 | |
List Price: $19.98 | | Label: Warner Home Video
Salesrank: 6195
Released: October 22, 1997 |
| Our Price: $29.24 |
| Used Price: $13.28 |
|
MPAA Rating: PG-13 (Parental Guidance Suggested)
Media: DVD |
|
Editorial Review:
The Caped Crusader and Robin battle Mr. Freeze and Poison Ivy. Uncle Alfred is dying and his niece comes to help and becomes Batgirl.
No Track Information Available
Media Type: DVD
Artist: CLOONEY/O'DONNELL/SCHWARZENEGG
Title: BATMAN & ROBIN
Street Release Date: 11/14/2006
Domestic
Genre: ACTION / ADVENTURE
Description of Batman & Robin:
Following Val Kilmer's portrayal of the caped crusader in Batman Forever, the fourth Batman feature stars George Clooney under the pointy-eared cowl, with Chris O'Donnell returning as Robin the Boy Wonder. This time the dynamic duo is up against the nefarious Mr. Freeze (Arnold Schwarzenegger), who is bent on turning the world into an iceberg, and the slyly seductive but highly toxic Poison Ivy (Uma Thurman), who wants to eliminate all animal life and turn the Earth into a gigantic greenhouse. Alicia Silverstone lends a hand as Batgirl, and Elle McPherson plays the thankless role of Batman/Bruce Wayne's fiancée. A sensory assault of dazzling colors, senseless action, and lavish sets run amok, this Batman & Robin offers an overdose of eye candy, but it is strictly for devoted Bat-o-philes. --Jeff Shannon
Batman & Robin Reviews:
The worst one of the series 
2008-09-01 - This tired fourth installment of the latter day "Batman" series is about ten times worse than its predecessor "Batman Forever." George Clooney replaces Val Kilmer as Batman and makes the worst Batman and everybody else in the film is actually even more miscast. Arnold Schwarzenegger has the film's biggest laugh portraying the lead villain, Mr. Freeze. Chris O'Donnell reprising his "Batman Forever" role as Robin is even more unbelievable in that role the second time around and Alicia Silverstone as Batgirl(!) seems unnecessary. Lastly in casting, Uma Thurman as the villainess Poison Ivy suffers from the biggest miscasting of all. The film's laughable plot probably served as some script inspiration for the following year's even worse film "The Avengers" (which also starred Thurman, ouch).
One of the Worst Movies Ever Made! 
2008-08-30 - I loved the 60's TV show. It was made to be intentionally camp, but that was in keeping with the spirit of the time in which it was made. The series also faithfully adapted the source material as it was during the time period; just read a Batman comic from 1966. Taht being stated, I am not anxious to see something of a similar tone done on Batman again.
In 1997, with Batman returned to his earlier roots as an urban vigilante, some out of touch creative decision making lead to this disaster of a film which takes Batman back to the camp era, but without the wit or respect for the source material, or for the audience.
The script is composed entirely of oneliners, which screen writer Akiva Goldman still feels was appropriate, and Joel Schumaker throws away all his credibilty as a director of note and talent by selling out to make what can only be called garbage. It's hard to beleive this movie was made by the same person who directed the Client, A Time to Kill, and Falling Down.
With the exception of Michael Gough's performance as Alfred, the film is devoid of any emotional hook or narrative, and there is nothing for the audience to relate with. How could anyone at Warner Brothers think people would want to watch a Batman movie like this? Silly, loud and badly acted, this movie is a lowpoint in film making.
If you must see a Batman film, go and watch the excellent Batman Begins or the Dark Knight, but avoid this one.
Mr. Freeze, Poison Ivy, Bane and Batgirl. An icey piece of muscely plant smelling batcrap
2008-08-27 - Joel Schumacher makes a bad Bat movie yet again in Batman and Robin. It is beyond the the campiness of the 1960's. Its beyond any B-movie, it should be called a C-movie for crappy. This movie features an alright cast. The man behind the mask this time was George Cloony, but he didnt help the heredesnous(?) of the film. He must of felt embarrased delivering such bad lines(like when he mentions Superman). Then theres the bat credit card, wich I couldnt beleive I saw.George Cloony was okay, he was better than-whoops my bad hes not any better than the other Batman's.
Chris O'Donnell did as well as Robin as he did in Batman Forever, with(thankfully) little to no complaining. Batgirl played by Alicia Silverstone was close to becoming one of the worst actress to play in the Batman Anthology. Together George Clooney, Chris O'Donnell and Alicia Silverstone make "THE BAT-TRIO". Watch at the ending how they run towards you with not 2 but 3 Bat people.
