After Nolan's BATMAN trilogy... - Part 1

[Thread Manager]

This is a continuation thread, the old thread is 345998

[Peyton Westlake]

I know this is premature since the Dark Knight Rises hasnt even been completed or knowing who the villain is or what the plot will be but...

I couldnt help but think....is this the end of Batman?

Hes a cash cow for WB so I know they wont totally put him to bed but, Will WB try to reboot him yet again like Marvel is trying with Spider-Man?

Is this what we can expect from now on...a director to take control of a trilogy and then someone else is handed the reigns down the road?

How long does WB wait to film another Batman..if ever?

[MessiahDecoy123]

On topic I'd like to see Brad Bird team up with Dini/Timm and see what they come up with.

So much potential with those guys coming together to do Batman.

[MessiahDecoy123]

I know this is premature since the Dark Knight Rises hasnt even been completed or knowing who the villain is or what the plot will be but...

I couldnt help but think....is this the end of Batman?

Hes a cash cow for WB so I know they wont totally put him to bed but, Will WB try to reboot him yet again like Marvel is trying with Spider-Man?

Is this what we can expect from now on...a director to take control of a trilogy and then someone else is handed the reigns down the road?

How long does WB wait to film another Batman..if ever?

A reboot is inevitable. I think someone from WB confirmed it.

I myself would love another trilogy. Another self contained story/character arc with its own style, cast and continuity that would look great on my dvd shelf.

Never understood the blind reboot hate.

[Pfeiffer-Pfan]

How long does WB wait to film another Batman..if ever?

5 years... TOPS!

Nolan has WB by the balls, this reboot is only happening because he is finished but doesn't want anyone messing with his story once hes gone. Wb have agreed as long as they can whore his name out with a producer credit for the reboot.

Simple.

[MessiahDecoy123]

How did you reach that conclusion, Sherlock? :woot:

[Pfeiffer-Pfan]

Was up all night... but it came to me in the end. :woot:

[LuisTX85]

I can never get enough of Bats and so I'm already exited for a new rebooted trilogy,WB confirmed it and I'm glad cause that's what I wanted since I found out Nolan is done after this one as director&wants his movies to end as a trilogy..Which I agree with him there!!!

[TheWatcher]

I want the tone of the reboot to be a mix of realistic cop drama and supernatural super crime. Think the Long Halloween.

[Rodrigo90]

A Batman movie written by Nolan and directed by Aronofsky...A fantasy stylized Aronofsky film that uses the logic and storytelling traits of Nolan...pure gold, dammit! :D

[TheWatcher]

Let's get this thing rolling!

[AnorexicBatman]

Will Christopher Nolan be a hurdle or a boon for the possibility of a JLA film ?
He seems rather protective of Batman and probably thinks Justice League is ridiculous

[LuisTX85]

Yeah I sure can't imagine Nolan agreeing to even produce it!

[Young Superman]

Like most Batman fans out there, I don't want an unnecessary origin film like they are doing with the Spider-Man film franchise. I want an established Batman in the reboot. If they have to tell Bruce's origin, I think a neat way to do it is a quick flashback montage, told by Alfred showing Bruce Wayne's parents getting killed, a little traveling the world and training, before returning to Gotham City and becoming Batman.

[LuisTX85]

I say do it in the opening credits like in TIH or do a flashback of it with Bruce in the Batcave and looks at his parents picture!!

[MessiahDecoy123]

Like most Batman fans out there, I don't want an unnecessary origin film like they are doing with the Spider-Man film franchise. I want an established Batman in the reboot. If they have to tell Bruce's origin, I think a neat way to do it is a quick flashback montage, told by Alfred showing Bruce Wayne's parents getting killed, a little traveling the world and training, before returning to Gotham City and becoming Batman.

I'm fine with doing only flashbacks but there has to be enough to show Bruce had a wide variety of crucial/specialized training since he was a kid.

Most people don't realize Batman mastered everything related to crime fighting and how he did it. One of the biggest weaknesses of Batman Begins IMO.

[GREEN =w= DAY]

my top 5 directors in no particular order to work on the next series of Batman films:

1 - Guillermo Del Toro
2 - David Fincher
3 - Darren Aronofsky
4 - Alfonso Cuaron
5 - Nicolas Winding Refn

[MessiahDecoy123]

Nice picks.

I'd replace Del Toro with Brad Bird but other than that I'd love to see any of those directors launch the reboot.

[DarkSovereignty]

I'd keep the del toro on the list and bump Refn, I feel his approach would be too similar to nolans, which would just be redundant. a reboot is an oppurtunity to try something new with a concept, why waste it with a rehash of the same exact style as its predecessor? not to say refn isn't a talented directed, I want him to direct wonder woman lol.

[raybia]

Here is a link to AICN's article feature more posters.

http://www.aintitcool.com/node/55929

[Rodrigo90]

You know what I really want to see?

Not a Batman who kills (Keaton)
Not a Batman who bores me to tears (Kilmer)
Not a Batman who is more camp than straight (Clooney)
Not a Batman who leaves villains to die (Bale)

I WANT TO SEE A KEVIN CONROY BATMAN!!! THE PERFECT BATMAN, WHO DOESN'T KILL, WHO IS INTERESTING, WHO IS ALL MAN, WHO IS EVEN A HERO TO THE DAMN BAD GUYS!!!!! :up:

[raybia]

You know what I really want to see?

Not a Batman who kills (Keaton)
Not a Batman who bores me to tears (Kilmer)
Not a Batman who is more camp than straight (Clooney)
Not a Batman who leaves villains to die (Bale)

I WANT TO SEE A KEVIN CONROY BATMAN!!! THE PERFECT BATMAN, WHO DOESN'T KILL, WHO IS INTERESTING, WHO IS ALL MAN, WHO IS EVEN A HERO TO THE DAMN BAD GUYS!!!!! :up:

You mean a "live-action Batman: The Animated series" Batman? Do you know who would be the perfect director for that version?

























Brad Bird!!!!

I could definitively go for that.

[Daniel Thompson]

Has Brad Bird ever did a dark and grity film before? Because BTAS was dark and grity, but if he can do that kinda Batman than I'm all for it. Was thinking he could do a Batman film that was serious but not as serious as the Burton/Nolan films but not light hearted like the Schumaker ones either.

[CConn]

We're talking about a live action Brad Bird movie, right?

I dunno. The direction on MI4 didn't totally blow me away. Not that it was bad in any way, but it didn't make me stop and take notice like Refn, or Abrams or Rian Johnson did.

[raybia]

Has Brad Bird ever did a dark and grity film before? Because BTAS was dark and grity, but if he can do that kinda Batman than I'm all for it. Was thinking he could do a Batman film that was serious but not as serious as the Burton/Nolan films but not light hearted like the Schumaker ones either.

Based on Mission Impossible: Ghost Protocol I would say that is a definite yes as it was an excellent balance of action, thrills, suspense, humor, and grit.

[raybia]

We're talking about a live action Brad Bird movie, right?

I dunno. The direction on MI4 didn't totally blow me away. Not that it was bad in any way, but it didn't make me stop and take notice like Refn, or Abrams or Rian Johnson did.

I found Bird's MI superior to JJ's. But what really has me convinced he could successfully pull it off is both the Iron Giant and the Incredibles.

With that said, I think while Brad Bird could pull off a Batman movie inspired by BTAS, I think he would be better suited for a Superman movie.

Since thats not going to happen anytime soon I love to see him do the Flash or do the reboot of Green Lantern.

[CConn]

Yeah, Iron Giant and The Incredibles are nothing like Batman. Neither thematically, characters or otherwise.

[CConn]

I found Bird's MI superior to JJ's.The film or his direction?

There's a distinct difference between those two things.

[Rodrigo90]

I wouldn't want to see a direct adapt of TAS. But to see the characterization of Batman and the design of Gotham be used, amongst other things, it would be heaven! :p

[MessiahDecoy123]

Yeah, Iron Giant and The Incredibles are nothing like Batman. Neither thematically, characters or otherwise.

But Batman is much closer to those things than Mission Impossible and Brad Bird made one of the best MI movies.

So who knows what he could do with Batman?

Memento and Insomnia is nothing like most Batman comic books yet Nolan's trilogy is pretty well received by Batman fans and film critics.

[CConn]

But Batman is much closer to those things than Mission Impossible and Brad Bird made one of the best MI movies.No, The Incredibles and MI4 are kinda similar. Both are very much spy movies (albeit for different age groups), and I found the tone of both to be quite similar (IE; suspenseful, but always rather light with an element of fun laced underneat).
Memento and Insomnia is nothing like most Batman comic books yet Nolan's trilogy is pretty well received by Batman fans and film critics.Both Momento and Insomnia deal very heavily with obsession, revenge (or, rather, vengeance) and strong themes of justice and the morality behind it.

That seems very Batman to me.

[raybia]

Yeah, Iron Giant and The Incredibles are nothing like Batman. Neither thematically, characters or otherwise.

I think what would make Bird's take on a Batman film interesting is his thematic style of the exceptional individual overcoming obstacles.

He successfully projects a distinctly American spirit in many of his movies, one that celebrates exceptionalism and individual achievement and its for that reason that he would be a no-brainer to direct a superhero movie but is probably tailor made for Superman. Iron Giant was really IMO partly a homage to the character.

[CConn]

I think what would make Bird's take on a Batman film interesting is his thematic style of the exceptional individual overcoming obstacles.

He successfully projects a distinctly American spirit in many of his movies, one that celebrates exceptionalism and individual achievement and its for that reason that he would be a no-brainer to direct a superhero movie but is probably tailor made for Superman. Iron Giant was really IMO partly a homage to the character.
Yeah, I definitely agree with that.

I'd love to see him on a movie like Superman, Flash, or another superhero of that similar tone.

