Transition from Returns to Forever

[fabman]

english's not my native language

 

[DocLathropBrown]

You guys....you're arguing about Micheal Keaton's height. Come on.

I finished arguing. I got my point across. Unlike most arguments that never get finished, this one did. If people would pay attention to the fact that this thing is over, we might be able to move on...

Getting back on topic: I've definitely got to pick up the BF novel. I've always appreciated the basic storyline of BF. Too bad Schumacher got ahold of the flick.

 

[Mr. Socko]

Actually, Keaton is shorter then Danny Devito. They just digitally made Keaton taller.

 

[El Payaso]

a) Whoa, is there anything CGI can't do
b) Haha?
c) I knew DeVito was big.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

I finished arguing. I got my point across. Unlike most arguments that never get finished, this one did. If people would pay attention to the fact that this thing is over, we might be able to move on...

Excellent.

 

[dude stannis]

I'm still waiting for the Tim Burton TDKR, Band of Brothers style mini series that brings closure to the themes of Returns. It really would make sense to have it follow up on Returns. Think about it. He kills Joker, but he wakes up every morning looking for someone else to pwn, he gets his chance at redeeming himself by saving Selina, no good there. So he gives up being Batman but his life is one big empty void. Then he's Batman again and he does stuff to finally fill that void.

I hated how Batman went from a borderline psychopath to a borderline bisexual. Eleven years on and I'm still bitter at Schumacer.

 

[Mr. Socko]

LOL! I agree with your first paragraph. Laughed at the second.

 

[DocLathropBrown]

Actually, Keaton is shorter then Danny Devito. They just digitally made Keaton taller.

LOL.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

Actually, Keaton is shorter then Danny Devito. They just digitally made Keaton taller.

DeVito actually plays the Tattoed Strong Man, who Batman straps the dynamite to. That's how short Keaton really is, DeVito towers over him.

 

[Thespiralgoeson]

For everyone who hates Schumacher's guts for Batman Forever and B&R, I can't say I blame you. But let's at least be fair. Not all of the blame should lie with him. Schumacher has always claimed to be a devoted Batman fan, and in fact has publicly stated that he always wanted to an adaptation of Year One. The fact is, WB wanted the franchise to be kid friendly, marketable, and basically campy. If Schumacher had refused to go along with the studios wishes, he would've been fired. If he wouldn't make a campy Batman, WB would've found someone else who would have.

So, in that sense, it's really unfair to blame Schumacher for the franchise taking the turn that it did. Schumacher has always been an ambitious filmmaker, preferring risky projects. With Batman Forever, he was presented with an incredible challenge. He had to make a movie edgy enough to appeal to an adult audience, and childish enough to sell a lot of toys, and the movie had to be the biggest blockbuster of the year. While I'm not a fan of Batman Forever myself, I admire Schumacher's accomplishment in making an at least watchable film with many redeeming qualities in spite of WB insisting on doing absolutely EVERYTHING the wrong way.

Batman and Robin is a different story. With Batman Forever, I feel Schumacher tried to make a good film while obeying the studios wishes at the same time. It was a compromise, but still it was a Batman movie. The second time around, however, I think he just didn't even try to make a Batman movie (or even a real movie for that matter), and submitted to WB's every wish and demand to ****e out the franchise for every dollar it was worth via action figures, happy meals, and other various forms of merchandise. B&R was practically a Batman parody. So B&R was a monumental failure, but again, I think the blame lies much more with WB than Schumacher, because I think if he hadn't made marketing and merchandising his top priority, he would've been replaced with someone who would have.

However, what we CAN blame Schumacher for is the nipples on the costumes, and the not so subtle homo-eroticism of the two films. I suppose we could also say that he sold out, basically sacrificing his artistic integrity by obeying WB's wishes to make a film all style and no substance. However, that again leads me back to the belief that we can't really blame Schumacher for the direction the franchise went, because WB wouldn't have it any other way.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

For everyone who hates Schumacher's guts for Batman Forever and B&R, I can't say I blame you. But let's at least be fair. Not all of the blame should lie with him. Schumacher has always claimed to be a devoted Batman fan, and in fact has publicly stated that he always wanted to an adaptation of Year One. The fact is, WB wanted the franchise to be kid friendly, marketable, and basically campy. If Schumacher had refused to go along with the studios wishes, he would've been fired. If he wouldn't make a campy Batman, WB would've found someone else who would have.

Kid friendly does not mean campy.

Warner Bros AT NO POINT asked for...

- Nipples
- A script full of nothing but puns
- Extremely 2D characters
- Blinding neon lights everywhere
- Ass shots
- Heavy homosexual subtext
- Looney Tunes sound effects
- Fight scenes where you can't see anyone getting hit
- General silliness

Yes, Warner Bros wanted Forever lighter than Returns. But they asked Schumacher for more of the same with Batman 4. It was Schumacher who decided not to take it seriously at all.

However, what we CAN blame Schumacher for is the nipples on the costumes, and the not so subtle homo-eroticism of the two films. I suppose we could also say that he sold out, basically sacrificing his artistic integrity by obeying WB's wishes to make a film all style and no substance. However, that again leads me back to the belief that we can't really blame Schumacher for the direction the franchise went, because WB wouldn't have it any other way.

I understand your point, and you are right that Schumacher was certainly restricted in what he could do, and had to keep toy companies and McDonalds happy. However, that is a burden many such blockbusters have to contend with, and does not preclude you from making a good film.

