New rumblings of '66 Batman on DVD (1 Viewer)

[Sam Favate]

I made the mistake yesterday of posting this to an old thread that was started on April Fools Day, but this is NOT an April Fools Joke. I came across this info, posted earlier this month, that could suggest the series is really on its way. I think it is worth reading.

Several people at this Batman TV show chat board, claiming to have contacts at Warner and/or Fox, have posted that the 1966 Batman series is planned for DVD in 2005. Obviously, just rumors, but they do make sense, given the state of the TV on DVD marketplace and the new Batman film coming next year. We can only hope.

Here is the link:

http://www.workshirtsales.com/cgi-b...&num=1084035796

 

[Joseph Bolus]

"Holy Cyberspace, Batman!!" That link doesn't appear to work!

In any event, this would be more than welcome news. And I would expect to see some nice extras included on these discs, including a few episode commentary tracks per season.

Still, as nice as I'm sure it will be to have these episodes finally available on DVD, this is one series that actually benefitted from the original "over-the-air" experience. Every week there was some ridiculous cliffhanger that our heroes had to escape from, and we would be forced to wait 24-48 hours for the resolution. During the first season of the series this sparked quite a few conversations at the school I was attending, as we would get together during recess and discuss all the crazy ways that our caped heroes could escape from their latest predicament! (We actually nailed a few of those, such as the time they escaped from the vat of acid by putting their backs together and walking up the sides!) Now, of course, we'll be able to just select the concluding episode of the week by just pushing a button. It just won't be the same!

 

[Sam Favate]

Re-posting link:

http://www.workshirtsales.com/cgi-bi...num=1084035796

 

[AndyMcKinney]

It can be same if you can resist the temptation to push that button, of course, and watch only one episode in any given day.

 

[Dan Lindley]

I hope David L and the folks from TVshowsonDVD follow up on this.

TIA David!

Dan

 

[David Lambert]

Dave L. thinks that this is a recycling of the same thing that's been said all along:

Warner and Fox are each vying with the other for which entity will get the biggest piece of the pie in such a deal. With two giant studios involved, neither wants to give up a cent to the other that they don't think they have to.

I respect both companies, but I don't think there is enough motivation to resolve this until Batman Begins is heading toward post-production.

I read every word of the info at that link, and I don't see anything really new in there. Or even really anything to work with: it's all "a friend said..."

I don't see how I could call my contacts at either studio and get any different answer than we already know. Let's remind ourselves:

1/12/04: HTF Chat with Fox's SR. V.P., Peter Staddon:



There's nothing at Sam's link to make me think that Fox or Warner would say anthing different than they did 2-4 months ago. Sorry.

Over in Sam's link, a fellow named "Dark Knight" had the best response I've seen to this:
[c] [/c]

 

[Carlos Garcia]

I remember asking that question. While I wasn't really surprised by the answer, I still feel a solid answer could've put rumors (whether good or bad) to rest. To me that response sounds like negotiations started but for whatever reason they broke down. I'm just speculating, and I could be all wrong, but if they were in fact negotiating, how hard could an answer of "We're currently in negotiations on that" have been? At least it would've sent some kind of message of hope to the fans.

 

[David Lambert]

Part of me wonders if the "no comment" perhaps in response to Peter Staddon's comments in his chat about the same title. Peter was very forth-right about the situation, and I think most HTFers appreciate and respect that. However, I can't blame Warner for feeling a bit uncomfortable about that. I wouldn't have wanted Peter's answer changed for anything, though. I love how straight he is! Take his post in the Lost In Space S2 thread, for example. Well done.

 

[Dan Lindley]

Thanks, David. Let's hope Batman Begins ends quickly!

Dan

 

[oscar_merkx]

just out of curiosity, how many seasons were there ?

Thnaks

Oscar

 

[Bryan Ri]

I believe there were three

 

[Daniel Kikin]

Bryan's correct, there are three seasons.

 

[Sam Favate]

The episodes are unevenly distributed through the three seasons though. Season 1 had 34 episodes, or 17 2-parters. Season 2 had 60 episodes, or 30 2-parters, fully one half of the entire show's run. And Season 3 had 25 episodes, each a half-hour, many of which were stand-alone shows. When compiling the season sets, Fox may want to put 40 episodes in each volume, which would still mean 3 sets, but the shows would be more evenly distributed.

 

[oscar_merkx]

Hi folks

Thanks for the answer, should be fun watching this on an eventual dvd release


Oscar

 

[Tony J Case]

I'm going to try something impossible and apply logic to Studio thinking.

Just for the sake of argument, lets say that sales of Batman make a million dollars. I dont know if that's even close to accurate, but lets just throw it out there anyway.

Now - if the studios quibble over every penny, and the show never gets releases, how much will they make. Not a red cent. If they were to say, oh - I dont know - split the rights, the production costs and the profits right down the middle 50/50 - then each side makes half a million bucks.

Which is better? Half a million in the hand or none? I dont know, but it seems like a simple equasion to me.

 

[Carlos Garcia]

The problem is that Warner Bros probably feels since they own the character of Batman, they should be entitled to way more than 50% of the profits, while I'me sure 20th Century Fox probably feels since they own the entire show, THEY should be entitled to way more than 50% of the profits...and so it goes.

 

[David Lambert]

Exactly, Carlos.

 

[Sam Favate]

Yeah, but sooner or later, someone is going to say "Hey, we have this old property sitting here making us NO money when it could be making us SOME money." And if they sell the DVDs at a time of heightened interest in Batman (say, when the new feature arrives), then each studio's profit - regardless of percentage - will be greater because the discs will sell more copies.

 

[Carlos Garcia]

Why? Why should they have to say that? I think you are thinking of it like a fan who wants the show on DVD. I don't blame you, because I too want the show out, however, I think company bigwigs think differently. This is all nothing more than a power trip to them. They don't care if the fans lose out by not having the show on DVD. They care more about winning. By winning I mean one side wants to know that they will get MORE than 50% of the profits from this deal, and unfortunately, I feel unless one side blinks (which I don't see anytime soon because of the powers of greed), it'll be a long time before we see the show out on DVD.

 

[Sam Favate]

I disagree.

I was thinking of it from a business perspective. If you own property A and aren't using it, it isn't making you money. The way companies think of things, any property that isn't performing up to its potential is costing the company money, because it takes away from the maximum intake the company could/should have.

From a financial perspective, if the execs at Warner and Fox are doing their jobs, they are preparing to release this series on DVD next year when attention and interest can be maximized due to the feature film.