[Daniel Thompson]

^ Thats why I said if they go the action/adventure Batman route Bird would be perfect for it. But if they are still going for the crime drama Batman that has been displayed in Nolans films than someone esle would be better.

[CConn]

Hm. That actually just made me picture a really awesome adaptation of 70s Batman. :o

[Daniel Thompson]

What was wrong with 70s Batman? Its what turned him around to being a great hero again. And Bird would be good for Superman aswell, but Snyder has that project right now, maybe when his run is over Bird can get a shot.

[Young Superman]

I found Bird's MI superior to JJ's. But what really has me convinced he could successfully pull it off is both the Iron Giant and the Incredibles.

With that said, I think while Brad Bird could pull off a Batman movie inspired by BTAS, I think he would be better suited for a Superman movie.

Since thats not going to happen anytime soon I love to see him do the Flash or do the reboot of Green Lantern.

If Bird was gonna direct any DC superhero film, it sould have been Superman.

[TheWatcher]

I wouldn't want to see a direct adapt of TAS. But to see the characterization of Batman and the design of Gotham be used, amongst other things, it would be heaven! :p
You read my man man.
BTAS + a little bit of 70's Batman + Brad Bird = Perfection

[CConn]

What was wrong with 70s Batman?Oh no, I'm being honest. It would be an awesome movie.

[MessiahDecoy123]

No, The Incredibles and MI4 are kinda similar. Both are very much spy movies (albeit for different age groups), and I found the tone of both to be quite similar (IE; suspenseful, but always rather light with an element of fun laced underneat).
Both Momento and Insomnia deal very heavily with obsession, revenge (or, rather, vengeance) and strong themes of justice and the morality behind it.

That seems very Batman to me.

But if two serial killer movies qualify Nolan for Batman how would a spy oriented, animated superhero movie and a badass rogue spy action movie disqualify Brad Bird from doing a more imaginative Batman reboot? Even Nolan's Bat-films are kinda like Bond spy movies.

Would Brad Bird ever make a movie like Batman Begins? No but that doesn't mean he couldn't make a smart and respectful Batman movie with Robin, Clayface, or Mr. Freeze leading up to a Justice League film, things that Nolan's universe wouldn't allow.

[MessiahDecoy123]

You read my man man.
BTAS + a little bit of 70's Batman + Brad Bird = Perfection

Exactly! :woot:

[GREEN =w= DAY]

i want the freaks of nature villains. i'm talking about Man-Bat, Clayface, Killer Croc, etc.

[MessiahDecoy123]

i want the freaks of nature villains. i'm talking about Man-Bat, Clayface, Killer Croc, etc.

I would like a classic fantasy-based villain and a reality-based villain for every movie. One of each.

[Llama_Shepherd]

I just want a writer/director team that can do Robin justice on screen.

[metaphysician]

I want a director who, if they did a movie with Mr Freeze as the villain, would go and watch "Heart of Ice" ten times in a row to get the characterization down.

[MessiahDecoy123]

I want a director who, if they did a movie with Mr Freeze as the villain, would go and watch "Heart of Ice" ten times in a row to get the characterization down.

Or just team up Timm/Dini with Brad Bird.

[Optimus_Prime_]

But if two serial killer movies qualify Nolan for Batman how would a spy oriented, animated superhero movie and a badass rogue spy action movie disqualify Brad Bird from doing a more imaginative Batman reboot? Even Nolan's Bat-films are kinda like Bond spy movies.

Would Brad Bird ever make a movie like Batman Begins? No but that doesn't mean he couldn't make a smart and respectful Batman movie with Robin, Clayface, or Mr. Freeze leading up to a Justice League film, things that Nolan's universe wouldn't allow.
Honestly The Dark Knight is more like Ghost Protocal and the other M.I. movies than Memento and Insomnia. I mean even Nolan stated his influences were movies like Blade Runner which isn't like either two of his previous films. M.I. is essentially a thriller through and through, and deals with themes and lofty subjects. Very similar styles of action. Anchored by similar styles of characters, most of them are serious. I mean in the first one you had Batman quipping "nice coat", "damn good television", "I won't kill you, but I don't have to save you" just like Tom Cruise in an M.I. movie.

I think The Dark Knight certainly outweighs M.I. in grimness, and better villain in Ledger's Joker, but honestly similar stuff. "You're gonna love me", "(Bat forearm blades to Joker's face) I know how you got these", "You shoulda picked I higher window", "I thought my jokes were bad", "You wanna know how I got these scars". Again, very quoteable, action one liners.

Also you have very grand shots very skyscrapers in TDK and BB and that's nothing like his previous two. Those are much more akin to action and in large part what makes them so visually spectacular.

[TheWatcher]

I would like a classic fantasy-based villain and a reality-based villain for every movie. One of each.
I love this idea. Man Bat,Killer Croc or Clayface would be awesome to see on the big screen.

Maybe Two Face with Killer Croc as his henchman? Or possibly Riddler/Scarecow with Clayface/Manbat respectively?

[cronosred]

Or just team up Timm/Dini with Brad Bird.

That could be amazing but I doubt WB would be smart enough to give them a try.

[CConn]

I wonder if Brad Bird would even be allowed to work for WB what with his Disney connections.

[Daniel Thompson]

I think Brad Bird directing 70s style Batman films can be good. Think that era of Batman would fit Birds directing style.

[Daniel Thompson]

I wonder if Brad Bird would even be allowed to work for WB what with his Disney connections.

They might try and get him to direct a Marvel film in the future. Like future X-Men films or Avengers films. Maybe the reboot Fantastic Four franchise.

[Rodrigo90]

The things is, after seeing MI4, I think Bird would be too similar to Nolan. I mean I do want to see Nolan's style have a presence within the Bat movies, but not entirely. And I don't want to somebody like Del Toro take over, because he makes things just too bizarre and far too different from Nolan.

I'm not a supporter of Aronofsky for nothing! :p

His movies are fantastical, but he puts in the blend of realism that feels natural. That's the next step the franchise needs to take...a director that gently leads the movies away from Nolan, while still keeping his influence close to the chest, whilst also doing his own thing...Aronofsky is a good example for what needs to happen for Batman :)

[MessiahDecoy123]

Nolan and Brad Bird are totally different film makers.

Mission Impossible 4 had to fit in with the rest of the series. That limited what Brad Bird could do. But the man is capable of incredible comic book style and vision.

Look at his Pixar movies and Iron Giant. His imagination should not be underestimated.

[Rodrigo90]

MI4 was quite similar to Inception IMO. Namely them both being action thrillers :hehe:

[DarkSovereignty]

I'm growing increasingly fond of the idea of a brad bird batman film, with a screenplay by paul dini and bruce timm. if not him then somebody who'll bring back the fantastical element to batman, like I would love for Guillermo Del Toro to do a batman film.

[metaphysician]

I haven't seen MI4 yet, but from the clips and footage I've glimpsed, I wouldn't say its *that* similar to Nolan. Yes, they both take place in a vaguely similar "hyper-real" setting, but Nolan has a darker, more brooding sensibility. Bird is more gonzo, less interested in making things realistic than in making them incredible. Sure, this means Batman wouldn't get as deep a psychological examination over the course of the film(s), but we've just gotten that with the Nolan trilogy.

[DarkSovereignty]

exactly, we've already gotten the cerebral take on batman, hell we got that in the 80's with the Burton films. I think Brad Bird could bring some heart back to the bat films. not saying the character needs to get warm and fuzzy, but that doesn't mean it has be 100% cold and empty.

[Daniel Thompson]

^ Yeah bascially Bird can bring actual omic book Batman to life. The Avengers proved you can use alot from the comics and make it work on the big screen. Bird is talented so he can do the same for Batman. Show the adventure side of Batman and the fantasy one aswell. Do Mr. Freeze and Riddler justice, Two-Face has been done justice and Bane will most likely be done justice too.

[Rodrigo90]

Bird is more likely to make a Marvel movie. He wouldn't risk souring his relationship with Disney in favour of making a Bat movie for their rival companies, not when they own Pixar :p

[raybia]

Bird is more likely to make a Marvel movie. He wouldn't risk souring his relationship with Disney in favour of making a Bat movie for their rival companies, not when they own Pixar :p

I hate to admit it but WB has their head so far up their azz when it comes to DC Entertainment that not only aren't they considering Brad Bird to direct one of their movies, the only thing that they are seriously looking to develop besides the Superman and Batman properties is....Nothing.

They have no clue. Damn waste is what it is. I would love if WB sold DC to Sony. Don't know about the quality but IMO they would at make a real attempt to development many of those rich characters.

[Daniel Thompson]

What marvel film you think Bird would be best at making? I love to see him direct a Captain America film.

[The Guard]

The obvious choice for Bird is FANTASTIC FOUR. A little too obvious, really. I could see him doing Power Pack or something like that. I don't think he's quite proven himself as a live action director yet. Would like to see a few more films before there's serious talk about him making a comic book movie.

[Daniel Thompson]

If its a team superhero flick I rather him be doing X-Men or Avengers. But for solo guys I like Captain America or Ironman.

[cronosred]

I hate to admit it but WB has their head so far up their azz when it comes to DC Entertainment that not only aren't they considering Brad Bird to direct one of their movies, the only thing that they are seriously looking to develop besides the Superman and Batman properties is....Nothing.

They have no clue. Damn waste is what it is. I would love if WB sold DC to Sony. Don't know about the quality but IMO they would at make a real attempt to development many of those rich characters.

It is a waste especially when they have no idea what to do with the characters yet they have Timm/Dini who seem to have no problem creating solid stories for each one of them that people love. Why they don't utilize them for their live-action films is beyond me.

[MessiahDecoy123]

Brad Bird has vision and talent and understands superheros. That's the most important things to direct a great Batman fim.

Don't think he can do something darker?

Who knew George Lucas could do something as imaginative as Star Wars after American Graffiti and THX1138?

