Why not more Burton's movies after Batman Returns?

[Gonking]

I make this question because yesterday I saw Batman Returns again (after a lot of years) and it has an open ending (catwoman living).

So, is there any reason why Burton and Keaton didn't make anymore Batman movies?

 

[DocLathropBrown]

Warner Bros. had an enormous backlash after Batman Returns was deemed too scary for children. The Soccer Moms threw a fit at McDonald's because the happy meals had toys from "such an awful movie", so McDonald's threw a fit, so WB had to quietly hint at Burton that they didn't want him to do another Batman film.

Burton himself said they were making it plain they wanted him out of the director's chair, but not forcing him out.

Keaton was still on board if he liked the script. Keaton has said he read it, and didn't like it. He met with Schumacher. He told Schumacher what he didn't like about the script, and Schumacher wouldn't budge. Keaton says he actually wanted something similar to what Batman Begins ended up being, a film letting more into Batman's origins, if not an actual prequel.

Anyway, Keaton left over the creative differences, as he saw Forever was going to focus even less on Batman. Warner Bros. next offered Keaton 30 million to come back, but Mike still refused.

Sad, really. Burton/Keaton weren't keen on doing the second one, but once it was done, they both were excited about doing more Batman films, only to be shot down by the Soccer Moms of America.

 

[Gonking]

Warner Bros. had an enormous backlash after Batman Returns was deemed too scary for children. The Soccer Moms threw a fit at McDonald's because the happy meals had toys from "such an awful movie", so McDonald's threw a fit, so WB had to quietly hint at Burton that they didn't want him to do another Batman film.

Burton himself said they were making it plain they wanted him out of the director's chair, but not forcing him out.

Keaton was still on board if he liked the script. Keaton has said he read it, and didn't like it. He met with Schumacher. He told Schumacher what he didn't like about the script, and Schumacher wouldn't budge. Keaton says he actually wanted something similar to what Batman Begins ended up being, a film letting more into Batman's origins, if not an actual prequel.

Anyway, Keaton left over the creative differences, as he saw Forever was going to focus even less on Batman. Warner Bros. next offered Keaton 30 million to come back, but Mike still refused.

Sad, really. Burton/Keaton weren't keen on doing the second one, but once it was done, they both were excited about doing more Batman films, only to be shot down by the Soccer Moms of America.

thanks for the answer .

Warner really f***ed it up. How could they say Batman Returns was "too scary" and now they will make a really insane Joker? They ruined the franchise Completely. As you said, it's really sad. Shame on you Warner.

 

[DocLathropBrown]

thanks for the answer .

Warner really f***ed it up. How could they say Batman Returns was "too scary" and now they will make a really insane Joker? They ruined the franchise Completely. As you said, it's really sad. Shame on you Warner.

It's because Warner Bros. now, finally, gets it. But they only really did something about Burton when McDonald's and the Soccer Moms got on them. They didn't have a problem with the movie BEFORE the whining. And we have to be able to sell the toys, now!

But they now understand that if the films aren't good (Even though I detest Begins, I recognize it was a good film), they won't have a franchise to keep selling toys with. Not to mention the fact that people are more liberal now than in '92, so they can get away with a darker film these days.

Still, I blame the parents who assumed that the film would just be okay for their kids... if it's not rated G, you should probably check it out before your kids see it. Know your kids, y'know? My parents saw Returns before me, and, knowing my limits, let me see it. They knew it would take more than the Penguin biting someone's nose off to make me cry.

 

[Hades]

Burton died of cancer shortly after Returns was released.

R.I.P. Burton.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

thanks for the answer .

Warner really f***ed it up. How could they say Batman Returns was "too scary" and now they will make a really insane Joker? They ruined the franchise Completely. As you said, it's really sad. Shame on you Warner.

First of all, Begins may be a dark movie in some respects, but in terms of actual content it's not especially nasty or violent. No more so than, say, Raiders of the Lost Ark. Whereas Returns contains genuine horror elements. Also, Begins presents Batman as a positive force and Bruce as a more-or-less stable and logical man. Returns shows a Batman who is just as weird, isolated and violent as his enemies.

As much as some fans want to see the most nightmarish Joker possible, it's just not going to happen. Ledger will play the character as sinister, of course, but not horrifying. It won't be much different to Cillian Murphy's Scarecrow.

 

[Gonking]

First of all, Begins may be a dark movie in some respects, but in terms of actual content it's not especially nasty or violent. No more so than, say, Raiders of the Lost Ark. Whereas Returns contains genuine horror elements. Also, Begins presents Batman as a positive force and Bruce as a more-or-less stable and logical man. Returns shows a Batman who is just as weird, isolated and violent as his enemies.

As much as some fans want to see the most nightmarish Joker possible, it's just not going to happen. Ledger will play the character as sinister, of course, but not horrifying. It won't be much different to Cillian Murphy's Scarecrow.

I know it's not going to happen but I want a nasty and violent Batman movie. That would be great for the truly fans and the best for the film. But the money is in the middle and superhero movies will always be commercial films.

 

[Hades]

Burton died of cancer shortly after Returns was released.

R.I.P. Burton.

What the hell. I don't remember writing this.

 

[El Payaso]

That's because you're dead.



R.I.P. Hades





(and of course I am Haley Joel)

 

[batman7289]

i smell a nolan/burtan masterpiece collarboation

 

[DocLathropBrown]

I know it's not going to happen but I want a nasty and violent Batman movie. That would be great for the truly fans and the best for the film. But the money is in the middle and superhero movies will always be commercial films.