Now for the villians. The first on the list is Mr. Freeze played by Arnold Schwarzenegger. I will tell you now that almost everything he says has an ice or freeze pun. Arnold was an intresting choice for Mr. Freeze. Poison Ivy is played by Uma Therman. Theres not alot to say but she definetly didnt put in any effort into playing Poison Ivy. And remember what I said about Alicia Silverstone? Well Uma Therman was the worst actress in the bat anthalogy. The last is Bane who I didnt bother looking for whoever played him. He was my most anticipated villian for Batman and Robin. But he got tossed aside like nothing near the ending. I give this movie 1 strong ice cube covered by a plant with batwings out of 5. Tommorow I will review Batman Begins. I cant wait!
Reviewing the item not the service.
2008-08-25 - First this product got here fast, and in great shape. The movie its self is absoultly horrible. Avoid if possible. I only got it for the riff track that goes with it.
The Ridiculously Inept End to The Original Batman Franchise... 
2008-08-23 - What happens when a film franchise starts off with a massive success, follows that up with a smaller, somewhat unfocused sequel alienating some moviegoers, then comes back with a completely different tone, actors, director, etc., all of which leaves the movie studio (Warner Brothers in this instance) believing that lighter, more family friendly fare may be the way to go? Well, in the case of the once successful Batman franchise, the end result of this chain of events is the utterly campy, ridiculously acted, slap-in-the-face to the comic book fans, excuse of a movie titled "Batman & Robin".
"Batman & Robin" follows the Dynamic Duo (George Clooney as Batman and Chris O'Donnell as Robin) on yet another adventure as they must take on the villainous pair of Mr. Freeze (Arnold Schwarzenegger) and Poison Ivy (Uma Thurman). With Mr. Freeze attempting to freeze all of Gotham City's population to death so that Poison Ivy can remake the city in a more Earth-friendly image, Batman and Robin, along with newcomer Batgirl (Alicia Silverstone) joining the Bat-family, must work together as only a family can, in order to save Gotham City's citizens before time runs out.
Where to begin? This is a tough one for me to determine a good starting point for my critique portion of the review, mostly because the movie is just so horrible, with very few good points, that I find myself unsure of what to criticize first. Oh well, let's just take the plunge and see what happens.
First we have the story, written once again by screenwriter Akiva Goldsman ("Batman Forever"), which is one of the campiest, lamest one-liner ridden, with the cheesiest action scenes, little to no drama, and poorly acted, pieces of comic book garbage that I have seen come out of Hollywood since either "Superman 3" or "Howard the Duck". The plot is the thinnest of all of the four Batman films in the franchise, leaving me to wonder if Akiva didn't really feel all that into writing this installment and perhaps allowed a child to do most of the work for him, that's how low the quality is for the overall story in this movie. I thought perhaps given the tone of the previous film being so much lighter than the first two movies in the series that perhaps the franchise was heading into the direction of the 60's television series, but I held onto hope that no one wanted to see that again; apparently I was way wrong. Now, I can't blame the writer completely for the lighter direction this franchise took with this last installment (although I can blame him for how horribly it was written); apparently Warner Brothers felt that because with "Batman Returns" audiences complained about it being so dark and twisted, that with "Batman Forever" the tone needed to be much friendlier towards children and family audiences. So, due to the success that "Batman Forever" enjoyed, which was considerably more than that of "Batman Returns", the WB decided that the fourth installment in the series needed to go even lighter, essentially making the movie funnier, more outlandish, and almost completely devoid of any semblance of drama, basically just recycle the 60's television series with new actors and you'll have the movie "Batman & Robin".
The second set of problems that I had with "Batman & Robin" is with returning director Joel Schumacher ("Batman Forever"), who took everything that I didn't enjoy about his previous effort, "Batman Forever", and multiplied it by ten for this movie. For instance, in the previous movie, Schumacher used a lot of neon and bright colors to lighten up the movie's atmosphere, which felt completely out of place in a Batman film; so, in "Batman & Robin" everything is brighter and utilizes tons of neon, to the point that it feels like every scene has some sort of neon color in it. Another issue I have with the director is that once more Joel chose to leave nipples on the costumes for Batman and Robin, and once again I say to this, "No nipples on the suits! Never in the history of the comic books or even in the really good film adaptations (which would exclude Joel's attempts) have there been nipples on the costumes, there's just no point to having them there!" My last major gripe with Joel Schumacher's direction was that the action scenes were so phony and cheesy that I had to roll my eyes as I watched some of the absolutely ridiculous things both the heroes and villains do in this movie. Every stunt has the feel of obvious wire work, and not very good wire work at that, and all of the fight choreography is so telegraphed that you can see what's coming a mile away! One last thing regarding the stunts, whoever decided to have Robin's motorcycle bust through a wall leaving a hole in the shape of the Robin symbol really should be slapped (and I'm thinking the guilty party is you, Joel Schumacher), because that is so stupid, that even kids point at that moment and laugh at how ridiculous a stunt that is.