Who knew Richard Donner could do a ground-breaking brightly colored Superman movie when his only movie previously was The Omen.

If a director has vision, talent, and understanding of a genre it's all that matters. Brad Bird could do a legendary Batman movie.

[Daniel Thompson]

^ All very true sir.

[CConn]

Who knew George Lucas could do something as imaginative as Star Wars after American Graffiti and THX1138?Anyone with an IQ over 80?

The intangibles of Star Wars was very present in both THX and AG.

[The Guard]

Brad Bird has vision and talent and understands superheros. That's the most important things to direct a great Batman fim.

Don't think he can do something darker?

Who knew George Lucas could do something as imaginative as Star Wars after American Graffiti and THX1138?

It's pretty obvious after those two movies that Lucas had some range as a director. Not a ton, but some.

Who knew Richard Donner could do a ground-breaking brightly colored Superman movie when his only movie previously was The Omen.

I don't think anyone knew anyone could do a ground breaking Superman movie.

Richard Donner,however, had directed quite a few live action projects before THE OMEN.

My issue with Brad Bird has nothing to do with what tone he could do...but with his actual talent as a live action director. Wasn't all that impressed with MI4. I found his directing work to be pretty average action movie stuff. I don't want to go from Chris Nolan to someone who MIGHT be talented enough to be good enough to follow up one of the best superhero franchises ever.

[DarkSovereignty]

and I thought his visual inventiveness is what made me interested in the film. I haven't seen any other MI film before it. the hall way screen sequence alone was fantastic.

[MessiahDecoy123]

My issue with Brad Bird has nothing to do with what tone he could do...but with his actual talent as a live action director. Wasn't all that impressed with MI4. I found his directing work to be pretty average action movie stuff. I don't want to go from Chris Nolan to someone who MIGHT be talented enough to be good enough to follow up one of the best superhero franchises ever.


Well Serenity gave no indication that Avengers would become a cultural phenomenon and the 3rd highest grossing movie of all time.

[MessiahDecoy123]

Anyone with an IQ over 80?

The intangibles of Star Wars was very present in both THX and AG.

THX gives no hint of imagination and cultural impact of Star Wars.

The movies may have a similar theme about rebelling against a tyranical system but they couldn't be any more different in many of other ways.

Most people would be bored to death or weirded out watching THX which is a bleak nightmarish art film.

Star Wars is an imaginative and fun space opera blockbuster with wookies, jedi and light sabers.

No one knew at the time George Lucas had such a vision with so much ground-breaking potential nesting in his brain.

No one.

[Rodrigo90]

It's far more plausible that Bird would direct a Disney/Marvel movie than a WB/DC one. Disney would easily snap him up because they own his main bread and butter, Pixar.

And I agree that he would be the perfect director for the FF reboot.

[MessiahDecoy123]

Brad Bird is too big for Fantastic Four.

He needs a bigger franchise: Avengers, Batman, or Justice League.

[Rodrigo90]

I think a Justice League movie would definitely suit him best. But it's more than likely he'll be nabbed Disney and Marvel.

Perhaps if he gave up his love for Pixar things would be different :hehe:

[CConn]

THX gives no hint of imagination and cultural impact of Star Wars.

The movies may have a similar theme about rebelling against a tyranical system but they couldn't be any more different in many of other ways.

Most people would be bored to death or weirded out watching THX which is a bleak nightmarish art film.

Star Wars is an imaginative and fun space opera blockbuster with wookies, jedi and light sabers.

No one knew at the time George Lucas had such a vision with so much ground-breaking potential nesting in his brain.

No one.
OMG, do you watch movies with your eyes closed?

[Boom]

What are our thoughts of Drew Goddard directing a Batman movie?

[S. Grundy]

My issue with Brad Bird has nothing to do with what tone he could do...but with his actual talent as a live action director. Wasn't all that impressed with MI4. I found his directing work to be pretty average action movie stuff. I don't want to go from Chris Nolan to someone who MIGHT be talented enough to be good enough to follow up one of the best superhero franchises ever.

Well one thing Bird had over Nolan was he could do competent action scenes his first go around, it took Nolan until Inception to do decent action scenes.

I like the idea of Bird doing a Batman movie, he would give me hope that maybe it be all dour like the Nolan movies have been, and actually infuse a bit of fun. Because frankly, after The Avengers, I've become kinda bored of the whole grim n' gritty comic book films.

[MessiahDecoy123]

OMG, do you watch movies with your eyes closed?
Nice rebuttal.

It really supports your argument. :doh:

[The Guard]

Well Serenity gave no indication that Avengers would become a cultural phenomenon and the 3rd highest grossing movie of all time.

No, but common sense might have...

[MessiahDecoy123]

No, but common sense might have...

Exactly Serenity didn't give any indication that Avengers would be so successful but common sense might have.

I agree completely. :woot:

[Rodrigo90]

Bird would make an awesome Batman movie.

But you guys shouldn't get your expectations up, cause there is a good, solid chance he will be taken by Disney for a Marvel movie. Bird wouldn't jeopardize his relationship with Disney/Pixar. Disney is also ruthless enough to hold a knife over his head and say
¨You do Batman, and we do you¨ :D

[HighFivingMF]

If Brad Bird has anything else to say about superheroes, he'll do Incredibles 2.

[Rodrigo90]

:up: That's what I want to see from Bird!

[Daniel Thompson]

Again Marvel would be good too bor a Bird superhero flick. He could make a badass Captain America, X-Men, Avengers or FF film.

[DoomsdayApex]

Well one thing Bird had over Nolan was he could do competent action scenes his first go around, it took Nolan until Inception to do decent action scenes.

I like the idea of Bird doing a Batman movie, he would give me hope that maybe it be all dour like the Nolan movies have been, and actually infuse a bit of fun. Because frankly, after The Avengers, I've become kinda bored of the whole grim n' gritty comic book films.

That's absurd. Batman isn't 'fun'. It's alright to feature a few humorous scenes but the last thing the Batman franchise needs is another Batman Forever or Batman & Robin just because you found The Avengers greatly entertaining. It took nearly a decade and a brilliant director to resurrect Batman after those events.

No thank you to a lighter and fun Batman movie.

After all the grim-n-gritty CBMs? What in bloody heavens are babbling about? Other than BB, TDK, Watchmen, Punisher '04 and V for Vendetta, you act as if the superhero genre is flooded with them. The fun and light-hearted CBMs outnumber the dark and gritty CBMs in a 5 to 1 ratio.

[Raiden]

Again Marvel would be good too bor a Bird superhero flick. He could make a badass Captain America, X-Men, Avengers or FF film.

I agree. I think with the number of CBM that Marvel still wants to make, they can definitely offer him a movie that he can really sinks his teeth into. I'd love to see him taking over Cap 2 & 3, because with SHIELD integrates into his movie, I see these two sequels not only maximizing Cap's appeal but can also give spotlights to agents like BW and Hawkeye. Of course, Bird can also make The Incredibles 2, and this is something I want to see.

[Optimus_Prime_]

That's absurd. Batman isn't 'fun'. It's alright to feature a few humorous scenes but the last thing the Batman franchise needs is another Batman Forever or Batman & Robin just because you found The Avengers greatly entertaining. It took nearly a decade and a brilliant director to resurrect Batman after those events.

No thank you to a lighter and fun Batman movie.

After all the grim-n-gritty CBMs? What in bloody heavens are babbling about? Other than BB, TDK, Watchmen, Punisher '04 and V for Vendetta, you act as if the superhero genre is flooded with them. The fun and light-hearted CBMs outnumber the dark and gritty CBMs in a 5 to 1 ratio.
Batman is fun. Batman the man may be about as humorous as a bag full of crocodiles, but the comics by and large are fun. I mean the whole share of Neal Adams stories were fun, especially tales like Son of the Demon. Very Bond-esque. You're confining Batman to a very narrow scope.

[S. Grundy]

That's absurd. Batman isn't 'fun'. It's alright to feature a few humorous scenes but the last thing the Batman franchise needs is another Batman Forever or Batman & Robin just because you found The Avengers greatly entertaining. It took nearly a decade and a brilliant director to resurrect Batman after those events.

No thank you to a lighter and fun Batman movie.

After all the grim-n-gritty CBMs? What in bloody heavens are babbling about? Other than BB, TDK, Watchmen, Punisher '04 and V for Vendetta, you act as if the superhero genre is flooded with them. The fun and light-hearted CBMs outnumber the dark and gritty CBMs in a 5 to 1 ratio.

I'm not looking for another Batman & robin, but more Avengers than dour and depressing like Nolan has been doing.

It's bad wording on my part, it's more to do with people saying that whatever comic properties should be gritty. Hell take The Amazing Spider-Man, when they announced they said it would be more gritty like TDK.

[DoomsdayApex]

Batman is fun. Batman the man may be about as humorous as a bag full of crocodiles, but the comics by and large are fun. I mean the whole share of Neal Adams stories were fun, especially tales like Son of the Demon. Very Bond-esque. You're confining Batman to a very narrow scope.

Sorry, no I'm not. The idea of 'fun' is currently being derived from what The Avengers was during it's run. And that's not Batman.

ALL comic books and graphic novels are fun. If they weren't, then why would we be fans of them? However, Batman is not a colorful character (per se) -- nor is The Punisher. So I'm not against a 'fun' Batman at all. After all, I adored the B:TAS and the Arkham games, but it varies to what level of 'fun' is suggested here.

[DoomsdayApex]

I'm not looking for another Batman & robin, but more Avengers than dour and depressing like Nolan has been doing.

That's my point though. Batman isn't Tony Stark, Steve Rogers, Bruce Banner, Thor, etc. He's a damaged hero with sociopathic issues.

Depressing? I find Nolan's Batman films to be optimistic and inspirational.

