Why all the bad feelings towards Schumacher?

[Superwoman Prime]

lol.
Ive heard enough complaints about B & R. Everyone knows it's terrible. The end.

and Uma Thurman isn't sexy. Ever.

I promise to never tease you for your sexuality. This is modern society after all, and I'm about as liberal as they get.

 

[thcapedcrusader]

not a big fan of campy batman - the character is dark, let's keep it that way. bat credit card eh? ok...

 

[MrQuinn]

I promise to never tease you for your sexuality. This is modern society after all, and I'm about as liberal as they get.

um..okay...sorry I like women who are actually attractive. Oops, my bad.

Maybe I'll try to go for ugly broads in the future.

 

[Superwoman Prime]

um..okay...sorry I like women who are actually attractive. Oops, my bad.

Maybe I'll try to go for ugly broads in the future.

*shakes head*

 

[MrQuinn]

*shakes head in agreement*

 

[DarkKnight245]

I watched Forever again tonight and I realized how much I miss Burton and his darker depiction of Batman. I prefer my Batman to be dark and brooding. Which why I liked both Burton films. but Returns stands out the most to me as far as Batman's darkness sure he was a killer but in the comics around the 30's and 40's Batman was a very dark character and I feel Burton pulled that off. It's a shame that Returns was Burton's last hurrah with the Batman franchise. He should have done Forever IMO. Nolan is doing a fantastic job though.

 

[thcapedcrusader]

I watched Forever again tonight and I realized how much I miss Burton and his darker depiction of Batman. I prefer my Batman to be dark and brooding. Which why I liked both Burton films. but Returns stands out the most to me as far as Batman's darkness sure he was a killer but in the comics around the 30's and 40's Batman was a very dark character and I feel Burton pulled that off. It's a shame that Returns was Burton's last hurrah with the Batman franchise. He should have done Forever IMO. Nolan is doing a fantastic job though.

agreed!

 

[NameIsn'tBuddy]

IMO, the best adaptation of Batman to film was Tim Burton’s 1989 film. It depicted Batman as a crazy person hell bent on beating up minorities in alleyways. Frank Miller invented Batman, forget Kane or Finger. The Nolan films are well made, but the theatricality of the character is lost to realism. Batman is a walking Freudian nightmare, and the only thing that satisfies his lust for justice, are the screams of criminals. Bruce Wayne stopped ageing when his parents were killed, and he never had the chance to fully grow up. Instead of working past the trauma of losing his loved ones, he made a childhood promise to avenge their deaths as a modern day Zorro.

The version of the character I enjoy the most is even darker than anything depicted in the films thus far. I like the idea of a crazy, bald, homeless Batman, beating the living piss out of every criminal in Gotham, including cops. Even with this preconceived version of the character, I can still enjoy the Schumacher films for what they are. Frank Miller’s version of the character is quite different than the Schumacher films, and the Nolan Films, but I still enjoy them both as creative entities of the Batman. So stop complaining, and nitpicking movies to death. Their purpose is to entertain, and all of the Batman films have succeeded in that.

 

[Ziggyman]

We should applaud this guy! Without his movies we wouldn't of gotten BB or TDK...After all...He did apologize!!!

Sorry if this has been posted before...I just saw this...And I thought it was post worthy...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6epsGrcuTs&feature=related

 

[Pfeiffer-Pfan]

We can't always get what we want... but damn it, Burton needed to do a third movie...


Saying that... neither of Schumacher's movies are the raping crimes people make them out to be. It was a version of the character, it didn't work...

We moved on...

And got Batman Begins and The Dark Knight as a result. t:

 

[AmazinUncleBen]

We should applaud this guy! Without his movies we wouldn't of gotten BB or TDK...After all...He did apologize!!!

Sorry if this has been posted before...I just saw this...And I thought it was post worthy...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=r6epsGrcuTs&feature=related

Poor guy, I have no hard feelings, when I was 10 I thought Batman and Robin was a good movie and I now got BB and TDK so its all water under the bridge.

 

[Ziggyman]

Poor guy, I have no hard feelings, when I was 10 I thought Batman and Robin was a good movie and I now got BB and TDK so its all water under the bridge.

