I respect and admire Joel Schumacher.

[GothamAlleys]

Schumacher doesnt take criticism well and thats evidenced by his constant announcements about how Forever was and is worshipped by everyone (he even assumes everyone loves it while giving his matter-of-fact apology) and when someone says that B&R was bad then hes met with comments like "grow up, get a life, go out" among others

Heres one of many examples of Schumacher getting all worked up when someone criticizes B&R. Its already a 3rd interview that I found in which he gets angry when someone mentions that people didnt like his Batman movies. From sabotagetimes.com

So how do you feel now about what Batman And Robin did to your reputation as a filmmaker – do you think you suffered, in the public eye?

Did I suffer in the public eye?

Well do you feel that your reputation was damaged? Because the film got a mighty battering, and inevitably a lot of criticism was aimed at you as director. Do you understand what I mean?

No. (pause) You mean that all my other movies would be meaningless?

No…

You mean that I would be judged on one misstep?

No, you were saying after that film that you wanted…

You asked if I think my reputation was damaged. And my question to you is, because I made one film that wasn’t as popular as the other ones?

But it was enormously unpopular, wasn’t it.

(pause) Maybe to you, I don’t know.

Do you feel…

You know what it feels like? It feels that you’ve made a decision and you want me to agree with it.

That’s not true.

I will if you want…


Another example from contactmusic.com

Q: How did you feel about the terrible critical reception of "Batman and Robin"?

A: Oh, grow up! It's a "Batman" movie.



I also had newer interviews where he claims only "some" people didnt like B&R. Hes nice when interviewed for WB releases like Anthology, but as you can see he gets majorily offended when someone says something bad about his precious B&R

 

[Ponyboy]

Well it's been about 15 years now, I reckon he's tired of it being brought up every time he does an interview.

 

[Fudgie]

I think he made Val Kilmer a better and more interesting Batman than Keaton. He got inside Batman's head.

 

[TruerToTheCore]

Well, he's probably pissed off because people think making a bad Batman movie is the worst sin you can commit...

 

[GothamAlleys]

He never treated and looked at Batman in a serious light anyway. "Grow up its a Batman movie". He was always so dismissive of the fact that its a "Batman" movie and a comic book movie, thats why I would love to see him watching Nolan's movies and commenting back on his statements that Batman and comic book movies are meant to be silly and cant be taken seriously

 

[Ponyboy]

I think he made Val Kilmer a better and more interesting Batman than Keaton. He got inside Batman's head.

Fudgie just give up while you're... not ahead.

 

[The Joker]

Schumacher did delve into Batman's psyche more than the previous movies did though. That whole storyline with the nightmares he was having about the giant bat, his father's journal, counseling Dick over the pain he was going through etc.

Schumacher did get some things right. Have to give him props for that.

 

[GothamAlleys]

Schumacher did delve into Batman's psyche more than the previous movies did though.

I didnt like it. He made Batman the main character instead of how he was in the previous movie a side, shadowy character that we dont get to see much , therefore being more interesting, and he simply just showed Bruce's pain black on white. In Burton's movies it was there but subtle, it was all in Keaton's mannerism and physical expressions while being alone. Schumacher just hit everyone on the head with it and spelled it out onscreen

 

[The Joker]

He made Batman the main character

Which is exactly how Batman should always be, IMO.

 

[GothamAlleys]

Which is exactly how Batman should always be, IMO.

Personal preference, and would completely ruin the whole mystery angle and change the character, which it did. I hated that Schumacher changed it. Naturally its a perfect approach for Nolan's movies cause its a different approach, but in the older movies Batman was like Hunchback from Notre Damme, Stoker's Dracula and Phantom of the Opera. While they were title characters in their own stories, it was through someone's eyes that we saw the story and the characters this way were that more interesting cause we were eager to see them, to find out more about them, to follow the lead characters in the depths of their lairs and hideout. Thats the angle Burton's movies had

 

[The Joker]

Yeah I know, but I never saw Batman as a Dracula or the Hunchback of Notre Damme type character for a movie. He's a deep and complex character with lots to offer a story. I can't imagine movies like Mask of the Phantasm or Nolan's movies being as great as they are if they approached Batman that way.

It's not a slur on Burton, I still love his movies, but I prefer my Batman with a bit of meat on his story.

 

[GothamAlleys]

Yeah I know, but I never saw Batman as a Dracula or the Hunchback of Notre Damme type character for a movie.

But Burton did and created a character that imo was far more interesting than the Batman i knew from the comic books at the time

I can't imagine movies like Mask of the Phantasm or Nolan's movies being as great as they are if they approached Batman that way.

