Talk:Joel Schumacher

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article must adhere to the policy on biographies of living persons. Controversial material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourced must be removed immediately, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted or if there are other concerns relative to this policy, report it on the living persons biographies noticeboard.

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.	Biography Portal
Start	This article has been rated as start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
	This article is supported by WikiProject Actors and Filmmakers, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed biographical guide to actors and filmmakers on Wikipedia.

It is requested that a picture or pictures of this person be included in this article to improve its quality. Note: Wikipedia's non-free content use policy almost never permits the use of non-free images (such as promotional photos, press photos, screenshots, book covers and similar) to merely show what a living person looks like. Efforts should be made to take a free licensed photo during a public appearance, or obtaining a free content release of an existing photo instead.

	LGBT Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject LGBT studies, which tries to ensure comprehensive and factual coverage of all LGBT related issues on Wikipedia. For more information, or to get involved, visit the project page.
B	This article has been rated as B-class on the quality scale.

[edit] Another point of view

I actually like "Batman Forever". Even "Batman and Robin" wasn't as bad as people make it out to be. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 172.129.249.96 (talk) 07:13, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

• Agree. Batman Forever, The Lost Boys, The Phantom of the Opera, makes Schumacher one of my favorite directors. Has a very creative and energetic style. 24.17.73.18 (talk) 19:29, 26 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] I'm requesting a disscussion on the Batman sections.

I'm frankly a little tired of over protective Batman fanboys going on and on about this. I don't like his versions either, but these sections are exceptionally leading to the extent where it almost seems like deliberate character assassination. When it is assumed this person takes on projects other than simple comic book films should this be considered ‘detrimental’ to his career? Seriously, fanboys are the bane of Wikipedia, they attempt to inhabit every article with the most trivial of comment and criticism if they happen to feel their bedtime reading is not represented to their exacting visions. On a personal level, I find it sad. It is a notable part of his filmography, but there just isn't any balance here, something I feel the respective editors are aware of, especially given he has admitted his disappointment in the approach of the films rather than him 'dismissing criticism' of ‘fans’.

I’m not really a Schumacher fan, I can just identify comic book weasels when I see them. The sections regarding his involvement in the Batman franchise should be clipped down and removed of POV (albeit how subtle). The header ‘Post-Batman career’ is an obvious insinuation of dissatisfaction regarding those films and should be altered into either 'later career' or 'recent career'. 195.92.168.163 04:15, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

You want discussion? Okay. Here goes: You're making a mountain out of a molehill, and you seem more intent on removing this blight from Schumacher's record than actually presenting the negative impact it had.

Overall, this article is pretty well-balanced in that it offers Schumacher's defense (or rather his admission of guilt) alongside the criticism, and then goes on to explain that he rebounded somewhat by seeking different material post-Batman. The "Post Batman" header is appropriate because the films (and especially the latter one) is cited as a DIRECT CAUSAL LINK to the type of work he was later given. Simply put, his two Batman films hurt his career, which is different than people simply not liking them.

The sections you cite as POV probably need to be fleshed out better, but the conclusions would be more or less the same. The main Batman & Robin (film) article actually does a better job of this. One *might* be tempted to defend Schumacher up until the point you read the overwhelmingly negative reviews by major critics, the severe personal embarrassment of George Cloony, the fact that it stalled out the careers of several principal actors, Schumacher's own dislike of his work (even going as far as to say that people should blame HIM and not the script witer), and the fact that Warner Bros. didn't make much money on it (ie. It didn't quite bomb, but it was well below expectations). At which point, it essentially becomes an exercise in futility to try and introduce balance where there can be none. None of this has to do with "comic book fanboys". It's simple reality.

I'm not a Schumacher fan, and I'm not even a really big Batman fan, but the films were a watershed in Schumacher's career, and (along with the Catwoman film) drastically forced WB to re-examine how they would handle comic book franchises in the future. Even WB executives will admit they were left with no choice but the reboot the film franchise (ergo, we got "Batman Begins"...which was much much MUCH better received).

And yes...in fairness, Schumacher deserves credit for not shirking responsibility (albeit he still defends the idiotic "nipple suit"). Just like Halle Barry deserves credit for actually accepting her Razzie award (check out the YouTube video). But that doesn't change the fact that these events all still happened and caused some issues. --Kensuke Aida 00:21, 23 August 2007 (UTC)