I watch B&R whenever I'm in a bad mood.
It really is a hysterical film when you take it for what it is.
It's a [blackout]cool[/blackout] film. Dont give it the [blackout]cold[/blackout] shoulder just because its not grim dark.
ahhhaaaa.... I actually agree with both of this.
JAK®;19850338 said:
As an adaption of 50's/60's Batman, and the Adam West TV show, B&R is an amazing film.
I know, that's what actually surprised me. It still fails to be a -true- reflection of the 60s show, but it veers really close. I always wanted to see how a third film might have fared, something that's more in the line of
Batman: The Brave and the Bold. Overtly campy, high on the kitsch, and maybe a step back to fabric-based costumes. Kurt Russell was rumoured for a 'Batman Triumphant', and I always thought that was what would happen. Oh well.
If that were true, then I would love B&R, but I don't. The difference, I think, is that the 60s TV show was plain and innocent silly fun with a good smattering of tongue-in-cheek dialogue to amuse mum and dad; B&R is a really cynical attempt to create a merchandising juggernaut stuffed full of pointless special effects, wasted star power, and the dumbest of possible scripts.
I hate it. I really do.
I recently got a copy of the old 1940s
THE BATMAN serials in glorious b&w. And it seems to carry the same ironic idea that Schumacher had - it tries to be both funny and serious at the same time, and the result is just awkward. I haven't finished watching all the episodes yet but it's strange to think that this series inspired a bunch of counter-culture types in the 60s to come up with a light-parody of Batman, that eventually became so iconic and pop-cultural that superheroes and comic books have forever become defined by it. But anyway, yes Schumacher failed to carry on the tongue-in-cheek tradition, even though he went real close to it. What ruined the film wasn't the fact that it was campy, it was the fact that the film was poorly made.
It's strange because it seems as though that only the antagonists (Carrey, Jones, Arnold, Thurman) knew what they needed to do. The Batmen in both films were out of place. Kilmer was watching too much of the animated series and thought (foolish man that he is) that he could actually become the Dark Knight, and Clooney...well... he just didn't have the passion with which West did the part.
It's sad because the films had some of the best talent that Hollywood had to offer at the time.
I actually liked O'Donnell as Robin, but once again the heroes were too serious in it. Yes, I said it. The Schumacher movies are terrible because they took themselves too seriously.
I actually thought Uma's performance as Ivy, fit very well (along with Carrey) as the modern ilk of the Adam West villains. But yes, everything else was a travesty of devastating proportions. B&R is the only Batman film I will refuse to see ever again.
Agreed

But I'll still watch it from time to time. I once tried watching it without the sound and some of the visual artwork was actually admirable. Well, almost.