Neither can I and I wouldnt want that in MOTP or Nolan's movies. Their approach and focus on the character was perfect for their visions, I cant imagine it being any different. But Schumacher continued the haunted house story and completely changed the character to the point the 2 are like separate characters. One is a socialite siting in a castle away from people, staring at people in the dark like a ghost, the other one is a moping around pretty boy who is all over media events and public places and shoots one one liner after another when in the suit always looking startled. And thats my point, if Schumacher was doing a reboot I wouldnt mind it, but just redoing the character and angle didnt work for me, it wasnt the continuaion, it wasnt the same character,. I know his movies werent the Gothic tales that the first 2 were and they were the typical hero-comes-from-the-sky-in-floating-cape-to-the-rescue, but thats why I didnt like em. I love serious and dark Nolan stuff and the Goth, dark Burton stuff

 

[helloiamben]

He never treated and looked at Batman in a serious light anyway. "Grow up its a Batman movie". He was always so dismissive of the fact that its a "Batman" movie and a comic book movie, thats why I would love to see him watching Nolan's movies and commenting back on his statements that Batman and comic book movies are meant to be silly and cant be taken seriously

Eh, Batman Forever had some pretty serious elements thrown in and I don't know if you've listened to Schumacher's commentary but he sounds pretty enthusiastic about both films. He also "got" or understood that a dark and serious Batman works too, even after the fact. There are people that like the "light hearted" comical Batman, maybe he was a fan of that interpretation, that was his particular eye and it got him the job.

Yeah Batman and Robin is a joke but there are redeeming qualities in Forever. Who do you think cut all the Burtonesque "darkness" and seriousness from Forever? It certainly wasn't Schumacher, it was WB. They wanted a friendly, marketable film and that's exactly what they got and it was a success. They went even further with Batman and Robin and it fell apart.

Schumacher is to blame also, after all he was the director but it takes more than one person to make a film. It's a team. The actors are to blame (I think Clooney and Arnold apologized) as well as other people that had their hand in it. As for not taking the criticism very well, I guess I couldn't really blame him. I wouldn't react that way if I made a dud, but I can see where he's coming from. I mean, atleast he apologized but then again, did any of them have to? Is it that serious or important to apologize to people for making a movie that misses the mark? I don't know. But they did it anyway.

It's water under the bridge. He made a bad Batman film, it happened. He apologized, discussed the problems and that was that. Now we've experienced better, higher caliber Batman films. What do people want him to do? It used to be his kid, now it's off off in the hands of another, capable director.

 

[GothamAlleys]

maybe he was a fan of that interpretation,

Its confirmed that he was. He grew up with the 60s Batman and that was HIS Batman, Batman HE knew and wanted to base B&R on the Silver Age

What do people want him to do? It used to be his kid, now it's off off in the hands of another, capable director

.

Again, I think apology is an overstatement. He just said it as a matter of fact thing, that hes sorry if he disapointed Batman Forever fans. Yes, cause again, he says that everyone is worshipping this movie and its crazy if you dont. Ive read really plenty of interviews with him and he always comes off as smug and very offensive with a huge attitude. The listed interview is one example. He disregarded Batman as just a Batman movie or just a comic book movie more than I can count, and the only time he wasnt defensive towards people who didnt like B&R was on Anthology DVD when he just briefly said sorry if you didnt like it to Forever fans

The only stuff from Forever I like is the design of the city (sans colors), music, sound mix, Batman's cowl and Wayne remembering past. I hate the fact that its the typical superhero comic book movie, I cant stand the dialogue (again, that one liners exchange called dialogue between Chase and Batman is embarassing), the portrayal of the villains, the inclusion of Robin, and well, just about everything else. Heck, the movie even starts with a stupid one liner and a butt and cod shots

 

[helloiamben]

I don't know, I think you're looking too far into it. I doubt Schumacher even cares at this point. Did you happen to get dates on those references you have? When was the analogy where he apologized, 2006? People change, maybe he feels differently. If the interviews were recent, post-analogy then perhaps he really is a high strung wuss that can't take negative criticism. Who knows, who cares?

He's obviously moved on and so has everyone else. The films are a thing of the past. People either like them, or hate them.

Oh and the ridiculous butt shots aren't shown in the beginning. It's actually really tame and not gay at all. It's up there with my favorite superhero "suit up" scenes actually. He suits up, grabs his gear and heads out. The Mcdonalds plug, sandwhich thingalmost, kills it for me but, eh, Bruce and Alfred can't have jokes once and awhile? Whatever. The butt crap doesn't happen until the end with the Sonar suit, but even then it's no where near as awful as Batman and Robin.

 

[El Payaso]

I think he made Val Kilmer a better and more interesting Batman than Keaton. He got inside Batman's head.

Haha. He just made Kilmer have a couple of bad memories.

His Batman was in love with some airheaded shrink and his Bruce Wayne was jealous of Batman attracting Chase more than he did.

Then his Batman acted like a fragile damsel before a stud when he was talking to Chase at the rooftop. Chase kept chasing him and Batman kept avoiding her, running some steps away and turning his back at her.

That's interesting? Heh.

 

[Spoonman]

The suit up at the begining of Forever I like quite a lot actually, and no, that doesn't feature any "butt shot" whatsoever, Forever only has it at the finale when suiting with the Sonar suit.

And about the whole Notre dame thing and all of that, I don't agree, to me Batman is Batman and he is already misteripus as it is and has his own set of characteristics to go with it. Eventhough I like Burton movies a lot I actually liked what Scumacher did in changing focus to Batman's mind in Forever, and I don't see how we were hit in the head with it, I disagree completely with that, Nolan was way more literal at it and I am not even complaining; but long story short if I like something about what Schumacher did is his delving into the Bruce / Batman persona in BF.

