Hot Toys Announce Batman Returns License

[jye4ever]

I think he would, yeah... Though I doubt it would have been in the film.

He was pretty close to killing Wayne... Gun was cocked and ready to fire. It was just when Chill yelled "Come on Jack, let's go!" (fleeing before the cops arrived) that he stopped.

Had there been no reason to get out fast or not bring attention to where they were? Yeah, I think he probably would have killed him.

Sallah

Well, I meant Joker, not young mob Jack.

Which is weird.

You might be right, as younger Jack he might've taken out young BW, hard to tell though.

Yet when he's even more psychotic Joker, I don't know if he would.

For starters he chemically altered tons of cosmetic products which likely could or did kill off many children and adults before Batman got the word out.

I guess young girls would play with makeup, so you're probably right, he would kill kids then.

Oh well, there goes my argument.

Thanks alot Frank.

 

[batfan08]

that's supposed to be funny? if so, that's really, um, NOT.

It's subtle humor. At least, that's my opinion; it's not supposed to warrant a laugh, or even a chuckle, but it does add a little levity to some otherwise serious stuff.

 

[DarthDiggler]

It's subtle humor. At least, that's my opinion; it's not supposed to warrant a laugh, or even a chuckle, but it does add a little levity to some otherwise serious stuff.

Also, this then opens up a whole new can of worms:

Comic book movie or not, is comic relief all that important in every film people see?

Just sayin.'

 

[Desamo]

After over a year of announce 327 pages and still no pictures or even a good teaser of any of these figures.

 

[sallah]

I guess young girls would play with makeup, so you're probably right, he would kill kids then.

Oh well, there goes my argument.

Thanks alot Frank.

Yeah, this is very true... He probably did a few in without us ever seeing it.

Sallah

 

[DarthDiggler]

After over a year of announce 327 pages and still no pictures or even a good teaser of any of these figures.

You are 100% correct.

Outside of Sdabbs amazing custom work--NOTHING.

 

[jye4ever]

Yeah, this is very true... He probably did a few in without us ever seeing it.

Sallah

So then 89 Joker is just as psychotic as the TDK Scorpio Zodiac Killer.

Cool.

 

[sallah]

You are 100% correct.

Outside of Sdabbs amazing custom work--NOTHING.

...and oh how much seeing that BEAUTIFUL work makes me yearn for these figures!!!!

Sallah

 

[batfan08]

Also, this then opens up a whole new can of worms:

Comic book movie or not, is comic relief all that important in every film people see?

Just sayin.'

I think it is, to an extent. A little levity can go a long way to making some films more enjoyable. Note how the pencil trick is one of the most iconic moments in TDK for a lot of people.

By the way, I love your avatar, and I really want that film to be out already.

As far as Haytil's argument goes, I agree, to an extent, though, I think calling out Sallah's parenting is a little over the line, and there's no need to make things personal, but I do agree with some of his points, and I think, in the long run, exposing your kids to a variety of Batman media, while also acknowledging that it's a different interpretation, and that they should keep an open mind actually will only serve to enhance their love of the character. I grew up on a diet of The Animated Series in the morning, one of my Burton (and/or Schumacher films, later on) VHS tapes in the afternoon, and reruns of the 66 show on TV Land at night, along with a variety of comics, and I think it helped shape a more well rounded Batman fan, if you will.

I just think that people get too hung up on their own interpretations of what Batman should be, and that it actually hinders their enjoyment of the character, in a lot of ways. There are some great stories out there that are on completely opposite ends of the spectrum tonally, and people, for one reason or another, often miss out on those stories because they're part of something that isn't "their Batman." Batman's been around for a long time; going on 75 years next year, and, over the course of that history, he's changed a lot, but it's important to note that, throughout all of those interpretations, there has always been one constant, when you strip away aesthetics and tone, and look at the true core of the character: Batman.

 

[Bo Shrek]

After over a year of announce 327 pages and still no pictures or even a good teaser of any of these figures.

Yes but Hot Toys is please to announce the Batman Returns license and we should expect launch in late 2012.

Thank for keeping your loyal fans updated HT's *******s!!!

 

[sallah]

As far as Haytil's argument goes, I agree, to an extent, though, I think calling out Sallah's parenting is a little over the line, and there's no need to make things personal...

