The acting is appallingly bad (even Clooney can admit to that).
I don't mind the cast, I found them pretty entertaining, especially Arnold Schwarzenegger and Uma Thurman as the villains. Michael Gough gave the best performance.
The story is paper thin, and some of it doesn't even make sense in the context of a fantasy movie (growing plants on a dead frozen planet?).
Makes perfect sense. The purpose of the freeze gun was to kill people, not to freeze the planet. As the sun would have melted the ice (hence, that was Batman's plan, to undo the effects of the freeze ray). After everyone is dead, Poison Ivy would probably killed Mr Freeze, then started growing her plants.
The only half way decent character in the whole movie is Alfred.
At least we can both agree that the late Michael Gough gave a good performance.
As you've been told numerous times by several people, myself included, it's got nothing to do with appreciating camp. Many of us like camp, it's one of the main reasons why the 1960's show was and still is so popular. Batman and Robin is just a bad movie for the aforementioned reasons. Plain and simple. You don't even have the excuse of saying it was trying to emulate the 60's show (which isn't a defense anyway because the result is still the same regardless of their intentions) because Schumacher definitively said that was never their intention.
Where? In the Batman and Robin commentary or on the docs in the 2005 dvd set?
Calling it pure genius is like calling Uwe Boll this generation's Steven Spielberg. If you or anyone else like the movie, then that's fine. As we've firmly proven even the worst movies have fans (Catwoman is seemingly more popular than B&R lol). But you keep trying to constantly bombard everyone with the idea they they're all wrong for thinking it's a bad movie. Saying you never heard a good objective reason for why it's hated is a sheer falsity. You just don't agree with the good objective reasons. Much like nobody buys your reasons that it's pure genius just because it's got camp and good comic book action.
All I've heard of the reasons you've given is 'bad acting' and 'paper-thin plot'. That's a very common criticism of movies, anyway. Acting is yet another art form that can be done in a variety styles.. fair enough if you don't like the acting, but it's only 'bad' if it fails to achieve what it sets out to do.
As for plot, it doesn't always have to be the strongest part of the movie, either. Some movies have little to no plot. Some movies are more based in visuals or ideas. Not saying Batman and Robin doesn't have a good plot, because the plot is entirely serviceable for the kind of movie it is.
1. Batbutts like I wanna see that in a Bat film I even hated that in Forever too
Fair enough, but there might be women or gay men who like that sort of thing.. For example, I've never heard of anyone complaining about the closeup of Alicia Silverstone's breasts in the Batgirl costume.
2. Nipples I didn't like it then don't like it now. I don't understand why Schumacher accomplished here by putting nipples on the suit
To emulate the statues of ancient Greek gods (ancient mythology were the first 'superhero' type tales).
3. Bat Credit card Why would he carry one or even have one?
Because he's a billionaire and probably owns his own bank so he can issue himself a credit card.
4. Robin (Just annoying I love the way they gave his origins in Forever he wasn't annoying like in B&R
What's wrong with Robin? You could even call Batman and Robin a Nightwing origin movie.
5. Villains Too many in this film, Bane is wasted, Ivy was ok and Freeze was badly acted like Clooney as Batman
Bane - yeah, he wasn't exactly like the comics, but the fact he was even put in the movie when he'd only been introduced a few years previously and was not as well known as the other Batman villains... is pretty remarkable IMO.
Freeze - Arnold gave an entertaining performance, it wasn't dramatic like something out of the Nolan movies because it wasn't that type of film.
Ivy - more than "ok", she was fantastic in the role.. and even won a Blockbuster Entertainment Award in 1998.
6. Batgirl (Making her as Alfred's niece from England) Why would she have American accent if she studied or lived in London? Having Batman & Robin as heroes was enough.
Batgirl was introduced to continue the theme of family. Also to give a role model to young girls, as stated by Schumacher (see the Making of Batman and Robin)
As for the American accent, it's possible she's an
expatriate.
7. The music I understand if composer uses same theme but teaks it around so that it's not the same. I liked Elliot G's theme for Schumacher's Batman but he's just lazy here
Some of the themes were re-used, but we got new themes as well. The same with the other Batman scores by Hans Zimmer and Danny Elfman.
8 Clooney as Batman I don't blame him well maybe a little but even he saw what a joke the film is here I reckon if given another chance and give proper script he would have played the character differently.
Maybe Clooney doesn't personally like the film. He's entitled to his opinion.
9. Noen Gotham I didn't like it in Forever and same in B&R
The 'neon look' actually emulates the bright colours of a comic book, and gives the film a distinct visual style.
10. Just like Burton Schumacher went over the top with the cash I still think Forever was decent film than B&R. But then Jim Carrey is likeable in my opinion.
But with both Batman Returns and Batman and Robin... we got something a little more extreme, and perhaps more interesting than their relatively 'moderate' predecessors. They weren't playing it as 'safe' anymore, and let go of their creative inhibitions.
Some would argue it didn't work, but I see what both director's were going for in their artistic vision. And it was a brave and bold (pardon the pun) experiment.
t:
