Pat-Hingle Movie Reviews

It would have been better without Carradine (What is with that stupid smirk on his face?). Haley Du Mond is beautiful and talented. It must have been a chalenge for her to act as though she loved Carradine's character. Reynolds was good but the flowing long hair in the 1920's? The diologue was also inconsistant with the time period, as were many other details. The sound quality was [poor]. It is too bad because with a little effort this could have been pretty good.

I have always been a big fan of Burt Reynolds. Even though I haven't enjoyed all of this movies, i think that he isa highly underrated actor. It does me good to see him in a great role. Hunter's Moon is one of those films that you see sitting on the new release shelf at your video store and you wonderto yourself why you've never heard of it. It could mean one of two things. It is absolute straight to videocrap or could be an overlooked gem that is actually worth your time. this is one of the latter. I was very suprised at how enjoyable it was. There is a great sense of atmosphere through the effective use of musci and Reynolds does some of his best work in years. I'm sure that he signed on (to steal a line from Smokey and the Bandit) "mostly for the money" but here he gets to have fun playing a complete mad man. The( )main( )plot( )is fairly straight forward but the side plots do add texture. All in all, it's a lot of fun and it's worth a couple hours of your time.

Richard Weinman does a lot with a little budget in this vehicle for Burt Reynolds with some of his most colorful work in years. When have you seen Reynolds cry? -- after committing murder. He is sardonic, evil and sympathetic. The ensemble work is superb with Keith Carradine solid, and Pat Hingle wonderfully venal. Newcomer, Hayley DuMond, carries her weight and often the weight of the movie itself. She is the center of the emotional storm, complex and driven. Weinman's choice of authentic folk music is worth the visit alone. I had a good time.

The reason I say this is the 2nd worst is because Crododile Dundee in L.A. is the worst.After I saw this movie in the theater I swore off seeing anything with Paul Hogan again,and the woman I was dating at the time,who liked the movie when we saw it was booted faster than lightning,jack.The plot is terrible as are the actors,sets,sound and directing.I had reasonably expected Cuba Gooding JR. to play a decent role since he had a few good parts under his belt but his deaf,mute character was ridiculous.I had thought at the time this poor guy had just killed his career but I am glad I was wrong.He has since put this behind him and went on to achieve an Oscar while Paul Hogan still bumbles around like a wallaby with a hangover from drinking to much Foster's Lager.If you want to see Cuba at his best see him Pearl Harbor in a small but pivotal role or Jerry Maguire or the upcomung Rat Race.If you want to see Paul Hogan at his best he's probably on a cancelled Austrailian postage stamp .

If you like western or comedy movies, you will probably like "Lightning Jack." Paul Hogan stars as Lightning Jack, a cowboy that is famous for craftily robbing banks. He is one of the most wanted criminals in the country. Cuba Gooding, Jr. is a mute that later tries to team up with Lightning Jack and become a successful robber and cowboy in his own right. That's when the movie gets a lot better and more interesting. It will keep you interested throughout the movie so you can find out if Lightning Jack will remain successful at robbing banks across America or if he'll get caught. The movie also has a lot of funny parts that make it even better.

Good movie about an australian american outlaw [Hogan] named Jack who's gang gets shot up, and in need of help, accepts a black mute orphan to help him out. While Jack is trying to get a reputation in the U.S. as a mean cold blooded killer, the mute orphan barely knows how to fire a gun and ends up slowing them up, until Jack teaches him what being an outlaw is all about. If you liked Crocodile Dundee, you'll really like Lightning Jack.

The reason I say this is the 2nd worst is because Crododile Dundee in L.A. is the worst.After I saw this movie in the theater I swore off seeing anything with Paul Hogan again,and the woman I was dating at the time,who liked the movie when we saw it was booted faster than lightning,jack.The plot is terrible as are the actors,sets,sound and directing.I had reasonably expected Cuba Gooding JR. to play a decent role since he had a few good parts under his belt but his deaf,mute character was ridiculous.I had thought at the time this poor guy had just killed his career but I am glad I was wrong.He has since put this behind him and went on to achieve an Oscar while Paul Hogan still bumbles around like a wallaby with a hangover from drinking to much Foster's Lager.If you want to see Cuba at his best see him Pearl Harbor in a small but pivotal role or Jerry Maguire or the upcomung Rat Race.If you want to see Paul Hogan at his best he's probably on a cancelled Austrailian postage stamp .