 

[dude stannis]

When WB said "Lighter than Returns", I've been under the impression for years now that they wanted the same tone as the original. Schumacer makes me sick, he gives a half assed apology and subtly tries to throw more blame on Warners than himself. That's how I see it anyway.

 

[Thespiralgoeson]

Kid friendly does not mean campy.

Warner Bros AT NO POINT asked for...

- Nipples
- A script full of nothing but puns
- Extremely 2D characters
- Blinding neon lights everywhere
- Ass shots
- Heavy homosexual subtext
- Looney Tunes sound effects
- Fight scenes where you can't see anyone getting hit
- General silliness

Yes, Warner Bros wanted Forever lighter than Returns. But they asked Schumacher for more of the same with Batman 4. It was Schumacher who decided not to take it seriously at all.

I agree and disagree with you. I agree that kid friendly doesn't mean campy, but I really think WB wanted the general campiness and pushed for it.

understand your point, and you are right that Schumacher was certainly restricted in what he could do, and had to keep toy companies and McDonalds happy. However, that is a burden many such blockbusters have to contend with, and does not preclude you from making a good film.

It doesn't in most cases, but I really think this was an exception. I really think WB was just bound and determined to have a silly, campy, happy meal film both times around. I'm not saying Schumacher isn't responsible for making two lousy movies (one bad with some good qualities, the other just plain horrible) All I'm saying is that I think the franchise was really doomed with or without Schumacher. For all its flaws, there were still a lot of things I liked about Forever, and I think Schumacher did a much better job than most filmmakers would have under the same circumstances. Could've done without the bat-nipples, but oh well, I could still enjoy the film to an extent. B&R however, I won't forgive him for. There's just no excuse for a man as talented and skilled as him to make a film that bad.

 

[ab38416]

bump

 

[Kevin Roegele]

I agree and disagree with you. I agree that kid friendly doesn't mean campy, but I really think WB wanted the general campiness and pushed for it.




It doesn't in most cases, but I really think this was an exception. I really think WB was just bound and determined to have a silly, campy, happy meal film both times around. I'm not saying Schumacher isn't responsible for making two lousy movies (one bad with some good qualities, the other just plain horrible) All I'm saying is that I think the franchise was really doomed with or without Schumacher. For all its flaws, there were still a lot of things I liked about Forever, and I think Schumacher did a much better job than most filmmakers would have under the same circumstances. Could've done without the bat-nipples, but oh well, I could still enjoy the film to an extent. B&R however, I won't forgive him for. There's just no excuse for a man as talented and skilled as him to make a film that bad.

Okay, well we're agreed to a certain extent really.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

''I didn't consider Billy Dee Williams for the role, because I think that he is a hero. I always see him like Clark Gable." - Schumacher on casting Two-Face

That's the point, Joel. Dent is a hero. The other half of him becomes a villain.

 

[ab38416]

edit

 

[Bat Attack]

I like to think they are all in the same continuity but the dramatic style changes between Batman Returns and Batman Forever are hard not to notice that they look like completely different films. Although this was kind of the same with the first one becuase Batman Returns took a bit of departures with its sets (redesigning gotham totally from the ground up, and the giant sculptures were placed prominatley around the set as well.

 

[batman strikes]

How much do we actually know about Tim Burton's Batman 3? Was the story in Batman Forever basically what Tim Burton had in mind, except he wasn't going to include Two-Face? Did Robin Williams and Micky Dolenz really do a screen test for The Riddler, because it dosen't seem unlikely that Tim Burton would go through the trouble if WB didn't want him to return. And finally did the Batchler's meet with Tim Burton before or after Schumacher was hired to direct the movie? These are just the few question I would love to know.

 

[Bat Attack]

There was basically no "Tim Burtons Batman 3". Most things you hear about it are either untrue or just old rumors.

 

[ab38416]

edit

 

[Victarion]

Well...yes. I know I would. Burton never got it right for me. He made okay movies but it wasn't the vision of Batman I ever wanted to see. Nolan has come closer.

And let's take a look at some odds here.

Returns was much more a Tim Burton movie than the first Batman was. He pushed the character further into his Burton fantasy. It would only stand to reason that his follow up movie would have gone even further into Burton's style. That may be fine for fans of morbid, gothic fantasias but it's not fine for me.

Look at most sequel franchises. The first two movies are often the best in any series and then the franchise begins to lose steam. Look at Superman. Look at Alien. Maintaining the quality of a product over the course of a franchise is extremely difficult. And seeing Burton's spotty track record and the fact that he isn't really interested in sequels, I would lean towards the quality of the succeeding movies to diminish.

That was part of the appeal of BR, for myself. Apparently soccer moms didn't warm up to it, though.

 

[mrhayzie]

- Heavy homosexual subtext

can you elaborate on this? i never really got that from watching this movie. i saw it in b&r though.

 

[batman strikes]

I believe Burton met with the Batchler's several times only to discuss how to properly resolve Bruce Wayne's character arc & tie up the loose ends from "Returns". He then met with Schumacher once & that was it. He had nothing to do with the main plot & the other characters.

So all the stuff about The Riddler having a green shaved question mark on his head was all rumors to?

 

[Bat Attack]

I believe Burton met with the Batchler's several times only to discuss how to properly resolve Bruce Wayne's character arc & tie up the loose ends from "Returns". He then met with Schumacher once & that was it. He had nothing to do with the main plot & the other characters.

Yep, thats basically all that happened.