Did anyone se Batman Returns in theaters?

Did anybody get the feeling that they were burned out after Batman Returns? I mean for me I'm still a Batman fan but back then it was all about X-Men, Spider-Man and Image comics that for awhile there I stopped buying Batman comics until the Knightfall saga of course.

I wasn't a fan of the gaudy, garish Marvel and Image comics of the '90s and DC's broken backed Batman: Knightfall/Knightquest crossover event in the regular Batman titles turned me off from the start as a cheap gimmicky ploy to temporally boost sales. The trend of long character shattering crossover events about Batman getting his back broken and Superman dieing didn't interest me. I didn't find those fun at all. Back in 1992 for me it was all about Doug Moench/Kelley Jones' Elseworlds Batman & Dracula: Red Rain, Neil Gaiman/Jill Thompson's Sandman, Keith Giffen/Alan Grant/Simon Bisley's Lobo's Back, Grant Morrison/Richard Case's Doom Patrol and Frank Miller's Sin City in Dark Horse Presents.
 
I wasn't a fan of the gaudy, garish Marvel and Image comics of the '90s and DC's broken backed Batman: Knightfall/Knightquest crossover event in the regular Batman titles turned me off from the start as a cheap gimmicky ploy to temporally boost sales. The trend of long character shattering crossover events about Batman getting his back broken and Superman dieing didn't interest me. I didn't find those fun at all. Back in 1992 for me it was all about Doug Moench/Kelley Jones' Elseworlds Batman & Dracula: Red Rain, Neil Gaiman/Jill Thompson's Sandman, Keith Giffen/Alan Grant/Simon Bisley's Lobo's Back, Grant Morrison/Richard Case's Doom Patrol and Frank Miller's Sin City in Dark Horse Presents.

So you're going to act like Grant and Breyfogle's BATMAN run wasn't still going on in 1992? did you forget that those 2 also launched Shadow of the Bat that same year? I mean as I said before initially Knighfall left me dry but it also started in 1993. Let's not act like the regular Batman books weren't in a really good place back in 1992 either.
 
Yeah I actually saw it twice. I had a thing for Catwoman/Pheiffer at the time. :hrt:

I also saw B89 in theatres.
 
one thing i distinctly remember....

while B89 merchandise sold like crazy,and was sold out all over ( even the crappy Toy Biz figures) , BR stuff was easy to find,and apparently didn't sell as well (at least around here)....no poster stealing, shirts and hats were easy to find,as were the toys ( even the "Hard to find" Catwoman and Robin i got on the pegs at the local K-B Toys)....whether that was due to the more adult/crazy feel of the film that turned some off, it's less than stellar box-office compared to the first,or all the merchandise companies being better prepared this time and manufacturing more than enough,i don't know....
 
So you're going to act like Grant and Breyfogle's BATMAN run wasn't still going on in 1992? did you forget that those 2 also launched Shadow of the Bat that same year? I mean as I said before initially Knighfall left me dry but it also started in 1993. Let's not act like the regular Batman books weren't in a really good place back in 1992 either.

I'm not going to act like I loved Alan Grant and Norm Breyfogle's run by 1992. I was burned out on Alan Grant and Norm Breyfogle's long run by 1992, I wasn't impressed with Shadow of the Bat and I was disappointed by the quality of art Jim Aparo was providing in 1992, which hindered my enjoyment of Doug Moench's Batman run. I enjoyed Doug Moench's Batman #485 (1992) "Faces of Death" which Tom Grindberg illustrated. As I said, back in 1992, for me, it was it was all about Doug Moench and Kelley Jones' Elseworlds Batman & Dracula: Red Rain, that was my favorite Batman comic book of the year. I stated my views on Knightfall because Knightfall had been brought up. The Death of Superman started in 1992, Knightfall started in 1993, on February 16th, 1993 to be exact. This is from DC Direct Currents #61:
imgqs.jpg

img0001dl.jpg
 
Last edited:
I'm not going to act like I loved Alan Grant and Norm Breyfogle's run by 1992. I was burned out on Alan Grant and Norm Breyfogle's long run by 1992, I wasn't impressed with Shadow of the Bat

Oh ok that's more understandable. I quite liked it myself but yeah I won't front like it wasn't a drop off from the quality of their 'tec run.

I enjoyed Doug Moench's Batman #485 (1992) "Faces of Death" which Tom Grindberg illustrated.