Yeah...I agree...I use to love the movie...Now that I know better...It could of been good...I also kind of liked "Forever"...It was goofy at first...Now I just see it as over the top...More so Tommy than Jim...I'm Canadian...I might be biased...Though!

 

[ChrisBaleBatman]

Schumacher sucks.

That's all I've got.

For now.

 

[Alchemyst]

who knows, Schumacher probably had no say so in the whole thing, it was a decision that was made by the studio. Silly if you ask me to take Batman in a lighter direction, but that was something that WB wanted to have done, i guess in order to draw in younger fans and not depict Batman as being completely violent and dark. But if it werent for those Schumacher movies, we probably wouldnt have BB and TDK

 

[jabbatheridge]

Batman Forever was released when I was about fourteen and at the time I quite liked it. Two Face and Riddler were two of my favourite Bat villains and seeing them teaming up was a treat. However I watched it again more recently when it was on TV and it hasn't aged at all well. Some of the dialogue is cringeworthy, the neon lighting looks ridiculous and I'm just not as big a fan of it as I was.

Batman And Robin however was garbage from the moment it was released IMHO. Arnie as Mr Freeze was rubbish, basically he was just Arnie with a freeze gun instead of the standard canon, all the ice jokes were appauling, Bane was horrendous and there were tons of horrible in jokes and winks like the Bat Credit Card scene that just made no sense. I'm not against the campy Batman and enjoyed the Adam West series, but that was done with a sense of style. You knew it was about that from the beginning. The Schumacher films didn't seem to know what they wanted to be and I've nothing against them being camp, but they didn't have wit and were the wrong kind of camp IMHO.

If some people like that film good for them, it wouldn't do for us all to be the same, but I think the fact that the vast majority of fans actually hate it and the WB didn't make a Batman film for like eight years afterwards says alot about it.

 

["V"]

I don't understand why people feel sorry for Shumacher. It wasn't as if he had a gun pointed to his head; he took his thirty pieces of silver and knew he was making a film with no integrity. The studio may have wanted a lighter tone, but Schumacher still made terrible decisions like making virtually every line some kind of pun; to have Bat credit cards; neon lights; frozen dogs taking a leak; and George Clooney playing himself as both Batman and Bruce Wayne! It's not like Schumacher was some brilliant visionary who had his film taken out of his hands and butchered; his film was always going to be fluff. I will never feel sorry for somebody who had two opportunities to make a Batman film.

 

[Superwoman Prime]

Schumacher sucks.

That's all I've got.

For now.

We've already established that he sucks. But bringing up his sexual preferences at every turn isn't getting us anywhere.

 

[Pyro Man]

I have an opinion that's not popular with alot of people. I'm not really a huge fan of any of the first four Batman films. I liked Batman 89 but alot of stuff bugged me about it, same goes for Batman Returns. However, despite what I saw as flaws in the character development were more than made up for cause Burton kept a good essence of the characters and made a great atmosphere. And the films were both well written in alot of ways. I just didn't think they were all that special.

On the other hand, Batman Forever and Batman and Robin were both really bad. Michael Gough manages to be a redeeming quality in both films (barely in the second one). In Forever Kilmer did the best he could with what he was given and I dug his version of Batman. And Nicole Kidman was really hot and managed to make the movie not so bad. Some of the action scenes weren't so bad. On the other hand, all the homoeroticism, underdeveloped characters and awfully done villains killed it. I mean 60's Batman was campy but it knew it was campy. Batman Forever tries to be serious in too many scenes and it just kills any appeal the campiness would have.

Batman and Robin shares a number of the flaws but the flaws that were already in Forever are even worse and there's added flaws. I do not have any idea how it was possible but Schumacher managed to make both of the major females in the film seem unattractive. The writing is atrocious. Poor, poor Michael Gough only barely salvages some of his lines. Ahnold was never a good actor. Clooney could have been a good Bruce Wayne/Batman but not with that script. And they just ruined so many characters that could have been done well. It's not that hard to make a good popcorn flick but still have well rounded entertaining characters. Look at Iron Man. So you say it's not aimed at children. Fine, look at either of the first two Spider-man films. Both have good character development and never get dark to the point of not being fun entertainment.

I don't hate either of these films because they are campy. I hate them because they are awfully written, badly acted for the most part and while yes the Batman character can be adapted many ways it doesn't mean we should have to appreciate two films that adapt the character a certain way and do a bad job of it.