It's bad wording on my part, it's more to do with people saying that whatever comic properties should be gritty. Hell take The Amazing Spider-Man, when they announced they said it would be more gritty like TDK.

See? Spiderman isn't dark and gritty, so why start now? Batman is Batman, Spiderman is not the Dark Knight and Batman isn't fun as The Avengers or Justice League Unlimited.

For me, a 'fun' Batman movie would be closer to the mythology of the character (which is still dark) with villains like Killer Croc, Poison Ivy and Mr. Freeze.

[Optimus_Prime_]

Sorry, no I'm not. The idea of 'fun' is currently being derived from what The Avengers was during it's run. And that's not Batman.

ALL comic books and graphic novels are fun. If they weren't, then why would we be fans of them? However, Batman is not a colorful character (per se) -- nor is The Punisher. So I'm not against a 'fun' Batman at all. After all, I adored the B:TAS and the Arkham games, but it varies to what level of 'fun' is suggested here.
You're wrong though:huh:. Your merely pointing out that Bruce Wayne is a sociopath with zero sense of humor, agreed (kind of, he's been 'lighter' or 'darker' depending on the writer, but basically a not happy dude). Alfred Pennyworth - dry sense of humor, good for one liners. Robin (pivotal character), Nightwing are both humorous, good banter. Could see a very Downey Jr. take on Dick Grayson as Nightwing for example. Have him being very quick witted, and very cheaky with the ladies. All that is very consistent with the comics. Joker, again, can be very humorous on top of being murderous, and fits with multiple takes on Batman. Then you really have a colorful cast of villains over all.

No Batman could have the 'tone' of Avengers. Batman simply wouldn't be the one responsible for that kind of dialogue, but you could certain have a comic bookish Batman take, and it's fits seemlessly with the comics. I mean Cap wasn't really funny in Avengers, and Batman has some parallels there, he's very by his own book and no one else's, and a bit moreso than Cap.

Remember, even 'Night of Owls', a very current Batman story that honestly has movie potential has a complete fun element to it. Owl ninjas? It's great, btw.

So I just completely disagree. There is too much Batman canon to consider to say that Brad Bird can't capture some of it, or that the style of Avengers is inappropriate. It's completely appropriate for Batman stories like Hush, Under the Red Hood, No Man's Land, Arkham Aslyum, or villains like Clayface, Mr. Freeze, or even Ra's Al Ghul would be given good treatment. I in fact think Nolan really only did a sub par Ra's thus far, I think he dumbed down many great aspects of the character. There's a ton of high concept fantasy and sci-fi that has always found a home with Batman, and it'd be nice to see a movie that does that.

I think you also have to realize that not having to necessarily redo the origin now, which is probably the case, they can make a more expansive universe not just pigeonholed into our own.

[Optimus_Prime_]

Frankly I'd like to see Batman R.I.P. get adapted. I'd modify Dr. Hurt, maybe make him Thomas Elliot or something, but still keep the Satan overtones. I love that story. Batman fights the Devil and the Devil blinks.

[DoomsdayApex]

You're wrong though:huh:. Your merely pointing out that Bruce Wayne is a sociopath with zero sense of humor, agreed (kind of, he's been 'lighter' or 'darker' depending on the writer, but basically a not happy dude). Alfred Pennyworth - dry sense of humor, good for one liners. Robin (pivotal character), Nightwing are both humorous, good banter. Could see a very Downey Jr. take on Dick Grayson as Nightwing for example. Have him being very quick witted, and very cheaky with the ladies. All that is very consistent with the comics. Joker, again, can be very humorous on top of being murderous, and fits with multiple takes on Batman. Then you really have a colorful cast of villains over all.

I don't disagree with most of this, however, you seem to conclude that the supporting cast will be similar to what RDJ was in TA, for example, when approaching Nightwing or Robin. These characters can still be cheeky, sarcastic and witty without following the same template.

No Batman could have the 'tone' of Avengers. Batman simply wouldn't be the one responsible for that kind of dialogue, but you could certain have a comic bookish Batman take, and it's fits seemlessly with the comics.

Yes and no. I don't mind Alfred and Nightwing or Robin having their own personas (lighter personalities) but these stories typically revolve around Bruce Wayne. In fact, the whole reason why Nolan excluded Robin in his film series was because Grayson would have disrupted a few elements of his story and the film's tone. He wanted his trilogy to focus solely on Batman.

In all honesty, I don't want an ensemble Batman movie featuring Batgirl and Nightwing/Robin because I believe it'll take from screen-time and set-pieces away from Batman.

The playful banter from Lucius and dry humor from Alfred is more than enough for me. Not to mention you've got Gordon in the mix as well.

Remember, even 'Night of Owls', a very current Batman story that honestly has movie potential has a complete fun element to it. Owl ninjas? It's great, btw.

Ehhhh... no thanks.

So I just completely disagree. There is too much Batman canon to consider to say that Brad Bird can't capture some of it, or that the style of Avengers is inappropriate. It's completely appropriate for Batman stories like Hush, Under the Red Hood, No Man's Land, Arkham Aslyum, or villains like Clayface, Mr. Freeze, or even Ra's Al Ghul would be given good treatment. I in fact think Nolan really only did a sub par Ra's thus far, I think he dumbed down many great aspects of the character. There's a ton of high concept fantasy and sci-fi that has always found a home with Batman, and it'd be nice to see a movie that does that.

And I disagree with your belief that a more light and fun tone is what the next Batman franchise needs just because Batman can go there, and The Avengers utilized it. In my opinion, it's a slippery slope to returning back to Bat-Nipples. Now, that doesn't mean the next franchise can't venture into the more fantastical realm. I just believe that these feats can be accomplished without changing the 'tone' too much.

[MessiahDecoy123]

Why do people always focus on the lack of ”fun”.

What many fans want is IMAGINATION.

More specifically we want DARK and IMAGINATIVE.

”Fun” is the wrong word.

[DoomsdayApex]

Why do people always focus on the lack of ”fun”.

What many fans want is IMAGINATION.

More specifically we want DARK and IMAGINATIVE.

”Fun” is the wrong word.

I'm down with a more fantastical and 'imaginative' Dark Knight story. Nolan tackled the gritty and philosophical/socio-political format for about seven years (and the films were fantastic -- some of the greatest CBMs ever made). I think it's time for Batman to return back to the 'supernatural' elements that the Burton movies, Arkham games and the animated series are currently known for.

[Rocketman]

Here's my line of thinking.

I really liked how Nolan used villains that were never used before in Batman Begins. In the 1989-1997 era, we had Joker, Catwoman, Penguin, Two-Face, Riddler, Mr. Freeze, Poison Ivy, and Bane.

Then Nolan acknowledged what was already used and gave us something different: Scarecrow, Ra's Al Ghul, Mr. Zsasz, and Carmine Falcone. Once it was established that this was clearly a NEW direction, Nolan had free rein to return to old villains from the old era: Joker, Two-Face, Catwoman, and Bane.

So I say: Follow that pattern. With the next reboot, bring in villains that have NEVER been used before, and then once the first movie is done, go back to the villains that were used before. Something like this:

First Movie:
- Black Mask
- Ventriloquist
- Hugo Strange

Second Movie:
- Riddler
- Penguin

And don't be afraid to introduce new supporting characters in addition to the new villains:

Leslie Thompkins
Harvey Bullock
Rene Montoya
Jeremiah Arkham

And MOST IMPORTANTLY, don't be afraid to have a big phenomenal cast like Nolan's ensembles. I'm talking big names, like the way Nolan drew in Morgan Freeman, Gary Oldman, Michael Caine, Liam Neeson, etc. It's one thing to have a great Batman movie, but the thing that makes these movies even more great and epic is the amazing cast that is around Batman. These movies are events, moreso than any franchise I can name, and one reason is the casts they always pull together. And don't be afraid to go big, while still going small. I'm talking:

Batman: Jon Hamm or Josh Brolin
Alfred: Timothy Dalton
Hugo Strange: Robin Williams
Ventriloquist: Bill Murray
Jeremiah Arkham: Jeff Goldblum
Leslie Thompkins:Meryl Streep
Jim Gordon: William H. Macy

I'd kill for a Batman movie with Robin Williams and Bill Murray teaming up as villains, with Meryl Streep and Jeff Goldblum in the same cast. That's exactly along the same lines as the combined forces of Morgan Freeman, Liam Neeson, Michael Caine, and Gary Oldman together.

[DaveMoral]

I don't disagree with most of this, however, you seem to conclude that the supporting cast will be similar to what RDJ was in TA, for example, when approaching Nightwing or Robin. These characters can still be cheeky, sarcastic and witty without following the same template.



Yes and no. I don't mind Alfred and Nightwing or Robin having their own personas (lighter personalities) but these stories typically revolve around Bruce Wayne. In fact, the whole reason why Nolan excluded Robin in his film series was because Grayson would have disrupted a few elements of his story and the film's tone. He wanted his trilogy to focus solely on Batman.

In all honesty, I don't want an ensemble Batman movie featuring Batgirl and Nightwing/Robin because I believe it'll take from screen-time and set-pieces away from Batman.

The playful banter from Lucius and dry humor from Alfred is more than enough for me. Not to mention you've got Gordon in the mix as well.



Ehhhh... no thanks.



And I disagree with your belief that a more light and fun tone is what the next Batman franchise needs just because Batman can go there, and The Avengers utilized it. In my opinion, it's a slippery slope to returning back to Bat-Nipples. Now, that doesn't mean the next franchise can't venture into the more fantastical realm. I just believe that these feats can be accomplished without changing the 'tone' too much.

