Shop now Shop now Shop now  Up to 50% Off Fashion  Shop all Amazon Fashion Cloud Drive Photos Shop now Learn More Shop now Shop now Shop Fire Shop Kindle Learn more Shop now Shop now
Customer Discussions > action discussion forum

Batman & Robin. Is it REALLY that bad?

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 119 posts in this discussion
Initial post: 10 Jun 2010 13:30:18 BDT
Last edited by the author on 10 Jun 2010 13:31:10 BDT
vnllaS0ulMan says:
Just to be clear, I refer to the 90's film starring George Clooney and Uma Thurman.

This film has become a popular vote in "worst films ever" polls. I will agree that it's poor but I'm sure I've seen far worse before. I suspect a case of Sheep Sydrome to be honest.


Posted on 10 Jun 2010 13:44:05 BDT
Paul McNamee says:
It's mostly to do with how it nailed shut the coffin for that franchise for what, 8 years? It was rushed out, it had a different star than the previous entry, and even a mass cinema audience could tell it was awful. The fact that it places so high on said lists is because of circumstance, context, profile, things like that. You're not going to see some Asylum film on those lists because they don't matter. Batman And Robin was a massive blockbuster that starred George Clooney and Arnie, and for something like that to fail multiplies the significance of that failure.

That said, it has become fashionable to dismiss it, if that's what you meant by the sheep thing.

Posted on 10 Jun 2010 13:44:40 BDT
Last edited by the author on 10 Jun 2010 13:45:36 BDT
JJG says:
Saw a bit of this the other day on Sky. Trust me, it's terrible, I had to watch Batman Begins and Dark Knight to extinguish it from my mind.

Worst film ever is a deceptive one, it's certainly the worst Batman film, and possibly the worst big superhero film I've seen (superman 4 was worse imho). It's also one of the worst scripted films I've ever seen, literally every other line is a cliche. But some of the action is alright, the bike race etc. There are plenty of worse films out there, but this was a big disappointment, which is why it features in lots of lists. Batman is one of most successful characters in popular culture, there was bound to be a lot of let down people by a dodgy film.

Posted on 10 Jun 2010 21:39:20 BDT
D. Climo says:
I'll be honest I prefer the likes of 'Batman Begins' and 'The Dark Knight' as well as the first two Burton/Schumacher films. However I think what it boils down to at the end of the day is what Batman era you were brought up on. Now if someone was brought up watching the sixties series and film then they'll think Batman & Robin is okay at least no doubt (let's not forget the sixties series was actually rather faithful to the then current comics). However someone else may be brought up on the more recent films and would therefore have wanted this film to be darker (frankly it would've made sense though seeing as Batman 89 and Batman Returns are quite dark).

I myself presonally agree that the studios shouldn't have tampered with the theme but like I said earlier in this post, I think the film is a little more watchable if you bear in mind that it could be aimed at not just the teens-twenty year olds but also the forty-fifty year olds who grew up with Batman (abeit a different one) as well.

I just hope they don't mess up the next film.

Posted on 10 Jun 2010 21:44:10 BDT
"Batman & Robin. Is it REALLY that bad?"
No. It's worse

Posted on 10 Jun 2010 22:36:54 BDT
Last edited by the author on 11 Jun 2010 15:10:51 BDT
The trouble with this film started with the previous one in my opinion. Joel shumacher took the franchise into a neon lit kiddie friendly Direction which practically alienated the entire fan base of the darker gothic first 2 films.

This is always the divide with the Batman character. He has been portrayed as the dark gothic knight if Gotham and has also gone through the campy 60's era and thus has lead to a light and shade way of portraying the character.

Personally I prefer the loner darker Batman character, away from Robin and the more campy villians. The two recent Batmans have captured the character, Gotham city and the villians perfectly for me. The right actors played the parts and the quality of the script and acting made the characters far more interesting than has ever been done before on film giving them more depth and creating an emotional connection to the viewer.

The 2 tim burton films are very good but a bit too gothic for my tastes and put far to much emphasis on the villians. Whilst Batman does have one of the best roll calls of villians out of all the superheroes I felt batman was far to much in the background.

Batman forever and Batman & Robin are just plain trash. Val Kilmer was awful and even more wooden than he had been in previous films. He and most of the high profile cast sleep walked through the film and were clearly not interested in the source material and only there to pick up pay cheques. Jim carrey was the only one who was watchable in the whole film and even his riddler was a poor mans joker.

