Batman Forever (US - DVD R1)
Dustin McNeill reviews the film that started the franchise circling the bowl.
I'm pretty sure that most everyone on the planet over the age of five is in agreement that when director Joel Schumacher took over for Tim Burton in 1994, the Bat-franchise hit rock bottom in only two films. Most often, we cut Batman Forever a little slack as not being as bad as it's brain-cell depleting successor. Having re-watched the film recently after several years, I have to wonder why. Batman Forever is actually nothing more than Batman & Robin but with the smallest hint of restraint. In the end, I can only think of two reasons why you'd ever want to watch this film a second time and since this is in fact the beginning, I'll wait a little while to reveal them. For clarification, none of them involve rubber nipples or Chris O'Donnell.
If you plan on picking this special edition up, I must recommend buying it as part of the Batman Motion Picture Anthology. That way if you happen to be in line at your local DVD retailer, you won't have to stand there holding a copy of Batman Forever for everyone to see and judge you by. Don't think you can offset it by purchasing the first two Batman films separately and holding them together, that'll only look worse. Your only excuse to buy this film should be as part of a larger box set, trust me.
Feature
In Batman Forever, we find Gotham troubled by former district attorney Harvey 'Two-Face 'Dent, now a criminal after being scarred with acid which results in his split-personality disorder hence the name 'Two-Face'. Switch to Wayne Enterprises employee Edward Nygma, a major loser, who gets his invention dubbed the ‘Box' rejected by Bruce Wayne, sending Nygma over the edge. He becomes a peculiar criminal, the Riddler, and teams up with Two-Face to ruin Batman by exposing his secret identity. Their plan involves mass-producing the ‘Box', which creates fantasy scenarios in the user’s head while beaming their private thoughts back to Nygma. While this is all unfolding, Bruce Wane takes in an orphaned circus performer, Dick Grayson. Grayson of course eventually becomes Robin and the Dynamic Duo take on Two-Face and the Riddler.
It's a delicate matter to discuss the main fault of Batman Forever. The key word that comes to mind is flamboyance which is often wrongly termed as being 'gay' as in "Schumachers Batman movies are so gay." I missed out on any overt homosexuality in the film, but caught bucket-loads of flamboyance. Is that to say that there are no homo-erotic undertones to Batman Forever? Not at all, they're definitely there. I cringe to think of what possessed the Riddler to switch from his somewhat dignified green suit in the public eye to his tight-fitting spandex outfit when he and Two-Face return to their layer or what made him want to wear a glittered outfit for the finale. Combine his wacky fashion choices with his unhealthy obsession towards Bruce Wayne and you've got a character of questionable sexual orientation. I'm not trying to say that the character's gay, but we didn't have these kinds of innuendos with the Burton films.
As much as I hate to hear myself say this, a huge fault of the movie was introducing Robin in the first place, much less having him played by a much too old Chris O'Donnell. Robin may work in the cartoon, the comic book, and the 60's show, but when you try to introduce the concept into a serious live-action film, the character becomes rather idiotic. The Dark Knight needs help from a boy? Surprisingly, Schumacher toned down Robin’s costume for Batman Forever, from the bright reds and yellows to darker tones. I was stunned.
Another bad blow was the casting of Val Kilmer, who looks more confused than anything else in this movie. Yet apart from O'Donnell and Kilmer’s stale performances, the casting is terrific even when the material isn't. I bet if given a better script, Jim Carrey could've been an excellent Riddler. The same goes for Tommy Lee Jones as Two-Face. His character is made out to be incredibly stupid, spouting out one-liners every chance he's given. These two were portrayed with more dignity and depth in the Fox animated series for crying out loud! Here comes the first reason why you'd ever want to watch Batman Forever twice, Nicole Kidman in the sizzling hot role of psychologist Dr. Chase Meridian. Her character is the first and only Bat-babe in the series who tries to figure out Batman/Bruce Wayne and I wish we could've had more of this.
Following up on the fantastic production design of Batman Returns, Batman Forever looks... well... to repeat myself, incredibly flamboyant. In the opening scene of the film, Two-Face is holding up a bank and rather than normal police spotlights pointed up at the building, there are funky shaped disco lights circling the area... for what purpose? There's an entire section of downtown Gotham where a gang resides that's painted bright glowing neon. Oh, right... because street gangs love neon? The worst is the Riddler’s island hideout in the finale. He's got giant question mark neon lights all over the place. Did he just stroll into a local hardware store and custom order these? Where's the logic behind these insanely stupid sets? I know I'm harping on this too much, but there's a gigantic bat symbol in the bat cave. Why? Who's going to see it other than Alfred, Batman, and eventually Robin? Is it an ego thing or what?
The second reason why you'd ever want to watch Batman Forever twice would be the excellent score by Elliot Goldenthal. Instead of directly copying Elfman’s work on the series, Goldenthal uses only bits and pieces of the Batman theme and with it creates something new and exciting. The music is considerably brighter than previous scores, but then again so is the film. I wish the entire film had turned out as well as the score did.
I'm entirely okay with a more family friendly version of Batman. What I'm not okay with is this logic-less bright neon rave of a film we've been given. The saddest part of all is that director Joel Schumacher and screenwriter Akiva Goldsman are capable of so much more and have better films on their resume than this. I truly believe that knowing what he knows now, Schumacher could've made two great Batman films that were both lighter and more family friendly without venturing into the territory he did.
In conclusion, I absolutely hated Batman Forever after my recent viewing. Sure it's watchable, and maybe even entertaining if you don't use your brain, but that's not how a Batman movie should be. But it sold a lot of action figures, and to the studio, that is most important.
Video
Batman Forever is presented in 1:85:1 anamorphic widescreen. Video quality is fantastic here, producing a sharp and artefact-free image. Colours are particularly vibrant, which is a must since this flick has more of them than a Liberachi Vegas show. Black levels are near perfect, as was the case with the previous two films in the franchise. Conclude from my compliments that if Batman Forever actually had anything worth looking at besides Nicole Kidman, it would look great. Warner Brothers has done everything in their power to make the movie look as good as it can short of re-shooting it.
