Pat-Hingle Movie Reviews

The dramatization of Jane Smiley's "A Thousand Acres" is dissapointing in that not only does it come from an excellent novel, but also because of the dream cast involved.
The story is loosly based on Shakespeare's "King Lear," in only that the father in the modern version is an evil villain, while the two daughters are alleged martyrs. The issues involved in the film are important and though-provoking--incest, sexual abuse, breast cancer, Alzheimer's disease, dysfunctional families--too bad the writers handled these noteworthy subjects so messily. The calamities piled upon the characters happen in an episodic way, that makes the film feel like a miniseries without commercial breaks. With each new mini-drama, you feel as if you should watch this movie in installments. The script is also full of cliched dialogue, and characters without motivation.
Despite all these flaws, the film is still worth watching if just for the cast. Jessica Lange, Michelle Pfeiffer, and Jason Robards prove themselves brilliant performers in this film--each actor gives more than the shallow script deserves.
Lange plays Ginny Cook, the shy and docile oldest daughter, who accepts her lot in life without complaint, and manages to live a relatively happy life. Her character is the most appealing, and Lange gives nuances and shadings to the character that weren't written in. Ginny described herself in the film as a "ninny" and she is written as so--Lange gives her so much more, and it is amazing to watch her create a true three-dimensional character.
Jason Robards is Larry Cook, a dragon of a father. He like Lange is given an essentially cardboard character, and his performance gives Larry a sense of pity and pathos, that the script did not allow. The writer wanted him to be simply evil, and Robards chose, wisely, to instead, elevate Larry out from the cartoonishly evil lines he was given, and make him a complex human being.
Michelle Pfeiffer gives the most provoking performance of the three main stars, because hers seems to be an mixture of Robards and Lange's. Her role is also quite underwritten, but she manages to breath life (not just fire) into her character, the angry and resentful, Rose. The part is written as dour and bitter--completely unlikable, and even as the story moves on (slowly) and you realize the sacrifices Rose has made, she is still written in a completely shrewish way. Pfeiffer gives her vulnerability sorely needed, and manages to steal the film (not an easy thing to do, considering her costars).
Jennifer Jason Leigh has a smaller role as Caroline, the youngest daughter. Her role is underwritten on the lines of Robards' and Pfeiffer's characters, yet unlike the two, she fails to bring any depth to the essentially pouty and boring person she is portraying.
All in all, a good movie to watch to witness the beautiful chemistry between two of America's finest actresses.

The actors save this sparse script in this film.

Based on the novel of the same name, this is the story of a farmer who signs over his farm to his adult daughters and the tragic results that follow.

It's not the type of movie I usually like. It's slow and talky with soap opera elements. However, perhaps it was because I saw this on video and the intimacy of the small screen was my own private viewing room, that I really got into it.

It was the excellent characterizations superbly acted by Jessica Lange, Michelle Pfieffer and Jason Robards that did it for me. The plot unfolded slowly and every scene revealed yet more about these characters. And even though it was set on a farm in Iowa with a very different life style than mine, I was able to get into their heads. I fell asleep thinking of the characters, not the actors who portrayed them, and was still haunted by them the next morning.

The movie is sad. There's sickness, betrayal, anger, weakness and unhappy resolution. True drama in every sense of the word. It works

Garner made 2 movie for disney. if your on the look out for good family movie that are fun, no cursing or nudity, a little action and a little romance... you want Castaway Cowboy, CC not One Little Indian, OLI.

CC is a nice movie about a cowboy that ends up stuck on an island. He shows the nice widow woman how to start a cattle ranch instead of tring to far or fish.

OLI is very boring. Not one of my three kids stayed for the end. And isn't that the true test of a movie. It isn't totally what mom or I like, it is also what they will like enough to sit and watch and enjoy.

James Gardner makes this sporadic paced comedy putter along. It does have some good lines and pranks if you can stay awake with the dead fill time. Average compared to the "Support the ****" movies.

A thoroughly enjoyable film, especially for James Garner fans. Some amusing moments but never played tongue in cheek.
Be warned that, in spite of the claim that the DVD is universal, it wouldn't play on my Region 2 machine.

