Karry Best movie of this year hands down!

Cebalord Very best movie i ever watch

Unlimitedia Sick Product of a Sick System

Erica Derrick By the time the dramatic fireworks start popping off, each one feels earned.

adamjackson-91071 When it seemed everyone and their mother complained of the adult material in Batman Returns, it's dark tone, the sexual references, the grossness, (both box office and nature), Warners were quick to change direction of the Batman franchise. When Burton dropped out into a producer role, (how much impact he had on the final film I do not know), Joel Schumacher was brought in as replacement, with the task to make it more easily accessible to kids, and more light hearted. Upon hearing this Michael Keaton also dropped out, meaning the new director needed to sought out a new Batman. In steps Val Kilmer into the cape and cowl. A decent actor, and more in line with the physicality of Bruce Wayne, would seem on paper to be a deft replacement. But it's what was actually on paper, that let his performance down. Everything about this film is a direct contrast to the earlier entries. No longer adopting a broody dark atmosphere, it instead adopts a lighter, more "heroic" approach. Gothic architecture also scrapped, in its place a neon drenched super city, utilising far more special and visual effects than maybe the first two films combined. It suffers from this however, the city never feels lived in anymore, just vast and bright, empty. It also looks computer-y in some scenes, namely the exterior of the circus shot, which doesn't help in drawing people into that world. Everything about this film is weaker than the earlier entries, which is mainly down to the script. It's widely known there is a darker cut of the film with 40 minutes extra, and it is known to have a darker first draft script, probably when Burton and Keaton were both still attached. I NEED to see this directors cut. I feel it would completely change the film's legacy and reputation. But the shooting script is somewhat disappointing. Making a great actor in Tommy Lee Jones, (replacing Billy Dee Williams), perform as a mixture of the Joker and channeling his co-star Jim Carrey. (There is a well known serious conflict of personalities between the two during filming.) I feel if the character were more true to its comic origins, Jones would have been an excellent Two-Face. Clearly Carrey has been cast to just be Jim Carrey with his Riddler, I feel he is one of the highlights of the film however, although he quite have easily, and more effectively, been a good choice for a darker take on the character also. Nicole Kidman is the sexed up love interest, Chase Meridian. She spends much of the film in a permanent state of lust, and doesn't actually bring anything to the film other than her insane attractiveness, and that's it. Chris O'Donnell is brought in as Dick Grayson/Robin, but his age does suspend belief in the majority of his scenes where he's clearly supposed to be someone of college age. Again it's mainly the writing and the crafting of the character, as opposed to his performance, that drags it down. Interesting to think how Burton would have tackled the character. Danny Elfman is also absent, in his place is Elliot Goldenthal, whose score doesn't compare with Elfman's even remotely. But it's solid enough for the film, and does feel more light and heroic. More kid friendly. Which is what the film succeeds in. It's far more kid friendly, in every aspect, but it pays a terrible price for it which drags the film down. There are elements of a good Batman film in there, but it's not enough to even be compared to its two brilliant predecessors. It doesn't even feel like it belongs in the same universe as them, could easily be seen as a reboot. It's an entertaining film, definitely. The plot, as daft as it gets sometimes, moves quickly, and the whole film works, as a film. As a Batman film, it doesn't even hold a candle to the first two. What this film led to two years later is catastrophically worse, and although the cracks started showing in this entry, at least it never got to to the levels of Batman & Robin...

elshikh4 Now that's a loud matter to review !(Val Kilmer) was just a handsome robot, delivering his lines tastelessly as if it's intentional. At one episode of "Inside The Actor Studio", Kilmer said that he hated the role, the suit, the whole deal, but Hey.. that's not an enough justification for not making his best, or spending any effort (or maybe what we watched was his best !). The script provided us with many explosive situations, but it was idiotic at certain places; Bruce Wayne is thinking about bat, so he's Batman ! (I may think about sea at times, so that makes me Aquaman ?!!). Batman saves Harvey Dent / Two-Face from a whole deformation, so the latter wants to revenge on Batman NOT the real doer ?? Moreover, the solution of all the Riddler's riddles' is the "Riddler" himself, so he was only declaring himself ?? There were smart ideas along the way, which the script wasted utterly; like the character of the Two-Face as someone who lives an inner conflict all the time, and also the plan of the Riddler to suck the people's brains through TV. But who said that this movie wanted to be smart ?! The movie wanted to make crazy action unremittingly, while being one huge party of vociferous colors unlike its too dark antecedent Batman Returns. Yes, the colors were harmonious, but their turmoil was onerous. Therefore Elliot Goldenthal's orchestrated music sounded too noisy to stand among all of this. Ironically, the movie's music video with U2's masterpiece (Hold Me, Thrill Me, Kiss Me, Kill Me) was better than the movie itself !Name good things IN it ? Well, just 2 things were perfect : the beauty of Nicole Kidman and Drew Barrymore, and when I knew that (William Baldwin) was considered for the role of Batman and (Linda Hamilton) as his girl; since I thanked God, deeming not doing that a good thing indeed !To everyone complained about (Batman & Robin) as the uglier one in the first franchise, telling unstoppable jokes about the nipples of the Batsuit as the lowest bottom that movie hit-please look closer, the nipples made their first appearance IN HERE first, where the evil seed of "silly" was sown. To end it on a tolerant note, I'll say that this is a gaudy, loud, silly action; which's usual in most of Hollywood movies !

