Batman Forever

[DieSmiling]

I hadn't watched the movie in awhile, but when I watched it last night, I started thinking...

It's really a very good Batman movie. It has alot of flaws, sure, but at the end of the day it's a very entertaining movie that captures the spirit of Batman very well. Outisde of Batman Begins, its the best characterization of Batman/Bruce Wayne by far, I really like the psychology of the character and his interaction with Chase is better than his interaction with any other Batman love interest. The Robin storyline is handled pretty well. And whether you hate his overacting or not, Jim Carrey does the Riddler great justice.

The only real lowlight of the movie to be is Tommy Lee Jones getting two face all wrong, and the stupid neon light Gotham. And that ridiculous chase scene where Batman drives up a wall. Other than that, it's really quite good... It's a shame that it often gets coupled up with Batman and Robin as Schumaker's horrible Bat-movies, because it's really LIGHTYEARS better than B&R.

Anyone else think Batman Forever is underrated?

 

[Catman]

I liked Batman Forever. Like you said its flawed but entertaining.

 

[ShaneHelms]

I'm watching it right now.

 

[Thespiralgoeson]

I hadn't watched the movie in awhile, but when I watched it last night, I started thinking...

It's really a very good Batman movie. It has alot of flaws, sure, but at the end of the day it's a very entertaining movie that captures the spirit of Batman very well. Outisde of Batman Begins, its the best characterization of Batman/Bruce Wayne by far, I really like the psychology of the character and his interaction with Chase is better than his interaction with any other Batman love interest. The Robin storyline is handled pretty well. And whether you hate his overacting or not, Jim Carrey does the Riddler great justice.

The only real lowlight of the movie to be is Tommy Lee Jones getting two face all wrong, and the stupid neon light Gotham. And that ridiculous chase scene where Batman drives up a wall. Other than that, it's really quite good... It's a shame that it often gets coupled up with Batman and Robin as Schumaker's horrible Bat-movies, because it's really LIGHTYEARS better than B&R.

I agree with pretty much everything in the first paragraph. However I actually liked the look of Gotham a lot in Forever. Not sure why, but the neon lights didn't bother me at all. The Batmobile driving up the wall was kind of silly, but not anymoreso than dozens of other corny moments throughout the film, so that didn't bother me either. None of those things bothered me nearly as much as the nipples on the batsuit.

But you're right, on the whole it really wasn't bad. The mischaracterization of Two-Face was definitely the biggest flaw in the film, but I wouldn't blame Tommy Lee Jones. That was all Schumacher's fault. A serious, grim, sinister Two-Face would've been a great contrast to the over-the-top Riddler, but instead the script called for "Harvey Two-Face" to somehow try to keep up with Carrey's Riddler. It didn't turn out well.

Anyone else think Batman Forever is underrated?

By Bat-fans like us? Maybe. But it was the biggest money-maker of 1995, and the most financially successfull movie of the franchise, so no, I wouldn't say it's really underrated per se.

 

[fabman]

It's enjoyable, but nowhere as near as other comic book films.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

I LOVE Batman Forever and enjoy it moreso than Batman Begins. In fact, I've probably watched Forever more than any other film, ever.

 

[DieSmiling]

By Bat-fans like us? Maybe. But it was the biggest money-maker of 1995, and the most financially successfull movie of the franchise, so no, I wouldn't say it's really underrated per se.

What? It wasn't nearly as successful as the original Batman.

 

[fabman]

Batman Begins also made more at the box office, the audience clearly liked it more and... it's by far a better movie than Batman Forever.

 

[ab38416]

edit

 

[Kevin Roegele]

Batman Begins also made more at the box office, the audience clearly liked it more and... it's by far a better movie than Batman Forever.

Although Begins is the better film overall, Forever has much better pacing (almost perfect pacing), a more satisfying climax, and for my money the best script of the entire series.

 

[SHADOWBAT69]

Batman Forever, to me, was the first summer "popcorn" Batman film. It was a decent Batman film that captured its representation of the characters.

 

[fabman]

Although Begins is the better film overall, Forever has much better pacing (almost perfect pacing), a more satisfying climax, and for my money the best script of the entire series.

Sorry, dude, I don't agree!

 

[CConn]

Batman Forever is to me, while hardly very good, a very fun movie. It's such a perfect...representation of Americana circa the mid nineties. It just seemed to capture all of the little personality traits of that time. The music, the cast, the bright, fast-paced atmosphere. It really had it all. And for that reason alone, it's an extremely interesting movie to watch - not to mention nostalgic for teenagers like myself who grew up in that period.

That aside, the film does have plenty of good, plenty of bads. The over the top portrayals of the villains and even Gotham itself could be complained about. That said, there was plenty of good to it as well.

While I've never been a fan of Val Kilmer, the Bruce Wayne/Batman written for BF was very well done, was very inline with who Batman is and what he's about. And I don't care what anyone says, the origin of Robin was done just fantastically. Sure, he was a decade too old, but everything else about the character clicked. From the characterization, to how he was eased into the role of Robin...it really could not have been done any better or more faithfully to me.

