Batman Forever wasn't as bad as Batman & Robin

Originally posted by Bat Dude
I don't want to start this old argument again, but Begins had a lot more wrong with it than just one thing...

1. Ras Al Ghul wasn't like the comics (this is just nitpicking, but if Burton bashers can say that about Penguin in Returns, I have every right to expose that flaw in Begins)

2. Batman didn't save Ras (the comics version would at least try) This one I could go on and on about... It's like, Bruce preaches about how "no one is beyond saving" all throughout the movie, and then he refuses to save Ras... That's one of the most hypocritical things I've ever heard... I mean, he didn't "kill" him per se, but he DID go against his "code", which is something Batman NEVER does, no matter what...

3. Bruce deliberately destroyed the monastery, knowing that there were hundreds of ninja in there that would die (again, it's kinda just nitpicking, but if Burton bashers can say that about blowing up Axis Chemicals, I can say that about the monastery)

It's still an awesome movie, though (not as good as mine, though 🙂)

1.well I can tolerate Ras not being faithful to the comics unlike peguin cause he's not one of bats MAIN villians and like you said,thats really a minor thing.

2.True that The batman from the comics would have saved him but at that point and Im sure most audiences agree,it would have been stupid to save him again because look at the gratitude he showed him when he saved him before.the bastard.world of difference between murdering someone and not saving somebody.not saving someone isnt murder.so that was no biggie.

3.I think its pretty evident nobody died in the monastary.I mean all those ninjas had MUCH more time to get out of there than bruce did by far.If bruce got out and lived, then its pretty safe to say everybody else did.There was no evidence he killed anybody.where with batman 89,it would be absurd to say he didnt murder people.dropping a bomb directly right in front of those goons,it would be absurd to say they didnt die. 😉

yeah probably not as good as yours. 😄

Originally posted by Mr Parker
Im just telling you what several people I know told me who were so disgusted with the first two batman movies they could not bring themselves to go see another batman movie by the time Forever came out and when I loaned them Forever a few years back, they regretted not seeing it because they liked kilmer much better as bruce wayne/batman and forever better than keaton and the first two films.I'm just the messenger telling you what they told me,dont shoot the messenger.want me to give you their phone numbers to call them up and debate about it with you? I doubt they would like that so i couldnt.LOL. like i said,im just going by what some people told me that agreed with me on it.dont shoot the messenger. 😛

Batman Begins is a better movie than the others ones but it is certainly not more exciting I think than some of the other Batman films. Overall Begins was so straightforward and serious it bordered on being dry at times. There was an epic excitement missing from it that I hope is present in the next film. But even Batman Begins only scores a few percentage points higher on the Rotten Tomatometer than Batman Returns.

Originally posted by Mr Parker

busy tr
3.I think its pretty evident nobody died in the monastary.I mean all those ninjas had MUCH more time to get out of there than bruce did by far.If bruce got out and lived, then its pretty safe to say everybody else did.There was no evidence he killed anybody.where with batman 89,it would be absurd to say he didnt murder people.dropping a bomb directly right in front of those goons,it would be absurd to say they didnt die. 😉

yeah probably not as good as yours. 😄

At the end of the day when Nolan does it it's creative license and okay but when Tim Burton and Sam Hamm or Daniel Waters do it it's the highest order of blasphemy there ever was.

Originally posted by SelinaAndBruce
At the end of the day when Nolan does it it's creative license and okay but when Tim Burton and Sam Hamm or Daniel Waters do it it's the highest order of blasphemy there ever was.

That's always bothered me...

It's the same way at BOF... Anything Nolan does is instantly either "the greatest thing to happen to Batman films ever", or "He's just using his creative license"... Yet no one dares defend Burton's creative ideas for Batman, though...

Don't get me wrong, I LOVE Nolan's version of the character, same with Burton's, but I just think that there is a huge amount of bias that really shouldn't be there...

Meh. The temple thing is when Bruce is still young. He's essentially still in training (though nearing the end) and hasn't quite "found" himself yet.

The point you all are missing: it's different than him not shooting Falcone at the resteraunt. That wouldn't have been justice, but rather revenge.

