Conference bookie::movies

Someone told me that Robin Williams would play The Riddler. No confirmation on
that one yet.

Donald.

    	I remember hearing ( for Batman Returns ) that Robin Williams or
    Steve Martin would play the Riddler, and that <blank> Wayans ( Damon
    and Keenan's little brother ) would play Robin.  My vote would be for
    R.W., though - he'd probably be as big a box-office draw as Jack
    Nicholson was as the Joker . . .
    
    					- Jim
    

No one will ever top Frank Gorshwin's (sp?) performance as the Riddler.  He
was manic.

No Batgirl, huh?

    
    	Batgirl?  Surya Bonaly.
    
    	8^)
    
    							GTI
    

    
    	And by the way, that's Frank Gorshin.
    
    							GTI

Thanks ... I thought I had an extra letter or two in there.  Anyways, he
was the best.

    Hi! Everybody.
        Could you tell me, about batman III.  What it will going on batman
    III.  This movie will show who is Robin or not ?
                            Thanks
                            Panuchat S.

    	Chris O'Donnell from SCENT OF A WOMAN is expected to be named as
    the newest cast member to BATMAN III in the role of Robin.
    
    Barring any disasters of course....

    
    Joel Schumacher is probably going to direct.  Will be filmed in New
    York this Autumn.
    

From the internet news...

>Article 74693 of rec.arts.movies:
>Newsgroups: rec.arts.comics.misc,rec.arts.movies
>Subject: BATMAN III NEWS!!!
>
>From the Michael Sneed column in today's (5/4) Chicago Sun-Times...
>
>"On the Batbeat: Sets are being built for 'BATMAN III' and 
> locations are being scouted. Meanwhile, producers are
> still on the lookout for the actress to play Bruce Wayne's
> love interest, this time out. Again Michael Keaton will
> be the Caped Crusader, with Robin Williams as the Riddler
> and Tommy Lee Jones as Harvey "Two-Face" Dent. As for Robin,
> it'll be Chris O'Donnell, late of 'THE THREE MUSKETEERS'."
>
> 
>There have also been reports on CNN Entertainment news that
>they will be filming on the streets of New York as well as
>the studio this time around.

Look like it could be good... but I can't imagine them doing any justice
to all these characters (Robin, Riddler, Two-Face, AND a love interest,
and of course Batman himself) in just 2 hours...

So far - it looks like it should be at least a 3 hour film in order to
give enough time to all characters...

but I like the castings...

/Scott

    
    Have to agree, I thought the last Batman movie was stretched a little 
    thin when it came to introducing Catwoman and the Penguin. Having 
    2 villians and Robin (and another girlfriend) in this one is really 
    stretching it... 1 villian and some detail how Robin gets "formed" 
    would be plenty to present properly and give a great foundation for
    future movies. 
    
    I'm really looking forward to it though as well as the other comic 
    based movies coming out.. I'd love to see justice done to a Spidey 
    movie. The technology is finally there (just look at Jurassic Park) 
    but is the budget ? Marvel doesn't have the deep pockets the DC comics 
    does. 
    
    Rp 
     

>    but is the budget ? Marvel doesn't have the deep pockets the DC comics 
>    does. 
    
    Marvel has deeper pockets, but tighter fists.
    
    Ray

    
    Marvel has deep pockets and short arms.....
    
    
    
    
    Ian

    
    Without turning this into a comics not... Actually Marvel has a 
    much bigger share of the comics market and does very well with 
    gadgets toys and promotional stuff. But I believe DC is affiliated 
    with a larger conglomerate that among other things has controlling 
    shares in some movie studios and other things in the entertainment 
    industry.
    
    That's the primary reason why any marvel comic based superhero movie 
    has been a flop (the Spiderman movies, Capt America, Punisher etc...) 
    and Batman has real money behind it.  The exciting thing about the 
    current Spiderman, X-Men and Fantastic Four movies that are being 
    talked about are all the result of some negotiations over Marvels 
    involvment. They will have less than usual and who will put up the 
    money and receive the larger share of profits (not Marvel). 
     
    Rp
    

    
    DC is owned by Time Warner, which is about as big a media conglomerate
    as there is.
    
    DFW

    I am just glad that Tim Burton is not directing. Although his style has
    its place, and BAtman is supossed to be very dark, He just goes
    overbored.  Batman II was rediculously overdone and basicaly stupid.  I
    can't remember the actors name, but the penguin from the TV series, No
    matter how corny, was much better.  Dany DeVito would have been able to
    do this role well.  Instead the penguin was turned into a diformed into
    a deformed man with flippers and a pillow under his underwear. As far
    as the catwoman goes Michelle Phiefer was grate but her story sucked.
    And she was still alive at the end of the movie so will she just be
    ignored in Batman III. She should atleast have a camio.

    
    	I never followed the Batman story [comic books] before the TV
    	series came out, but an educated guess tells me that Danny
    	DeVito's "Penguin" is probably more in line with the original
    	character than Burgess Meredith's in the TV series.
    
    							GTI

re.16

I heard somewhere that Tim Burton is working on a Catwoman movie starring 
Michelle Pfieffer. This is fine by me because she seemed to take over the 
Batman II movie, just as Jack Nickolson took over Batman. It might be kind 
of cool to see a batman story for once!

Kevin

    Actually, I thought that making the Penguin a deformed pitiful character
    went well with setting him up against Batman.... rather than just having
    someone who is after Batman or just being evil because the movie
    needed someone to play the bad guy..... 
    
    Michael

    THE IDEA DOES MAKE SENSE, AND PROBABLY COULD HAVE WORKED.  THE PROBLEM
    WAS THAT IT WAS OVER DONE.  THE COSTUME WAS HORRIBLE. IT WAS SO OBVIOUS
    THAT IT WAS JUST STUFFING. I HAVE MADE FAT LOOK BETTER WITH PILLOWS.
    