Your argument fails. There is no reason I should have to appreciate these films.

You say that I'm not a true fan if I don't appreciate every interpretation of the character. I'd argue that you're not a real fan cause you'll just lie down and let any studio pour a pile of crap on you and call it Batman and not care. Aren't the real fans those interested in fighting to have the best possible depiction of the character reach the screen?

 

[Bads316]

If everything within the Batman cannon was presented in the same way as the two Schumacher films then there aint no way Id be on here or in anyway consider myself to be a fan.

Along with Godzilla '98 these films are the bar by which all bad films will be measured. May they burn in hell.......on the other hand if it werent for them we wouldnt be enjoying what we have now in Begins and Dark Knight - ''the night is darkest just before the dawn'' QFT

 

[justinianus]

[quote="V";15474221]I will never feel sorry for somebody who had two opportunities to make a Batman film.[/quote]
I will never feel sorry for someone that has a paycheque that makes him a "Bruce Wayne" compared to the average guy that works office hours.

Anyway, these films suck bad, I love to bash and make fun of them, the same way I enjoy watching with my friends some other brainless movies (e.g. Chuck Norris actioners) simply for the fun of it, but there are no more hard feelings about them. We were kids (some 15, some 16) year old when Batman & Robin was released, Batman was a part of our lives, it was an almost personal insult to our nerdiness (back then, Schumacher said to the dark fans, and I'm still looking for the quote:"Get out more, get a Life"). We moved on hopefully, I am glad there are two good movies by Burton and two by Nolan (as a result of the bombing of the old franchise), but I still enjoy to hate Schumi's 2-hour commercials, in a totally different way compared to 1997-99.

 

[Alchemyst]

alot of moves made on Schumachers end werent that good, i agree. The neon lighting was just too excessive, Gotham City looked more like a city made of statues, I never really understood why Two-Face would be kinda happy after having his faced burned the hell up, and Riddler was kinda goofy, no offense to Carrey, but I would have liked to see the Riddler in a regular suit with maybe a question mark on the tie like BTAS, and maybe his personality a little more serious, maybe a joke here and there, like insulting Batmans intelligence when he doesnt figure out a riddle right away, but hopefully we can see him done with a little more justice if Chris Nolan decides to use the character.

 

[jabbatheridge]

The worst part about Two Face in Schumacher's Batman Forever was that he missed the whole duality concept of the character. Two Face was basically just a thug in the film and there wasn't a hint of the Harvey Dent personality until right at the end of the film just before he fell to his death. There was also no real build up to the character, he was already Two Face at the start of the film so we had no sympathy for the Harvey Dent character being destroyed.

 

[p4poetic]

^They really hammed it up with the theme of 'half' of everything.

I've always said this in regards to BF & BR -- without him, we would of never gotten BB and TDK, so his films were a blessing in disguise. Besides, he's apologized, so leave him alone

You can't even compare Joel's Batman films to Adam West's. Of course it looks cheesy NOW and for it's time, but even then, I'd watch the show over Schumachersdkfwrkmdf or however you spell his name in a heart beat. With BF and B&R, they seemed to not care at all. I watched the 'Inside the Actor's Studio' with Val Kilmer and he spoke about Batman non nonchalantly it bothered me. 'I uh yeah, I dressed up as a Bat, it wasn't really that hard,' and the audience laughs. I'm sure he's singing a different tune now. The only good thing I can say is that Seal's 'A Kiss From A Rose' for the soundtrack was a beautiful song.

No, this is not a troll post. I would like to have a civilized conversation regarding Batman Forever and Batman and Robin. Let’s start off with the first things that come to mind when people bash these films.

1. Nipples on the Batsuit.
If this really bothered people, they need to get out more often. Sure it’s homoerotic to have nipples on the Batman and Robin suits, but then again hasn’t the relationship between the two caped crusaders always been a little awkward? Even so, being a gay man himself, Schumacher brought Batman into the 90’s.
Case in point: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Batbed.png

Batman was already in the 90s. Besides, maybe it's my naievity, but I really don't see anything homosexual about that old comic panel.