Ah... He did? I have him on ignore now, so I didn't see that.

Oh well. He can have his fun. I love my kids, my kids love me... that is all that matters.

As for exposing them to all Batman... I am. They started on West, then Schumacher & the Animated Series... Blaze is old enough for Burton, Keaton still has a few years. When they hit their mid-teens, then they can watch Nolan, as I think that is an appropriate age. See, I never said they couldn't watch the Nolan films. Just that they weren't geared towards their current ages (Keaton is 6, Blaze just turned 11), and I, as a parent, am mindful of what I want my child exposed to at certain ages. When the time is right, of course they can watch Nolan and judge for themselves.

Sallah

 

[batfan08]

Ah... He did? I have him on ignore now, so I didn't see that.

Oh well. He can have his fun. I love my kids, my kids love me... that is all that matters.

Sallah

Well, I hope you read the rest of my post.

 

[sallah]

Well, I hope you read the rest of my post.

I did. And I just edited my reply a bit to reflect that.

Sallah

 

[Frank]

So then 89 Joker is just as psychotic as the TDK Scorpio Zodiac Killer.

Cool.

Yeah, this is very true... He probably did a few in without us ever seeing it.

Sallah

That's our Joker!

 

[DarthDiggler]

I just think that people get too hung up on their own interpretations of what Batman should be, and that it actually hinders their enjoyment of the character, in a lot of ways. There are some great stories out there that are on completely opposite ends of the spectrum tonally, and people, for one reason or another, often miss out on those stories because they're part of something that isn't "their Batman." Batman's been around for a long time; going on 75 years next year, and, over the course of that history, he's changed a lot, but it's important to note that, throughout all of those interpretations, there has always been one constant, when you strip away aesthetics and tone, and look at the true core of the character: Batman.

This has long been my mantra regarding "franchises" of various mediums.

Over the years and all the countless reboots/re-imaginings/whatever, I realized that I'm not very sentimental.

I can honestly enjoy things based on their own merits without letting too much of my own expectations and baggage with a fictitious character/franchise get in the way. I give a lot of leeway to creators to create and then make my own personal judgment.

That said, I still pretty much HATE Star Wars Episode I.

 

[batfan08]

Ah... He did? I have him on ignore now, so I didn't see that.

Oh well. He can have his fun. I love my kids, my kids love me... that is all that matters.

As for exposing them to all Batman... I am. They started on West, then Schumacher & the Animated Series... Blaze is old enough for Burton, Keaton still has a few years. When they hit their mid-teens, then they can watch Nolan, as I think that is an appropriate age. See, I never said they couldn't watch the Nolan films. Just that they weren't geared towards their current ages (Keaton is 6, Blaze just turned 11), and I, as a parent, am mindful of what I want my child exposed to at certain ages. When the time is right, of course they can watch Nolan and judge for themselves.

Sallah

I actually think that 13 is a pretty good age for most of the Nolan films, for the most part, but I think 11 might be fine for Begins. 13's the suggested age rating on the films, and I think it's one case where it actually fits, when it comes to TDK and TDKR, but I think that Begins is by far one of the most easily accessible for people of a variety of ages, and I think that, while it arguably has some of the darkest imagery (Scarecrow, for instance), it's a great Batman film that really showcases Batman. It seems like, in everything from West to Nolan, the hero has often been defined by his villains, and I think that it's important to showcase why Batman is a hero, why he's important, and that he isn't just a foil for colorful foes.

I think that it might have the best balance of the traditional Batman and Nolan's interpretation of any of them, and that's why I think it'd probably be fine. That being said, at the end of the day, it's your call, naturally.

 

[Ponyboy]

HA! Now that's a funny movie.

 

[Ponyboy]

Ah... He did? I have him on ignore now, so I didn't see that.

Oh well. He can have his fun. I love my kids, my kids love me... that is all that matters.

As for exposing them to all Batman... I am. They started on West, then Schumacher & the Animated Series... Blaze is old enough for Burton, Keaton still has a few years. When they hit their mid-teens, then they can watch Nolan, as I think that is an appropriate age. See, I never said they couldn't watch the Nolan films. Just that they weren't geared towards their current ages (Keaton is 6, Blaze just turned 11), and I, as a parent, am mindful of what I want my child exposed to at certain ages. When the time is right, of course they can watch Nolan and judge for themselves.

