WI No Batman (1966-68) Series?

[John Fredrick Parker]

It seems the infamous 1960's camp Batman series came to be because TV execs wanted to do a superhero movie, and Supes was tied up doing a musical. The idea of making it "ironic" came when the exec in charge coukdn't see a way of seriously bringing him to the small screen (a problem the Man of Steel presumably would bot have). So what if the 1966 saw the premier of a Superman TV show, instead of a campy Batman? How would the respective DC properties be affected?

[Marc Pasquin]

Originally Posted by John Fredrick Parker

It seems the infamous 1960's camp Batman series came to be because TV execs wanted to do a superhero movie, and Supes was tied up doing a musical. The idea of making it "ironic" came when the exec in charge coukdn't see a way of seriously bringing him to the small screen (a problem the Man of Steel presumably would bot have). So what if the 1966 saw the premier of a Superman TV show, instead of a campy Batman? How would the respective DC properties be affected?

wouldn't negatively affect superman in my mind. further down the road, batman might not have received the tim burton treatement. Lot of pop culture value would have been lost though as making batman psychadelic *was* taken as a joke by everyone involved (and the viewers too). Superman was already lightearted (at least when compared to batman) so it might not have had the same impact.

[John Fredrick Parker]

Originally Posted by Marc Pasquin

further down the road, batman might not have received the tim burton treatement.

Could it be TTL doesn't see a Batman movie at all until much later?

[GeorgeUK]

No Batman & Robin. Which means no Batnipples, no ice puns, and no Bat Credit Card.

[Marc Pasquin]

Originally Posted by John Fredrick Parker

Could it be TTL doesn't see a Batman movie at all until much later?

could be though I'd assume there might have been at least a cartoon at some point.

Would be interesting to have something inspired by the O'Neil and Adams era or based on Miller's the Dark Knight Return (which he would have immediately disavowed).

[ANARCHY_4_ALL]

I'm working on attempt of a no campy Bat series. But instead a serious dark adaption for the screen around the same time. I'm still contemplating actors. What I'm thinking so far is Paul Newman as the Batman, Steve McQueen as Deadshot, Kathrine Hepburn as Catwoman, and Jack Nicholson as the Joker of course. The rest of the cast is still up in the air for me.

[kevvy2010]

Originally Posted by GeorgeUK

No Batman & Robin. Which means no Batnipples, no ice puns, and no Bat Credit Card.

And likely no Batman the Animated Series. Meaning no Kevin Conory as Batman, no Mark Hamill as the Joker, no Harley Quinn, no Batman: Arkham Asylum/City.

EDIT: Oh, and no Bat Shark Repellant

[arrowiv]

Of course, there was already the George Reeves Superman series of the Fifties so Supes had already been done on tv.

[Badshah]

Batman simply wouldn't be as popular. It's the 66 show which brought him to the real mainstream and it was hugely influential, and started Bat- mania.

[John Fredrick Parker]

Originally Posted by arrowiv

Of course, there was already the George Reeves Superman series of the Fifties so Supes had already been done on tv.

True, this would be just the nth version of Superman, rather than anything as influential as the Batman series of OTL...

Originally Posted by trollhole

Batman simply wouldn't be as popular. It's the 66 show which brought him to the real mainstream and it was hugely influential, and started Bat- mania.

I can't help but see this happening as well -- really, no Bat-mania in the late 60's may even mean DC does away with Batman sometime during the Bronze Age... though that said, it's possible he still gets "rediscovered" and rebooted during the Dark Ages, though that would make for some different mythology.

But I don't see him constantly making the top three superheroes TTL, which would make for a different fandom...

[ANARCHY_4_ALL]

I think I've discovered away to blend our two ideas into this TL. Without the 60's Batman tv series. Uslan and Melniker could still acquire the rights maybe earlier than 1979. Without the campiness they could make the film they originally imagined closer to the dark tone of the comics. Following closely to my imagined darker earlier Batman franchise you would probably not have Newman or Hepburn. But if you like I would like to further this....

