Is There a Plausible Way to Tie 'Batman Returns' to 'Batman Forever'?

Started by Burtonite_08, Sat, 12 Jul 2008, 14:35

Previous topic - Next topic
Fri, 16 Jan 2009, 08:25 #10 Last Edit: Tue, 17 Mar 2009, 20:06 by Dark Knight Detective
I can't even tie the Burton & Schumacher films together. Burton's films followed on his view of Batman & the "Dark Knight" comics, & they came out perfectly. Batman Forever is just so different. Examples include a neon Gotham, campiness, different Batmen, too many unrealistic aspects of Batman, goofy villians, a ****-of-a-doctor for a love interest, corny dialogue, & just a brighter overtone all together (it's literally brighter, too).

I don't think I could even connect B & R w/ Forever. Everything that was bad in Forerver just gets worse. One huge reason is B & R's version of Bane. He went from being the cunning strategist who was in top human physical condition & becomes a super skinny convict who would be transformed into a green-skinned giant barely capable of human speech & becomes Poison Ivy's dumb muscle. Definitely one've the worst ways to bring a villain into a movie!

Recently I wrote a response to a topic pretty much similar to what the title says. If possible, I would like to hear from other members if you agree w/ what I say or if you don't. I like to hear what my fellows think. :)

I think the only tie that was mentioned in Forever was the "...skin-tight vinyl and a whip?" remark made by Chase Meridian which was about the Catwoman.

Also the Wayne murder flashbacks were somewhat similar to what was done in '89.

DICK--"You're parents weren't killed by a MANIAC!"  BRUCE--"Yes they WERE!"...reference to the Joker.

I know that in the script for Forever, Bruce considers retiring, one reason being that Jack Napier/Joker is dead.


What's strange about the Wayne's murder was that the killer didn't have an accomplice, like Jack Napier had Bob back in BATMAN. You'd think they'd have the decency to have an accomplice? ???

True, I never thought about that. The killer, though in the shadows, was definitely Napier.

BTW Batass, do you think that it's hard to connect Forever w/ B & R? I mean Forever had its campy moments, but B & R is just OTT! Three examples are a jokey Bruce/Batman, antagonists more cheesier than the ones from before, more & more colorful lights, & Barbara Wilson (I still can't believe she's suddenly related to Alfred)!

Quote from: The Batman Returns on Sat, 17 Jan  2009, 04:28
BTW Batass, do you think that it's hard to connect Forever w/ B & R? I mean Forever had its campy moments, but B & R is just OTT! Three examples are a jokey Bruce/Batman, antagonists more cheesier than the ones from before, more & more colorful lights, & Barbara Wilson (I still can't believe she's suddenly related to Alfred)!

Actually I never gave it much thought because the movie(B&R) was such a huge joke to begin with but I'd have to say both yes and no.

YES because of the Schumacher tone and the way things were done.

NO because at least Forever was more zany than stupid and had some dark serious themes.


Sat, 17 Jan 2009, 05:07 #17 Last Edit: Mon, 16 Feb 2009, 21:39 by The Batman Returns
Forever is still entertaining to watch as a Batman film. I only see B & R as an homage to that goofy 60's show, but it's actually hilarious.:D

Quote from: The Batman Returns on Sat, 17 Jan  2009, 05:07
Forever is still entertaining to watch as a Batman film. I only see B & R as an homage to that goofy (& evil) 60's show, but it's actually hilarious...

The 60's show as actually closer to the original comics than some will admit. Aside from the fact that it wasn't dark and was campy it was alot like the comics of the late-40's and early-50's IMO. You're entitled to your opinion though. :)

Thank God Dennis O' Neil & Neal Adams brought back 'The Dark Knight" image. Adams is also the one responsible for the current look of Batman's logo. Before, it was just the black bat that was on the other suits in a yellow elipse. Adams made the bat look menacing.