I’m tired and worn-out with the constant bashing of these films. I consider Batman Forever to be one of my favorite films, ok maybe just a good one. The Riddler and Two-face rocked the cinema in 1995, and Arnold kicked some serious ice in 1997. The films were made for a different audience, the majority of the audience at the time. If you can’t take these films in for pure entertainment, then I’ll be laughing on the day when Christian Bale is fighting neon goons in an alley.
Nuff' said.

No, Christian Bale has dignity.

1. How were Two-face and the Riddler portrayed as being gay? Two-face lived in a split condo with two female prostitutes. I can see the comparison if you were referring to the ugliness of Drew Barrymore. And hey, I expect a Batman movie with Robin in it to be about in your face homoeroticism. Hell, if you really wanted to you could pin that stereotype on almost ALL superheroes.

Drew Barrymore isn't ugly, and even if she was, it doesn't matter. She is a woman, and being with a woman is not gay, regardless of someone else's opinion of their attractiveness.

No, not really. I loved these films when they first came out. In fact when Forever was in theaters I didn’t know anyone who disliked it. Val Kilmer, Nicole Kidman, Seal, all at the top of their game. Batman and Robin was cheesy, but come on man, it’s a kids movie. And for a kid’s movie, I thought Arnold was pretty cool (pun intended). Only looking back do people start to criticize these films. They might not be compelling crime dramas, but the Schumacher films are great popcorn movies.

Er...NO. People hated them then and they hate them now. No difference.

This should make you feel better (pandering to the Nolan fans), if the Schumacher films had never come out, then there would be no Begins or TDK. B&R was a very different take on the character, but you know what? Do you criticize the Power Rangers? No. This is what Batman had to compete with at the time. It is what it is and I’m not going to nit-pick it to death. Any version of Batman is good enough for me because it introduces a person to the vast universe of interpretations of the character. If its one more Bat fan, I’m all for it.

LOL. You are out of your element and are far reaching. The Mighty Morphin' Power Rangers hoopla was well and over with by 1995 (the movie and the third season) and in 1997, what with Zeo, Turbo, In Space, etc. the series was no where near popularity that started in 1993. Like I said, that doesn't even make any sense. Since when did Batman films have to compete with FOX KIDS television shows? Are you forgetting that we have Batman: The Animated Series in 1992-1997? There was no need!

Fair enough. Ok, story. The whole plot with Michael Gough dying and the only man who can save him is a super villain was pretty compelling. Again, being an Alicia Silverstone fanatic, having her in the movie was great (for a kid going through puberty and all). Cinematography and style were almost identical to Forever. Elaborate set pieces, lighting, color filter. Again, this film was made for kids who enjoyed watching the Power Rangers and yeah, it shows. The one thing that stands out for me the most was the marketing. I loved it all! Mr. Freeze pops, the toys, it all brought me immense happiness at the time. I thought that John Glover was great as Dr. Woodrue, “Time to Scream!” I guess for me the film is more of a nostalgia trip that had to do with the ecstasy of 90’s hyperrealism.

A-HA! A root to all evil. I knew there was something.

And I still disagree about the Power Rangers angle. Hell, Power Rangers was deeper than those two Batman films (as with Super Sentai). The whole Green With Evil arc from the first season ****s all over them.

These movies aren't supposed to be a deep intellectual study into the criminal mind, they’re supposed to be fun, flamboyant, and ridiculous. WB was catering to a different breed of Bat fan, and the majority of them at the time were children. I was entertained when I saw these films, because they were simply fun. If I really needed to see the dark, and moody Batman that I like, I could just watch 89’ or Returns.

Don’t rip a film for being too campy, when it was made for kids. If you want to see the darker version of the character, read Year One or TDKR instead of watching a movie made to appeal to pre-pubecent boys. I accept these films for what they are, and I love every second of it.

Wrong again. Many Batfans young and old consider the animated series to be the best interpretation of the mythos, and that was a show for children.

Well, not to be mean to any gay people, but Superman could be the most blatantly homoerotic character around. Superman is about a man pretending to be a “normal” guy, but when there’s trouble he COMES OUT of a phone booth and emerges as a guy wearing red cowboy boots. The whole secret identity thing is what is most noticeable (double lives and sexual repression). The same for Spider-man and his colorful costume; all I’m saying is that you can infer anything you want from any fictional character.

