WI: Tim Burton as the director of Batman Forever

It depends on how this comes about- does Burton bow to studio pressure and make a more mainstream, less dark movie, or does the studio let him continue doing his own thing? Does this change the script writing process?

Either way, Michael Keaton's more likely to stick around (especially if Burton's allowed to do his thing- Keaton left because he didn't like thee direction the series was taking).

If they do Two-Face it might be Billy Dee Williams?

Irrelevant side note, there were some interesting ideas floating around during the casting process- how's this
Daniel-Day Lewis as Batman (he'd presumably become a real vigilante to study for the role)
Leo Di Caprio as Robin
Michael Jackson as the Riddler
Linda Hamilton as Dr Chase Meridian
 
It would be a totally revamped movie. I think an earlier title was "Batman Continues" so let's assume it's that.

My POD would be that the writer for Batman Returns gets earlier feedback that it is too dark and lightens it to the levels of the 1989 movie. The backlash was only recognized at the first screening. By then it was too late. Burton, initially hesitant to do a second Batman film, was all for a third one in the OTL but the studio pressured him out of it. Here, he could still be on board because of a lack of popular backlash.

Burton's Batman 3 has a number of possibilities. For one, Marlon Wayans was originally tapped to be Robin. He was bought out of his contract in the OTL when Schumacher took over, and still receives royalty checks. Thirdly, either Robin Williams or Micky Dolenz were tapped to be the Riddler. Williams may not be part of it since he was burned in the OTL. He was used as a negotiating ploy to get Jack Nicholson to be the Joker. Billy Dee Williams was tapped to be Two-Face at some point, though it may not be in the third film. And Catwoman was supposed to be part of the franchise as it went on.

The series was project to last for 4 films. My money is that you'd have Robin introduced in the third one, have Riddler as the main film villain, and have Two-Face introduced in the third to be carried over to the fourth film. Keaton also really wanted to cover and explore the Bruce Wayne character in depth, like Nolan did, and may have gotten Burton to do that for the third and fourth films. And the thing people forget is Keaton didn't give up on Batman Forever because Burton wasn't directing. He thought Schumacher's script and direction sucked for the third one. He would have stayed on had it remained the same Batman under another director.
 
I could actually see Ra's Al Ghul in the Fourth Movie as a deranged semi-immortal(?) Terrorist.
 
I think the key to a lighter Batman Returns-and consequently a Burton directed third film-is the Penguin.

No, the Penguin was not the entire reason for the backlash but once you give Burton complete creative control-which he did not have with Batman it's the one element that could be different with Batman Returns still being a film Burton was interested in directing.

Burton did not know what to make of the Penguin. The reason that he's in the film is because the studio demanded his presence-not because that's what Burton was interested in doing from the onset. To him, the Penguin was a cipher even when compared to the other characters in Batman's world once you moved him away from being a mere gimmick villain. Even Batman the Animated Series had some trouble with him-which should be an indication in making a film where he's the primary antagonist. Burton felt compelled to reinvent the character more or less from scratch and so he created the monster in the film we have.

If you want to avoid that outcome you have to either avoid the mandate-or somehow have Burton be persuaded by someone to reinvent him in a different direction. I think Burton would have sooner made a film about the Riddler than Penguin if left entirely to his own device. he latter is much harder because "monster" is the kind of character Burton was interested in focusing on.

A different reinvention of the character might mean that Batman Returns is a completely different film. One option is that the Penguin is reinvented as a cruel-distant aristocratic sort of character. I say this because the one thing that Burton said he noticed about the Penguin before the reinvention was that he was a guy who constantly wore a tuxedo. He couldn't get a profile from that-but it does suggest a conceited aristocrat.

I don't know whether Burton would have done this-probably not. Then again he did put such a character in Batman Returns-Max Schreck is similar to what Aristocrat-Penguin would have been like.

But otherwise-the Penguin has to be a monster-and no matter how much he's toned down-it probably wouldn't be enough to stop the backlash unless he's toned so far down that it isn't the monster penguin anymore anyway.
 
I watched Batman Returns yesterday, and it's pretty terrible. Michelle Pfeiffer is a great Catwoman though, and her relationship with Keaton on screen is extremely well done.

If Burton had toned it down (or had a better script) I suspect you could have gotten a better movie and been able to keep him on for a third Batman movie which means Keaton sticks around too. $15 million in 1990s dollars is a retarded amount of money.
 
Irrespective of anything else, including tone or violence, the problem with Batman Returns is that it is just off-putting. There's just something about it where it doesn't work within the context of Batman.
 
Irrespective of anything else, including tone or violence, the problem with Batman Returns is that it is just off-putting. There's just something about it where it doesn't work within the context of Batman.

It's a very off putting movie. It has an ARMY OF PENGUINS WITH ROCKETS STRAPPED TO THEIR BACKS... along with child abandonment and Penguin attempting to kidnap the Gotham elite's firstborn children.

Plus, for being a Batman movie, he's barely in it. Danny DeVito consumes a huge amount of screen time trying to explain the Penguin.
 
You can't tone down the movie and or give Batman more screen time and keep Burton.

Burton did not want to make the sequel to Batman, he only agreed because he was given complete creative control.

Either toning the film down or having Batman appear more frequently would represent a compromise that would violate the premise of Batman Returns being more of a Burton film than a sequeL

The alternative was the Sam Hamm script which contained interesting elements but has an even worse third act in which The Penguin and Catwoman hunt for Gold in Wayne manor.

The problem at the heart of both project again is the Penguin-who simply does not work as a primary antagonist unless the film revels in camp.
 
If you want Burton to direct Batman III, there might be another option, albeit it may go against Burton's personality and inclination, but then engineering Burton's directing of the third film requires a lot of hand waving to begin with.


Burton says no to Batman II after ultimately deciding he can't figure out what to do with the Penguin.

There's no backlash to this alternate Batman II-but it slightly underperforms expectations. Panicked Warner Brothers fires the new director and begs for Burton to return. Now it's hard to imagine Burton agreeing given that Batman is years in the past by this point, but if he could somehow be convinced you'd have a Burton directed Batman III.

The chances of that happening are nil-but I just don't see a way around the Batman Returns issue.
 
Top