Also, it kinda seemed to be a really perfect merging of campy, "out there" kids stuff, and more serious, adult, content. Kids may be able to watch B89 or BB, but IMO, BF is really the one made for them. Yet, it's certainly not SO horrendous that parents wouldn't be able to watch it as well.

As I said at the beginning of my post, BF is hardly a great movie, but sometimes, being a great movie really doesn't mean all that much. BR is certainly better than BF, yet, for me, BF just has a tone and pacing that makes it, for me, one of the more enjoyable Batman films out there.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

Sorry, dude, I don't agree!

No-one's holding a gun to your head!

 

[Kevin Roegele]

Batman Forever is to me, while hardly very good, a very fun movie. It's such a perfect...representation of Americana circa the mid nineties. It just seemed to capture all of the little personality traits of that time. The music, the cast, the bright, fast-paced atmosphere. It really had it all. And for that reason alone, it's an extremely interesting movie to watch - not to mention nostalgic for teenagers like myself who grew up in that period.

That aside, the film does have plenty of good, plenty of bads. The over the top portrayals of the villains and even Gotham itself could be complained about. That said, there was plenty of good to it as well.

While I've never been a fan of Val Kilmer, the Bruce Wayne/Batman written for BF was very well done, was very inline with who Batman is and what he's about. And I don't care what anyone says, the origin of Robin was done just fantastically. Sure, he was a decade too old, but everything else about the character clicked. From the characterization, to how he was eased into the role of Robin...it really could not have been done any better or more faithfully to me.

Also, it kinda seemed to be a really perfect merging of campy, "out there" kids stuff, and more serious, adult, content. Kids may be able to watch B89 or BB, but IMO, BF is really the one made for them. Yet, it's certainly not SO horrendous that parents wouldn't be able to watch it as well.

As I said at the beginning of my post, BF is hardly a great movie, but sometimes, being a great movie really doesn't mean all that much. BR is certainly better than BF, yet, for me, BF just has a tone and pacing that makes it, for me, one of the more enjoyable Batman films out there.

I agree with those statements I've highlighted. Some fans didn't see O'Donnell as the right choice for Robin (not me, I found him to be the perfect modern Robin), but the character was written perfectly.

 

[El Payaso]

I think Batman Forever showed more ass than kicked it.

Seriously, Idon't think it's a terrible movie. But not excellent.

 

[Thespiralgoeson]

What? It wasn't nearly as successful as the original Batman.

My bad. I was going by opening weekend alone, and not by overall sales.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

I think Batman Forever showed more ass than kicked it.

up: Witty.

 

[Palpadious]

Replace kicks with sucks, and I agree with you.

 

[Darkest Knight]

I LOVE Batman Forever and enjoy it moreso than Batman Begins.

SMH @ your tastes and opinions. As a Batman fan, this is almost as ridiculous to read as saying 2 + 2 = 8.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

SMH @ your tastes and opinions. As a Batman fan, this is almost as ridiculous to read as saying 2 + 2 = 8.

Let me guess; you see Batman as a religion, and because I do not see it exactly the way you see it (the only true Batman in your head), therefore I am a heretic who simply does not understand the character.

 

[Darkest Knight]

Maybe, Maybe not ...

In reality, it's just that you have poor taste. I'm not mad that you prefer that movie. It's just pretty funny considering most sane people would disagree with you.

 

[SHADOWBAT69]

Hm. Obviously someone doesnt know the complete history of the Batman character, or chooses to ignore it. Each of the Batman films have depicted different interpretations of the character, as has been done in the comic books. There isnt any one true definition of what Batman should be presented as, thats fact, even the original writers and artists changed the way he was perceived. But i guess all those who did the stories of the mid 40's to 60's had poor taste too. The truth is, there are so many closed minded "fans" of Batman that they refuse to see that there are different visions of this character and his world and that each of them appeal to many different people. The sooner everyone accpets this, the sooner everyone can simply enjoy just being a Batman fan.

 

[Darkest Knight]

Obviously someone has no clue what they're talking about. I'm not talking about the interpretation of the character. Hey, if you prfer the camp / tongue in cheek Batman ... be my guest, but I'm talking about the quality of the movie. The show Batman was QUALITY camp. It's like someone saying they prefer the taste of dog **** to chocolate. It just isn't normal.

 

[SHADOWBAT69]

No. Youre just proving my point. Its all about the different interpretations of the character and the way he is portrayed. There is nothing wrong with the quality of the films. They are presented in a manner that best fits those individual visions. Those different visions have appealed to different poeple on different levels due to their personal liking of the character. You obviously like Begins and the more realistsic approach to the character. Thats all good and fine. that is what appeals to you. If someone else says they like the more comic action version of the character with the larger than life atmoshpere, which touches on the 50's era Batman, you insult them. You made no direct reference to the "quality" of the movie. Thats all open to interpretation.