    	BATMAN FOREVER will star Michael Keaton, Tommy Lee Jones as
    Two-Face, Chris O'Donnell as Robin, and Jim Carrey as the Riddler.

>    	BATMAN FOREVER will star Michael Keaton, Tommy Lee Jones as
>    Two-Face, Chris O'Donnell as Robin, and Jim Carrey as the Riddler.

I read this in the Globe... but it didn't mention anything about who is
playing Robin... it did confirm Jim Carrey as the Riddler, however.

/scott

RE .22 - Chris O'Donnell as Robin was confirmed on TV news last night (Channel
56, Boston).

						-- Nina

    A co-worker here just said that he heard over the radio today that
    Michael Keaton just announced that he is resigning from the project...
    said that 2 were enough. Has anyone heard anything to support this?
    
    Michael

Re: .24

	Officially it's said that they weren't willing to pay the $10Mil
	that Mikey has asked for.  Unofficially it's said Mikey and the
	director don't get along well.

	The new Batman is supposed to be Val Kilmir (Doors, Tombstone, etc)

    I'd rather not put Val Kilmer behind a mask....

    
    	How do you think I felt when Michelle Pfeiffer put her mask on?
    
    
    							GTI

    
    Val kilmer isn't a good choice in my opinion, he's too wimpy.

         Like Michael Keaton is the 1994 Toughman champ...
    

    Re: .28
    
    I dunno, his Doc Holliday did have an air of menace about him.

    
    re 29
    
    I know Keaton wasn't exactly a hard bast, but at least he had an air of
    'been around a bit and seen a few things millionaire type' about him. 
    It's hard to imagine Kilmer as being that experienced, he's too young
    looking.

    I rented _Batman_ last night.  As I watched, I imagined Val Kilmer in
    the role.  I think he'd make a better Bruce Wayne.  It's harder to
    visualize a particular actor as Batman, the suit gets in the way.
    
    Apparently Michael Keaton was tired of having the titular hero play
    second fiddle to the villains.  This time around, we have Two-Face, the
    Riddler _and_ Robin vying with Batman for time and attention.

    
    Thing is, the film would be lousy if it concentrated on batman ALL the
    time, the good thing about the villains is that they have so much depth
    whereas batman is almost a two-dimensional character.

    Re: .33
    
    >the film would be lousy if it concentrated on batman ALL the time
    
    De seguro.
    
    >batman is almost a two-dimensional character.
    
    So make Batman a three-dimensional character.

There may be more characterization done for Batman in 'The Animated Series' 
than in the two films. Oddly enough, in the cartoon, he does seem to be 
three dimentional.

    
    > De Seguro
    
    
    Say What?

    Spanish for "of course."

    
    I knew that....
    
    
    Anyway, what I meant about bats, is that he is a difficult character to
    develop because his origins are so clear cut (his parents are killed, he
    dedicates his life to mopping up criminals) and his motives are
    obvious.  It would be improved if we were to look a bit more deeply at
    what drives him, but that would take a whole film by itself.  The
    reason the villains are easy to concentrate on is that they usually
    have easily explained motives and are more colourful characters anyway.
    
    Ian

    It COULD take a whole movie in itself to delve into Bruce Wayne's
    psyche, but one really well written and well acted scene between Alfred
    and Bruce could add several whole new dimensions to the character...
    
    In BATMAN : MASK OF THE PHANTASM there was a scene somewhere close to
    the end where Wayne and Alfred are in the batcave, and Alfred states
    that he has been afraid for so long that Bruce would consumed into the deep
    hole of the force of darkness.. but has managed to avoid doing so... it 
    was a meaningful but short scene... even though it's just an observation 
    of Alfreds, it not only gives a small insight into one of Alfred's fears,
    but sheds a bare pinpoint of light on a usually ignored part of Bruce
    Wayne's psychological makeup.
    
    In a live-action movie, this could really be addressed in an
    enlightening manner if done well even in a single scene.
    
    Michael

    
    To date the 2 movies done have really neglected Bruce Wayne... 
    I've been a bats comic book fan for many years the current run of 
    Batman the Dark Knight lets you see a whole different dark side of 
    Batman. There is alo you can do with Batman, I agree that there 
    has not been enough focus on Batman/Bruce Wayne.. From the couple 
    of movies that have been done you know virtually nothing about 
    him. The focus has been and is seemingly continuing to be around the 
    flashy villians. This IMO bites 8*}, Introducing 2 villians last time
    and now supposedly 3 villians and Robin, and a new love interest way  
    too much to handle they most likey won't do any of them well at all.  
    It's really just a merchandising thing. The more villians they put out 
    in the movies the more characters they have to merchandise... Toys, 
    clothes, lunch boxes, trading cards, etc... (I know, I collect this stuff)
    
    They should've layed a better foundation for Bats in the second movie 
    (why the second ? because for the first movie the idea wasn't a proven 
    success.. it was after that and they knew they'd be doing more
    follow-ons films. 
    
    
    Ron
            

    
    	When does "Matman Forever" start?
    
    	A friend had told me he heard it would be yesterday, but unless
    	the theaters around here are VERY slow then I don't think that's
    	correct.  Is it this Friday?
    

    A friend told me it would start June 17th, eh...I could be wrong.
    
    But, there was a comic that my friend has (he collects too) about
    Batman battling the demonic forces of a vampire, and the physical and
    internal struggle with the temptation to drink blood. It was a very
    good comic story, and I think if they were to bring that story line to
    the big screen, I know I would probably enjoy it. 
      Unless you're the kind to think the vampire movies have been done to
    death (or undeath :*} )
    
    Joe
    
    

    
    	Thanks!!
    
    	That explains why it wasn't in the paper this week.
    

    
    
    Recently saw a preview and the release date is June 16th.  The preview
    looked good but my main concern is that there are too many new
    characters being introduced and they won't be able to tell enough
    about each character to build a like or dislike of them.  Maybe just
    the addition of Robin and one villian would have been better?
    
    FWIW.......
    
    p.s.
    I can't help but think of Jim Carey's other roles when he's playing the
    Riddler.  He doesn't quite seperate past characters and he seems to be
    a little bit of the same in all the roles he plays.  
    

    ...FYI to all: many theatres will be screening "Batman Forever" this
    evening at 12:00 midnight (or is dat tommorrow morning at 00:00???)
    
    IMHO, this one looks better than both of the previous two...read an
    interesting interview with Dennis O'Neil (DC Comics, "Batman" editor),
    and he's read the script and thought it was very well written, better
    than either of the two previous)....personally, I was VERY disapointed
    in "Batman Returns" script, very weak in parts)...
    
    I hear that the sony complex in Leominster, Mass is showing it
    tonight...also heard that this one will open in 3800 theatres, outdoing
    "Jurassic Park" by 500 theatres....great quote by Tommy Lee Jones on 
    thgis film: "This film is SO big that, if it were any other film, it
    would be a mistake, and this is no mistake!"
    
    Looking forward to the return of the Dark Night.....
    
    mac

    
    There was a special on TV last night about the movie and I missed it. 
    One of the things they were supposed to reveal on the special was, "Why
    Batman is Forever".  Did anyone catch this?  I was wondering how they
    came up with the title for the movie and didn't know what the special
    would reveal about it.
    
    Just curious......
    
    

    I saw the special.  I don't think they actually answered the 
    question on why its forever....if they did, I didn't catch it.
    It was a decent tickler for the movie.  
    
    They did brief interviews with each character.  Val looks and acted
    great!  Definetely a good replacement for Keaton.  He talked about
    all the different toys he gets to play with and his costume weighed
    40lbs.
    
    Nicole talked about her character, a doctor is turned on by Batman.
    She says she is the first female character to actually kiss Batman.
    
    The interview with jim Carry was pretty funny.  He said he thought
    he looked like Michele Pfiffer in his costume and he didn't play
    Batman because *he didn't want to*....it was cute.
    
    Most of show centered on all the new gadgets and the new car design,
    also on gotham itself.  It is done in miniature.  We will see much
    more of Gotham in this movie than previously.
    
    They talked a lot to the guy who actually created Batman.  He got
    his idea from a drawing he saw of an early flight machine where
    the guy was wearing wings to help him fly.  He was also inspired
    by a saying--something about bats.  He has been a big part of the
    movie and he says it is just like he pictured it.
    
    There was nothing really meaty in the show.  Just little tidbits
    to get your curiousity up to see the movie.
    
    RS

     A little more..
    
    The creator of Batman came up with the idea when he was only 18.
    He created Robin in the 1940's and his boss told him it might
    not be a good idea because parents would not want to see a youngster
    fighting bad guys.  They kept him in one issue to see how it would 
    sell and it wound up outselling the others so that's why there
    is a Robin.
    
    rs

    
    	Forgot the creator's name ... Bob something [Kane?].
    
    	And wasn't the "bat quote" in the 1st movie ... Keaton said
    	something about bats when he and Kim Basinger were in the
    	cave.
    

    
    
    On the side....
    
    Wasn't Michele Pfieffer the first female to kiss Batman?  I thought she
    kissed Batman when she was dressed as Cat Woman?
    
    

    I thought she did too.  I know she kissed him as Bruce Wayne.
    
    Rs

    NPR critic Tom Shales really panned the movie in his review this morning.

    "The movie comes on like a bat out of hell, and I wish it would just go
    back there."

    "Val Kilmer radiates self-absorbtion." ["... and is easily upstaged by
    Chris O'Donnell."]
    
    Lots and lots of explosions, something the American public probably
    doesn't want to see at this time. Some of the action is difficult to
    follow. We learn more of Batman's past but don't care about him.
    
    And on and on. Though I kinda liked the patter between Batman and the
    lady Psychlogist.
    
      John

    
    	The Telegram gave it an OK ... 3/5.
    
    	Said it had more good points than bad.
    

    ...I did not see the special on the tele, but is bob Kane in 
    this one (cameo)? He was in the 1st one as a newspaper artist who
    handed reporter Alexander Knox a drawing of his "giant bat"....
    and big deal about NPR's review...who the heck is he to say
    what "America wants to see"???  He'd probably like to force-feed
    Disney-cheeze to us all to make sure we're all one big happy family,
    right???  Excuse the flaming, but if I hear once more about violence
    in the movies as the root cause of violence in America, I'm gonna hurl
    fer sure!!!!  That's what smacks me about Sen. Dole's recent
    comments...
    here's a guy who blames Hollywood, when he wants to repeal the
    ban on assult-style weapons...gimme a huge, fat break, willya????
    
    IMHO, if it were not for men like Bob Kane and Shuster & Seigel (SP?),
    (not to mention Stan Lee, and directors like tim Burton)....I shudder
    to think of the scenario......
    
    
    soap_box_mac

 >  and big deal about NPR's review...who the heck is he to say
 >  what "America wants to see"???
    
    Who the heck indeed. Who says he said that.
    
 >  IMHO, if it were not for men like Bob Kane and Shuster & Seigel (SP?),
 >  (not to mention Stan Lee, and directors like tim Burton)....I shudder
 >  to think of the scenario......
    
    Ah yes, the scenario.  Time to try decaffeinated, maybe?
    
    It's not a movie anyway, just this summer's giant marketing campaign.
    Which fast-food franchise is doing the Batman stuff--Burger King or
    MacDonalds?  Taco Bell is doing the Congo merchandise. 
    

    
    	Well after I got dragged to see the first two flops, this third
    	movie would have had to be pretty spectacular to draw me back in
    	to give it yet another try. Sounds like this one might be just like
    	the first two... mild and not very interesting, just barely OK.

    	Just goes to show, it's time bring back Adam West... :-)

    	-Erik

    "Washington complaining about Hollywood is pretty much the same
     as Sodom complaining about Gomorrah."
    
     -- more or less what Jay Leno said
    
    And because of the Equal Time Rule I include:
    
    "An armed society is a polite society"
    
    -- R. A. Heinlein

    ...maybe I shoulda watched where the quotes actually came
    from...previous note before mine had "..probably not what America
    wants to see...", and not the NPR critic...excuse the slip-up...
    ...still stand by my statement, though....
    
    decaff_mac

    ...saw "Batman Forever" Saturday night (packed theatre!!)...what a WILD
    ride!! Val plays the role well, seemed very confortable portraying
    both The Dark Night and Bruce Wayne...and Nicole Kiddman!!!!
    
    Hummana-Hummana-Hummana!!!!
    
    great entertainment, wonderfully filmed and scored....also good to see
    Michael Gough back as "Alfred" (or "Al" as Robin called him!!!)
    
    Verrrrrry over-the-top, perhaps not for everyone (especially those with
    no love for fantasy)...but, hey, it works for me!!!
    
    mac

    Anyone know the UK Cinema release (and Certificate) for this yet?
    Thanks; Phil.L�

    The date '14th July' seems to stick in my mind, but I can't remember if
    that's Batman Forever or Judge Dredd!
    
    Soz :-}
    
    Cheers,
    Dan

    July 14th  --  Bastille Day
    

    I saw Batman Forever this weekend and I loved it!  The other folks with
    me were lukewarm on it, so it's not for everyone, but I had a great
    time.  It was truly a live comic book, with all the flavor and sometime
    silliness that that implies.  
    
    Val Kilmer was the perfect Bruce Wayne, and Jim Carrey as the Riddler
    was awesome.  I've never been a Carrey fan but this part was absolutely
    perfect for him.
    
    The movie was extremely rich in imagery.  Prepare for a lot of rich 
    visuals, driving music, flashing lights, gloomy city scenes ... it truly
    sets the mood.
    
    This was the most fun I've had in a movie in a long time.
    
    ***.75 out of ****
    
    Karen.

    Ditto for .64
    
    My husband and I both enjoyed this movie.  It is comical, serious,
    exciting, lots of different views.  All of the actors were very good.
    I think some people tend to overthink this type of movie. 
    It is after all, based on a comic book hero, and is a fantasy 
    type movie.  This one is not as "dark" as the second.  When I saw
    the second one, I left with the *yuk* face.  This one I left
    laughing and looking back on how good it was.
    
    Go see it....  

    Well, I wasn't lukewarm, but just 'cause I didn't gush over it didn't
    mean I didn't like it.
    
    Humph.  
    
    That said, my two cents:
    
    It was fun.  Not exciting -- I mean, I wasn't on the edge of my seat or
    anything, but it *was* fun.  Visually pleasurable, cute lines, a
    *slightly* more relaxes Bat-dude in Kilmer's respresentation (plus, he
    had more to do as Bruce Wayne), lots of things blowing up, goofy stunts
    and of course, lots of Jim Carrey doing what he does best, including
    weird hair.
    
    A good summer movie.  Certainly more fun that "Batman Returns", and far
    less "dark" then the original.  Big blasting soundtrack though, be
    forewarned.  That seems to be a staple of this particular franchise.
    (Elliot Goldenthal does a reasonable take on the Danny Elfman
    precedent).
    
    *** out of ****
    
    kim

    
    
    Grossed between 55-56 million over the weekend.
    Surpassed Jurassic Park.
    
    holly cow! Batdude..
    
    

    ...it REALLY helps if you still read the DArk Knight, or if you have
    recently, however, that's not a prerequisite...my wife doesn't read
    my comics (despite my ever-present willingness to allow her to!!), but
    as stated earlier, great summer action-packes-fun-laden movie!!!
    
    looking forward to seeing it alone on the first rainy summer's eve....
    
    mac

    Short review:  Good but not great.
    
    Longer review:  Val Kilmer was excellent, as was Chris O'Donnell.
    Nicole Kidman was very sexy but not a caricature.  Jim Carrey was
    forced to spend too much time trying to make a too-complex plot make
    sense and not enough time going wild as the Riddler.  (The movie
    needed more riddles!)  Tommy Lee Jones was OK, but Two_Face was given
    short shrift by the writers, and we never got a true feel for what
    motivated him.  Action was good, but as noted previously a bit
    confusing at times.  I enjoyed the ending, which set up perfectly for a
    sequel (what a surprise!).
    
    7.5 out of 10
    
    NAZZ

    I'm not sure what the motivation is to have more than one villain per
    movie. I think it makes things more complicated than need be. Is that 
    part of the over-complex plot?
    
    
    Marilyn

    ...let's not forget that the 60's "Batman" movie had THREEE villians
    in it, The Joker, The Penguis, and The Riddler....and if I'm not
    mistaken, Cat Woman as well?  That makes four....just FYI.
    
    Also, in the 1st Tim Burton movie, The Joker was the lone villian...
    then the 2nd one had teo...soooo, the third should have had three
    (using Vulcan logic...)
    
    bantering_mac

    re: .71
    
    Yeah.  Catwoman was in the Batman movie (yow!).  Posed as some kind of 
    Russian diplomat to win Batman's heart.  A classic, that was.  My 
    favorite:  Batman disposing of the bomb just in time ...   Cheezy,
    campy, B-movie FX, bad puns, just the way I like it.  Rubber shark, 
    cheapo bat-gadgetry, bat-fu.  What more can one ask for?
    