My third and final batch of complaints must be aimed at the cast of "Batman & Robin", all of which act as if Jim Carrey had been their acting coach, or should I say "over-acting". Now, I understand that given the lack of a decent script and questionable direction from the writer and director respectively, that the actors didn't have a whole lot to make do with; however, this isn't the first time a group of actors have had to make something out of nothing, and it's been done successfully many times over, just not in this movie. George Clooney who hadn't done very many feature films prior to this one, wasn't the greatest actor at this point in his career (today he is much more accomplished at his craft), and without a doubt George gives the weakest performance as Batman within this franchise. Michael Keaton knew to establish Bruce Wayne and Batman as two discernible characters, the same with Val Kilmer in "Batman Forever", but with George there was no distinguishing between Bruce Wayne and Batman other than the costume, because he played both sides to the character the exact same way. Chris O'Donnell was good as Robin, though not as interesting as he had been in the previous movie. This time around Robin seemed more like a spoiled brat than a superhero, which made Batman seem more like a nanny than the Caped Crusader. Michael Gough portrayed Alfred once more in this installment, and provided the only true source of drama for the entire movie, but even that aspect wasn't executed near as well as it should have been.
With "Batman & Robin" we were also introduced to several new characters, none of which come close to capturing the true essence of what made those characters so great in the comics. Alicia Silverstone ("Clueless") as Batgirl was an alright choice, she wouldn't have been my first pick; however, she's a decent enough actress that I thought maybe she could do a good job. Well, she wasn't great, but that's not completely her fault because the story arc she is given is fairly weak all across the board, but her line readings were mostly flat and uninspired. Not to mention the fact that her origin has been altered to make her Alfred's niece instead of Commissioner Gordon's daughter, a decision that served as just another problem, in the already far too long list, this movie had going against it. Along with Alicia we also have Uma Thurman ("Kill Bill") as Poison Ivy. Now, I thought that Uma definitely looked the part of Poison Ivy, but the constant use of Earth inspired references throughout her dialogue began to grow tiresome, and she apparently felt that because she was playing a villain it would be the perfect opportunity for her to practice the Jim Carrey art of over-acting in every scene in hopes of getting attention, most of which fell pathetically flat. Lastly, we have Arnold Schwarzenegger (`The Terminator' series) as one of the worst bits of casting I have seen in a comic book inspired movie. In the comics, Mr. Freeze was a skinny man in a mechanized suit with a big freeze gun; obviously Arnold couldn't pull off the skinny man routine due to his physique, so his resemblance to the character's appearance was nowhere near accurate. Although, to the Casting Director's credit, DC Comics did change the appearance of Mr. Freeze to resemble more closely that of Arnold in the movie, so maybe the choice wasn't all that bad, to me it was just another example of how everyone associated with this movie did not take the source material seriously at all. Aside from Arnold's obvious physical difference to the character's initial appearance, his acting in this movie was alright, but just like Uma Thurman's character of Poison Ivy, writer Akiva Goldsman apparently felt that including as many ice-themed one-liners into his dialogue as possible would be a good idea. Wrong, all that decision did was made his character become incredibly annoying at an even faster rate than Poison Ivy's.
Well, you may be wondering when I will get to the good points regarding this movie, because so far it's all been mostly negative. I do have a couple of positive things to say regarding "Batman & Robin", first I must say that as pathetic as the story was, it did contain some decent elements in regards to trust and family issues that Batman and Robin must face, although sometimes even this was done a little too heavy-handed that it was a bit on the annoying side. Another standout achievement for the movie, was that the special effects (given that this movie is 11 years old now) were very good, especially for the numerous "ice covered" or "freezing" sequences featured throughout the movie. The last good thing I can say for this movie is this... It ends! Yes, that is probably the best aspect this movie has going for it, the fact that eventually the movie ends. On the flip side of that, is once the movie ends, you're left with the nagging feeling of having wasted two hours of your life away that you'll never be able to get back, other than that it's all good though.
"Batman & Robin", if you haven't figured it out yet, is absolutely the worst installment in the Batman franchise that spanned from 1989 through 1997; however as pathetic as this movie is, for some reason it has the same appeal as that of the 1960's television series and movie. The movie's like a train wreck, you know the results are going to be horrifying, yet you can't seem to bring yourself to look away; although, this movie does push the limits of that sentiment a few times.
"Batman & Robin" is rated PG-13 for violence and sensuality.