Audio
My ears jammed out to the Dolby Digital 5.1 track of Batman Forever. The audio here is actually more impressive than previous films in the series. Where musical score took centre stage on the previous tracks, here the spotlight focuses on atmosphere and loud sound effects. Music stays mostly on the rear channels, while all others are used for dialogue and atmosphere. Warner Brothers does not disappoint in the technical department on these special editions, that's for sure.
Extras
On disc one we have the theatrical trailer and a director commentary by Joel Schumacher. Believe it or not, Schumacher’s involvement in this special edition alone makes it worth owning. He's a thousand times easier to listen to expound upon his creation than Tim Burton was previously. In the first two minutes of the film, he addresses the rubber nipples on the costume and rather than apologize for every decision he made, he stands up for several of them which I really respect. I still disagree with him on them, but I respect him for what he has to say here. Schumacher discusses casting, stunts, visual effects, defends Batman Returns and his own film. I could talk about the commentary for several more paragraphs, so I'll wrap it up by telling you that it's one of the best commentaries I've ever heard on a DVD.
First up on disc two is 'Riddle Me This: Why is Batman Forever?', an absolutely horrid promotional featurette in the same vein as 'The Bat, the Cat, and the Penguin' feature from Batman Returns' special edition. The only thing worse than the horribly filmed opening sequence (on poor quality videotape, no less) is that Chris O'Donnell hosts it. This feature clocks in at twenty three minutes. The only upside to this is that if you're looking for cast interviews, they're scattered throughout this. The only two actors to return for new interviews are Val Kilmer and Chris O'Donnell so this is where you'll find Carrey, Kidman, and Jones.
Next up we have the fifth instalment of 'Shadows of the Bat: The Cinematic Saga of the Dark Knight' entitled 'Reinventing a Hero'. Clocking in at half an hour, this basically talks about the new direction that Batman Forever was going in and the time period in Batman comic history it was based on. Most of what is said here is obvious and could be assumed just by watching the film. Ultimately, a disappointing episode of this series considering parts one through four.
The best part of the second disc is the 'Beyond Batman' section, which is composed of five mini-documentaries on the production including design, Gotham City, stunts, visual effects, and music. A most convenient option is the 'Play All' feature that runs these together for a grand total of forty-five minutes. Thanks to fantastic on-set video, these are amazingly insightful looks into the production. My favourite was the featurette on the stunt-work in the picture.
Moving on, we have thirteen minutes of deleted scenes. When this set was first rumoured to be in production, word on the street was that Schumacher was going to release a darker director's cut of Batman Forever but that idea was scrapped in favour of including the deleted scenes here as bonus material. I've seen them all and there's definitely enough to justify a new cut, but it's all very difficult to watch and for one reason: Val Kilmer. The scenes are mostly of Bruce Wayne mucking around the Bat Cave and of flashbacks to his childhood. Kilmer doesn't emote very well when he's not speaking, so this material is truly a pain to watch, especially without music. There is an alternate opening with Two-Face escaping from Arkham, but it's misleading as he doesn't even make an appearance. I appreciate these scenes being included, however take a quick glance at the trailer on disc one and you'll see that more excised footage exists than what is given here.
Another feature standard to all movies in this set is a gallery of heroes and villains, made up of video biographies on the characters. They cover Batman, Robin, Chase Meridian, Riddler, and Two-Face. I find these entertaining for the insightful focus each character is given during their segment. These tell us who the character was in the comics, how they were changed for the film, and why the performer was cast in the role. Together, these total just under sixteen minutes.
Last up is the music video by Seal, 'Kiss from a Rose', directed by none other than Joel Schumacher. I found this music video to be just as cheesy now as it was when it came out, but then again, it's not Prince so I don't mind it. It is upsetting however, that the stellar music video by U2, 'Hold Me, Kiss Me, Thrill Me, Kill Me' isn't included here. It may be a rights issue since Universal released it a few years back on a U2 music video compilation DVD, but either way, I hate to see it absent.
Overall
This is one of those rare times when a DVD becomes worth owning because of its supplemental features. Even though I detest this film, I believe the director commentary alone almost makes it worth the purchase price. Toss in an excellent technical presentation and more entertaining supplements, and this DVD is alright by me. You did good, Warner Brothers.
If you plan on picking this special edition up, I must recommend buying it as part of the Batman Motion Picture Anthology. That way if you happen to be in line at your local DVD retailer, you won't have to stand there holding a copy of Batman Forever for everyone to see and judge you by. Don't think you can offset it by purchasing the first two Batman films separately and holding them together, that'll only look worse. Your only excuse to buy this film should be as part of a larger box set, trust me.
Feature
In Batman Forever, we find Gotham troubled by former district attorney Harvey 'Two-Face 'Dent, now a criminal after being scarred with acid which results in his split-personality disorder hence the name 'Two-Face'. Switch to Wayne Enterprises employee Edward Nygma, a major loser, who gets his invention dubbed the ‘Box' rejected by Bruce Wayne, sending Nygma over the edge. He becomes a peculiar criminal, the Riddler, and teams up with Two-Face to ruin Batman by exposing his secret identity. Their plan involves mass-producing the ‘Box', which creates fantasy scenarios in the user’s head while beaming their private thoughts back to Nygma. While this is all unfolding, Bruce Wane takes in an orphaned circus performer, Dick Grayson. Grayson of course eventually becomes Robin and the Dynamic Duo take on Two-Face and the Riddler.
It's a delicate matter to discuss the main fault of Batman Forever. The key word that comes to mind is flamboyance which is often wrongly termed as being 'gay' as in "Schumachers Batman movies are so gay." I missed out on any overt homosexuality in the film, but caught bucket-loads of flamboyance. Is that to say that there are no homo-erotic undertones to Batman Forever? Not at all, they're definitely there. I cringe to think of what possessed the Riddler to switch from his somewhat dignified green suit in the public eye to his tight-fitting spandex outfit when he and Two-Face return to their layer or what made him want to wear a glittered outfit for the finale. Combine his wacky fashion choices with his unhealthy obsession towards Bruce Wayne and you've got a character of questionable sexual orientation. I'm not trying to say that the character's gay, but we didn't have these kinds of innuendos with the Burton films.
