While technically it is a continuous series from B89 to B&R, there is an obvious change in the look, feel, and general mood from the B89 and Returns films to the Forever and B&R films. This is due to three main factors: 1. Keaton vs Kilmer/Clooney 2. Burton's dark Gotham vs Schumacher's neon tinged Gotham 3. Villains who took thmeselves seriously vs cartoonish villains Anybody who frequents this site knows all of the above. My question is why and how this change from Returns to Forever came about. Any information from anyone would be welcome, and this post can be very general. Some things to get it started: - Why was Keaton not Batman in the third installment? Most likely he declined, but why after the first two were so successful? -Why did Burton stop directing and move to "producer"? His first two films were so beautiful and haunting, perfect for Batman. - What happened to Catwoman? At the end of Returns, her appearance clearly sets up her being in the third movie, and yet her only mention in the movie is a quick (though clever) throwaway line by Nicole Kidman. This is very hard to imagine after watching Returns and how it ends. This is the equivalent of the Joker not being in the Begins sequel (after seeing Gordon's playing card). -Why the change in Gotham city? Why the neon? The frist two films were highly successful, why change something that was working? -Something I did find intereting was the scene with Keaton/Selena in the Mansion and Kilmer/Kidman in the Mansion. It seems to be in the exact same room because of the enormous fireplace in both scenes. In Returns, they are sitting in front of it, in Forever, they are on the side of it. I can only imagine the greatness of Forever if it had been directed by Burton, starring Keaton, and populated by Catwoman and a realistic Joker and Two-Face. What a shame.