• Welcome! The TrekBBS is the number one place to chat about Star Trek with like-minded fans.
    If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Why No 1960s Batman TV Series on VHS, DVD, etc.?

FalTorPan

Vice Admiral
Admiral
So Fox owns the rights to the 1960s Batman TV series, and Warner owns all video rights to Batman. That's my understanding, anyway.

Why haven't the studios ever worked out an arrangement that would benefit both studios, and allow consumers to buy Batman in some video format?
 
It seems to me that some sort of arrangement could be made which would benefit both companies. Then again, I don't know the soup-to-nuts details about these sorts of things.
 
One possibility is of personal enmity between WB-owned CNN and Fox News. Rupert Murdoch founded FN with a mad-on for CNN.

BTW, there are a lot more fingers in the pie than you might think. I think Adam West and George Barris, designer of all those kewl Bat-Vehicles, also get some residuals--then there's the music. I could be wrong, but the estates of Bat-creators Kane and Finger may get something to boot, possibly a settlement done to avoid the Siegel&Shuster lawsuits.

But don't declare it impossible. Until last year and this year, the cynics also said that a modern-day diecast 1966 Batmobile would never see the light of day. Now we have three scales, and three levels of quality in the 1/18.

Rob
 
Last edited:
$$$$$$$

Neil

That's exactly right. There was an interview a few years ago where they said that there were negotiations about releases (this was back when Begins was first coming to DVD) but no agreement could be made. I remember reading that Warner Brothers wanted the majority of the profits while Fox would take a minority share despite making the show.
 
If thats the case, whats the story with the first Batman movie (1966)? Why wasn't that affected by this dispute?
 
I read there may also be a problem with the series's frequent celebrity cameos. What do you do about all those scenes where Sammy Davis Jr. (or whomever) says hello to Batman as he's scaling the side of a building? Do those performers (or their estates) need to be compensated?

Mind you, that's just a rumor I read somewhere, but it sounds like a plausible complication to me.
 
Batman Was a great adaptation of the comic for the time it was made in, just as Burton's were excellent for thier era; Schumacher's, not so much. It'll be interesting in about twenty years to see if that generation's fans rip Nolan's efforts apart as being too serious or too artsy. Personally, I think Batman has done a pretty good job of keeping up with the times; Except for Batman The Animated Series, which is of course timeless.
 
Because god hates campy Batman.

Not my god.
My god trembles in anticipation of the release of Batman on DVD.
Of course, clearly, it's not a mighty god, as if it were, then the release of the sets would have happened.

I read there may also be a problem with the series's frequent celebrity cameos. What do you do about all those scenes where Sammy Davis Jr. (or whomever) says hello to Batman as he's scaling the side of a building? Do those performers (or their estates) need to be compensated?

Mind you, that's just a rumor I read somewhere, but it sounds like a plausible complication to me.

My bet is that an untrue rumor. Residuals were very different then...and didn't last forever. Didn't Shatner's residuals run out on Star Trek? Did cameo's even get residuals then?

I find it hard to believe that they would have to pay estates residuals from almost forty years ago...

Now, if it was something from the 90s...maybe...
 
I read there may also be a problem with the series's frequent celebrity cameos. What do you do about all those scenes where Sammy Davis Jr. (or whomever) says hello to Batman as he's scaling the side of a building? Do those performers (or their estates) need to be compensated?

Mind you, that's just a rumor I read somewhere, but it sounds like a plausible complication to me.

In recent months, I've had to become familiar with agents and talent representation for Hollywood actors and the loops involved with studios and permission rights, licensing and reproductions for a book project I am the research assistant on; therefore, this also seems like a plausible complication to me as well.
 
Batman Was a great adaptation of the comic for the time it was made in, just as Burton's were excellent for thier era; Schumacher's, not so much. It'll be interesting in about twenty years to see if that generation's fans rip Nolan's efforts apart

We don't need to wait for the next generation. Ours ALWAYS finds something to bitch about.

Hell, I've heard fans complaining about the ending of The Dark Knight already.
 