The damage was done by the time Batman & Robin came out and in itself is more of the same neon lit dross, this time made worse by the fact all the best villians had already been used, poison ivy and mr freeze are so low rent.

One thing I will say in this films favour is two things: firstly at least Arnie appears to be trying to have fun and whilst most of his dialogue is cheesy crap he does his best and puts in an enthusiastic performance. The other thing is George Clooney. The secret to casting the right Batman which seemed lost in the first three films is making sure you cast the right Bruce Wayne. Anyone can pull on a suit, hell apart from close ups it was a stunt man as Batman most of the time anyway. Bruce Wayne provides the emotional connection that is needed to believe a man wants to dress up as a bat. I like George clooney as an actor and thought he made a passable Bruce Wayne. He had a dodgy script and a poor storyline to deal with but hadn't made many films when Batman & Robin was offered to him and I thought he played the part quite well. I always wondered how much better the first two films would have been if he had been cast in them.

Posted on 11 Jun 2010 07:54:26 BDT
Paul Tapner says:
I thought george clooney could have been pretty good but they didnt give him enough to do. There was also really no need for elle mcphersons character as she got so little to do. One great thing about it though: the scenes of bruce remembering growing up with alfred always being there for him fair brought a tear to this old bat fan's eye

Posted on 11 Jun 2010 08:57:47 BDT
JJG says:
I'm glad other people think Clooney would have been good given the chance. I think he was the best Wayne they've had on film, but I agree he's shockingly mis/underused in the film. IMHO I thought Keaton was the best Batman, but a poor Bruce. While Bale when he isn't doing the stupid voice is excellent. But as a personal thing, he just looks a little young and not the typical Bruce Wayne look to him, superb Batman though.

As you point out Paul, Batman and Robin isn't without a couple of alright things to it, as the flashbacks show. Arnie is stupid, but quite watchable. But what happened to the guy who played Robin? I honestly thought Robin was a big miss step for Schumacher's films, as a character I'm not sure it's ever going to work on film. I doubt he's going to appear in Nolan's final Batman, and if a character like that does, it'll be because Bale's Batman is finished off in some capacity.

Posted on 11 Jun 2010 12:03:29 BDT
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on 11 Jun 2010 12:24:24 BDT
He meant the film
"gramar" LOL

In reply to an earlier post on 11 Jun 2010 12:52:02 BDT
vnllaS0ulMan says:
"It should read - Are they really that bad"

Erm, no. As you can see in the intial post, I made it crystal clear that I'm talking about the George Clooney film. Bad grammar? At least I can read properly!

Posted on 11 Jun 2010 13:08:02 BDT
JJG says:
Just see the 'rubbish explosions in Predator' thread and you'll see ramsey is not to be taken seriously, at least not most of the time.

Posted on 11 Jun 2010 13:11:59 BDT
I can't really say more than Wayne did I agree with his view completely ... Joel Schumachers Batmans are just dreadful .... strange cause I do rate him as director ... just god knows why he thought taking the Bat down the camps 60's route was the way to go .

So YES... BATMAN & ROBIN is really that bad! .. Alicia Silverstone has cracking ar5e tho!

In reply to an earlier post on 11 Jun 2010 13:13:35 BDT
Last edited by the author on 11 Jun 2010 13:16:23 BDT
vnllaS0ulMan says:
Yes, it's fashionable to dismiss. Thanks Ted, forgive my sheep analogies :)

What made me start this discussion was that it was recently voted in Empire as the worst film of all time. Now I'm a believer that everybody has their own opinion, but I don't believe for a second that so many people genuinely think it's the worst of all time!

If we have to take several other things into account when explaining why it's so bad, surely that suggests the film itself isn't quite as terrible as people let on. The film came out when I was a young kid and I remember quite liking it, but kids will watch practically anything so this isn't saying much. I too caught a few minutes of it on Sky recently, and as I've said I agree it's rubbish, but it still doesn't strike me as one of the worst things I've ever seen. I'd have thought the "worst film of all time" would make it's title clear immediately.

Posted on 11 Jun 2010 13:35:33 BDT
Yeah I would say its one of the worst films ever made in my book ...I remember George Clooney saying he killed Batman .. (before Batman begins obviously) to be honest I dont blame the Clooney, yeah he wasnt great but slightly better than Kilmer.

