Batman & Robin

The biggest/ funniest flaw in this movie is that Alfred created a plastic moulded coustume to his niece's exact measurements. How'd he get them? And how did he feel when creating the butt and breasts?

Complete with nipples. It's that kind of thing that makes this movie not only watchable, but damn near entertaining.
 
The movie sucked in 97 and sucks today as much as before.

The opnly bit that can be treasured is thatscene I mentioned in some other thread with Bruce and the dying Alfred talking about death, finishing with "I love you old man." The rest is the paradigm of what a really bad movie is. Unredeemable.
 
It's a hilarious movie to watch when you're drunk.
 
It was better than Superman IV.

The biggest/ funniest flaw in this movie is that Alfred created a plastic moulded coustume to his niece's exact measurements. How'd he get them? And how did he feel when creating the butt and breasts?

It was better and yes movie was entertaining.
 
It was better than Superman IV.

Only because it's longer.

The biggest/ funniest flaw in this movie is that Alfred created a plastic moulded coustume to his niece's exact measurements. How'd he get them? And how did he feel when creating the butt and breasts?

Not only that but he anticipated she was going to find out the secret in spite he insisted in not opening the CD. If he knew she was going to open it then why talk his nece against it? Dying Alfred seemed like he had a lot of time to waste in such useless games and precautions.
 
Superman 1v sucked cause Lex Luthro was lame and so was the storyline/plot. And Nuclear Man sucked as a villian.
 
Yeah, Batman & Robin sucked better.

Batman & Robin was far entertaining then Superman 4 which made no sense at all. Lex Luthro having a child run with him and Gene Hackman being totally campy as hell as Lex Luthor. Reminded me of Lex Luthor from Superman When Brainac Attacks movie. When Lex had that high pitch voice.

P.S. Nuchealer Man sucked as a villian.
 
Batman & Robin was far entertaining then Superman 4 which made no sense at all. Lex Luthro having a child run with him and Gene Hackman being totally campy as hell as Lex Luthor. Reminded me of Lex Luthor from Superman When Brainac Attacks movie. When Lex had that high pitch voice.

P.S. Nuclear Man sucked as a villian.
He had a nice Mullet though....:grin:
 
I have more fun watching Batman and Robin that I do Superman IV. The low production values and corner cutting hurt the Superman movie. At least the money spent on B&R is seen on the screen.
 
Where the hell did all the Nicole Kidman chatter go? My posts vanished!!!??
 
Batman & Robin was far entertaining then Superman 4 which made no sense at all. Lex Luthro having a child run with him and Gene Hackman being totally campy as hell as Lex Luthor. Reminded me of Lex Luthor from Superman When Brainac Attacks movie. When Lex had that high pitch voice.

P.S. Nuchealer Man sucked as a villian.

I can agree with this, though I've seen SIV like once and a long time ago.

But at this point, I mean, I find pratically useless to compare them. Both gets no star out of 5 or 10 or whatever. B&R is better than IV? Okee, but that's saying nothing no matter how true is.
 
B&R was really the first movie I saw in the theater that I walked out and said "that sucked." God it was soo bad that I kinda feel bad when Forever is lumped together with it. I don't know, I can watch the 3rd one without winching too much, but B&R is ridiculoso. Methinks the real problem with this is that though its based on a lighter interpretation of our caped friend, it takes place in a series that has set a serious precedent. I think it would work better stand alone but put it in the same universe where the joker likes war photography and the penguin bites folks noses is kinda weird (unless the explanation is that Bats cleaned up the town so good that there are only dumb crazy villains left.)


BTW one thing that I was shocked about was how huge Hancock really was:
Budget: 150m
Domestic take: 227m
Total take: 624 Million dollars

not a flop by any standard. Will Smith is worth 20m if he can do for your
film what he has for his last few films (that is make them horrible but profitable)

That doesn't totally invalidate his point though, he still has 3 examples of the bad being punished. (though it does throw the whole worldview into question because if Hancock wasn't punished then it was good.) I'm trying to make the point that a lot of times you will go to Boxofficemojo and be shocked at how good a movie that you hated did, also that those numbers mean nothing but the fact that there are dumb people everywhere.

Also I know its old as hell but if you haven't seen it look for the youtube video with all of the ice puns. It makes me laugh like a madman to this day.
"Allow me to break the ice"

Last point: I liked the spirit more than B&R. I think it was all about expectations.

I know that I said that was the last but I would be remiss if I didn't say that one of the worst parts of that film was that folks (Alan Moore and Paul Dini) had worked hard to make 2 of the characters in that movie (who were worthless before them) into characters that actually made sense and worked and what did the film do with them? returned them to their worthless roots.
 
Last edited:
Yeah but under your standard of 12th highest grossing is 12th best, Hancock is the 4th best movie of 2008. (I know you don't actually believe this, because if you did then you would say that B&R was better than "L.A. Confidential" which cannot be said by someone who is not either a liar, a troll, or a fool)

I know that your real point is probably not "B&R was good" but "B&R is not as bad as they say" but you really set yourself up on that one.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,268
Messages
22,077,218
Members
45,876
Latest member
Crazygamer3011
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"