From Wikipedia
-
nova-63 — 13 years ago(January 17, 2013 08:23 PM)
All this speculation is interesting. But I seriously doubt "guest stars" would be getting royalties on the show. Do you really think Sammy Davis would be getting royalties for opening a window and uttering a line. It would have been written in their original contracts. And because the show was hot and hip, stars were begging to get on the show.
And why were the Columbia movie serials from the 40's made available. Why didn't Warner Bros./DC sue Columbia? Batman is also pretty campy in those. Who knows? All speculation. -
nova-63 — 13 years ago(January 17, 2013 08:35 PM)
PS: Warner Bros is notorious for suing everything and everybody. I read somewhere they were suing some guy who built a custom batmobile. Pathetic. They probably claim ownership to the sidewalks and want payment from anyone who walks on one.
-
LaPfieffer92 — 13 years ago(January 31, 2013 08:00 PM)
yeah, that is a really stupids reason not to have DVD's of this CLASSIC show. these characters arent based on classic literature for crying out loud, its a COMICS BOOK! YEESH! i dont care how many dark and serious batmans they make, he will always be based on cartoon characters in a comic strip. this show is now considered a classic of 60's television, and seriously would rake in the doe if it was officially released on dvd. for now we'll have to deal with the bootleg copies, which really arent bad at all.
plus the 60's show was extremly faithful to the comics of the time so you cant say its not accurate. -
TheNamelesStranger — 13 years ago(February 02, 2013 06:46 AM)
plus the 60's show was extremly faithful to the comics of the time so you cant say its not accurate.
No, the comics were changed to reflect the show for a short period of time. You constantly claim to not be a comic reader but you don't let it stop you from trying to declare what is or isn't like the comics. -
sticksstoneswwiv — 13 years ago(March 04, 2013 04:26 PM)
The problem isn't guest stars as such it is guest characters.
ie Characters playing character from other TV series.
Lurch from the Adams family is an example given.
I a lot of the old TV contacts did not play royalties for repeats (ie residuals).
The reason for this is actually straight forward they never assumed TV shows would be repeated years later.
So much that in the UK contacts (actor union contacts) stated that an actor's performance in a TV show can only be broadcast a set number of times (3 I believe) after which the show tapes were deleted.
This is a major issue for old shows many episodes were lost.
There are exceptions, I Love Lucy, they owned the rights as they were both producers and still get royalties. Note how you can buy I Love Lucy on DVD. -
GreenLantern1988 — 13 years ago(April 04, 2013 05:12 AM)
Well I'm not sure about Lapfeiffer92's previous history on these forums. But he is absolutely right the TV Series DID reflect the comics. BUT you TheNamelesStranger are also right as the comics were tailored to reflect the TV Series for a period of time. I know this because I have done a 15 part project on the TV Series, and I will be posting it for you all to see.
-
GreenLantern1988 — 12 years ago(August 03, 2013 06:35 AM)
Well wait no longer my friend, as I will now present you with a link to the third entry in my 1966 Batman project.
http://www.arkhamverse.com/news/2013/08/the-legacy-of-the-batman-part-3-comic-book-references-in-the-tv-series/ -
GreenLantern1988 — 12 years ago(August 04, 2013 12:56 PM)
If you enjoyed reading that don't forget to look out for next week's version which will focus on Batman: The Movie.
Speaking of which, here is the link to the this week's entry in the series.
http://www.arkhamverse.com/news/2013/08/the-legacy-of-the-batman-part-4-comic-book-references-in-batman-the-movie/ -
wristwatchraver-1 — 11 years ago(May 15, 2014 05:49 AM)
I've been told the reason for the non-release isn't anything to do with DC. Greenaway (the company made the series). is owned by 20th Century Fox. They would release the series but the name 'Batman' is owned by Warner Bros. 20th CF can't release a Batman series without paying copyright costs to WB and they REALLY don't want to do that. WB can't release it because 20th CF owns it and 20th CF can't release it because WB owns the name. Personally, I think it should be released by 20th CF because nostalgia sells! Even if they did have to pay certain costs to WB I think the outpouring of the love people have for this series would certainly re-coup the costs. if not, make a profit!
If I can't save you, I swear to God, I am gonna stop you! -
Sandoz — 11 years ago(November 07, 2014 06:44 PM)
Well, evidently all the snags have been worked out that kept the Batman TV series from being released because next month (just in time for the Christmas season) it's finally being released on DVD and BluRay.
And according to the details as listed on Amazon, "ALL 120 Original Broadcast Episodes Fully Remastered" will be included. Now whether or not these will all be UNCENSORED will be left up to the die-hard fans to uncover the secrets of, and it will be interesting to hear reports about that. But hey, can't argue too much with "all episodes" and "remastered", right?
With words we build, with words we break/I'm drunk drunk drunk in the gardens and the graves