Garner made 2 movie for disney. if your on the look out for good family movie that are fun, no cursing or nudity, a little action and a little romance... you want Castaway Cowboy, CC not One Little Indian, OLI.

CC is a nice movie about a cowboy that ends up stuck on an island. He shows the nice widow woman how to start a cattle ranch instead of tring to far or fish.

OLI is very boring. Not one of my three kids stayed for the end. And isn't that the true test of a movie. It isn't totally what mom or I like, it is also what they will like enough to sit and watch and enjoy.

James Gardner makes this sporadic paced comedy putter along. It does have some good lines and pranks if you can stay awake with the dead fill time. Average compared to the "Support the ****" movies.

A thoroughly enjoyable film, especially for James Garner fans. Some amusing moments but never played tongue in cheek.
Be warned that, in spite of the claim that the DVD is universal, it wouldn't play on my Region 2 machine.

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.

I can't believe they casted Arnold as the Iceman. The iceman is too complex, too intelligent, too cold, too creepy to be played by and action-hero actor. What a shame!!

I really do think this is arguably the best of the series. Why? Because in this movie, the character motivations, especially the villains, but excluding Batman/Bruce Wayne himself, are clear. Motivation is key to driving plot. Why do the characters do what they do? Mr. Freeze's tragic story provides him with an interesting impetus, and it's a shame the makers of this movie chose a paint-by-numbers approach and did so little with so much to potentially work with. I would still contend, though, that the highbrow critics of this feature have got it all wrong about Mr. Freeze and Poison Ivy here, blasting them as cookie-cutter, when actually, the writing clearly shows us an interesting web of motive. Of all the series, it is this movie which does the two big villains thing best.

My criticisms are:
1. The clumsy innuendos slung about in a movie marketed towards kids. It's possible to write innuendo in such a way that only the clever adults in the audience will get it; many of the old movies did this well. These writers aren't crafty enough, though, and it's embarrassing.

2. Batman himself is not developed any further, and he should be. With both Freeze and Ivy, there's opportunity for some exploration of his pain, but the movie is also saddled with Robin and Batgirl, and so loses focus and gets crowded.

3. The final scene in Arkham Asylum, which countermanded all the work of the story leading up to it. I won't spoil it for those who haven't seen it, but it's completely untenable (even for a comic-book movie) and ruins whatever good work they tried to do with Mr. Freeze. Stop the movie before you get to it -- it'll be a better experience.

A positive: I enjoy the color and lighting of the Joel Schumacher films ("Batman Forever" and "Batman and Robin") more than the Tim Burton- directed ones (the first two), and with a comic-book movie, what is visual is of primary importance. I know this is partly taste - but I just find the scheme more satsifying, because it seems to more creatively use the pallette. Batman stuff is supposed to be dark, but bright hues (even neon) mixed in make for a more comic book-like feel to me.

If your a fan of the old Adam West original Batman from the tv show then you can't find a better remake out of the whole bunch of Bman movies!I liked the ORIGINAL Batman (Adam West) series more so than the violent films of the past.In m opinion this is the best of the buch. It has almost every aspect of the tv version in this movie. First of all I can't stand George Clooney. He can't act an this makes him the perfect Batman version of Adam West and also the Best of all the Batman actors to play the role.Arnold is great as Freeze and this movie contains all the comedic and style of the tv show.The DVD has a great picture and an awesome Dolby 5.1 soundtrack that'll test your home theatre sound system.Contrary to most people's opinions on this movie, I think they were expecting the same old serious DARK Batman characters and violence that the other Batman movies had more of.This great version was more like the TV version which I enjoyed alot and was hoping for to begin with. Micheal Keaton as Batman? Val Kilmer as Batman? You could beat those little un-muscular guys up. Atleast Clooney can't act and is taller than those two. More-so like Adam West.

I can't believe they casted Arnold as the Iceman. The iceman is too complex, too intelligent, too cold, too creepy to be played by and action-hero actor. What a shame!!