I think the fact that people are using The Avengers as an example of honing closer to comic roots and feel is distracting you and conjuring images of B&R and Adam West instead of something closer to a live action marriage of Arkham City and BTAS. And you don't see the latter because you lack faith in writers and directors doing Batman's supporting characters right IMO. Grayson shouldn't take away from Bruce because he is, in a very real way, an extension of Bruce. He repeesents both what Bruce lost and what he became. He also puts Bruce in a new role, having to become mentor and father. There's no reason Dick has to take away from Bruce at all. It's more likely that, with the wild success of Nolan's approach, when they do reboot they will find writers and directors that will know how to handle the charscter and how he fits into the Batman world and story. Batman is going to be the one cgaracter that WB wants to safeguard for a long time. If Man of Steel does well they might work to safeguard him too. But Batman is one where they are not going to make the same mistakes.

[Léo Ho Tep]

I can't believe some people are still saying Batman should have a sense of humor. When Bill Finger wrote Detective Comics and Batman, the dark knight was cracking jokes ALL THE TIME.

[DaveMoral]

I can't believe some people are still saying Batman should have a sense of humor. When Bill Finger wrote Detective Comics and Batman, the dark knight was cracking jokes ALL THE TIME.

I can't believe reading comprehension is so low that people believe this is what's being said.

[Léo Ho Tep]

I can't believe reading comprehension is so low that people believe this is what's being said.


I meant shouldn't have. And come on, a lot of people are still acting like Miller created Batman.

[metaphysician]

That's absurd. Batman isn't 'fun'. It's alright to feature a few humorous scenes but the last thing the Batman franchise needs is another Batman Forever or Batman & Robin just because you found The Avengers greatly entertaining. It took nearly a decade and a brilliant director to resurrect Batman after those events.

No thank you to a lighter and fun Batman movie.

After all the grim-n-gritty CBMs? What in bloody heavens are babbling about? Other than BB, TDK, Watchmen, Punisher '04 and V for Vendetta, you act as if the superhero genre is flooded with them. The fun and light-hearted CBMs outnumber the dark and gritty CBMs in a 5 to 1 ratio.

Honestly, I have to agree, albeit probably for other reasons. This conflation of Avengers with the Schumacher Bat films misses the point. Yes, both had jokes, but one was camp, one wasn't. Batman doesn't need an infusion of camp. It just, arguably, could use an infusion of the fantastic.

( oh, and you missed two more grim and gritty films, Hancock and Kick-Ass. However, your point stands, thankfully. )

[metaphysician]

As for villains in a potential reboot, I kind of agree with the idea "start with someone new." However, there are a lot of villains who wouldn't work very well for that. Hugo Strange probably is the best bet; use for the theme of the movie "does someone have to be insane to do what Batman does?" Just make sure to give a resounding answer of "no."

[Rockstar]

I'd go with:

2015 film: Hugo Strange and Hush (villains that allow for flashbacks to Bruce's origins)

2018 film: Ridder and Bio-Terrorist Poison Ivy

2021 film: Black Mask and The Penguin

[DoomsdayApex]

I think the fact that people are using The Avengers as an example of honing closer to comic roots and feel is distracting you and conjuring images of B&R and Adam West instead of something closer to a live action marriage of Arkham City and BTAS. And you don't see the latter because you lack faith in writers and directors doing Batman's supporting characters right IMO. Grayson shouldn't take away from Bruce because he is, in a very real way, an extension of Bruce. He repeesents both what Bruce lost and what he became. He also puts Bruce in a new role, having to become mentor and father. There's no reason Dick has to take away from Bruce at all. It's more likely that, with the wild success of Nolan's approach, when they do reboot they will find writers and directors that will know how to handle the charscter and how he fits into the Batman world and story. Batman is going to be the one cgaracter that WB wants to safeguard for a long time. If Man of Steel does well they might work to safeguard him too. But Batman is one where they are not going to make the same mistakes.

When mentioning The Avengers, I do think a more comic-booky Batman film is what's being asked for, but that's almost guaranteed with the following franchise. An insider told us WB is actually interested in heading into the 'Arkham' direction. Yet, I don't believe those who are suggesting a more 'fun' movie are trying to embrace the Batman lore and mythology from the comics. Not from the impression I'm soaking up when I read comments such as:

''Ugh, Nolan's Batman is so depressing. Why can't we get a Batman movie like The Avengers? There was no colorful, humor or fun moments in TDK."

Well, for the most part, that's not Batman. That's why. Unlike most heroes, Bruce Wayne is a severely damaged human being (remains that scared eight year old in the dark alley with his dead parents) who's hellbent on revenge/justice of every second of every day in his life. Thus, making him a cynical emotionally-crippled *******.

Dick Grayson might be an extension of Bruce Wayne's character in the comics but it would still be mighty laborious to make the dynamic between the duo work. Adding another main character to story usually leads to another character(s) getting a portion of their development/growth subtracted, and I don't want that character to be Bruce Wayne.

[DarkSovereignty]

that's not your batman, there are several interpretations of the character in the comics. Nolan's seems more in line with Frank Millers or Jeph Loeb, but that doesn't make it the be-all-end-all of batman.

[DoomsdayApex]

that's not your batman, there are several interpretations of the character in the comics. Nolan's seems more in line with Frank Millers or Jeph Loeb, but that doesn't make it the be-all-end-all of batman.

Yes, there are several interpretations of Batman, but I'll bet you my bottom dollar that WB isn't going in 'lighter' direction anytime soon. Batman is identified as a dark brooding character by the general audience. It's the most popular and accepted incarnation. Hell, the animated series and Arkham titles were no different. They were still dark to a certain degree.

[Rodrigo90]

I just want a Kevin Conroy inspired Batman. Whatever media he has portrayed Batman in, the characterization has always been pitch perfect.

[Pfeiffer-Pfan]

I just want a Kevin Conroy inspired Batman. Whatever media he has portrayed Batman in, the characterization has always been pitch perfect.

Yes... Give me a B:TAS type Bats. Hell, adapt the Conroy interpretation right out.

And give me a little more visual flair as well.

[KalMart]

40's period-piece. :up:

[Jordacar]

40's period-piece. :up:I'm starting to like the idea of a period reboot. Kinda like New Frontier, where we see Batman in the same era as the Adam West show, but with a straight face.

[Rodrigo90]

It would have to be an exaggerated 40's style movie, which mean it could be quite similar to Burton's.

[KalMart]

It would have to be an exaggerated 40's style movie, which mean it could be quite similar to Burton's.

:barf:

For the love of god please no.


More of a classic film noir and not caricatured or rompy.

[Pfeiffer-Pfan]

Burton Bats is the best he has ever looked in live action... in a broad sense.

I'd always be up for more.

[Optimus_Prime_]

Batman does have more of a sense of humor than people are giving him credit for. Batman shows the full range of human emotion, in fact for that very reason a lot of people detest Miller's take on the character, and frankly they have a point. Batman has definitely cracked wise in costume before.

[Léo Ho Tep]

Batman does have more of a sense of humor than people are giving him credit for. Batman shows the full range of human emotion, in fact for that very reason a lot of people detest Miller's take on the character, and frankly they have a point. Batman has definitely cracked wise in costume before.


He was always cracking jokes in his first years, when Bill Finger was writing him. For years, he has been a well rounded human being. Of course, he had scars because of his parents death, but he was a living caricature like some writers make him.

[Rodrigo90]

While I'm not huge on Miller's recent Batman work, I did enjoy his stuff in TDKR. His take on Batman was an amazing thing, and psychologically realistic, Batman as a tortured and disturbed soul, who's not really in the joking mood.

But heres my main beef...Keaton and Kilmer used it too much in their characterization's, which made them kind'a boring and Bale didn't use it too much, which made him seem 'fine'. Bale's take is a less disturbed Bruce/Batman, you see him make jokes and smile.

And it all boils down to Clooney...a BATMAN who is all cheerful and makes one liners, smiles at charity events....want to see that again?

[Léo Ho Tep]

While I'm not huge on Miller's recent Batman work, I did enjoy his stuff in TDKR. His take on Batman was an amazing thing, and psychologically realistic, Batman as a tortured and disturbed soul, who's not really in the joking mood.

But heres my main beef...Keaton and Kilmer used it too much in their characterization's, which made them kind'a boring and Bale didn't use it too much, which made him seem 'fine'. Bale's take is a less disturbed Bruce/Batman, you see him make jokes and smile.

And it all boils down to Clooney...a BATMAN who is all cheerful and makes one liners, smiles at charity events....want to see that again?


Why not. It's a much part of the mythos than the psychotic Batman. The brave and the bold animated series did a great job with a lighter Batman.

[Rodrigo90]

Another Clooney Batman?

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! :D

[Léo Ho Tep]

Clooney was priceless. "Hello Freeze, I'm Batman". That's genius acting.

[Rodrigo90]

But it was silly.....like the old days of the comics, they were silly. Nobody goes for the silly take on superheroes anymore, and especially not for Batman.

[Léo Ho Tep]

What a shame... I'm all for diversity.

[Rodrigo90]

However, the Batman in the comics is not exactly like Miller's take now. He isn't totally dark.

As I said, the perfect take? KEVIN CONROY! THE BATMAN IN TAS! THE BATMAN IN THE AA AND AC GAMES! Now there's a Batman who has a perfect blend of light and dark.

[MessiahDecoy123]

Batman from BTAS didn't tell jokes.

Neither did the Batman from the Arkham Asylam/Arkham City games.

So why are we talking about a Batman who cracks jokes?

[Rodrigo90]

He didn't make jokes, thank God, but he wasn't all downright moody.

[Rockstar]

Nolan's Batman had a great balance of humor and seriousness, probably the best of any Batman medium.

The banter between Bruce and Alfred, and Bruce and Lucius was great. Perfect comedic timing.

Bale's 'playboy Bruce' performances were quite comical too, like when he was asking to go to the hospital in TDK and playing dumb.

Ledger as Joker was sadistically amusing as well. He had so many great one liners. The pencil trick "it's goooone" made the entire audience laugh.


You can't really expect more 'fun' out of Batman than that without drastically changing the character and concept.