If you think that Schumacher had some sort of secret gay agenda for Batman, fine. Believe what you want to believe. But don’t be an ignorant person and say that there is only one correct version of Batman and everything else should be ignored. Batman through his different incarnations can appeal to everyone, not just “pissed off soccer moms.”

NOW YOU'VE GONE TOO FAR.

SUPERMAN HAS ALWAYS BEEN IN LOVE WITH LOIS LANE, AND SPIDER-MAN HAS BEEN IN LOVE WITH MARY JANE WATSTON SINCE ELEMENTARY SCHOOL. I've never seen anyone with a valid argument to have to go those extreme lengths to argue those two characters are gay with general happenings as explanations. 'Coming out of a phone both'? Seriously? They are undisputedly attracted to women, it's pointless to try and make subtext out of the smallest of non related phrases ('coming out of the closet') things.

(faints)

Quoting the user Adam West, “YOU think they are fun and entertaining, and that’s fine for you. But that is your opinion, and unfortunately for you 99.9% of Batman fans do not share it.”

By stating that 99.9% of Batman fans dislike the Schumacher films, you are saying there is a correct version of Batman. This is why I called you an arrogant person. You are in no way capable of estimating which, if any, version of Batman people enjoy the most. You can only gossip with fellow like-minded fan boys on websites like this one on a “predominant” version of Batman.

I don’t need to be lectured on the history of Batman, ever heard of Batmite? The Batman mythos is full of a wide variety of interpretations of the character so that a wide variety of people can enjoy it. As a real Batfan, you should embrace the full spectrum of everything related to the character, because if you don’t, you are ostracizing your fellow Batman fan. If you can’t do this, at least respect them.

No one here knows the exact statistics obviously, but I'm willing to bet 99% is quite accurate. As you can tell by this thread alone.

I haven't read the whole thread (I'll try to do so later), but I'll make it simple. Not only did it return Batman to the self-deprecating camp of the 1960s in an attempt to sell more happy meals IT STILL WAS A BAD MOVIE. You can make a kid-friendly superhero movie that is still a good movie (the first two Superman and Spider-Man movies spring immediately to mind) with good stories, character development and meat for the adults. Or you can at least make it entertaining.

But BF and B&R are bad movies. Forget they royally raped the villains in both movies and that each film had an increasingly wooden Batman and they had the exact same plot structure/story....

They were simply bad movies. Yeah an 8 year old can like it, but they can also like Power Rangers the movie. That doesn't make it good. Adam West did Batman camp in a funny way that is worth defending if you like that. These movies did not.

They were bad movies, so all the complaints you mentioned add onto them and cannot be so easily swept away, thusly.

The themes in MMPR:TM was a lot deeper than BF and B&R. And I'm being totally serious, regardless of how sardonic that may sound.

To be fair, take note that TDK has only made so much because of its connection to Heath Ledger.

The film was always bound to be extremely successful. It was the sequel to the highly critically acclaimed Batman Begins, and it was the first time the Joker would be seen in 19 years. People were anticipating how would this come out, because it was something that hasn't been seen before. I'm so tired of that reasoning (and it seems to be the only ones who truly believe it are the general public who haven't followed the movie's production like the fans have). Please remember, he only died January of this year. The promos for the film began far earlier, and the hype generated + the viral marketing caused a lot of buzz for the film. I have a feeling now everyone will use his death to manipulate to prove a point. Note: I am definietely NOT saying you're doing this, but this is general speaking on my part.

 

[Alchemyst]

The worst part about Two Face in Schumacher's Batman Forever was that he missed the whole duality concept of the character. Two Face was basically just a thug in the film and there wasn't a hint of the Harvey Dent personality until right at the end of the film just before he fell to his death. There was also no real build up to the character, he was already Two Face at the start of the film so we had no sympathy for the Harvey Dent character being destroyed.

I agree and also add that, Two-Face flips his coin, and whatever face it lands on, he carries out his action. There was one scene in BF where he kept repeatedly flipping the coin to get the result he wanted. Honestly, I cant even remember seeing the Harvey Dent personality, he was just as goofy as Jim Carrey. And another thing, no offense to a guy having his group of thugs, but do they all need to be color coded or dressed the same exact way????? and one chick dressed up for his good side, and the other was just some goth, dominatrix lookin broad.

 

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

I like his other films alot more than his bat-films, but I still enjoy BF from time to time!