The Riddler wants everyone to know he is smarter than they are, and the list goes on.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top