Another big disapointment of 1997, the fourth "Batman" movie is a total mess. How bad is it? when I went to see it all the middle rows were booked out by seven and eight year olds, (I had to sit in the aisle, something I really hate). Their parents were nearly all asleep half way during the movie, and even I was bored, and I was 12. The plot (a very thin one, by the way), consists of Mr. Freeze (Arnie) trying to take over Gotham City so he can cure his wife, who is put on ice until he can find a way to cure her. And the only person who can stop him is...Batman, right? No actually, it's Batman and Robin. No, it's Batman, Robin, and Batgirl. Oh please, in the first two movies, Batman didn't have a sidekick -- now he's got two. Freeze has a sidekick, as well Posion Ivy, who controls man-plants. (Don't get me started on the stupidness of that. So it's based on a comic book -- it still should be realistic).

Batman has changed again to the face of George Clooney. Why don't they bring back Keaton? He's the best Batman. And the film wouldn't probably would be good if Burton was directing it. So what if parents complain that his films were too dark? They were the best, and Joel Schumacher's "comic book" versions were just plain terrible.

Overall, it is pretty bad. The dialogue, acting, direction, and sets look to much like something from a cartoon. The Oscar-winning (two words that won't go near this film) sets in the first film were the brilliant.

So the critics were right. This stinks, and the way the box-office received this, hopes for the series to end are quite high.