The Controversy

[greggbray]

See that "quote" button in the upper right hand corner of each post? Click it. Easy peezy!

The Peezy was quite Easy.  Cheers.   

I may have mentioned it elsewhere on the forum, but I remember viewing a talkshow where there was this parents advocacy group discussed their strong distaste for Batman Returns.  Given that the merchandising included happy meal toys, the parents felt the tone of the film was way out of bounds for the kind of marketing WB did for the film.

At the time I found partial agreement--but ultimately faulted WB's marketing team, and not Tim Burton.  You can't tell Tim Burton to 'make a Tim Burton film' (direct quote) and then be surprised when he does just that.  It's still a Batman film, I don't mean to say that it can't be both in the same gesture, but just like the Nolan films the director's finger prints are all over it. It's his stamp and aesthetic.

Mind you, I shouted at my television set that there was already a device in place---called a PG-13 Rating in the US.  Meaning if the child is under 13 parents are "strongly cautioned."  In any event, as colorsblend mentioned, the larger mass audience was only recently experiencing a darker Batman.  There was a time before geek-chic--before Hot Topic could print vintage-inspired 1980s characters and put them (sometimes ironically sometimes with sincerity---depends on the wearer) on tee shirts. 

In my own adolescence during the late 1980s, liking Comic Books was about as close to liking the most abhorrent pornography on the planet.  That it seems to have passed that hurdle (if the BO success of most comic book properties is anything to go by) is remarkable.  And in that respect, I find the Burton films to be a kind of cultural index--a turning point for comic book adapted properties. 

So, I'd have to agree--if TDKR were released in 1992, I think you would have seen a similar reaction.  Though, to be fair, I think Penguin is a far scarier villain for younger children than Bane.  He's a hell of a movie monster. 

[thecolorsblend]

At the time I found partial agreement--but ultimately faulted WB's marketing team, and not Tim Burton.  You can't tell Tim Burton to 'make a Tim Burton film' (direct quote) and then be surprised when he does just that.  It's still a Batman film, I don't mean to say that it can't be both in the same gesture, but just like the Nolan films the director's finger prints are all over it. It's his stamp and aesthetic.

Right, and this is one reason why there's a limit to how far I want to go in excoriating either Schumacher or WB for the follow ups. The public seemed to say "we think you did wrong in marketing an adult film to children", WB (dependent upon the revenue streams that come from tie ins and merchandising) took that to heart and so found a filmmaker who'd make a movie designed for broader and/or younger audiences.

If there's a criticism, it's that Burton made a Burton movie as he was told... and for that reason was shown the door because of a backlash. It wasn't hit fault WB gave him artistic freedom while trying to attach crucial merchandising efforts to his not-so-commercial film... but even that was probably a learning experience for them.