If you like western or comedy movies, you will probably like "Lightning Jack." Paul Hogan stars as Lightning Jack, a cowboy that is famous for craftily robbing banks. He is one of the most wanted criminals in the country. Cuba Gooding, Jr. is a mute that later tries to team up with Lightning Jack and become a successful robber and cowboy in his own right. That's when the movie gets a lot better and more interesting. It will keep you interested throughout the movie so you can find out if Lightning Jack will remain successful at robbing banks across America or if he'll get caught. The movie also has a lot of funny parts that make it even better.

Good movie about an australian american outlaw [Hogan] named Jack who's gang gets shot up, and in need of help, accepts a black mute orphan to help him out. While Jack is trying to get a reputation in the U.S. as a mean cold blooded killer, the mute orphan barely knows how to fire a gun and ends up slowing them up, until Jack teaches him what being an outlaw is all about. If you liked Crocodile Dundee, you'll really like Lightning Jack.

The movie was much less than I expected. I found the
movie to be more boring than something that would catch
and hold a viewer's interest.

Originally advertised as the first picture filmed entirely by a cast and technicians from the Actor's Studio, this tale of power play amongst the cadets of a Southern military academy, only comes alive when it features the material that the Production Code of the 1950's demanded be cut. Based on the autobiographical novel and play End as a Man by Calder Willingham, director Jack Garfein uses the music of Kenyon Hopkins noticably in the scenes between Ben Gazzarra as an upperclass man and Paul E Richards as a presumably gay cadet Gazzarra nicknames Cockroach, who wears a shower cap when the other cadets don't. Richards is a "creative writer" who names the Gazzarra character in his novel "nightboy". Their best scene together is where Richards reads to Gazzarra, who plays with his sword! Clearly Gazzarra is not adverse to Richard's attention, and their farewell handshake is more a sensual than manly experience. Gazzarra's relationship with Richards is also echoed in his friendship with football jock James Olson, where Gazzarra reacts to being casually touched. I also like idea of Gazzara's cigarette holder, though his kissing his own wrist at one point is a little too self-consciously Method. But whilst it is interesting to observe these subversive (for the period) elements, the narrative ultimately disappoints in the treatment of Gazzara as the academy's resident sadist. The Actors Studio adaptation needs to create an ensemble, as opposed to allowing Gazzara to star, which dissipates the tension and reduces his threat. Whilst it may be more psychologically truthful for him to underplay his psychotic nature, with the addition of Freudian insight which makes him more intellectual than physically violent, this doesn't help the drama, which is even more obvious when the far more satisfying climax uses mob intimidation and a physical act of revenge. The worst of the Actors Studio excess is in the presentation of victim Arthur Storch who is said to be schizophrenic and thus an easy target. Storch has coke-bottle spectacles, buck teeth, cartoon at attention posture, ambition to become a priest, is a mommy's boy, afraid of women, and anti-alcoholic. Gazzara's interest in Storch is inexplicable, even if he does hold him down while Olson spanks him with a broom, but as a good part of the film has us trapped in one room (the stage origins show here) while we're supposed to observe how bad Gazzara is, proceedings crawl into tedium. Or perhaps this kind of s/m power play just doesn't hold that much interest for me. The academy rooms have cell-like iron gates in front of the doors, and even though they aren't locked, the film opens with a guard hitting each as he passes, doing a role call. Watch for Gazzara's sci-fi buggy car, which has room in the back for a passenger.

Ben Gazzara is a perfect bully in a military academy. He uses his position of authority to settle his own accounts with one cadet, the son of the major of the academy, and the major himself. He terrorizes and crushes the freshmen cadets in all possible ways to achieve his own end which is pure domination. The interest of the film is the unanimous rebellion among the cadets and their final treatment of the bully they exclude from the academy after making him sign a confession of his « crimes ». The best part in the role is the fact that the bully always assumes an aristocratic stand and not a purely violent attitude. He dominates like a feudal squire or baron of old and he always manages to enwrap other people in his own acts so that he can blackmail them into lying and silence. But the final treatment reveals him to be nothing but a coward, afraid of suffering and frightened by the perspective of losing his power just as if his power was the only thing he could hold on, he needed to be anything, to respect himself. Power corrupts, it's true, and absolute power corrupts absolutely.

