Subject: REVIEW: BATMAN AND ROBIN (1997)

From: [email-masked] (Ram Samudrala)
Date: 30 Jun 1997 23:53:43 GMT

BATMAN AND ROBIN
                       A film review by Ram Samudrala
                        Copyright 1997 Ram Samudrala

The latest Batman movie, /Batman and Robin/, the fourth in the series,
would've been much better off had it been a silent flick.  The
cinematography is spectacular, but the dialogue leaves a lot to be
desired and the plot is non-existent.  My feeling is that if the
characters hadn't spoken a single word, I'd have enjoyed the movie a
lot more.  As it is, I couldn't help myself groaning every time a bad
one-liner was made.

When I reviewed /Batman Forever/, it was from the perspective of an
avid Batman comic book reader (the Knight Fall series had just
completed).  I had problems with that movie not being faithful
to the /spirit/ of its main character, the Dark Knight.  I have the
same problems with this movie, but I can put a better handle on why
this is the case, and perhaps even offer some solutions.

Director Joel Schumacher's Gothic Gotham does indeed have the comic
book look and feel to it.  It is dark, dreary, and befitting the Dark
Knight. But the story is way too campy and too many villains are
introduced for no good reason.  When I criticised /Batman Forever/ for
not being faithful to the comic book, people wrote back and said I was
expecting too much. But the expectations arise because villains like
Two Face, the Riddler, Freeze and Poison Ivy are included in the
movies.  I think a /terrific/ Batman movie could be done without /any/
reference to Batman's famous villains, while having a tremendous
commercial appeal and still remaining faithful to the comic book. Some
of the best stories written have featured such villains: Ten Nights of
the Beast, written by Jim Starlin featuring the KGBeast, is one of the
best Batman stories ever written even today.

Some good choices were made in this movie: George Clooney is by far
the best Batman.  He has the look and the attitude, though he doesn't
make such a great Bruce Wayne as Val Kilmer did.  As was the case in
the past movies, it is the villains who are more charismatic and
appealing than Batman and Robin.  Every Batman movie I've seen, I've
found myself rooting for the villains. In /Batman and Robin/, both
Poison Ivy (Uma Thurman) and Mr. Freeze (Arnold Schwarzenegger) steal
the show.  Thurman is brilliant in all possible incarnations she
adopts: she is convincingly innocent and confused at first, and sexily
seductive and deadly at the end. She goes through her lines with
style, and was the only person who made me laugh.  Schwarzenegger
appears to be having a lot of fun barking out his lines.

But a lot of bad decisions were made too, outweighing everything else:
The Knight Fall series featured Bane as one of the greatest villains
Batman has faced; the person who broke Batman's back, after almost
breaking his mind.  In /Batman and Robin/, Bane (Jeep Swenson) is a
grunting villain not even worth a couple of laughs.  In fact, I think
a great story could've been structured alone Bane alone. The way Bane
is defeated in the end is insulting to anyone who is familiar with the
character.

Both Robin (Chris O'Donnell) and Batgirl (Alicia Silverstone) are
completely unnecessary in this movie, except for their looks. The
sub-plot involving Robin and Batman competing for Poison Ivy's
affections is incongruous.  The sub-plot involving Alfred's sickness
is unnecessary.  These are just distractions to make up for the lack
of a main plot.

The final problem I have with this movie is that Batman is as much a
detective as he is a crime fighter.  That aspect of it is never
explored here, even though opportunities abound.  However, I expect
Batman to do well at the box office, and I do think it's worth the
matinee fair (certainly not worth renting).

email@urls  ||  http://www.ram.org  ||  http://www.twisted-helices.com/th
               Movie ram-blings: http://www.ram.org/ramblings/movies.html