 

[Spoonman]

Haha. He just made Kilmer have a couple of bad memories.

His Batman was in love with some airheaded shrink and his Bruce Wayne was jealous of Batman attracting Chase more than he did.

Then his Batman acted like a fragile damsel before a stud when he was talking to Chase at the rooftop. Chase kept chasing him and Batman kept avoiding her, running some steps away and turning his back at her.

That's interesting? Heh.

I disagree, thats a very ironic way of downplaying the situation, its wasn't like that at all, for my money Kilmer seemed to be haunted by those memories throughout the film and he was convinicing at it IMO; I am not saying it was a deep essay in psychology or anything like that but it was nothing like you say, I could play the very same game with some of the Burton / Keaton aspects and downplay them with irony but I will pass at it.

 

[helloiamben]

I could play the very same game with some of the Burton / Keaton aspects and downplay them with irony but I will pass at it.

Difference is that everything that the Kilmer Batman or Bale Batman felt is discussed from character to character, it's a part of the story. Keaton Batman doesn't get that chance in the films. You can see that he's clearly hurting and thinking but it's never brought up. We don't know exactly what is on his mind, only that he is pondering. It's like a silent film.

I personally don't have a preference to what is more dramatic. I like how they're all show cased, even Kilmer's. I'm just more fond of Keaton and Bale.

 

[christpunchers]

BF was interesting and good in its own way. It's less weighty but still retains some interesting elements. All I can say is that the deleted scenes were pretty damn dark, especially the one where Bruce dreams about falling into the cave again and sees that giant bat.

Also I've never seen this deleted scene before, it's damn good. I believe Schumacher wanted this to be in the film but WB had other ideas:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEGl8FJ99sg

 

[Two-Face]

Not really, the producer decides in most cases. There are just a few directors in Hollywood who can truly turn something into "their movie".

"Batman & Robin" was in general the result of false assumptions and greed. Batman Forever was a huge success, not only box office wise but also when it comes to merchandise. So people involved probably thought: "So let's go one step further, give them more!".

No It's director's decision on what the film will look like end of the day. It's their baby.

 

[El Payaso]

I disagree, thats a very ironic way of downplaying the situation, its wasn't like that at all, for my money Kilmer seemed to be haunted by those memories throughout the film and he was convinicing at it IMO; I am not saying it was a deep essay in psychology or anything like that but it was nothing like you say, I could play the very same game with some of the Burton / Keaton aspects and downplay them with irony but I will pass at it.

So in the end you get my point.

 

[Thebumwhowalks]

Re: the Schumacher interview at the top of the page, I think he has every right to be pissed off in that interview. Basically the interviewer is insinuating that his whole reputation as a filmaker is in tatters cause of B&R, which is ridiculous. Plenty of better, more respected filmakers than Schumacher have made movies just as bad as that one.

just look at the big guns...
When did Coppola last make a good movie?
Scorsese has made a couple of mis-fires.
Speilberg has made a couple of mediocre films right?
Lucas....Lucas!!!

But the thing is, Schumacher screwed up a Batman movie, so all the lifelong Batman fans will not shut up about it, lol. the movie is complained about by hundreds of people every frickin day, just like the SW prequels.

and the funny thing is, Schumacher has made a better vigilante film than BB or TDK, it's called 'Falling Down'. Well, TDK is as good as it, although it loses momentum in the last act, but FD is a great movie, it's quality not dropping from beginning to end.
'The Lost Boys' was a very fun vamp movie, that ref in Reservoir Dogs was right on the money, young people played that movie to death on vhs back in the day, it was a short, snappy vamp movie that did what it promised with no flab on it's bod.

It was those two movies that made me very excited that he had been signed on to do Batman, esp FD, I had no idea about the machinations behind the scenes though.

He can make good a good fantasy movie, and a good vigilante film, mayeb if WB had let him go dark with BF, he would have made a film that folk would appreciate more, but it still has some good qualities, I'm not going to go into for the hundredth time.

frickin B&R though, Schumacher did **** up a lot himself during that, even though there were ceratin circumstances that guarnateed it would not be a good Batman movie anyway...the priority for the studio to make it 'toyetic'..being rushed in two years(O Donnell said he felt BF was a real film while on set, but with B&R it felt like a toy advert was being filmed)...Arnold's terrible acting...awful rushed script that re-heated the beats of BF to far lesser effect...Clooney's mis-casting(Schumacher's fault)...but it was Schumacher who called the shots of 'remember folks it's a cartoon' which contributed to the arch over acting...

But, the guy did have the skills to make a good Batman film, that is evident from his CV, and the good stuff in BF.

 

[The Joker]

But, the guy did have the skills to make a good Batman film, that is evident from his CV, and the good stuff in BF.

Yeah and he has done good movies. Ones like Falling Down and The Lost Boys are great.

 

[theMan-Bat]

Falling Down (1993) is the one Joel Schumacher film I really enjoy.