That was one of my favorite Black Mask issues. I'm curious did you get to read Moench and Jones' post-Knightfall run in the regular continuity? if so what'd you think? I've always felt it was one of the most unique and under appreciated runs in the character's history myself. I loved how they amplified the gothic aspects of it all without hindering the detective aspect but I know some people hated that run. Mostly cause they were too shallow and couldn't appreciate Jones' one of a kind Batman interpretation.
 
That was one of my favorite Black Mask issues.

One of mine, too, and I enjoyed the conflict Doug Moench provided between Jim, Sarah and Batman over the controversy of Batman's vigilantism and I loved the fog infested look and the architecture of Gotham City Tom Grindberg provided in that issue.
img0005bv.jpg

Since this is a Batman Returns thread, I'll post the back cover :woot::
img0006dj.jpg


I'm curious did you get to read Moench and Jones' post-Knightfall run in the regular continuity? if so what'd you think? I've always felt it was one of the most unique and under appreciated runs in the character's history myself. I loved how they amplified the gothic aspects of it all without hindering the detective aspect but I know some people hated that run. Mostly cause they were too shallow and couldn't appreciate Jones' one of a kind Batman interpretation.
Yeah, I loved the 1995 to 1998 Doug Moench and Kelley Jones' Batman run in the then-regular DC Universe continuity. Denny O'Neil did away with crossover events in the Bat-titles for the most part during the Moench/Jones run as well as year long story-lines, which can alienate potential new readers and even turn off the most devoted fans. Doug Moench provided readers with of a variety of storylines by writing short stories, thus making the books much more accessible to new readers again. Most stories ran no longer than three issues and there are many single-issue stories, getting actual and complete stories in an issue rather than mere pieces of year long mega-events. A refreshing change from the usual stuff in the comics today. The result was a wide variety of stories: including Batman and Deadman traveling to Peru pursuing criminals from Gotham and confronted by Inca mummies, Joker studding demonology, the occult, alchemy, and conjuring up the Demon Etrigan, Batman hunting Killer Croc to Louisiana and meeting Swamp Thing who doesn't want Croc to go back to Gotham, the Spectre in Gotham sticking his ectoplasmic nose into Batman's business - and right through the stalactite-spiked ceiling of the Batcave - to demand punishment (of a capital kind), Ragman in Gotham killing neo-Nazi skinheads. There is also refreshing humor in the subplots with the resurrection of Bruce Wayne's personal life as Bruce had a daylight affair with a woman in the comics again (Vasper Fairchild). Kelley Jones' art was so atmospheric and creative that he had the ability to make the most routine moments that would be visually dull by a lesser artist, look visually striking. And I loved how he had Batman driving that classic Golden Age Batmobile.
img0004he.jpg
 
Last edited:
I have that Black Mask issue with the Penguin advertisement on the back cover :up:

Doug Moench is one of the best writers Batman ever had.
 
One of mine, too, and I enjoyed the conflict Doug Moench proved between Jim, Sarah and Batman over the controversy of Batman's vigilantism and I loved the fog infested look and the architecture of Gotham City Tom Grindberg provided in that issue.
img0005bv.jpg

Since this is a Batman Returns thread, I'll post the back cover :woot::
img0006dj.jpg

Your previous post actually inspired me to look through my long boxes and pull out some of my favorites from that era for a well deserved re-read after all these years :woot:

I love the cover of that issue to death. The perspective composition is just gorgeous and so inspiring to look at.

33yibcw.jpg



Yeah, I loved the 1995 to 1998 Doug Moench and Kelley Jones' Batman run in the then-regular DC Universe continuity. Denny O'Neil did away with crossover events in the Bat-titles for the most part during the Moench/Jones run as well as year long story-lines, which can alienate potential new readers and even turn off the most devoted fans. Doug Moench provided readers with of a variety of storylines by writing short stories, thus making the books much more accessible to new readers again. Most stories ran no longer than three issues and there are many single-issue stories, getting actual and complete stories in an issue rather than mere pieces of year long mega-events. A refreshing change from the usual stuff in the comics today. The result was a wide variety of stories: including Batman and Deadman traveling to Peru pursuing criminals from Gotham and confronted by Inca mummies, Joker studding demonology, the occult, alchemy, and conjuring up the Demon Etrigan, Batman hunting Killer Croc to Louisiana and meeting Swamp Thing who doesn't want Croc to go back to Gotham, the Spectre in Gotham sticking his ectoplasmic nose into Batman's business - and right through the stalactite-spiked ceiling of the Batcave - to demand punishment (of a capital kind), Ragman in Gotham killing neo-Nazi skinheads. There is also refreshing humor in the subplots with the resurrection of Bruce Wayne's personal life as Bruce had a daylight affair with a woman in the comics again (Vasper Fairchild). Kelley Jones' art was so atmospheric and creative that he had the ability to make the most routine moments that would be visually dull by a lesser art, look visually striking. And I loved how he had Batman driving that classic Golden Age Batmobile.
img0004he.jpg

The Swamp Thing 2 parter you mentioned is another one I pulled out of the box to re-read again

153wjvb.jpg


I just read Batman #8 today (the latest vol. not the golden age one) and man even though it's not all that bad the decompression really killed me at times. I miss the days where you could find solid one and dones within that title. A lot of the single issues from Moench in those days were just really really good.

