Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Jeritron
Yea, I think it's clear that they were trying to shy away from Burtons darkness.
It worked in Batman 89, and then in Returns it got a bit darker and more bizarre. I liked it. But they were worried about how many action figures they could sell. They wanted it to be more kid friendly. Hence their seperation from Burton and Keaton, and the new direction.
With Forever they tried to segway from dark to campy. It's somewhere inbetween, so though it's not great, it isn't abysmal.
Batman & Robin was the intended goal. To make it campy. It failed miserably.
Batman Forever and B&R are based on the campy element of Batman from the 60s which is for better or worse just as much a part of Batmans legacy as the origins and dark roots. People rejected it, because of course the Batman of the 30s and 80s is much cooler. But they were only trying something new, and it was a failed gamble. I don't think they were trying to make a serious movie and failed, but instead succeeded in making a cheesy movie and it didn't go over well.
|
B&R was awful. Forever was something new, with both a noir feel and a comic book feel. That and I liked Kilmer as Batman. The last movie of the four was pure Cheese, and more poorly executed than the TV show.
I can see why people would think it tried to be serious, with the way Clooney played Wayne, etc.
It's worth noting that the 60s Batman saw a near-death to Batman, because it just didn't move.