The Official Batman & Robin Thread

[Mr_336]

Absolutely. It's there simply because Robin needed something to do.

Another interesting thing is that Batman & Robin argues against Nightwing. In the script, Robin even declares that he's now called Nightwing (and he is wearing a Nightwing costume) and he tries to leave Batman and be a solo crimefighter. It basically says Dick going solo is a petulant and arrogant idea, and he belongs by Batman's side.

You can understand why they cut the line, as audiences watching a film called Batman & Robin would be bemused to find Robin calling himself Nightwing instead. But it kind of spoils a specific subplot in the movie.

Now I'm convince that right there might be a catalyst in Dan Didio's not so subtle disdain for Dick as Nightwing and the entire concept of him being his own hero.

These days we see the B&R Robin suit act as the official Nightwing suit for the New 52 complete with Grant Morrison including a scene in Batman Inc where Nightwing put a cape on himself bearing a vague resemblance to the film cape

 

[Uncle Radiation]

Yeah, Schumacher and Goldsman and the Batchelors did some intresting things in those two movies, it's a shame all people see are neon and nipples.

 

[The Joker]

The problem is the half way decent moments are few and far between, and are drowned out by the camp and silliness. More so in Batman and Robin than Batman Forever. If Mr. Freeze had more scenes in the tone of him watching his wedding video of his wife as opposed to ones more in the tone of him wearing polar bear slippers and dressing gown making his men sing Mr. White Christmas, these movies might have been decent and more respected than they are.

That's the frustrating thing. Schumacher makes good movies. You can see glimpses of the potentially good Batman movies we could have had in scenes like Freeze watching his wedding video, or when Bruce tries to counsel Dick in BF. Thank WB for insisting the franchise go more campy and kid friendly.

 

[CountOrlok]

The camp and silliness are what makes this a cult movie. Like Rocky Horror Picture Show or Troll 2.

 

[The Joker]

Batman and Robin is not considered a cult movie by the consensus. Unlike the Rocky Horror Picture Show, it's hated and extremely unpopular. With good reason. It's not even gained a small cult following like Troll 2 has; http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/cult-fan-base-forms-troll-worst-movie/story?id=10565306

 

[CountOrlok]

http://events.cornell.edu/event/batman_robin_film_screening_with_live_comedic_commentary

 

[CountOrlok]

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/...-cult-followings_n_3536589.html#slide=2649776

^Batman and Robin included.

 

[The Joker]

http://events.cornell.edu/event/batman_robin_film_screening_with_live_comedic_commentary

Yeah so? How does a couple of comedians roasting the movie in a commentary make it a cult? It looks like a comedy event where comedians rip the movie and make the audience laugh. Not fans going to enjoy the movie itself, like say in the Troll 2 example.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/...-cult-followings_n_3536589.html#slide=2649776

^Batman and Robin included.

Where exactly is the proof of the large cult following of the movie as that article claims? My Troll 2 article gives examples of it:

'Two decades later, audiences seem to think that "Troll 2" is so terrible, it's actually good. A rabid fan base has formed around the hilarious horror movie and theaters from Austin to Los Angeles are hosting special screenings to sold-out audiences.'

http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/cult-fan-base-forms-troll-worst-movie/story?id=10565306

Yours makes a false unsupported claim.

http://fearofaghostplanet.com/2012/09/best-worst-movie-or-worst-movie-batman-robin-1997/

The opinion of one guy doesn't make a cult following lol.

 

[CountOrlok]

Yeah so? How does a couple of comedians roasting the movie in a commentary make it a cult? It looks like a comedy event where comedians rip the movie and make the audience laugh. Not fans going to enjoy the movie itself, like say in the Troll 2 example.

That's why people go to screenings of movies like Troll 2 and The Room. To laugh and have a good time. It's fun. I've never been to any, but I know of them.

