Hot Toys Announce Batman Returns License

[Bustajesse]

Even as a kid I never took Batman Forever or Batman & Robin as sequels to the Burton films.

 

[sallah]

Even as a kid I never took Batman Forever or Batman & Robin as sequels to the Burton films.

Agreed. Well, I was almost an adult (17) when Forever hit... But the minute I watched it, I categorized it as basically a re-start for the franchise, with a whole different feel and take on the character. Outside of the actors playing Alfred and Gordon and possible a line of dialogue here and there, almost nothing in the film ties it directly to the Burton films for me.

All this separation stuff being said... I would buy Hot Toys versions of Carrey's Riddler and O'Donnell's Robin suit from Forever in a heartbeat. But they can't even seem to get Returns stuff out!

Sallah

 

[DGTWoodward]

Agreed. Well, I was almost an adult (17) when Forever hit... But the minute I watched it, I categorized it as basically a re-start for the franchise, with a whole different feel and take on the character. Outside of the actors playing Alfred and Gordon and possible a line of dialogue here and there, almost nothing in the film ties it directly to the Burton films for me.

Sallah

But that is your perception, mate. Could I see the the differences, of course I could as they stuck out like a sore thumb, but I still did not perceive it as a reboot of any kind, soft or otherwise.

And despite what may have been said afterwards, or over a producer's desk...they were sold as direct sequels to the rest of the world at large.

All this separation stuff being said... I would buy Hot Toys versions of Carrey's Riddler and O'Donnell's Robin suit from Forever in a heartbeat.

Me too! As well as the Nightwing style Robin outfit from B&R, and once again I say just how KER-OOL would 1:6 Arhrnult Mr Freeze would be by HT, all silver with blue lights in strategic places. In fact, I'd be in for a Bane, a Two-Face and a Poison Ivy too!

 

[sallah]

But that is your perception, mate. Could I see the the differences, of course I could as they stuck out like a sore thumb, but I still did not perceive it as a reboot of any kind, soft or otherwise.

And despite what may have been said afterwards, or over a producer's desk...they were sold as direct sequels to the rest of the world at large.

...which made complete sense in the days before "reboot" was really a thing in Hollywood. Had "Forever" happened today instead of 1995? I think without a doubt it would have been labeled as a reboot of the franchise. Back then though? Rebooting a franchise and taking it in a different direction after 3 years wasn't heard of. Today? Sure. But back then, the MO was to label things as sequels... regardless of how distant they were from the original vision (Halloween 3 anyone?).

This is all opinion of course... but they will always be separate to me. Different director, different vision, different takes on Batman.

Sallah

 

[DGTWoodward]

...which made complete sense in the days before "reboot" was really a thing in Hollywood. Had "Forever" happened today instead of 1995? I think without a doubt it would have been labeled as a reboot of the franchise.

This is all opinion of course... but they will always be separate to me. Different director, different vision, different takes on Batman.

Sallah

Now on that we agree! Yes it would have been a big thing too! Nowadays the term reboot is used so often, with results being so mixed and all, that I alway imagine hearing an enormous moan from cinema folks up and down the streets "OooooooooooohNooooooooooo!" All in unison!

 

[DarkMagic]

Superman Returns was a soft reboot too, right?

 

[a-dev]

Superman Returns was a soft reboot too, right?

It kept Superman The Movie and Superman II as a ''vague history'' I think was the phrase they used at the time.

 

[Double J]

They are the same series. Just because its different directors doesn't matter. Look at the Fast an Furious franchise for example. 6 movies. 3 different directors. But yet they all go together . Even Tokyo Drift. Lol

 

[DarkMagic]

It kept Superman The Movie and Superman II as a ''vague history'' I think was the phrase they used at the time.

Exactly. One could easily connect Batman Forever to Batman Returns and Batman '89 this way....Chase Meridian's reference to having to dress specifically like Pfeiffer's Catwoman (and not like any other incarnation of the character up to that time) to get Batman's attention "You like strong women. I’ve done my homework. Or do I need skin-tight vinyl and a whip?", and Kilmer's Bruce Wayne making a clear reference to killing the Joker to avenge his parents when he's trying to convince Robin that killing Harvey won't help. "You make the kill, but your pain doesn't die with Harvey, it grows....yada yada yada...revenge has become your whole life, and you won't know why."..."You don't understand, your family wasn't killed by a maniac"..."Yes they were."

There is so much more tying Batman Forever to the two films that came before it, on a deeper thematic level than just "Alfred and Gordon were played by the same actors"....or even Chase's specific reference to Catwoman. And it's even more important than the superficial things that divide the movies. The costumes, props, set design, and yes, even actors in the lead and supporting roles can be overlooked to an extent--as DGTWoodward said:

Yes things look, artistically, vastly different in BF and B&R, but then if you want to use that argument you'd have to separate BATMAN from RETURNS anyway.