But even if Christian Bale was in Batman and Robin it would have still sucked ... it was just an awful awful movie bad script, story, setting just everything really !

Mind you "Watchmen" would also be on my top 10 god awful films .. so each to their own!

Posted on 11 Jun 2010 15:41:43 BDT
M. Dowden says:
To be honest I don't like the Batman movies, I find them rather dull and boring. I grew up with the original tv series and so I liked the Batman and Robin film because it was camp and silly, just like the series used to be.

In reply to an earlier post on 11 Jun 2010 16:34:01 BDT
Well said. The Adam West Batman and the Burt Ward Robin are the best versions. I wouldn't call them campy though. POW!

Posted on 11 Jun 2010 18:09:17 BDT
gabriel71 says:
I remember my girlfriend & I went to see this at the cinema and people were leaving left right and centre! I wanted to go to but we stayed because we paid but all I can say is that in retrospect, its probably the worst film I have ever seen with some of the worst acting and campy performances and awful dialogue that I have ever seen...It made you feel uncomfortable to watch because it was so embarrassingly bad. I hope I never have to go through that ever again...sniff sniff

Posted on 11 Jun 2010 18:12:35 BDT
Last edited by the author on 11 Jun 2010 18:14:06 BDT
Adam west and burt ward as Batman and robin is a laugh but seriously please seek medical help if you think this is the best incarnation of Batman. This was a 60,s camp OTT take on a dark violent comic book character and whilst it dies have novelty value it is nothing compared to the Xhris Nolan films, the greatest screen interpretation of Batman ever.

Posted on 11 Jun 2010 21:00:34 BDT
Last edited by the author on 11 Jun 2010 21:02:21 BDT
E. Smith says:
Actually the best screen interpretation of Bats is The Animated Series that premiered in 1992. Spot-on characterizations and the tone is pitch perfect. Plus Kevin Conroy has the best voice of Batman hands down; and I love the Bale movies! Clooney though, would've been perfect casting as Bruce and Bats IF it was Begins or an adaptation of Year One, which from interviews i've seen with Schumacher, is the film he wanted to make but the WB wanted family/teen bums on seats. As a final note I love the character of Robin, but why call a film Batman & Robin and not focus on them?

In reply to an earlier post on 11 Jun 2010 22:12:10 BDT
Last edited by the author on 12 Jun 2010 17:39:58 BDT
charred says:
If you think about it statistically, your absolutely right. Firstly its a vote as opposed to actually technical reasons about why its a bad movie. Also because its a vote, if it received the most votes, say 51 and the runner-up received say 50 then it doesn't look so bad. there is no doubt that there are worser movies out there, but they probably didn't get enough votes to even register.
The reasons why I hate that movie was the irreverence for the original comic book material, the infantile treatment of freeze damage to living tissue, the nipple suit and the worst thing of all, The Bat creditcard scene! Oh dear...

Posted on 13 Jun 2010 15:06:47 BDT
Stu says:
The film is terrible - Batman Forever should have been the last one

In reply to an earlier post on 14 Jun 2010 01:23:19 BDT
Hubbard says:
"Never leave the cave without it...."


In reply to an earlier post on 14 Jun 2010 03:10:55 BDT
Totally agree with you about Batman: The Animated Series. It's superb. Best Batman. Definitely the best Joker. Harley. What more could you want.

I liked the Burton films when they came out but they suffer from being villain-centric and from poor casting (Michael Keaton? Seriously?! <shakes head>). They have a lot going for them though.

Batman Forever... Not completely awful but not good.

Batman and Robin... Yes, it is that bad. And no, it's not a sheeple thing. It's just a very bad film.

The new ones are good. Now if they can just manage to not ruin it with the third one...

In reply to an earlier post on 14 Jun 2010 13:16:22 BDT
Sam .. what u on about Keaton was brilliant !!! my fav yet, even better than Bale .. although i do prefer Chris Nolans films
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in

Recent discussions in the action discussion forum (517 discussions)

More Customer Discussions

Most active community forums
Most active product forums

Amazon forums

This discussion

Discussion in:  action discussion forum
Participants:  54
Total posts:  119
Initial post:  10 Jun 2010
Latest post:  13 Sep 2012

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 4 customers

Search Customer Discussions