[KalMart]

A dry humor can (and is) plenty prevalent with Batman depending no the situation. He could also be funny when being dead-serious....like when he tells other members in TAS how much they're pissing him off (to Booster Gold) "...CROWD control....!", (to Flash after he presses the fire-lasers button and takes out a wall at Wayne Manor) "...you're not....helping....!!", (to Lois while saving her in World's Finest, referring to Superman) "...never around when you need him...".

It doesn't have to be 'so a guy walks into a bar....' level. ;)

[Optimus_Prime_]

Batman from BTAS didn't tell jokes.

Neither did the Batman from the Arkham Asylam/Arkham City games.

So why are we talking about a Batman who cracks jokes?
Sure Conroy's Bats tells jokes. What show were you watching? One of my favorites is when he toys with the Joker is a Christmas episode.

Check 2:14 seconds in
7VaHIQMQxbQ

[MessiahDecoy123]

The point is 96-98% of the time Batman from BTAS is dead serious.

[Rodrigo90]

Batman shouldn't be about comedy. The only time we see him smiling and cracking a gag of some kind, is when he has somebody at his mercy. So Batman has kind of a wicked sense of humor.

[KalMart]

Batman shouldn't be about comedy. The only time we see him smiling and cracking a gag of some kind, is when he has somebody at his mercy. So Batman has kind of a wicked sense of humor.

And a bit mischievous as Bruce Wayne....especially when it comes to the ladies.

[Optimus_Prime_]

Yeah, as Bruce Wayne he can certainly have a sense of humor. It also depends on who is around. I think he gets a lot of his joking out around Alfred in many incarnations. I don't think you can make the statement Batman has no sense of humor. Batman retains his humanity, and in part that's retaining a sense of humor.

[Daniel Thompson]

When mentioning The Avengers, I do think a more comic-booky Batman film is what's being asked for, but that's almost guaranteed with the following franchise. An insider told us WB is actually interested in heading into the 'Arkham' direction. Yet, I don't believe those who are suggesting a more 'fun' movie are trying to embrace the Batman lore and mythology from the comics. Not from the impression I'm soaking up when I read comments such as:

''Ugh, Nolan's Batman is so depressing. Why can't we get a Batman movie like The Avengers? There was no colorful, humor or fun moments in TDK."

Well, for the most part, that's not Batman. That's why. Unlike most heroes, Bruce Wayne is a severely damaged human being (remains that scared eight year old in the dark alley with his dead parents) who's hellbent on revenge/justice of every second of every day in his life. Thus, making him a cynical emotionally-crippled *******.

Dick Grayson might be an extension of Bruce Wayne's character in the comics but it would still be mighty laborious to make the dynamic between the duo work. Adding another main character to story usually leads to another character(s) getting a portion of their development/growth subtracted, and I don't want that character to be Bruce Wayne.

How is them going the Arkham route make the next Batman films more comic booky?

[Léo Ho Tep]

Batman from BTAS didn't tell jokes.

Neither did the Batman from the Arkham Asylam/Arkham City games.

So why are we talking about a Batman who cracks jokes?


Because Batman exists since 1939, and not since BTAS?

Because a character whose longevity is so spectacular allows creative team to have a different vision?

Because Batman has been cracking jokes during decades?

Because without the Adam West show, the comics would have been cancelled?

Because a Batman who cracks jokes can be great, if done by talented people, as seen in the brave and the bold?

Because we don't need to see the same grim and gritty cliches all the time, or else most people would grow tired of Batman?

[Léo Ho Tep]

The point is 96-98% of the time Batman from BTAS is dead serious.


yeah, but Batman from TAS is one iteration of the character, and there are many more.

[MessiahDecoy123]

Yeah but most Batman fans put BTAS far above versions of Batman where he cracks jokes.

[Léo Ho Tep]

Yeah but most Batman fans put BTAS far above versions of Batman where he cracks jokes.

I would most likely call themself BTAS Fan. Are you trying to say than most Batman fans don't like Bill Finger stories?

[Léo Ho Tep]

I can appreciate both a dark, brooding Batman, and a Batman cracking joke. What matters is the writing. As long as it's well written, it can be great. Why the need to prefer one above another? Why shouldn't we allowed to appreciate both?

[RoughNTumble]

http://i169.photobucket.com/albums/u233/jacobiztehroxor/1334773417575.jpg

[Léo Ho Tep]

http://i169.photobucket.com/albums/u233/jacobiztehroxor/1334773417575.jpg


YEAH!!!! Let's hate everything Batman related!

[Llama_Shepherd]

Let's get that Catman movie gaining momentum!

[MessiahDecoy123]

I can appreciate both a dark, brooding Batman, and a Batman cracking joke. What matters is the writing. As long as it's well written, it can be great. Why the need to prefer one above another? Why shouldn't we allowed to appreciate both?

We've seen the cheesy Batman done in Batman the Movie and the Schumacher films.

We haven't had one done like BTAS and Arkham City.

[ThePhantasm]

I think Andrew Scott would be a terrific Joker:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-vPpY6jB6Jtw/T8i4U7UWo7I/AAAAAAAAAzA/Nl1k_wm5REA/s1600/jokermoriarty.jpg

[Optimus_Prime_]

Bale's Batman does act a bit like he's trying to pass a really hard turd all the time. I think that's kind of the off putting nature about it. He only has that one volume and stays there. Keaton was great as Batman because he was subtlely crazy, creepy and menacing but he could lighten that a bit around Vicky Vale and characters he wasn't fighting. Bale never really does that. Even the lines to Rachel in Batman Begins to Rachel all came with that intensity. I saw him loosen that up a bit in the next one, but a lot of that still remained. He seems to lack emotional range inside the Bat-costume.

While the movie states Bruce is the "mask" and Batman is the real man, I never truly buy this. Bale's Bruce seems to be the more genuine person, and Batman the act. Keaton definitely flipped that, as does Conroy. Case in point: the episode "Appointment on Crime Alley" Daggett calls Bruce. Immediately as he hangs up (with Alfred present) Conroy switches from his Bruce voice to his Batman voice seemlessly. Almost like he was dropping an act.

[Pfeiffer-Pfan]

A blend of Keaton and Bale would be the perfect on screen Bats.

[DarkSovereignty]

yeah, Bale's feels way too forced, like he is putting on act, like batman is an outlet for all his anger, and that's not what batman is. he's not spider-man where peter parker gets to blow off steam while in costume, for batman, bruce wayne is the outlet.

[Optimus_Prime_]

yeah, Bale's feels way too forced, like he is putting on act, like batman is an outlet for all his anger, and that's not what batman is. he's not spider-man where peter parker gets to blow off steam while in costume, for batman, bruce wayne is the outlet.
One thing we miss a ton of, and maybe because he lacks a cave, is we rarely see Bruce half in costume or just "being Batman". By that I mean where Batman isn't particularly doing anything and in the bat costume. That's something Batman does that almost no other heroes do. Spider-Man doesn't hang around the house much as Spider-Man. Batman does it all the time. It's like if he never left the Manor he'd never stop being Batman. When other's are not looking he is Batman.

[Jordacar]

yeah, Bale's feels way too forced, like he is putting on act, like batman is an outlet for all his anger, and that's not what batman is. he's not spider-man where peter parker gets to blow off steam while in costume, for batman, bruce wayne is the outlet.I know I'm gonna get rapped in the mouth for this, but I kinda disagree. The whole persona thing is a little different for each hero. For one, I don't think Peter Parker puts on the costume to blow off steam any more than Batman does. Also, while Batman certainly is an outlet and an expression of his true self, I'd say he's still putting on something of an act. He behaves differently when he puts the costume on, even towards people who know his secret (this turned off a lot of people in TDK, the way he did the voice even when talking to Lucius. I still think it was intentional though).

[OP84CC82]

I don't see why people keep thinking of well-known directors? Why not think outside of the box once in a while? Personally, I'd like to see either Louis Leterrier, Kevin Tancharoen, or Marc Webb do a Batman film.

[Brian2887]

I think WB needs to get a filmmaker with something to prove. A director who's still hungry. Someone who can tell a good story, build suspense, but hasn't had a breakout hit.

When Christopher Nolan was hired, he was a talented young filmmaker with critical appeal, but no real commercial success. Jon Favreau was a respected writer but unproven director before Iron Man, and he delivered gold. Joss Whedon never had a hit before Avengers, and, because of his hunger and respect for the characters, he delivered a hit. We should find someone in that same mold.

Someone who gets the characters, and has something to prove.

To me, that's one of three people:

1. Rian Johnson (Looper, Brick)
After Looper, I think Johnson is going to become a commodity, but I doubt the movie is going to do bonkers numbers. Batman could be the first real hit for a talented young director.

2. Martin McDonagh (In Bruges)
Brilliant at dark comedy with seedy characters and random acts of violence.

3. Scott Frank (The Lookout)
The Lookout is a great, twisty thriller with JGL, Isla Fisher, Mathew Goode, and there's an especially strong performance by Jeff Daniels.

[Jordacar]

I think WB needs to get a filmmaker with something to prove. A director who's still hungry. Someone who can tell a good story, build suspense, but hasn't had a breakout hit.

When Christopher Nolan was hired, he was a talented young filmmaker with critical appeal, but no real commercial success. Jon Favreau was a respected writer but unproven director before Iron Man, and he delivered gold. Joss Whedon never had a hit before Avengers, and, because of his hunger and respect for the characters, he delivered a hit. We should find someone in that same mold.

Someone who gets the characters, and has something to prove.

To me, that's one of three people:

1. Rian Johnson (Looper, Brick)
After Looper, I think Johnson is going to become a commodity, but I doubt the movie is going to do bonkers numbers. Batman could be the first real hit for a talented young director.

