I just want to know who approved nips on the suit
No more ridiculous than abs on the suit.
Bats are mammals, if it didn't have nipples he can't be Batman.
There were probably long meetings about nip or no nip.
Say what you like of Clooney Batman, but it was the most memorable. I think of the bat credit card more than I would like.
it's such a fucking good joke too
"good thru: FOREVER"
Such a good joke all the Nostalgia Critic could do was repeat "A BAT CREDIT CARD???" like it wasn't hilarious.
They must have had a Visa/MasterCard/whatever product placement in mind that fell through, and then they did the scene, anyway.
When I saw that movie I was disappointed. Everyone in my life would always tell me how terrible it was and I shouldn't watch it, then when I actually did watch it it turns out the movie is actually just a gigantic love letter to Adam West's batman and is one of my favorite batman movies and I'm upset I listened to The Average Idiotic Movie Viewer and didn't watch it sooner.
The problem is that it's supposed to be a sequel to the Tim Burton movies and it just doesn't work on that front.
Neither does Batman Forever but that one is treated a lot better.
Because Batman Forever is a sequel to a Tim Burton movie.
Batman & Robin is a sequel to a sequel of a Tim Burton movie.
The level of camp/silliness increased for each film.
As a standalone film, it was fine. In the era it came out in, it didn't work.
Tommy Lee Jones acting like a sugar addicted child was more emotionally scarring than any other movie I have ever seen. And I am including liveleak videos in this.
There was something about that movie (uma Thurman) that no Batman movie after was able to do (it was uma Thurman). I haven't seen the movie in years, but I remember empathizing with the villains in a way that modern movies just don't want you to (it may have just been uma Thurman but I remember feeling bad for mr freeze too). I might just be queerer than other people but the level of camp felt genuine. I don't dislike other Batman movies, but that one felt fun to watch the way old comics were fun to read.
mr freeze and poison ivy are definitely the most sympathetic of the main cast of batman villains. as in, their motivations make more sense than like... calendar man.
Poison Ivy is like Magneto. It becomes harder and harder every year to say they're wrong.
I assume Calendar Man had a mental illness like OCD that manifested around dates due to the fact that his parents named him Julian Gregory Day.
And if someone has a mental illness in Gotham, you can bet a billionaire in S&M gear is there to beat the shit out of them.
I assume Calendar Man had a mental illness
Pretty much every batman villain is mentally ill in someway or another, and it's probably easier to list the ones that aren't. That's why they end up in Arkham "Asylum".
The ones that aren't mentally ill are disfigured. And at this point, you can probably count out the only ones left.
Ra's Al Ghul
Catwoman
Hush
Funnily enough, out of modern superhero movies, I think MCU got me to empathize with a villain the most. It was Thanos, who had a legitimate reason for reducing the population of the universe and didn't even want to discriminate.
I've grown bored with the MCU and haven't seen any of the newest films, but Infinity War was actually great.
Legitimate reason? Really?
That was the one thing that removed my ability to even try to suspend any disbelief in the fantasy. Like I couldn't even think of him as more than a one-dimensional caricature, let alone empathize with him. I was okay with Thanos just being some powerful guy seeking powerful objects to become more powerful. I might even sympathize, not empathize, with that. It was evil to be sure, but understandable. But, as soon as they revealed what he actually wanted to do with that power the whole thing just fell apart completely and became a total farce.
It was just bad logic that doesn't hold up to any scrutiny. Like why didn't he just double the resources? Why did he think the universe wouldn't just eventually return to pre-snap populations, because it's not like he also slowed population growth?
I don't know why the movies got the direction they did for his motivation but in the comics Thanos is trying to impress Death who he is in love with. It makes more sense than just getting rid of half the people for supposed resource scarcity.
Population control is an ineffective solution to a nonexistent problem, but that thread of misanthropy, woven into the worldview of most who think #thanoswasright, is based on misinformation. Knowledge is the cure.