    Steve (not a Tim Burton fan)

     I got to see "Batman Forever" over the weekend. I thought they did a
    good job on this movie. It was an entertaining two hours. Jim Carrey 
    was good, but it seemed like his charactor was a cross betwen Ace
    Ventura and the Mask(when he was wearing the mask).I really didn't care
    for Tommy Lee Jones role as two face. Val Kilmer played an excellent 
    Batman. Nicole Kidman's role could of been played by anyone. Chris
    Odonell as Robin was a good addition to the movie. I must be getting 
    old because when they have those loud shoot em up scenes I just want to go
    turn the volume down. 
    
      2.5 stars out of 4. 
    
     Chris
    
     p.s. They did show scenes for the new Ace Ventura movie coming out in
          November.....Alrighty then!!!
     

Copy from movies Newsgroups
Possible spoiler comment:

From: [email protected] (Michael Legeros)
Newsgroups: rec.arts.movies,rec.arts.movies.current-films,alt.comics.batman
Subject: BATMAN FOREVER Goofs List, v3.1 (SPOILERS)
Date: 21 Jun 1995 21:51:47 GMT
Organization: Creative Cybernetics, Inc.
Message-ID: <[email protected]>

Here's the latest version of the Goofs List.  I'll add some more to it,
after I see the movie again tomorrow.   

mjl

-- begin include


BATMAN FOREVER Goofs List, v3.1

SPOILERS

Send submissions to [email protected]


****


Q: How does Batman defy the laws of physics to fall faster than
   both Robin and Dr. Chase in the climax?

A: He uses the boot jets that we saw a few minutes earlier.


Q: How does the Riddler know that Batman *and* Robin are coming
   to Claw Island?

A: He must've heard/read that another costumed figure rescued
   Batman from the subway tunnel.  Then, when he saw *two* approach-
   ing Batobjects on his radar, he put two and two together!


Q: How does Batman survive the fiery subway/gas explosion?

A: He activates something on his utility belt that transforms his
   cape into a fire-proof shield.


Q: How does Batman get the Batmobile down from that building?

A: He activates the jet boosters, flys over and *onto* the roof,
   bypassing the grappling hook, disengaging the connecting cable,
   and then drives from roof to roof, until he hits land.  See
   diagram.


                                     +
                                  +     +
                               +          +
         __-    +  +    +   +               +
     -o--o-  +        +-------------------+
   +--------------+   |                   | +
   |              |   |                   |


Q2: But what about the gargoyle?

A2: He either swerves (!) to avoid it, or breaks through it.  So
    what if the gargoyle was strong enough to anchor to?  He's
    Batman and he's driving a car with a jet engine on it!


Q: How does the Batcable support the weight of a bank safe, if the
   hook is only secured to a wall that could be punctured (by the
   Bathook) so easily in the first place?

A: The Bathook projectile device exerts more force than the bank
   vault weight.  That is, the "shot" is strong enough to puncture
   the wall, but the weight of the vault isn't heavy enough to pull
   the hook back out.  (Hey, it's movie.)


Q: What happened to Sugar and Spice, who presumably overheard the
   Riddler and Two-Face talking to "Bruce" in the climax?  Don't they
   know Batman's identity?

A: ?  (they kill each other in a catfight over who'll get to expose
       themselves on their inevitable Letterman appearance :)

Q2: Don't the rest of the goons know Bruce Wayne's identity?

A2: No.  Only the Riddler went into the Batcave-- the rest of the
    gang thought they were simply kidnapping Dr. Chase.


Q: Why does the Batmobile have two fins when Robin is driving it?

A: Off-screen, he flipped a switch to split the single fin into two.
   (I think the original script has a scene of him pulling up alongside
    some low-riders and "showing off" the Batmobile.)


Q: How is there enough light in the pit for us to see Two-Face, Batman,
   Robin, and Dr. Chase?

A: After Bats blew up the Riddlers giant blender, somebody activated
   the emergency lighting.  (I think the original script has Two-Face
   blinding the sonar Batman with some sort of floodlight.)


Q: Why doesn't Batman ever interrupt the Riddler and Two-Face during
   their crime spree?

A: Off-screen, Batman is responding to the wrong addresses, thanks to
   some electronic Riddler trickery.  (Again, I think this is in the
   original script.)


Q: What exactly does the "sonar suit" do?

A: The suit allows Batman to "see" through the Riddler's trap doors
   in the floor.  So, when he plunges the lair into darkness, he can
   see where to step and where *not* to step.  (This is explained in
   the script, or the novel.)


Q: How does Batman overheard Two-Face talking about "the very same
   acid," if he's trapped in a (presumably) sound-proof bank vault?

A: In addition to adding acid dispensers, Two Face conveniently added
   a speaker system to the interior of said cash machine.


Q: How did Dr. Chase notice Two-Face's coin, if she was outside the
   bank building during the entire affair?

A: She reviewed the security tapes after the fact.


Q: Why does Bruce Wayne automatically suspect that the person who is
   sending him riddles is a "he?"

A: ?  (it's a guy thing)


Q: How does a helicopter expertly manuever a wreckling ball?

A: It doesn't.  The bank is next door to a construction site, and
   Two-Face used a crane, from there, to break open the wall.  (This
   is in the script, I think.)


Q: How does Alfred "whip up" a Robin suit so quickly?

A: Wayne Manor must have some sort of "rubber room," where Alfred can
   produce sculpted rubber Batsuits on demand.

Q2: Well, then why doesn't Alfred simply make a new Batsuit for Batman
    after the Batcave is destroyed.

A2: No time.  Gotta save the girl.  Also, said "rubber room" may very
    well have been destroyed by the Riddler.

Q3: But what about the spare suit in the limo?

A3: Questions, questions!  That suit was destroyed/damaged in the
    battle with Two Face, in the subway, and had yet to be replaced.


Q: Why isn't the character of the Riddler more like the character in
   the comic books?

A: For the same reasons that Catwoman, the Penguin, and the Joker are
   all broad (or not-so-broad) variations on the originals.