[Devolved]

Originally Posted by trollhole

Batman simply wouldn't be as popular. It's the 66 show which brought him to the real mainstream and it was hugely influential, and started Bat- mania.

Agreed. Also no campy series means no attempt to make him dark later.

[Nivek]

That would make Batman very niche somehow, the Adam West Batman was a Dual-edge Sword in the sense who leave a bad taste for a long time about what was really batman(a Traumed Vigilante) rather a cheap Superman, but still give him the Mainstream light to make people aware of him, that least to the 'dark ressaniace' who apex was the Nolan's Batman

[Torqumada]

Originally Posted by ANARCHY_4_ALL

I'm working on attempt of a no campy Bat series. But instead a serious dark adaption for the screen around the same time. I'm still contemplating actors. What I'm thinking so far is Paul Newman as the Batman, Steve McQueen as Deadshot, Kathrine Hepburn as Catwoman, and Jack Nicholson as the Joker of course. The rest of the cast is still up in the air for me.

If you are looking to do a Batman movie at the same time as the OTL series, you're not really going to get a dark tone for the series. This was the middle of the Silver Age of comics. DC wasn't really doing anything dark with the majority of their characters at the time. Comics really were for kids at that time. It would take Oneil and Adams to move Batman towards a darker tone than that seen during the Silver Age. In addition, Jack Nicholson was a bit actor and writer at that point in time. The biggest thing he had been on was The Andy Griffith show and was known for writing the Monkees movie Head. As for the character of Deadshot: While he had been created in 1950 by Bob Kane, he was basically a one shot character until 1977 when he got his modern incarnation (the Golden Age version dressed in a tux.) I don't think anyone would use him, except maybe as a one off character that may not even get named.

Torqumada

[John Fredrick Parker]

Originally Posted by Torqumada

If you are looking to do a Batman movie at the same time as the OTL series, you're not really going to get a dark tone for the series.

Exactly. And with no TV Show or Movie in the next 20 years, I'd say Batman invariably becomes a less popular character -- maybe somewhat more akin to where Wonder Woman or the Green Lantern ranks OTL -- completely turning the DC Universe upside down, and likely giving Marvel's standing a huge boost.

[Tom_B]

Without the Batman series I don't see the Green Hornet getting the green light (sorry couldn't resist). Bruce Lee got a lot of exposure playing Kato so his career might not take off.

[Torqumada]

One more thing about doing a Batman film instead of the OTL series: Katherine Hepburn is 59-61 at this time. She is much too old to play Catwoman at this point in her career.

Torqumada

[ANARCHY_4_ALL]

You must have missed my last post I said we should blend these two ideas. No Batman anything in the 60's. So, around 74-75 Uslan and Melniker acquire the film rights from DC. Instead of OTL's 79 acquire. Their plan to take Batman back to it's roots it's less complicated due to their being no campy series. The first film of the franchise comes out in 77-78. Already said Hepburn and Newman are out by the point. Deadshot is getting that rebut you spoke of and he is not the major villain with in the film. The major villains are the organized crime elements within Gotham. As the origin story and Batman's fight against them is the premise. Deadshot comes later in the film as an assassin hired by the bosses to fight this new vigilante. The second film will focus on the Joker which around that time Nicholson would be perfect for. It's also a time period of dark films. So, it's no longer a 60's Batman that I'm looking at but a late 70's-early 80's franchise.

[Simreeve]

Originally Posted by ANARCHY_4_ALL

Their plan to take Batman back to it's roots it's less complicated due to their being no campy series. The first film of the franchise comes out in 77-78. Already said Hepburn and Newman are out by the point. Deadshot is getting that rebut you spoke of and he is not the major villain with in the film. The major villains are the organized crime elements within Gotham.

Batman carrying a gun, as he did in some of his earliest comic appearances?

[ANARCHY_4_ALL]

I actually considered this possibly a supped up grappling gun that shoots rubber bullets as well?