Exactly. It's a nonsense motivation. What was he going to do? Come back every couple of decades and snap again?
Compare to Mass Effect's genophage. That's a plan. Horrible, but at least it makes sense.
The thing about Thanos though is that he is also a good example of what happens when a powerful figure is only surrounded by “yes” folks. Because his idea is, ultimately, stupid. Killing half of all life in the universe doesnʻt really change anything substantial because you wind up with the same problems: If you have 100 people and 50 cows or fruit trees or whatever, and you snap half of those, you still wind up with the same ratio. Now itʻs 50 people fighting for 25 cows or fruit trees or whatever.
The Infinity Stones basically make Thanos close to God. He could do anything. He could have doubled the resources of the universe, he could have created an entirely new form of resource.
In some ways this is in keeping with his characterization in the comics, where he has a habit of getting in his own way. But I kinda wish that Endgame, like in the Infinity Gauntlet series, would have revealed that he was actually trying to woo Death (which could have been represented by Hela) and so his supposed altruism is actually self-serving. Regardless, he does stand as a good representative of charismatic villains that garner sympathy while also being singularly focused on a really bad idea rooted in the villainʻs own self-assurance and ability to gather acolytes through a kind of “reality distortion field” effect.
keaton was the best, but clooney was up there.
batman & robin was probably the closest a mainstream comic book movie has ever been to the tone of the source material.
The Schumaker films had good casting. Clooney, Kilmer, Thurman, Jones, and Carrey were all great for their roles. They just happened to be cast in terrible films.
i mean, the films perfectly captures the camp of the batman characters, which i'd say makes the films good.
i hold that the best modern version of batman is The Brave and The Bold.
So many good cast members completely wasted
I really liked George Clooney as Batman.
But I also liked Pierce Brosnan as James Bond so I'm probably wrong.
Pierce Brosnan was great as James Bond. Goldeneye probably saved the franchise from oblivion. He got shit scripts after that, but he was right for the role.
Also, Dalton's first movie as Bond is highly underrated.
Please elaborate on the Brosnan part? I think he fit the role well, and I think GoldenEye is one of the best Bond movies. That being said, I wouldn't call myself a Bond connoisseur.
I don't think any of the Bonds were bad in the role. They all bought their own thing to it.
Some of them got some dogshit plots and scripts though, and frankly Brosnan's may have been even worse than Dalton's. Goldeneye is at least goofy and fun, a return to the Moore era. The rest were irredeemably bad.
It was reminiscent of the older silly Batman stuff and I liked it! I'll die on that hill!
I call it the Nipple Batman, and I enjoyed it too.
Clooney Batman was great, he fit right in the role IMHO, too bad he was in Batman & Robin, but I could easily see him doing what Keaton did, or even Pattinson.
I heard him tell a story about the time he had a close call with guys with machine guns on one of his foreign aid missions, and found himself on his knees with his hands in the air. He said he was worried that they'd figure out that they were safe, and start to let them go, and then recognize him, and say "YOU PUT NIPPLES ON THE BAT SUIT!" and shoot him anyway.
he wasn't the problem with that movie
Both of the Joel Schumacher films are fun if you don't take them seriously. They're not perfect by any means, but I'll throw them on every few years and have a good time. I can't even remember the last time I watched the Burton films, besides clips of "Love that Joker"
Batman Returns is in my holiday movie rotation.
I think you just have to judge them for what they are, not hyper gritty neo noir anti hero or the gothy expressionist dark serious tone, but more of a campy fun 60s Adam West bman style everyone just going really hammy.
Lmao damn, George Clooney 's son is colder than Mr Freeze
There is a kernel of a truly great movie hidden inside Batman & Robin. Unfortunately it's buried under a mountain of shit. The result? Pure corn.
Dinner dinner dinner dinner Batman!
People tweeting stuff. We allow tweets from anyone.
RULES:
