From /home/matoh/tmp/sf-rev Fri Aug 22 16:16:43 1997 From rec.arts.sf.reviews Tue Jul 15 23:06:45 1997 Path: news.ifm.liu.se!news.lth.se!eru.mt.luth.se!www.nntp.primenet.com!nntp.primenet.com!feed1.news.erols.com!howland.erols.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uchinews!cbgw2.lucent.com!nntphub.cb.lucent.com!not-for-mail From: rhodes_steve@tandem.com (Steve Rhodes) Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews,rec.arts.sf.reviews Subject: RETROSPECTIVE: BATMAN RETURNS (1992) Followup-To: rec.arts.movies.past-films,rec.arts.sf.movies Date: 30 Jun 1997 23:55:28 GMT Organization: Tandem Computers, Inc. Lines: 88 Sender: evelynleeper@geocities.com (Evelyn C. Leeper) Approved: evelynleeper@geocities.com Message-ID: <5p9h1g$2n0@nntpb.cb.lucent.com> ~Reply-To: rhodes_steve@tandem.com (Steve Rhodes) NNTP-Posting-Host: mtvoyager.mt.lucent.com Summary: r.a.m.r. #08050 Keywords: author=Rhodes Originator: ecl@mtvoyager Xref: news.ifm.liu.se rec.arts.movies.reviews:7444 rec.arts.sf.reviews:1398 BATMAN RETURNS A film review by Steve Rhodes Copyright 1997 Steve Rhodes RATING (0 TO ****): ** 1/2 After recently having suffered through the press screening of Joel Schumacher's BATMAN & ROBIN, we decided to check out one of Tim Burton's originals. BATMAN RETURNS is the second in the Batman series and the last to be directed by Tim Burton. Correctly criticized at the time of its release in 1992 as being too dark, it nevertheless has more imagination and energy than Schumacher's latest two (BATMAN FOREVER and BATMAN & ROBIN). As in all the Batman films, the landscape is populated by a cornucopia of quirky characters. Danny DeVito plays the mistreated Oswald Cobblepot, who comes back to Gotham City as the Penguin to wreak havoc on Gotham City's occupants. With the dark circles under his eyes, his black lipstick, and his beak of a nose, the sewer living Penguin is at once both pitiful and scary. Ever creepy Christopher Walken plays the evil industrialist Max Shreck. His moral compass does nothing but spin, and he is happy to do whatever it takes, including pushing his bullied secretary out the window, to achieve his financial goals. When she comes back to life, he casually remarks that there are always higher windows. Easily the best and only memorable performance in the picture is turned in by Michelle Pfeiffer as Max's secretary, Selina Kyle. Before her death, Pfeiffer seems totally out of character as a ditzy and helpless woman with hair as frazzled as her brain. After her resurrection by some local alley cats, she metamorphoses into Catwoman, ever strong and out to get all of those men who have made her downtrodden. Catwoman gets most of the better lines in the script by Sam Hamm and Daniel Waters. "Hello honey, I'm home," she announces when she comes home. "Oh, I forgot. I'm not married." It is her sly and understated intonation that makes the show's best line: "I am Catwoman. Hear my roar." In print, it has no punch, but as delivered by Pfeiffer, it has a beautiful and poetic energy. Although many actors have tried to wear Batman's heavy rubber suit and ended up looking silly, none more so that George Clooney, Michael Keaton gives the most satisfying rendition. His Bruce Wayne and Batman are dark and brooding like all of Burton's films. Without the levity of Catwoman, BATMAN RETURNS would have been too much of a downer to take. The batmobile has more gadgets than any vehicle James Bond ever drove. Bo Welch's art deco sets look like they came from Albert Speer's design studio. And Danny Elfman's dramatic music is full of symphonic power making the show resemble an elaborate and macabre opera. Most of the violence is at the rock 'em, sock 'em cartoonish level, but some can be downright gory. In a scene that reminds one of CHINATOWN, the Penguin is given a pair of giddily happy, image consultants by his mentor Max. The Penguin hates the idea so much that he tries to bite off one of their noses. Burton has blood flowing everywhere and leaves it dripping down the Penguin's mouth after the incident is over. BATMAN RETURNS drags frequently, and Burton has trouble controlling his dark tendencies, but still, thanks mainly to Pfeiffer, it remains one of the better of an overhyped and too often unwatchably bad series. Then again, since the series has generated a reported 4 billion dollars in Batman merchandise sales, the quality of the films themselves are only of secondary importance. BATMAN RETURNS runs too long at 2:06. It is rated PG-13 for sometimes gory violence. The show would be fine for kids around 8 and up depending on how sensitive they are to gore. My son Jeffrey, age 8, thought the movie was "good," but he did get scared and had to cover his eyes during several scenes. In a somewhat marginal call, I give the film thumbs up and ** 1/2. _______________________________________________________________________ **** = A must see film. *** = Excellent show. Look for it. ** = Average movie. Kind of enjoyable. * = Poor show. Don't waste your money. 0 = Totally and painfully unbearable picture. REVIEW WRITTEN ON: June 28, 1997 Opinions expressed are mine and not meant to reflect my employer's. From /home/matoh/tmp/sf-rev Fri Aug 22 16:16:47 1997 From rec.arts.sf.reviews Tue Jul 15 23:06:47 1997 Path: news.ifm.liu.se!news.lejonet.se!newsfeed1.telia.com!masternews.telia.net!newssrv.ita.tip.net!ubnnews.unisource.ch!news-zh.switch.ch!surfnet.nl!newsgate.unisource.nl!fido.news.demon.net!demon!dispatch.news.demon.net!demon!europa.clark.net!feeder.chicago.cic.net!vixen.cso.uiuc.edu!uchinews!cbgw2.lucent.com!nntphub.cb.lucent.com!not-for-mail From: chandlerb@geocities.com (Ted Prigge) Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews,rec.arts.sf.reviews Subject: RETROSPECTIVE: BATMAN RETURNS (1993) Followup-To: rec.arts.movies.past-films,rec.arts.sf.movies Date: 24 Jun 1997 15:57:11 GMT Organization: - Sender: evelynleeper@geocities.com (Evelyn C. Leeper) Approved: evelynleeper@geocities.com Message-ID: <5ooqon$628@nntpa.cb.lucent.com> ~Reply-To: chandlerb@geocities.com (Ted Prigge) NNTP-Posting-Host: mtvoyager.mt.lucent.com Summary: r.a.m.r. #07976 Keywords: author=Prigge Originator: ecl@mtvoyager Lines: 71 Xref: news.ifm.liu.se rec.arts.movies.reviews:7370 rec.arts.sf.reviews:1382 BATMAN RETURNS A film review by Ted Prigge Copyright 1997 Ted Prigge Director: Tim Burton Writer: Daniel Walters Starring: Michael Keaton, Michelle Pfeiffer, Danny DeVito, Christopher Walken, Michael Gough, Michael Murphy, Pat Hingle, Vincent Schiavelli, Paul Reubens "Batman Returns" is probably one of the most ballsiest moves in Hollywood history: They took a formula that was dark but very light and made the film intensely dark and brooding. But of course, you have at your realm the bizarre Tim Burton who does one thing Hollywood's way then turns around and does what you're not supposed to do. For example: he made the brilliant "Ed Wood" and turned around and made an Ed Wood film, "Mars Attacks!" While this was probably his only mistake, it's still not a bad film and perfectly exercises what Tim's all about - being unique. This is what he goes for with his sequel for the schweppervescent "Batman" from 1989 - a film where all the villains are sympathetic to some degree. The Joker wasn't a sympathetic character - just a wildly fun villain to root for. His villains are all reclusive, misunderstood people, some who do the wrong thing for a good cause. Bruce Wayne (Micheal Keaton, again) has apparently lost Vicki (maybe why he's brooding again) but he falls deeply in love with a girl, Selena Kyle (Michelle Pfeiffer), who works for an evil industrialist, Max Schreck (Christopher Walken). Little does he know that Selena found out about Max's evil plans to do something bad and selfish with electricity and he threw her out of a window. She was a cat lover and becomes a catwoman after all these cats bite her wounds (I don't get it either). She has nine lives, is a tad insane now and constructs a tight leather costume for herself and carries a whip when she goes out at night to destroy Max Shreck and beat up thugs. But her real persona is in love with Bruce. But little does she know, he's Batman. This is the most intriguing subplot in any of the Batmans and is handled magnificently. Meanwhile, the Penguin (Danny DeVito), a deformed man who was thrown into the sewers by his priggish parents (one of them being Paul Reubens) when he was an infant, has decided to rise and woo everyone so he can go into office and help Max Schreck do his dastardly