I really do think this is arguably the best of the series. Why? Because in this movie, the character motivations, especially the villains, but excluding Batman/Bruce Wayne himself, are clear. Motivation is key to driving plot. Why do the characters do what they do? Mr. Freeze's tragic story provides him with an interesting impetus, and it's a shame the makers of this movie chose a paint-by-numbers approach and did so little with so much to potentially work with. I would still contend, though, that the highbrow critics of this feature have got it all wrong about Mr. Freeze and Poison Ivy here, blasting them as cookie-cutter, when actually, the writing clearly shows us an interesting web of motive. Of all the series, it is this movie which does the two big villains thing best.

My criticisms are:
1. The clumsy innuendos slung about in a movie marketed towards kids. It's possible to write innuendo in such a way that only the clever adults in the audience will get it; many of the old movies did this well. These writers aren't crafty enough, though, and it's embarrassing.

2. Batman himself is not developed any further, and he should be. With both Freeze and Ivy, there's opportunity for some exploration of his pain, but the movie is also saddled with Robin and Batgirl, and so loses focus and gets crowded.

3. The final scene in Arkham Asylum, which countermanded all the work of the story leading up to it. I won't spoil it for those who haven't seen it, but it's completely untenable (even for a comic-book movie) and ruins whatever good work they tried to do with Mr. Freeze. Stop the movie before you get to it -- it'll be a better experience.

A positive: I enjoy the color and lighting of the Joel Schumacher films ("Batman Forever" and "Batman and Robin") more than the Tim Burton- directed ones (the first two), and with a comic-book movie, what is visual is of primary importance. I know this is partly taste - but I just find the scheme more satsifying, because it seems to more creatively use the pallette. Batman stuff is supposed to be dark, but bright hues (even neon) mixed in make for a more comic book-like feel to me.

If your a fan of the old Adam West original Batman from the tv show then you can't find a better remake out of the whole bunch of Bman movies!I liked the ORIGINAL Batman (Adam West) series more so than the violent films of the past.In m opinion this is the best of the buch. It has almost every aspect of the tv version in this movie. First of all I can't stand George Clooney. He can't act an this makes him the perfect Batman version of Adam West and also the Best of all the Batman actors to play the role.Arnold is great as Freeze and this movie contains all the comedic and style of the tv show.The DVD has a great picture and an awesome Dolby 5.1 soundtrack that'll test your home theatre sound system.Contrary to most people's opinions on this movie, I think they were expecting the same old serious DARK Batman characters and violence that the other Batman movies had more of.This great version was more like the TV version which I enjoyed alot and was hoping for to begin with. Micheal Keaton as Batman? Val Kilmer as Batman? You could beat those little un-muscular guys up. Atleast Clooney can't act and is taller than those two. More-so like Adam West.

I can't believe they casted Arnold as the Iceman. The iceman is too complex, too intelligent, too cold, too creepy to be played by and action-hero actor. What a shame!!

I really do think this is arguably the best of the series. Why? Because in this movie, the character motivations, especially the villains, but excluding Batman/Bruce Wayne himself, are clear. Motivation is key to driving plot. Why do the characters do what they do? Mr. Freeze's tragic story provides him with an interesting impetus, and it's a shame the makers of this movie chose a paint-by-numbers approach and did so little with so much to potentially work with. I would still contend, though, that the highbrow critics of this feature have got it all wrong about Mr. Freeze and Poison Ivy here, blasting them as cookie-cutter, when actually, the writing clearly shows us an interesting web of motive. Of all the series, it is this movie which does the two big villains thing best.

My criticisms are:
1. The clumsy innuendos slung about in a movie marketed towards kids. It's possible to write innuendo in such a way that only the clever adults in the audience will get it; many of the old movies did this well. These writers aren't crafty enough, though, and it's embarrassing.

2. Batman himself is not developed any further, and he should be. With both Freeze and Ivy, there's opportunity for some exploration of his pain, but the movie is also saddled with Robin and Batgirl, and so loses focus and gets crowded.

3. The final scene in Arkham Asylum, which countermanded all the work of the story leading up to it. I won't spoil it for those who haven't seen it, but it's completely untenable (even for a comic-book movie) and ruins whatever good work they tried to do with Mr. Freeze. Stop the movie before you get to it -- it'll be a better experience.