Q2: What are some other differences from the comic book?

A2: The four-color Dark Knight doesn't date, he doesn't wear all black,
    and he doesn't let his enemies die.  (If he could save Robin and
    Dr. Chase, it should've been short work for Bats to rescue Two-Face.)


Q: Why does the movie start so abruptly?

A: Because they dropped/cut/never-filmed the originally scripted scene of
   Two-Face's escape from Arkham Asylum.   The bank robbery (most likely)
   originally fit into this sequence:

     Face escapes ->

             Wayne mees Nygma ->

                   Wayne sees Batsignal ->

                         Batman refuses take out ->

                               Batman arrives at bank robbery



Q2: So, where does that leave the other action sequences?

A2: Probably along the lines of:


     Wayne sees signal, again ->

            Batman meets Chase Meridan ->

                  Batman meets Face on way back ->

                        Batmobile is taken out for a climb


Q: Why are Bruce Wayne's bad dreams never explained?

A: Because certain parts of this subplot have been dropped.  In the
   script, Bruce blames himself for the murder of his parents.  He
   wanted to go to the movie.  He can't shake the memory of this
   diary, but he doesn't know why.  Later, he *discovers* said diary
   and finds that his *mother* wanted to see the movie that they went
   too.  Thus absolving his guilt; thus preparing him to accept his
   role as Batman.  Forever.  (If I recall correctly :)


Q: Can Bruce Wayne say the words "chair" or "door" in his office, 
   without tragic consequences?

A: Of course.  His automated system would only key on words used in
   a certain sequence, and, perhaps, in a certain voice tone.  Maybe
   there's an external activator, also, that Bruce signalled pre 
   his arrival in said office.


BONUS:


Q: How does Nicole Kidman keep her lipstick from smearing, when she
   kisses Bruce Wayne at the end of the movie?  Related question:  how
   does she sleep in perfect centerfold position without waking up with
   a supremely sore back?

A: Before she trained as a criminal psychologist, Dr. Chase Meridan was
   an extra on BAYWATCH....  :)


Again, send submissions to [email protected]

mjl


-- 
Michael J. Legeros
Raleigh, NC
[email protected]
"Orange whip?  Orange whip?  Three orange whips."



% ====== Internet headers and postmarks (see DECWRL::GATEWAY.DOC) ======
% Received: by easynet.crl.dec.com; id AA20494; Thu, 22 Jun 95 15:45:44 -0400
% Received: by cadosf.hlo.dec.com; id AA23561; Thu, 22 Jun 1995 15:45:41 -0400
% Message-Id: <[email protected]>
% Date: Thu, 22 Jun 95 15:45:42 -0400
% Sender: [email protected]
% From: David Tai <US1RMC::\"[email protected]\">
% X-Mailer: Mozilla 1.1b3 (X11; I; OSF1 V2.1 alpha)
% Mime-Version: 1.0
% To: decsim::tai
% Subject: BATMAN FOREVER Goofs List, v3.1 (SPOILERS)
% X-Url: news:[email protected]
% Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
% Content-Type: text/plain

  OK, I admit that I saw "Batman Forever" this weekend.  It was raining, my
  garden work was washed out, and I was in the mood for a fun summer flick.
  Plus, it was just before 6PM so we had a matinee price for a THX equipped
  theatre.

  In judging the movie by the reduced lax summer hit rules of "it just has to
  entertain me, that's all," I would have to sum the movie up in three words,
  "lame and sometimes boring." Which of course translates to 'it dies as a
  summer film.'

  Sometimes the previews shown before the movie clue you into what audience,
  both in age and in level of sophistication, they had in mind for the movie to
  be made for.  The previews here were for "Free Willy2," Disney's "Operation
  Dumbo Drop," and "Ace Ventura2." Each preview brought favourable responses
  from the audience, especially Ace Ventura.  I still cannot fathom why people
  find Jim Carrey funny, but the audience disproved my secretly-posed notions
  that it must all be a dumber and dumber Hollywood conspiracy, because the
  audience was reacting as if this was the funniest stuff they've ever seen.
  Sigh.

  I had none of the problems several others had with the movie where they felt
  it was too unrealistic and improbable for them.  For me this was a comic book
  hero in a comic book story, so the movie inherited all the fantasy room given
  comic books.  An unreal look is part of the Batman trappings for me.  In
  fact, the costumes and sets worked here for me much better than they did in
  the first two movies.

  Val Kilmar was excellent _for_ (note I didn't say 'in') the role of Batman.
  He is much better suited for the role than Keaton was.  Chris O'Donnell was
  also a good choice to play Robin.  I would have preferred his cleaner cut
  'Harvard grad' image in the role instead, but he still worked fine here.  In
  fact, he worked so well that he stole several scenes away from Kilmar.
  Critics seem to hate Tommy Lee Jone's performance here but I thought it fit
  Two Face well enough for me.  Jim Carrey was Jim Carrey (to me, he always
  plays the same exact character (himself) in everything he does, Living Colour
  to Ace to Mask, it's all the same unchanged manic schtick), and so not for
  one moment did he seem like the Riddler.  In fact, we felt he was
  overwhelmingly UNamusing in most of the scenes he was in, even for the rest
  of the audience (not much laughing).  Neither he nor his art deco blenders
  made for an imposing villain in my mind.  There was no real threat in his
  presence.  The commissioner and Alfred were played pretty close to the old TV
  show I thought, which came off well here.

  So if I liked Kilmar, O'Donnell and other crew, why didn't I feel the movie
  flew as a summer hit? The writing.  It stunk, pure and simple.  The writers
  couldn't decide whether they wanted to make the movie like a "Dark Knight"
  film or instead made one like a fun campy 1960's Adam West Batman film.  And
  so they tried to have both mixed into one film, and it didn't work. 

