Most Helpful Customer Reviews
|
|
12 of 15 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
*** AVERAGE? ***, 17 Oct 2002
First of all let me start by saying that I really liked Batman Returns but thought Batman was pretty poor, overlong and boring. The third instalment of Batman however is a bit of a mixed bag. Visually it's great but the darker tone of Tim Burton's previous two movies is replaced here with a much more 'camp' style, in something of a throwback to the old seventies TV series. To my mind this is something of a shame. Yes, Batman Forever is okay but it does takes this franchise back a step. For example, Val Kilmer doesn't do anything wrong but he hardly shines as Michael Keaton's replacement in the batsuit. Jim Carrey is well-cast as The Riddler but his riddles are (well to be frank) rubbish, Tommy Lee Jones is wasted and Nicole Kidman is well, forgettable. All in all the movie is just a bit of a mish mash. It's not bad. It's just not good. That said, my five year old nephew loves it (but he also thinks Batman and Robin is good too) if that's any recommendation. Batman ** Batman Returns **** Batman Forever *** Batman and Robin *
|
|
|
8 of 10 people found the following review helpful:
2.0 out of 5 stars
The one in which Robin arrives, 13 Sep 2004
When I first saw this in the cinema, back in 1995, I actually quite liked it, however I admit in retrospect it isn't really that good. Val Kilmer as the new Batman, does not have the weird off the wall appraoch which Michael Keaton demonstrated so well in Batman and Batman Returns. kilmer is simply too normal, to be convincing as a man, who let's face it, must have a lot of inner demons to go round dressed up in a Batsuit. Jim Carrey is fine as the Ridler, but the usually excellent Tommy Lee Jones, is simply miscast as Harvey 2 face. Clearly his star was shining brightly after his then recent success in the excellent "The Fugitive", and so was given the central role as villain, but he looks uncomfortable throughout. On the whole, this is ok, but not great
|
|
|
9 of 12 people found the following review helpful:
3.0 out of 5 stars
Forget that Dark Knight business - let's go for silliness, 28 Jun 2005
Wild horses couldn't stop me from watching a movie featuring both Nicole Kidman and Drew Barrymore, but Batman Forever does have some problems, and reactions to the film probably break down to different viewers' image of the Batman story. If all you care about are Wam! Pow! moments, this film is right up your alley. Batman traditionalists such as myself look upon Batman as the Dark Knight - with emphasis on the Dark. While this film does attempt to examine the psyche of the man who is both Bruce Wayne and Batman, it doesn't do it very effectively - and all substantive parts of the story are completely lost amidst all of the flashy Gotham sets and the over-acting of both Jim Carrey and Tommy Lee Jones. It really pains me to watch a talented actor such as Jones indulge in the types of ridiculous shenanigans of this movie's Two-Face (and I say this movie's Two-Face because this is basically a silly caricature of the real Two-Face). The most annoying thing about Batman Forever, though, is its shamelessness at throwing in criminally bad puns that almost make a mockery of the Batman series - e.g., the whole "Holy rusted metal, Batman!" shtick. The writer and director really ought to be ashamed of themselves for that one.Basically, what you have in this film is the re-entry of Two-Face, the introduction of the Riddler, and the birth of "Robin." You also get a beautiful psychologist thrown into the mix to help Batman get in touch with his feelings. I adore Nicole Kidman, but her character ended up being little more than bait for catching Batman. It's not all her fault, though; it's not easy to get a character as wooden as Val Kilmer's Batman to open up. We all know that Batman internalizes his feelings, but Vilmer could easily be mistaken for a block of wood in a bat suit. Jim Carrey, on the other hand, emotes like the neon lights that clutter every piece of scenery in this new vision of Gotham. The Riddler is an over-the-top character, but Carrey perhaps goes too far; he's good for laughs early on, but you can't help but be sick of him before the end. The Riddler's invention - which allows him to suck the knowledge out of people's heads as they watch his new-fangled TV "box," is just plain silly. Then there's Chris O'Donnell, the troubled youth who, after watching his parents die, discovers Bruce Wayne's secret and insinuates himself into the role of his sidekick. Certainly, he is affected by the death of his parents, but young Master Grayson's character just doesn't ring true here, as he really is quite a pain in the posterior. Naturally, we have to relive the murder of Wayne's parents and see the genesis of his determination to become a dark avenger in order to see how this traumatic experience impacts his less than normal psychological health, but everything else consists of special effects-laden brouhahas organized by Two-Face and the Riddler. It's a classic case of style over substance, which in this case involves an over-the-top style that just gets sillier as you go along. Batman being Batman, he falls for one stupid trap after another, yet always manages to escape. We're basically expected to ooh and aah over all the glaring lights of busy Gotham and the seemingly endless supply of nifty Batman gadgets and thus overlook the fact that the story itself isn't presented very well at all. You have to wonder what would happen if one of the theatrical Batmans ever took on a bad guy who wasn't insanely stupid.
|
|
|
Most Recent Customer Reviews
|