BATMAN FOREVER
A film review by Jeff Pidgeon
Copyright 1995 Jeff Pidgeon
It's Not "Batman Forever"--It Just Feels That Way
I wholeheartedly admit up front that I didn't like either of the first two "Batman" movies very much. This sequel, on the other hand, was created by an entirely new team--nobody (except the fellow who plays Alfred the butler) was carrying over from the other two. Tim Burton's executive production credit didn't worry me much as I had heard initially that he wasn't very interested in doing the third installment, so I figured his involvement would be limited at best. I've since heard that Warners actually didn't want Burton to direct again, because BATMAN RETURNS was too dark for the huge mainstream audience Waners was aiming for. Possibly, but I have trouble believing they shooed away the director of one their most successful films of the decade, not to mention of all time. At any rate, I was curious to see what fresh perspective Joel (FLATLINERS) Schumacher would bring to THE FRANCHISE. I've never liked any of his films either, but FALLING DOWN showed promise, and like the saying goes, "Nobody Knows Anything."
After the first fifteen minutes had passed, I wanted to leave. Usually, if I'm not into it after thirty minutes, it's not gonna happen. There are exceptions, but that sort of thing is pretty rare. Basically, it's a mess--a loud, confused, ugly heap of color and noise that occasionally draws into focus only to rend itself apart with the next action sequence. The editing is so rapid fire I found myself longing for a sequence with the love interest (and those are generally the worst things about the "Batman" series--if I hear one more speech about 'duality' or 'darkness and light'...!) to give my eyes a rest. Val Kilmer is generally a better Batman--he's more physical than Keaton, which I think is more appropriate. They even attempt to make him more of a detective by giving him The Riddler's puzzles to solve. That would work if solving the puzzles had a bearing on the plot, but by and large, they don't really seem to. The Riddler and Two-Face keep such a high profile in the film that they never seem particularly difficult to track down. The majority of the time, they seem to be throwing themselves in Batman's face.
Nicole Kidman is attractive and generates more screen heat than Kim Basinger, but how difficult is that, really? Generally, her time is spent mooning after Batman/Bruce Wayne, or hiding the fact with that swordplay-type banter that's all the rage in romantic comedies. Both Kidman and Kilmer are given more to do than Keaton, Basinger and Pfeiffer had, but that's not saying a lot. Their portrayals don't bring any dimension or empathy to the characters, so it's mostly two hours of quipping between them. Tommy Lee Jones has worked with Oliver Stone, so he knows what it's like to be acting over the art direction. Sadly, the script focuses more on The Riddler, so his role is lost in the din--we find out how he became Two-Face later in the picture, on that Exposition News Network Bruce always seems to be watching. Carrey has his moments as The Riddler--he's a gifted comedian, maybe the best physical performer since Steve Martin--but he has to shriek most of his lines just to make his presence known. His sense of timing and delivery carry him through the wake of the film without getting pulled under. Chris O'Donnell and Michael Gough are the two, as Dick Grayson and Alfred, who come out of this the best. Neither are given much in the way of script (as opposed to screen time), but they were the only two who created believable, empathetic characters out of virtually thin air. Although most of their scenes together are the same, they work, both (to a degree) as performances and as a respite from the action.
The script is a tangle of flashbacks, one-liners, clues that ultimately seem pointless, a smeared xerox of the does-she-love-the-hero-or-the-man conflict from SUPERMAN, another take-over-Gotham plot, the origin of the Riddler, the origin of Robin, and the Batman-Robin conflict, the most interesting fragment but mostly a case of too-late-in-the-picture-to-care-anymore. We've heard all of it before, and it wasn't too robust in the first place. The climax seems lifted straight from the TV show, only amplified beyond all comprehension. It's not something that's built up to as much as wandered upon. Much like the previous installments, all the props and vehicles are destroyed in order that new ones may be designed (and a new toy line prepared) for the successor.
The art direction consists mainly of 'put searchlights and neon on it'. The main problem with comic books being turned into live-action movies is that the director seems to feel that since it's a comic book, he/she can *play* *it* *up* visually, which usually results in clutter (like THE FLINTSTONES). It's sad to say, but as time goes on, FLASH GORDON looks better and better. The huge sets and CG models are covered with so much crap in BATMAN FOREVER that it still feels cramped in spite of the scale. I've never seen so many lasers and black light in my entire life. The new Batwing looked spiffy for its brief stint on screen (I especially like how it was stored in the Batcave), but overall, it's the worst looking film of the series.
I don't remember hearing many of Danny Elfman's themes in Eliot (ALIEN 3) Goldenthal's score, so he gets credit for striking out on his own and not coasting (like SUPERMAN II), but to be honest, I hardly remember music at all. Most of the score was totally lost in the onslaught. I remember hearing brief patches that reminded me of ALIEN 3, but that's all. Granted, the sound system in the theater I was in was poor to say the least, so I think the only thing left to do is to hear it on its own, or see the film in a better theater. For me at least, the latter isn't really a desirable option. So far, CRUMB is the best film I've seen this summer, and I have this feeling APOLLO 13 and WATERWORLD aren't going to change that.
-- - Jeff "Doh!" Pidgeon
The review above was posted to the
rec.arts.movies.reviews newsgroup (de.rec.film.kritiken for German reviews).
The Internet Movie Database accepts no responsibility for the contents of the
review and has no editorial control. Unless stated otherwise, the copyright
belongs to the author.
Please direct comments/criticisms of the review to relevant newsgroups.
Broken URLs inthe reviews are the responsibility of the author.
The formatting of the review is likely to differ from the original due
to ASCII to HTML conversion.
Related links: index of all rec.arts.movies.reviews reviews