They feel very 90's with the stunt casting of actors, the toyetic approach, the light-heartedness of the time, it was the era of the romantic comedy where all G rated films had to be campy and over the top.
shareOnly Bhatman & Robin has aged very badly. It was dust as soon as it was released into theaters.
Batman Forever is just fine.
Absolutely - I think Batman Forever is a comic book come to life. It's a fun ride from beginning to end.
It also shows Batman as he should be in action - beating up a bunch of bad guys at once instead of Burton's "one guy at a time" stuff.
More like a cartoon out of the Sunday funnies come to life.
shareYou are ignorant. Hunchback of Notor Dame came out in the 90s and it was one of the darkest Disney films. Also, Batman Returns came out in the 90s too. But frankly I think both Batman Forever and Batman and Robin have aged worse than Batman or Batman Returns.
shareReading elsewhere online, it appears that Batman Forever definitely had the unfortunate luck of being lumped in with Batman & Robin:
https://www.batman-online.com/forum/index.php?topic=3978.msg61328#msg61328
Forever under Joel Schumacher's watch, definitely had an MTV pop '90s feel and vibe to it. But there is also a good Bruce Wayne/Batman story there. Schumacher balanced drama (and in adult themes) with lighter kid-friendly and '60s batman homages (which does go back to Tim Burton).