Dr Jacques COULARDEAU

The book was made into a GREAT movie in 1952. For some odd reason, they tried to re-do it in 1998 and the result is AWFUL.
The casting is all wrong, the script is totally re-done until it does not even resemble the original. The ending just fizzles out and has no point. Imagine going to see West Side Story, but there is no music, and everyone lives at the end. You would wonder what idiot was trying to pass off that farce as being the genuine West Side Story.
It is exactly the same situation here, if you buy this version you will NOT be seeing the REAL story, and you won't even be seeing very good acting. It is an absolute waste of time, period !!!

Anyone familiar with the play or the 1952 version with Julie
Harris will wonder what happened in this remake. The producers
went back to McCullers' novel and adapted that version. When
McCuller's adapted the work for the stage she made several
changes. Alfre Woodard is wonderful as Berniece and Anna
Paquin captures the hormones-ragin teenager quite well. The
matted colors make you feel you are part of the environment.
I am glad there are two versions of the story on video and both
are worth having.

The Carson McCullers' novel whom this movie is based on is very simple on its surface, but deeply it contains a stunning sadness and melancholy that the intelligent writer expresses perfectly.

It has characters whose lifes are normal without nothing special happening to them, but the deep feelings are there and the novel captures them in a very special way. There lies the greatness of the book.

But, ¿Is possible to translate this to the screen? Well, is not an easy job, but here we have an excellent and very faithful adaptation of the story of Frankie Addams with the same minimalism that characterizes the novel (sometimes it seems a play rather than a movie) and, of course, its same power. Is the story of Frankie (a wonderful Paquin), a tall, depressive, imaginative and sad 12 years-old girl who hopes to runaway from her village with her brother and his girlfriend (who are going to marry that summer). Meanwhile she spends that long and hot summer with the only company of Berenice (Woodard) and her cousin John Henry (Dunn).

The movie's great success is on the casting: this is the movie of Anna Paquin, who is so believable and superb as Frankie that ends becoming Frankie rather than playing her. To see Paquin dreaming of Alaska, hitting a soldier or not hearing what others say in her conversations is to see the Frankie of the novel; and to see Paquin suffering in the long scene of Woodard's monologue and in the ending is to suffer like when you're reading the book. There Frankie and her mind are the center of the story and in the movie the center becomes Paquin, with the same rage of Flora from "The Piano" and the same sadness and melancholy of Amy from "Fly Away Home".

Summarizing, an excellent TV-movie for those who admire the novel and Carson McCullers and for those who admire Anna Paquin, one of the most talented young actresses actually.

The Ugly American is one of those typical political dramas that falls short of what it hopes to accomplish. Marlon Brando plays Harrison Carter McWhite, an American ambassador sent to the fictional southeastern Asian country of Sarkhan, where a political uproar has begun over an American project. The project is the building of a road called Freedom Road, and the uproar is over the fact the natives of Sarkhan do not want it. Enter McWhite to solve the problem. And he brings a special talent to the table, he has been friends for years with the leader of the revolt, a revolutinary named Cheyung. Unfortunately much time has passed and it seems McWhite no longer has any influence over Cheyung. Tensions between them escalate, particullarly after McWhite discovers Cheyoung is in favor of a new communist government for Sarkhan. Then disaster strikes at the grand opening of Freedom Road. Cheyoung is responsible, but it is later discovered he is being used to start the revolt, only to be assasignated when it is through. And thus the picture ends shortly after with the events ensueing.

This movie failed to gain the simpathetic feeling refected by it's tone. The performances are on the whole pretty good, and Brando creates another interesting personality in McWhite. However, good acting does not make a good movie, as is the case here. George Englund's direction is poor and the film seems to hit and miss all over the place.

A decent film for Brando fans but seekers of political dramas will find this film does not deliver.

It's been a long time since I've seen the Ugly American. I would have watched it more, it's just that it's so difficult to find... anywhere. Many people consider it a political drama. I would have to disagree. To me, it's more of a social commentary, not only on the entire situation in Vietnam, but also as relates to US foreign policy in general.
It never pretends to have any of the intricacy of "The Insider," or the insight of "JFK." It is, none the less, one of the better fils I have seen to date. Marlon Brando's performance is admirable, and the mood almost reminds me of an Akira Kurosawa movie.
In my opinion, this movie has been overshadowed because people did not like the message it sent, nor did they like the often thinly veiled criticism of US foreign policy during the 60's.

Overall, I would say it was an excellent movie, turning me from an apathetic movie watcher to a marlon brando fan.

