I said in my "Batman Returns" review that my personal opinions sometimes clash with popular opinion. "Batman Forever" is a fair example of that. If memory serves, this one was more popular than "Batman Returns" and did pretty well at the box office. Yet, it is one of my least favorite Batman movie attempts.

It starts by tossing out the continuity fromt he Burton films. There’s a different director, different Batman, different design, and different style. Whereas the first two are dark with an eye towards realism, this one is more like a campy comic book with more vibrant colors and more explosive action. In some ways this works well, but I preferred the more realistic approach with Tim Burton's style.

I love Val Kilmer. He single-handedly took "Tombstone" to the next level, and has done an outstanding job in any number of other movies. While I like him as Bruce Wayne I just don't feel he is as good in the role as Keaton. Keaton’s stare as Batman has a penetrating quality that Kilmer doesn't match; I don’t feel the same intensity.

Tommy Lee Jones does a fantastic job with Harvey 2-Face Dent. He plays that psychosis well. My only complaint with him is the make-up. His disfigurement looks too much like a mask, too over-the-top with the purple coloring and all. A more subtle melting of the skin might have been better though maybe too gruesome for the style they wanted for the movie.

I enjoy seeing the origins of the characters, but I think the quick referrals to 2-Face’s beginnings rather than a whole subplot was the right move especially since we’re already going through the creation of Riddler. Two origins might have been too much. More exploration of the time between his disfigurement and total psychotic breakdown might have made the characterization more realistic, but I think Tommy sells the insanity without that.

Riddler isn’t as impressive. He’s never been one of my favorite villains anyway (at least not until the Arkham games came along), he strikes me too much as a wannabe Joker when he's not done right. I don’t think Jim Carrey brings as much to the role as Tommy does to 2 Face leaving Riddler overshadowed. I guess that’s mostly because he is supposed to be a super-genius yet falls so easily. Oops, was that a spoiler? Come on, you know Batman is going to win unless you just really know NOTHING about these types of movies. Maybe it's his over-the-top flashy style that makes him too hard to take seriously.

Robin is the one character I least expected to be impressive. Boy Wonder, silly tights - I didn’t expect much. Chris O’Donnell changed my tune. Being older than the comic portrayal, Robin does not feel like a device to draw in younger audiences but like a real character. His life tragedy and subsequent thirst for revenge make a nice subplot. The death of his family is taken right from the original story, but his transformation into a super hero (and more importantly his costume) is updated.

Dr. Chase played by Nicole Kidman is my biggest gripe. I think Nicole is gorgeous and a good actress, but her character muddles the plot. Maybe that wouldn’t be the case if there hadn’t been love interests in the first two movies. Put the three together and it looks like Bruce Wayne reveals himself to every pretty face that comes along. Batman is solitary by nature and not every story told about him needs to explore the breakdown of that.

There are also scenes with Chase that don’t work. For example, a professional doctor is not going to get into a punching-bag work-out session with an appointment with someone like Bruce Wayne minutes away (not to mention a punching bag in the middle of her office...?). Explaining it as Wayne being early helps, but I don’t see him being so early that Chase has time to finish working out, clean up, redress, and take the punching bag down from the center of her office.

I also don’t believe Wayne/Batman would be as ignorant of the Rorschach as he seems to be here (a scene involves him getting caught off guard by commenting on one as a bat which supposedly give a clue about him being obsessed with bats). Not only that, but the real ink blot test of that form is most commonly interpreted as a bat, though sometimes also seen as a butterfly. I’m not a doctor, but my reading suggests that a doctor like Chase would expect a well-balanced mind to see one of the two. Given her fascination with Batman this framed test on her wall is indeed indicative of a “thing for bats,” and Wayne’s view of it is not the slightest bit unusual. Wayne would have known this and not be caught off guard like he is in this scene. Wow, am I nitpicking or what? But it's this level of characterization in this movie that bugs me.

There are two other things that reduce my fondness for "Batman Forever" (not counting the goofy pop title). One is the Batmobile design with that ridiculously huge tail fin. The previous car was awesome. They should have stuck with it. The other is the use of one-liners. I don’t see Batman making comments like “I’ll get drive through” or “Chicks love the car.” Robin’s one-liners are better, though, it’s mostly Batman’s I don’t like. I do love the hysterical nod to the old Batman TV show. Holy rusted metal, Batman!

There’s a little depth to the story in Robin’s struggle with desire for revenge and Batman’s reluctance to take on a partner. Mostly though it’s an action oriented comic book movie with colorful villains. It's still darker than the Adam West show but much more like it than Burton's movies were.