Added: 2 years ago
From: BatmanDarkTomorrow
Views: 31,541
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:

All Comments (212)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • didn't have a problem with Val Kilmer as Bruce Wayne/Batman -- or Nicole Kidman as the Sexy Chase Merridian my problems with the movie were this.. 1. Robin was done all wrong- he ( Dick Grayson/Robin ) was much younger when he met Bruce Wayne ( i believe around 12 -13 )..if you cant follow the comic right then DON'T ADD THE CHARACTER IN THE MOVIE. 2. Should of done a backstory on Harvey "Two Face" Dent to explain why Bruce is obsessed with saving him 3. Keep the suit dark.. like its meant to be

  • batman returns was much better than this the acting and the dark mysterious plot was sooo chilling and amazing i have loved it since i was a kid and still do

  • I really like Batman Forever. I may be one of theonly ones, but its cool. It has a great plot, great action, great villains, emotional times with Bruce Wayne, awesome funny scenes, a hot girl in the picture in Nicole Kidman. Disagree but this was my favorite of the non Christopher Nolan Batman films. I've just always considered this one to be quite entertaining. Val Kilmer was no Keaton, but he did the job well. Anyway, my rank of the six Batman films

    1. TDK 2. BB 3. BF 4. B 5. BR 6. B&R

  • @Wadsy591

    I really like Batman Forever as well. I haven't seen the apparently "super dark" Batman Returns yet, but I've seen the Tim Burton Batman(with the Joker), Batman and Robin, and both the current Nolan films. As of now my two favorite Batmans have to be Forever and the Tim Burton one.

  • After watchng this, I have to say....Nolan is a fuckin genius

  • Not as good as 89, but I'd say it was about as good of a movie as and a better Batman movie than RETURNS (Which is much better viewed as a Tim Burton movie) This one really is only hated as much as it is for not having Burton/Keaton and that has been made guilty by assocation with BATMAN & ROBIN. It's not a perfect movie, but it's got a lot of merits that people ignore. A very underrated movie.

  • @SLPIFan "much better viewed as a Tim Burton movie," the perfect review in just seven words.

  • What a horrible horrible movie.

  • I had a very similar reaction to Superman Returns. I liked it, but I wasn't thinking about it much after I saw it.

  • They took what Burton did with Batman and made it into a pointless lasertag game...

  • @WeaponXXIV they killed the bat

  • i actually loved Batman Forever. it was campy but at least there was character devlopment and some really good visuals and style. unfortunatly batman and robin pushed the envelope to deep and created a huge mess

  • Batman Returns was every bit as goofy and silly as Batman Forever just with darker colors and more violence. Atleast Batman Forever wasn't as pretentious. That being said I love all the Burton/Shumacer Batman movies. Even Batman and Robin though I know its not very good.

  • @BobTheHun64 it not being pretentious is one of the reasons this is one of by favorite batman movies

  • Batman Forever was much better then Batman Returns. It wasn't great, but it wasn't that bad.

  • @BobTheHun64 batman returns was way better,the first line in this movie was "you want a sandwich mr wayne".. "ill get drive thru" like what the fuck was that,this film was horribal

  • I actually liked this one. I'm not a big comic book movie fan but I really enjoyed this movie. As a matter of fact, I tend to enjoy the ones people hate. Except Spiderman 3. I'm with the crowd on that one. But, back to this movie, I liked it a lot and I'd watch it again. But then again, I loved the 1960s TV show too...

  • christopher nolans batman is overated, Tim burtons first 2 are amazing, and bale is the worst batman with clooney.

  • @buddyisgod4ever batman kills people in the Burton films also there really starting show there aged

  • @JayDee284 Burton's batman films are still classics,and also have aged better then sam raimi's spiderman films.batman killing criminals makes him even more epic.although one thing that has aged awful about batman 1989 is the Prince music

  • @usernameDOGS Killing criminals goes against Batman character yes he did kill back in the golden age and even had a Gun but that was the early day's also the Batsuit's in the Burton films look so goofy now

  • Comment removed

  • Comment removed

  • @JayDee284 well no batman film has ever stuck to the source material..and by the way, in batman begins and the begging of the dark knight batman's costume was very awkward and fat,glad they fixed it though..the costume in burtons films were simple,i didnt see much wrong with it.

