1966 Batman

Does anyone know about the 1966 Batman with Adam West and Burt Ward when will it come on DVD?

Re: 1966 Batman

This show has been involved in so many negotiations that it's been rumored to never be released. However, there is some good news in that a toy model of the Batmobile from the 1966 show is finally going to be released by Hot Wheels sometime this year. Who knows, if the toy sells well, maybe it will inspire Warners/Fox to iron out a deal and finally release the show to DVD. Here's a link to the Hot Wheels announcement:

http://www.1966batmobile.com/hw.htm

Re: 1966 Batman

There is also an lawsuit by the heir to one of the shows original producers that makes the release of this series unlikely.

Re: 1966 Batman

Hairy, this is one topic that's been talked about many a time on this forum- you can check the HTF archives for past discussions on the ongoing problem. It's one of the most-wanted unreleased shows around.

Re: 1966 Batman

Well... looking at the ad below this post, there is a set available at ****************. Bootleg? Manufactured outside the US? Anyone have insight to this?

Re: 1966 Batman

It is most certainly a bootleg. The show has not been released anywhere.

I would love to see batman 1966 release, but, based on the below it is not likely to happen

 

Despite considerable popular demand^[5], no official home entertainment release (VHS, laserdisc or DVD) of the series has occurred to date in North America, with the situation seemingly unlikely to be resolved in the near future.

Conflicting reports of the reasons behind the non-release of the series point to a number of different factors, some, none or all of which may indeed play a part. These include:

• Disagreement between DC Comics, owners of the Batman character after DC's sister/parent company Warner Bros. took over DC in 1976, in which Warner Bros. could also be involved, and 20th Century Fox, owners of the program itself. Gord Lacey's influential TV/DVD website TVShowsonDVD.com is often quoted in support of this much-discussed theory, after a story the website ran in December, 2005.^[6]
  • Commentators have suggested that DC Comics itself is not involved, and that Warner and Fox are reluctant to work with each other. This was denied by a Warner spokesperson in 2005 during their semi-regular "Home Theater Forum" chat, where it was stated that the issues were between Fox and DC alone, with Warner playing no part in negotiations.^[7]
  • The argument has been made that DC does not wish to distort the current image of the Dark Knight by having the overtly-campy 1960s series competing head-to-head with more modern takes, such as Tim Burton's Batman film and its sequels or Christopher Nolan's Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. DC may indeed be distancing itself from the 1960s series. A solicited cover by Mike Allred for issue #7 of Solo—a 2005 DC Comics series—featured Batman doing the Batusi. The cover, based on Adam West and a memorably campy episode of the TV series, was replaced by the time of Solo #7's released. Allred explains that the cover was pulled by "higher ups" for reasons largely unknown.^[8] Speculation over the reasons first intimated that potential infringement of rights were the issue, but this was soon replaced with suggestions that its "campy" nature was the real factor in its removal. At the time of the issue's release, DVDs of Batman, Batman Returns, Batman Forever, Batman & Robin, and Batman Begins were also being promoted, and DC's chief editor Dan Didio reportedly does not like camp.^[9]

I remember reading something about Adam West saying that he was hoping the show would be released and that many fans would like to see it released.

Has anyone heard anything lately?

Regards,
Paul Young

Forum friend David Lambert summed up the whole complicated affair in this post at TVShowsOnDVD.com. 

If DC Comics doesn't like camp, then why are "Batman Forever" and "Batman and Robin" allowed to be on home video and not the 1966 Batman TV Show?  Those movies were just as campy as the TV show.  Camp has nothing to do with the situation of Batman being released on DVD, it is business negotiations.

Also, Adam West has done a two DVD set of commentaries on every Batman episode for all three seasons of the Batman TV show and it is available through his website, adamwest.com.  The DVD set is called "Adam West . . . Naked."

DC Comics may not like the camp factor of Batman '66, but DC Comics is now a toothless, impotent entity that has recently been thrust squarely into the middle of Warner corporate and their interference, and has been renamed "DC Entertainment".

Right now, DC wants what Warner wants, because more than ever, WB controls DC and eveything they do. If WB could ever get Batman '66 released, DC would want it done, too, because their new corporate overlords would tell them to want it.

I hate to ask, but what is campy supposed to mean? After seeing that poor movie they released in theaters a while back, I presume it means they find the tv series too out of fashion and anachronistic because it's actually well done and clean fun, something that isn't popular these days?

 

 

It's when things are over the top and silly, like in the movie where Batman is trying to dispose of the huge bomb and there are people in the way in every direction.  Or, the way everything is labeled.  The UN council is dehydrated and turned into dust, and they all have big labels on their vials.  I think there were labels saying, "Batcomputer" and "Batphone" as well.  

Camp is very hard to do well. It really requires someone as straightfaced as Adam West or else it all just seems very silly. The 1966 Batman is really the epitome of camp.

Maybe the shake-up at Warner/DC Entertainment will shake loose the rights to the show for DVD but somehow I doubt it. (Don't forget that Fox still has to have a stake in releasing it too.) A good test will be whether the Green Hornet comes to DVD in conjunction with the release of the Seth Rogen movie next year. Hornet was produced by the same folks as Batman and has many of the same rights issues. If a release for Hornet can be worked out, there is hope for Batman.

As mentioned earlier, you have to go back to the authoritative postings found at this site to get the whole run down. I am one of the serious Batman 1966 fans who has waited not years but decades for this release.