As much as I hate to hear myself say this, a huge fault of the movie was introducing Robin in the first place, much less having him played by a much too old Chris O'Donnell. Robin may work in the cartoon, the comic book, and the 60's show, but when you try to introduce the concept into a serious live-action film, the character becomes rather idiotic. The Dark Knight needs help from a boy? Surprisingly, Schumacher toned down Robin’s costume for Batman Forever, from the bright reds and yellows to darker tones. I was stunned.
Another bad blow was the casting of Val Kilmer, who looks more confused than anything else in this movie. Yet apart from O'Donnell and Kilmer’s stale performances, the casting is terrific even when the material isn't. I bet if given a better script, Jim Carrey could've been an excellent Riddler. The same goes for Tommy Lee Jones as Two-Face. His character is made out to be incredibly stupid, spouting out one-liners every chance he's given. These two were portrayed with more dignity and depth in the Fox animated series for crying out loud! Here comes the first reason why you'd ever want to watch Batman Forever twice, Nicole Kidman in the sizzling hot role of psychologist Dr. Chase Meridian. Her character is the first and only Bat-babe in the series who tries to figure out Batman/Bruce Wayne and I wish we could've had more of this.
Following up on the fantastic production design of Batman Returns, Batman Forever looks... well... to repeat myself, incredibly flamboyant. In the opening scene of the film, Two-Face is holding up a bank and rather than normal police spotlights pointed up at the building, there are funky shaped disco lights circling the area... for what purpose? There's an entire section of downtown Gotham where a gang resides that's painted bright glowing neon. Oh, right... because street gangs love neon? The worst is the Riddler’s island hideout in the finale. He's got giant question mark neon lights all over the place. Did he just stroll into a local hardware store and custom order these? Where's the logic behind these insanely stupid sets? I know I'm harping on this too much, but there's a gigantic bat symbol in the bat cave. Why? Who's going to see it other than Alfred, Batman, and eventually Robin? Is it an ego thing or what?
The second reason why you'd ever want to watch Batman Forever twice would be the excellent score by Elliot Goldenthal. Instead of directly copying Elfman’s work on the series, Goldenthal uses only bits and pieces of the Batman theme and with it creates something new and exciting. The music is considerably brighter than previous scores, but then again so is the film. I wish the entire film had turned out as well as the score did.
I'm entirely okay with a more family friendly version of Batman. What I'm not okay with is this logic-less bright neon rave of a film we've been given. The saddest part of all is that director Joel Schumacher and screenwriter Akiva Goldsman are capable of so much more and have better films on their resume than this. I truly believe that knowing what he knows now, Schumacher could've made two great Batman films that were both lighter and more family friendly without venturing into the territory he did.
In conclusion, I absolutely hated Batman Forever after my recent viewing. Sure it's watchable, and maybe even entertaining if you don't use your brain, but that's not how a Batman movie should be. But it sold a lot of action figures, and to the studio, that is most important.
Video
Batman Forever is presented in 1:85:1 anamorphic widescreen. Video quality is fantastic here, producing a sharp and artefact-free image. Colours are particularly vibrant, which is a must since this flick has more of them than a Liberachi Vegas show. Black levels are near perfect, as was the case with the previous two films in the franchise. Conclude from my compliments that if Batman Forever actually had anything worth looking at besides Nicole Kidman, it would look great. Warner Brothers has done everything in their power to make the movie look as good as it can short of re-shooting it.
Audio
My ears jammed out to the Dolby Digital 5.1 track of Batman Forever. The audio here is actually more impressive than previous films in the series. Where musical score took centre stage on the previous tracks, here the spotlight focuses on atmosphere and loud sound effects. Music stays mostly on the rear channels, while all others are used for dialogue and atmosphere. Warner Brothers does not disappoint in the technical department on these special editions, that's for sure.
Extras
On disc one we have the theatrical trailer and a director commentary by Joel Schumacher. Believe it or not, Schumacher’s involvement in this special edition alone makes it worth owning. He's a thousand times easier to listen to expound upon his creation than Tim Burton was previously. In the first two minutes of the film, he addresses the rubber nipples on the costume and rather than apologize for every decision he made, he stands up for several of them which I really respect. I still disagree with him on them, but I respect him for what he has to say here. Schumacher discusses casting, stunts, visual effects, defends Batman Returns and his own film. I could talk about the commentary for several more paragraphs, so I'll wrap it up by telling you that it's one of the best commentaries I've ever heard on a DVD.
First up on disc two is 'Riddle Me This: Why is Batman Forever?', an absolutely horrid promotional featurette in the same vein as 'The Bat, the Cat, and the Penguin' feature from Batman Returns' special edition. The only thing worse than the horribly filmed opening sequence (on poor quality videotape, no less) is that Chris O'Donnell hosts it. This feature clocks in at twenty three minutes. The only upside to this is that if you're looking for cast interviews, they're scattered throughout this. The only two actors to return for new interviews are Val Kilmer and Chris O'Donnell so this is where you'll find Carrey, Kidman, and Jones.
Next up we have the fifth instalment of 'Shadows of the Bat: The Cinematic Saga of the Dark Knight' entitled 'Reinventing a Hero'. Clocking in at half an hour, this basically talks about the new direction that Batman Forever was going in and the time period in Batman comic history it was based on. Most of what is said here is obvious and could be assumed just by watching the film. Ultimately, a disappointing episode of this series considering parts one through four.
The best part of the second disc is the 'Beyond Batman' section, which is composed of five mini-documentaries on the production including design, Gotham City, stunts, visual effects, and music. A most convenient option is the 'Play All' feature that runs these together for a grand total of forty-five minutes. Thanks to fantastic on-set video, these are amazingly insightful looks into the production. My favourite was the featurette on the stunt-work in the picture.
