Box Office Smash Batman Probably Never Made A Profit - And It Was The Joker's Fault

With a $35 million budget, "Batman" wasn't exactly a poor production. In fact, it was one of the biggest projects Hollywood had ever seen, with a massive 95-acre Gotham City set erected on 18 sound stages at the UK's famed Pinewood Studios. And while Nicholson was arguably the film's biggest star, Kim Bassinger, who played photographer/Bruce Wayne love interest Vicki Vale, and lead role Michael Keaton were far from strangers. Burton, too, who had only done "Pee-wee's Big Adventure" and "Beetlejuice" at the time, had nevertheless gained significant buzz in the industry when he was only 30 when the production of "Batman".

All of this meant, as Alexander Knox actor Robert Wuhl said, that "Batman" was "the greatest movie of all time" and "there was a lot of careers in this stuff, especially on the Warner Bros side." It's a good thing the movie became the hit it did, then. At least, that would be the case if it weren't for tricky accounting considerations that likely meant that "Batman" never really made a significant profit for Warners, despite bringing in nearly half a billion dollars worldwide.

In 1991, the LA Times reported that two years after its release, "Batman" was showing a "$35.8 million deficit" and would likely "never show a profit." The Times blamed the financial hardship on "extraordinary expenses for publicity, publicity and high-priced talent", which, given the film's massive marketing campaign, multiple stars and profit-sharing contracts, makes sense. But, as reported by Entertainment Weekly, "Batman" had earned over $250 million at the box office at the time, which should have at least knocked the Warners blockbuster out of red. But this is Hollywood, where there is always creative accounting behind the scenes.