Biggest Batman Myth of All Time

[Azrael]

^ Yes,  I remember someone saying that Batman & Robin was everything Batman Forever pretended not to be. When something is supposed to be silly fun, better go all the way.

(I think the scenes in Batman Forever where the two villains act silly are some of the most entertaining: their robberies with Two Face teaching the Riddler how to punch a guy (the security guard just calmly waits for his punch); acting like school kids when dressed up for Halloween and about to storm Wayne Manor; Two Face crying on Riddler's shoulder because Batman survived the subway attack; playing Battleship... if it's the villains that defined Batman movies from the 90s, this is what Batman Forever is)

What both have in their favour are the designs - great stuff. The first thing I look for in anything, be it a movie, video game, or comic, are the sets or background designs. The overblown Gotham with this mix of neogothic/ baroque/ neoclassical/ fascist/ communist/ Albert Speer etc. architectural elements is still more interesting visually than a mundane city on real locations.

(Believe it or not there were people who commented negatively on Arkham City for the design of the buildings - "too Schumacher", they said, possibly referring to it being more in tune with the elaborate cities in the 90s movies than with Nolan's realism. Maybe there's two kind of Batman fans, those who see it as pure fantasy and embrace an enjoyably otherwordly setting, while some others want it to feel "real")

[Wayne49]

I think the Nolan movies were the end result of all the fallout from the Batman and Robin critical drubbing. And while I do thoroughly enjoy the Nolan films, I still find great fun and enjoyment out of the Schumacher movies. It's like anything, you have to be in the right mood for either kind. But now that those movies have established themselves, we have to wonder what treatment will be used for Affleck. Will they try to find a happy medium? Or will they go for another all out depressed hero?