The entire "Batman" movie saga

Started by dragonlight2 pages

The entire "Batman" movie saga

Batman (1989)
Batman Returns (1992)
Batman Forever (1995)
Batman & Robin (1997)

😑 is that it?

The "entire" GOOD Batman movies in the saga...

Batman (1989)

is that it??

yep, 'fraid so...

and the point is...?

What about the 1966 classic?

😂

yeah

Classic???????????????????? You just call it that 'cause it's old. Let's face it....that is not what Batman is supposed to be.
These are the ones that are good:

Batman (1989)
Batman Returns (1992)
Batman Begins (2005) it's going to be awesome

the 1st Batman flim was the very best but everything started to go bad after Batman Forever was made.

I hope Batman Begins is gonna help redeem the series.

that would depend on wether they will or will not put nipples on the bat costume.

nice sig mc pee! 😊

I think everyone is leaving out Batman Mask Of The Phantasm which was released in theatres.

Originally posted by Paola
nice sig mc pee! 😊

right back at yah! swank

Originally posted by TheFilmProphet
I think everyone is leaving out Batman Mask Of The Phantasm which was released in theatres.

Yep. Best Batman movie made, so far.

I liked Batman returns but the franchise went way downhill after that. Mask of the Phantasm is the Batman movie I watch the most out of all of them though.

I just bought Mask of the Phantasm at a thrift shop today. I have heard much about it, and I do agree that the franchise did go downhill, but I think Batman Forever was an okay entry. It had its camp moments thanks to Jim Carey and Tommy Lee Jones.

Originally posted by DarthLazious
the 1st Batman flim was the very best but everything started to go bad after Batman Forever was made.

I hope Batman Begins is gonna help redeem the series.

actually contrary to what so many people think,Batman forever was the very best even though it was bad in areas as well.ALL the batman movies sucked BIG TIME but Batman 89 sucked even worse because michale keaton was such a horrible casting choice for the role because he was so physically wrong for the part.Thats why batman forever is the only halfway decent batman movie made because Val Kilmer made a much better batman because he at least physically fot the role of bruce wayne which michael keaton did not.I agree though that BATMAN BEGINS needs to be great to make up for this nightmare franchise.

Originally posted by DirectorFitz
Classic???????????????????? You just call it that 'cause it's old. Let's face it....that is not what Batman is supposed to be.
These are the ones that are good:

Batman (1989)
Batman Returns (1992)
Batman Begins (2005) it's going to be awesome

As I just said,those Batman movies suck even worse than BATMAN FOREVER did.

acting ability is a hell of a lot more important than physical traits. keaton played bats and bruce perfectly imo (personality wise), the first two movies were really great, and nobody has come close to nicholsons portrayal of the joker. 3 and 4 bordered on insulting imo.

Doesnt matter if the acting is good,if the person doesnt even come close to fitting the role then that person should not be cast.Ive always felt Kilmer was by far the best because not only was his acting good in that movie and prior to that I never liked Kilmer as an actor but he surprised me in this film.Not only did he do a pretty good acting job,but he is everything Bruce wayne is suppose to be that Keaton was not.Handome,atheletic build,and a full set of hair.

kilmer, good actor? u kidding me, sure he was physically better, but his portrayal of bruce was amateurish compared to keatons.