The conversations between Bruce and D i c k are what ties BF to B89 and BR. Beyond the fact that Alfred and Gordon were played by the same actors. Beyond the fact that Chase referenced Catwoman. Beyond Schumacher's visual style, his "vision" (not visual) for the character was that he could grow...not necessarily to "get over" the pain that drives him, but to reach a point that he could effectively mentor Robin who was going through the same thing he went through and try to spare him the obsessiveness that his own life has become.

 

[kl241]

It's like the Alien movies. Different films by different directors with a different interpretation and vision. Sure, you could say that there is some kind of continuity (Ripley) that ties them all together but I prefer to look at each film as a distinctly different vision and interpretation of the character.

 

[RIDDICK]

It's like the Alien movies. Different films by different directors with a different interpretation and vision. Sure, you could say that there is some kind of continuity (Ripley) that ties them all together but I prefer to look at each film as a distinctly different vision and interpretation of the character.

 

[Burning Saber]

Wasn't Keeton supposed to do Forever but backed out before filming, necessitating the recast of Kilmer? That isn't really much of a reboot, soft or otherwise. Whether you liked the vision of Schumaker or not, it would be hard to deny that the first four films take place in the same film continuity and are certainly sequels to the original '89 film. That WB itself began floating around the idea of rebooting the franchise a couple of years after the disastrous Batman & Robin would also seem to support they where intended as one continuous series of films.

 

[vodoun]

It was never meant to be "BATMAN II". There was actually a script to that and it picked up right after where the first film left . . . and it was terrible. Robin was in it, Vicki was back, Penguin was completely different and one-dimensional, and Catwoman was disgusting. The plot was about treasure being under Wayne Manor in the Batcave. Like Indiana Jones meets Batman.



Batman Returns was/is a much better story and film. Yeah, it's ****ing weird, but a good kind of weird. It's nothing like the crap Burton churns out now a days. And hey, the world might be different from the first film and bizarre, but atleast Bruce/Batman is pretty much unchanged and the only absolute in that world. He's the same guy we meet in the first film thrust into this crazy, macabre world where Halloween meets Christmas. I love that "WTF did I just see" look he has on his face when he's riding through the sewers and sees one of the Penguin commandos. Keaton's expression as Batman is great and feels genuine, like Batman couldn't even believe what he was seeing.

I find Burton a freaky guy. Sleepy Hollow, Alice in Wonderland all felt like a link from Beetlejuice. Same style but it felt like the films were directly linked.

Therein lies the problem...

The stupid assumption that if it's originally from a comic, it must be suitable for children. It has happened many times and those movies have bombed at the box office, most recently with DREDD*. Why must it be suitable for children?

I remember the Dark Horse "Thing From Another World" comics from yesteryear and the covers alone should tell parents that those were not for the younger reader.

As to Batman Returns, this grand 'theatrical panic' syndrome was just ridiculous from the start. Warners cannot (supposedly) have read and approved a script for shooting, released the movie and then panicked when a co-sponsor like Mackie-Ds get all up in a fluster about it...they'd approved the script...so surely someone must have actually read it, even if it was only to estimate a budget? That cake don't slice both ways.

* Slightly OT, but DREDD seems to have done really quite well in the home entertainment market so talks of another movie appearing seem to be happening...tentatively, could all come to nothing. I liked it so

Oh noes, boiling acid!

It's still (and always will be) my favourite Batman movie. The third act is very unfocused (I imagine they toned down Penguins scheme/child catcher routine) but the world of Batman Returns is unique, it gels together. Weird, dark and exciting, but so stylised that anything can happen. I love EVERY character in Returns, even bit parters. Every scene is iconic, Catwoman looking through Shrecks window/cat logo? The giant duck blasting through the floor? The party with Bruce/Selina/the mistletoe? I could go on and on. The music is magnificent I even love the Banshee's track Face to Face. Some of the Penguin stuff went too far at the end but then it returned to blistering form with Catwoman and Christopher Walken.
Amazing. And I have grown to love it even more over he years.

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=poZwkw3ZIFk[/ame]

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KPU6rQ-PBao[/ame]

I think i'd like the Nolan movies if they weren't so different from the past films, and didn't focus so much on being "today". they just had to throw cell phones and texting into it, that's where I rolled my eyes. so much for being timeless. Nolan comes off as someone who really doesn't care for the comic books, and just wants to make a cop drama with some of the characters of batman in it. I just want to write him a letter sayin "hey chris, its cool you like cop movies and all that, but please don't include batman in it cuz it just doesn't fit and is boring as in ZZZZZZZzzzzz, thank you"

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FJ-RDj_50oI[/ame]

You guys make me cry with tears of joy.