Batman isn't supposed to be "nasty and dark". If Batman Returns wasn't a masterpiece in-spite of the grotesqeness, I'd dislike it, a lot. Kane's early Batman had his share of macabre stories, but nothing that wasn't already represented on-screen already in BATMAN. The Joker should not go beyond that, as, really, the Joker in the comics isn't really that much nastier than Nicholson's performance. And if you don't believe me, go back and look at the film... Jack's Joker is very, very nasty. A cold-blooded killer, and he kills in the nastiest ways, like the books. You won't see him killing Robin in the films, but the Joker's standards have already been represented on-screen, going beyond that that was established in BATMAN is overkill, and only an attempt to distance the character from Jack's performance.

Jack's mirth in the role helps people ignore just how evil his Joker really was. It worked that way then (Parents had no problem with the Joker talking to a charred corpse covered in burnt skin, but the Penguin coughing up black goo is worse?!?) People who want the Joker to "make TDK end-up R-rated" need a reality check. The Joker isn't THAT evil. We need a rehash of Jack's turn in the role, only younger. Jack brought us the Joker in full. If you're not going to use the comics for inspiration, you should sure-as-Hell use Jack for reference.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

I know it's not going to happen but I want a nasty and violent. That would be great for the truly fans and the best for the film.

Why?

Why why why why why?

Why do you think that nasty and violent means quality?

Why do you think that Batman should be nasty and violent?

Why do you think Batman comics are nasty and violent? 95% of all Batman comics ever produced are made for a general audience.

Is it because you feel slightly embarassed liking a character most consider for children and think it needs to be nasty and violent to be legitimate entertainment for an adult?

 

[Gonking]

Why?

Why why why why why?

Why do you think that nasty and violent means quality?

Why do you think that Batman should be nasty and violent?

Why do you think Batman comics are nasty and violent? 95% of all Batman comics ever produced are made for a general audience.

Is it because you feel slightly embarassed liking a character most consider for children and think it needs to be nasty and violent to be legitimate entertainment for an adult?

I never said that nasty and violent means quality but it depends on the film. I think any Batman movie should be dark, nasty and violent (not as violent as A Orange Clockwork, but very violent and sinister) because Batman itself is a dark character, the city is dark and the villains are even more darker.
Imagine Sin City, V for Vendetta or Pan's Labyrinth without violence...that would have sucked.

 

[Bat-Hombre]

The Joker is not dark.

 

[CConn]

I never said that nasty and violent means quality but it depends on the film. I think any Batman movie should be dark, nasty and violent (not as violent as A Orange Clockwork, but very violent and sinister) because Batman itself is a dark character, the city is dark and the villains are even more darker.
Imagine Sin City, V for Vendetta or Pan's Labyrinth without violence...that would have sucked.

While I have't seen Pan's Labyrinth, V For Vendetta was hardly more "nasty and violent" than B89 or BB, IMO.

And Sin City is meant to be much, much more violent than Batman is, or should be. Unless you believe Batman begins and ends with The Dark Knight Returns, there's no reason at all why any Batman movie should come anywhere near the violence displayed in Sin City.

 

[Catman]

I never said that nasty and violent means quality but it depends on the film. I think any Batman movie should be dark, nasty and violent (not as violent as A Orange Clockwork, but very violent and sinister) because Batman itself is a dark character, the city is dark and the villains are even more darker.
Imagine Sin City, V for Vendetta or Pan's Labyrinth without violence...that would have sucked.

The movie will be PG-13. End of story. Besides what would an R-rated Batman film accomplish? Batman is for kids too you know! Why should they suffer so you could get your little R-rated movie?! Batman works best as PG-13. Why? Because Batman is for EVERYBODY not a specific age group.

 

[El Payaso]

The movie will be PG-13. End of story. Besides what would an R-rated Batman film accomplish? Batman is for kids too you know! Why should they suffer so you could get your little R-rated movie?! Batman works best as PG-13. Why? Because Batman is for EVERYBODY not a specific age group.

The more Bats is for kids the worse he goes.

 

[Catman]

The more Bats is for kids the worse he goes.

I never said Bats was for kids. I said it was for EVERYBODY which is why PG-13 works best. Batman shouldn't be for an age specific crowd. It should be something everyone could enjoy for different reasons.

 

[Gonking]

The more Bats is for kids the worse he goes.

totally agree

 

[Victarion]

Because of the tasteless soccer moms who can't recognize artistic talent when they see it. If they're so concerned about their kids, why take them to McDonald's, huh? That's some very unhealthy choices on the part of the cadres of mini-van driving preppie soccer moms.

-Morzan

 

[Nepenthes]

TDK should not be PG-13 because soccer moms take their kids to McDonalds.

 

[Bat Attack]

But, I still have McDonalds Batman Returns toys and a happy meal box with the Batman Returns logo on it so they couldn't have ended their marketing tie-in.

 

[Kevin Roegele]

Because of the tasteless soccer moms who can't recognize artistic talent when they see it.

LOL, it's nothing to do with them not liking the film. It's simply that they think it's unsuitable for children when it should be suitable for them, and all ages.

 

[Gonking]

LOL, it's nothing to do with them not liking the film. It's simply that they think it's unsuitable for children when it should be suitable for them, and all ages.

yeah, bring on a new Adam West and Schumacher! lol

the only way to make the greatest batman movie, is doing a Batman movie for adults. Children should watch cartoons...

 

[Catman]

the only way to make the greatest batman movie, is doing a Batman movie for adults. Children should watch cartoons...

Blade is a comic-book character for adults. Batman, Superman, and Spider-Man are for all ages! Are their some Batman comics written specifically for mature audiences? Definitly. Would that make a great HBO tv series or something? But of course! However, if you're doing a big budget full-length feature film than PG-13 is the best way to go.