I read the issue that comes before that Swamp Thing/Croc story (Batman #520) with my coffee this morning for example. I remember that being the first time that I really felt for Harvey Bullock as a character and that was back when I was 11 but now re-reading it as an adult it had even greater resonance. So much great emotional development for the Gotham characters in that run by Moench.

I have sold off hundreds of the Batman comics I have bought since 1988 through the years on auction sites (including the complete Knightfall and No Man's Land sagas) but Moench's run from the mid 90's with Jones and others is a part of my childhood I could never ever part away with. It's as precious to me as the Grant/Breyfogle run and truly a Bat run that deserves a proper collection one day so that more modern day readers could really take a look at all the greatness that they missed out on.
 
Last edited:
Your previous post actually inspired me to look through my long boxes and pull out some of my favorites from that era for a well deserved re-read after all these years :woot:

I love the cover of that issue to death. The perspective composition is just gorgeous and so inspiring to look at.

Yeah, that's a great cover by Micheal Golden, I remember wanting him to draw the entire issues in the early '90s instead of just being the cover artist.

The Swamp Thing 2 parter you mentioned is another one I pulled out of the box to re-read again.

I just read Batman #8 today (the latest vol. not the golden age one) and man even though it's not all that bad the decompression really killed me at times. I miss the days where you could find solid one and dones within that title. A lot of the single issues from Moench in those days were just really really good.

I read the issue that comes before that Swamp Thing/Croc story (Batman #520) with my coffee this morning for example. I remember that being the first time that I really felt for Harvey Bullock as a character and that was back when I was 11 but now re-reading it as an adult it had even greater resonance. So much great emotional development for the Gotham characters in that run by Moench.

I have sold off hundreds of the Batman comics I have bought since 1988 through the years on auction sites (including the complete Knightfall and No Man's Land sagas) but Moench's run from the mid 90's with Jones and others is a part of my childhood I could never ever part away with. It's as precious to me as the Grant/Breyfogle run and truly a Bat run that deserves a proper collection one day so that more modern day readers could really take a look at all the greatness that they missed out on.

I was 11 in 1978 during the Steve Englehart/Marshall Rogers run, I was in my 20s during the Doug Moench/Kelley Jones run, so it's not a part of my childhood nostalgia. It's the kind of run I'd wanted to see on the Batman title since the '80s to follow up Frank Miller/David Mazzucchelli's Batman: Year One instead of the Max Allan Collins/Chris Warner/Ross Andru/Dave Cockrum run which I found rather dull.
What you said about the memorable lasting greatness of the Doug Moench/Kelley Jones run reminded me of this Kelley Jones interview: "I'm much more concerned with their opinion (the readers), infinitely more concerned with their opinion than anyone else because that's the guy who's keeping you afloat. That's the guy who makes it worthwhile when you go, 'I'm so tired I cannot see straight' and you sit down and do, you know, put the extra oomph into a page, because it's going to last forever. And as it was for me, it can be no different for them. I go back and look at things and I'm completely swept away again and you hope to get the same thing going, rather than someone saying 'How much is this worth?'"
http://www.comic-art.com/intervws/jonesiii.htm

