Batman and Robin...Nothing short of a masterpiece!!

[Lex M]

I just bought Batman and Robin blind at Best Buy after years of hearing bad things about it, and all I can say is.....Wow! It's nothing short of a surrealistic masterpiece! Does anyone else love this great film?

The way Schumacher intertwines his themes of repressed homosexuality and society's repression of the individual into the Batman mythos is masterful and very appropriate to the subject matter, and the production design is incredibly inventive. Just as 8MM, St. Elmo's Fire, Tigerland, Flawless, and Dying Young deal with a sheltered lead character's awakening and struggle to maintain sanity in an ever-darkening world, Schumacher plunges the Batman story further into the direction of Bruce's self-acceptance, with the very thinly veiled homoerotic relationship with Robin nicely paralleling the thematic elements common to Schumacher's finer work. In many ways, it's as dark a film as the supposedly edgier 8MM or Flawless, since in B&R, the supposed blockbuster sheen of respectability only serves to drive home the auteur's darker themes even more strongly.

So who else thinks B&R is pure genius, and very misunderstood? It's definitely worth a blind buy if you've been scared away in the past!

[Istagi]

Hey, I'll have what he ^^^^^^ is haveing

Anyway. I am glad that you liked the film and found meaning in something no one else seems to have found meaning in.

[mlemmond]

I don't think we watched the same movie. The Batman & Robin I watched was complete piece of crap, it took one of my favorite comic book characters and made him look like a friggin idiot. The dialogue was just plain stupid, between this movie and Batman Forever JS almost completely killed the Batman film franchise. If you liked this movie hey man thats all you, I hated it, it gets 5 out of 5 pukes.

:barf: :barf: :barf: :barf: :barf:

[Porkchop]

I do believe he's joking.

Or at least, I hope he is.

[John Yaya]

Lex.....I hope you're being sarcastic or did you drop some serious acid lately?


I like some of Schumacher's past films (esp the Lost Boys) but there is one word that comes to mind for his Batman films...............CLUELESS!!

[downhuman]

Batman and Robin....masterpiece? Joel Schumacher's finer work? Wha..? Wait a minute. What day is it? Who are you people? What do you WANT FROM ME? GET AWAY FROM ME!!!!!! YOU'RE ALL MAD!!!! MAD, I TELL YOU!!!! AHHHHHHHH!!!!!! STOP LOOKING AT ME!!!! THIS ISN'T REAL!!!! NONE OF YOU ARE REAL!! YOU'RE ALL JUST HALLUCINATIONS AREN'T YOU??!!!MUAHHAHAHAHAHAHAH!!!!!!!


No really. If you like Batman and Robin, I would definitely recommend a little movie called Battlefield Earth.

[SidcupMartin]

it's a world turned upside down...

[SilentBob]

I too hope he is joking. I saw the movie before worka nd for the rest of the night i felt so tired. I couldn't believe how bad the acting was ""Ah my lungs" and the sets are to futureristic and colourful. Isn't he the Dark Knight Since when did Batman and Robin become real super power crime fighters. Lets glide 5,000 feet on a metal door to our safety. . . . The ice on the city is just funny. When they unfreeze the city (oops spoiler well more of a warning to a bad bad movie) the poilce man gets out of his car with a giant mound of rubber ice attached to it. (you can see the ice wobble back and forth when the door opens) The costumes just get worse and worse. Also why do the costumes for Batman and Robin have nipples on them and Batgirl has non. (my sister pointed that one out and what do you know she was right) Its just a waste of ime and money. But an easy way to fall asleep i can guaretee that.

[Buffalo Bill]

Genius? Worth a blind buy? If I had to watch it again I would be blind having gouged my eyes out. You know the saying "don't feel like the Lone Ranger"? Well kemosabe, I think you're going to be hard pressed finding a Tonto on this one.

[Deez108]

To each their own, I suppose.

I guess there is something good to be found in everything.


.....


I take that back. IMO, B&R was one unneccesary piece of garbage.

[Jerm]

I thought that it was a masterpiece myself, a master piece of monkey crap! Seriously, this was the movie that did indeed kill the Batman Franchise. And as much as I'd like to blame Arnold or Clooney, I have to blame Schumaker. Destoryed Batman, forever.