deeds. He's seen as a sympathetic character because he's so reclusive and utterly ugly. He has legions of penguins and circus freaks at his side too, so he can war against Batman. Tim Burton carefully constructs the story and adds his great psychological depth to the film. The fight scenes between Catwoman and Batman have whole new dimensions because we know that they will be fooling around as Selena and Bruce on a couch later on. When they find out, it's one of the most intense scenes in recent action hero history, as they are dancing with one another. And the action sequences are amazing to watch, although not as cool as the first one. The acting is basically stolen by Michelle Pfeiffer. Yes, Michael Keaton rocks once again as Batman, and Danny DeVito is a great Penguin and Christopher Walken is at first laughable with his Eraserhead hair, but he also rules. But Michelle is just amazing. Every move is unpredictable, every line is said perfectly and she makes her character so seductive, she could make Uma Thurman's Poison Ivy look like Mr. Freeze. Her performance ranks up there with Jack Nicholson's in the first one. This sequel dares to be different, dares to be dark and depressing and still has some of the great wit of the original. It also dares to have sympathetic characters and ends with one of them still lurking around (hopefully to be brought back). I highly reccomend this one for being fun and still very deep. MY RATING (out of 5): ****1/2 From rec.arts.sf.reviews Thu Sep 18 22:42:34 2003 From: Eric Walker Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews,rec.arts.sf.reviews Subject: Retrospective: Batman Returns (1992) Approved: ramr@rottentomatoes.com Followup-To: rec.arts.movies.past-films Date: Mon, 28 Jul 2003 19:39:40 -0000 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: X-RAMR-ID: 35372 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 1179243 X-RT-TitleID: 1039328 X-RT-AuthorID: 1470 Summary: r.a.m.r. #35372 X-Questions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Submissions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 91 Path: news.island.liu.se!news.Update.UU.SE!puffinus.its.uu.se!newsfeed.sunet.se!news01.sunet.se!logbridge.uoregon.edu!newshub.sdsu.edu!elnk-nf2-pas!newsfeed.earthlink.net!sjc70.webusenet.com!news.webusenet.com!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-04!sn-xit-06!sn-post-02!sn-post-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail Xref: news.island.liu.se rec.arts.movies.reviews:7198 rec.arts.sf.reviews:626 Reposting a review first written in 1992. Many are the ironies of Hollywood, where true genius is overlooked and boring mediocrity is worshipped at the altar. The latest example of these ironies is Tim Burton, the twisted genius at the helm of "Batman Returns." Yes, I think "genius" may be the operative word here, because Burton is one of those truly unique filmmakers who we're going to look back upon, years from now (not many years, though), and nod wisely when we talk of the "Tim Burton school of filmmaking." This guy's got talent, he's got vision, he makes movies that he can definitely call his own. But the irony here is that the "Batman" movies, which are going to be his biggest box-office hits, are not really his movies. Let me put it this way: Tim Burton, and his screenwriter, Daniel Waters, have taken a so-so Hollywood sequel and made an above-average movie from it. They've done with this movie what 20th Century Fox wanted to do with "Alien3," and on the whole they've succeeded. "Batman Returns" is an entertaining, enjoyable, often funny movie, despite a silly, fragmented story and a star who is completely lacking in charisma and screen presence. It has the same weaknesses that plagued the first film, but it also has the same strengths, and this time the strengths outweigh the weaknesses. First the strengths. As with all of Tim Burton's movies, the scenery and sets are mind-blowing. Setting this movie in winter at Christmastime immediately made me think of "Edward Scissorhands" on a much bigger budget. The Penguin's underwater grotto is the best Evil Villain's Hideout haven since Lex Luthor's lair in the first "Superman" movie, and Wayne Mansion, which we see more of this time around, is obviously taken directly