Merge all Burton & Schumacher Batman portrayals?
As well as every other character split up by different actors in the same continuity? I think it could and should work. It would help make for a seamless biography. Williams' and Jones' Harvey Dents are one in the same. I think people could adjust over some of the radical differences. Because Bruce Wayne's childhood flashbacks are shared by all the portrayals. Young Bruce running off with his father's journal was shared by Keaton's Batman as well. 22.214.171.124 07:24, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
They are fine as they are. This way we can make the articles more detailed without mixing all the characters. Besides we have a system set up, why change it to suit you? Doomlurker 14:41, 6 October 2008 (UTC)
- Why not change it to suit everyone better? Why leave it to suit you? And merging them into the one, concise character's biography would be more detailed and accurate to understanding him.
Firstly this system has been set up for longer than you have been here and no one else has complained. And secondly Batman is a pretty major character so why not have pages for each actor? That way when we get round to it we can make it more detailed. For minor characters like Bruce's parents who hardly appear in the films they don't need articles for each actor but the main character it makes sense for them to have each page. If it is that much of a problem we can make a Batman (Films) page that has a brief biography for the character in each film and link it to the individual pages BUT we are not merging them.
Doomlurker 20:26, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
- And besides who says merging the pages would suit EVERYONE better ??? 126.96.36.199 20:30, 8 October 2008 (UTC)
- It would suit many more people better than it currently does, even if not those who don't like in-depth histories within a single continuity. Check out the Anakin Skywalker article at starwars.wikia.com. It covers the entire life of him, including his rebirth as Vader. And you know what, it works and is totally kickass.
Please reconsider allowing this matter to be voted on. And many things that existed before you or I should not exist anymore: slavery, House, Hugh Hefner. We must fight for the beautiful young women he has bought and holds captive in his castle of depraved, wanton sex.
Try to be liberal-minded with this. There was a time for this policy, but not anymore. This is the time for the spreading of vast amounts of knowledge, not the supressing of it. Don't try to destroy the memory and honoring of the lives of these men and women, to be forgotten by time. The power is in our hands. You've got The Touch. We must unite as a people and voice our opinion, and not be crushed under the thumbs of a select elite. 188.8.131.52 03:04, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
Its still a no. You said on another article that if it was down to you you would have an article for every type of Joker balloon so why don't you just face it IT IS FINE AS IT IS. Doomlurker 09:10, 28 January 2009 (UTC)
He's got a point, its a bit confusing to have them separate pages when they're the same character. Few wikis do it this way, making separate character pages (for the same character) based on actor. At the very least a mention should be made at the end of the bio saying that he is the same Batman that's in Batman Forever.Scarletspiderfan 17:16, July 11, 2011 (UTC)
Automated transfer of Problem Report #22446
The following message was left by Anonymous via PR #22446 on 2009-05-23 14:21:56 UTC
Seperating the Burton/Schumacher Films
Hi. I'm aware of the reasons these incarnations were probably blended and that apparently Arrow or whatever retroactively implies its the same continuity, but this decision feels flawed to me. I feel that this is degrading both to the Burton movies and the Schumacher movies in their portrayal and makes the organization of the article itself to be messy.
Batman/Batman Returns and Batman Forever/Batman & Robin are both thematically drastically different with conflicting diagetic elements despite technically being in the same continuity. One of the most glaring instances being how the article jumps back and forth between the different runs in Bruce's biography and as a result the article feels like it has poor footing with it feeling like it wouldn't be best for a wiki viewer looking for information on the Schumacher incarnation or for the Burton incarnation.
Personally I would suggest seperating these based off of, "Batman (Michael Keaton) or Batman (Burton films)/Batman (Schumacher films)" but to each their own. Anywho I hope you consider this as I do sincerely think it would be for the best in-terms of wiki navigation and for the content of the given articles.
