clooney did a good job, i mean he only did what he was told. i didnt like kilmer though. and dont u think that o'donnell was a little old for his part? he was suppose to be a boy wonder.
__________________ its fear that gives men wings - Max Payne
Sorry to break the news but ALL the batman movies sucked.Tim Burtons Batman movies were even more of a joke than Batman Forever was with the horrible casting choice of Micheal Keaton as Batman,the worst casting choice in comicbook history.I mean pudgy gut,receding hairline,half bald short runt Michael Keaton for tell,muscular,handsome,full set of hair Bruce Wayne? what a joke.Burtons Batman movies suck worse than Forever also because it was mostly about the villians,the first one should have been called the joker since Nicholson had most the screen time.
and Clooney and O'donnel were the worst parts about Scumachers Batman movies.Not only could Clooney not act,but he looks like eddie munster for god sakes.And not only was O'donnel way too old for the part of Robin,his acting was the worst part of Batman Forever.
you can tell batman forever was the beginning of the end when they changed the bat suit - a key part of the central character.
batman 1+2 look good and are generally good but the plot of 2 goes downhill a bit.
batman forever is rescued by jim carrey+tommy lee jones but it doesnt feel like a batman film.
batman + robin is extremely poor.
Batman and Batman Returns were exceptional. They had the dark, gothic feel for Gotham, as opposed to the neon lights and huge statues.
Michael Keaton (and Jack Nicholson since this relates to him as well) may not have been physically like Batman, but that NEVER matters if they can play the character right. Keaton portrayed Batman's brooding, secretive, vulnerable personality perfectly, and Nicholson did the insanity, randomness and audacity of Joker flawlessly.
PHYSICAL ATTRIBUTS MEAN LITTLE WHEN IT COMES TO GREAT CHARACTER ACTING
What about Bane in the movies? In comics he is actually intellingent. But in the movies he cannot even say a real sentence, but he can drive a car.
"Monkey business". Great Scott.
You've got several points here that are absolutely correct, but the part about Michael Keaton is wrong. Keaton wasn't pudgy then, and if you'd seen his body in movies where they how it, you'll see he's ripped. I think the flaw was in the way the part was written. You're right about the first movie not having enough Batman in there. However, I can't agree that the second two movies were better.
Chris O'Donnel alone is enough to make "Batman Forever" and "Batman & Robin" an inferior set of movies. I thought that the writing for Batman's part plus Val Kilmer's performance made him the best Batman/Bruce Wayne if you average out both sides of the character, but the rest of the movie failed. The entirety of "Batman & Robin" was a failure. I don't blame Clooney, I blame the person who casted him and the director who told him to act like himself. I like Clooney and I hope they pick him to be Mr. Fantastic (God knows, they'll try to cast worse if they can), but he isn't the Batman we expect in a contemporary movie. He's great for a revamp of the old Baman TV show, but clearly that was what Joel Schumacher wanted, not what most of the fans wanted.
__________________
I'm the best there is at what I do, but what I do isn't very nice.
I loved Batman Forever when it came out. At age nine or ten, I was probably in its target audience.
I recently rewatched it on video. And you know, I still didn't think it was that bad. Not great, but I can't help thinking that the people who rave about how much it sucks might not have their standards set a little too high.
KMC Community Forums
Nov 29th, 2003 07:40 AM