from Xanadu in "Citizen Kane," complete with a huge roaring fireplace and big, empty rooms that reflect the empty life of their owner. These two sets stand out from the general weirdness of the movie, and they're a sight to behold. And the characters themselves? As you've probably heard, Michelle Pfeiffer steals the entire movie as Catwoman. When she dresses up in that sleek black leather suit, the hormone level in the audience rises noticeably. Not only can she hold her own with Batman in a fight, but she's equally believable as she begins to fall in love with Bruce Wayne. She's pictured here as a mirror image of Batman - a mousy, shy exterior with a raging demon underneath. And that whip! In her own words, "I am Catwoman - hear me roar!" (I wouldn't mind playing with this kitty myself.) Danny DeVito's Penguin is a delightful monster as well, the tragic figure who wants to get back at the world for what it's done to him, and who allows himself to be used by Christopher Walken's evil businessman Max Shreck because he has his own secret plan in the works. He throws himself into the role, and I think he put a better job in as the Penguin than Jack Nicholson did as the Joker. But desite all these pluses, there's still the problem of Michael Keaton. What problem? The problem that as Bruce Wayne, and as Batman, he's as stiff as a board. He's boring, he mumbles too much, and his spotlight is continually stolen by the villains. I just can't work up any emotions at all for this guy. I felt that Keaton was woefully miscast in the first movie, and he suffers in the role even more here. It doesn't help that the action scenes are probably the weakest part of the whole movie. "Variety" magazine has said that at his heart, Tim Burton is not an action movie director. I agree whole-heartedly with this. In fact, we don't get that much action at all until the climax of the movie, but that's okay because the characters cast a spell of their own, without any gratuitous violence to keep the audience awake. The scenes of Batman battling the Penguin's goons seem to have been put into the movie simply because the movie had to have a few fight scenes in it. Maybe Tim Burton should get himself a second director like Sam Raimi or John McTiernan to handle the fights in the inevitable third "Batman" movie, because he just can't do them himself. This is why I call the success of the "Batman" movies ironic. They're not the type of movies that Tim Burton truly excels at, but they're what Hollywood wants, and apparently they're what the public wants. So for most people, Tim Burton will be best known as the director of "Batman." (One might say the same thing about Martin Scorese and "Cape Fear.") (These complaints about the fight scenes, however, do NOT apply to Batman's battle with Catwoman. I want MORE! ) -- First Online Church of "Bob" http://www.modemac.com/ ========== X-RAMR-ID: 35372 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 1179243 X-RT-TitleID: 1039328 X-RT-AuthorID: 1470 From rec.arts.sf.reviews Thu Sep 18 22:42:39 2003 Path: news.island.liu.se!newsfeed.sunet.se!news01.sunet.se!uninett.no!feed.news.nacamar.de!newsfeed.vmunix.org!newspeer1-gui.server.ntli.net!ntli.net!sn-xit-02!sn-xit-06!sn-post-01!supernews.com!news.supernews.com!not-for-mail From: John Ulmer Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies.reviews,rec.arts.sf.reviews Subject: Retrospective: Batman Returns (1992) Approved: ramr@rottentomatoes.com Followup-To: rec.arts.movies.past-films Date: Mon, 04 Aug 2003 19:17:55 -0000 Organization: Posted via Supernews, http://www.supernews.com Message-ID: X-RAMR-ID: 35420 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 1183757 X-RT-TitleID: 1039328 X-RT-SourceID: 1382 X-RT-AuthorID: 6769 X-RT-RatingText: 2.5/5 Summary: r.a.m.r. #35420 X-Questions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Submissions-to: ramr@rottentomatoes.com X-Complaints-To: abuse@supernews.com Lines: 85 Xref: news.island.liu.se rec.arts.movies.reviews:7246 rec.arts.sf.reviews:629 Visit www.wiredonmovies.com for movie scripts, reviews and quotes! Batman Returns - 2.5/5 Stars REVIEW BY JOHN ULMER There's a certain something about "Batman Returns" that doesn't quite fit. Perhaps it's the mix of film noir with superhero-after all, isn't film noir the opposite of the notion of a superhero? Film noirs are about an Everyman in an odd situation, thrust into something he can't possibly stop; comic book superheroes are those who choose a life of salvation, who give something away voluntarily. Tim Burton's "Batman" was a good comic book adaptation; one of the best. It blended film noir with action hero, super-hero-type stuff. Very risky, but it paid off. "Batman Returns" fails miserably. The Dark Knight always was a bit darker than his other superhero friends, such as "Superman" or "Spider-Man." If I had to choose a favorite, it would be Batman: The world he lives in is darker, and he is much more identifiable than someone who is extraordinary; Batman is just a guy tired of the bad life, much like Robert De Niro's Taxi Driver, who once said, "Here is a man fed up with the crime on the streets..." Batman is, in a way, a sort of Taxi Driver. But director Tim Burton, whose other director outings have included the colossal hit "Batman" and "Edward Scissorhands" (both very dark films), fails to seamlessly blend film noir with superhero. The two are contrary, Batman living in a 1940s-era Gotham City always worked, but there's something wrong with this Gotham City. It was the start of more bad sequels, which would all lose the classy vision the original sustained. Things started getting darker and yet, at the same time, much brighter. Dialogue started getting cornier. Situations started getting ludicrous. "Batman Returns" was the start of this; I keep repeating myself but I'm not sure how to explain what feeling this film gives me. In a way, I love Tim Burton as a director for the Batman series; in another way, I don't. In a way, I like the dark look of Gotham City; in another way, I think it's too dark. In a way, I loved the original; in a way, the sequels all suck. Batman (Michael Keaton), a.k.a. Bruce Wayne, is once again called out to stop the unstoppable Penguin (Danny DeVito), who is trying to take control of Gotham City with the help of Catwoman (Michelle Pfeiffer) and Christopher Walken (what's his character's name in the film? Who cares.) Many villains followed, many sequels followed, and they all stank. "Batman Returns" makes the mistake of turning the Penguin, a very dark creature (from what I can tell as I never read the comics very much at all-barely ever, in fact), into an overly creepy, corny character who speaks a lot of cliches. He doesn't convince; Danny DeVito is the perfect casting choice, but his character is too weird to like, or even have fun watching. There's a certain joy in watching Jack Nicholson parade around as the Joker in the original "Batman"-and though he was the bad guy, I myself kind of felt sad when he died at the end, knowing he would never be seen again (unlike the comics and television shows where he always appears to have died, only to come back again). Danny DeVito is great, but the things his character does, and the way he is captured on screen, is almost too dark to enjoy. This film is essentially much darker than the first, something I never imagined possible for a Batman film. Burton really pushed the envelope on this one. I must admit I have, on occasion, viewed the "Batman" television show; not the 60s one (though I've seen that, too), but the cartoon show. It's splendid fun; it's a lot like Tim Burton's sequel but actually captures more of what the original film had. The villains, especially the Joker, are great fun to watch. I recommend the cartoon over this film, as Batman fans will find it much more respecting to the comic-strip, and regular moviegoers will actually find it a lot more fun to watch. "Batman Returns" tries a lot of things, but it doesn't get away with them like the first film did. How are we supposed to enjoy watching creepy villains that aren't any fun to watch? To be honest, I don't care. I gave up on trying to solve this after the third film, which though truly terrible, was even more fun to watch than this film (don't ask me why). The fourth was unbearable, but that's another story. Copyright, 2003, John Ulmer www.wiredonmovies.com ========== X-RAMR-ID: 35420 X-Language: en X-RT-ReviewID: 1183757 X-RT-TitleID: 1039328 X-RT-SourceID: 1382 X-RT-AuthorID: 6769 X-RT-RatingText: 2.5/5