Moving on, we have thirteen minutes of deleted scenes. When this set was first rumoured to be in production, word on the street was that Schumacher was going to release a darker director's cut of Batman Forever but that idea was scrapped in favour of including the deleted scenes here as bonus material. I've seen them all and there's definitely enough to justify a new cut, but it's all very difficult to watch and for one reason: Val Kilmer. The scenes are mostly of Bruce Wayne mucking around the Bat Cave and of flashbacks to his childhood. Kilmer doesn't emote very well when he's not speaking, so this material is truly a pain to watch, especially without music. There is an alternate opening with Two-Face escaping from Arkham, but it's misleading as he doesn't even make an appearance. I appreciate these scenes being included, however take a quick glance at the trailer on disc one and you'll see that more excised footage exists than what is given here.
Another feature standard to all movies in this set is a gallery of heroes and villains, made up of video biographies on the characters. They cover Batman, Robin, Chase Meridian, Riddler, and Two-Face. I find these entertaining for the insightful focus each character is given during their segment. These tell us who the character was in the comics, how they were changed for the film, and why the performer was cast in the role. Together, these total just under sixteen minutes.
Last up is the music video by Seal, 'Kiss from a Rose', directed by none other than Joel Schumacher. I found this music video to be just as cheesy now as it was when it came out, but then again, it's not Prince so I don't mind it. It is upsetting however, that the stellar music video by U2, 'Hold Me, Kiss Me, Thrill Me, Kill Me' isn't included here. It may be a rights issue since Universal released it a few years back on a U2 music video compilation DVD, but either way, I hate to see it absent.
Overall
This is one of those rare times when a DVD becomes worth owning because of its supplemental features. Even though I detest this film, I believe the director commentary alone almost makes it worth the purchase price. Toss in an excellent technical presentation and more entertaining supplements, and this DVD is alright by me. You did good, Warner Brothers.
Review by Dustin McNeill
Advertisements
Existing Posts
I honestly HATED Batman Forever. Spider-Man 3 is so much better.
Yay
All this talk about Forever, I busted it out yesterday. Loved listening to the interviews. It is interesting to hear Bob Kane's widow talk about how he wanted Forever to be toned down from Returns which he thought was too dark.
I really enjoy listing to Schumacher's commentary. I love his frankness about everything from the design, to the nipples on the batsuit.
I really enjoy listing to Schumacher's commentary. I love his frankness about everything from the design, to the nipples on the batsuit.
I can't remeber. I think it was on the last page of the comic menus. I'll have to check again.
Gabe, where is/how do you access the "index" on the Batman Begins disc 2 that you refer to in post #57?
Here in Australia we get a great sounding DTS track! (Just to get back to the DVD....)
I can totally see what they were going for with that design and it is a cool concept. But it is a major pain in the arse to navigate at times. And if you are like me, sometimes, I want to hit the "play all" and just let it flow. Lazy perhaps, but after a long day at work, it is nice not to have to "work" for some entertainment, LOL 
I just hope Warners doesn't screw us over and add a directors cut and other extras to a Forever HD/Blu Ray (not sure who Warners has aligned with)release. That would not be good.
I just hope Warners doesn't screw us over and add a directors cut and other extras to a Forever HD/Blu Ray (not sure who Warners has aligned with)release. That would not be good.
I tried to show my roomate the bit on the fighting technique they used, but the bloody menu systems are so user unfriendly that it took like 5 minutes of clicking and searching....then I found the index.
LL cruize, I completely agree with you on the Begins thing. The Play All features on these special editions is what made them so great, linking the little stuff together. Begins did get kind of a c**p special edition compared to these. They tried to be cool with the comic book layout on disc two, but failed miserably.
One thing I forgot to mention (to get back on topic a sec). I was REALLY excited about this film when it was announced over at BOF that it would be a directors cut. Was disappointed that it wasn't. Also was disappointed that not all the videos were acquired. "Kiss By a Rose" is a great song, but would have been nice to have all the videos just to complete things out. Still, as the review puts it, the extras on this baby are plentiful and more than make it worth a purchase.
Now if only they can give us a decent Begins disk with deleted scenes, commentary and "play all" feature for the making of parts, I will be a happy man
Now if only they can give us a decent Begins disk with deleted scenes, commentary and "play all" feature for the making of parts, I will be a happy man
For Christ's sake. I wish the internet came with a tonal display. You can't maintain a normal human level of discussion because everyone sees a negative remark as an attack. Sarcasm, mild annoyance, indifference, none of these transfer in these text boxes. The more I explain myself, the more defensive people get. How have I or Dustin not shown honor in our discussion? Maybe I need to reread everything, but this uber-sensitivity needs to stop. Seriously, I love all you guys, especially downfall...where ever he may be...*sniff*
I can sense a world of sarcasm, eh? 
I am no longer confused regarding the integrity of contributors on this board.
Um, are you confusing me with Dustin? We are different people. Hell, I don't even know what he looks like. Spelling errors and opinions aside, using the word "thou" as a serious means of convesation is pretty condescending (I looked that one up just for you, seeing that there's no spell check on the boards 
). I didn't mean to "chastise" you as much as make it clear that I had a pet peeve (one word, or two?) about that specific behavior.
). I didn't mean to "chastise" you as much as make it clear that I had a pet peeve (one word, or two?) about that specific behavior.
Dustin,
No, Thank You.
You're doing a fine job of chastising those make an error and this is a finer board for it. Keep up the good work. Since I was merely paraphrasing, I felt that those who point out my errors shouldn't be so quick to judgement when spelling is usually paramount to making a point and those who do are snarkier than I.
But I digress, I should actually apologize to those on this board for letting this go so far and not clarifying what I hope everyone would see as an opinion but instead you were so kind to point out my glaring mistake of how I perceived the legacy of a cartoon character.
Keep up the good work Caped Crusader!
No, Thank You.
You're doing a fine job of chastising those make an error and this is a finer board for it. Keep up the good work. Since I was merely paraphrasing, I felt that those who point out my errors shouldn't be so quick to judgement when spelling is usually paramount to making a point and those who do are snarkier than I.
But I digress, I should actually apologize to those on this board for letting this go so far and not clarifying what I hope everyone would see as an opinion but instead you were so kind to point out my glaring mistake of how I perceived the legacy of a cartoon character.
