Batman & Robin
Remove ads with our VIP Service
|Wait for Rental
|17 Total Reviews|
Share This Page
strong stylized action and some innuendos
Starring George Clooney, Arnold Schwarzenegger, Chris O'Donnell... View more >
Looking for more opinions? Check out our Featured Movie Reviews for Batman & Robin.
Please Note: Reader Reviews are submitted by the readers of The BigScreen Cinema Guide and represent their own personal opinions regarding this movie, and do not represent the views of The BigScreen Cinema Guide, or any of its associated entities.
First of all...I kinda liked it! This film is not going to win any Academy Awards, but it definitely was better than the third or fourth film Superman made.
What's the film about? I can't believe you had to ask....it's about Batman and Robin. What did you think it was going to be about? Well, the Dynamic Duo takes on some old villians (or new ones depending upon how well you knew the villians from the TV series) and introduces Batgirl to the world for the first time. You have got to really like comic books, to like this Batman and Robin tale. It is like watching the latest Batman and Robin comic unfold before you eyes...you get some wild scenes and imagery, which are totally unbelievable. I know Batman is a Superhero and all, but come-on, none of us remember Gotham City having three or four level streets, yet having the oldest cars ever driving around on them. Gotham City becomes outrageous in it's believability. It is easier to believe that there are four green turtles, speaking English, eating pizza, living in the sewers and fighting bad Bruce Lee imitations....than even remotely believing in this Batman tale.
It is unfortunate that this Batman took the twist it did, for Clooney was great as Batman and Bruce Wayne...more believable than past Batmans (except Adam West, of course) and O'Donnell as Robin lays an egg. The other Batman movies sparked some questions regarding how Batman did this or that, the only question coming out of this film is whether or not the Alfred in this movie is the same one from the TV series? (I doubt it, but you probably can convince your friends that it is.)
Bottom line...wait till you are at the video store and you have a free coupon or there is a special being offered of 3 for the price of 2.
|by Jason Whyte ||Jan 25, 2000|
Holy Trash Batman!
I said that right away when Batman Forever -- oh, I mean Batman and Robin ended after 126 dull minutes. In my ownopinion, this is the worst of the series: a hopeless and boring summer blockbuster that only wants to entertain allthe stupid people in the world, while us smart filmgoers get shafted with the ticket price. If you do go, seek outa print presented in SDDS, about twice as powerful as DD and DTS.
While this film is almost EXACTLY the same as the last Val Kilmer vehicle, George Clooney has stepped in as Batman, andhe does an all right job. He brings more dimension than Kilmer's line-reading, however he was no match for Michael Keaton (Just the same as director Joel Schumacher is no match for Tim Burton). The plot is the same as Returns andForever, with villians trying to kill Batman and rule Gotham. In Batman and Robin, it's Dr. Freeze, a sub-zero anti-hero(Now THAT should have been his calling card, which sounds as good as 'I'll be back!') who sounds and looks ugly, and Poison Ivy, a supposed ultra-sexy villiness who can kill with her lips. While this sounds like good fun, the formeris played by Arnold Schwarzenegger. He spews out useless one liners ("Chill" "Kill The Heroes!" among others), which mean nothing, because Schwarzenegger has no character to begin with. He might as well be just saying "Blah!" forall we care. The latter is played by Uma Thurman, who has seemed to been handed a fat paycheque for her trouble.
Where is all the darkness gone? Why has these movies been altered for 256 dimensions of color? How come there areBatman's partners, such as Robin, played by Chris O'Donell, and Batgirl, played by Alicia Silverstone? How come thisfilm introduces Bruce Wayne's girlfriend and forgets about her two seconds later? And how come people keep lining up, throwing their money on a counter, just to see a movie that they know is bad? Wake up, Americana!
|by Mike ||Jan 25, 2000|
This latest "Batman" movie is a call that it's time for a new team to take over the caped crusader's adventures. This movie has too much of everything, too many effects, too many characters, too many big sets and not enough story or good acting.
The movie follows Forever almost exactly and even the music is the same. Clooney's Batman and Bruce Wayne aren't different enough to believe him as having a dual personality, he is just Bruce Wayne dressed like Batman.
Overall a really boring and uninteresting movie
|by Michael Ng ||Jan 25, 2000|
The movie is very corny and boring!
Batman & Robin is the second-best of the Batman movies. However, this installment in the series is nothing like the first. Ardent fans of the previous three movies will not like this movie, since it does not retain the dark qualities to the Batman character.
Taken separately, Batman & Robin is an adequate film. It takes the good guys and pits them against the bad guys, and throws some action scenes in for good measure. Whereas previous films explored the conflict between the personalities of Batman and Bruce Wayne, this one never takes itself too seriously.
George Clooney does a good job at playing Batman. He continues the character with a technique that is interesting enough to get involved in. Uma Thurman is a very good Poison Ivy, with the proper mix of villianess and vamp. Honorable mentions are given to the characters of Julie Madison, Bruce Wayne's girlfriend (Elle Macpherson) and Alfred (Michael Gough). They played their parts in an understated manner that was appropriate and completely refreshing in a movie filled with actors who were working too hard (or too little?) at their parts and failed. Kim Basinger and Nicole Kidman can't hold a candle to Elle when it comes to playing a beautiful girlfriend!