Where exactly is the proof of the large cult following of the movie as that article claims? My Troll 2 article gives examples of it:

'Two decades later, audiences seem to think that "Troll 2" is so terrible, it's actually good. A rabid fan base has formed around the hilarious horror movie and theaters from Austin to Los Angeles are hosting special screenings to sold-out audiences.'

http://abcnews.go.com/Nightline/cult-fan-base-forms-troll-worst-movie/story?id=10565306

Yours makes a false unsupported claim.

No, it doesn't have the fanbase that Troll 2 has. But it still has a fanbase. That article in the Huffington Post agrees with me.

The opinion of one guy doesn't make a cult following lol.

I deleted that link from my post, because that guy hates the movie. There's plenty of reviews out there of people who like the movie, though. I'm not going to spam the forum trying to post every one I can find.

 

[The Joker]

That's why people go to screenings of movies like Troll 2 and The Room. To laugh and have a good time. It's fun. I've never been to any, but I know of them.

That's people actually going to watch the movie themselves and enjoying them. What you posted there is some kind of screening where a bunch of comedians are going to rip on the movie all throughout the whole thing in a live roasting commentary, rather than people going to watch the movie itself. It's people going to listen to comedians slag the movie off.

No, it doesn't have the fanbase that Troll 2 has. But it still has a fanbase. That article in the Huffington Post agrees with me.

The Huffington Post doesn't substantiate it. Not that they have a stellar reputation anyway:

http://www.stormfront.org/forum/t1006859/

http://www.foxnews.com/entertainmen...ue-retraction-apology-after-falsely-accusing/

http://www.breitbart.com/Big-Journalism/2013/08/01/Huffington-post-retracts-mcdonalds-slam

http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/...t-marissa-mayer-buying-san-francisco-mansion/

http://dailycaller.com/2012/08/15/h...sely-accusing-fox-of-doctoring-romney-speech/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...for-lack-of-standards-in-scott-brown-article/

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/...-of-Huffington-Post-8220-wellness-8221-editor

I deleted that link from my post, because that guy hates the movie. There's plenty of reviews out there of people who like the movie, though. I'm not going to spam the forum trying to post every one I can find.

They're minorities. You can find reviews defending Catwoman 2004, too. The numbers are not big enough to indicate a cult following. When movies have cult followings they're easy to find. Or easy to find proof they are attracting groups of cult fans like the sold out screenings Troll 2 gets.

 

[CountOrlok]

There's no way in hell that Catwoman has the kind of popularity that Batman and Robin has. But if you're comparing B&R to Troll 2, that's a little unfair because that is considered the best worst movie ever, and even had a documentary made about it. It's hard to measure popularity for cult films, but Batman and Robin is definitely up there in popularity.

http://whatculture.com/film/batman-robin-10-reasons-its-criminally-underrated.php/2

Find me one good review of Catwoman, that goes into detail why its good (and isn't just trolling), other than that Halle Berry looks good in the catsuit. Nobody of any repute is going to defend that piece of **** movie.

 

[The Joker]

There's no way in hell that Catwoman has the kind of popularity that Batman and Robin has.

You could actually argue Batman and Robin is even more unpopular. For example Empire Magazine did a vote with it's readers for the 50 worst movies of all time. Thousands of votes came in, and Catwoman came in at #15, while Batman and Robin got #1: http://www.empireonline.com/features/50-worst-movies-ever/default.asp?film=15

Now that's not me saying I agree with those rankings, or even some of the choices on their list, but factually it's just an example of how hated the movie is. More so than Catwoman based on these stats.

There's only a 0.3 rating difference between them on IMDb:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0327554/reference

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118688/reference

Ditto on Rotten tomatoes audience rating:

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1077027-batman_and_robin/

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/catwoman/

There's not some notable gap of respect or popularity between these movies.

But if you're comparing B&R to Troll 2, that's a little unfair because that is considered the best worst movie ever, and even had a documentary made about it. It's hard to measure popularity for cult films, but Batman and Robin is definitely up there in popularity.