Fascinating drama about Communist insurgency in early-60s Southeast Asia. Takes place in a fictional country named "Sarkhan," which was based at the time on the situations in Laos and Vietnam. Brando is great as the U.S. Ambassador to volatile Sarkhan, trying to balance American political objectives with the nationalist sentiments of the "Sarkhanese" people. Perhaps one of the most intelligent political films of the 1960s. Also includes the Asian perspective and real Asian settings, a rare achievement for a Hollywood film of that era. It was beautifully filmed in Thailand, and the VHS looks great. The story lacks clarity and pace at a few points, keeping the film from being five-star. But it succeeds as a rich character drama in an exotic setting, and an powerful historical statement...a much more intelligent look at the politics of the 1960s in Asia than more famous films like "The Green Berets." Highly recommended for viewers interested in Asia, the Vietnam War era, and Brando fans.

The Ugly American is one of those typical political dramas that falls short of what it hopes to accomplish. Marlon Brando plays Harrison Carter McWhite, an American ambassador sent to the fictional southeastern Asian country of Sarkhan, where a political uproar has begun over an American project. The project is the building of a road called Freedom Road, and the uproar is over the fact the natives of Sarkhan do not want it. Enter McWhite to solve the problem. And he brings a special talent to the table, he has been friends for years with the leader of the revolt, a revolutinary named Cheyung. Unfortunately much time has passed and it seems McWhite no longer has any influence over Cheyung. Tensions between them escalate, particullarly after McWhite discovers Cheyoung is in favor of a new communist government for Sarkhan. Then disaster strikes at the grand opening of Freedom Road. Cheyoung is responsible, but it is later discovered he is being used to start the revolt, only to be assasignated when it is through. And thus the picture ends shortly after with the events ensueing.

This movie failed to gain the simpathetic feeling refected by it's tone. The performances are on the whole pretty good, and Brando creates another interesting personality in McWhite. However, good acting does not make a good movie, as is the case here. George Englund's direction is poor and the film seems to hit and miss all over the place.

A decent film for Brando fans but seekers of political dramas will find this film does not deliver.

It's been a long time since I've seen the Ugly American. I would have watched it more, it's just that it's so difficult to find... anywhere. Many people consider it a political drama. I would have to disagree. To me, it's more of a social commentary, not only on the entire situation in Vietnam, but also as relates to US foreign policy in general.
It never pretends to have any of the intricacy of "The Insider," or the insight of "JFK." It is, none the less, one of the better fils I have seen to date. Marlon Brando's performance is admirable, and the mood almost reminds me of an Akira Kurosawa movie.
In my opinion, this movie has been overshadowed because people did not like the message it sent, nor did they like the often thinly veiled criticism of US foreign policy during the 60's.

Overall, I would say it was an excellent movie, turning me from an apathetic movie watcher to a marlon brando fan.

Fascinating drama about Communist insurgency in early-60s Southeast Asia. Takes place in a fictional country named "Sarkhan," which was based at the time on the situations in Laos and Vietnam. Brando is great as the U.S. Ambassador to volatile Sarkhan, trying to balance American political objectives with the nationalist sentiments of the "Sarkhanese" people. Perhaps one of the most intelligent political films of the 1960s. Also includes the Asian perspective and real Asian settings, a rare achievement for a Hollywood film of that era. It was beautifully filmed in Thailand, and the VHS looks great. The story lacks clarity and pace at a few points, keeping the film from being five-star. But it succeeds as a rich character drama in an exotic setting, and an powerful historical statement...a much more intelligent look at the politics of the 1960s in Asia than more famous films like "The Green Berets." Highly recommended for viewers interested in Asia, the Vietnam War era, and Brando fans.

Batman Return was a far better movie than Batman Forever Batman forever was like watching a two hour cartoon show val Kilmer was okay as batman but Jim carrey was good as the riddle but tommy lee jones sucks as two face best part of the movie was The showdown Between Batman, The riddler so rent this okaymovie but Batman Forever is a better movie Than Batman and Robin Batman and Robin sucks i hpoe tthe new Batman movie is going to be good

When Michael Keaton and Tim Burton had had enough of the Batman franchise after two excellent films, Val Kilmer and Joel Schumacher stepped in to make Batman Forever, a far cry from the first two films being a more colorful, comic book-type adventure. To start with acting, Val Kilmer is good as the new Batman/Bruce Wayne, and Chris O' Donnell is okay as Robin, though I could have gone another film without Robin for certain. Nicole Kidman is also okay as Dr. Chase Meridian, a psychologist who wants to know what makes Batman tick. As for the villains, Tommy Lee Jones plays his part very well as Harvey Dent/Two-Face, but the script makes him closer to the Joker, taking away the toughness and gruff from the animated series' Two-Face. Jim Carrey goes overboard as Edward Nygma/The Riddler, Two-Face's partner in crime. Though he is very amusing too watch, he needs to have a bit more intelligence, cool, and confidence. It is also very funny to watch these two colorful criminals work to conquer Gotham with a brain-draining device and destroy Batman.