Poison Ivy's origins were not original (see Catwoman in Batman Returns), nor were her motivations believable, but she made up for it in evil seduction. Arnold Schwarzenegger's Mr. Freeze was not as interesting. He wasn't evil enough to hate, so all you're left to do is sympathize with his motivation; which was not developed well enough for you to care about. Arnold was reduced to having to deliver one-liners to make his character interesting, and a touch more character development would have helped tremendously.
Other characters, namely those played by Chris O'Donnell and Alicia Silverstone are better left unmentioned. To mention them would lend too much credence to their appropriateness in the film. Both characters were an annoyance and a hindrance to the film.
While the special effects were good, the presentation was not so amazing that you need to see this film in the theater to enjoy it. See it when it hits the 99-cent rack at the video counter, and enjoy the one-liners in the comfort of your own home.
While I enjoyed the story better than Batman Returns (the rocket-launching penguins ruined what could have been a good film) and Batman Forever (Jim Carrey pulling a muscle trying to be the ultimate Riddler), I would rather see another rendition of Batman in the style of the first movie than another laugh-a-minute formula.
My recipe for Batman 5:
<BLOCKQUOTE>Bring back the darker character that Keaton started (either Clooney or Keaton would fill the role well), bring back Catwoman (Michelle Pfeiffer required), introduce a bad guy with the depth of Nicholson's Joker, and trash Batboy and Batgirl. Don't forget to include Elle and Alfred for continuity and good character distribution.</BLOCKQUOTE>
<I>This review is the property of Scott Jentsch, Copyright © 1997. This information cannot be reprinted without the permission of the author.</I>
|by Freddy Feliciano ||Jan 25, 2000|
This has to be the worst one in the series. Boring and tasteless, is the word for this turkey.
If there is a Batman 5, please get rid of Schumacher, he is killing the bat-franchise.
|by Paul ||Jan 25, 2000|
To me, Batman & Robin, the fourth installment to the growing Batman franchise was the best Batman of them all. The best thing about it wasn't the visuals, really, but the characters. Here's a breakdown:
Batman/Bruce Wayne: George Clooney was definitely the best Batman yet. He gave Batman/Bruce the spark that Val Kilmer and Michael Keaton didn't. Infact, George was so good as Batman, I actually gave a damn about him!
Robin/Dick Grayson: Chris O'Donnel just continues to prove that there could never be a much better Robin. Chris gives Robin that bad-ass, Gen-X edge thatmakes Robin an interesting character.
Batgirl/Barbra Wilson: Surprisingly enough, the most intriguing character in the the movie was not one of the villains, but Batgirl. Alicia Silverstone pullsoff the wannabe proper, innocent school girl bad-ass biker chick convincingly. Especially enjoying was her fight scene with Poison Ivy. Not to mention her adding to the movie's sex appeal (aided by George, Chris, and Uma). You could just tell how many guys were watching when they showed Batgirl suiting up. Hell, I was the loudest one!
Mr. Freeze/Victor Fries: Arnold was the best choice as Mr. Freeze. He had most of the best lines in the movie (for one-liners) and actually showed some acting abilityduring his scenes with his wife. You can't help but feel sorry for the guy.
Poison Ivy/Pamela Isley: Though we all know that Uma's Poison Ivy wouldn't be as good as Michelle's Catwoman, she's still awesome. Uma does real well as the seductive,manipulative, plant-loving vixen. Poison Ivy had some good scenes.
Alfred Pennyworth: Can anyone imagine a better Alfred than Michael Cough? Didn't think so. While Alfred still provides humor and wiseness, he also gets to do more than what Batman and Robin tell him to do. He definitely brings out the best in George, Chris, and Alicia due to his sub-plot. Alfred is back and better here than in any of the other Batman movies.
|by Scott Turner ||Jan 25, 2000|
George Clooney has the potential to be a great Batman....pity about the terrible script and the worst directing I have seen in a long time.
The best bit of the film was Arnold's Mr (or Dr) Freeze, which says a great deal about the rest of the film. In fact the whole feel of the movie reminded me of the Adam West TV show and I expected to see the 'KAPOW' and'CRUNCH' splatter signs to pop onto the screen, which would probably be useful in covering up the dreadful Gotham City backdrops.
But since there will be a fifth installment of this franchise I have a little advice for the money men. 1) Keep George Clooney but give him a little more to do than throw quips at the bad guys. 2) Lock the director in a very strong air-tight box and throw away the key, then get someone who can actually direct like Tim Burton. 3) Bring back Michelle Pfeiffer's catwoman character as the 'bad-guy' 4) Kill off Batgirl in the first five minutes5) Try writing a script which contains a story, some characterisation and not so much camp.