Keep up the good work Caped Crusader!
to me, I actually liked Tommy Lee Jones as Two Face and Jim Carrey as the Riddler, I thought they did great jobs at portraying their character and were funny as hell. Val Kilmer was 'eh' as Batman of course, but at least the movie made up with hottness from Nicole Kidman's character. Another thing I enjoyed was Alfred. he was the only believable character in this movie and he was excellent! Don't diss the Alfred! Other than that, this movie was 'blah' and 'eh'. The batmobile looked like c**p and the set designs were very 'shotty' The film was too futuristic looking in my opinion. This isn't Batman Beyond, this is Batman, set in the 1950s or so. Where were all those old classic cars and such? Didn't care for that. Other than that, thank God for Batman Begins!
Ah... and thank you Thembones for using your own opinion as blatantly incorrect fact as in post #29. You're quick to point out the mistakes of others but completley sidestep your own when called out.
Charming.
Charming.
Thank you for capturing the essence of the contributors on this board.
LLcruize wrote: I think the great thing about all these films is each one encompases something that brought all of us to the character through the years.
That is what I meant to say above in my first sentence.
I think it has been said a few times and I agree. In my opinion, Mask of the Phantasm has been my favorite Batman movie of all them, live action or animated.
That is what I meant to say above in my first sentence.
I think it has been said a few times and I agree. In my opinion, Mask of the Phantasm has been my favorite Batman movie of all them, live action or animated.
Ah, snarky and petty. Charming.
Gabe Powers wrote:
hiest
Yeah, I kind of get irked when people don't use spell check but I do agree with the rest of the post.
hiest
Yeah, I kind of get irked when people don't use spell check but I do agree with the rest of the post.
I think the great thing about all these films is each one encompases something that brought all of us to the films. I think Batman 89, Batman Forever & Batman Begins culls all of the incarnations that people love and depending on which they love, one of these films will fill that need. Returns and B&R seem to be an island all to themselves. Returns on the large is seen as way too gothic and B&R way too camp. But the other three seem to contain what each type of fan enjoys the most.
I personally think Begins is darker than the 89 movie -- for one, it really showed the inherent chaos the city was in. In the 89 version the city was dark with petty hoodlums running around but it never really felt foreboding or decrepit like in Begins. And as for claiming that Batman never showing any detective skills in Begins, think again. Bruce listens in on private conversations and in one scene of the movie, he's writing down the names of potential allies or enemies (that's the scene where he finds the bat flying around in his house). I think they'll explore Batman's detective skills much more in the sequel, though.
sheesh... if 'Begins' had been the first one out the door, I probably would've never been the batman fan I am today.
if it weren't for the more elaborate fight sequences (if you could even make them out) or the dull and far less theatrical setting, I can't see how 'Begins' was anymore darker then the original '89 film... besides, bale's take on the character was 'too' much of a brute, and barely gave hints of the character possessing any kind of detecting skills at all. seriously, if morgan freeman- er, sorry I mean lucious fox weren't in the film I seriously wonder how bale's dark knight would've succeded. maybe michael caine- er, I mean nigel powers, er-alfred could've helped out.
if it weren't for the more elaborate fight sequences (if you could even make them out) or the dull and far less theatrical setting, I can't see how 'Begins' was anymore darker then the original '89 film... besides, bale's take on the character was 'too' much of a brute, and barely gave hints of the character possessing any kind of detecting skills at all. seriously, if morgan freeman- er, sorry I mean lucious fox weren't in the film I seriously wonder how bale's dark knight would've succeded. maybe michael caine- er, I mean nigel powers, er-alfred could've helped out.
Thembones, Thembones, Thembones...
That's great that you've now called it your opinion of what the true vision of Batman is... but your original post said that this film and camp in general had nothing to do with the legacy of Batman which is VERY incorrect. You nowhere stated you meant that as an opinion.
By the way, Tricky D**ky, you make it seem as though I'm bashing homosexuals. I am not. If you didn't find anything queer however about Jim Carry as the Riddler, then I'd be surprised. I'm certainly not the first person to have found his performance and costumes questionable, for the record. And I'm by no means suggesting that many people sharing an opinion makes it valid, it's just my personal opinion on the character in the film.
That's great that you've now called it your opinion of what the true vision of Batman is... but your original post said that this film and camp in general had nothing to do with the legacy of Batman which is VERY incorrect. You nowhere stated you meant that as an opinion.
By the way, Tricky D**ky, you make it seem as though I'm bashing homosexuals. I am not. If you didn't find anything queer however about Jim Carry as the Riddler, then I'd be surprised. I'm certainly not the first person to have found his performance and costumes questionable, for the record. And I'm by no means suggesting that many people sharing an opinion makes it valid, it's just my personal opinion on the character in the film.
Thembones wrote: ...Thou protest too much...
I'm sorry, but it really irks me when people misquote Shakespeare in some vain attempt to make their argument sound more "dignified". I'm ok with the rest of the post, but really...
For the record, The Riddler is an inherently campy character. I hate this film, but think that the treatment of Two Face is a far greater offense than that of The Riddler. I think the Animated Series is still my favorite representation of the character, and because of that, even Begins wasn't a slam dunk for me.
Anyone else ever noticed that glaring continuity error when The Riddler picks up a fist sized diamond during a hiest, and while he lifts it to his face to look at it it shrinks to the size of a grape?
I'm sorry, but it really irks me when people misquote Shakespeare in some vain attempt to make their argument sound more "dignified". I'm ok with the rest of the post, but really...
For the record, The Riddler is an inherently campy character. I hate this film, but think that the treatment of Two Face is a far greater offense than that of The Riddler. I think the Animated Series is still my favorite representation of the character, and because of that, even Begins wasn't a slam dunk for me.
Anyone else ever noticed that glaring continuity error when The Riddler picks up a fist sized diamond during a hiest, and while he lifts it to his face to look at it it shrinks to the size of a grape?
i for one wasn't impressed with 'begins'... granted, yes it was a good film but it just didn't move me like I had hoped it would, or as much as the 'burton' films did.
with that said i'm shocked to find people here actually admitting to have liked 'batman & robin'... personally, even though I though both were horrible, I did enjoy 'b&r' more than 'forver'... being a fan of the bat, I love all renditions of the character... including the campy side... however, I prefer my bat-camp with adam west behind the cape, and cowl.
with that said i'm shocked to find people here actually admitting to have liked 'batman & robin'... personally, even though I though both were horrible, I did enjoy 'b&r' more than 'forver'... being a fan of the bat, I love all renditions of the character... including the campy side... however, I prefer my bat-camp with adam west behind the cape, and cowl.
