I respect and admire Joel Schumacher.

[Cobblepot]

Lost Boys is also pretty good.

 

[GothamAlleys]

'Client' was my favorite

 

[The Joker]

That was a good one, too. Tommy Lee Jones was in that as well.

 

[GothamAlleys]

Right. And Phone Booth was nice too. Schumacher is a good filmmaker, hes just a terrible Batman movie maker and I think the reason behind it is his dismissing view on Batman and how he views it as "just a Batman movie"

 

[Bathead]

Probably that, but I think it's more that he was told by the suits how they wanted the movie done, and I suspect Joel didn't fight back much, simply because he was really just a hired gun and didn't have an emotional investment in the character. He is a good director, he just probably wasn't the right one for Batman. He deserves some criticism, but the level of hate some fans express is simply over the top and wholly inappropriate.

 

[Majik1387]

I think if he had a decent amount of control, he would have given us good Batman movies. Notice I'm not saying dark or whatever, because as much as that's a big part of Batman, despite what some think, it's not everyone's favorite version of the character, he can be lighter than some try to deny him to be. I think he would have been good for a fun, light-hearted throwback to the 60's series without being dated nor as campy.

So what his mindset is "it's just a Batman movie." If Nolan had that mindset and still gave you BB and TDK, I doubt any reasonable one of you would care that much.

 

[GothamAlleys]

But the difference is that Nolan DIDNT have that dismissive view on Batman and that made ALL the difference. See, Schumacher always repeated "oh oits a Batman movie", and "oh, its a comic book movie, how can someone take it seriously' and grew up with 60s Batman and the TV show. Yet Nolan always liked the character, respected it and treated it as seriously as a heart attack, hence the result we got. He was one of those, according to Schumacher, "silly" people who took comic book movies and Batman seriously

 

[SHADOWBAT69]

as big a Batman fan as I am I dont take any of these Batman movies seriously. Its a movie. There are alot more important things in life than a Batman film.

 

[Majik1387]

But the difference is that Nolan DIDNT have that dismissive view on Batman and that made ALL the difference. See, Schumacher always repeated "oh oits a Batman movie", and "oh, its a comic book movie, how can someone take it seriously' and grew up with 60s Batman and the TV show. Yet Nolan always liked the character, respected it and treated it as seriously as a heart attack, hence the result we got. He was one of those, according to Schumacher, "silly" people who took comic book movies and Batman seriously

To be honest, yeah taking Batman as seriously as some here do, it is silly. Now that's not a negative or anything but come on, it's a fictional character in a comic world.

And just so you know, Ledger didn't care much for comic movies either, yet he still did TDK, not because he was some huge fan of Batman or anything, he felt he knew a good way to portray the character, just like Shumacher with the story and characters in his movies.(with as little control as he had)

 

[Ponyboy]

as big a Batman fan as I am I dont take any of these Batman movies seriously. Its a movie. There are alot more important things in life than a Batman film.

yeah we know that, but that's why this thread is here... to deconstruct the films and have fun being Batman-nerds.

 

[El Payaso]

as big a Batman fan as I am I dont take any of these Batman movies seriously. Its a movie. There are alot more important things in life than a Batman film.

The context is a forum about superheroes. people debate even if the trunks of Superman are okay and why are they okay or not.

Sure, there are things more important, but when a director is making a movie, THAT is his life. At least if the director is good.

To be honest, yeah taking Batman as seriously as some here do, it is silly. Now that's not a negative or anything but come on, it's a fictional character in a comic world.

Actors make fiction, directors, artists. Leonardo's Gioconda is just a painting, Michelangelo's David is just a statue, Shakespeare's Hamlet is just a fictional story.

Being fictional doesn't make anything silly, unimportant or dispensable. Characters in comics are no different than characters in literature. If you can take the latter ones seriously, there's nothing that stops you from taking the former ones the same way.

And just so you know, Ledger didn't care much for comic movies either, yet he still did TDK, not because he was some huge fan of Batman or anything, he felt he knew a good way to portray the character,

Which proves you that taking a comic book character seriously is not silly as you said.

Ledger did everything, he went to live in a room alone for 2 months. Other guy would say 'what a silly man. All he had to do was putting the make-up on and collect his check."