  Nicole Kidman was HORRIBLE here! Yikes.  I don't know what to blame on her
  and what to blame on her dreadful lines, but it was so bad that nearly every
  scene with her had me cringing.  Her 'performance' was terribly embarrassing.
  Her few scenes construed a romance as only envisioned by elementary school
  children in their crayon drawing of 'how does a girl catch a batman?' Scene
  one: the 'girl' turns on the bat signal, drops her gown in front of Kilmar to
  reveal her breasts toward him, and the very next scene has Batman saying
  "Alfred, I'm in love." It was very immature and cheesy feeling.  [This and
  the previews had me feeling that the film was made for elementary school
  children, made on a level to fit their understandings of the world and
  romance myths).  Her scenes as the female love interest were played very
  cheaply.  She was neither sexy, attractive, intelligent or believable here,
  she was simply embarrassing.  The directors even managed to find a way to
  subdue Drew Barrymore, someone who until now has always had the intrinsic
  ability to shine through a scene no matter what it was.  But even Drew's
  performance here was drab and uninspired.

  The biggest gaffe of the movie was the lack of much action, the reason d'etre
  for summer films.  There were many moments where I was outright bored.  The
  story didn't create any suspense, on the edge of your seat moments, or
  interest in you.  I didn't find myself caring much about what (little) was
  happening.  The special effects were done well enough, but they were rather
  standard, there were no scenes which really "Wow!"'ed the audience.

  Even as a simple summer film whose only duty was to entertain, it fell short.
  Mostly due to the poor writing.  Kilmar and O'Donnell would have been great
  together given a better script.  How do you translate a shoulder shrug answer
  of "Ehh" to "What did you think?" into stars?

  I give "Batman Forever" only 2 of 5 stars.  They had more than enough great
  actor strength to draw on, it was just that the writing was very poor.  There
  is more action, thought and better writing in most Saturday morning cartoons.
  The writers and director really dropped the ball on this one, when it really
  had a chance given the acting talent.  "Crimson Tide" was by far the better
  of the two in terms of being an edge-of-your-seat summer thriller...

  -Erik

    One comment about BF: This film has the most effective surround
    sound effect that I've ever experienced in a movie theater. 
    The surround sound is fully discrete and full of power. This is the
    movie that deserves a good AC-3 encoding for home video releae.
      

> not a summer hit, barely entertaining, Nicole laughable...
  ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

	FWIW, this film set a new opening weekend record (50-something million).
	The second weekend it statistically tied with opening weekend
	Pocohantis.

	I'd say it's officially a summer hit! (even though it opened
	before the official start of summer)

    
> The second weekend it statistically tied with opening weekend Pocohantis.

    	Yes, amazing what hoards of vacationing school children can do at
    	the box office, eh?

    ...speaking from personal experience, there were hardly any children
    at all at the showing I was at....a 7:10 showing, BTW.....
    
    still_a_kid_at_heart_mac

    
    	...I was just commenting on the fact that Batman and Pocohantis are
    	fighting it out for #1 (1 & 2) in the box office right now.
    

    
    
    I finally got to see this and have to admit that I liked it better than
    the first two.  Why exactly, I'm not sure.  I enjoyed Val Kilmer's
    Bruce Wayne more than Keaton's.  The addition of Chris O'Donnell was a
    plus IMO.
    
    One thing I do wonder about and that is.........
    
    
    
    Did anyone else catch the fact that Harvey Dent, District Attorney, was
    portrayed in the first film by a black actor (Billy Dee Williams) and
    now Harvey Dent is played by Tommy Lee Jones?  
    
    just wondering if anyone else caught it.......
    
    

    ...yeah, we thought that as well...my guess, other than Billie Dee
    Williams was not asked to play the role, is that if you can change
    actors with The Batman, then why not with ol' Harvey Dent...in the
    comics, he's white as well....good example of how a character can and
    should be played by other actors/actresses...("Doctor Who" is a prime
    example of this....)
    
    
    ramblin'_mac
            

> Discrepency in Batman 1 and 3

	I recently saw a few sound bites of an interview with the director
	of Batman 3 and he indicated he made Batman 3 as if it was *not*
	a sequel to the 1st and 2nd Batman films of this series.

	Which probably explains why they didn't worry about discrepencies
	between the two films ......

>	I recently saw a few sound bites of an interview with the director
>	of Batman 3 and he indicated he made Batman 3 as if it was *not*
>	a sequel to the 1st and 2nd Batman films of this series.

But I did catch some references to the other films... for instance,
Kidman's character when talking about her desire for Batman says something
to the effect of "I know I'm not a woman in skin tight leather outfit"
which was a reference to Catwoman...

/scott

    
    	Saw this again last night, and this time the film DIDN'T break and
    	I DIDN'T doze off numerous times due to the movie being 1/2 hour
    	behind.
    
    	And as a result, I DIDN'T miss important plot developments like
    	who won in the end.  8^)
    
    	Great movie ... Nicole Kidman is gorgeous, and the cast was all
    	excellent.
    
    	When Batman bashed Two Face's helicopter's window with his head
    	and started to jump in, was anyone besides me expecting to see
    	him "morph" ala "Terminator II"?  No, huh?  I didn't really think
    	so.  8^)
    

    
    
       I thought this was a very good movie.  I think I enjoyed the Robin 
    character the most. They did a good job of introducing him and
    developing the character.  I also think Nicole is yummy and Tom Cruise 
    is one lucky man.... 
    
       Disapointments - I think Carey did a good job but I would've liked 
    Robin Williams better I think. I know the world's acraze with Jim Carey 
    lovers right now but I think he's acting too STUPID. He was better when
    he was on In Living Color. 
    
       I also think that both Mike and Val are too twirpy to be a good
    batman. 
    
    
    Rp
    
    

>       Disapointments - I think Carey did a good job but I would've liked 
>    Robin Williams better I think. I know the world's acraze with Jim Carey 

I have to strongly disagree with this... Robin Williams would have been
absolutly 100% horrible!!! Not only is he too hairy, but also too fat!
I can't picture him in a skin tight green suit...