In my experience, the Adam West Batman is a show that you love as a serious adventure series when you're a kid, then dismiss as silly and campy when you reach adolescence and want to take everything seriously, then love again when you're fully grown up and finally figure out that it was a sitcom and was intentionally silly and campy, not to mention quite clever and subversive at times. Unless you're a comic-book geek who takes Batman way too seriously and insists on ignoring the historical reality that the character hasn't always been a grim avenger of the night.

As a sitcom, Batman was brilliantly original. People love to put down the weird and fanciful sitcoms of the '60s, shows like this and Gilligan's Island and My Favorite Martian, but at least they weren't just the thousandth sitcom in a row about a working schlub with a wife and cute kids or a teacher and his class of misfits or a bunch of young single friends hanging out together and talking incessantly about sex. Sitcoms today rarely have the originality they had in the '60s, and Batman was one of the most distinctive and unusual sitcoms ever created. It also had impressive production values and casting.
 
In my experience, the Adam West Batman is a show that you love as a serious adventure series when you're a kid, then dismiss as silly and campy when you reach adolescence and want to take everything seriously, then love again when you're fully grown up and finally figure out that it was a sitcom and was intentionally silly and campy, not to mention quite clever and subversive at times.
My experience exactly, though I haven't had the opportunity to revisit more than the theatrical film as an adult. I absolutely worshipped this show in my mid-single digits...there was literally nothing cooler or more exciting in the world to me then. Then the long years when I wouldn't touch it with a ten-foot pole. Recently, I bought the movie from a bargain bin for the hell of it, and thoroughly enjoyed myself. Now I can once again appreciate the fact that this series, and this series alone, is responsible for having started my lifelong obsession with super-hero comics.

I'm curious to know if anyone else had the same experience--Was the Batman TV show primarily responsible for getting you into comics?
 
In my experience, the Adam West Batman is a show that you love as a serious adventure series when you're a kid, then dismiss as silly and campy when you reach adolescence and want to take everything seriously, then love again when you're fully grown up and finally figure out that it was a sitcom and was intentionally silly and campy, not to mention quite clever and subversive at times.
My experience exactly, though I haven't had the opportunity to revisit more than the theatrical film as an adult. I absolutely worshipped this show in my mid-single digits...there was literally nothing cooler or more exciting in the world to me then. Then the long years when I wouldn't touch it with a ten-foot pole. Recently, I bought the movie from a bargain bin for the hell of it, and thoroughly enjoyed myself. Now I can once again appreciate the fact that this series, and this series alone, is responsible for having started my lifelong obsession with super-hero comics.

I'm curious to know if anyone else had the same experience--Was the Batman TV show primarily responsible for getting you into comics?


It may have been the reason I got into comics.

But, like you, as a kid it was MUST WATCH TV...I saw it in repeats and it was appointment watching. It was awesome fun adventure.
 
In my experience, the Adam West Batman is a show that you love as a serious adventure series when you're a kid, then dismiss as silly and campy when you reach adolescence and want to take everything seriously, then love again when you're fully grown up and finally figure out that it was a sitcom and was intentionally silly and campy, not to mention quite clever and subversive at times.
My experience exactly, though I haven't had the opportunity to revisit more than the theatrical film as an adult. I absolutely worshipped this show in my mid-single digits...there was literally nothing cooler or more exciting in the world to me then. Then the long years when I wouldn't touch it with a ten-foot pole. Recently, I bought the movie from a bargain bin for the hell of it, and thoroughly enjoyed myself. Now I can once again appreciate the fact that this series, and this series alone, is responsible for having started my lifelong obsession with super-hero comics.

I'm curious to know if anyone else had the same experience--Was the Batman TV show primarily responsible for getting you into comics?


It may have been the reason I got into comics.

But, like you, as a kid it was MUST WATCH TV...I saw it in repeats and it was appointment watching. It was awesome fun adventure.

Plus - Let us never forget - it produced some of the coolest vehicles ever seen on the screen, including the car. When I was a kid, and I saw the 66 Batmobile on TV, I knew for a fact that evil could never win. To paraphrase Kevin Conroy : Growing up, he was my hero. He still is.
 
If you are not already a member then please register an account and join in the discussion!

Sign up / Register


Back
Top