2. Martin McDonagh (In Bruges)
Brilliant at dark comedy with seedy characters and random acts of violence.

3. Scott Frank (The Lookout)
The Lookout is a great, twisty thriller with JGL, Isla Fisher, Mathew Goode, and there's an especially strong performance by Jeff Daniels.^I like the way you think :word:

[KalMart]

I think WB needs to get a filmmaker with something to prove. A director who's still hungry. Someone who can tell a good story, build suspense, but hasn't had a breakout hit.

When Christopher Nolan was hired, he was a talented young filmmaker with critical appeal, but no real commercial success. Jon Favreau was a respected writer but unproven director before Iron Man, and he delivered gold. Joss Whedon never had a hit before Avengers, and, because of his hunger and respect for the characters, he delivered a hit. We should find someone in that same mold.

Someone who gets the characters, and has something to prove.

To me, that's one of three people:

1. Rian Johnson (Looper, Brick)
After Looper, I think Johnson is going to become a commodity, but I doubt the movie is going to do bonkers numbers. Batman could be the first real hit for a talented young director.

2. Martin McDonagh (In Bruges)
Brilliant at dark comedy with seedy characters and random acts of violence.

3. Scott Frank (The Lookout)
The Lookout is a great, twisty thriller with JGL, Isla Fisher, Mathew Goode, and there's an especially strong performance by Jeff Daniels.
I've said this from the very start way back...a la most big-time franchises are a director's 'claim to fame', when they're out to really make a mark on the map. Jackson and LOTR, Singer and Xmen, Donner and Superman, Verbinsky and Pirates, and so on.

That's why I think any new Batman or whatever franchise would do the same for a relatively unknown up-and-comer.

[Léo Ho Tep]

I know I'm gonna get rapped in the mouth for this, but I kinda disagree. The whole persona thing is a little different for each hero. For one, I don't think Peter Parker puts on the costume to blow off steam any more than Batman does. Also, while Batman certainly is an outlet and an expression of his true self, I'd say he's still putting on something of an act. He behaves differently when he puts the costume on, even towards people who know his secret (this turned off a lot of people in TDK, the way he did the voice even when talking to Lucius. I still think it was intentional though).


Agreed. His persona is way more complex than "bruce is the mask, batman is the real identity". While that's why himself would like to think, that's not true. He does get lost in his batman identity often, but that mostly because he uses it as a way to not face human emotions and loss.

[raybia]

Lets say that Bruce gave up being The Batman. He would still have several personas.

There would be the "real Bruce" who is a product of all of his previous years of experiences including the shooting of his parents, the "public Bruce" who behaves a certain way socially, "the family Bruce" who behaves the way he does based on the relationship he has with those in his inner circle.

I'm sure it can be taken even further. There may be a "board room Bruce", and if he was in an intimate relationship then he would show a side of himself only his significant other would be familiar with.

Even in his Batman persona, he behaves in different ways based on those he is interacting with, the place and the circumstances.

This is true of all humans. We all have different sides of who we are.

[Léo Ho Tep]

agreed.

[Rodrigo90]

I study psychology, and I already made an indepth analysis on Bats on the Superman boards.

Short story. He is Bruce Wayne, who NEEDS to be Batman.

I forget which story it was, but he was framed for the murder of a girlfriend, and he had the gang go out and vindicate him. While in jail, he starts cracking up because he can't be Batman, he gets the withdrawl like junkies do after they've stopped the drugs.

[Léo Ho Tep]

I study psychology, and I already made an indepth analysis on Bats on the Superman boards.

Short story. He is Bruce Wayne, who NEEDS to be Batman.

I forget which story it was, but he was framed for the murder of a girlfriend, and he had the gang go out and vindicate him. While in jail, he starts cracking up because he can't be Batman, he gets the withdrawl like junkies do after they've stopped the drugs.

yeah, Batman is part of who he is, but in the end, he will always be Bruce... and his batman persona will always be part of him.

[KalMart]

I study psychology, and I already made an indepth analysis on Bats on the Superman boards.

Short story. He is Bruce Wayne, who NEEDS to be Batman.

I forget which story it was, but he was framed for the murder of a girlfriend, and he had the gang go out and vindicate him. While in jail, he starts cracking up because he can't be Batman, he gets the withdrawl like junkies do after they've stopped the drugs.
And do you approve of/support that?

If so, what does it say about those who may have suffered a similar fate at youth, but don't have the fiscal means or physical abilities to do something like what Batman does?

[Rodrigo90]

It's like in TDKR. He hears about all the terrible crimes happening in Gotham, and he NEEDS to be Batman again, because he can't cope with just sitting around doing nothing. Even though strangely, the Batman persona is treated like an entity within Bruce's mind...

[Rodrigo90]

And do you approve of/support that?

If so, what does it say about those who may have suffered a similar fate at youth, but don't have the fiscal means or physical abilities to do something like what Batman does?

A lot of people suffer in youth, similar to Batman, and they react in different ways. They are either scarred while coping with the tragedy, or scarred while becoming self destructive.
It's part of the mind trying to cope with the trauma.

Bruce is a blend of that, he is both normal and self-destructive.

Batman is the mental extension of Bruce's scarred mind. It's his angry, psychotic part of his mind, scarred by the tragedy and going on a destructive path. But Batman is influenced by Bruce's wanting of normality and his hatred of the criminal society, whereas a true psycho would go after everyone.

[Travesty]

I in fact think Nolan really only did a sub par Ra's thus far, I think he dumbed down many great aspects of the character. There's a ton of high concept fantasy and sci-fi that has always found a home with Batman, and it'd be nice to see a movie that does that.
I actually think Nolan has done that to about every character, except for Alfred and Gordon. Every single character, even Batman, has been pretty sub par compared to their comic book counterpart. I always see people say how much Nolan has gotten right, but at the same time, he loves to strip away the very things that make these characters who they are in the first place. And I'm fine with different interpretations of the characters, but not when you start stripping away they very thing that defines them. Ra's without his immortality is just a regular man: that's it.

40's period-piece. :up:I love the settings of BTAS, in that it seems to be in a 40s-50s time period, and yet, Batman is much more technologically advanced compared to everyone else. Everyone, even the cops, are driving around in these slower 40s style vehicles, and Batman has this amazingly sleek and sophisticated Batmobile and Batwing. There is no comparisons: Batman just has the upper hand when it comes to his tech and gadgets.

Batman shouldn't be about comedy. The only time we see him smiling and cracking a gag of some kind, is when he has somebody at his mercy. So Batman has kind of a wicked sense of humor.He did that so many times in BTAS. I loved when he would interrogate people, and when he walks away, you laugh a bit, because he scared them into thinking he was going to do something much worse than what was actually happening.

yeah, Bale's feels way too forced, like he is putting on act, like batman is an outlet for all his anger, and that's not what batman is. he's not spider-man where peter parker gets to blow off steam while in costume, for batman, bruce wayne is the outlet.I gotta agree with you here. The Nolan movies have tried to tell us that "Bruce is the mask", and I just don't see it that way in these movies. Not only does it feel like Batman is more of an outlet, but also in the fact that Bruce's motivations are much different than that of the comics. He wasn't inspired by his parents death in the same way as the comics. Sure, their death had a little to do with it, but overall, his motivations were more about shaking Gotham out of this apathy. He had a very minimal and narrow minded goal, in that he thought he could accomplish all of this in a year or two. Hell, he was ready to retire with Rachel in TDK, and from what we know of TDKR, he actually did retire. That's not a Bruce that needs Batman, that's a Bruce that just wants to do a rush job, and leave this "crazy" persona behind. That's not a Batman that is completely inspired by his parents death. That's just a....sub par Batman, IMO.

Now, will TDKR rectify any of these thoughts about Nolan's-Batman, for me? We'll have to see, but if the death and retiring rumors pan out, it wont at all. It'll just be another case of Bruce wanting to do another rush job.

[raybia]

I study psychology, and I already made an indepth analysis on Bats on the Superman boards.

Short story. He is Bruce Wayne, who NEEDS to be Batman.

I forget which story it was, but he was framed for the murder of a girlfriend, and he had the gang go out and vindicate him. While in jail, he starts cracking up because he can't be Batman, he gets the withdrawl like junkies do after they've stopped the drugs.

Thats an awesome analysis.

[Rodrigo90]

Also, he heres something else to ponder about :)

Not many people realise, when Mr. Freeze goes out his way to save Nora, he's actually doing it to save his own life, because he can't live without her...

[Optimus_Prime_]

Also, he heres something else to ponder about :)

Not many people realise, when Mr. Freeze goes out his way to save Nora, he's actually doing it to save his own life, because he can't live without her...
Not many people realize this but Mr. Freeze was a two bit thug with a backfiring freeze gun until Bruce Timm decided to make him a tragic character.

[Rodrigo90]

That I did not know! :p

[KalMart]

A lot of people suffer in youth, similar to Batman, and they react in different ways. They are either scarred while coping with the tragedy, or scarred while becoming self destructive.
It's part of the mind trying to cope with the trauma.

Bruce is a blend of that, he is both normal and self-destructive.

Batman is the mental extension of Bruce's scarred mind. It's his angry, psychotic part of his mind, scarred by the tragedy and going on a destructive path. But Batman is influenced by Bruce's wanting of normality and his hatred of the criminal society, whereas a true psycho would go after everyone.
But he also continues to spend time he could just being a person outside of this mission to the extent that when he can no longer physically endure this, it will have been all he's known. Has he ever taken an actual vacation, or started an honest relationship, etc?

[RachelDawes]

I think Andrew Scott would be a terrific Joker:

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-vPpY6jB6Jtw/T8i4U7UWo7I/AAAAAAAAAzA/Nl1k_wm5REA/s1600/jokermoriarty.jpg

AAH NO! He was the single worst part of Sherlock. Keep him away from Batman.

