Is Batman & Robin (1997) a false version of the supernatural that can't avoid acknowledging its acceptance of peace?

I'd rather forget that sin.

Compared to the Nolan movies and to Batman v Superman, Batman & Robin is perfection

I'm sorry @trokanmariel but most will agree that The Dark Knight, along with Captain America: Winter Soldier, is one of the best big-screen comic book adaptations ever made.

Batman Forever, Batman & Robin are blasphemous cash-ins that tried to exploit the vision Tim Burton had created but could not finish. If you knew anything about comic book movies you would know this.

Batman v Superman, however, was a massively missed opportunity.

The Nolan movies are hollow capitalist propaganda pieces that don't understand the Batman mythos; Batman & Robin is the best attempt so far at representing the true meaning of Batman

Enlighten us, please, what is the true meaning of Batman?

To illustrate the importance that symbolism is its own merit, and not just something to be used for a specific purpose, especially for the cynical purpose of protecting social hierarchy and capitalist infrastructure. Batman & Robin is a deep exploration of the need to bridge the gap between the function of symbolism and its pointlessness. For Batman & Robin, normal reality is the supernatural (unlike in the Nolan movies), which makes the ethos of Batman & Robin to understand the logic of the supernatural being its own creator of symbolism 

Funny, I thought Batman was about one man's mission to use the fear of a lawless vigilante against those that prey on the innocent in the hope of extinguishing crime and bringing social equality to Gotham City.

Batman creator Bob Kanes original, and preferred Batman was a lonely figure, haunted by the injustices of his past. It was Bill Finger that introduced Robin as a means of relating to the audience what his actions were, rather than having him talk to himself. A such any movie featuring Robin moves away from Bob Kanes vision.

As for Batman and Robin...

In Batman Tim Burton cast Billy Dee Williams (Lando Calrissian) as Harvey Dent. Billy was meant to return for Batman returns but was unable to and the character was recast as Max Shreck portrayed by Christopher Walken. It was the accident that killed Max Shreck that was to turn Dent into Two-Face for the sequel. But because his vision could not be realized Tim Burton left after Batman Returns and producer Joel Schumacher took over and turned the sequels into shallow, empty, capitalist cash-ins. These two movies practically murdered the careers of most that starred in them, specifically Val Kilmer and Chris O'Donnell.

While Forever is watchable its sequel is an insult not only to the character and the property of Batman but is also one of the worst movies ever made, something Schwarzenegger fully understood when he accepted the role of Mr. Freeze, which is why he plays the role so camp and cheesy.

If you are going to troll at least make an effort to make it believable rather than spouting insensible rhetoric with absolutely no substance. That way we can all enjoy such ramblings.

Why are you name-calling? I thought this was just a civil conversation

The Nolan films are the pinnacle of DC filmmaking. Every Batman movie between '89 and Batman Begins sucks.

The Nolan films are the mistake of trying to defend ideology, when the Schumacher films are the genius of ideology being the supernatural, and therefore exempt from scrutiny

^You may like B&R, and I can't really do anything to stop you, so why bother? But good luck getting ME to change. I don't look for corny ice puns, bat-nipples, or shoehorning too many villains in a movie. I look for movies with well-developed characters, a compelling storyline, and interesting themes and conflicts.

The story of Batman & Robin is about pain being painless, and all things in the universe having to right to avoid death; the Nolan movies are 2-Dimensional and bankrupt of philosophy by comparison

I'm not saying every Batman movie has to be joyless and depressing like The Dark Knight, but the amount of campiness in the Schumacher abominations is cringey.

The campiness is part of the metaphor that life is gained through equality; the film's motif is to have everything in life subject to the same identity so that pain is avoided equally

The Nolan films gave one of the most in-depth conflicts for Batman: is his existence causing crime in Gotham?

Bane in The Dark Knight Rises was still more comic-accurate than Bane in Batman & Robin.

The theme of Batman having a crisis of identity is normal, but at the same time the story of Batman & Robin is about the supernatural having a crisis of identity. The Dark Knight treats a person's identity as important, whereas Batman & Robin treats human flesh and physical matter as the spiritual

Alright trok, when are you going to end this charade? The pretentious mask is getting tiresome. Funny, but a waste of time.

The nature of Batman & Robin is as has been described; if a movie can negotiate with outside the universe on the behalf of the universe, Batman & Robin is one of a very short list of movies that could probably be that movie

So the answer to my question is, "not any time soon". Just checking.