[RamonesGirl]

I thought parts were fun, it had it's moments (though mostly it was medicore)... though it's no masterpiece or a piece of crap in my opinion.

[UFO]

When the first lines of a "dark" Batman movie is

"I want a car...chicks dig the car."

"This is why Superman works alone."

you KNOW it's downhill from there baby. :barf:

[Cap42086]

As the immortal Mr. Cranky would say, "Alongside this [Bad Company], Joel Schumacher has also directed Batman & Robin making him the Hollywood equivalent of anthrax."

But then again, to each his own.

[newt]

I find Batman & Robin good for repeat viewing. I see no difference between this & other popcorn movies that are bad but entertaining.

[limacharliewhiskey]

Originally posted by newt
I find Batman & Robin good for repeat viewing. I see no difference between this & other popcorn movies that are bad but entertaining.

I try to avoid repeated viewings of bad but entertaining movies. I watch them once, and then I move on.

There are lots of good and entertaining movies I'd rather watch instead of Batman & Robin. You might think that adding Uma Thurman and Alicia Silverstone to the cast would make a movie better, but you would be wrong in this case.

Easily the worst film of the Batman franchise and one of the worst in Schwarzenegger's career. Even the worst Alien film is better than this movie.

To each his own, I guess. If I'm lucky, I'll never see this film again for the rest of my life.

[Wirehed]

I think Lex was making a joke.... I mean... he has to be right? This has got to be one of the worst films ever made (at least of the big budgeted made for the masses type films)

:barf:

[Damian]

Yeah...and Uma should have been nominated for an oscar for her performance.:barf:

I enjoyed Clooney as Batman, and I enjoyed looking at Alicia in tight leather, other then the movie sucked.

[Oscar Antonio M]

Thinks i liked:
The cinematography.

Just that, everything else (in my opinion=) :barf: :flush:

[Flash Ahhh]

Wow, this is a harsh group. It wasn't that bad. Maybe some of you had your expectations too high.

And no follow up comment from Lex?

Hmmmm.

-Flash

[Jerm]

During the 50's and the early 60's Batman (in comics) was a joke. He fought goofy characters, did goofy stuff. This was represented by the Batman TV show, and it was touched on in the Superfriends cartoons. Around the same time that the show was running though, Dennis O'Neal started writing the comics, and Batman became a darker character. Then in the 80s Frank Miller wrote The Dark Knight Returns. A very dark version of Batman in the future. From then on, Batman remained a dark vigilante.
The Batman movie (which was released in '89) was dark. It was gothic. It was a lot like Miller's story.
Batman Returns was even darker.
Batman Forever got a little cheesier, but it was still a dark movie.
Then comes...97 I think) and Schumaker gets a chance to make a second BatFilm, and I believe that it was the first without any Tim Burton influence. How does he run with the ball.

• He re-creates a cheezy villian who hadn't been heard from in years in the comics. And this cheezy villian spouts off cheezy Arnold Jokes
• Batman & Robin surf/snowboards through the sky
• People get frozen by a ray gun
• Batman convinces Bruce Wayne to put up priceless diamonds as bait (right out of the '60s show)
• Batman & Robin hang out at charity events (out of the Show and Superfriends)
• They use a satelite to borrow sunlight from the other side of the planet
• Rubber Nipples
• Bane...what a waste of a villian

That's just off the top of my head, without analyzing the movie. I could go on about BatGirl needing to be Gordon's daughter & not Alfred's niece, but that's a change in the story that I could live with.

[Lex M]

Jerm, I would counter that your list of "cheesy" elements, while valid from the point of view of a Batman traditionalist, are part of the film's subversive genius. If you go back and read my initial post, you'll see that I find it a VERY dark film, and I state that under the superficially broad camp elements, you'll find the true power of Batman and Robin. The more serious undertones and elements of S&M and homosexuality are all the more effective when contrasted with the camp staples like ray guns, surfing down from outer space, Arnold's villain etc. Arnold's contribution to the film is priceless, as he gives a thoroughly surface-level, if sly, comic-book villain performance, seemingly the only actor unaware that he's basically in a sadisitic gay opera. Contrasting the supremely masculine Mr. Universe with the film's more flamboyant qualities is another subtle device Schumacher uses.

