Is "Batman Forever" misunderstood?

[Seattle Freeze]

Though I did like the music, I didn't like what it did to the movie- it made it almost an expression of pop culture at the time.

[Ed Sizzers]

I just think to such a poorly done film that didn't at least have the decency to be so bad that it becomes funny like [I]Batman and Robin

Exactly. There's no denying Batman and Robin is a bad, bad film... But it's played so ludicrously campy that it almost works, at leass in terms of the film it's trying to be. Which is clearly a camp, silly film.

Forever, on the other hand, doesn't know what it is. It's like it tried to be both things at the same time, attempting to maintain some of the dark, moody vibe of Burton's fims, but with the camp and colour that Shumacher obviously wanted to bring the franchise, even then. For that reason, I find it works less as a film than Batman and Robin, which is, if nothing else, consistent!

[speedline]

I would have liked the film a lot more if Riddler and Two Face weren't constantly giggling like children and hugging one another through the whole film. All that neon was too overdone as well. The Batmobile looked like a ribbed penis probably to satisfy Schumachers homoerotic overtones he wanted in this franchise. Nipples looked ridiculous. I do feel bad hearing Schumacher constantly apologizes for his Batman films, I just don't think he was the right man to take over the franchise. He's made some really good films, but he will always be remembered for these two embarrassments.

[sportsguy831]

I haven't watched it but it must be better than the Dark Knight which was absolute $#!^. I'll admit that Heath Ledger as the Joker was amazing but the rest of the movie was crap. Nolan went over-the-top gritty on Batman and decided that 2:30 hours wasn't that much time, and its not like people have something good to do. Bale's Batman's voice was so stupid it was hilarious and the whole Two-Face thing could have been interesting if there was actually some common sense in Batman's decision to save him instead of the girl. I doubt that Nolan's ever read a Batman comic in his life as in all of his Batman movies, Batman killed the villain(s), which he's never done in the comics (or any other things featuring Batman, not by Nolan), not even to save innocent lives. It's even too long to watch just about to make fun of, so it even tries to make sure it takes itself too seriously. I can't wait for the next Batman reboot just to get Nolan's stink out of my brain.

[Guglio08]

[T]he whole Two-Face thing could have been interesting if there was actually some common sense in Batman's decision to save him instead of the girl.

Did you even WATCH THE MOVIE?

The Joker tells Batman that Rachel is at one location, Batman goes for that one, only to discover that The Joker lied and Rachel and Harvey's locations were flipped.

Man, what ever happened to legit criticism where people actually know what it is they are talking about.

[TheBalzan]

SPOILERS FOR DARK KNIGHT RISES

Personally I feel like Dark knight Rises is just an attempt at Batman Forever's main story (which is mostly cut). That of Bruce Wayne coming to terms with the Batman and finding his self in the Bat. The Robin thing was much better done in Batman Forever than Dark Knight Rises, even if it was Chris O'Donnell.
I'd watch Forever again over Dark Knight Rises any day. At least this Batman doesn't have Bruce pining over a dead girlfriend for 8 years then faking his own death. It's the only Batman movie to do Bruce Wayne justice.

[DebkoX]

For some reason ITV keeps reshowing it -.-'

[David Walton]

Though I did like the music, I didn't like what it did to the movie- it made it almost an expression of pop culture at the time.

I can see that. Personally, I still enjoy the music and the feel it gives the movie, but hey, I have the soundtrack.

I do think Burton's films come across as more timeless. You don't really know if Gotham is something out of the 1930s, late 80s, or a futuristic city that borrows from every era. Burton creates worlds.

[Statham]

I can see that. Personally, I still enjoy the music and the feel it gives the movie, but hey, I have the soundtrack.

I do think Burton's films come across as more timeless. You don't really know if Gotham is something out of the 1930s, late 80s, or a futuristic city that borrows from every era. Burton creates worlds.

This. I remember owning the companion book that touched on the characters, the storyboards, the story, the designs, etc, and that blatantly pointed out the anachronisms on display, like Grissom's mob men being very, very stereotypical mobsters dressed in three piece suits, over coats and fedora, who are suddenly usurped by Joker's gang wearing their leathers and baseball caps. It's really interesting in that sense, and definitely manages that balance better than Schumacher's films, whose Gotham just seems more like a cut and paste approach of giant statues and generic architecture.

