So, I've been working on this for a while. Trying to get the POD as plausible as possible for what I want. This is what I've come up with so far. There is an argument early on in the pre-production of the series between 20th Century Fox and Dozier that leads to the project being aborted. Batman goes unnoticed in Hollywood for another decade. When two young producers named Uslan and Melniker attained the rights in 1978. With no campy series their ideal of a darker more realistic Batman for the big screen is not infringed. After the success of Superman in 1978 Warner Bros. signs on to produce. Hoping that another successful film adaption of a DC comics hero will give them control of what maybe an emerging market. How is that plausible enough for you guys? Also I keep considering who would be the best New Hollywood director to tackle the project. I'd like to here suggestions from you all before I make the choice. As soon as I figure that out this TL will be made for your enjoyment. Please help me.
No 66' Batman series. The Batman film released 79' or 80'.
- Thread starter ANARCHY_4_ALL
- Start date
Ok I've been considering Ridley Scott or Stanley Kubrick the most but that would interfere with some of their best work. Tell me why I shouldn't use either one of those and who may be a better choice for the time period.
Maybe but the 66' tv series causes complications for what I intend. I don't want anyone to think of Batman as the campy version ever. Also it keeps out of service so it's easier for the producing duo to acquire the rights earlier. Which gets it made earlier. Maybe the Superman film is more of a success without it.
Part of the problem is that the campiness of Batman in the 60s was not entirely based on the TV show. Beginning in the 1950 Batman became more associated with fantastic sci-fi stories, and campy, and the 60s stories stemmed directly out of this. Part of this was the result of natural tendencies of American culture during the period (look at the Dick Tracy comic strip during the same time, where Tracy traveled to the Moon, and his adopted son married an Alien), and some of it sprang out of a result of the Comicbook code.
Without the campiness of the 1960s show, then you may well see a return to the darkness of the comic a few years earlier (in OTL, it began, roughly, around 1968, I bleieve, with O'Neil), but, certainly, no sooner than 1965 or 66, I would think.
What this mean is that, as with any DC comic book during this period, there may well be still a lot of people who remember the campy period very fondly, although it won't get the cultural exposure it did in OTL. I could well see a director in the 1970s, trying to do a grim and gritty comic book movie, as realistic as possible, in this case, although as to who, I couldn't say.
An interesting side thought: if there is no Batman show in the 1960s, then there may not be a Green Hornet show, which will have some major impacts upon Bruce Lee's career.
I read in Larry Tye's "Superman" that the Batman was near cancellation in 1966 and that even Superman's Girlfriend Lois Lane was regularly beating it in sales. If there had been no television show, there would be a strong possibility that Batman would fade into the background and have some interesting butterflies. Ulsan and Melniker could still acquire the rights though.
I'm now thinking there should be an earlier series around the time of the Superman series. That would be more of a noire pulp detective series. Which would cause the comics to stick the traditional route. And allow for the series to come about the same time as the Superman films.