A positive: I enjoy the color and lighting of the Joel Schumacher films ("Batman Forever" and "Batman and Robin") more than the Tim Burton- directed ones (the first two), and with a comic-book movie, what is visual is of primary importance. I know this is partly taste - but I just find the scheme more satsifying, because it seems to more creatively use the pallette. Batman stuff is supposed to be dark, but bright hues (even neon) mixed in make for a more comic book-like feel to me.

If your a fan of the old Adam West original Batman from the tv show then you can't find a better remake out of the whole bunch of Bman movies!I liked the ORIGINAL Batman (Adam West) series more so than the violent films of the past.In m opinion this is the best of the buch. It has almost every aspect of the tv version in this movie. First of all I can't stand George Clooney. He can't act an this makes him the perfect Batman version of Adam West and also the Best of all the Batman actors to play the role.Arnold is great as Freeze and this movie contains all the comedic and style of the tv show.The DVD has a great picture and an awesome Dolby 5.1 soundtrack that'll test your home theatre sound system.Contrary to most people's opinions on this movie, I think they were expecting the same old serious DARK Batman characters and violence that the other Batman movies had more of.This great version was more like the TV version which I enjoyed alot and was hoping for to begin with. Micheal Keaton as Batman? Val Kilmer as Batman? You could beat those little un-muscular guys up. Atleast Clooney can't act and is taller than those two. More-so like Adam West.

I can't believe they casted Arnold as the Iceman. The iceman is too complex, too intelligent, too cold, too creepy to be played by and action-hero actor. What a shame!!

I really do think this is arguably the best of the series. Why? Because in this movie, the character motivations, especially the villains, but excluding Batman/Bruce Wayne himself, are clear. Motivation is key to driving plot. Why do the characters do what they do? Mr. Freeze's tragic story provides him with an interesting impetus, and it's a shame the makers of this movie chose a paint-by-numbers approach and did so little with so much to potentially work with. I would still contend, though, that the highbrow critics of this feature have got it all wrong about Mr. Freeze and Poison Ivy here, blasting them as cookie-cutter, when actually, the writing clearly shows us an interesting web of motive. Of all the series, it is this movie which does the two big villains thing best.

My criticisms are:
1. The clumsy innuendos slung about in a movie marketed towards kids. It's possible to write innuendo in such a way that only the clever adults in the audience will get it; many of the old movies did this well. These writers aren't crafty enough, though, and it's embarrassing.

2. Batman himself is not developed any further, and he should be. With both Freeze and Ivy, there's opportunity for some exploration of his pain, but the movie is also saddled with Robin and Batgirl, and so loses focus and gets crowded.

3. The final scene in Arkham Asylum, which countermanded all the work of the story leading up to it. I won't spoil it for those who haven't seen it, but it's completely untenable (even for a comic-book movie) and ruins whatever good work they tried to do with Mr. Freeze. Stop the movie before you get to it -- it'll be a better experience.

A positive: I enjoy the color and lighting of the Joel Schumacher films ("Batman Forever" and "Batman and Robin") more than the Tim Burton- directed ones (the first two), and with a comic-book movie, what is visual is of primary importance. I know this is partly taste - but I just find the scheme more satsifying, because it seems to more creatively use the pallette. Batman stuff is supposed to be dark, but bright hues (even neon) mixed in make for a more comic book-like feel to me.

If your a fan of the old Adam West original Batman from the tv show then you can't find a better remake out of the whole bunch of Bman movies!I liked the ORIGINAL Batman (Adam West) series more so than the violent films of the past.In m opinion this is the best of the buch. It has almost every aspect of the tv version in this movie. First of all I can't stand George Clooney. He can't act an this makes him the perfect Batman version of Adam West and also the Best of all the Batman actors to play the role.Arnold is great as Freeze and this movie contains all the comedic and style of the tv show.The DVD has a great picture and an awesome Dolby 5.1 soundtrack that'll test your home theatre sound system.Contrary to most people's opinions on this movie, I think they were expecting the same old serious DARK Batman characters and violence that the other Batman movies had more of.This great version was more like the TV version which I enjoyed alot and was hoping for to begin with. Micheal Keaton as Batman? Val Kilmer as Batman? You could beat those little un-muscular guys up. Atleast Clooney can't act and is taller than those two. More-so like Adam West.