[clownprince01]

SPOILERS FOR DARK KNIGHT RISES

Personally I feel like Dark knight Rises is just an attempt at Batman Forever's main story (which is mostly cut). That of Bruce Wayne coming to terms with the Batman and finding his self in the Bat. The Robin thing was much better done in Batman Forever than Dark Knight Rises, even if it was Chris O'Donnell.
I'd watch Forever again over Dark Knight Rises any day. At least this Batman doesn't have Bruce pining over a dead girlfriend for 8 years then faking his own death. It's the only Batman movie to do Bruce Wayne justice.

Just because you make a word for word adaptation of Hamlet, doesn't make it good. Any value given to the film as a result of faithfulness to the comics is completely undercut by the MANY horrible aspects of the film from the dialogue to the acting to all that damn neon. There's simply no way around that. Schumacher clearly aimed at a much younger demographic (or he's a REALLY bad filmmaker, probably both). I mean, compare how much darker Burton's films are, and then remember Schumacher's are suppose to be sequels.

Nolan's Bruce Wayne feels like a real person (as real as Bruce Wayne can be anyway). He's interesting, he's three dimensional and he doesn't come across as some caricature. Also, I think people are way too blasé about death given comments like that about Rachel's death.

On a not unrelated note, I don't really consider John Blake's storyline in TDKR to be literally about Robin. He's more of a composite character and the revelation of his name was more a nod to the comics than anything else.

[David Walton]

This. I remember owning the companion book that touched on the characters, the storyboards, the story, the designs, etc, and that blatantly pointed out the anachronisms on display, like Grissom's mob men being very, very stereotypical mobsters dressed in three piece suits, over coats and fedora, who are suddenly usurped by Joker's gang wearing their leathers and baseball caps. It's really interesting in that sense, and definitely manages that balance better than Schumacher's films, whose Gotham just seems more like a cut and paste approach of giant statues and generic architecture.

I have that companion book! I forgot the guy's name who worked on the designs (was it Furst?) but he did excellent work.

I'll go on record as saying I don't mind Schumacher's Gotham, although it's nowhere near as brilliant as Burton's.

[Redem]

I can see that. Personally, I still enjoy the music and the feel it gives the movie, but hey, I have the soundtrack.

I do think Burton's films come across as more timeless. You don't really know if Gotham is something out of the 1930s, late 80s, or a futuristic city that borrows from every era. Burton creates worlds.

What kind of funny is that in Burton stuff (especially in the first batman) the 1980's stuff stand out more than the 1930's stuff

[David Walton]

What kind of funny is that in Burton stuff (especially in the first batman) the 1980's stuff stand out more than the 1930's stuff

Probably more so for those who lived through the 1980s, though. I mean, if you're under thirty then it's just a mash-up of various eras.

[Statham]

I have that companion book! I forgot the guy's name who worked on the designs (was it Furst?) but he did excellent work.

I'll go on record as saying I don't mind Schumacher's Gotham, although it's nowhere near as brilliant as Burton's.

Anton Furst, yeah. The same guy who they got to actually redesign Gotham in the books during a crossover, I think?

But yeah, I just ordered that book and the Batman Returns companion book, since I can't find my old copy anywhere. It's a real shame there's not been a new volume or whatever put out to detail those first two films.

[David Walton]

Anton Furst, yeah. The same guy who they got to actually redesign Gotham in the books during a crossover, I think?

But yeah, I just ordered that book and the Batman Returns companion book, since I can't find my old copy anywhere. It's a real shame there's not been a new volume or whatever put out to detail those first two films.

I never got the BR one, sadly. I read the Batman one to pieces before the film even came out! It was the first I'd ever heard of Bob Kane, too. Seriously, I think '89 Batmania did more for discussions about comics creators than anything that came since, because news stations were running full pieces about Kane and, to a lesser extent, other contributors.

I love the visuals for BR, too. Especially with the snow, which provides an eery feeling. I mean, it's Christmas, and all this creepy stuff is going down with the Penguin.