Yeah, I like a satisfying full story with some real substance in each issue of a comic book rather than mere pieces of one gimmicky story event that lasts a year. My favorite Batman story is a short one-issue story called "There Is No Hope In Crime Alley" by Denny O'Neil featuring Batman fighting real world street crimes, muggings, robberies, helping elderly people and flashing back to his parents murder. It's a short simple story, and a touching one with emotional impact. Some series manage to have short satisfying story-lines in each issue within a continuing story. Steve Niles/Kelley Jones' Batman: Gotham After Midnight had short storylines with a continuing story subplot within a 12 issue series. Each issue had a singular, encapsulated story—with each featuring a different Batman villain—but there was the structure of an over-arc to the entirety of the book. A different villain—each two to three issues had a slight mini-arc to them with one overriding story over the entire 12 issues. Steve Niles said about Batman: Gotham After Midnight, "I really want this to be the kind of Batman book that, if by some chance somebody who isn’t that familiar with the character in the comics wants to pick up a Batman comic, these folks could pick up issue #3 and get a story. And then, hopefully, they’ll want to go back and get #1 and 2 and then go back and get #4 when it comes out. Some of the current attitudes for writing comics are a little more geared towards the writing of something like a television show like Lost than actual comic books themselves. Lost, to me, is a soap opera—and in soap operas they stretch things out. I just think the trend of long, slow stories doesn’t interest me. I think shorter stories leads to more enjoyment per comic book—when you look at a story that is part three of twelve—you are getting less of an issue of the comic book. And I’ve had editors call me and say, “Are you sure you want to do this? We could spread this out over a couple of issues…” and I’d much rather just pack this thing and really not stretch the reader out. If I can give readers something that doesn’t stretch a short story out—something with some real substance—in a twelve issue series, I’m going to be really happy."

This discussion is more appropriate for the Batman Comics board. This has drifted way off the topic of the Batman Returns movie.
 
Last edited:
I did. Felt drained and disappointed, with the exception of Pfeiffer's great Catwoman.

B&R is the only one I didn't see in theaters.

EDIT: Christ, I already posted in here months ago. :doh:
 
Last edited:
Oh wow. IIRC I had the Bruce and Selina one. Burger King, right?

No, McDonald's, including Happy Meal toys, which was very controversal.
NBC reporter Faith Daniels devoted the July 3, 1992 episode of her daily talk show, A Closer Look With Faith Daniels, which aired on NBC at 12 pm, to ''Parents Against Batman Returns.'' Faith Daniels, who refused to take her 5-year-old son to see the movie, said ''It's fine to make Batman Returns an adult film, but don't market it to kids. It's rated PG-13, but who's buying the action toys? Not 13-year-olds.'' The Los Angeles Times published letters that protested ''one violent image after another.'' ''Has McDonald's no conscience?'' another letter asked. Meanwhile, the Michigan-based Dove Foundation, a nonsectarian Christian organization, has protested the McDonald's Happy Meal promotion, designed for children 1 to 10. ''Parents trust McDonald's,'' says a Dove spokesman. ''So why is McDonald's promoting a movie to little kids that's filled with gratuitous graphic violence?''

This caused McDonald's to claim that the Batman Returns toys they were selling were not promotion for the movie at all. McDonald's spokeswoman Rebecca Caruso said, ''The objective of the (Happy Meal) program was to allow young people to experience the fun of Batman the character. It was not designed to promote attendance at the movie. It was certainly not our intent to confuse parents or disappoint children.''

Warner Brothers also claimed that the McDonald's Happy Meal promotion wasn't tied to the movie but to the Batman character. ''We were careful not to provide actual toys from the movie,'' says a Warner spokeswoman. She insists that Batman Returns is rated responsibly. ''Clearly Batman Returns is not meant for 5-year-olds. As for whether it's appropriate to Happy Meals, that's up to McDonald's. We don't tell them their business.''
http://www.ew.com/ew/article/0,,311012,00.html
McDonald's was clearly promoting the film Batman Returns:
returnscoupons.jpg

0a1a002big.jpg

And the Happy Meal toys are clearly promoting Batman Returns featuring the films version of the Batmobile and Batman in the Batmissile from Batman Returns and the Penguin in a yellow vehicle, even showing that spiral umbrella from Batman Returns which Max Shreck said "What is that suppose to do? Hypnotize me?":
40167150427096469be.jpg

McDonald's issued a written apology to the Dove Foundation, a non-sectarian organization, that charged McDonald's with promoting Batman Returns as an acceptable movie for children. "The object of our Happy Meal program was to simply allow young people to experience the fun associated with the character Batman," Jack Daly, McDonald's communications vice president, said in a prepared release. "It was not designed to promote attendance at the movie or to take the place of parents using their best judgment regarding which movies their children are allowed to see."

"We think McDonald's was culpable in the fact that the figurines they packed in the Happy Meals were advertised as safe for children 1 years old and up, and they were designed to promote a movie created for viewers 13 years of age and over," explained Richard Rolfe, managing director of the Dove Foundation. Dove characterizes itself as a foundation that previews and identifies movies that adhere to accepted Judeo-Christian values.

"McDonald's has historically had Happy Meal premium tie-ins with more benign films, like those of Disney," said Pat Broeske, a correspondent for Entertainment Weekly magazine. "Parents who saw the TV ads most likely figured if McDonald's was involved, it was acceptable for children. McDonald's is looked upon as someone they can trust."