I am also one of the people who feels that there is only and will always be only one Batman and Robin (Adam and Burt). Call it camp, call it what you like but I love every minute of it.

I know a lot of people like the Dark Knight. To me, there is no relation between the Batman TV show and the Batman of the Dark Knight movies. Those movies are dark, disturbing, and depressing.

Lastly, what is campy or fake about dehydrating the members of the UN Security Council to dust and then re-hydrating them back? Adam's Batman was right. Some days it is hard to get rid of a bomb.

That's one of the great things about Batman.  There have been so many incarnations of the character, both in comics and other media, since his inception that everybody has their favorite - and all of them can be traced back in some degree to the roots of the character.  Love them or hate them, both Adam West's and Christian Bale's takes on Batman are part of the character's mythos.  West's campy take was the outgrowth of the brighter comics of the late 50s and early 60s; Bale's goes back to Bob Kane's film noir and pulp novel influences, as well as the Frank Miller/Jeph Loeb, etc. version from the 80s and 90s.  I am too young to have caught the Adam West series but LOVED the movie when I was a kid and caught the show in syndication.  I came of age with Batman: The Animated Series (IMHO, the version that best blends all of the varying elements), but I'd really like to see the Adam West show come to DVD. 

Maybe, as others have suggested, The Green Hornet might be a good test to see if the show can make it.

I agree that The Animated Series is the best version of Batman. It's not silly like the Adam West series and it's not unnecessarily grim like the new movies.

I Agree that the Animated version I though captured the essential Nature of the character its my favorite.

i think there has been always an issue with eras. Batman in 1966 was funny, but, good series for its time. Batman has changed over the years to become more of darkside cartoon/movie. The original batman never seen people killed on screen. However, i still think the studios are missing the point, especially a generation that would pay money for the 1966 series irregardless whether or not character has been transform. I was born in 1968 and can tell you that i remember the show in syndication in 1970s/1980s. I was a huge batman fan and never really got into Batman movies, because i like Adam West as Batman along with actors that played his enemies, like burgess merideth (penguin), Lee Merieweather (catwomen - movie only), Cesar Romero, Vincent Price as Egghead, Roddy McDowell, etc.

I think the studios and all parties have to show some flexibility with the series. I really believe this series would be very hot dvd.
 
This is latest i was able to find out from internet:

You have to hand it to Adam West. He was severely typecast when his popular TV show was cancelled and found it difficult to find other work. While many other actors from that era threw in the towel, West kept at it and became a pop-culture icon. Like William Shatner, he’s now involved in many new projects and is busier at age 80 than he ever has been before.

Though many fans would love to purchase an official release of the 1966 Batman series, it doesn’t seem like one is going to be available any time soon. The rights to issue the episodes on DVD are tied up in a myriad of financial red tape. In short, 20th Century Fox owns the TV series while the Batman characters are owned by DC Comics (a sister company to the Warner Bros. studio in the vast Time Life conglomerate). Before a DVD release can happen, those two companies must first come to a financial agreement.

http://tvseriesfinale.com/tv-show/batman-adam-west-naked/#more-7139

I think as Dave Lambert points out, there is considerably more to this situation than simply having Fox and Warner come to some type of agreement. If that's all it was, it would have happened long ago. After all, both companies came to an amicable arrangement with the release of Watchmen (including home video) in fairly short order. There are other principals and estates involved in the 1966 Batman program that appear to have a legitimate legal claim in the ownership of the series. Since they haven't been able to come to terms in over 40 years, I don't see the situation changing anytime soon. I'd LOVE to be wrong on this, but for now, I don't think I am.

In total agreement.

The suggestion that it's because "the TV show was campy" is just a popular conspiracy theory. The editorial staff of DC Comics might not care too much for that version of the character, but they wouldn't try to roadblock a release of the show just because it was "campy". It's all down to rights, people.

If it weren't for the differences in motion picture rights versus TV series, Fox would've released this long ago (probably, on VHS through Columbia House in the '80s!).

Some people in entertainment business may rate the show as poor, but, they need to remember it was 1960s and lots things were happening then. It was good action show, especially with cast of villains. I also believe it would generate a lot of money if and when it is released on dvd. I for one would be first in line to purchase the dvd.

Regards,
Paul Young, CGA

Many people believe Greenway Productions' rights are an impediment to the show's release. Allegedly, it was created as an equal partnership between Greenway and Fox. Greenway was William Dozier's company, which also has an interest in The Green Hornet TV show - another show lost to the DVD era. Dozier's daughter sued a few years ago over the rights to the show, but I think the case was dismissed. No idea if it was refiled in some fashion and is still pending.

I have no doubt it would be a top seller. It remains a very popular show and most requested DVD release. It would easily lend itself to a beautiful box set. You could do season sets and a complete series set in a designer box with plenty of cool extras. I think you wouldn't have to split seasons because everyone who wants it would pay for full seasons. Excuse me, I just realized that they would want to split the seasons into multiple sets so they could charge more. What was I thinking?

I realize their are a number of legal issues and rights claimants but the window of sales for this series is starting to close. I would hate to see a dust covered set on a store shelf and hear people remark, "Hey, that's the show my great grandfather used to watch".

Here's another one to add to the mix - ABC may still own a piece of the show as well!





They could also issue "best of" compilations focusing on one villian for those not wanting to by a full season/half-season/set. :)