While the superhero genre appears to be in an immortal status in the film industry, that wasn't always the case. During the late 90's, it seemed that the genre would have been a fad and it was all thanks to one of the biggest box-office bombs of all time. At first, the story seems like it's the typical Batman affair as it follows the dynamic duo as they have to face-off against Mr. Freeze, Poison Ivy and a very dumbed-down Bane, while Alfred's niece, Barbara Wilson, visits to spend time with her caring uncle when he begins to suffer the early stages of MacGregor's Syndrome. The story probably should have worked on its own merit alone... if this were a normal Batman movie. However, the tone and identity of the film has become surrounded in infamy thanks to the extreme use of campy, over-the-top approach to the film along with jokes and scenes that feel like they came from a parody movie. What's strange is that at very few moments, the film almost acts like a true Batman film with the more emotional scenes regarding Bruce and Alfred, along with Mr. Freeze's backstory. These moments however are so few and far-between that it won't make diehard fans stick around and watch. In my honest opinion, I did manage to get a few ironic and un-ironic laughs while watching, thanks to some witty dialogue and bizarre situations. I actually think that if it went all out on the satire approach and did something similar to what "The LEGO Batman Movie" did with the character and legacy, I believe that it could actually be pretty good. However, one can only tolerate so much camp and silliness with a good chunk of unfunny jokes to boot. Even if you just focus on the story, it still has its issues regarding some pointless sub-plots regarding Alfred's brother and Bruce's girlfriend as well as the tonal shifts between serious Batman film and comedic campiness.
Upon hearing the casting for the film, you'd be forgiven for thinking that it's not only ideal casting, but fuelled with talent. From George Clooney's Batman, Arnold Schwarzenegger's Mr. Freeze, Uma Thurman's Poison Ivy, Chris O'Donnell's Robin, and Alicia Silverstone's Batgirl, these actors and actresses not only look the part, but could even act it well...if this were a normal Batman film. While the cast never seemed to run into issues on set and do manage to recall having fun when filming, it's quite clear that they didn't really give it their A-game for this film. Because of the ridiculous tone and campy approach, everyone either underacts or overacts. Clooney looks great and acts fine as Bruce Wayne, but phones it in as Batman. O'Donnell and Silverstone mostly feel wooden as Robin and Batgirl, despite having a few decent lines and banter. Schwarzenegger is great at using body language for the more dramatic scenes, but plays Mr. Freeze way too campy. Thurman as Ivy is perhaps the best campy performance in the film as the lack of drama allows her to go all in on the femme fatale nature of the character and be just the right amount of over-the-top, even if that's not what many fans would want from the character. Bane, played by the late Robert Swenson, is well-known to be horribly mischaracterized as the strong, but dumb henchman despite the character having great intelligence and menace in the comics, but considering the type of movie this is, I'm not that offended about it. The only good performance that manages to come out of the film is the late Micheal Gough as Alfred. Despite how silly and comedic the film gets, Gough never phones in his performance unlike the others and makes his portrayal of Alfred very consistent throughout the various films. As for the minor characters and extras, they are all clearly having fun in being in an unapologetic campy, comic-book movie, which is both enduring and kind of bad to watch. While the cast overall do have their moments and Gough surprisingly manages to be the best actor in the film, the inherent nature of the tone clearly made the talented actors and actresses not take their roles seriously and just had fun with it, which is both understandable and insulting at the same time.
If there's one thing that the film has going for, it's Joel Schumacher's direction. Yes, his vivid colourful aesthetic does take away the gothic nature of Gotham City to practically turn it into a neon wonder, but man, does it look great. Schumacher states that he was trying to homage both the look and feel of the 60's show and early comics by Dick Sprang and he very much succeeded on his goal. The lighting in particular is able to offer its share fair of natural and gothic-looking scenes such as Wayne Manor and Arkham Asylum on top of the robust neon coloured scenes such as Freeze's and Ivy's lair. The cinematography by Stephan Goldbatt can feel a bit amateurish at times, but the pans and zooms help show off the grand scale of the set design, which Schumacher is clearly proud of. The score by Elliot Goldenthal is not bad by any means as it does fit with the character, but it's way too over-the-top and exaggerated like the film itself and it constantly blares itself over the film. It also just doesn't hold a candle to Danny Elfman's memorable score from the Burton films. The visual effects hold up pretty well for a film made nearly twenty-five years ago. Not only do you have some fantastic-looking minatures, props, matte-paintings, and opticals (save for one infamous moment), but the CGI is pretty solid. The action sequences, on the other hand, aren't anything special as the majority of the fights have some poor choreography and scale. There are some neat moments such as the various Bat-vehicles being put to use and when Freeze freezes the city, but the action isn't really the strong suit of Schumacher's films. Overall, the saving grace of the film is very much Schumacher's direction as he does manage to make a pleasant and memorizing-looking superhero film, even if it's not one that best associates with Batman.
"Batman & Robin" is nowhere near one of the worst films ever made or even one of the worst superhero films made, but it's very much the worst Batman film to date for obvious reasons. The story feels undercooked in areas with the tonal shifts and undeveloped sub-plots, the tone goes far too campy and goofy for many, the humour mostly misses instead of hits, the Bat-crew are underacting and phoning in their performances, the villains and side-cast are overacting and making them goofballs, and the action sequences are just not really engaging to behold. Despite all of this, it's far from being considered painful or boring for me to watch. When the film acts like a serious Batman film in sparse moments, it does feel effective. The tone is very much an issue, but if you quickly accept the tone, there are some funny lines and moments to witness that are both intentional and unintentional. The casting all around is spot-on with Thurman and Gough offering the best performances with the others showing few moments of charisma, the camerawork by Goldbatt complements the great production and set design, Goldenthal's score is decent on its own merit, the practical and digital effects hold up extremely well with the minature and matte-paintings being the best aged elements of the visuals, and Schumacher's direction makes a memorable-looking film with a wide and vivid use of colour palette makes the comic panels come to life regardless of the aesthetic of Batman. It's a film that can range so bad it's good to just below-average depending on your perspective towards the franchise and acceptance of what the film is. Could it have been a really mature Batman story or even an interesting satire on the iconic character if given proper attention? Sure. But, no matter what you say about this film, it will never be a boring one to watch or talk about.
Verdict: 4/10. Bad overall, but can serve as great eye candy. A recommended watch with friends and drinks!
No comments:
Post a Comment