You mentioned Troll 2 and the Rocky Horror Picture Show as a comparison not me. I was just using your chosen examples against Batman and Robin.

http://whatculture.com/film/batman-robin-10-reasons-its-criminally-underrated.php/2

Find me one good review of Catwoman, that goes into detail why its good (and isn't just trolling), other than that Halle Berry looks good in the catsuit.

http://www.efilmcritic.com/review.php?movie=10221&reviewer=416

http://enormouschasms.wordpress.com/2012/10/08/catwoman-2004-and-elektra-2005/

http://www.film4.com/reviews/2004/catwoman

 

[CountOrlok]

You could actually argue Batman and Robin is even more unpopular. For example Empire Magazine did a vote with it's readers for the 50 worst movies of all time. Thousands of votes came in, and Catwoman came in at #15, while Batman and Robin got #1: http://www.empireonline.com/features/50-worst-movies-ever/default.asp?film=15

Now that's not me saying I agree with those rankings, or even some of the choices on their list, but factually it's just an example of how hated the movie is. More so than Catwoman based on these stats.

There's only a 0.3 rating difference between them on IMDb:

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0327554/reference

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0118688/reference

Ditto on Rotten tomatoes audience rating:

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1077027-batman_and_robin/

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/catwoman/

There's not some notable gap of respect or popularity between these movies.

I won't comment on the rankings because that doesn't really indicate anything. No one is trying to argue that Batman and Robin is a mainstream, popular movie.

As for the Empire poll, of course Batman and Robin got more votes because it's a Batman movie. It's always going to raise more passion and ire because of how popular Batman is with audiences.

http://www.efilmcritic.com/review.php?movie=10221&reviewer=416

That review is so flaky it's hard to tell. Some people have bizarre tastes. "a stylish piece of kitten-with-a-whip empowerment pulp".. yeah, I guess you could say that..

Ok, I concede, you can find a good review on any movie no matter how crap it is. Batman and Robin still has much more of a following than Catwoman does, though, all you have to do is compare the number of positive reviews with Catwoman.

http://enormouschasms.wordpress.com/2012/10/08/catwoman-2004-and-elektra-2005/

NOT good:

"Ultimately though, both films end up being, a trifle yawningly, about “finding yourself” and thus (?) saying goodbye to your current potential boyfriend. Argh. Both creations deserve better…"

http://www.film4.com/reviews/2004/catwoman

"Daft and moderately entertaining. "

Great review, also.

 

[The Joker]

I won't comment on the rankings because that doesn't really indicate anything. No one is trying to argue that Batman and Robin is a mainstream, popular movie.

The rankings indicate people don't like Batman and Robin much better than Catwoman.

As for the Empire poll, of course Batman and Robin got more votes because it's a Batman movie. It's always going to raise more passion and ire because of how popular Batman is with audiences.

Don't talk nonsense. This list has Spider-Man, Superman, The Matrix, M. Night Shayalman, Transformers, and Jaws related movies also. All major mainstream franchises based on mega popular characters. But according to you just because it's Batman it supersedes all of them?

Talk about denial.

That review is so flaky it's hard to tell. Some people have bizarre tastes. "a stylish piece of kitten-with-a-whip empowerment pulp".. yeah, I guess you could say that..

It's a positive review. It was also submitted on RT.

Ok, I concede, you can find a good review on any movie no matter how crap it is. Batman and Robin still has much more of a following than Catwoman does, though, all you have to do is compare the number of positive reviews with Catwoman.

The number of positive reviews where? On RT? It's got 17 positive ones on RT. B&R only has 8.

NOT good:

"Ultimately though, both films end up being, a trifle yawningly, about “finding yourself” and thus (?) saying goodbye to your current potential boyfriend. Argh. Both creations deserve better…"

The article was defending the movies for what they tried to do, even though they didn't totally succeed. But since that didn't satisfy you here's a couple more positive ones:

http://www.sfgate.com/movies/article/A-feisty-feminist-feline-with-a-taste-for-sushi-2739485.php

http://articles.latimes.com/2004/jul/23/entertainment/et-Catwoman23

"Daft and moderately entertaining. "

Great review, also.

For Catwoman it is yes.

 

[CountOrlok]

The rankings indicate people don't like Batman and Robin much better than Catwoman.

From critics.. but audience rankings are 59% for Batman and Robin compared to 37% for Catwoman.

Don't talk nonsense. This list has Spider-Man, Superman, The Matrix, M. Night Shayalman, Transformers, and Jaws related movies also. All major mainstream franchises based on mega popular characters. But according to you just because it's Batman it supersedes all of them?

Talk about denial.

Batman is bigger than all of those franchises.

http://boxofficemojo.com/franchises/?view=Franchise&sort=sumgross&order=DESC&p=.htm

The number of positive reviews where? On RT? It's got 17 positive ones on RT. B&R only has 8.

The weighted average (3.3 for Catwoman and 3.6 for Batman and Robin) from IMDB is proof enough. That's based on 71539 votes for Catwoman and 152838 for Batman and Robin.

The article was defending the movies for what they tried to do, even though they didn't totally succeed. But since that didn't satisfy you here's a couple more positive ones:

http://www.sfgate.com/movies/article/A-feisty-feminist-feline-with-a-taste-for-sushi-2739485.php

http://articles.latimes.com/2004/jul/23/entertainment/et-Catwoman23

Ok, I get the point.

 

[The Joker]

From critics.. but audience rankings are 59% for Batman and Robin compared to 37% for Catwoman.

Where are you getting those percentages from? It can't be RT. Catwoman has an 18% audience rating there while Batman and Robin only has 16%:

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/catwoman/

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1077027-batman_and_robin/

Batman is bigger than all of those franchises.

http://boxofficemojo.com/franchises/?view=Franchise&sort=sumgross&order=DESC&p=.htm

Oh for goodness sake. That's because he's had more movies than most of them! But since you insist on being so pedantic on this point, here's another vote list for worst movies of all time, another one in the thousands, complete with actual numbers for each movie;

http://www.rifftrax.com/top-10-worst-movies-ever-2013-edition

Batman and Robin was beaten by The Last Airbender and the Twylight movies, which are definitely not bigger than Batman financially. Also as you can see B&R beat Catwoman on the list again by over eleven thousand votes. Once again more stats showing Batman and Robin is more unpopular than Catwoman.

If you try to deny this one, too, then I give up on you. You can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink.

The weighted average (3.3 for Catwoman and 3.6 for Batman and Robin) from IMDB is proof enough. That's based on 71539 votes for Catwoman and 152838 for Batman and Robin.

Actually that would count towards Catwoman's favor because it's got way less numbers of votes but it's still only 0.3 away from B&R's score.

Ok, I get the point.

Hallelujah. There's at least one point you can agree on

 

[CountOrlok]

Where are you getting those percentages from? It can't be RT. Catwoman has an 18% audience rating there while Batman and Robin only has 16%:

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/catwoman/

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1077027-batman_and_robin/

Hang on a second. Audience reviews for Catwoman on RT are 9% http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/catwoman/reviews/?type=user and Batman and Robin 12% http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1077027-batman_and_robin/reviews/?type=user

..the 59% and 39% are the percent rankings of RT users who want to see the movie.

Oh for goodness sake. That's because he's had more movies than most of them! But since you insist on being so pedantic on this point, here's another vote list for worst movies of all time, another one in the thousands, complete with actual numbers for each movie;

http://www.rifftrax.com/top-10-worst-movies-ever-2013-edition

Batman and Robin was beaten by The Last Airbender and the Twylight movies, which are definitely not bigger than Batman financially. Also as you can see B&R beat Catwoman on the list again by over eleven thousand votes. Once again more stats showing Batman and Robin is more unpopular than Catwoman.

Rifftrax is for people who are into bad movies, isn't it? Empire Online is more about general movie goers.

Actually that would count towards Catwoman's favor because it's got way less numbers of votes but it's still only 0.3 away from B&R's score.

I haven't studied statistics in a long time, but I assume that's why they use the 'weighted average' and not just the 'average'.

The weighted mean is similar to an arithmetic mean (the most common type of average), where instead of each of the data points contributing equally to the final average, some data points contribute more than others. The notion of weighted mean plays a role in descriptive statistics and also occurs in a more general form in several other areas of mathematics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weighted_arithmetic_mean

 

[The Joker]

Hang on a second. Audience reviews for Catwoman on RT are 9% http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/catwoman/reviews/?type=user and Batman and Robin 12% http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1077027-batman_and_robin/reviews/?type=user

..the 59% and 39% are the percent rankings of RT users who want to see the movie.

......you're kidding me right?

The 9% and 12% are the critic percentages. The audience percentages are over on the right hand side, you know under the heading that says Audience.

Rifftrax is for people who are into bad movies, isn't it? Empire Online is more about general movie goers.

Absolutely not. They're a website that do hilarious commentaries on movies. All kinds of movies. From popular ones to bad ones. Here watch their video on their main page explaining what they're all about:

http://www.rifftrax.com/

I haven't studied statistics in a long time, but I assume that's why they use the 'weighted average' and not just the 'average'.

The weighted mean is similar to an arithmetic mean (the most common type of average), where instead of each of the data points contributing equally to the final average, some data points contribute more than others. The notion of weighted mean plays a role in descriptive statistics and also occurs in a more general form in several other areas of mathematics.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weighted_arithmetic_mean

I know all about stats. That's why Catwoman's score is more impressive because the total number of votes is not as much as B&R's, meaning there's much more numbers to crunch on the B&R score and still only comes out 0.3 ahead of Catwoman's, even though Catwoman's is 81299 votes behind according to your numbers.

 

[CountOrlok]

......you're kidding me right?

The 9% and 12% are the critic percentages. The audience percentages are over on the right hand side, you know under the heading that says Audience.

I can't find the audience percentages. I don't use RT much, but it looks different to the screenshot you posted. Maybe there are different versions for different regions or something.

Absolutely not. They're a website that do hilarious commentaries on movies. All kinds of movies. From popular ones to bad ones. Here watch their video on their main page explaining what they're all about:

http://www.rifftrax.com/

Yeah, they..... charge you for it. No wonder.

 

[The Joker]

I can't find the audience percentages. I don't use RT much, but it looks different to the screenshot you posted. Maybe there are different versions for different regions or something.

That's bizarre. I've never heard of that before. I'm from Ireland. All the U.S. members here never have any trouble finding the audience score (assuming you're from the U.S.)

Yeah, they..... charge you for it. No wonder.

Charge you for what? Buying their commentaries? It's not relevant to the point we were discussing.

 

[Uncle Radiation]

The problem is the half way decent moments are few and far between, and are drowned out by the camp and silliness. More so in Batman and Robin than Batman Forever. If Mr. Freeze had more scenes in the tone of him watching his wedding video of his wife as opposed to ones more in the tone of him wearing polar bear slippers and dressing gown making his men sing Mr. White Christmas, these movies might have been decent and more respected than they are.

That's the frustrating thing. Schumacher makes good movies. You can see glimpses of the potentially good Batman movies we could have had in scenes like Freeze watching his wedding video, or when Bruce tries to counsel Dick in BF. Thank WB for insisting the franchise go more campy and kid friendly.

This is going to sound weird, but I completely agreed with your up to a few years ago. But I have seen these films endless times, and it gets to a point where I completely understand what Schumacher was doing...