In the temple, he's trying for justice, as he clearly DOESN'T want to execute that farmer.

Young, and inexperienced, he tries his best to escape and change the situation. It doesn't go as planned, but even then he's trying to save lives. (Ra's, in particular)

Your guys argument is a pathetic strawman, where you assume that the character was on some mass vengence spree, or even trying to say:"Well, I'll just blow 'em all up and be gone." He wasn't. I don't think he even meant to start the fire..he was trying to make a diversion so he could fight his way out.

It's not out of character at all.

It is out of character IMO because as I said he didn't even demonstrate any caring for the murder after starting the fire. That was his whole point for causing the diversion was to get out of having killing him and he may have ended up doing it anyway by accident and he didn't even care to find out if the man got out alive.

It isn't anymore a strawman than some of the things brought up from the Burton films IMO. In Batman 1989 Batman had just really gotten started in his crime fighting spree the rumors about him were pretty fresh and all he cared about was saving the people of Gotham from having to experience more poisoning from Axis chemicals when he blew it up. I don't think he'd have purposely blown up some thugs though in reality but I think that Batman 1989 was set back in the late 30s Batman era where he would kill people.

Originally posted by SelinaAndBruce
Well a couple of people's opinions don't change the fact that the critical consensus is that both Batman Forever and Batman and Robin are crap and that Batman 1989 and Batman Returns were superior films to both in almost every aspect.

Batman Begins is a better movie than the others ones but it is certainly not more exciting I think than some of the other Batman films. Overall Begins was so straightforward and serious it bordered on being dry at times. There was an epic excitement missing from it that I hope is present in the next film. But even Batman Begins only scores a few percentage points higher on the Rotten Tomatometer than Batman Returns.

except thats not at all the case.while most usually say batman 89 is the best of the four,most the critics I have seen, say batman forever was better than batman returns.the critics dished batman returns big time when it came out, much more so than they did with batman 89.Forever didnt get near the same kind of backlash by critics that returns did and hate to break the news but rotten tomatoes isnt god. Lol.Oh and as far as a couple peoples opinions goes,very rarely do I ever run into anybody in real life that tells me they liked the first two batman movies when I ask them.just about everywhere I went in high school when batman 89 came out,pratically all the dozens and dozens of people I bitched with about that movie back then,they all felt the same way and had the same agreements.once in a great while, I'll find people that think the same as you in real life,but VERY seldom.usually they say they hated all the previous batman films as well.

Originally posted by Mr Parker
except thats not at all the case.while most usually say batman 89 is the best of the four,most the critics I have seen, say batman forever was better than batman returns.the critics dished batman returns big time when it came out, much more so than they did with batman 89.Forever didnt get near the same kind of backlash by critics that returns did and hate to break the news but rotten tomatoes isnt god. Lol.Oh and as far as a couple peoples opinions goes,very rarely do I ever run into anybody in real life that tells me they liked the first two batman movies when I ask them.just about everywhere I went in high school when batman 89 came out,pratically all the dozens and dozens of people I bitched with about that movie back then,they all felt the same way and had the same agreements.once in a great while, I'll find people that think the same as you in real life,but VERY seldom.usually they say they hated all the previous batman films as well.

Furthermore Rottentomatoes is not god but it like Metacritic compiles critical reviews from all over and gives you a general consensus of what critics thought and the general consensus if you look up the movies is that these are the best Batman movies ranked in order of their critical response:

1) Batman Begins
2) Batman Returns
3) Batman 1989
4) Batman Forever
5) Batman and Robin.

Now whether you and your elite posse of friends agree with that is another matter but that is a critical consensus some with over 200 reviews counted and as I said Batman Returns didn't score that much lower than Batman Begins did.

