Batman/Superman Anthology Timelines

Avilos said:
Regardless of what Earth or universe Lois & Clark is set on my fan explanation for Tim and Amber Lake have a Batmobile -

It's a replica using the real pieces lost when Batman converted it to the Batmissle. Following the blueprints the Penguin and the Red Triangle Circus gang had. All acquired illegally from GCPC evidence lockup. Which fits the Lakes method of operation. Which is one of the reasons we see a completely new Batmobile design in Batman Forever. The original's design and security had been completely exposed. Was the source of where the Penguin got those blueprints ever explored anywhere?
Click to expand...
Batman and Gotham City are referenced a few times in L&C. Metropolis is referenced in Batman Forever of course, as well as in a deleted scene for Batman & Robin. Then there's the Superman reference in that film as well. The only connection is the Batmobile though. I swear that I heard a motif of the Danny Elfman theme when they reveal the Batmobile.

Lois & Clark doesn't have a designation, so there's nothing wrong with throwing it in with the Schumacher continuation if one wanted to.
 
iceman109 said:
Their was a comic where he was hallucinating all 3 versions of them though
Click to expand...
I believe that might have been the animated movie. In Batman '66 Meets Wonder Woman '77, she starts off as Eartha Kitt then becomes Julia Newmar. They are treated as the same character (regardless of whether that story took place in Earth-66, Earth-76 or a combined timeline).
 
Also, how does a dazzed Batman seeing Catwoman split into three different actresses imply that they're different people and not that they're the same person? They're basically showing that all actresses play the same character.
 
Pro Bot said:
Also, how does a dazzed Batman seeing Catwoman split into three different actresses imply that they're different people and not that they're the same person? They're basically showing that all actresses play the same character.
Click to expand...
He would be seeing Julie Newmar's Catwoman if it was one person if he was hallucinating
 
And going back on the aesthetics bit Schumacher's Gotham has Greek god inspired statues while Burtons Gotham doesn't
 
Why would he hallucinate two people splitting off from one individual? As I've stated already, the comics have actually used them interchangeably before. As in, Julia Newmar's Catwoman experienced the events that Eartha Kitt's Catwoman did earlier in the comic. Regardless of whether that's Earth-66 or Earth-76, it's still reflective of how they viewed it.
1000015497.jpg
1000015498.jpg
1000015499.jpg
1000015500.jpg
 
iceman109 said:
And going back on the aesthetics bit Schumacher's Gotham has Greek god inspired statues while Burtons Gotham doesn't
Click to expand...
Greek God statues being in Gotham City in one film doesn't mean that there wasn't Greek God statues in another film. If we're seeing a new part of Gotham, does that mean that the other part doesn't exist? I would argue that they both use similar architecture.
 
iceman109 said:
What about the city being decked out in neon?
Click to expand...
What about it? In one film you don't see neon signs everywhere and then in another you do? That doesn't prove anything. Nothing in Batman or Batman Returns contradict Schumacher's Gotham existing.
 
All of the films are supposed to be set in the same area of Gotham (which would probably be Downtown) there's no neon in the Burton films
 
Pro Bot said:
What about it? In one film you don't see neon signs everywhere and then in another you do? That doesn't prove anything. Nothing in Batman or Batman Returns contradict Schumacher's Gotham existing.
Click to expand...
Why can't Earth 97 exist anyways?
 
iceman109 said:
All of the films are supposed to be set in the same area of Gotham (which would probably be Downtown) there's no neon in the Burton films
Click to expand...
I need an example of the same location appearing in the different films. Gotham is a fictional city. They used miniatures and huge sets to make it. I don't think we can simply say that they're the same location when all we're told is that they're both Gotham City. Once again though, it's a fictional city. I'm still not convinced how neon signs in one place invalidate the existence of the previous films.

How about this, then. Batman Forever IS a sequel to Batman Returns. That's an objective fact. He's even dealing with how he used to be a murderer in it, which is far more explicit in the deleted scenes.

iceman109 said:
Why can't Earth 97 exist anyways?
Click to expand...
Earth-97 was a joke made about the fact that realities are named after their first appearance and Mr. Freeze first appeared in Batman & Robin. 1997 = Earth-97. A joke... if you take that seriously, they're literally saying that Batman & Robin's reality started in 1997. That means that Batman Forever isn't canon to Batman & Robin. That's completely false though. In another case, and this doesn't really make sense either, you could say that a Mr. Freeze variant that looks like Arnold Schwarzenegger exists in Earth-97 even though the one from Batman & Robin would be Earth-89.
 
Pro Bot said:
I need an example of the same location appearing in the different films. Gotham is a fictional city. They used miniatures and huge sets to make it. I don't think we can simply say that they're the same location when all we're told is that they're both Gotham City. Once again though, it's a fictional city. I'm still not convinced how neon signs in one place invalidate the existence of the previous films.

How about this, then. Batman Forever IS a sequel to Batman Returns. That's an objective fact. He's even dealing with how he used to be a murderer in it, which is far more explicit in the deleted scenes.


Earth-97 was a joke made about the fact that realities are named after their first appearance and Mr. Freeze first appeared in Batman & Robin. 1997 = Earth-97. A joke... if you take that seriously, they're literally saying that Batman & Robin's reality started in 1997. That means that Batman Forever isn't canon to Batman & Robin. That's completely false though.
Click to expand...
Why can't a joke be considered canon though?
 
If Earth 97 as a number exists why cant Batman Forever be canon regardless of what the number is
 
Earth-97, in the joke, refers to the release date of when said actor appeared. The same joke could have been made about Gus Gorman coming from Earth-83 because Superman III came out in 1983. The only reason you would have to use such a silly joke is if the universe that it originates from isn't designated. Batman & Robin comes from the Burtonverse as it's the fourth installment of the Batman film series, and we know it absolutely was intended to be set in that universe due to the actors, the costumes, the references, the behind-the-scenes and the planned sequels.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Back
Top