What’s a “good-bad” movie? It’s the kind of flick that might have you cackling, hollering or groaning, one that is not necessarily great cinema but is great fun. It’s highly watchable even though — or maybe because — it’s memorably ridiculous. And it always has at least one element that pushes it into absurd territory.
After Tim Burton’s twisted takes on the Batman saga, complete with a repugnant Penguin and a latex-clad Catwoman, American audiences were demanding family-friendly “Batman” movies. At least that’s how the director Joel Schumacher remembered it, he said in a 2017 interview. So he stepped in to deliver — first with “Batman Forever,” in 1995, and then with its 1997 sequel, “Batman & Robin.”
“Batman Forever” was a box-office blockbuster, unseating “Jurassic Park” for the highest-grossing opening weekend. “I just knew not to do a sequel ever,” Schumacher said. But under pressure from Warner Bros. and propelled by his own ego, “Batman & Robin” — a high-energy, lighthearted, live-action comic book — came to be.
It stars George Clooney as a ho-hum Batman (replacing Val Kilmer from “Batman Forever”); Chris O’Donnell, reprising his role as the whiny sidekick Robin; Uma Thurman as Poison Ivy, the saucy star of the show; Alicia Silverstone as Batgirl, a watered-down Cher from “Clueless”; and Arnold Schwarzenegger as Mr. Freeze, a walking — well lumbering — meme.
With expectations high, “Batman & Robin” suffered a dramatic box office falloff compared with its predecessor and was deemed a disaster by critics and audiences. “After ‘Batman & Robin,’ I was scum. It was like I had murdered a baby,” Schumacher said. “I want to apologize to every fan that was disappointed.”
But The Times critic Janet Maslin seemed to pick up on the joke even then, calling it “a wild, campy costume party of a movie and the first ‘Batman’ to suggest that somewhere in Gotham City, there might be a Studio 54.”
It’s that excess that has kept the movie from slipping into obscurity, whether you loved it, have grown to love it or can’t help but lovingly hate it.
What Makes It Good?
A Slinky Poison Ivy and the Beloved Alfred
In particular, Maslin praised Thurman’s performance as the femme fatale eco-terrorist Poison Ivy, correctly calling her the movie’s “most showstopping character.”
Thurman channels Mae West, doling out cheeky double-entendres with swagger and swinging hips. When she delivers a playful strip tease, emerging from a gigantic gorilla suit at a fund-raiser packed with Gotham’s elite — hypnotizing attendees with both her feminine wiles and a sprinkle of pheromone dust — it inexplicably works.
Michael Gough also returned here as the ever-heartwarming butler, Alfred Pennyworth, his fourth and final turn after the Burton and Schumaker films. His inclusion serves as a totem to “Batman” fans, no matter how disorienting the plot.
What Makes It Bad?
Toyetic at Every Turn
Comparing his experiences on both films, O’Donnell once said, “On ‘Batman Forever,’ I felt like I was making a movie. The second time, I felt like I was making a toy commercial.” The truth is, he pretty much was.
“Batman & Robin” was, in large part, a merchandising play that resulted in a movie so safe, it sometimes feels like “Scooby-Doo” meets the Ice Capades. According to a 2005 Los Angeles Times article, toy manufacturers were even invited to sit in on creative meetings.
Accompanying toy commercials hawked branded play-sets, vehicles and action figures, going particularly big on Mr. Freeze. “Ice terror Mr. Freeze launches a chilling strike,” one ad declares. “Blast wing Batman whips his massive cape to cut down the cold criminal!”
Speaking of …
What Makes It Good-Bad?
Ice Puns and Bat Nipples
Mr. Freeze speaks exclusively in agonizingly cheesy ice puns that have become perpetual internet fodder, prompting rankings, thoughtful reflections and a lot in between.
Some puns apply to whatever fiasco is at hand. Others are shoehorned in for no reason whatsoever. But even a statement as benign as, “All right, everyone! Chill!” can become immortalized thanks to Schwarzenegger’s signature delivery.
And that’s nothing to say of the enduring discourse around the film’s bat-suit nipples. Just last month, in an interview for the SAG-AFTRA Foundation, Clooney took it upon himself to mention them. “I know I was the best Batman!” he jokingly shouted toward the audience, which erupted in laughter. “You know Batman needed nipples!”
It’s eye-popping how prominently — like, really prominently — the nipples feature, starting with close-up shots in the opening montage. Schumacher said the idea was to make the suits more anatomical, inspired by Greek statues and medical-book drawings.
“Such a sophisticated world we live in where two pieces of rubber the size of erasers on old pencils, those little nubs, can be an issue,” he continued. “It’s going to be on my tombstone, I know it.”
Maya Salam is an editor and reporter, focusing primarily on pop culture across genres.
The post When a Not-So-Dark Knight and His Sidekick Saved a Wacky Gotham appeared first on New York Times.