Originally posted by SelinaAndBruce
Bruce more than likely killed at least one person and he didn't even check to see if the murderer he claimed was o so worthy of living got out of there alive because he was too busy trying to save Ras. Furthermore if the murderer did get out of there alive he essentially freed a killer a didn't even care about it. That completely contradicts what the Bruce Wayne character would do IMO. He'd at least make sure the kiler was apprehended and sent to jail to get a fair trial. But he couldn't be bothered. 🙄 🙄

At the end of the day when Nolan does it it's creative license and okay but when Tim Burton and Sam Hamm or Daniel Waters do it it's the highest order of blasphemy there ever was.

now THIS is hysterical.obviously you only read PARTS of my post and not the whole thing or you would see how its extremely unlikely he killed anyone.He couldnt carry Ras out when he was under the log AND get his mentor out at the same time,He had a choice to make and he made the right one i trying to save his friend.He probably didnt even know where the guy even went.this is serious nitpicking here.

its probably because its obvious to any real batman fan that schumacher AND Burton,Hamm and Waters committed blasphemy. 🙄 they didnt give a rats ass about the fans.Nolan did.its kinda tiresome having to explain that to you over and over again though when you are just going to ignore the facts though. 😛 so I really dont want to have to keep repeating myself on that like i would have to.Thats why my friend bakerboy got wise cause of how you constanly ignore things we tell you.I dont know why I even bother with you anymore myself.I really should sto now,its tiring wasting my breath just to see it goe through one ear and out the other.

Originally posted by SelinaAndBruce
The people you know are not a reflection of the general population. Batman 1989 didn't make millions and millions of dollars and become one of the biggest box office successes of all time because people hated it 😆 😆

Furthermore Rottentomatoes is not god but it like Metacritic compiles critical reviews from all over and gives you a general consensus of what critics thought and the general consensus if you look up the movies is that these are the best Batman movies ranked in order of their critical response:

1) Batman Begins
2) Batman Returns
3) Batman 1989
4) Batman Forever
5) Batman and Robin.

Now whether you and your elite posse of friends agree with that is another matter but that is a critical consensus some with over 200 reviews counted and as I said Batman Returns didn't score that much lower than Batman Begins did.

all you got to do is go back to when Batman Returns came out and read the reviews in the papers back then and youll see where the majority of reviewrs bashed it big time.go to the libray,do your research,its there.AGAIN rotten tomatoes isnt god,those papers reviews back then tell the story.Leonard malton for one liked Forever the best of the four and bashed returns equally as he did batman and robin.again,read the newspapers reviews from back then,go to the library and you'll see how they bashed it.please stop referring to rotten tomatoes as god for once.

well you obviously have horrible memorys problems because I constantly got to repeat myself to you on this since you never remember.Batman is extremely popular character around the world.Kids love him like crazy.at that time,people had been extremely anxious and crazy about seeing batman finally come to the movie screen,it didnt mnatter how awful the film was,you could have cast willie nelson in that role of bruce wayne and because of the name BATMAN alone,it would have been the huge money maker it was at the box office .it WAS brillantly marketed like crazy after all.seriously this is where you cripple your arguments all the time,if your going to talk about box office success,AGAIN as i have told you a hundred times in the past but you obviously dont want to remember,BATMAN was the FIRST batman movie brought to the screen,it was extremely overhyped liek crazy and because of how extremely popular he is as character,of course it was going to do great at the box office.to YOUR logic,as I have repeated to you a hundred times before in the past,if your going to go by box office success as people liking these movies,then to YOUR logic,Batman Returns was a worse movie than Batman Foreverwas because Batman Forever made more money at the boc office than Returns did. 😆 Really its tiresome having to repeat my points over and over to you just for them to go through one ear and out the other with you,obviously you never listen so I need to ake a cue from bakerboy.its tiring to have to repeat myself over and over just to have the word go through one ear and out the other.see you when THE DARK KNIGHT comes out.maybe you'll have decent points by then to talk about and be able to listen for a change.im done here.

Originally posted by sithsaber408
Meh. The temple thing is when Bruce is still young. He's essentially still in training (though nearing the end) and hasn't quite "found" himself yet.

The point you all are missing: it's different than him not shooting Falcone at the resteraunt. That wouldn't have been justice, but rather revenge.

In the temple, he's trying for justice, as he clearly DOESN'T want to execute that farmer.

