Anthology revelations

Started by batass4880, Wed, 11 Mar 2009, 02:39

Previous topic - Next topic
It's odd you say that Burton was associated with Batman as early as 1985.  It's my understanding that Warner Bros. orignally asked the Coen Brothers to helm the project straight after their success with Raising Arizona.
Now I love the Coen Brothers' films but I can't imagine their version coming close to the brilliance of Tim Burton's.
Johnny Gobs got ripped and took a walk off a roof, alright? No big loss.

That's never been stated officially, at all. I think that's just some wild rumors that managed to survive the years to the internet.
"There's just as much room for the television series and the comic books as there is for my movie. Why wouldn't there be?" - Tim Burton

Quote from: johnnygobbs on Wed, 11 Mar  2009, 21:10
It's odd you say that Burton was associated with Batman as early as 1985.  It's my understanding that Warner Bros. orignally asked the Coen Brothers to helm the project straight after their success with Raising Arizona.
Now I love the Coen Brothers' films but I can't imagine their version coming close to the brilliance of Tim Burton's.

it's possible seeing as how the main problem that the WB had with Batman during the early stages of the project was getting the right vision ...I think pretty much every director was considered at one point.

I was a little confused when Val Kilmer said that people were saying that he and Jim Carrey weren?t getting along. I actually heard that Tommy Lee Jones was a royal b*stard to Carrey.

Various articles have suggested that both Kilmer and Lee Jones were generally quite mean to Carrey during the filming of Forever; something along the lines of being proper actors and behaving sniffily to Carrey who was only perceived to be a comic at that point in his career.
Joel Schumacher, to his credit has been quite candid about the way Kilmer and Jones behaved on the Forever set, whilst praising Carrey for his professional attitude.
Whatever the case, I get the impression that Kilmer and Jones are much easier to work with nowadays.
Johnny Gobs got ripped and took a walk off a roof, alright? No big loss.

Yea, Schumacher stated several times that he found Jones and Kilmer hard to work with. What's funny is that Schumacher picked Jones after working with him on "The Client."


It was interesting to hear that at first Burton didn't want to make Returns until WB enticed him by letting him do whatever he wanted with the film. I always thought he was on board for that one even if he wasn't under contract to.

despite all the praise the Burton gets for doing the 89 movie, the studio didn't have much faith in him at the time and made his life very difficult during the production( changing the script, rushing scenes, ect), so Burton wasn't exactly ready to relive that all over again...unless he got free reign over the next one, which in my opinion is clearly more of a "Burton" film than the 89 film.

Quote from: Dark Knight Detective on Wed, 11 Mar  2009, 20:00Burton had the power to make just about every Batman rogue fit into a film of his, w/o a doubt.
Agreed.  I've never had any trouble picturing Hugo Strange and the monster men roaming the BR version of Gotham City.

By contrast, I can't envision too many directors we've seen up to now handling anything other than the villains they've already handled (and not even them in some cases).

Burton rocks.

Where is that article about the Burton-Hickson treatment?