Messages

That's interesting.

If that DID actually happen, that's great. And come to think of it, I think on one of the featurettes found on the 1989 SE states that Burton did infact walk around with a copy of "The Killing Joke" telling fans that his film would look more akin to TKJ, than the 1960's tv show.

Which was obviously a huge concern at the time.



Oh, to evesdrop on that conversation .... 

As much as I liked Vicki Vale in Batman 1989, Selina was definately more of a match for Keaton's Batman.

I think alot of kids today would have liked Ledger's Joker either way, but him passing away did IMO bring that little something extra special to the portrayal that made people perhaps examine it more than it might have otherwise have been.

Personally, I'll probably always prefer Jack's Joker. And for more than just sentimental reasons. Overall, his Joker just seems more akin to the various Joker incarnations that appeared in DC comics and other media for a very good number of years.

Who on Earth would not love Nicholson's Joker!? I mean, just look at him in BATMAN. HE IS THE JOKER! Take no substitutes.

No argument heard here.

It really must have been satisfying to have Nicholson in mind for the Joker (Kane claims that after seeing The Shinning, he felt Nicholson would make a great Joker), and then years later ... actually have him play the part.

Kane was being professional. He said the same thing about Keaton & Clooney. IMO, I'm sure he liked Burton's films the best b/c they kept the balance of realistic & fictional elements intact, just like the "Dark Knight" vision Kane & Bill Finger had back in 1939. I also think he liked Keaton the best b/c he's the only actor to play the true Bruce/Batman in live action.

I'm sure Kane enjoyed every version of Batman to be perfectly honest. From the serials to Adam West to Burton to Schumacher. To have the character go from the comic book, newspaper strip, guest spot appearances on Superman's radio show, Saturday afternoon Serials, a very popular Adam West tv show, a number of animated efforts, and popular big budget live action films is a beautiful thing. And I'm sure he liked them all to a certain degree.

And as much of a fan as Kane may have been of Keaton/Kilmer/Clooney as Batman, after reading his book "Batman & Me", it certainly seems like he was more of a fan of Jack Nicholson as the Joker.

I certainly cant blame him for that. 

Outside of the Burton Batman films, I would have to say my favourite films with  Michael Keaton are:

Mr. Mom
Clean and Sober
The Paper
Multiplicity
Beetlejuice
Jackie Brown
Desperate Measures

And his cameo in Out of Sight was cool.

It would have been interesting to hear what Kane would have said about Nolan's Gotham, but if he loved Burton's vision so much it would be hard to see him actually rank another Gotham environment the same or even better.

I'm sure Bob Kane would have praised Nolan's vision, and whatever else. I just cannot for the life of me see him speaking ill of the current franchise in any way, shape, or form.

I remember watching the Premiere of Batman Forever on E! with Kane praising Schumacher's take, and how it wasnt as "dark" as the other two, and his excitement over a (at the time) new Batman, Val Kilmer.

I dont think doing a direct sequel to Batman 1989 interested Burton that much. Actually, I believe it was WB basically telling him, "Well what if it's more of a Tim Burton movie?" was what essentially hooked Burton back in for doing another Batman movie.

The camp fest in BF was definately there with Tommy Lee Jones and Jim Carrey hamming it up ... but the camp dial got turned waaaay up with B&R. Add that with WB caring more about happy meals, and making everything "toyetic", along with Schumacher going along with it .... we end up with something very, very disappointing. 

I'm not really sure how I would tie BF to B&R, but personally I think out of all the Burton/Schumacher Batman films, B&R feels like more of a direct sequel to BF than Batman Returns was to 1989. And maybe that's just because we had O'Donnell returning with Michael Gough and Pat Hingle, instead of just Gough and Hingle who were about the only people from the Burton films reprising their roles from the in Forever. But yeah, it just felt like more of a continuation. Although that's just my personal opinion.

Unfortunately, as you stated, we got a watered down theatrical cut with Forever, and a even more watered down movie with Batman and Robin. 

Maybe. Maybe not.

From what I've read, Shumacher's original cut for Forever paid more homage to Burton's film than what we ultimately saw with the theatrical cut.