Talk:Batman Forever
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Worst Batman Run since the 60s
Tommy Lee Jones is a great actor. There was no excuse for him to ham it up so over-the-top in this; however, I believe it was direction. The next Batman movie was even worse. Something should be said on this page and the one for the Clooney Batman that the production team (including writers, directors and ACTORS) did not take these two movies seriously and aggregiously wounded the Batman idea. Tom S.
- It really amazes me when people insult Tommy Lee Jones performance as over-the-top. I really liked how he was calm and cool as Dent yet just psychotic as Two-Face. It may not be exactly what is in the comics, but it is certainly a valid interpretation (and really that's what all movie versions of comics are, an interpretation). At any rate I don't think he was any more over-the-top than Nicholson's Joker. That's not an insult, Nicholson was phenominal. But these characters are larger than life and beyond the norm. If you simply mean Jones was overacting, I refer you to Cobb or Natural Born Killers. Compared to those he's positively subdued in Batman Forever. I think there's a lot in Forever that is true to Batman and was mising from all the other three to a degree. Someone on the new DVDs made a really interesting statement. As it relates to the comics, Batman is Bob Kane's 1939 version. Batman Returns is how the characters were treated in the 90s. Batman Forever is Bill Finger's heyday in the 1940s with an intersting detective or adventure story yet larger than life props like the giant typewriters and huge pennies in the Batcave. Batman & Robin is the TV show. All are valid interpretations, it really just depends on what you like.--Talison 05:14, 31 October 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Tim Burton Inconsistencies?
It says early in the article that "Originally it was intended that the third Batman film would be directed by Burton... When Burton was attached by the studio to the Superman film..." Later, in the Trivia section, it says that, "Director Tim Burton intended to direct the third film in the franchise, but turned it down due to creative differences."
The first quote makes it seem that Burton became attached to another movie and was unable to direct, but the latter quote says he refused it. Are they both true? Maybe the first should be changed to say that Burton refused the role as director or that was not to work on the project.
--Daev 03:44, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
[edit] Remarks
Only Frank Gorshin could play E.NIGMA aka THE RIDDLER
[edit] Failure?
I removed uncited, unsourced, unverifiable comments in relation to Batman Forever being a failure, as we need some statistics or other verifiable information to back this claim up. Feel free to add some if you have it. Werdna648T/C\@ 11:46, 2 January 2006 (UTC)
- Failure??, hell no, it was probably the most successful Batman movie since Batman 1 (but maybe not as successful as the recent one).
I think Schumacher dropped the ball big time
[edit] Critical reaction and box office Bias
This section seems to be a POV fork, Characterizing opinions of people's work. The lines which seem to be biased are:
Due to the fact that Batman Returns earned less than the original, Warner Bros. insisted the movie be made into a kid-friendly cash cow.1
This resulted making the third Batman movie with a feel that was more reminiscent to the 1960s TV show than its Burton predecessors
Batman Forever has been regarded by some as a homoerotic movie after a conservative columnist for the Chicago Sun-Times, Gary Willis, (not a movie reviewer) sardonically bashed the movie's campiness and perceived homoerotic motifs ("Batman Forever is a Gay Old Time," Chicago Sun-Times, 1995). Though not defending the film's cinematic merits, most view this analysis a groundless throwback to similar homophobic criticisms of the early years of the comic books and the 1960's TV series.
- I suggest that this be removed...Much of the negativity came from the drastic makeover of the franchise (most of it led by Joel Schumacher at the will of the Warner Bros. executives)....unless a source is provided. Forever young 04:23, 22 January 2006 (UTC)
Authenticity check: A search reveals that the phrase "regarded by many" appears in the text. Is the phrase a symptom of a dubious statement? Could a source be quoted instead? Perhaps the "many" could be identified? Might text be edited to more genuinely reflect specific facts? —Wetman |
[edit] My Power, My Pleasure, My PAIN
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ateQQc-AgEM&search=Batman%20Forever
...And despite criticism, there's a degree of depth to Batman Forever that Batman and Robin clearly did not have. Several scenes were cut that would have expanded the plot and made the film seem whole instead of inconsistent to fit with the stunts and the action set peices. The only real flaw being that Tommy Lee Jones thought he was playing The Joker and displayed nothing of what made Harvey who he was.
Damn you and your mother for dissing Tommy. He was the master of light and dark, and made The Joker laughable in comparison. "Emotion's always the enemy of true justice"- Two Face
[edit] Plot
I dont think it's necessary to write everything that happens in the movie in this section.
[edit] POV
This article has pov issues. The reaction area reads liike one persons opinion: Kilmers wooden performance, criticism of Joel, cartoonish acts by Jim and Tommy, criticism of gadgets etc etc. Though many of these opinions are most likely true, it needs to be referenced properly. The plot needs a massive rewrite as well, it is huge, the whole article is 33 kilobytes. Davey4 02:21, 25 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Image
[edit] Best Batman Of Them All
I hated that stupid Batman and Robin film that one sucked and the batman films before this were worse! But This film was a genuine work of art.
Batman, Batman Returns, and Batman & Robin all have the movie posters in the infobox, whereas this one has the DVD cover. Can somebody please upload a movie poster for this one too? Osaboramirez 07:27, 24 November 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Home Video releases
The text pretty much assumes that the UK Region 2 DVD is the only R2 release, there are many others. Also, only the UK release was previously cut, while all other R2 releases (both original and special edition) were/are uncut http://dvdcompare.net/comparisons/film.php?fid=41 62.142.194.228 12:52, 19 February 2007 (UTC)