  • @usernameDOGS Ehh I don't think enough time has passed to say the Spider-man films have "aged" yet but I personally think they won't age that much (the first two were amazing, the third sucked)

  • @moviehypno23 the old films were very campy,too campy that its close to flat out parody.go look up "Nostalgia Critc - Top Dumbest Spiderman Moments" and you will know what im talking about.for a film that was made in 2002,its very out of date.why does the green goblin look like a power ranger villain?lol i dont know they are just silly to me ,plus the acting and dramatic story seemed straight out of a soap opera

  • this movie is so mixed up.

  • Batman, Batman Returns, and The Dark Knight are awesome and fantastic. Batman Begins was my least favourite but its way better than the shit Batman Forever and the even shit Batman And Forever. Ebert and Siskel are Assholes for giving Batman Forver two thumbs up

  • I actually thought this was the best of the first four movies -- but, that's only because I think they all sucked. So, this was merely the least bad. Not an one of them deserved more than two stars. Thank god for Christopher Nolan and his far superior Batman films.

  • this is the worst batman film in my opinion. batman and robin was atleast hillariously bad. this one not so much

  • I loved "Batman" and "Batman Returns" but I won't even have the other two in my house.

  • @BigTimeLuck You have really bad interpretation skills. Work on that, bro.

  • In no way isthis better than Batman Returns.

  • "Batman deserves more and better"

    A wild Nolan appears.

  • @RetardicA LOL you just made my day!

  • @RetardicA And is if on cue Ebert likes Batman Begins and I quote "Batman Begins is the fifth Batman, but the first to get is right."

  • I think forever is even worse than batman and robin

  • Jim carry did steel the show and if you are getting the Batman Trilorgt But Throw away Batman and Robin

  • how did these two dipshits keep this job for so long?? Batman Forever was the the beginning of the end of a great movie franchise that Tim Burton jump started....first two were epic, forever and 4 were complete jokes....siskel and ebert , good grief, they got the most ass backwards taste in movies of all time...

  • i agree in that batman forever is better then Returns in that is was more what people wanted at the time. it had all the ingredients for a big budget superhero flick. handsome hero, hot leading lady, lots of great big OTT action, cool cars, zany colorful villians and sets on an epic scale. Returns was defiently nowhere near as big a film as Forever but it was better screenplay wise and storywise and was more pshychological then Forever was. they are both great but in different ways.

  • Ebert is batty and ugly forever

  • this is ok v=but the batsuits have nipples

  • @Devman60006

    The creative genius of Joel Schumacher as pertains to the Bat-nipples, I take it?...

  • "I do think Batman Forever is better than Batman Returns"

    Excuse me, but precisely why the hell is Ebert such a respected film critic? I mean there is betting it wrong and then there is GETTING IT WRONG!

  • @Treblaine He didn't like BR because he refuses to accept that it's "Batman." He has a point. BR is bizarre and fascinating. But it flies off the rails. Is it "Batman"?

  • @Abr022575 yes

  • @Treblaine

    I will say this. I like BATMAN RETURNS a lot. It appeals to me more as a Tim Burton fan. But the Batman fan part of me is gonna have to say that FOREVER was a better Batman movie than RETURNS was.

  • Tommy Lee Jones overdid Two-Face and it was just overwhelming to see it.....

  • Val Kilmer certainly is a terrible Batman.

  • What? That this one is better than Batman Returns? That guy must have been on drugs ...

  • This movie kicks all of Nolans bat-movies' ass!

  • Yea, Jim Carrey looks EXACTLY how he did in The Mask! It's uncanny!

  • @Kronicyumyum it's funny, because I though Val played Batman pretty well, but he didn't really play Bruce well

  • tommy lee jones would make a better 2face if he didnt try to act like the joker...val kilmer is an awesome bruce wayne, but a shitty batman in my opinion

  • @Kronicyumyum haha ur right. Tommy lee is playing the joker characteer, giggling an bein crazy. thats not wat two face is all about

  • bat credit card

    

  • @shikamarustudent21 Wrong movie, you are thinking of Batman & Robin

  • @OneAndForAll sorry let me change my comment bat nipples

  • keaton and nicholson was the best part about batman to me!