But thank God some people take these characters seriosuly and don't consider that attitude "silly."

just like Shumacher with the story and characters in his movies.(with as little control as he had)

No. Schumacher didn't do the same as Ledger. He just relaxed and did some easy pop corn movie that could make enough money. Period.

 

[GothamAlleys]

as big a Batman fan as I am I dont take any of these Batman movies seriously. Its a movie. There are alot more important things in life than a Batman film.

Thats not the kind of serious I meant. Seriously meaning not thinking of the character and the mythology as something silly and for kids, but rather approach the material with unbiased eye and present an adult and compelling drama, which is what Nolan did. Burton also treated it seriously, and looked at it as dramatic opera about tarnished souls, at the same time adding bits of his surreal camp


El Payaso's last response is pretty spot on

 

[Two-Face]

Joel Schumacher did what WB wanted him to do. A kid friendly movie which is pretty good worked for Batman Forever Batman & Robin.

 

[GothamAlleys]

Joel Schumacher did what WB wanted him to do. A kid friendly movie which is pretty good worked for Batman Forever Batman & Robin.

But the look, feel and design and leading the actors comes from him. And he was the one pitching for taking 60s and the TV show as the source material for this movie. Plus I doubt it was WB that told him to put a sculpted phallus on Bane's chest - I still dont know how that passed

 

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

Too bad good ol Joels directing career has gone down the toilet since he mad B&R hes making dtv films now and theyre awful, anyone see Blood Creek?

 

[GothamAlleys]

Well Phone Booth was good

 

[Majik1387]

I don't recall Phantom of the Opera flopping.

And The Number 23 and Twelve are underappreciated.

 

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

Those may be the last films hes done in the last ten years that have even been in a mainstream theater release.

 

[Majik1387]

So what? Before Avatar, when was James Cameron's last theatrical release? Titanic.

And no, I'm not trying to compare Cameron and Schumachers directing abilities, but people here truly are over-exaggerating by trying to say Joel is some sort of box-office poison.

 

[DaRkVeNgeanCe]

Never said he was poison just stating the facts. Camerons absence from filmaking was becausr of personal problems And supposedly working on avatar where as Shumacher continued to make films which eventually led him to the dtv route.

Im not a Schumacher basher or hater, but i do see his directing abilities to have diminished A bit, After watching Blood Creek a horror film ( a genre he is familiar with considering Lost Boys is a classic ) and it being so poorly directed i sort of stopped caring for his work.

 

[TX85]

That was a great read about him,He wasn't nearly 100% to blame But still had plenty of faults,However I've always thought he was a good director and I've always thought BF was underrated as well as even B&R to an extend!!

I of course like many also feel they were the weakest Bat films.....But I still see Batman from the comics in them cause Bruce/Batman was not always a dark character and yes some of the designs&characters were off But I still feel they were like Batman comic issues&cartoon episodes come to life!!(silly&random ones But Batman non the less)

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

BTAS was at its prime while Schumacher was doing Batman but he completely ignores it and does his glo sticks and plastic nipple crap.

Screw him. He had no respect for the source material or the fans. He thinks comic books are nothing but jokes.

 

[christpunchers]

Hey, you GOTTA respect the man, even just a little. He got paid millions to put nipples on the batsuit. That fact alone deserves something.

 

[Mister Meddle]

No hard feelings at all. I liked the Burton-two and the Animated Series much more when I was a kid however I somewhat enjoyed Batman Forever. I really don't know what happened but my interest in Batman completely died out about a year later, this was before Batman & Robin. I did see it at the movies but I really didn't care to see it at the time. The only reason I went was because my 5 year old step brother bought into the Warner Brothers marketing scheme for their action figures at the time. I don't blame him because Kenner sure as hell made quality figures. I think I only watched the movie about two times since then yet I still remember everything because it was full of WTF moments.

Unlike some people, I didn't lose sleep over Batman & Robin's craptacular crapfest.

 

[Victarion]

I give him credit for the Alfred subplot in B&R. Watching those scenes with the rest of the movie is almost like watching two separate films. Tsundere Riddler was a good idea too. I just felt Jim was too easily recognized in the role.