Carey had the perfect physical body to play the Riddler, along with the
right attitude... Remember, the Riddler is crazy, so you can't expect 
Carey to behave "normal"...

/scott

Finally got around to seeing this film.  Batman stole the box office on 
its weekend opener, then sputtered out.  Now I see why.  Batman lacks much
of a story beyond the special affects.  And the injection of the 
Jim Carey phenomenon kind of drained the life out of everyone else.

Brian

    
    Went to see this on Saturday night.
    
    Good effects, enough of a plot to get by on. Tommy Lee Jones and Jim
    Carey were great as the baddies (Carey too over the top as Ed Nygma,
    but just right as the Riddler).
    
    I liked the little in-jokes and didn't mind that they played this
    Batman for laughs a little. I liked the fact that kept the darkness
    pretty much there - The TV series is good for a laugh, but the films
    work on a different level, because they're more sinister.
    
    However, Val Kilmer was too smooth and too young to be a convincing
    Bruce Wayne. With his short cropped hair Chris O'Donnell looked old
    enough to be Val's twin brother, so the 'look after the kid' comments
    didn't work too well. I know I'm bucking the trend, but Keaton was
    better for me - dourness and all.
    
    
    Still, my wife and I both enjoyed our 2 hours or so in the cinema and
    came away talking about our favourite lines/scenes.
    
    A worthy third Batman film. We liked the other two and we liked this
    one as well.
    
    Mark
        

    re .90

    ET reported that Val has problems with other contractual obligations 
    and timing. 

    Lisa

    This was one of 3 movies rented this past weekend. Watched it first,
    thinking to start off with the best.... well, we almost didn't finish
    watching it, we though it was so bad.
    
    I've been reading through the other replied here and after reading the
    Q&A note (forget which number) which states over and over "...was in
    the original script...." "....subplot dropped from original script..."
    well that explains a lot. While the movie was going on, I made the
    comment that it seemed they threw away every other page of script. Yes,
    there was lots of action, and it had the feel of a comic book, but too
    disjointed.
    
    Can't tell if it was the writing, the directing or final cutting, but
    felt the movie was jumpy and actions were very poorly explained. 
    
    I also prefer Keaton as Batman, he plays a better Bruce wayne and his
    face while in the bat suit seemed much stronger than Kilmer's, though
    the last bat suit kilmer was wearing had a different cut and was
    better. Hadn't seen O'donnell in anything before this,so had no
    pre-conceived notionson him. Thought he did an ok Robin. Haven't seen
    nicole kidman in anything yet where I thought she could act and this
    just adds one more film to the list. I think Tommy Lee Jones was wasted
    in the part. Jim Carey was a good (not great - again, was it the
    writing or the directing, I think he could have been much better)
    riddler - I did like him, though Frank Gorshin (sp?) is still the best. 
    
    Kept thinking of the first Batman movie (didn't see II) and comparing.
    Number III was a definate loser. 
    
    Good points:  
        gadgets as usual were fun
    	Alfred - best part in the whole movie, especially liked his line in
             the opening about "are you sure I can't pursuede you to take
             along a sandwich?" when Batman is going flying off to some crisis.
        Robin - the circus costume was a replica of the TV Robin's outfit
        scene towards the end that's a take-off of the TV show Robin
           Robin - "holy metal rocks, Batman!" (or something to that
    		effect) as they are climbing the island. 
    	   Batman - "huh?"
    	   Robin - "the rocks, they're metal and full of holes!"
    	Batman (to Kidman) - "are you trying to get under my cape?"
    
    Overall - 1 out of 4 stars at best
    
    janetb.

I thought Kilmer was terrible as Batman.

I couldn't help thinking that it was Jim Morrison in a Batsuit!

Ken

    
    	So you preferred "Mr. Mom", or "Beetlejuice", to Jim Morrison?
    
    	8^)
    

    
    <--- or the guy who had to prove he wasn't mel torme?

>So you preferred "Mr. Mom", or "Beetlejuice", to Jim Morrison?

Actually, I don't really like the Batman movies.  I just can't get into them,
I don't know why.   But I thought Keaton was better than Kilmer though.

Believe it or not, I think George Clooney would make a good batman.  Now, if
they had him as Batman, and Henry Rollins as a real tough Robin, with Umma 
Thurman or Jamie Lee Curtis in it as well, I might like it!  :')

Ken

    
    "Darkman" was what "Batman" was supposed to be.
    

    
    re: .99
    
    Henry Rollins as Robin! Kinda hard with all his tats! BTW What flicks
    has Rollins been in? I know he was in The Chase with Charlie Sheen, not
    that great a flick, other than when she got "sick" out the window!
    
    Rollins as Robin, hmm, what a concept!
    
    

    Rollins was in, I believe, "Johnny Mnemonic".  I rather liked his
    character.
    
    
    
    kim

    Rollins what in another movie or two beside Johnny Nmenonic and the
    Chase.  Can't remember which ones... they were very small parts.  I
    think he might have been in Heat.  And possibly True Romance?....
    
    I'm sure shawn will clear all this up! :')
    
    The only reason I even thought of him as Robin, is because the guy who
    did play Robin in Batman 3 kind of looked like him.

    
    	Apparently you have some sort of a rare medical condition which
    	prohibits you from accessing the WWW IMDB, so please, PLEASE
    	let me go in there and get the information for you.
    
    	8^)
    

    
    	"Lost Highway"
    	"Heat"
    	"Johnny Mnemonic"
    	"The Chase"
    

    
    What part did he play in heat?  I think I remember seeing him but I
    forget which part he was in.
    
    
    I.

    	He played stocky wooden actor bloke with tattoos.

    
    Helpful as ever, furniture, helpful as ever.
    
    I.