It's a delicate matter to discuss the main fault of Batman Forever. The key word that comes to mind is flamboyance which is often wrongly termed as being 'gay' as in "Schumachers Batman movies are so gay." I missed out on any overt homosexuality in the film, but caught bucket-loads of flamboyance. Is that to say that there are no homo-erotic undertones to Batman Forever? Not at all, they're definitely there. I cringe to think of what possessed the Riddler to switch from his somewhat dignified green suit in the public eye to his tight-fitting spandex outfit when he and Two-Face return to their layer or what made him want to wear a glittered outfit for the finale. Combine his wacky fashion choices with his unhealthy obsession towards Bruce Wayne and you've got a character of questionable sexual orientation. I'm not trying to say that the character's gay, but we didn't have these kinds of innuendos with the Burton films.
Yes because all gay men not only wear 'green tights', but usually only find men who do wear 'green tights' sexually attractive!
Yes because all gay men not only wear 'green tights', but usually only find men who do wear 'green tights' sexually attractive!
Dustin, Dustin, Dustin. You've heard the thing about "Assume" haven't you? Thou protest too much. Yes, I have read a variety of Batman comics and yes, I find the Frank Miller versions to be closest and truest to how I feel the legacy or essence of Batman should be when I think of Batman. This is my opinion. Whether you like it or not, deal. I am not into the CAMP of if all. Those Camp send ups of Return, Forever and Batman & Robin seemed rather overindulgent, over-the-top, flashy and off the mark for me and not how I like my Batman. Sure, they captured the essence of Batman but not how I would have envisioned or preferred the franchise to take it's course. If Batman Begins had begun the franchise I believe the movies that followed would have been made differently and more to my liking. I never disavowed that The Camp is part of the Batman legacy but I don't have to like it and as said before, it's not how I prefer to perceive Batman.
How the heck did 'ol Batman get the Batmobile down off the side of the building he 'drove' up(as seen in the screen captures). This has always bugged be to no ends. The neon was bad, and the villians were way to over the top, but the one thing this Batman had over Keatons is that he actually did stuff, like jumped off buildings, hang from helicoptors... Keaton's walked down the middle of the street to take on the Red Triangle Circle Gang in BR, and made a huge production of his mechanical hanglider... But again... I must ask How the heck did 'ol Batman get the Batmobile down off the side of the building he 'drove' up in Batman Forever???
The title of Batman Forever would have been much cooler as the fourth title in the franchise.
The title of Batman Forever would have been much cooler as the fourth title in the franchise.
I for one, am not offended. This isn't a matter of opinion. A very large part of Batman's legacy has been camp. It's not up for debate. You didn't much address my question Thembones, you don't read the comics, do you? I can tell, because you would know just how campy Batman has been over the years. You can think camp is c**p and not be wrong, that's your opinion. But you can't think that Miller's Batman is the only true vision of the character, when it's not. Batman was camp long before he was the Batman of '89 and Begins.
The first Batman movie and Begins are decent but the rest are campy c**p. All bells and whistles, no substance. I also love how offended everyone gets when people disagree with them. Hello, its a forum to discuss and state opinions.
Holy controversy Batman!
Holy controversy Batman!
Dustin wrote: Trap Door, ya got me... I hadn't heard that about Begins or LOTR. I still however see no logic... Are you somehow trying to suggest that LOTR and Batman Begins are in the same caliber of film as Batman Forever? There's just not that kind of demand for anything more on Forever.
I'm not saying Forever is in the same league with them, I just don't see why they didn't include the rest or more of those deleted scenes. Given the nature of Movie companies I think they'd like to cash in on the fanboys later down the line with another release.
I'm not saying Forever is in the same league with them, I just don't see why they didn't include the rest or more of those deleted scenes. Given the nature of Movie companies I think they'd like to cash in on the fanboys later down the line with another release.
Gotta agree with ya there Dustin. True, Bob Kane had a vision for his character that was created. In my opinion, the original concept of Kane was captured with Batman 89,. The character of Batman in Batman Begins is more about the Frank Miller era character.
Sounds like some folks need to pick up the boxed set, or atleast the first one, and watch the very informative documentary on the legacy of Batman.
Sounds like some folks need to pick up the boxed set, or atleast the first one, and watch the very informative documentary on the legacy of Batman.
Thembones, do you have any idea what you're talking about? Have you even read any of the comics from the first ten years of Batman? The first couple years are so disgustingly violent that they would make Batman unrecognizable to the public today. When Robin came about, the violence was toned down and then came the most idiotic storylines you could possibly think of (50's, 60's,). Original intent? What is this original intent you speak of?
Batman has been interpreted so many ways over the years that there is no one true version of the character. The legacy of Batman is both light, dark, funny, and serious.
Batman has been interpreted so many ways over the years that there is no one true version of the character. The legacy of Batman is both light, dark, funny, and serious.
Warner Brothers has totally trashed and twisted what Batman is about in name of commercialism by making trashy camp laden movies that really had not much to do all with the legacy and original intent of Batman. Batman is opitomy of how Hollywood can take a great idea and turn it into a steaming pile of dung.
Trap Door, ya got me... I hadn't heard that about Begins or LOTR. I still however see no logic... Are you somehow trying to suggest that LOTR and Batman Begins are in the same caliber of film as Batman Forever? There's just not that kind of demand for anything more on Forever.
Dustin wrote: Hey Version 1, get ready for the surprise review of the century... I actually liked Batman & Robinmore than this. Course that's not to say I'm terribly fond of either of them.
Hehehe cheers Dustin! I personally hated both films but I'm one of the few who see Forever as worse then Batman & Robin. Both awful films though.
Hehehe cheers Dustin! I personally hated both films but I'm one of the few who see Forever as worse then Batman & Robin. Both awful films though.