  • Better than Returns?

    Ebert, get the fuck out....

  • the biggest mystery of all is what happened to val kilmer?

  • Jim carrey is awesome, end of review

  • The only thing I really liked about this movie was Val Kilmer. He and Christian Bale rank as my favorite actors to play Batman

  • this movie wasn't that bad

  • Even thought the movie has dumb lines I thought that Batman Forever was a fun movie with fantastic proformances from Val Kilmer as Bruce Wanye also known as Batman, Jim Carrey as the hysterical Dr. Edward Nygma also known as The Riddler and one sexy-looking Nicole Kidman as Dr. Chase Meridian.

    I give the movie 3 out of 5 stars.

  • "I read your work. Insightful. Naive, but, insightful.".; Batman can be a real ass-hole.

    Lol.

  • & I thought Batman Forever was OK.

  • R.I.P Gene Siskel.

  • oh what did the fat failed movie writer turned critic say about it? oh tell me what to think!

  • jaw dropping talk!

  • Batman Forever was an ok movie

  • @lightingcobra you have to admit this was better then Batman and Robin

  • nicole kidman was hot in this movie!!!!!!

  • I heard Michael Jackson was originally supposed to be The Riddler. I know he would've been terrible but I'd rather have seen him instead of the usual boring ass Jim Carrey who does the same old shit in every movie. Those stupid facial expressions!

  • @Mr1131988 no Robin Williams was originally cast as the Riddler and Michael Keaton was meant to come back as Batman but those both fell through and they were replaced by Val Kilmer and Jim Carrey

  • @zombiefan011 I read otherwise. All I know is Robin Williams was campaigning hard but MJ was attached.

  • Nowadays I'm so incredibly used to superheroes being crossed with film noir that it actually surprised me to hear Ebert say that as if it were a neat idea.

  • i can remember seeing this movie 3 times at the theater

    good movie but tommy lee jones sucked as two face

  • I actually enjoy watching this movie. But it is like having tons of candy and after the sugar rush is over you think to yourself "ugh, why did I watch this??"

  • Anybody ever consider that Schmacher was working under the guidelines that he had to make a " kiddie " friendly Batman film for Warner Bros??

    They told him to make a Batman film for children, and in that sense, it pretty much delivers on every level.

    He went way too far with Batman & Robin which was just a rushed and neon drenched mess, but Batman Forever is alot of fun.

    Drew Barrymore & Debi Mazar as " Sugar n Spice " ..yes please :)

    Nicole Kidman looked pretty hot too!

  • And to add on to my previous comment about Schumacher's films being God-awful, I do have some positive things to say regarding Batman Forever. In Batman Forever, you could tell they were at least attempting to compose a viable screenplay. And again, this film is at least a watchable film. But it's still just a moderate film. Now as far as Batman and Robin goes, it literally seemed as if the writers said who cares about the story? Let's just add cheesy one-liners, and filler dialogue.

  • The worst things that the studio could've implemented for the franchise was to head into a campy direction, and produce a more child-friendly, but unconvincing film. Batman Returns is severely underrated. It's not as epic as the original 1989 film, but it's still pretty viable. It's considerably better than Schumahcer's pieces of absolute shit. Tim Burton successfully captured the dark, conflicted, and secluded nature of Batman. Censorship, and Batman should never go together in film-making.

  • This sucked so much. What a dumb movie.

    God damn Joel Schumacher to hell.

  • Did Ebert enjoy any Live-action Batman movie that wasn't Nolan's?

  • Batman returns kicks this movie's ass.

  • @TheBadMovieReviewer1 and Batman Returns gets its ass kicked by Batman Begins, which gets his ass kicked by The dark Knight. We'll have to see if any batman film can kick the Dark Knight's ass.

  • @Regenmacher175 I'm not too sure this new movie's going to top the Dark Knight. Starting to sound like the problem Spiderman 3 had, and Batman and Robin, too many characters in the story. They saying its gonna have Catwoman, Bane, Hugo Strange, and the Black Mask.

  • @Regenmacher175 mask of the phantasm. is by far the best batman ....

    Dark knight was good not as "GREAT" as everyone feels they are supposed to make it.

