BATMAN (1943) in Cliffhangers Forum

RSS
Email

0 Points

BATMAN (1943)

Author	Comment
Richard Valley	BATMAN (1943)	Lead	[-]
Posts: 54081 Aug 16 05 2:27 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Tags : None Coming to DVD this fall. The question is--censored or uncensored . . .?
	Remove this ad
Doctor Daka	Re: BATMAN (1943)	#1	[-]
Posts: 8 Aug 16 05 1:44 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Will the ending of chapter 2 be intact? Its rather damaged on that one 16mm print that previous transfers come from. When they showed it on AMC in the late 1980's they used that same print and just cut off the last few seconds due to the film damage. There were at least 3 different trailers for this one - I wonder if any will be on the DVD? Doctor Daka "Let that be an object lesson to those of you who entertain similar ideas"
Richard Valley	Re: BATMAN (1943)	#2	[-]
Posts: 54081 Aug 16 05 2:37 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	It's not so much the damage that concerns me, as it is the censored dialogue . . .
len2476buster	Re: BATMAN (1943)	#3	[-]
Posts: 7251 Aug 17 05 10:46 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I've heard that the BATMAN serial will be presented - as the THREE STOOGES shorts are now on DVD - in a black-and-white version and also "colorized. THAT - if nothing else - makes me think that Columbia HAS gone into their vaults (or found good material from other sources) to get pristine material of the serial. NOBODY has heard whether or not the serial will be uncut and untampered with. It's a real good question, particularly as Columbia is spending money to "clean up" the print and add "color" to it, making it attractive to children, makes me think that the WWII anti-Japanese statements might get "white-washed" out of the soundtrack. If the Columbia "suits" were smart, maybe they'd leave the black-and-whtie version completely unedited, since only the real "die-hard" serial "nuts" would want to watch the black-and-white version over the allegedly-glorious new, new, new, NEW "colorization" process anyway! I really believe that BATMAN should be released in uncensored form. Add a "disclaimer" at the beginning of the show, or just before each chapter is shown if you must, but leave the serial alone. It's not just entertainment, but it's also an historical document on what movie-makers and moviegoers felt about Japanese spies. My God, we were at WAR with Japan then! Why revise history and pretend that World War II didn't happen??? - Mr. Len
DonM435	Re: BATMAN (1943)	#4	[-]
Posts: 9514 Aug 17 05 11:23 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I saw the 1943 Batman in its marathon four-hour re-release in the Batmania era, circa 1965. Went back later that week and sat through it again. Batman had always been my favorite "super hero" from the comics. Since then, I've tried to watch serials, but no longer have the patience for this particular art form. So, I guess this will always be my favorite chapterplay. I was well aware that it was sloppy filmmaking, but I appreciated the sober tone, so different from the fat, clownish, boy scout Adam West fiasco that was all the rage at that moment.
Richard Valley	Re: BATMAN (1943)	#5	[-]
Posts: 54081 Aug 18 05 12:39 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	spending money to "clean up" the print and add "color" to it, making it attractive to children And idiots . . .
len2476buster	Re: BATMAN (1943)	#6	[-]
Posts: 7251 Aug 24 05 11:44 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	No kiddin'! However, I hear that tons of "research" was done to use just the RIGHT colors for the "Stooges"' outfits, cars, etc. as to what they would have looked like in the '30s, '40s and so on. Well, maybe so, but I'd much rather see them in their ORIGINAL form. You know that cameramen and their assistants worked hard to determine what clothes people wore and what the sets looked like when they would be seen by the public in BLACK AND WHITE! Fooling around with the solid blacks and gray scales and then painting shades of color over them just doesn't seem right to me. Use the "colorization" process to restore faded color films or restore tints or tones to silent or earlier sound films... hey, what a great idea! But for the other stuff! No thanks! - Mr. Len
Doctor Daka	Re: BATMAN (1943)	#7	[-]
Posts: 8 Aug 25 05 12:41 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I find it very hard to believe that they would colorize the the entire 4+ hours of the serial. I wonder if the colorized version will be more like a feature version of the serial? Doctor Daka "The League Of The New Order marches on and nothing will ever stop it!"
Richard Valley	Re: BATMAN (1943)	#8	[-]
Posts: 54081 Aug 25 05 3:07 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	As always, Mr. Len and I are in complete accord . . .
len2476buster	Re: BATMAN (1943)	#9	[-]
Posts: 7251 Aug 25 05 11:34 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Not always, Rich, not always! Sometimes ya can't help things like that! - Mr. Len
HarryLong	Re: BATMAN (1943)	#10	[-]
Posts: 25163 Aug 26 05 2:13 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Law of averages or something like that. Heck, I've heard even Richard & Ken are sometimes always in complete accord.
	Remove this ad
len2476buster	Re: BATMAN (1943)	#11	[-]
Posts: 7251 Sep 3 05 2:51 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	The latest romor I've heard regarding BATMAN is that the serial will be uncut and uncensored, but it willl be available in the original black-and-white format and also a "colorized" version. - Mr. Len
Richard Valley	Re: BATMAN (1943)	#12	[-]
Posts: 54081 Sep 4 05 1:16 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Uncut, uncensored, black-and-white sounds great . . .
kevin g shinnick	Re: BATMAN (1943)	#13	[-]
Posts: 15102 Oct 7 05 10:52 AM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I agree with Richard- I saw this serial when they had the marathon back in the 1960s.. boy were we shocked by how different Batman was from the tv version!
len2476buster	Re: BATMAN (1943)	#14	[-]
Posts: 7251 Oct 9 05 5:27 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	From what I hear from our resident movie critic Bob Bloom (a.k.a. "Zorro the Fox") at the SERIAL SQUADRON website, the serial is offered black-and-white and colorized. The material is UNCUT, but the print is not the best quality, but appears to be the best Columbia can find. So, good news, I'd say! - Mr. Len
Richard Valley	Re: BATMAN (1943)	#15	[-]
Posts: 54081 Dec 27 05 2:37 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Hysterical! Quite a different between 17-year-old Douglas Croft and his stunt double, isn't there . . .?
David Morrill	Re: BATMAN (1943)	#16	[-]
Posts: 15215 Dec 27 05 2:44 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Combine that and J. Carroll chewing up the scenery and you have a Batman that is second only to that of the 1966 Les Martinson film.
Richard Valley	Re: BATMAN (1943)	#17	[-]
Posts: 54081 Dec 27 05 3:03 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	I'm surprised to see on the IMDB that Douglas Croft (who also played the young George M. in YANKEE DOODLE DANDY and was quite good opposite Jack Benny and Ann Sheridan in GEORGE WASHINGTON SLEPT HERE) died in 1963 at age 37. His last film was KILLER McCOY in 1947. Anyone know anything about him . . .?
David Morrill	Re: BATMAN (1943)	#18	[-]
Posts: 15215 Dec 27 05 3:38 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Only that he was a young Ronald Reagan in KING'S ROW. Poor little guy....
David Morrill	Re: BATMAN (1943)	#19	[-]
Posts: 15215 Dec 27 05 3:40 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	It's quite amusing to see John Duncan still billing himself as "the original Robin." Didn't anyone ever tell him about Croft?
Richard Valley	Re: BATMAN (1943)	#20	[-]
Posts: 54081 Dec 27 05 4:26 PM Reply Quote More My Recent Posts	Poor little guy.... Well, he was a young Jimmy Cagney, too, which wasn't bad--and he was a young Gary Cooper in PRIDE OF THE YANKEES . . .
	Remove this ad

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

BATMAN (1943)

BATMAN (1943)