None of his films look like the work of the same director, they do vary in quality, style, budget and subject matter.

@MickyMac said:

None of his films are what you would call kid's films or action adventure films, isn't exactly the most ideal choice to do a Batman film or a family friendly film usually go with someone whose a genre filmmaker or an auteur or hotshot director, he was probably only hired because he was a studio friendly director.

They wanted a campy Batman like the tv series so they hired the most camp director in Hollywood. I enjoyed Batman Forever except for two face and Nicole Kidman.

@intothenightalone said:

@MickyMac said:

None of his films are what you would call kid's films or action adventure films, isn't exactly the most ideal choice to do a Batman film or a family friendly film usually go with someone whose a genre filmmaker or an auteur or hotshot director, he was probably only hired because he was a studio friendly director.

They wanted a campy Batman like the tv series so they hired the most camp director in Hollywood. I enjoyed Batman Forever except for two face and Nicole Kidman.

Forever and B&R were mostly camp with the villains since they were portrayed as Joker knock offs.

I can see why people would associate Schumacher with the film's campiness especially if you come across as camp and flamboyant.

@intothenightalone said:

@MickyMac said:

They wanted a campy Batman like the tv series so they hired the most camp director in Hollywood. I enjoyed Batman Forever except for two face and Nicole Kidman.

You say they hired the most "camp" director...have you SEEN his other films prior to this? Falling Down? Flatliners? The Client? A Time To Kill? and to a lesser degree, Lost Boys? I wouldn't necessarily call them "camp", in fact, some were pretty heavy films with a very serious tone.

It seems Joel got a set of instructions to make "light" Batman films & he followed suit. he definitely had a "live action cartoon" in mind when making them & even claimed this on set several times out loud. On the special features of Batman & Robin, he also claims the studio came down on him HARD to make B&R as "toyetic" as possible...even goes as far as APOLOGIZING for B&R! Poor guy, I don't think his career ever really recovered after that...and IMO he was...IS...a GOOD director. Say what you will about the plot and acting, Batman Forever and B&R are pretty to look at. Colorful and the action is well directed.

@jorgito2001 said:

@intothenightalone said:

@MickyMac said:

They wanted a campy Batman like the tv series so they hired the most camp director in Hollywood. I enjoyed Batman Forever except for two face and Nicole Kidman.

You say they hired the most "camp" director...have you SEEN his other films prior to this? Falling Down? Flatliners? The Client? A Time To Kill? and to a lesser degree, Lost Boys? I wouldn't necessarily call them "camp", in fact, some were pretty heavy films with a very serious tone.

It seems Joel got a set of instructions to make "light" Batman films & he followed suit. he definitely had a "live action cartoon" in mind when making them & even claimed this on set several times out loud. On the special features of Batman & Robin, he also claims the studio came down on him HARD to make B&R as "toyetic" as possible...even goes as far as APOLOGIZING for B&R! Poor guy, I don't think his career ever really recovered after that...and IMO he was...IS...a GOOD director. Say what you will about the plot and acting, Batman Forever and B&R are pretty to look at. Colorful and the action is well directed.

Camp as a person not his body of work.

Schumacher was at the wrong Batman series at the wrong time and possible the wrong. The whole wanting feels he was a few films behind to where people are with the series or many years too soon for a prequel/reboot.

I know he was in talks to REBOOT it after B&R was panned. He pitched a darker "Year One" Batman movie, but WB decided to go with Chris Nolan.

I wonder how a darker movie by Schumacher would've been like.

I don't think dark and gritty would necessarily mean a better film but it would make a more accessible one.

@MickyMac said:

@jorgito2001 said:

@intothenightalone said:

@MickyMac said:

They wanted a campy Batman like the tv series so they hired the most camp director in Hollywood. I enjoyed Batman Forever except for two face and Nicole Kidman.

You say they hired the most "camp" director...have you SEEN his other films prior to this? Falling Down? Flatliners? The Client? A Time To Kill? and to a lesser degree, Lost Boys? I wouldn't necessarily call them "camp", in fact, some were pretty heavy films with a very serious tone.

It seems Joel got a set of instructions to make "light" Batman films & he followed suit. he definitely had a "live action cartoon" in mind when making them & even claimed this on set several times out loud. On the special features of Batman & Robin, he also claims the studio came down on him HARD to make B&R as "toyetic" as possible...even goes as far as APOLOGIZING for B&R! Poor guy, I don't think his career ever really recovered after that...and IMO he was...IS...a GOOD director. Say what you will about the plot and acting, Batman Forever and B&R are pretty to look at. Colorful and the action is well directed.

Camp as a person not his body of work.

Yeah, I don't see any studio giving instructions like, you know what Batman needs more of? Butt shots! Lots and lots of butt shots! And throw in some groin shots as well.

@Innovator said:

@MickyMac said:

@jorgito2001 said:

@intothenightalone said:

@MickyMac said:

They wanted a campy Batman like the tv series so they hired the most camp director in Hollywood. I enjoyed Batman Forever except for two face and Nicole Kidman.

You say they hired the most "camp" director...have you SEEN his other films prior to this? Falling Down? Flatliners? The Client? A Time To Kill? and to a lesser degree, Lost Boys? I wouldn't necessarily call them "camp", in fact, some were pretty heavy films with a very serious tone.

It seems Joel got a set of instructions to make "light" Batman films & he followed suit. he definitely had a "live action cartoon" in mind when making them & even claimed this on set several times out loud. On the special features of Batman & Robin, he also claims the studio came down on him HARD to make B&R as "toyetic" as possible...even goes as far as APOLOGIZING for B&R! Poor guy, I don't think his career ever really recovered after that...and IMO he was...IS...a GOOD director. Say what you will about the plot and acting, Batman Forever and B&R are pretty to look at. Colorful and the action is well directed.

Camp as a person not his body of work.

Yeah, I don't see any studio giving instructions like, you know what Batman needs more of? Butt shots! Lots and lots of butt shots! And throw in some groin shots as well.

If it was suppose to be a kid's film why is there so many homoerotic undertones like the nipples and butt shots? Schumacher doesn't come across as someone who was under pressure, he comes off as somebody who doesn't take himself seriously.

True about the butt shots and nipples...I guess those were his OWN personal add-ons we could've done without. lol.

OK, so maybe Schumacher DID screw up on his own some.

With Schumacher I'm not quite sure why he's doing or how he fits into the genre and this feels true of many of the cast and crew, they could've with people more ideal for the type of film but obvious they wanted to play it safe.

His Batman films were suppose to be kid friendly but there's a huge discrepancy on how it was done compared to The Animated Series Forever and especially B&R don't always look gay but they often do, Schumacher being blamed for B&R's poor quality is probably often an attack on him as a person.

If WB wanted a family friendly film after Batman Returns why go with somebody who hasn't done any of that? if you wanted family friendly Joe Johnson.

I thought Joel was a good choice at first.

I think he was overwhelmed with studio interference and a bad script.

@DanDare said:

I thought Joel was a good choice at first.

I think he was overwhelmed with studio interference and a bad script.

He wasn't a good choice, he's too flamboyant and effeminate to make a Batman film.

@MickyMac said:

@DanDare said:

I thought Joel was a good choice at first.

I think he was overwhelmed with studio interference and a bad script.

He wasn't a good choice, he's too flamboyant and effeminate to make a Batman film.

I guess that is code for: He is gay!