Dustin wrote: Trap Door, what would possibly make you think we'll see anymore deleted scenes on the HD-DVD? So far, I haven't noticed ANY HD releases featuring more supplements than there DVD conterparts... I really don't see any logic behind your prediciton.
Wanrer has already done their definitive Batman discs... other than the HD relase, I don't see why they'd ever want to touch this again.
Well Mr Smarty pants, if you pay attention you may notice that the HD-DVD of Batman Begins will have a video commentary. That's an extra not on DVD isn't it? So yes there is logic in my opinions.
Also if you want other examples, the guys who produce the extra's for the EE:LOTRs Box sets have stated that they held some stuff back to put on the HD-DVDs.
Wanrer has already done their definitive Batman discs... other than the HD relase, I don't see why they'd ever want to touch this again.
Well Mr Smarty pants, if you pay attention you may notice that the HD-DVD of Batman Begins will have a video commentary. That's an extra not on DVD isn't it? So yes there is logic in my opinions.
Also if you want other examples, the guys who produce the extra's for the EE:LOTRs Box sets have stated that they held some stuff back to put on the HD-DVDs.
Maybe an etxended cut of Forever wasn't here because Warner wants to double dip that movie for a future release like Sony douple dips with extended cuts.
Kyle Mertes wrote: No person in their right mind would call this film "smart."
I think that's probably one thing *ALL* of us can agree on, liking the film or not...
I think that's probably one thing *ALL* of us can agree on, liking the film or not...
Steven Carrier wrote: Adnan Khan wrote: A very smart film and DVD review, Dustin.
"Batman Forever" is a smart film? Well, I would love to know what you think a dumb film is.
The DVD is great though.
I think what Adnan Khan meant, Steven, was that the entire review of the film and the DVD Dustin wrote was smart.
No person in their right mind would call this film "smart."
"Batman Forever" is a smart film? Well, I would love to know what you think a dumb film is.
The DVD is great though.
I think what Adnan Khan meant, Steven, was that the entire review of the film and the DVD Dustin wrote was smart.
No person in their right mind would call this film "smart."
For the record, as I stated in my review of the first film and as I heavily state in my upcoming Batman & Robin review, I understand that Batman is a versatile character and open to many different visions.
Forever was a confused toss-up of many elements, light, dark, flamboyant, etc. On the DVD they actually show how most of Forever was based on the 40's work, not the 60's through 80's.
Forever was a confused toss-up of many elements, light, dark, flamboyant, etc. On the DVD they actually show how most of Forever was based on the 40's work, not the 60's through 80's.
100% totally disagree with the negative reviews of Forever. It walked the line between the Batman of the 50's, 60's & 70's. There is no one definitive version of Batman. People grew up loving the comics of the 40's - 80's, all of which morphed into different levels of dark/serious story arcs and people loved the 60's series. There are people who are Batman fans today because of the series, yours truly being one of them. I grew up in the mid 60's and 70's, Batman was THE thing on TV. The reruns in the early 80's created a whole new crowd of fans.
Forever is the only one to date that brought all those elements together in one movie. Sorry, but there are folks out there that are not Batman Begins kind of people. There is a cross group of fans from all the comic era's and the 60's series.
Forever is the only one to date that brought all those elements together in one movie. Sorry, but there are folks out there that are not Batman Begins kind of people. There is a cross group of fans from all the comic era's and the 60's series.
Adnan Khan wrote: A very smart film and DVD review, Dustin.
"Batman Forever" is a smart film? Well, I would love to know what you think a dumb film is.
The DVD is great though.
"Batman Forever" is a smart film? Well, I would love to know what you think a dumb film is.
The DVD is great though.
You know, I might just get the legacy box, or whatever it's called (I'm thinking of the PLanet of the Apes box with the original 5 films) with all four, including Schumacher's films because as terrible as the films are, they make me smile not in a good way, but in a "Man, this is so bad, it's hilarious" and I get a big kick out of movies like that. Uwe Boll comes to mind but then again Uwe doesn't have a box set. Thank Christ.
I also detest Batman Forever -- with the casting of Jim Carrey and Tommy Lee Jones as the two main villains (both of them were over-the-top), the movie just crashed and burned (B&R did have some camp value that made it halfway palatable). I thought Val Kilmer brought some depth to the Bruce Wayne character and Nicole Kidman's character was a definite step-up from Kim Basinger's Vicki Vale and Elle Macpherson's Julie Madison. Oh, and Chris O'Donnell's D**k Grayson wasn't as annoying like he was in Batman & Robin.
In the end, Joel Schumacher's less grim batman movies were made for only one reason; to sell merchandise.
Though I'd still much rather have the MKC batmobile over the neon-colored nightmare anyday.
Though I'd still much rather have the MKC batmobile over the neon-colored nightmare anyday.
A very smart film and DVD review, Dustin.
Thank you!! Someone finally stood up and said something!!! I never could understand how 'forever' always seemed to slip past all the negativity. Great review dustin, I totally agree... except for the bit about the score... Goldenthal is a excellent composer who's capable of great things... but this just wasn't one of them.
Ugh... that deleted scene of Val, and the "giant bat" was it for me.
Ugh... that deleted scene of Val, and the "giant bat" was it for me.
I love Batman Forever. Everytime someone picks on it, I can`t help but wonder why. It`s so much fun from begining to end. I hated Batman & Robin though, but I am a huge fan of the series as a whole.
I hate everything about "Batman Forever". I mean, it goes bad when th efirst bit of dialogue hits the screen Alfred says "Would you like me to make a sandwich for you sir?" Batman says "No, I have take out!" and woosh the batmobile drives away. Utter trash I tell you. Val Kilmer is no Batman. He has no expression. Jim Carrey was so annoying and hyper, probably the most he ever was onscreen. Same goes for Tommy Lee Jones. Nicole Kidman, has no purpose, she is just horrid and I never understood why she keeps throwing herself at Batman and wants to have sex with him. It makes no sense. The plot makes no sense. I hate this movie. It runied the franchise. I dont mind "Batman & Robin" as much because that is just a really silly B-movie. I enjoy it because it knows it bad. "Batman Forever" thinks its a good movie. So rediculious.
