Why is Joel Schumacher still to blame?

Schumacher & Co were under the misconception that the wackiness of Batman Forever had made it a huge success and B&R should follow through to make more money. B&R comes across as a film that was out of touch with what audiences were hoping for and what audience it was aiming for.

No one in their right mind would put their name on this crap no matter the pay check.

I don't think the AFI will honor him anytime soon or in his lifetime.

He's never even come close to receiving a best director nominations for everything, unlike Burton or Nolan he's more of a commercial director than anything.

What is Schumacher? a misguided good director or a hack?

See my post about the actors and actresses deliberately sabotaging the film to make it as absurd as humanly possible. Even Arnold had to have been in on the joke as was Schumacher.

http://vine.rottentomatoes.com/vine/showthread.php?t=212144

Why "Batman & Robin" failed:

http://vine.rottentomatoes.com/vine/showpost.php?p=1625941&postcou nt=1

1. Tim Burton: Burton directed the first two and produced the third film. "Batman & Robin" was the first Bat-movie without the malelovent genius. Don't get me wrong, he made mistakes! Killing The Joker in the first film was arguably one of them... but B&R failed because his gothic, dark influence was utterly lacking. Batman was no longer haunted... no longer duplicitious.

2. Casting: The choice of George Clooney was a disaster (and almost ruined a promising career). He had the jaw and the looks, but he did not take the character seriously (as Keaton or Kilmer did). Simply put... do not fix what ain't broken. Either make Kilmer return (he quit on a contract worth north of 15 million dollars) or entice the return of Keaton.

3. The direction of the film: Each installment was unique. 1989 differed greatly from 1992 and 1995... but 1997 was as uninspired as it was corny.

http://vine.rottentomatoes.com/vine/showpost.php?p=10730550&postco unt=2

4. The neon: Gotham being illuminated in neon was a stylistic blunder in Batman Forever, but not enough to ruin it. In this film, the city is literally bathed in neon. The pink hues were especially terrible.

5. The costumes: Rubber nipples and exaggerated codpieces aside, most of the outfits looked contrived and cheesy. The "sonar" Batman suit near the end of the film was perhaps the worst Batman costume of all time. Mr. Freeze's costume was especially bad. Why was there so much neon to it? Just pray tell, how could the design of the helmet keep him cold? Also, how could he do other things - such as walk? The only decent costumes in the film were Poison Ivy's outfits (but Uma Thurman is so damn sexy she'll look good in anything).

6. The one-liners: The puns from Mr. Freeze were especially cringe-worthy: "The Iceman cometh." "Hey everybody, CHILL!" "We will be Adam...and EVIL!" "Freeze in hell Batman." "You're not sending me to the cooler!" and "Let's kick some ice." are among his worst lines.

Batman also had some terrible one-liners, the worst ones probably being: "Batgirl? Not very PC." and "This is why Superman works alone."

Or how about Batgirl's little feminist diatribe? "Read a book, sister, that passive-aggressive number went out years ago. Chicks like you give women a bad name." And with that they both immediately resume their cat-fight in skintight outfits.

Poison Ivy's dialogue almost always centered around either her genitalia or someone else's: "My garden needs tending." "Who needs a frigid wife, anyway?" "Someone's about to hit the honey pot." "I'll help you grab your rocks." and "How about slippery when wet?" makes one want to puke. Which brings me to #7...

7. The blatant sexuality and homoeroticism: Besides the obvious sexual subtext of Poison Ivy's character, this film is permeated with Joel Schumacher's homosexual fantasies. Now, I'm not trying to be a gay-basher (I support same-sex marriages). After all, just look at Brian Singer. He's openly gay, and he was the director of X-Men, X2: X-Men United, and Superman Returns. However, Joel Schumacher's fetishes are at the forefront of Batman & Robin, including the constant camera shots of Batman's butt, the extravagant codpieces, the rubber nipples, Mr. Freeze's giant dildo-shaped rocketship, and the huge statues of naked men throughout the city.

8. The sci-fi elements: The superpowers of the villains aside, I'm talking about the giant rocket, the gem-powered telescope, the space-age silver costumes, and the bizarre new Bat-vehicles. Batman is the most "realistic" of all the DC superheroes and his stories should be portrayed as such.

9. The motivations of the villains: Poison Ivy's goals are especially vague. First she gets killed by that scientist guy, then is resurrected, allies herself with Bane (who was thrown in the film for no reason whatsoever), and decides to enact revenge on Wayne Enterprises for some reason. Then we find out that she wants to turn Gotham into a giant garden, so she teams up with Mr. Freeze, although I don't know why. He wanted to cover Gotham City in ice, which would appear to be counter-productive to Ivy's plans, but no matter. By the third act, it becomes quite clear that Poison Ivy is simply there so that Batgirl can fight her and win.

10. Batgirl and Robin: I am of the opinion that Batman works best, especially on film, alone. That having been said, Robin's character was handled quite well in Batman Forever, particularly his origin. Not so in Batman & Robin. He's not only an arrogant whiner but a complete idiot as well, especially when he lusts after Poison Ivy but then desires Batgirl like, two minutes later. Speaking of which, Batgirl was clearly unnecessary. There was simply no reason, other than to provide eye candy, to put her in this film. None.

11. Poor direction: This is ultimately the root of all the problems in Batman & Robin, and why, after the failure of this film, Joel Schumacher will never be trusted with a big budget franchise ever again from any studio. Ultimately, he was responsible for what made it onscreen. He could have cut the ice hockey, the dildo rocket, the Bat-card, Batgirl, the quasi-mute mongoloid Bane, and the sexual subtext, but he didn't. This film showed that he had a clear misunderstanding of modern cinema, the Batman mythology, actors, sexuality, the expectations of general moviegoers, humor, and basic storytelling. Of all the people involved in this film, Joel's career was the most tarnished and his newest film, The Number 23, is yet another critical and commercial failure.

http://whatculture.com/film/10-terrible-films-wrong-person-got-blamed. php/8

4. Joel Schumacher – Batman & Robin

Who Else Was To Blame: Everyone involved.

As discussed on this very site earlier this week, the misguided, dumb, camp, punny Batman & Robin is viewed as a necessary evil so we could get Christopher Nolan’s Dark Knight Trilogy. Following on from the already awful Batman Forever, the Gothic styles of Tim Burton’s films were well and truly gone in place of locations that were closer to toy playsets and vibrant colors that only served to highlight those infernal bat-nipples.

Try not to get too angry though; since the film’s franchise-redefining release, its director Joel Schumacher has been relegated to low budget, easily ignorable fare. Serves him right.

Well it would if Batman And Robin was just a director messing up; in reality it was a culmination of unbelievable hubris from all involved. Warner Bros. had forced out Burton for the third Bat-flick to ensure the hero didn’t become too dark for the lucrative child audience, slowly upping the toy quotient.

And writer Akiva Goldsman has admitted that with Batman he was completely out of his comfort zone, happy to throw pun after pun into the mix. Yet Warner eventually turned the series into a cash cow and Goldsman would go on to win an Oscar for penning A Beautiful Mind. Doesn’t seem fair now, does it?

From his filmography Schumacher clearly has little directorial skill beyond being susceptible to studio demands, but he didn’t need to become a singled-out fan hate figure he will forever be.

About Schumacher wanting to do Year One I don't think it was the right time to do it and the studio and audiences wanted a sequel not a prequel, as we talked about him being one step behind or out of touch with what his audiences wants.