Because of the controversy and protests McDonald's stopped selling Batman Returns merchandise prematurely. The McDonald's representative said the national advertising schedule for McDonald's-Batman Returns ended on July 2, 1992.
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m3190/is_n29_v26/ai_12477873/
 
I still find "bad parenting" to be the culprit on that one. Anyone in their right mind would know (after seeing the first Batman film) that the movies were violent and dark. If they hadn't seen the first movie, then they sure as hell couldn't miss the fact that it was rated PG-13. :doh:

As far as the McDonalds promotion... I don't see "GO SEE THE NEW BATMAN MOVIE IN THEATRES" plastered on any of those products. There was some truth to the fact that Warners said they weren't advertising the movie itself. One could easily argue that since "Batman Returns" was printed on the McDonalds products, that they were indeed an advertisement for the movie. Common sense says they are tied to one another. However, that does not excuse brainless parents who put the blame on McDonalds after they brought their children to a mature film.
 
I'm just finding it hard to believe ''Kids were screaming and crying in cinemas''...

The movie affected me... in a good way. It's not that scary or intense at all.

Maybe I was just a weird kid. :woot:
 
^I was 13 when I saw it, so right at the "right" age group I guess. I don't remember being frightened by any of it. My younger sister was there with me (she would've been 8 or 9 then) and she wasn't freaked out either. I suppose what you had was a handful of 4-6 year olds wigging out and causing the bad press. Again, that goes back to muppet-headed parents who had no business bringing a child into a PG-13 film... regardless of it being Batman or not.
 
my 8 year old saw it on DVD,and it didn't bother him at all.....
 
McDonald's was clearly promoting Batman Returns. If they were not then they wouldn't have plastered Batman Returns on their menus, wouldn't have had a life-size standy of Micheal Keaton from Batman Returns, wouldn't have sold Batman Returns cups and Happy Meals featuring toys of the Batman Returns Batmobile and Batman in the Batmissile from Batman Returns and the Penguin in a yellow vehicle, even showing that spiral umbrella from Batman Returns, and a Catwoman toy, but no Joker or Robin toys, since they aren't in Batman Returns.
McDonald's shouldn't have been promoting the film to young children with Batman Returns toys in Happy Meals in the first place because it's not a film aimed for little kids. As Tim Burton said about the Penguin in Batman Returns, "He doesn't really fit into the Happy Meal mode."
http://www.empireonline.com/features/wonderful-world-of-tim-burton/5.asp
Michael Keaton also wondered aloud if the movie was suitable for his (then) nine-year-old son, Sean. "There's a couple of things in it he doesn't need to see," he said. "And it's a tad too twisted for young, young kids--five- or six-year-olds."
http://www.timburtoncollective.com/articles/br5.html
Other than the Happy Meal promotion, Warner Brothers and McDonald's should have defended Batman Returns and their Batman Returns promotion in the name of freedom rather than cowardly suppressing and turning their backs on what some found offensive. They shouldn't be so terrified of controversy. You cannot be afraid that someone dislikes something. That thinking makes things banned, censored, mediocre, generic, dull.
 
Last edited:
^ I only said there was some truth to what Warner Bros said about "not advertising" the movie. They were kinda smart there. There is no "directed by Tim Burton"... there is no "In theatres on June 19"... there is no "WB logo" on anything.

That said, it clearly is (from a visual standpoint) representing the movie. I'm just showing both sides of the coin here. But that does not excuse parents responsibility, regardless of the fact that McDonalds "shouldn't" have been marketing toys for such a mature film. Would it have been any less appropriate if Burger King or Taco Bell had done so? Likely not.
 
Taco Bell did it for the first movie. I remember that they also had cups.
 
well,to be fair,the first film was marketed the hell out of for kids as well, toys,dolls,costumes,etc.

McDonalds basically went with that, looked at it as "BATMAN" ,therefore a comic book movie,therefore "safe" for kids...i have no doubt NONE of the McD's executives saw the film before signing the deal,looked at dailies,read a script, ANYTHING to give them an idea that it would be darker and not intended for the under 13 set. they saw "BATMAN" and thought,hey! good to go!
 
I remember being a kid one night and being afraid that Penguin and Catwoman would kidnap me. Other than that one time, the movie never bothered me.
 
I'll tell you one movie that scared the crap out of me as a kid... Edward Scissorhands.

That film left a powerful impression on me as a 5 year old. I used to have nightmares about Edward.

But its in my top five fav movies of all time now. Funny how things work out. :woot:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"