Duff Chastain This movie is a lot different from, and in my opinion much inferior to, the first two entries in the (original) Batman movie franchise. I think it's because they had new creative people in place (the new director but also some new cast), and they took the movie into a much too cartoon-like direction. I thought the original Batman movie (1989) was fantastic, and I know a lot of people actually disliked Batman Returns but I still thought it was a very good, entertaining movie. But this movie I thought was a clunker, and the one after this (Batman and Robin) is a complete disaster.You'll enjoy the series if you stop after the second one, when Tim Burton and Michael Keaton both left the series. Trust me.

ElMaruecan82 "Batman Forever" has all the makings of a great superhero film, the costume design are top notch, Gotham City looks great and the special effects never betray the fact that this was released in 1995, and I particularly adored the moment where the Bat-Signal became the dot under the Riddler's interrogation mark, all in flashy green. But I can also use a still frame of that moment to describe my general puzzlement toward the film. It's not bad enough to deserve a severe bashing but it's one of these cases where a film comes so close to being great that your disappointment almost amplifies the flaws. I could say that at least, this is no "Batman & Robin" but that wouldn't say much, would it? So, Burton became the producer and Joel Schumacher, although in another league of filmmaking, injected something fresh and unprecedented in a franchise that was getting maybe too dark and too gloomy for its own good. Batman is no jovial fellow but the problem when you overplay the noir tone is that you create a world where the notion of 'heroism' is totally relative. And when someone goes to such extents to save the world from crime, having to wear all these heavy costumes, and engineering the most sophisticated weapons, you've got to accept that there are positive motives behind it. At the end of "Batman Returns", I felt quite depressed, this was a movie where the villains were as misfit as the 'hero' and needed a great deal of psychotherapy. "Batman Forever" tends to get to the original format with a clearly defined hero and villain and still maintain a balanced psychological approach to Bruce Wayne. It's not all flash and no substance.And another mistake it doesn't commit is to overflow the film with villains like "Returns", this time, there are two bad guys, they're not on the same level than Joker, but together, they form a pair that is rather entertaining although a bit redundant, there's the maniac Harvey Dent two-Face played by Tommy Lee Jones and Edward Nygma aka the Riddler, a scientist played by Jim Carrey. They form a rather interesting duo except for one thing: they're equally crazy, and it's like each one tries to top the other, they're like the human versions of "The Lion King" hyenas or the weasels from "Who framed Roger Rabbi". On the other hand, Val Kilmer (a decent Batman) plays a low-key Bruce Wayne who meets journalist Chase Meredian (Nicole Kidman) with and without the costume. Well, she's obviously attracted by his leather counterpart but from his interactions, you can tell he's tempted to unveil a few of his secrets, the interactions work and prove that there's not a Batman movie with a good romantic love interest.But while Serena Kyle was also enigmatic on her own right and kind of stole Batman's thunder, Chase is that little anchor to Batman's status as a hero, even hinting at some sexual aspects of Batman, the movie generally pretends to ignore, there's a sort of self-awareness to appreciate in the film. Overall, I loved how it tried some new things while respecting a form of continuity with the previous Batman, and that includes another great performance from Michael Gough as Alfred. I guess it also gets right the encounter with Dick Grayson aka future Robin in a circus scene that has all the futuristic and baroque visuals you expect from a Batman film, spicing up the movie with a new young and rebellious protagonist who's the tumultuous Yin to Batman's yang. The Freudian undertones are subdued; we know there's something of a surrogate father in Batman with Robin, while he's also hooked to the memories of his parents' death and the conviction that he killed them somehow.But the film seems always at the edge of reaching something powerful without really getting to it, and I guess the blame is on the overuse of special effects and the villains that never find the right note. When Bruce and Grace's interview were disrupted by their entrance, I was bothered too and I didn't really care for the part where Riddler was throwing explosive balls. Sure the pyrotechnics did justice to the film's budget, but did it have more to prove on a less visual level? I seriously wish it would have tried to explore more in depth the personality of "Batman", especially from the perspective of a journalist. That's what makes "Batman Forever" a frustrating experience, moments of brilliance ruined by unexpected plot contrivances and too flashy visuals thrown at our faces.I will never understand what the purpose of that close-up on Batman rubber buttocks was supposed to inspire, what the writers thought when Grace came up with such a corny line as "Batman will come to rescue me" and the two villains venture so many times in cartoons' territory, especially with Carrey channeling both the Mask and Ace Ventura, that you have the feeling Bruce Wayne is really lost, as the only realistic man, caught in a live-action cartoon. Joel Schumacher is no untalented director, he got the budget, the right casting and the special effects but for some reason, he didn't create the right balance between the hero and villains' personality, so that the film often falls in the obvious trap and while being slightly better than "Batman Returns" never reaches the level of "Batman", it's a mixed bag, but with a few enjoyable moments.Again, it plays many leagues above "Batman & Robin", which explains why they went for a fourth movie, you know, the one too many.