- You're right, now the third and fourth sequels will be officially considered a splintering tangent continuity from the Burton/Keaton starting point. But there's still a bunch of the things about Muschietti's "cinematic multiverse" that will we still don't know. Will the events of Batman Returns also be ignored? It's a "Let's wait and see" kind of a thing. There's a number of other ways it could be handled by pointing out alternate timelines on one article. One of the main reasons for merger was the Schumacher pages never seemed to have more than two paragraphs of information, when it was separated by actor, which also never felt right/made sense trying to create a history rundown for the same character. (go over to this page to learn about his childhood etc.) After ten years place years of being barebones stub pages it didn't seem like a very promising endeavor. It simply wasn't attracting any interest. The original text from those pages are still intact on this article, you can see how short the descriptions of those events are comparatively. Also what would we label pages with that branch of continuity, Bruce Wayne (NeonBurtonverse)? The only glaring retcon/continuity error is stuff related to what the Wayne family were watching at the movie theater. Burton received top-billing producer credit on Batman Forever, and with direct references to Catwoman and Jack Napier it's never not been considered a sequel to Returns by WB or the majority of the public. They have always been packaged together in box sets, there are returning supporting cast members. Schumacher was continuing something pre-established, even with his strong desire to "go younger" after Keaton and Russo left the project, why didn't he take the same approach with Alfred and Gordon? The same basic approach to the batsuit was kept, Ringwood and his batshop worked on all four movies. I would never let a Arrow cameo dictate a long standing movie continuity. Whul's appearance would imply a third splintering continuity.--Phantom Stranger (talk) 14:46, August 23, 2020 (UTC)
- I can understand that mindset for combining them but it still seems to be outweighed for the mindset to seperate them to me. I can understand wanting to hold some stuff off until the Flash multiverse movie, but also these are major film characters from over 20 years ago so I see it as fair to try and do what's best for the respective pages now and cross the Flash bridge when we get there.
- I understand that the Schumacher films referance the Burton films but this can be fairly easily covered by having a couple sentances saying, "Kim Bassinger referanced his history with a character implied to be Catwoman blah blah blah" you know. As for them being 'seen as the official sequels by the public, non-cannon effective production details and DVD box sets', that seems weaker too me than just providing the more appropriate continuity information and maybe including a link at the top of the page for This article is on the character from Tim Burton's Batman and Batman Returns. For the character found in the sequels by Joel Schumacher click here or something along those lines. I don't see a surface-level assumption made by the masses to be fair enough of a reason to worsen the quality of the articles that they might search for.
- Additionally, while i don't see 'pages getting low visits' as a reason to not make a page, i do think that if they were just properly distinguished by Burton Films/Schumacher Films there would be a-lot more simplicity involved in writing the articles rather than based off of actors. There's a good amount of information for both and it would probably make things simpler than having to jump thematic continuity back and forth. For the betterment of both Schumacher's Batman and Burton's Batman I think it should probably be done, it would just need to proper formatting and wiki links to do as such, most the problems could even probably be solved with a trivia section.
- Anywho thankyou, MaleficiousVillain (talk) 21:19, August 23, 2020 (UTC)
Sounds great Maleficious, Schumacherverse it is. Eventually. The mugger that killed the Waynes was just a guy who wanted money, or doing it for Lew Moxon depending who you're asking. Almost never has he been described as a 'maniac' and compared to a disfigured psychotic like Two-Face. So it's more than just Kidman implying Batman's well known encounters with Catwoman in the city. Has Schumacher himself ever ever insisted that this is a different world? 20 years of home video box set releases that are still kept separate from the Dark Knight Trilogy and others isn't a surface level assumption it's just reality. Authors or corporations dictate canon, not fans. It's continually served to us as all one thing. I was the one who separated Batsuit (Burton films) into two separate articles. The same with Batsuit (Schumacher films) becoming four separate pages so each costume can get equal play. And google image searchers would have an easier time getting photos and concepts of specific costumes. It also give the opportunity of describing each suit's screen time action without the need to focus on the Bruce Wayne scenes in-between. That kind of already covers these bases. You see where I'm going with this? It transcends just the actor but every manifestation of the armor on top of a general bio page. Any need to point out differences in Batman's body language, voice or personality could be covered on each actor page article. They need content too, otherwise they're just pointless stubs that link back to character bios. While I personally love the idea of Keaton's history finally being officially separated from the Schumacher era, it's still just a bunch of 90's sequels to the 89 movie.--Phantom Stranger (talk) 22:22, August 23, 2020 (UTC)