15 years of Batman and Robin

[Wayne49]

I often wonder if this film will eventually get embraced after enough time has passed (and people have watched enough other incarnations) to just appreciate B&R on it's own merits and not with the totality of the franchise weighing on it. That being said, it will be interesting to see what the studios do with Ben Affleck now that Batman has seen extremes from very cartoonish to very dark and worldly. Is there a wrong direction to take here?

[riddler]

figured it was a good time for a bump. It is interesting to see how some have changed their tune after the 3rd Nolan film.

Maybe the worst thing about the film was the timing; Had it come out 10-30 years earlier (between Adam west and michael Keaton) it would have fit the ideals of batman better. Or had it come out now I think it would have been more tolerable; Nolan bored us to tears and barely showed us Batman. Schumacher set out to entertain and did keep the essence of the character vs making everything ultra realistic. While we could all do without the homosexual innuendos, we are in a far more tolerant society now than we were 18 years ago.

[Edd Grayson]

I'll admit that I rarely watch the movie as a whole, but small bits of it are hilarious (Freeze scenes) or very pleasing to look at (Poison Ivy scenes)

[The Laughing Fish]

The most frustrating thing about Schumacher's films is that it's not like they're inherently worthless. There's surprisingly quite a good amount of material in terms of plot, it's just that the execution of the films were way off. I've never quite jumped on the bandwagon to hate on these films, but if there is one thing I do kind of resent about them is that they left behind a damaging legacy that made fans lower their expectations in the franchise. Suddenly, people became desperate for a more serious Batman movie to the point that they were willing to turn a blind eye to whatever flaws they'd normally condemn another movie for having. All because that they were glad the film was nothing like Schumacher's.

I really believe that if Schumacher and WB were smart enough to tone down the overacting, removed the inappropriate sexual undertones and made a few adjusts to the script i.e. improving the humour, they would've been a lot better and appreciated by fans. Who knows, maybe the original franchise could've lasted a bit longer, or if it did get rebooted, people would be observing the recent movies more honestly without rose-tinted glasses. I honestly have no problem if Schumacher went for a lighter-hearted movie compared to Burton. Like I said, if he made those adjustments I'mentioned, Batman & Robin could've been highly regarded as a great film for kids.

[Wayne49]

I think aging at 18 years, Batman & Robin is absolutely finding it's audience and cult following if you will. I believe what the Nolan films did is essentially kill the reasoning fans had for hating this movie. Because what Nolan did is remove all the fun and color of the concept and instill this unyielding drudge of depression and darkness to try and flush out the concept as something intended to be "serious". What it did, I think, is force some fans to see the concept as it is and understand that seeing the character in a lighthearted, fun, and colorful manner is not the unforgiving treatment the Schumacher films embraced so warmly.

In many respects I see Batman & Robin going in the same direction as Flash Gordon from 1980. These days that film has an enormous cult following. But it took a long time for new generations to absorb and appreciate what that film was intended to be. Reading all of the comments on this thread and the thoughtful reflections of so many (along with others in different forums) are leading me to believe the days of the harden naysayers are dying out. Yes, there will ALWAYS be that compartment of people who seem to live to hate this film. But it's nice to finally see that awakening of people who are essentially saying, "Hey, kids love this movie. I think it's okay to relax and watch this movie so I can be that kid again too." After all isn't that what the magic of movies are in this genre?

[The Dark Knight]

Lately I've come to a simple realization. It's not always what's better, per se. It's about what you enjoy. What is more entertaining and what you watch more often. It's been said a million times, but if you want to sit back in a recliner with a tub of popcorn and chill, B&R fits the bill. More so than any of the other Batman films.

Does that make it better? Of course not. But if we dig into the other positives, there's merit.

Aesthetically, Mr Freeze was spot on. I like his suit, the gun looked good and so did the freeze ray CGI. Aesthetically, Poison Ivy was spot on. Her flower ball outfit rivals Catwoman from BR. Seriously, it's a stunning costume. And again aesthetically, Bane is on the money, more so than Tom Hardy's version.

So in terms of visuals, Schumacher knocked it out of the park.

Goldenthal gets too much negativity thrown his way for not being Danny Elfman, and from me too in the past. But his Batman theme is one of the best. His soundtrack fits the film like a glove and I couldn't imagine anything else.

B&R is the only film to properly address the elephant in the room - Alfred's mortality. We also get some juicy content which the other films haven't covered, namely Batman and Robin at each others throats. Batman and his allies not getting on hasn't been done other than Alfred leaving Bruce in TDK Rises. Except here, we receive a more satisfying conclusion with both parties realizing the importance of trust and working in a team.

If you like your Batman to be infallible in terms of killing his foes, look no further. This guy has a spotless record. And we must not forget - the film truly brings Batman from the brooding loner from B89 who had vengeance on his mind, to a man with a new family - enter Batgirl. He still fights for justice but he has mellowed over the years.

So yes, B&R is a fun two hours. But let's not pretend it's not without a story or themes.

[Edd Grayson]

I enjoy Batman Forever more than Batman Begins and The Dark Knight and the Dark Knight Rises. Do I think it's "better" ? Not entirely, aside from the entertainment. And if I had to choose between watching Batman & Robin and any of Nolan's films right now, I think I'd watch the former. Same for Batman 1966.

[thecolorsblend]

I often wonder if this film will eventually get embraced after enough time has passed (and people have watched enough other incarnations) to just appreciate B&R on it's own merits and not with the totality of the franchise weighing on it.

It's happening right now. You're looking at it. B&R has nowhere to go but up. Nolan's trilogy has nowhere to go but down. Time is on Schumacher's side. Kids will always be Batman's bread and butter. I think history has been kind to Schumacher and will be kinder still in the future.

That being said, it will be interesting to see what the studios do with Ben Affleck now that Batman has seen extremes from very cartoonish to very dark and worldly. Is there a wrong direction to take here?

From a commercial standpoint, not really. A dark Batman sells well. A film like Batman Forever could never get made today. I wouldn't go so far as to call that "progress" but Zack Snyder looks to be bringing the late 80's/early 90's status quo to BvS with a very Miller'ish influence, a dead Robin, etc. That's an aspect of Batman which, oddly enough, wide audiences have never seen before. And they could respond very well to it.

[Wayne49]

Well said thecolorsblend. I agree that Batman is durable enough to survive just about any artistic direction. I think in film, it just depends on how well directors match the mood with the audience's expectation. We've been in "dark mode" for a while now. Audiences tend to get fickle on these heroes after a treatment has been applied for a while. There's a degree of redundancy that sets in for the public if studios don't find a new way to make these "must-see" events (Hence the constant treatment swaps).

Fortunately (or unfortunately) I've been alive long enough to see that pendulum swing wildly from one end to the other. I saw Batman '66 on TV during it's first run. Monster success. It's reception was like the Beatles on TV. The public was manic for West and Ward. Who could guess just a few short years later the public would completely walk away and disown them? Even still there would be an estrangement from those actors to Hollywood for decades.

Batman '89 rolls out and no one from the last celebrated venture is allowed even so much as a cameo in the film. The paranoia was high. How THEN could we predict the camp and light-hearted approach would be back in full swing in just six years? Better yet how could we know rewarding the massive audience from Forever with a similar treatment would make them rebel on the franchise once again?

Now we've had a dark and moody Batman for three movies. All huge successes. ONCE AGAIN, studios THINK they're dialed in on what the public wants for the next movie. Affleck has even been given the green light to write, star, and direct solo Batman movies before the first ticket has been ripped from BVS. Hmmmmm. Do I smell history repeating itself? I think if we can learn anything from history, it's that audiences like change ups in the character. But they don't always amplify that to the studios until after the next movie is in the can. The lessons in Batman movies are always post-reflective. It's nearly impossible to predict on the frontend while they're in development.

So from my life experience, it feels like we're approaching that grey area again.  Warner bros has bathed in the cash flow from the Nolan movies. They're not about to drift too far from that treatment. And from what I see in trailers, Snyder is definitely taking the Nolan tone and practicality of the character and mixing them with his own fantasy-with-a-message style. But his hero movies have never gone over very big like Nolan's have. They tend to be divisive with fans for a variety of reasons. Will this bank like the Nolan films because he's giving Batman that influential nod? I have no idea. I just have this gut feeling the pendulum is swinging and the studio is unaware. I would never look further ahead than the current project when it comes to Batman. Audiences are just too fickle on treatments.

[Azrael]

Well, now it's 20 years! (no reason to start a new thread)

I agree with several opinions expressed in the posts above. Nowadays, this movie is fun. Of all the big-budget movies of its era, successful (Titanic, Independence Day, Men in Black, Twister, Armageddon) or not (remember The Avengers, Lost in Space, Battlefield Earth?) this one is still one of the most watchable.

There isn't really such a thing as a boring, or forgettable, Batman movie.