Batman and Robin (1997)

Since my childhood of the 1990s I have cherished Batman as one of my favorite superheroes of all time (others being Street Fighter, Sonic The Hedgehog, Transformers, and the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles). As a young child I had watched the live-action campy version and kinda liked it as any innocent child would; as I got older, then came the animated series, which was a critical hit at the time, and I expected any other adaptation to live up to its success. And then came the theatrical titles: Batman (1989), Batman Returns (1992), Batman Forever (1995), and finally Batman and Robin (1996), and boy what a wild ride. I had never watched any of these titles as a child and only did so when I bought all four on VHS as an adolescent. I kinda felt as though these movies did well equally without actually analyzing the very detail. This was before I studied their reviews on the web and decided to do a little research on these movies, characters, and atmosphere, and see why Tim Burton's versions were more memorable than Joel Schumacher's.

The very movie I shall be reviewing is Joel Schumacher's Batman and Robin. This movie has been listed to today as one of the worst movies of all time, and as a catalyst that killed of the Batman franchise for eight years. There are several elements than contributed to the brief but notorious downfall.

• The first is the notable transformation of the scenery: just as it was in Batman Forever, Gotham is flashy and colorful--not typical of a city plagued with crime and lawlessness--and looks more like a Mardi Gras city.
• The second is the portrayal of the villains: again, they all look more annoying than menacing, notably Bane and Mr. Freeze. Schumacher's intentions to rewrite the characters' personalities and Bane's origin had caused so much outrage in the past that today's filmmakers had to re-present Bane more faithfully to the comics. The same goes for the main heroes, Batman and Robin.
• The third is the paraphernalia and vehicles used on the movie set. Rather than stick with the original and iconic designs of the Bat-mobile from previous installments, this movie used some models which you would find as toys marketed and advertised for children. This movie was turned into a retarded Saturday morning cartoon or a commercial. (This is what is said to be toyetic.)
• Lastly, the possible use of homosexual innuendo and frequent close-up camera shots in the opening suit-up scene. The Dynamic Duo are given rubber nipples, rubber buttocks, enlarged codpieces coupled with close-ups, while  Batgirl lacks any of these sexualized features whatsoever! All these were the catalyst for the franchise's demise. No parent would allow their child to see something like this as appropriate in a children's movie; even Tim Burton's movies, which are darker, would not allow for this on the screens.

Most of the above points have unanimously been already explained before, but I shall share a vivid account as to why Bane was derided in this movie.

In the comics, Bane had no alias and was named this way. He was born in a prison and grew up throughout his childhood to early adulthood. He was more intellectually gifted, strong and was a lone villain who could rely on his intellect as well as his brute strength. In this movie, however, he no smarter than the Hulk and is a lapdog to Poison Ivy. In other words, he has been reduced to a servant to a woman villain, and has a moderately rewritten back story. (In this movie, Bane was formerly Antonio Diego who was a test subject to an experiment in which a Super Soldier Serum, codename Venom, was administered to him via his concentric pores drilled in his skull, making super strong but unintelligent as his side effect. The rest of his backstory is unexplained.)

Now we all can recall Mr. Freeze. Schwarzenegger's performance as the villain was a total abomination and is literally forgettable. I can now remember who repugnant he was as opposed to how he was as the Terminator. If he did his homework, it would have been agreeable if he could have replicated the Terminator's emotionless stances into Mr. Freeze's personality. It was agreeable that the Batman animated series correctly presented Freeze as a cold-blooded villain who truly fits his background. But in this movie, he is a complete disgrace: what villain would throw more one-liner jokes than ammunition at his targets? I mean, please, if we wanted cold, we wanted a cold-heartened snake, not a snake who boils our blood to the core with ad nauseam, unfunny jokes about ice! No offense, pal, but a movie like this would forever ruin your career.

As I recall, George Clooney plays a very poor job as Batman. Michael Keaton and Val Kilmer successfully disguise their vocal tones as they don their respective alter egos (Bruce Wayne has a smooth tone as opposed to Batman who has a gruff tone). If this Bruce Wayne had noticed that his vocal tone stayed the same all the way regardless, anybody would have eventually worked out who was under that mask.

Another thing, Batman is a man who lives in the shadows; the respective Batman characters played by Michael Keaton and Val Kilmer always remembered to avoid publicity at all costs to conceal their existence. But this Batman shrugs his notable character by PARTICIPATING IN A SEXIST AUCTION!! Whoa! I thought he [and Bruce Wayne] had solid respect for women! Why this?! And by the way, why would he even hold a Bat credit card?! ("I never leave the Cave without it"? Really?!) WHY!!!! What superhero in history would even carry a CREDIT CARD?!!! That is like, metrosexual!! So, he's not just a homosexual you're trying to discredit him as; but a metrosexual as well?! Goodness!! What kind of anti-hero has this guy been redefined into? What happened to the edgy, complex character from the first and second movies? I thought we were done with the 1960s campy approach; but no, it was for the kids, right? Well, big mistake, man. Big, big mistake!

It is understandable that Schumacher was under pressure from Warner Bros. to fast-track production and make it family-friendly (the irony is that no child was ever shown this movie at the end!). It is a shame because he had the potential to make it as success as his previous installment, and to do so would be to study every source material and the critically acclaimed aforementioned animated series. But at the end, we only see more annoyance from Batman (George Clooney), Robin (Chris O'Donnell), Batgirl (Alicia Silverstone), Freeze (Arnold Schwarzenegger) and Bane (the late Robert Swenson)--I know little about Silverstone but the rest are questionable--and the only characters to actually stand out from the crowd are Commissioner Gordon (Pat Hingle), Alfred (Michael Gough) and Poison Ivy (Uma Thurman). And give Michael Keaton credit for pulling out of the Schumacher projects when Tim Burton was sacked as director and replaced. At least his reputation was preserved after previous and doubtful speculations of his role as Batman.

After watching this crap fest, no wonder my mind erased anything from this movie! I'm so glad that was the case. George Clooney did a very lousy job at performing his lead role! Shameful (or shameless) Schumacher spend so much money on special effects and little time on the actual movie. For this reason, I think people were keen to have the Batman movies end with Batman Returns if Schumacher was going to kill the entire franchise!
Is it a coincidence that this movie and Superman IV each killed off their respective franchises indefinitely? DC. 

 

indefinitely 

Obvious plot hole: Freeze is smoking a cigar despite the earlier revelation of his altered physiology.

Was there a need for this theatrical exhibitionism?

Even Tim Burton's movies would not accommodate absurdly gigantic statues in Gotham. How do they build something of this size?

Batgirl is the only character whose suit SHOULD have nipples but does not.