Why isn't batman forever not considered the end of burton's trilogy?

[BatmanFanatic93]

Is it because keaton & burton didn't do this one?If so i kinda find that excuse to be a little poor to distance batman forever from the previous ones just because it took a different approach i mean superman returns was directed by another director & superman was played by another man fans yet it's consider a sequel to the donners films heck wb even made a superman trilogy boxset with only 1,2,& returns as the main ones ignoring 3 & 4 for good reasons but anyways i believe batman forever is the one to end the burton's batman trilogy plus i'll also give my reasons why batman forever only & not connecting batman & robin to it.Keep in mind i may like both burton & schumacher's batman but i'm a burton fan first schumacher 2nd so without further ado i'm gonna my reasons why i believe batman forever ends the burton batman trilogy.

1:Even though tim already established bruce wayne's darkside in his films but he also lacked the bruce wayne persona which is a important key to the batman character & joel took the liberaties & decided to strenghten it while adding more backstory & depth to batman's origin as well.

2:Batman Forever also references the previous films events mostly the 89 film but returns is mention about 2 times through the film like during the flashbacks it shows the waynes being gunned down by jack naiper,Alfred saying bruces parents are avenged in a deleted scene which refers to the night joker died,The convo between dick & bruce about how dick says his parents weren't killed by a maniac & replies "yes they were",A deleted scene which is not on the dvd but was filmed just not added to it with chase on a talk show defending batman about him being a hero from a hater saying he created these monster like penguin & joker he even mentions the plans they had about posioning gotham & killling the first born sons of gotham & even the red triangle circus are mention even the catwoman one by chase 

I know these are only two reasons but they're strongly good reason why batman forever is the end of burton series cause it ties in the burton batman story arc,bruces pain about him blaming himself about his parents death while struggling with the problem of wanting to quit so he can spend the rest of his life with chase & accepting dick as his ward & son also i think why burton don't see that way is because of the neon all over gotham at night,TLJ & Carry's over the top preformances (Even though TLJ was trying out act carrey cause he hated him),And the change of style/tone  towards gotham & story but if you look past all of that & see the true heart of the story then you'd see why batman forever is end the of the trilogy.Anyways i hope you understand where i'm going with this & give me your feedback.











oh yeah yeah i forgot to mention why i consider batman forever to the end of the trilogy & not batman & robin as a series okay for obvious reasons batman & robin was just a toy commercial or cartoon for wb to market & make money from & nothing more while chracters like gough,hingle,& donnell come back to the so-called sequel & reprise their roles the film however looses touch with the previous films by the silliness done by arnold & uma,Poor use of bane & bat-girl,Little to no dark & seriousness other then the alfred dying subplot,And the whole whining robin.Not only that but joel wanted to a darker batman film after the success of batman forever like batman year one which could have been the prequel to burton era or his own batman film or the dark knight returns which could have been the one that could've of ended it all instead of batman forever but since people loved the new direction of batman forever they forced joel to go lighter & sillier in the sequel & boom we ended up with batman & robin which like i said earlier is nothing more than a cartoon/toy commerical that wb could market for more money & nothing else so that's my reason why batman forever is the one.

[The Laughing Fish]

I'd say that Burton, WB et al had no intention of creating a trilogy to begin with; they were just determined to keep making more Batman movies as much as possible. Let's not forget that people are critical of the third movie because of the campy things that go on in it  and disregard any merits it might have (though, I for one wouldn't mind if the film was lighter in tone in comparison to Burton's movies, if it the writing and acting was a little better). People also might have a hard time to accept Forever was part of Burton's continuity because the lead actor in the first two films didn't reprise the role for a third time.

Personally, I believe Forever is still part of Burton's continuity, just like I believe that Superman III is still part of the first two. Regardless of how those movies turned out they are part of the continuity whether you like it or not.

[BatmanFanatic93]

I'd say that Burton, WB et al had no intention of creating a trilogy to begin with; they were just determined to keep making more Batman movies as much as possible. Let's not forget that people are critical of the third movie because of the campy things that go on in it  and disregard any merits it might have (though, I for one wouldn't mind if the film was lighter in tone in comparison to Burton's movies, if it the writing and acting was a little better). People also might have a hard time to accept Forever was part of Burton's continuity because the lead actor in the first two films didn't reprise the role for a third time.

Personally, I believe Forever is still part of Burton's continuity, just like I believe that Superman III is still part of the first two. Regardless of how those movies turned out they are part of the continuity whether you like it or not.

Good points maybe i should have thought about that more before i posted my forum but what is done is done i suppose  & true even though the live action batman during 90's era are still part of the Burton's continuity despite the last 2 being directed by joel why does wb say different?As posted they released a superman trilogy boxset with superman 1,2,& returns as the main three instead of the anthology with 3 & 4 does that mean they're sperated from the donner continuity or did they just wanted to pretend those never happen & go with a trilogy? 

[Paul (ral)]

I'd say that Burton, WB et al had no intention of creating a trilogy to begin with

Peters/Guber intended to make a trilogy from the get-go.

[BatmanFanatic93]

I'd say that Burton, WB et al had no intention of creating a trilogy to begin with

Peters/Guber intended to make a trilogy from the get-go.

Whoooo i knew it!!!

[The Laughing Fish]

I'd say that Burton, WB et al had no intention of creating a trilogy to begin with

Peters/Guber intended to make a trilogy from the get-go.

Did they?! God I hate that word "trilogy" now.

[Paul (ral)]

I'm not sure if they meant trilogy in the sense of story continuity or 3 films...but the word "trilogy" was used.

I suspect that Burton's decision to make a sequel with a very different tone (with studio backing) may have altered the course of that plan.

[Azrael]

"Batman Returns is not really a sequel to Batman. It doesn't pick up where the first one left off. [...] The point was to make it all feel fresh and new. It was the only way I could envision the movie" (Burton, 1992)

Maybe the term trilogy was used differently for Batman compared, say, to Star Wars, or later LOTR and Nolan's Batman etc. where each film is a "chapter" or an "act". More like "a succesful franchise with at least two sequels". Nicholson certainly knew something when his original deal for the Joker included a cut of the revenue from any sequels.

[riddler]

I'm not sure if they meant trilogy in the sense of story continuity or 3 films...but the word "trilogy" was used.

I suspect that Burton's decision to make a sequel with a very different tone (with studio backing) may have altered the course of that plan.

How much involvement did Burton have in forever? I know they borrowed ideas from him; use of the riddler, breaking into the batcave and wayne manor, hallowe'en as the setting.

I may be wrong but I kind of get the sense that Burton was phased out the way some people are in the working world; sometimes when companies want to go in another direction from an accomplished person, rather than fire them, they give them a more menial title such as 'consultant' or 'advisor' and of course in the film industry 'producer' can mean a lot of things.


Batman Forever's current hate is mainly due to Batman and Robin; the campiness was nice at the time after the ultra dark Batman Returns but Schumacher took it way too far with the next film. Batman and Robin couldn't have come right after Returns, it was too big of a leap, the third film created that bridge.

[Paul (ral)]

I'm not sure that Burton contributed any ideas to Forever.

The Riddler had been rumoured before Returns went into production, so I don't think it's something Burton decreed...it was a forgone conclusion.