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SzqzXMrjMhg[/ame]

I absolutely despise that about the new Bond movies. Makes it as confusing as ****.

Yeah, it's crazy.

I tend to look at each film as it's own entity anyway. Whether it's Batman, Batman Begins, Star Wars, Terminator, Robocop, Bond or what have you, I judge and perceive the film and story based on the the time it was made. There are even discrepancies with sequels where the same cast and crew return. Just look at the differences of the worlds between Batman and Batman Returns.

For the most part, The only series with a concise canon or in film universe is Lord of The Rings in my opinion.

Judi Dench had to be killed because she was having memory problems. I remember her saying this on tv. Look at the point in the film before the bad guy dressed as a police officer giving her speech about how they dress in with society.

Even as a kid I never took Batman Forever or Batman & Robin as sequels to the Burton films.

What got me fascinated before seeing Forever, was the U2 and Seal songs.

The U2 one sounds so horrible in this present day. Apart from the initial intro. I'm having scary 90s summer flashbacks right now. Can't believe thinking back I was doing cassette mixing.

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Zuy4828wpvg[/ame]

[ame]https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ateQQc-AgEM[/ame]

Agreed. Well, I was almost an adult (17) when Forever hit...

Do feel slightly warm and fuzzy like I am right now going down memory lane?

 

[kl241]

Keaton wouldn't do it without Burton so he bailed.

 

[DiFabio]

The thing I don't get is why some folks are so obsessed with categorizing Batman and Batman Returns with the Schumacher movies. I just don't get it.

As "loose" sequels, sure but people really want to think that the Burton Gotham and Batman turn into the garish Schumacher stuff? That that world and tone just changes? I just don't get it. Why are we even thinking in terms of universes and worlds any way? They're fictional creations put on film. Not a documentation of a real character.

Just watch the documentaries and features for Batman Forever and Batman and Robin and listen to how Schumacher and Co. refer to their movies. A new Batman (not just referring to the actors), a new city, a new team of collaborators. They use terms like, refresh, new, ours, etc. phrases just short of using the 2000s term "reboot" that modern audiences are so used to these days.

But since two actors reprise their previous roles and there are a few references/gags to Burton's "oh my god, the same universe".

I don't see how anyone could see the Keaton Batman characterization, doing/saying the things Schumacher created. All of that stuff wasn't the Burton Batman's style. I mean he barely talked, he remained mysterious, all that stuff. He didn't have a "Wayne Enterprises", he came from old money and did charities without actually attending the functions. He said he wouldn't be caught dead going to the Christmas ceremony in Returns, you guys could see him going to a CIRCUS? Wayne was practically Citizen Kane in the Burton films, in the Schumacher movies he's everywhere and everyone knows who he is.

I just don't get what some of you are seeing or how the Schumacher movies aren't their own entities as a "soft reboot".

 

[DiFabio]

Missed this.

It's like the Alien movies. Different films by different directors with a different interpretation and vision. Sure, you could say that there is some kind of continuity (Ripley) that ties them all together but I prefer to look at each film as a distinctly different vision and interpretation of the character.

Yup, exactly.


I wish I knew why some people were so wrapped up in continuity and canon when all these things are made one film at a time with their own stories in mind. Why bother making sense of a "world" past the film your viewing? It's not real. It's not history or a bipgraphy. Even actual sequels/series have continuity problems like Batman Begins and the last two.

 

[DiFabio]

Oh and I have one more thing, different origins.

The Burton/Keaton Batman doesn't blame himself for the death of his parents when they went to the Monarch Theater (to see footlight frenzy, which was an opera play, not a film). The reason he's determined to stamp out crime is "because no one else can". He doesn't blame himself, he's simply traumatized and angry about their death.

The Schumacher/Kilmer/Clooney Batman blames himself for what happened, that's his motivation. He blames himself because he wanted to go to see Zorro instead but later finds out that it was his parents idea. He feels guilt above all.


BAM, not the same dude.

 

[jye4ever]

I love all the similarities between B&R and 89/Returns.

 

[DiFabio]

I love all the similarities between B&R and 89/Returns.

Yeah, like the Batmobiles for instance. They're basically the same!

 

[jye4ever]

Yeah, like the Batmobiles for instance. They're basically the same!

Yup, they got rubber tires for starters.

I'm in a mood for some Burton/Keaton Batman, i'm going to go watch me some B&R.