Basically, Schumacher's Batman films are told almost 100% through visuals. You can watch them without sound and still understand them. The dialogue is supposed to be throwaway, that's why it's all puns....so while everyone complains about the puns and gives them so much attention, Schumacher never intended anyone to pay much attention to them. It's just to give the characters something to say.

Watch B&R on silent, then watch it again with the sound. You'll pick up subtleties and bits of character you never noticed before. When you see it again with sound, you realize how unnecessary all the dialogue is.

 

[The Joker]

This is going to sound weird, but I completely agreed with your up to a few years ago. But I have seen these films endless times, and it gets to a point where I completely understand what Schumacher was doing...

Basically, Schumacher's Batman films are told almost 100% through visuals. You can watch them without sound and still understand them. The dialogue is supposed to be throwaway, that's why it's all puns....so while everyone complains about the puns and gives them so much attention, Schumacher never intended anyone to pay much attention to them. It's just to give the characters something to say.

Watch B&R on silent, then watch it again with the sound. You'll pick up subtleties and bits of character you never noticed before. When you see it again with sound, you realize how unnecessary all the dialogue is.

No it doesn't sound weird. But Schumacher only had one agenda making these movies:

Joel Schumacher admits his Batman was just about selling toys

In a recent interview, Schumacher admitted they were just in it for the money. And that meant targeting children. "Our job was to entertain the whole family," he said. "To make it fun and sell a lot of toys. It was a franchise."

http://www.blastr.com/2012/12/joel_schumacher_admits_hi.php

That's the reason why they call Schumacher's movies the toyetic Batman. They were as Schumacher said there targeted squarely at kids and to sell toys. Batman Returns got this backlash for being too dark and disturbing for kids. So WB completely camped up the sequels and oriented them towards kids. It's not really Schumacher's fault these movies are so bad. He was just following the orders of WB to take the franchise in this campy direction. Outside of the Batman movies he's a good director, and if he had been allowed to do a proper Batman movie I think he'd have done a great job. It's a classic example of studio interference screwing up movies.

I also wholly disagree that you could watch B&R silently and understand everything. Barbara chastising Dick and Bruce for making Alfred live a life of servitude, Batman and Robin arguing about trust and being a team, Bruce asking Alfred is he sick, and does he regret his life at Wayne Manor etc. Basically the half way decent scenes in the movie where the movie actually has something worthwhile to say, and isn't about stealing diamonds, growing mutant plants, motorcycle drag races, and freezing the city so Ivy and Freeze can live as 'Adam and Evil'.

 

[Green Goblin]

This movie is so bad it's good.

I watch it once every year, usually around Christmas and I get entertained.

 

[CountOrlok]

No it doesn't sound weird. But Schumacher only had one agenda making these movies:



http://www.blastr.com/2012/12/joel_schumacher_admits_hi.php

That's the reason why they call Schumacher's movies the toyetic Batman. They were as Schumacher said there targeted squarely at kids and to sell toys. Batman Returns got this backlash for being too dark and disturbing for kids. So WB completely camped up the sequels and oriented them towards kids. It's not really Schumacher's fault these movies are so bad. He was just following the orders of WB to take the franchise in this campy direction. Outside of the Batman movies he's a good director, and if he had been allowed to do a proper Batman movie I think he'd have done a great job. It's a classic example of studio interference screwing up movies.

I also wholly disagree that you could watch B&R silently and understand everything. Barbara chastising Dick and Bruce for making Alfred live a life of servitude, Batman and Robin arguing about trust and being a team, Bruce asking Alfred is he sick, and does he regret his life at Wayne Manor etc. Basically the half way decent scenes in the movie where the movie actually has something worthwhile to say.

Every Batman movie is made to sell toys, Schumacher is the only one with the balls to admit it. He even sends it up in the movie: "That's why every Poison Ivy action figure comes with him".

 

[Stryderk]

Check out this funny video that talks about Batman and Robin.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nVT3xd6kDk0