Sallah

^I agree with Sallah on this one... it's his discretion to introduce what films he wants to his children. He has no way of knowing whether they will identify more with the Burton or Nolan films later in their lives. Ten years from now they might be arguing the merits of each one with their father, and supporting the Nolan versions (or whatever versions come after). I think it's a great way for him to let his kids "grow up" with Batman and give them that experience. Also, I don't have kids myself... so my opinion's probably moot.

 

[DiFabio]

I think the Nicholson Joker and Ledger Joker are both great, with their similarities and their differences. I don't really have a preference like I do with the Batman/Bruce Wayne actors.

I honestly think the Ledger Joker is the best thing about the Nolan series. In fact, if it wasn't for the Joker in the Dark Knight, I'm not quite sure I'd love the series as much as I do. The Joker pretty much sealed the deal for me. I enjoyed Batman Begins for the origin and Bruce Wayne journey, the training sequence in the mountains and confronting the mob are some of my favorite parts. But the thing that REALLY resonated with me was the Joker. I hate TDKR with a seething passion, so if Ledger as the Joker or that character wasn't as great as he was and The Dark Knight didn't do anything for me, I doubt I would have liked Nolan's take at all.

With that said, I don't see how anyone could dislike either Joker. They're arguably the best villains out of all 7 Batflicks and perhaps the best comic book villains in general.

 

[DarkMagic]

Also, this then opens up a whole new can of worms:

Comic book movie or not, is comic relief all that important in every film people see?

Just sayin.'

I think comic relief is not only important in films, it's realistic and natural. In real life, even in the most dire situations, people can find a way to crack some jokes to ease the tension, or even just take their minds off of whatever bad stuff they're going through for a moment. Humor is one way we humans cope. As the saying goes "If you don't laugh, you'll cry."

I think it is, to an extent. A little levity can go a long way to making some films more enjoyable. Note how the pencil trick is one of the most iconic moments in TDK for a lot of people.

By the way, I love your avatar, and I really want that film to be out already.

As far as Haytil's argument goes, I agree, to an extent, though, I think calling out Sallah's parenting is a little over the line, and there's no need to make things personal, but I do agree with some of his points, and I think, in the long run, exposing your kids to a variety of Batman media, while also acknowledging that it's a different interpretation, and that they should keep an open mind actually will only serve to enhance their love of the character. I grew up on a diet of The Animated Series in the morning, one of my Burton (and/or Schumacher films, later on) VHS tapes in the afternoon, and reruns of the 66 show on TV Land at night, along with a variety of comics, and I think it helped shape a more well rounded Batman fan, if you will.

I just think that people get too hung up on their own interpretations of what Batman should be, and that it actually hinders their enjoyment of the character, in a lot of ways. There are some great stories out there that are on completely opposite ends of the spectrum tonally, and people, for one reason or another, often miss out on those stories because they're part of something that isn't "their Batman." Batman's been around for a long time; going on 75 years next year, and, over the course of that history, he's changed a lot, but it's important to note that, throughout all of those interpretations, there has always been one constant, when you strip away aesthetics and tone, and look at the true core of the character: Batman.

Great post. Have you ever read Will Brooker's "Hunting the Dark Knight"? It's a very dense read, but the argument of the book (what I got from it) is very close to what you just said. Batman is too big to be put in the box of being ONLY dark, serious, gritty that has become the default "true" version of Batman for many modern fans. This "Batman = Dark ONLY" boundary for the character has been tightly controlled and encouraged by the DC Editorial Board + WB Studio Execs in the type of Batman films and other media they have green-lit for the past several decades. Anything that does fit the mold (Denny O'Neil/ Frank Miller/ Burton / Nolan / B:TAS /Arkham Games etc) is praised to different degrees as "getting Batman right". While the stuff that doesn't toe that line is summarily rejected by fans and downplayed by the WB (West /Schumacher etc) It's only in recent years that this trend has loosened up a bit, with the light-hearted animated Brave and Bold and WB's recent embracing of the 60s Batman in new mechandise and a comic series.