Young, and inexperienced, he tries his best to escape and change the situation. It doesn't go as planned, but even then he's trying to save lives. (Ra's, in particular)

Your guys argument is a pathetic strawman, where you assume that the character was on some mass vengence spree, or even trying to say:"Well, I'll just blow 'em all up and be gone." He wasn't. I don't think he even meant to start the fire..he was trying to make a diversion so he could fight his way out.

It's not out of character at all.

yep.as you see though.it just falls on death ears when you tell selina though.

I was not saying Batman's box office success is a sign of what a good movie it was I was using it as an example of how people didn't HATE it as much as you try to make it out like they did because it was a summer blockbuster and continued to turn huge profits. If the movie was not well liked and big JUST based on the popularity of the character it would have come out opening weekend and bad word of mouth about how much everyone hated the movie would have gotten around and it would have tanked after that. Instead it is the highest grossing of all the Batman flicks despite Batman Begins getting the hype from critics and hyper obsessed fanboys around the globe. So that argument to me is flawed. I never said the money made it a better movie I only said everyone didn't hate it like you seem to suggest.

And I know Batman Forever made more money than Batman Returns but again my argument was never that the money makes the movie better. Clearly Batman Forever was better received because it was dumbed down a great deal so kiddies could see it after Batman Returns scared them. But in time as people look back both Schumacher films are frowned upon because both of them sucked ass big time.

And just because I refuse to agree with your nonsensical fanatical hatred towards Tim Burton by making logical arguments doesn't mean I'm not listening. Just debating the points with you and if you can't handle that then I think you should excuse yourself from the conversation.

Originally posted by Mr Parker
now THIS is hysterical.obviously you only read PARTS of my post and not the whole thing or you would see how its extremely unlikely he killed anyone.He couldnt carry Ras out when he was under the log AND get his mentor out at the same time,He had a choice to make and he made the right one i trying to save his friend.He probably didnt even know where the guy even went.this is serious nitpicking here.

its probably because its obvious to any real batman fan that schumacher AND Burton,Hamm and Waters committed blasphemy. 🙄 they didnt give a rats ass about the fans.Nolan did.its kinda tiresome having to explain that to you over and over again though when you are just going to ignore the facts though. 😛 so I really dont want to have to keep repeating myself on that like i would have to.Thats why my friend bakerboy got wise cause of how you constanly ignore things we tell you.I dont know why I even bother with you anymore myself.I really should sto now,its tiring wasting my breath just to see it goe through one ear and out the other.

It's obvious to any REAL Batman fan that Nolan is not perfect or the god of Batman movie making either. Both sets of films have their merits and flaws. Batman Begins is not the holy grail it doesn't have Batman's character down perfect either IMO and no matter how many times you act like that movie is the second coming of Christ you're right I won't agree with you so you are wasting your keystrokes.

Thank God I'm not so far gone I can enjoy both B1989 and BR and BB

Wow! ok that was fun to observe!

well i could care less about trying to debate this with anyone here...again! i've got nothing but love for all, but...
the truth still stands with the majority of us...

1. we loved B-Man 3 & 4 as children
2. we can view them now as adults & get a good kick from them
3. 99% of everyone enjoyed Begins (silly nit pick criticism aside)
4. debates suck when they're not in our favor...thats why they're called debates!
& finally as i bid you adue i'd like to leave you all with these kind words:.....

"Like my plastic surgeon always says: "If you gotta go... Go with a Smile!" 😄

Originally posted by Mr Parker
1.well I can tolerate Ras not being faithful to the comics unlike peguin cause he's not one of bats MAIN villians and like you said,thats really a minor thing.

2.True that The batman from the comics would have saved him but at that point and Im sure most audiences agree,it would have been stupid to save him again because look at the gratitude he showed him when he saved him before.the bastard.world of difference between murdering someone and not saving somebody.not saving someone isnt murder.so that was no biggie.