  • @TheBadMovieReviewer1 The Hanna Montana Movie kicks this movie's ass.

  • @toucansam3 Its the car right? Chicks love the car

  • @TheBadMovieReviewer1 She's got the best of both worlds.

  • @TheBadMovieReviewer1 damn right!! Batman returns kicked this movies ass... the only reason why he is saying that is because that the previous movie was very controversial with catwoman and all this other stuff that was going on... which i think is crap... Batman returns was badass...

  • @HardcoreKatsu

    While maybe not a better film in general, honestly FOREVER is a better Batman film than RETURNS is. RETURNS is really more of a Tim Burton character sketch/allegory on outcasts.

  • @SLPIFan I agree there entirely. Batman Returns was indeed very neat, but it was missing elements that made the original so interesting. Forever is up with the original in my opinion.

  • Jim Carrey was way over the top in this movie, and the whole movie was very painful. Cartoons are more convincing and realistic than this. Hell, the 1960's show with Adam West was better than this.....

  • Here's my verdict on the original films.

    89-What do I need to say?It's awesome with great performances from Keaton and Nicholson with a spectacular true to the comics production design and the greatest superhero film score of all time.

    Returns-A good follow up.While more Burton's vision than the last,it is still Batman. It's visually engaging in that Burton way, and the artistic spins on the villains were interesting.The main problem is that while Keaton is still good, he's often overshadowed

  • @SLPIFan Cont

    The villains seeming to get a degree of more focus But as I said, Keaton still gave a great performance, and there's a good (but subtle) character arc concerning him killing criminals.

    Forever-Another good follow up. Where RETURNS excelled with the villains,FOREVER gave great character arcs to both Batman and Robin.Bruce dealing with his past, and Dick seeking vengeance for his parents murders,and through Bruce's guidance doesn't make the same mistake he made when he killed Joker

  • @SLPIFan Cont 2

    Carrey was a very good Riddler. Many say he was too zany, but look at his original comic appearances, That's how he acted. He had a good slightly darker edge and a demented personality. The main flaw with the film is Two-Face, who was done way too cartoony. While I somewhat enjoy it, it was a missed opportunity as his opening scene shows how great of a serious Two-Face TLJ could've been had he followed Schumacher's direction rather than trying to compete with Carrey.

  • @SLPIFan Cont 3

    BATMAN & ROBIN-Like with 89, what do I need to say about this one? It's campy, filled with over the top performances, and filled with corny one liners. A bad sequel to the original three, but I find it laughably campy film in a similar vein to the 60's comics and the Adam West television series. The only real praise I could give it was that Clooney was a decent Bruce Wayne (but a terrible Batman) and that Michael Gough probably had his best go as Alfred in it.

  • Dear MrGB, No..The real reason that I like this film better than the previous two movies with Mr.,Keaton and the later ones with Messers:Clooney and Nolan..is because..Mr.Kilmer adds some humanity and pathos to his troubled"Bruce Wayne"/

    "Batman".And the films were more family friendly.

  • Dear Wendileona,

    There were already too many super villians in the series..when"Batman Returns"had Ms.Phiffer,Mr.De Vito and Mr.Walken playing"The Catwoman","The Penquin" and "Max Schreck"in the movie.And the guest villians concept continue into the latter films..and thus overwhelmed the series.

  • As soon as Robin entered, it effed up the series. Val's Batman suit at the beginning was fantastic as was casting Val who also had a slight edge to his psych .

    That opening scened Batman look was simple, dark, agile, he was great. But then... midway, they fancy up the costume with all kinds of adornments and vents... take the edge out of it, then it become cheese. Ugh.

    Too many villains and characters.

  • Idiotic movie.Imagine what Burton would have done with the Riddler and Two-Face in the same movie.

  • I like this movie better than the ones with Mr.Keaton and Mr.Baled!

  • @TheStanbabe because of all the bright colors??

  • BETTER THAN BATMAN RETURNS?! YOUR FRIGGIN HIGH EBERT!!!

  • Comment removed

  • @MrHeslopian

    Robin was introduced in 1940, Batman's second year in print.

  • The best batman movie!

  • The comments here show the unfortunate misconception that most of the public seems to have - that you can't have Batman without Robin. They are not inseparable.