The Batman world is a great premise for a film, but with all four films I have been terribly dissapointed. Batman Returns came pretty close to my ideal andI just implore Warner Bros. not to make more Batmistakes.
|by Denis Leung ||Jan 25, 2000|
If you want to watch a movie for the plot, don't watch this one. I say stay away, but in fact, I already knew this was going tobe a flop, but it is really fun to see the GREAT ACTORS trying to do something in the middle of a very bad movie directed by the dreadfulJOEL Schumacher. I mean, what is it with this guy, is he a COLOR fanatic? In the third one, the colors were already a bad game, now hecontinues, I don't know but, I feel like we should get back TIM Burton that is really, on a HIGHER level of directing. Will Joel understandsomeday that a "good" movie doesn't have to color all scenes.
THE ACTING, Arnold wasn't really good, he was great with director JAMES CAMERON but now he acts really bad. The scene where he falls inthe cold water and become sick, it looked like a AMATEUR movie, like if he has never acted before, the little scream he had. Also, the one wordphrases are bad, he said chill once, OK, but he said Four times. Uma Thurman was really boring, her text was too long and I don't think anyone would listen completly to it. George Clooney did a good job, although, maybe he just didn't listen to the director. Everyone shouldhave noticed that Alicia Silverstone didn't have a british accent, a stupid mistake that none directors would do.
Another strange directing thing, Joel Schumacher showed BODY PARTS, close-up on butts, genital organs, chest and everything, he did the sameto Batgirl, this is pretty stupid. Batman does a lot of weird things, he slides on the dinosaur, was this supposed to beserious? The whole drama was on Alfred dying, but there was this music always playing, non-stop that blow my nerves out.
Those that said it was boring are not right, it is very funny to watch it and laugh at the stupid things going on. You may ask sometime,by surprise, what the.... is going on?, what is this ....?, what did he just say? A VERY LOW classed movie done by a very LOW CLASSED DIRECTOR.
|by Peter Woods ||Jan 25, 2000|
AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!! THIS MOVIE IS REALLY BAD AND LAME. I can't stand looking at it.Go watch the old batman show,or the 3 last Batman movies, then this.
|by Dustin Lathrop ||Jan 25, 2000|
I like Batman and Robin, It is better than Contact and The Lost World:Jurassic Park. This is the best movie of the year!
Grade:A+ E-mail me at:firstname.lastname@example.org
|by Brandon Kayser ||Jan 25, 2000|
Batman and Robin is an okay movie that I woudn't go see again. I think the problem with this movie is they brought in to many characters. I think this Batman movie is definitly not the best, as was said in the ads. If you're thinking of seeing this movie in the theater, I'd wait, because there are plenty of other good movies out this summer.
|by Rick Jass ||Jan 25, 2000|
Just when I thought the Batman movies were picking up some speed with Batman Forever, along comes Batman and Robin and spoils my theory. The set design was the best part of the movie, other than that the story was convoluted and the attempt to focus on too many new characters (Poison Ivy, Mr. Freeze, and Batgirl) didn't give enough time for any to be developed sufficiently. Alicia Silverstone did not work for me as Batgirl which was disappointing. Also the whole movie seemed disjointed. It seemed like a bunch of individual scenes spliced together and without much care of tying things together. This was not worth the price of admission, but on a cold night in January when you have nothing better to do, a $2.00 rental could be justified. I think the Batman franchise has lost its steam; anyone for Spiderman?
|by Megan Michelle Treptow ||Jan 25, 2000|
This is a very good movie if you are in to the Batman and Robin movies. When you first go you might think its kind of dumb but if you really listen you will probaly enjoy. This movie isn't the best but its good.
|by Philip Touchette ||Jan 25, 2000|
The Batman movies were always something special to me as I remember seeing the first one and falling in love with it. This Batman outing has disappointed me. It's just a standard "hollywood-shoot-explosion-carnage-violence" flick. I was totally turned off by the performance of practically all of the actors except for the guy who plays Alfred. I felt sorry for him. Most of the lines were delivered at the wrong time and seemed predictable. Plus, there were too many colors to concentrate on. I felt as if I was at a theme park or something.
This Batman is by far the worst, behind the morbid, odd, appalling "Batman Returns".
Wait for this to come to video. In fact wait until it becomes a $2 rental becase I'd feel very guilty to waste my money on it.
|by Dan ||Jan 25, 2000|
It was good. Actually it was great. It went into the budget way too soon. I don't care if it had too many special effects or glowy things, it was still a great plot line, great actors, great action. The only thing that was bad was that Poisin Ivy didn't become a good guy and replace batgirl.
A lot of critics had blasted the fourth Batman movie, well critics have the right to say whatever they want. I just one of a few pepople who like "Batman and Robin." George Clooney makes a much better Batman, than Val Kilmar. I glad he took the role in "The Saint," as a career movie. Arnold Schwarzenegger returns to playing the villain for the first time since "The Terminator" in 1984. He plays "Mr. Freeze," who out for veageance since his wife in a coma for many years. Uma thurman plays "Poison Ivy," another villian that came out of tragic circurstances. The film may not be as good as the first two Batman movies, but far better than the third movie inwhich the film is transferred into a costume party. With the fourth movie, has some good scenes, but enough for an uneven recommendation.