3.I think its pretty evident nobody died in the monastary.I mean all those ninjas had MUCH more time to get out of there than bruce did by far.If bruce got out and lived, then its pretty safe to say everybody else did.There was no evidence he killed anybody.where with batman 89,it would be absurd to say he didnt murder people.dropping a bomb directly right in front of those goons,it would be absurd to say they didnt die. 😉

yeah probably not as good as yours. 😄

1. I always thought that Ras was one of Batman's greatest foes, but hey, whatever you guys think is alright with me...

2. But it's the fact that he went against what he had been saying the ENTIRE movie... AND the fact that the true Batman would have at least attempted to save him... I can understand Ras not deserving it, but what about all the complaints about Joker in B89? Everyone complained that Batman didn't try to save him, well, Joker didn't deserve it either... But again, the thing that I REALLY didn't like was that he was basically doing the EXACT opposite of what he was preaching the whole movie, that "No one is beyond saving..."

3. Fair enough, but I do agree with SelinaAndBruce that Bruce should have at LEAST checked to see if that guy he saved actually survived...

Originally posted by Bat Dude
1. I always thought that Ras was one of Batman's greatest foes, but hey, whatever you guys think is alright with me...

2. But it's the fact that he went against what he had been saying the ENTIRE movie... AND the fact that the true Batman would have at least attempted to save him... I can understand Ras not deserving it, but what about all the complaints about Joker in B89? Everyone complained that Batman didn't try to save him, well, Joker didn't deserve it either... But again, the thing that I REALLY didn't like was that he was basically doing the EXACT opposite of what he was preaching the whole movie, that "No one is beyond saving..."

3. Fair enough, but I do agree with SelinaAndBruce that Bruce should have at LEAST checked to see if that guy he saved actually survived...

2.I understand what your saying and thats a good point, the huge difference here which is what bothers batman fans about Batman 89 is that Batman didnt kill Ducard so its acceptable with Begins what happened, where with batman 89,Bruce did kill The Joker and he should have been prosecuted for it regardless of the jokers past actions instead of treating him like a damn hero.It wasnt believeble at all.Thats why I really loved Batman Begins is because of the believeablity in it that just wasnt there with the Burton films.Bruce went out and caught Falcone for the police,something THEY couldnt do, and regardless of that,That police commissioner STILL wanted Batman captured when he said-Nobody is going to take the law into their own hands.Not in my town.Nobody is above the law.Thats realistic.thats the kind of realisem I expected to see in Batman 89 but never got to see till Batman Begins. I sure am glad that with YOU in our debates,you dont ignore points and forget whats been told to you and have to have the same thing repeated to you over and over and over again because of horrible memory problems.

3.I assume your talking about Ducard his mentor? Thats the only one he pulled out and saved right?

IMO in Batman 1989 Batman didn't kill the Joker he tried to restrain the Joker by preventing him from getting away. The Joker just ended up dead because his constant trying to escape caused the gargoyle to come free and pull him down to his death. I don't think it was Batman's intention that the Joker fall to his death like that all just his intention that the Joker didn't escape.

That's my take on it and always has been I never thought he meant to kill the Joker more so that it happened and he didn't regret it. Now him not regretting it I think is definitely out of character in a way.

Originally posted by SelinaAndBruce
IMO in Batman 1989 Batman didn't kill the Joker he tried to restrain the Joker by preventing him from getting away. The Joker just ended up dead because his constant trying to escape caused the gargoyle to come free and pull him down to his death. I don't think it was Batman's intention that the Joker fall to his death like that all just his intention that the Joker didn't escape.

That's my take on it and always has been I never thought he meant to kill the Joker more so that it happened and he didn't regret it. Now him not regretting it I think is definitely out of character in a way.

Too True! i gotta agree to that. it wasnt intentional.... that laughing bastard just wouldnt stop dancing! LOL! (trying to get away i mean!)

jim carry woulda made a great 2face. but val kiilmer was the best in that era. batman and robin sucked more than pamela anderson sucking off tommy lee and bret michaels

Val Kilmer was terrible. He just looked better than Keaton IMO but his acting as Batman was just flat. His line delivery was painful and awkward.

"I gotta get you out of those clothes".
"It's the car. Chicks dig the car".