Under the shiny, silly surface is a VERY angry film. It's like Schumacher said, "They want a blockbuster? I'll give them a blockbuster!!!" and slapped together the corniest, most insincere blockbuster gimmicks possible, as a cover for the true, dark tale he wanted to tell. In ever corner of the film are not-so-subtly hidden images of sadomasochism, despair, physical oddity, and ugliness. For a blockbuster, it's relentlessly depressing, even by Batman standards, and in its own way, it's a darker and truer representation of the Batman mythos, particularly the Frank Miller variety, than even Burton's original.

[UserNameUndecided]

I haven't seen this movie since it was in the theaters. Reading all of this kind of makes me want to see it again (probably for the last time), but I really don't want to waste a rental and/or sit through all of it.

[manigrasso]

I gave Batman & Robin another chance on video after seeing it in the theatre. It is by far one of the weaker big-budget blockbusters I'd ever seen. Why would you make ice such an important of your movie if you can't get fake ice that LOOKS like ice? Why would you customize your franchise to accomodate one star whe it compromises the very integrity of the franchise? (Arnie can't be TOO evil, he HAS to be good at the end, and he has to have what passes amongst dopey-asses as witty bon mots: "Ice to see you?" Blow me!) And what bothers me most of all: Why would take a character like Bane...a character who, in the Batman comics, BROKE BATMAN'S BACK AND AMLOST KILLED HIM...and make him comic relief for 5 minutes in a movie that already had two "super" villains. What could've been, would've been an ideal villain for the fifth installment of the Batman franchise, is pissed away like the rest of the money thrown at B&R

Lex may be right in that B&R is at its core an angry film. But it's not BATMAN'S anger, even though it IS a BATMAN movie. It's SCHUMACHER'S anger, and I didn't pay hard-earned money to see his hundred-million dollar hissy fit. The gay subtext is so overt, it might as well be TEXT. I get the feeling that Joel Shitmaker goes into pitch meetings wearing nothing but a gold lame jock strap hissing "I want to film MEN! HOT MEN! They can be almost naked, or wearing bondage gear, or wearing sexy military outfits, but they MUST be MEN, and they MUST be HHHHHOT!!!" Then, depending on the project, the Suits tell Joel what they expect him to deliver. Joel looks at them quizzically, like a dog that hears a high-pitched whistle, and says "But...I get to film hot guys, right?" The Suits say Sure, Joel Shitmaker says Yippe like Jake Lloyd in Phantom Menace, he does the ceremonial fellating of the life-size David Geffen voodoo doll, and does the bunny hop all the way to the wardrobe department. Shitmaker's vision is NOTHING like the comics, because I always get the vibe that the artists are conveying the sadomasochism & bondage with an air of disdain, as something that WOULD get Batman good and pissed. Shitmaker glorifies it, which might be fine in something like 8MM, but not a superhero movie, unless he plans to do the live action adaptatio of Ace & Garry, the Ambiguously Gay Duo.

What was decent about Burton's Batman movies is that he at least tried to get behind the motivation of the characters, be they hero or villains. Shitmaker is all sexy people wearing sexy outfits. The ridiculous lines they utter, the horrible action sequences, the unbelievable plot points, none of that matters, as long as the stars look god in their costumes, the nipples are pert, and the extras looking to earn their SAG cards are over the age of 18.

[godmoney]

I agree with Jerm 100%

Bane shoulda whooped Batman's ass and broke his back...lol.

CHILL OUT!

[Porkchop]

I still think Lex is joking. And as more people become convinced that he's serious, he's just laughing harder and harder.

I hope!

[SidcupMartin]

Originally posted by manigrasso
The Suits say Sure, Joel Shitmaker says Yippe like Jake Lloyd in Phantom Menace

man, i am on the floor

[redshifter]

mani, that was simply if a bit homophobic.

i saw b&r when i wrote film reviews with a few other reviewers. we discussed it after and all agreed it was one of the worst movies we had ever seen. i can accept the argument that it is a subversive film, excpet that the filmaking was ineptly handled. a good example of a well made action film with subversive elements is "starship troopers". that had homoerotic elements, big silly b-movie villians, and an anti-fascist subtext, but unlike b&r it was well crafted.

[NotEd]

Ah, I've always thought the erect, rubber-costume nipples were representative of man's struggle in a cold, uncaring world.

[manigrasso]

Originally posted by redshifter
mani, that was simply if a bit homophobic.