Barbara Ling's production design is very good, especially at Claw Island yet Gotham City is too bright and neon colored to give the sense and and look of darkness and awe that the original and second Gotham City had. John Dykstra's (Star Wars, Star Trek-The Motion Picture) visual effects are excellent, once again primarily at Claw Island. Dennis Virkler's (The Hunt For Red October, The Fugitive) film editing is also well-done. Oscar nominations for Best Cinematography, (Stephen Goldblatt-The Prince of Tides) Best Sound, (Donald O. Mitchell, Frank A. Montano, Michael Herbick,-Under Siege, The Fugitive, Clear and Present Danger and Peter Hliddal) and Best Sound Effects Editing (Bruce Stambler and John Leveque-Under Siege, The Fugitive, Clear and Present Danger, The Ghost and the Darkness). No wins for Batman Forever.

Despite some good action scenes (four slightly hokey yet nonetheless entertaining scenes- the opening, Batman driving up a skyscraper to escape Two-Face, the NygmaTech party crash, and the Wayne Manor break-in), great new vehicles including a redesigned Batmobile, the Bat Boat, the Bat Plane, and the Bat Sub, and plenty of new Bat hardware, the movie is hurt badly by a very disappointing climax at Claw Island. Though very lavish, the climax is dulled due to lack of fighting, not enough light and too much GREEN lighting (you still can't see well enough). A chilling yet funny ending at Arkham Asylum. Overall, not as well-done as the first two Batman films but is entertaining, lavish, and has a case of overload. I wished the next film would be more like the first two but...... P.S.- 3 1/2 stars for Batman Forever.

It is said of this film, that people watch Batman for the villians. However, I found Val Kilmer's portrayal of Bruce Wayne/Batman to be one of the better performances of the Dark Knight. Yes jim Carey as the Riddler was astounding, howver lets not forget that it is a batman film, not a villian peice.

Batman Return was a far better movie than Batman Forever Batman forever was like watching a two hour cartoon show val Kilmer was okay as batman but Jim carrey was good as the riddle but tommy lee jones sucks as two face best part of the movie was The showdown Between Batman, The riddler so rent this okaymovie but Batman Forever is a better movie Than Batman and Robin Batman and Robin sucks i hpoe tthe new Batman movie is going to be good

When Michael Keaton and Tim Burton had had enough of the Batman franchise after two excellent films, Val Kilmer and Joel Schumacher stepped in to make Batman Forever, a far cry from the first two films being a more colorful, comic book-type adventure. To start with acting, Val Kilmer is good as the new Batman/Bruce Wayne, and Chris O' Donnell is okay as Robin, though I could have gone another film without Robin for certain. Nicole Kidman is also okay as Dr. Chase Meridian, a psychologist who wants to know what makes Batman tick. As for the villains, Tommy Lee Jones plays his part very well as Harvey Dent/Two-Face, but the script makes him closer to the Joker, taking away the toughness and gruff from the animated series' Two-Face. Jim Carrey goes overboard as Edward Nygma/The Riddler, Two-Face's partner in crime. Though he is very amusing too watch, he needs to have a bit more intelligence, cool, and confidence. It is also very funny to watch these two colorful criminals work to conquer Gotham with a brain-draining device and destroy Batman.

Barbara Ling's production design is very good, especially at Claw Island yet Gotham City is too bright and neon colored to give the sense and and look of darkness and awe that the original and second Gotham City had. John Dykstra's (Star Wars, Star Trek-The Motion Picture) visual effects are excellent, once again primarily at Claw Island. Dennis Virkler's (The Hunt For Red October, The Fugitive) film editing is also well-done. Oscar nominations for Best Cinematography, (Stephen Goldblatt-The Prince of Tides) Best Sound, (Donald O. Mitchell, Frank A. Montano, Michael Herbick,-Under Siege, The Fugitive, Clear and Present Danger and Peter Hliddal) and Best Sound Effects Editing (Bruce Stambler and John Leveque-Under Siege, The Fugitive, Clear and Present Danger, The Ghost and the Darkness). No wins for Batman Forever.

