Clooney. Stupid. Colorful. And vinegret. It all comes together... I watched this movie a long time ago, about a month ago, so I don’t really pretend to be accurate.
To begin with, I think this is probably the very first superhero movie I’ve seen (albeit in chunks). However, when I watched the whole series, I watched this movie for granted. Ideally, it should be hard to say why I have this attitude to the film, because, at first glance, almost nothing has changed since the first picture. But for this film, the verdict is made with great ease.
First of all, I'll remember the story. I have to point out that this movie is like a true comic book in its gut, in the worst (for me) sense of the word. First, both Dr. Freeze and Poison Ivy are completely unreal heroes who became villains after cases where they were supposed to die, but because of luck, they survived, so both have superpowers (if they can be called that). Secondly, the story with Batman Forever is repeated - it is not clear why Dr. Freeze has so many people in subordination under such conditions of life, in my opinion, the flaw.
I also think it was very inappropriate for the writers to weave some drama into a picture like this. More specifically, I'm talking about the storyline that Alfred leads. Firstly, for half the film to the end, the finale became known, secondly, this turn in Hollywood is too obliterated, and thirdly, it does not fit into this picture in any way, so in Batman and Robin, there is no sense of integrity and the film is recalled by separate episodes. Also, in my opinion, such a character as Barbara was added in vain, and without her, the film is more like not a movie, but a vinaigrette.
Well, maybe it's time to think about the film's director, Joel Schumacher. Knowing other films of the director, you can just be amazed, where so much armlessness in this film. Apparently, Schumacher decided that he made a grave mistake, retaining the more or less familiar entourage of Batman and the atmosphere of Tim Burton in the previous picture. So, perhaps, in this film, we see all the possibilities of the director. Or rather, his merit I consider, for example, a huge number of statues in Gotham, insane color and diversity of the picture. In addition, he attributed the unsuccessful choice of the actor for the lead role, because after Batman Forever, it seemed that worse than Kilmore will not work, but Clooney appeared and broke all the records of his predecessor, but about this later.
I didn’t like the work of the cameraman, I would shoot differently. I was pleased with the usual musical theme, already at least something reminds of the good old Batman. I will probably keep quiet about the rest.
As for the actors, I don’t even know what to think, if it’s not the squalidest cast, it certainly goes right behind Batman. “The Beginning” (for myself, I have not yet completely decided which film is worse in this regard).
First of all, George Clooney, I have the most complaints about him from the entire cast. His Bruce Wayne is a kind of dandy, the soul of all parties, a public figure, a joker with an eternal ironic smile and it does not matter what he says at this time, "Aldfred dies." And, personally, I have absolutely no idea how such a prosperous and cheerful person could give even a hint of becoming Batman, a person who, due to the moral trauma inflicted in childhood, could not live a normal life. So, Clooney is the least suitable for my idea of this character, and I can safely call him the worst Batman, and I think that I am not alone.
I think I’ll remember Chris O’Donnell. It was this guy who amazed with his game (if you can call it what he was doing at all) in the previous part, and this is who should be replaced, in my opinion. But, alas, this did not happen and on the screen we see the same incompetence.
Now it’s time to think about the movie’s villains.
Arnold Schwarzenegger. I didn’t discover anything fundamentally new in his game. I would call him the Terminator in azure, as literally everything points to the presence of this character, not Dr. Freeze in this picture. Therefore, to evaluate the game of the well-known Arnie here is definitely not worth it, since there is nothing to evaluate.
Uma Thurman. Amazing, at the moment, of all her roles that I have seen so far, this is the worst. It seems to me that she does not look, although it is clear that they tried to make her look at least overly sexy. As a result, it turned out to be a puff, but I do not think that Thurman herself is to blame for this, although there is a share of its shortcomings.
Alicia Silverstone specifically disappointed me. I expected a lot more. In this picture, we will see her either wearing a helmet, where you do not have to play, or wearing a mask (which she took off so often that I had a quite logical question “why does she even need a mask?”), or with a focused face. Nothing more.
Even those actors who delighted me in the previous part did not brighten up the viewing this time. I didn't notice Pat Hingle at all. Even Michael Goff, who looks perfect in the role of Alfred, did not shine in this film, I suspect that because of what the writers invented for the butler-housekeeper, Goff simply did not know what exactly he needed to play, and why.
It seems that everything, although, probably, if the impressions were fresh, I would write more, but what is that?
I can’t call it the worst Batman story, and as you’ve already noticed, not because I liked it, but because I liked the next two, so Joel Schumacher can say thank you. Nolan for not letting him win the title from one person. I think that you should watch this “movie masterpiece” only if you want to know the whole story of the Bat, but you are not his ardent fan or fan, or you need to watch, for example, novice directors or just people, so they know how to spoil a rather profitable project. More importantly, what?
5 out of 10
Original