Nope. Not homophobic, just Schumacher-phobic

And I also assumed this thread was a joke but being able to vent my spleen on Shitmaker one more time means one less body to bury in the basement.

Mani- That was one damn funny rant!!! I am so going to have a difficult time getting through the rest of the work day with an image of a prancing gold lame jock wearing Joel Schumacher going through my mind.

*SHUDDER*

[godmoney]

CHILL OUT!!!!!

[caligulathegod]

Twenty or thirty years from now, it wouldn't surprise me if this view wins out. Most of us are too young or too into Batman to remember the gay subtext that was assigned to Batman for a while. "Bruce" is still occaisionally used as a cliche gay name. Even The Incredible Hulk tv series changed the name over that.
I still think both Schumacher films are terrible, but bad or not, I think Lex nailed what he was going for. Mark this:in 20-30 years or less, this film will be right up there with Mommie Dearest and Rocky Horror Picture Show as a gay cult classic.

[Indyphantom]

Schumacher should stick to doing films with Colin Farrell. TIGERLAND was awesome...and I'll be seeing PHONE BOOTH at the Toronto festival in a couple of weeks...looks amazing!

[theta]

Jerm, you seem to be well-informed, but I've been reading all the Bat comics from about the mid-1980s on, and Mr. Freeze wasn't a major player, sure, but he definitely had his time in the limelight (although I think the animated series really captured the character better; he needed a real voice.)

Lex M, you might want to antagonize everybody on this board and have a good laugh at their expense. If so, bully for you, I thought that was fun when I was sixteen, too.
I happen to think you might well be serious, since I know people who actually say things like this, so let me get on my soapbox. If you really believe this, do some research. Actually READ some of the Batman comics instead of just watching the TV show. Look at the whole work, instead of just the parts that support your opinion (the very first appearances of the character are particularly eye-opening.) The campy approach has not been in the Batman comics for more than thirty years. Neal Adams strangled it in the 70s, and then Alan Moore and Frank Miller came along, dug up the corpse, set it on fire, urinated on it, and then FedExed what was left to Mars. If it hadn't been for that goddamn TV show, the character wouldn't be remembered for it at all.

While you're at it, why don't you take a look at the filmography of Joel Schumaker? He has some decent flicks, but he has been cranking out mostly crap for the better part of two decades, and there's nothing pre-"Batman and Robin", save maybe "Falling Down", that I can think of that would indicate the guy cares about any sort of social issue, except maybe homosexuality, which would make sense, considering the man's gay.

The whole gay thing was never actually in the comics. A psychiatrist called Dr. Frederick Wertham read that into the comics, which the authors never intended, not even subconsciously (CHRIST, I hate that idea.) He also thought Wonder Woman was a lesbian because she wasn't a good homemaker and that horror comics would make kids mutilate themselves. He didn't actually have any PROOF of this, of course, but he knew it was true, so he wrote a book about it, "Seduction of the Innocent." I'll get off the soapbox now; my father wasn't born when this scandal played out, but it still deeply offends me as an American and as a human being that Wertham's garbage got as far as it did.

[Dr. Shrinker]

Since just about everyone HATES this one so much, I'd just like to offer the opinion that it was a HELL of a lot better than Batman Forever...watching Tommy Lee Jones try to out-crazy Jim Carrey was wretchedly painful, and Jim Carrey made me feel like I was chewing aluminum foil. The editing was so rapid-fire that, on the big screen I watched it on, I literally could not tell what the @#$ was happening.

And the bat, the bat, the "secret" repressed in Bruce Wayne's mind was a phenomenally fake critter that would have looked hokey in a 50s William Castle pic. And I haven't even gotten to Val Kilmer.

Compared to this piece of feces, Batman & Robin at least had Uma Thurman in a sexy costume....oh, wait, I can't pretend any longer. It was godawful bilge, as well.

[dvdjedi]

Originally posted by manigrasso

I get the feeling that Joel Shitmaker goes into pitch meetings wearing nothing but a gold lame jock strap hissing "I want to film MEN! HOT MEN! They can be almost naked, or wearing bondage gear, or wearing sexy military outfits, but they MUST be MEN, and they MUST be HHHHHOT!!!" Then, depending on the project, the Suits tell Joel what they expect him to deliver. Joel looks at them quizzically, like a dog that hears a high-pitched whistle, and says "But...I get to film hot guys, right?" The Suits say Sure, Joel Shitmaker says Yippe like Jake Lloyd in Phantom Menace, he does the ceremonial fellating of the life-size David Geffen voodoo doll, and does the bunny hop all the way to the wardrobe department.

[caligulathegod]

Originally posted by manigrasso
Why would you customize your franchise to accomodate one star whe it compromises the very integrity of the franchise? (Arnie can't be TOO evil, he HAS to be good at the end, and he has to have what passes amongst dopey-asses as witty bon mots: "Ice to see you?" Blow me!)

Truth is all the villains in the Batman movie and tv show weren't really the Batman villains but just hyperbolizd versions of the actors cast. Jack Nickolson was the Joker, but he was really JACK NICKOLSON. It is the one element of the TV show that Burton appropriated and Schumacher continued. Arnie's one-liners were purposely bad as a parody/satire of his persona (which is a big Austrian guy who throws off one-liners when he dispatches a person). Mr.Freeze's sympathetic portrayal comes more from the Cartoon than the need to accomodate Mr. Schwarzenegger.
Don't get me wrong. I think the film is a steaming pile freshly pinched off ca-ca. I just have to say it's better than BM Forever. That film ruined the franchise. It was unfocused and seemed to ignore Batman the comic and went back to Batman the TV show. It's the movie we all feared Burton was going to make. I've never understood why the casual Batman movie fan tends to think it's the best of the series(I'm a BM Returns guy). B & R at least threw out the pretext of trying to be a serious Batman movie and wore its camp like a big floppy hat and floor length mink coat. I hate that Schumacher had to use Batman and Robin to make his Ace and Gary movie, but it's a legitimate interpretation of at least the perception of superheroes. As a concept, I see nothing wrong with making a big gay superhero movie. Alan Moore's Watchmen touched on this angle. It's grown men running around in tights and capes saving the world against other outrageously dressed grown men. Tell me there's no gay subtext in superheroes. That's what Schumacher was going for but because it went against expectations people missed it. Stereotype or not, campiness is part of gay culture. It always has been. Why do you think it's called gay (happy)? This really is quite a subversive movie. I can't think of anything more subversive than taking such popular characters and making a $100M gay movie with them.

[mighty mint]

As a concept, I see nothing wrong with making a big gay superhero movie. Alan Moore's Watchmen touched on this angle. It's grown men running around in tights and capes saving the world against other outrageously dressed grown men. Tell me there's no gay subtext in superheroes. That's what Schumacher was going for but because it went against expectations people missed it. Stereotype or not, campiness is part of gay culture. It always has been. Why do you think it's called gay (happy)? This really is quite a subversive movie. I can't think of anything more subversive than taking such popular characters and making a $100M gay movie with them. [/b]

First off, I used to really enjoy superhero comics and movies until this thread. Thank you to everyone who has turned one of the darkest vigilantes into a grown man prancing from building to building in his satin briefs with his "partner", both complete with costumes suffering from nippleitus.
Yes...it is true that to place superheroes in reality makes them seem mentally unstable to say the least. The reality is that superheroes were created to give the populace a sense of hope that came in the form of wrongs being righted by someone willing to take a chance and fight back: Fight back, not only for the injustices done to themselves, but to others as well.
Gay subtext in superheroes...give me a break! That is an interpretation put on them by present progay society that wants to see homosexuality and lesbianism supported in everything that exists! My view of what superheroes are may seem a bit niave on the surface, but justice is what they originally represented not homosexual pajama rendevues with crime fighting as foreplay.
I think that as adults we begin to grow cynical and find it hard to suspend belief and reality to see the true meaning behind heroism. Everything has to have two meanings, everyone has to have an alterior motive. If there is pro gay symbolism in the batman movies it is due to purposeful additions by those in charge and not what Batman himself represents.
On the original posting... this movie was lame. It wasn't even remotely well done, the acting was horrible, the special fx terrible, and the final product...hershey hail storm.
Oh...hershey hail storm...is that some type of encoded gay message for a little something something? NNNNOOOOO!!!
It means the movie was pure unadulterated CRAP!

Okay...I'm done venting now...time for me to go and put on my satin briefs and head out to fight crime in the Metropolis

[Eric]

This is madness! Madness!