Rate 'Batman & Robin'

9/10 I believe everyone loves at least one film thats hated. This is mine.

5/10. It's bad, but in a good way.

I don't entirely blame Joel Schumacher for how Batman & Robin (1997) turned out. That was all on Warner Bros. for wanting it to be as campy as the original 1960s version. Yeah, putting nipples on the batsuit was stupid but, that was the least of this film's problems.

It was more of a "right idea, wrong execution" type of movie. It could have been better if the studio didn't put pressure on Joel and the writers to get it into theaters within a certain time frame. They wanted it to come out immediately after Batman Forever (1995).

And to think, this was supposed to be a trilogy. I still wonder how Batman Triumphant would have been had this film been successful in the box office.

1/10

I agree with kevin that this is a very difficult movie to rate. It is in fact quite enjoyable ("silly-bad"), and isn't that a prime criterion in its own right? In the same way, I would never say that Plan 9 from Outer Space or even The Room is the worst movie ever made: they are just too enjoyable, too goofy, in their badness. (Only among movies I've seen, Son of the Mask--ugh, I get nightmares thinking about it--has all of them beaten for "worst movie.")

With all that said, no, it isn't a good movie. Just about everything is off, and no element truly works. Its goofiness may prevent it from being "the worst," but it does it no favors either, as it's an Adam West-style film, filtered through Joel Schumacher's sensibilities, set in a Michael Keaton-style universe. Terrible fit there.

I am undecided whether to give it a 3 or 4 out of 10. I eventually went with the former, but it could go either way.

I go back and forth on this one. The first time I watched it, I thought it was good, campy fun.  On a later viewing (if it comes on television), I might think to myself "God, this is awful."  

5/10.

It's a cult classic movie but it still killed the Batman movie series.

No, not conservatives in a political sense, haha.  Conservative as in folks having a problem with gaudy colors and nipples on batsuits and so on.  In other words, people who don't want things too over the top, too different than norms, too weird, etc.

6/10 for me...was it bad? Yes undoubtedly but it has a few things going for it that Batman Forever didn't:

1. Arnold was a better main villain than Jones, whom I felt was channeling Nicholson's Joker a bit too much...plus Arnie can deliver the one-liners like no one else.
2. Carrey and Thurman were basically a wash; I despise him but he wasn't as annoying as the Riddler as he usually is. I really like Thurman, but couldn't figure out what she was attempting with her take Poison Ivy; what was with the Mae West impersonation?
3. For as much heat as Clooney gets, I still liked him better than Kilmer.
4. Nicole Kidman was useless in Forever; at least they kept Elle MacPherson to a minimum in B&R.
5. B&R was unapologetically camp; Forever couldn't decide if it wanted to be full-on camp or stay with Burton's darker vision from the first two movies and the tone just felt off as a result.

1/10 - Bad. Not bad in a "it's so bad it's funny" way. Just plain bad, lazy film making. IMHO.