  • what ebert said about the batman movies missing the point is what makes nolan's batman movies that much better

  • this film is bad, but enjoyable bad

  • Ouch, Ebert. . . Forever better than Returns? Not by a long shot. . .

  • @washbrook45 I think you could argue that "Forever" is more entertaining, but yes, "Returns" is by far the better film.

  • @washbrook45

    I'd say in a few ways FOREVER is better than RETURNS. But in others RETURNS is superior than FOREVER. For example FOREVER gave Bruce a deeper and more personal character arch with him dealing with memories of his family's murders. But RETURNS' villains were more interesting than the ones in FOREVER with greater depth. Two-Face was too cartoony in FOREVER, though I personally thought Riddler was good. And the villains in RETURNS almost eclipsed Batman in screen time.

  • I wish gene lived to see christopher nolan's batman movies

  • erm, he looks nothing like The Mask

  • I REMEMBER AS A KID THAT I LOVED THIS MOVIE..I MEAN I WATCHED IT WHENEVER I COULD. I REALIZE NOW THAT IT JUST FIT THE WORLD BAK THEN. YEA WE NOW TALK ABOUT NOLANS BATMAN BUT THATS BECAUSE WE NOW SEE IT DONE IN A BETTER WAY, (IN AN ADULT WAY)

  • it was much better than Shumachers second attempt. But the 1990's Batman films became all about the villains.

  • Though it was in 'Batman Forever', I liked the fact that they finally put Robin in one of the movies.

  • Aaron Eckhart Two Face>Tommy Lee Jones Two Face. Now if try to argue that Tommy Lee Jones's two face is better. I'll just ignore you because you'd be a total douche or an idiot or it'd just be a very bad joke that not even the joker would say "and I thought my Jokes were bad." It could be all of the above you're a douche,idiot,and you're telling a bad joke(or another set of comination of 2).

    Either Way Aaron Eckhart>Tommy Lee Jones(in the batman movies).

  • @09tranm I agree Tommy Lee Jones seriously over-played Two-Face, I found it quite insulting. Aaron Eckhart was perfect as both Harvey Dent and Two Face.

  • @Dparish24 Yes,he was.Eckhart seemed more believable and sinister to where as Tommy was being more cartoonish.I think Schumacher was trying to make the movie more appealing to kids as well as adults.To whereas Nolan made the characters more realistic..

  • @09tranm I don't know who would argue otherwise. To be fair to Jones, Eckhart had a WAY better script.

  • @Spengler56 Yeah sure very true. Tommy Lee Jones is in no way a bad actor. In fact I know him alot better than Aaron Eckhart. I've only seen Eckhart in The Dark Knight but Tommy Lee Jones has done a good job in other movies and in fact as an actor I like Jones better(since I've seen him more). However Eckhart two face was simply better than Jones two face end of story.

    I just think it'd be irrational to think otherwise but if someone does then fine whatever.

  • I forgot how horrible this movie was, I loved the soundtrack though and Val Kilmer was really good in it.

  • I noticed when I was watching this... Jim Carrey's not really The Riddler, is he? He's the Joker. Even Two-Face... they're really camping it up, aren't they? I know after "Returns," they wanted to "lighten it up" for the kids. A lot of them were traumatized by "Returns." Schumacher seemed to have been re-creating the '60's Adam West show with this film. At least with the villains. Gotham isn't gothic anymore here. Gotham is the futuristic LA from Blade Runner!

  • Nichole Kidman's character was a skank with a crush on Batman (like all girls in Gotham) and I was upset Batman would go for her.

  • Are they serious? Batman Returns kills Forever.

  • Jim Carrey was being too Jim Carrey

  • 2:30 - :35 he's supposed to be The Riddler.

  • :04 - :27 Michael's Batman would be too busy crime-fighting for this.

  • "It read your work. It's very insightful. Naive, but insightful" Ha, ha, Batman's an asshole.

  • val kilmer does rule but he just didn't work as batman not as bad as clooney tho

  • Would have been better with Michael Keaton as Batman battling Two-face and Riddler.

  • if riddler can develop a machine like that isn't he already gotham's cleverest life form?

  • I like the film, it's not terrific but it was WAY better tha batman and robin that's for sure.