Despite some good action scenes (four slightly hokey yet nonetheless entertaining scenes- the opening, Batman driving up a skyscraper to escape Two-Face, the NygmaTech party crash, and the Wayne Manor break-in), great new vehicles including a redesigned Batmobile, the Bat Boat, the Bat Plane, and the Bat Sub, and plenty of new Bat hardware, the movie is hurt badly by a very disappointing climax at Claw Island. Though very lavish, the climax is dulled due to lack of fighting, not enough light and too much GREEN lighting (you still can't see well enough). A chilling yet funny ending at Arkham Asylum. Overall, not as well-done as the first two Batman films but is entertaining, lavish, and has a case of overload. I wished the next film would be more like the first two but...... P.S.- 3 1/2 stars for Batman Forever.

It is said of this film, that people watch Batman for the villians. However, I found Val Kilmer's portrayal of Bruce Wayne/Batman to be one of the better performances of the Dark Knight. Yes jim Carey as the Riddler was astounding, howver lets not forget that it is a batman film, not a villian peice.

Batman Return was a far better movie than Batman Forever Batman forever was like watching a two hour cartoon show val Kilmer was okay as batman but Jim carrey was good as the riddle but tommy lee jones sucks as two face best part of the movie was The showdown Between Batman, The riddler so rent this okaymovie but Batman Forever is a better movie Than Batman and Robin Batman and Robin sucks i hpoe tthe new Batman movie is going to be good

When Michael Keaton and Tim Burton had had enough of the Batman franchise after two excellent films, Val Kilmer and Joel Schumacher stepped in to make Batman Forever, a far cry from the first two films being a more colorful, comic book-type adventure. To start with acting, Val Kilmer is good as the new Batman/Bruce Wayne, and Chris O' Donnell is okay as Robin, though I could have gone another film without Robin for certain. Nicole Kidman is also okay as Dr. Chase Meridian, a psychologist who wants to know what makes Batman tick. As for the villains, Tommy Lee Jones plays his part very well as Harvey Dent/Two-Face, but the script makes him closer to the Joker, taking away the toughness and gruff from the animated series' Two-Face. Jim Carrey goes overboard as Edward Nygma/The Riddler, Two-Face's partner in crime. Though he is very amusing too watch, he needs to have a bit more intelligence, cool, and confidence. It is also very funny to watch these two colorful criminals work to conquer Gotham with a brain-draining device and destroy Batman.

Barbara Ling's production design is very good, especially at Claw Island yet Gotham City is too bright and neon colored to give the sense and and look of darkness and awe that the original and second Gotham City had. John Dykstra's (Star Wars, Star Trek-The Motion Picture) visual effects are excellent, once again primarily at Claw Island. Dennis Virkler's (The Hunt For Red October, The Fugitive) film editing is also well-done. Oscar nominations for Best Cinematography, (Stephen Goldblatt-The Prince of Tides) Best Sound, (Donald O. Mitchell, Frank A. Montano, Michael Herbick,-Under Siege, The Fugitive, Clear and Present Danger and Peter Hliddal) and Best Sound Effects Editing (Bruce Stambler and John Leveque-Under Siege, The Fugitive, Clear and Present Danger, The Ghost and the Darkness). No wins for Batman Forever.

Despite some good action scenes (four slightly hokey yet nonetheless entertaining scenes- the opening, Batman driving up a skyscraper to escape Two-Face, the NygmaTech party crash, and the Wayne Manor break-in), great new vehicles including a redesigned Batmobile, the Bat Boat, the Bat Plane, and the Bat Sub, and plenty of new Bat hardware, the movie is hurt badly by a very disappointing climax at Claw Island. Though very lavish, the climax is dulled due to lack of fighting, not enough light and too much GREEN lighting (you still can't see well enough). A chilling yet funny ending at Arkham Asylum. Overall, not as well-done as the first two Batman films but is entertaining, lavish, and has a case of overload. I wished the next film would be more like the first two but...... P.S.- 3 1/2 stars for Batman Forever.

It is said of this film, that people watch Batman for the villians. However, I found Val Kilmer's portrayal of Bruce Wayne/Batman to be one of the better performances of the Dark Knight. Yes jim Carey as the Riddler was astounding, howver lets not forget that it is a batman film, not a villian peice.