We now need a "Batman & Robin" review to complete the set!
Do you have a "Batman Begins" review up?
We now need a "Batman & Robin" review to complete the set!
Do you have a "Batman Begins" review up?
Quite frankly, I'm ashamed I bought the box set after seeing Batman Begins on DVD at the same time. They all came out at the same time, didn't they?
I used to really like the first two films, even thought Forever wasn't bad. Hell, even thought 'and Robin' wasn't that bad, but after seeing Begins, all those old films just look ridiculous.
I used to really like the first two films, even thought Forever wasn't bad. Hell, even thought 'and Robin' wasn't that bad, but after seeing Begins, all those old films just look ridiculous.
Trap Door, what would possibly make you think we'll see anymore deleted scenes on the HD-DVD? So far, I haven't noticed ANY HD releases featuring more supplements than there DVD conterparts... I really don't see any logic behind your prediciton.
Wanrer has already done their definitive Batman discs... other than the HD relase, I don't see why they'd ever want to touch this again.
Wanrer has already done their definitive Batman discs... other than the HD relase, I don't see why they'd ever want to touch this again.
I expect we'll see more deleted scenes on HD-DVD, there's supposed to be a lot more with Two face and Batman darker moments. Another 15 minutes worth at least. Pity it wasn't recut like the Superman II discs will be.
Tommy Lee Jones gave a poor performance, he seems to be trying to out do Carrey with this over the top crazyness. Shame.
Tommy Lee Jones gave a poor performance, he seems to be trying to out do Carrey with this over the top crazyness. Shame.
This is actually my 3rd favorite of the Batman films behind only Batman Begins and Batman 89. I thought it was a great mix of everything that Batman had been about up to that point. I thought it was far superior in the treatment of Batman/Bruce Wayne than Returns. Returns you basically have Bruce and Batman take a major backseat to everything and everyone else. But in Forever, we get back to more focus on Batman and I think that is why this has always been seen by the masses as a step back into the right direction after Returns going off into something else.
Viewing the cut scenes, in my opinion, this would have been a much darker and deeper exploration of Bruce Wayne/Batman than Batman 89/
Viewing the cut scenes, in my opinion, this would have been a much darker and deeper exploration of Bruce Wayne/Batman than Batman 89/
This is a heavily underrated film. Sure, it's not perfect, but it's entertaining.
vomit noise. that's all I can muster. how so much money and time could be spent on something so awful is beyond comprehension. how nicole kidman could be suckered into being in it is even more baffling (although I always have enjoyed the scene where she's wearing just a sheet.) the only way schumacher could have made this worse was to add "pow!" "bam!" and "whap!" pop-ups. Actually, that would have probably made it better. And then - WB actually asked the guy back to direct another one? Thank heavens for Nolan and Bale.
Hey Version 1, get ready for the surprise review of the century... I actually liked Batman & Robinmore than this. Course that's not to say I'm terribly fond of either of them.
Keaton actually read this script and told Schumacher NO to doing this film. He didn't like how different the character and story were from the 2 previous ones.
So good 'ol Joel called Kilmer and he said YES to the project...without ever reading a single word of the script. That's his bad right there.
I would much rather watch this one over the one that has yet to be reviewed, though. Kilmer was a better Batman than Clooney, but both were bad.
And to be honest, this film had the worst title.
So good 'ol Joel called Kilmer and he said YES to the project...without ever reading a single word of the script. That's his bad right there.
I would much rather watch this one over the one that has yet to be reviewed, though. Kilmer was a better Batman than Clooney, but both were bad.
And to be honest, this film had the worst title.
I think Dustin's right that Forever gets cut a lot of slack these days for not being '...and Robin' - but it doesn't change the fact that it's still a mind blowingly bad film. I'd only buy this dvd if the commentary was Joel saying 'I'm sorry' repeatedly for lengh. Whilst being whipped by monkeys. Obviously.
How the hell could you NOT like Batman Forever?? sure its not as good as Batman, but come on it was worth more then 3 squares!!!
Useful post that one...
Me First!!
Some material may be inappropriate for children under 13
Disc Details
Release Date:
18th October 2005
Discs:
2
Disc Type:
Single side, dual layer
RCE:
Yes
Video:
NTSC
Aspect:
1.85:1
Anamorphic:
Yes
Colour:
Yes
Audio:
Dolby Digital 5.1 English, DTS 5.1 English
Subtitles:
English, French, Spanish
Extras:
Theatrical Trailer, Director Commentary, 'Shadows of the Bat: The Cinematic Saga of the Dark Knight Part 5: Reinventing a Hero', 'Kiss from a Rose' by Seal Music Video, 'Beyond Batman', Hero and Villains Gallery, Deleted Scenes, 'Riddle Me This: Why Is Batman Forever?'
Easter Egg:
No
Feature Details
Director:
Joel Schumacher
Cast:
Val Kilmer, Chris O'Donnell, Jim Carrey, Tommy Lee Jones, Nicole Kidman, Michael Gough, Pat Hingle
Genre:
Action and Adventure
Length:
121 minutes
Ratings
Amazon.co.uk
FOLLOW DVDACTIVE
Follow our updates
OTHER INTERESTING STUFF
Unseen Reviews
Doctor Who: Scream of the Shalka
UK - DVD R2
An Adventure in Space and Time
UK - DVD R2
Only God Forgives
UK - BD RB
Clear History
US - BD RA
Man of Steel
UK - BD
Hot Interviews
Pete O'Herne
DVD
Rick Dean
DVD
Bruce Boxleitner Interview: Area 51
DVD | BD
Simon Heller
DVD
David Prior: Part One
DVD
Hot News
Carrie (2013)
US - DVD R1 | BD RA
Lee Daniels' The Butler
US - DVD R1 | BD RA
Messageboard
DVD
Transformers
US - DVD R1 | HD
The Shadow: Collector's Edition
US - BD RA
Most Talked About
Prisoners
US - DVD R1 | BD RA
World's End, The
US - BD RA
Lionsgate/Miramax Steelbooks
US - BD RA
Riddick
US - DVD R1 | BD RA
Machete Kills
US - DVD R1 | BD RA