  • My God Val kilmer sucks!

  • They... agreed? No bickering? this movie is a miracle!

  • batman returns was awesome

  • they thought jim carrey was annoying in ace ventura and liked him in this one. its like the producers tole them they haee to like jim carrey

  • Batman Forever was all right. I, to some extent, enjoyed some of the cheese factor in this film, however, Two-Face was kinda wasted potential in this, and Jim Carrey acted to much like Ace Ventura, or just Jim Carrey in general. Its an all right movie, however, I'd take Nolan's/Burton's Batman movies over this anyday. As for Batman & Robin... Excuse me one sec..**BARFS**.. sorry what was that?

  • Why the fuck didn't Tim Burton direct this one???

  • This movie is too oftenly and wrongfully lumped together with Batman & Robin. Yeah Two-Face was a little too flamboyant but I couldn't help but still like him. I don't know, maybe it's Tommy Lee Jones. Val Kilmer was pretty good. This movie unlike the one that followed did explore Batman's personal demons and Val Kilmer played a good interim between what Michael Keaton and George Clooney played. He was still dark and brooding like Keaton, but a little more public.

  • Still my favorite pre-2000 super hero movie.

  • This is...WORSE THAN BATMAN AND ROBIN.

    One thing I found weird that the titles seemed mixed up. Batman and Robin should be about the beginning of the Dynamic Duo, and Batman Forever should be the adventures about the two.

  • Nah, the title "Batman Forever" works just fine where it is. A big subplot is Bruce trying to make up his mind on whether or not he'll continue being Batman. At the end, he decides he'll be Batman "forever."

  • @Hardman5509 Going to have to disagree with you...Batman and Robin was horrible.

  • this film was okay. it sort of found the right tone for kids. goofy, but not gay like batman & robin. obviously, nolans films were the first ones to push the boundaries

  • This holds up way better than that piece of trash called Batman Returns and it's far closer to the comics than that film, Batman Returns wasn't even 1 percent close to being like the comics, this film is a masterpiece compared to that.

  • @LiquidSolidRaiden This films a masterpiece comapared to Batman returns? I couldn't disagree with you more.

  • @j04370859 If you never read the comics then I'm not surprised you disagree, this film is far closer to the characterizations of the comics than Batman Returns. Batman Returns was so bad that I'm not surprised Warner Bros. fired Tim Burton. The only reason people like that film is for nostalgia.

  • This was my favourite as a child and is still my favourite to this day

  • me personally id say the movie was 5/10

    and its soundtrack was 10/10

  • Jim Carry, I love em but you never escape knowing he's Jim carry. You know what i mean. Like you have actors to portray characters but Jim Carrey is just... Jim Carry. He never really portrays the characters far away enough from himself. So he's a good actor but he can't be truely convincing in some parts.

  • Green and purple. Everything in this movie is green and purple.

  • ... Batman Forever, better than Batman Returns? That's the most stupid thing I have ever heard coming from the mouth of a professional movie critic...

  • @kurvos I agree that 'Returns' is better, but to say it's the most stupid thing you've heard from a critic is throwing a pretty wide net..

  • @anxresi I didn't say it's the most stupid thing a critic have said - I said it was the worst thing I MYSELF PERSONALLY have heard. I can claim that as much as I want.

  • I get the feeling that Nolan will redeem the Riddler in Batman 3. Can't wait for that by the way. Honestly, I think Batman and Robin is better. Not saying much of course, but still.

  • @tarakos729000 nooo. batman & robin went from silly to gay in the first 10 mins. and the bat girl character sucked. nothing close to the original comic books.

  • Comment removed

  • I'll admit, Forever is pretty corny & a little on the stupid side, but the reason I love it is partially because Batman Returns sucked so much. I wasn't a Bat-fan until Batman Begins, so then I decided to check into the old films. I watched Returns & hated it. It had no plot whatsoever & wasn't interesting or entertaining. The next night I watched Forever & it was so refreshing! Is it a good film? No. But in comparison to its predecessor, it's a masterpiece.

  • @fecxor

    'Batman Forever' & 'Batman Returns' were fuckin' golden compared to 'Batman & Robin'.

  • @tthomaselli2 True indeed.

  • better than returns?  dear lord...