Yep. And Q for
@samdavies ? ( with friendly tone, it's late, I know ... ) Why would one call hit film a cult film ? I mean, really why ? Big audience, lot's of cash. Sequel maybe.
It's subjective of course, but I would count near enough every Tim Burton film as "obscure" in some way shape or form, regardless of how popular some have become. If anything I'd say they've become more popular in the last 10 years with certain demographics purely because of this. Batman 1989 included. It's dark, dry, gothic and downright zany and offbeat at points. Certainly not the type of flick middle America would pop on sunday afternoon..
You have to remember superhero films were not the norm in 1989, especially not dark and bruding ones. The idea of marketing a film like this at the time towards adults (due to the certificate) was a massive gamble by WB. One that many exec's were convinced was the wrong route to go. Luckily it paid off and became a success and spawned one true sequel.
Idk what anyone says, the other 2 legacy Batman films are separate stories as far as I'm concerned, Canon or not
It certainly has a cult like following and is a product of its time. It's typically held as a favourite of those of a certain age and fans of the style and era, but wouldn't really be seen as directed at the mass market crowd of today. It's certainly no mcu or dcu style flick, regardless of how dark some of Snyder's flicks are.
As I said before, I do not agree that a film can be declassified as cult simply because it has made money, when it ticks many other areas that could be deemed as worthy of that status.