Discussion in 'Science Fiction & Fantasy' started by Chris3123, Jun 7, 2012.
Yeah. Window cameos. Appearances by Green Hornet and Kato. Things like that.
Honestly, I've begun to think in recent years that it's more a matter of when the rights would be cleared and a DVD release could be possible as opposed to if. A lof of infamous legal issues have been resolved over the past few years and we've been getting DVD releases people thought were guaranteed never to happen. Like the Doctor Who telemovie from 1996, for example.
I'll openly admit, I prefer the serious take on Batman seen in the Nolan movies or the animated series of the 90s. But this series is enjoyable in its own right and can co-exist without tarnishing Batman's popularity at all.
^Right. Batman's history in the comics includes both the bizarre, comedic adventures of the Silver Age and the more sophisticated, gritty drama of the Bronze and modern ages. It's fitting that there should be adaptations of both, and they can coexist as parts of the Bat-spectrum just as the comics can.
For me the world is big enough for all flavors of Batman, from the comics to Adam West, Burton, Schumacher and Nolan. It's all fun for me.
Schumacher? What are you talking about.
Schumacher NEVER did any Batman movies. It was always Burton and then we had Nolan doing them.
And those rights issues haven't yet been resolved, have they? AFAIK, to clear them for home release would require negotiating with each and every one of the actors who appeared in them (most of the window cameos were unpaid, uncredited walk-ons), which can be problematic in the extreme.
Also why the HELL were Green Hornet and Kato even on the show? They aren't even DC Comic characters.
Remember, the Batman sitcom was long, long before all DC film and TV rights were consolidated under Warner Bros. or DC Entertainment. The show was produced by 20th Century Fox Television and Greenway Productions, under license from what was then called National Comics Publications. Fox and Greenway also produced a Green Hornet show, so they had the rights to use both of them on TV. It's the same reason IDW Comics is able to publish the just-started Star Trek/Doctor Who crossover miniseries; the two franchises are from different owners, but IDW has the license to publish comics for both of them.
The crossovers between Batman and The Green Hornet were complicated and mindbending from a continuity standpoint. First off, the window cameo in which Batman and Robin recognized the Hornet and Kato as crimefighters was ignored by the later full crossover episode in which the Dynamic Duo believed them to be criminals, which was their cover in their own show. For another thing, TGH was a far more serious and naturalistic show than Batman; the Hornet had futuristic gadgets, but operated in a world that was basically realistic by '60s action-show standards. Moreover, Batman actually existed as a television show within the world of TGH, and we saw people watching it on more than one occasion in the show. So the Hornet was real in Batman's universe, but Batman was fictional in the Hornet's universe.
That's unfair. Batman Forever was a solid movie. It's no Batman Begins but it was at least as good as Batman Returns.
I hate that Batman Forever gets tarred and feathered just because it's the older, wiser brother of the mentally retarded Batman & Robin.
What are these Window characters?
I believe this video can answer that question for you, Captain Craig.
By the way, the Green Hornet and Kato are the third cameo, starting at about the 1:10 timestamp.
This is a Recap of Batman Forever that ALL Batman fans should read. More people need to realize how awful the whole thing was.
I would absolutely buy this on DVD. It doesn't "tarnish" Batman at all. It is supposed to be campy and funny, and it succeeds. I like the new serious Batman movies a lot but if anything tarnishes Batman it is the campy un-funny Batman of Batman Forever and Batman and Robin. In retrospect even Time Burton's Batman really isn't that great. Adam Wests Batman however is hilarious.
Also I support the availability of virtually every show on DVD, if for nothing more than nostalgia.
I wonder if Batman would ever have become the hugely popular character he is today without the Adam West series. If he'd just been a character from the comics, a few Saturday morning cartoons, and a couple of 1940s film serials, he probably wouldn't have been that widely known to general audiences or movie executives. After all, Captain Marvel (of Shazam!) was also a '40s-vintage comics character who was featured in a movie serial and a Saturday morning TV show or two, but he's never had a feature film franchise. A prime-time TV series, especially one that gets rerun in syndication for decades thereafter, can do a lot to increase a character's visibility and name recognition. So I suspect that the whole reason we got a Batman film franchise in the '80s-'90s is because a lot of people, among both Hollywood decision-makers and their target audience, had grown up watching Adam West as Batman, and whether they liked that version or not, they were familiar with the character and his world.
OMG... That was amazing.. Col. Klink AND Jose Jimenez? I had completely forgotten about these cameos... Talk about politically incorrect!!! Love it!
Of the Burton Batman movies, Batman Forever, is my favorite.
When you say more people need to realize how awful the whole thing was what you're really saying is more people need to agree with your opinion. And that is my point. Liking or disliking any movie is nothing but personal opinion and I don't think people need to see things my way on my taste in movies. It is nice when they do agree with me but it isn't essential.
Batman was pretty good but dull at times even though I think Keaton and Nicholson did a good job. Batman Returns has some good moments but pretty joyless in my opinion.
I am alright if no one agrees with me.
I wouldn't count that as a "Burton" film. It was directed by Joel Shumacher and feels very different than the films Burton actually directed.
And, yeah, it's not the completely unwatchable disaster the fourth film was . . . .
So every celeb who had a 15 second cameo was part of the hold up?
They wanted some percentage of a whole series set or even one season for that measly bit of time?
I know Joel Shumacher directed the last two movies in that series. But the last time I mentioned that to Dream in this thread he responded with this:
So I was trying to making him happy by not mentioning Schumacher.
Well, Burton did produce Batman Forever, at least, so it's kind of a transitional piece.
ComicsAlliance did a great series of reviews of the Batman movies, often offering some surprising perspectives, and they argued pretty effectively that Batman & Robin was actually the most cohesive of the four Burton/Schumacher movies, the one that has the clearest sense of what kind of movie it is (a goofy, ridiculous one), what story it wants to tell, and what the characters' motivations are. (Although they hated Silverstone's Batgirl.) Here's the review (Part One, Part Two), and links to their reviews of the previous three films are at the end of Part Two. (They also went on to review Catwoman, the '66 Batman feature, Mask of the Phantasm, and the Nolan films, then did the Blade trilogy, and they've just finished working through the Reeve Superman films and Supergirl. They'll be starting in on Superman Returns this Monday, unless they've managed to obtain a copy of Steel in the interim.)
Separate names with a comma.