[Rodrigo90]

But he also continues to spend time he could just being a person outside of this mission to the extent that when he can no longer physically endure this, it will have been all he's known. Has he ever taken an actual vacation, or started an honest relationship, etc?

I don't think Bruce can have a normal life like everybody else, even though he longs for it and has made attempts at it. He can't simply turn of his need and 'hunger' for being Batman, because the trauma of his childhood follows him everyday, and it's manifested into Batman, by a certain extent.

Think of Batman as a remedy for Bruce, something to help ease his pain and suppress his anger for a few hours.

He can't stop because he NEEDS it. It's almost like a powerful anti-psychotic drug, he's addicted to it, and it's part of him.

To have a normal life, and have meaningful relationships would have to mean him stop being Batman altogether. But as we all know, he can never give it up, because it's basically the other half of his soul, he would not and could not cope without it.

[metaphysician]

I don't think Bruce can have a normal life like everybody else, even though he longs for it and has made attempts at it. He can't simply turn of his need and 'hunger' for being Batman, because the trauma of his childhood follows him everyday, and it's manifested into Batman, by a certain extent.

Think of Batman as a remedy for Bruce, something to help ease his pain and suppress his anger for a few hours.

He can't stop because he NEEDS it. It's almost like a powerful anti-psychotic drug, he's addicted to it, and it's part of him.

To have a normal life, and have meaningful relationships would have to mean him stop being Batman altogether. But as we all know, he can never give it up, because it's basically the other half of his soul, he would not and could not cope without it.

OTOH, this is also why he's almost always much healthier when he is surrounded by the Bat-Family: it resolves the problem of not being able to have a normal life, but not being able to not be Batman, by bringing personal relationships into his existence as Batman.

[Rodrigo90]

Yup :up:

[Jordacar]

I'm starting to like the idea of a period Batman. Still a serious take, but in the 50s or 60s, like X-Men:FC. More like Gangster Squad really; flashy but still dark and gritty. It might be a cool way to give us something different from most of the other superhero movies, but still something that would work with Batman.

On another note, I don't think Robin's origin should be shown in the film. As much as I'd love to see a new take on the origin, that story doesn't fit very well into the superhero three-act structure, so for a movie I'd prefer it if he's just already there.

[Rodrigo90]

I'm starting to like the idea of a period Batman. Still a serious take, but in the 50s or 60s, like X-Men:FC. More like Gangster Squad really; flashy but still dark and gritty. It might be a cool way to give us something different from most of the other superhero movies, but still something that would work with Batman.

But how would things tie into the JL movie?

[TheWatcher]

It wouldn't. And that's why it wont happen.

[Rodrigo90]

Exactly!

[Rocanrol]

JL: New Frontier?

(I also think it wont happen)

[Minus Shock]

It almost feels bad just to suggest the idea of a new franchise before 'Rises' is even out. That said, I know it is inevitable, especially with JL getting a writer and likely happening in the near future. I can't deny that I don't think of what I would do with a Batman franchise.

Someone had recommended Jon Hamm for Batman and that is really perfect for me. I have thrown around Patrick Wilson because he reminds me of the best features of Michael Keaton but has a believable physicality. But Jon Ham has that, as well as the swag that I don't think has ever really been captured as Bruce Wayne.

One thing is for sure I want to see more Bruce in the public eye. I like to see that almost transformation. Is this guy who he is in the tux or the battle suit? In the boardroom or on the rooftops? I think that's a really fun dynamic to play off. Additionally I want to see a more detective-esque Bats. I am certain that is a common request.

Who to direct? Well in my mind that is simple. With the success Brad Bird had with Ghost Protocol, moving from animation to Live action seamlessly, also the director of Wall-E moving to live action (albeit not as successfully) Paul Dini seems like the only logical choice. In my opinion that guy did the arguably perfect incarnation of Bats on any screen and he did it for years, not just a few movies or a couple of movies. Between the tone, theme, direction, writing, retconning Freeze, giving us Harley Quinn, Mask of the Phantasm was also pretty excellent, Paul Dini should be given a chance to direct a live action movie, assuming he would be interested..

[Minus Shock]

Also why do we have reboot? Why can't they do something in the vein of Hulk? Where each movie can sort of be connected but isn't labeled as a DIRECT sequel? Almost, ironically, in a New 52 kind of way, where we aren't exactly sure how much of Nolan's history is maintained but it also isn't 100% erased and... well rebooted. After the what is stacking up to be a masterpiece, that seems like the way to go to me.

[RachelDawes]

^That's exactly what I'm hoping for. Much will depend on how long Batman's been retired at the beginning of TDKR, though. If it's made clear that he's been retired ever since the events of TDK then you can't make any movies set between it and TDKR.

[Rodrigo90]

I'm going give my reason why I really don't want Batman to be old...

First of all, yes, we've seen Batman young in the form of Bale...but that was CHRISTOPHER NOLAN'S BATMAN...His interpretation is considerably different to the comic Bats. His Bats has slightly different motivations, has a different mindset and has little to virtually no mental issues that comics Bats has. But Nolan's Batman is a brilliant interpretation, don't get me wrong, I do love it.

I do not however, want to see it again and I don't want attempts to be made to copy that interp for the reboot.

I study psychology and I do determine that Batman has what is called, Schizoid Personality Disorder. A disorder that develops during childhood, where the patient has no interest in relationships, has a cold and distant personality to others, and prefers to stay in their little world of fantasy. I didn't get that impression at all from Nolan's Batman, but I understand it and I respect the changes done to the personality in order to avoid it.

Keaton's Batman more or less displayed SPD. He wanted a relationship with Vicki, but then started caring less and then avoiding her calls...His personality can be seen as cold and distant for that reason, right? He went back into his fantasy world...that he concocted from childhood, because that's what he prefers...like real patients with SPD. He only progressed the relationship with Vicki because of outside interference, in the form of Alfred. With Selina? He had overcome it, in a way...but he still retreated back to fantasy (Batman). His idea of what a relationship was with Selina, was only shaped through his time with Vicki. A distorted idea, mind you...

Bale's Bats needed no prodding with his quest for Rachel. He was never cold and distant with her. He never retreated back into his solitary, fantasy world like Keaton...In fact, he was prepared to give it all up for Rachel!

So what has this got to do with me not wanting to start out old?
Well, I want Batman to mature and grow in this reboot. I want to see him start out like Keaton, then mature and overcome his problems at the best of his abilities, forming into a character akin to Bale's...Like the comics. I want to see him start out moody and brooding, not wanting relationships in any form, then by the end he's saved from his time in darkness...not by a woman...but by Robin. The first meaningful relationship he forms, opening the door to others and saving him from a dark, lonely path. It's distorted, but it's a start :)

If he's too old and established, I don't think issues like that can be addressed, and it's something we haven't really seen before.

That's my reason...sorry if I made you fall asleep, but I think I needed to explain it, cause I have ratting on for little reason why Batman shouldn't really be old.

[Young Superman]

Also why do we have reboot? Why can't they do something in the vein of Hulk? Where each movie can sort of be connected but isn't labeled as a DIRECT sequel? Almost, ironically, in a New 52 kind of way, where we aren't exactly sure how much of Nolan's history is maintained but it also isn't 100% erased and... well rebooted. After the what is stacking up to be a masterpiece, that seems like the way to go to me.

This is a great idea.

[dnno1]

You know what? They really need to do a series of Batman films based on the Arkham VG franchise. I think that the use of many of his famous villains as well as the action/fighting scenes modeled off the game would be fantastic. We could even find out if the Joker actually go Harley pregnant or not.

[Death2Fanboys]

On topic I'd like to see Brad Bird team up with Dini/Timm and see what they come up with.

So much potential with those guys coming together to do Batman.

I second that...

[CinematicESP]

If it were up to me, the next series would focus on the Batman family. We've seen Bruce's origin. Let's see him as an older, established hero with a regular rogue gallery. I would give the main character arc to Dick Grayson, casting young-ish and letting him grow into the role. My series would go roughly like this...

The theme of the first film would be Batman as a cult icon in the public eye, sort of an extension of the copycat thing in TDK. On one hand, you have a young Dick Grayson who idolizes Batman. On the other, Hugo Strange, an Arkham psychiatrist obsessed with becoming/replacing Batman. He visits all of Batman's enemies in Arkham to learn more about him. (This would include the Joker in a sort of Hannibal Lecter role. I might even have Harley Quinn start out as Strange's assistant who falls in love with the Joker and breaks him out at the end of the film, setting them up as villains for a future film). The plot would involve Strange dressing up as Batman and the real Batman and Robin having to stop him. (Imagine how cool a Batman vs. Batman scene could be.)

The second film could introduce Batgirl, and Dick could give up the Robin mantle at the end. Then in the third, he could return as Nightwing with a new Robin.

I'd push the series further in the "detective" direction, having the main villains be those that can challenge Batman on more of an intellectual level, but other villains could be peppered in the background (Black Mask and Penguin as minor antagonists, the equivalent of Falcone or Maroni in Nolan's films. Guys like Killer Croc or Deadshot in hired gun roles.)

[Rodrigo90]

For the film, I would actually tweak Robin's history to fit in with the Court Of Owls. Say Dick Grayson was taken by them after they murder his parents (since they kidnap children from the circus in the comic) and train him to be like them. Batman ends up rescuing the kid, who ends up being renamed Robin.

[ЯɘvlveR]

Also why do we have reboot? Why can't they do something in the vein of Hulk? Where each movie can sort of be connected but isn't labeled as a DIRECT sequel? Almost, ironically, in a New 52 kind of way, where we aren't exactly sure how much of Nolan's history is maintained but it also isn't 100% erased and... well rebooted. After the what is stacking up to be a masterpiece, that seems like the way to go to me.

I'd prefer it that way. a reboot would be boring............

[Willi Berg]

http://insidemovies.ew.com/2012/07/09/christopher-nolan-justice-league/

Christopher Nolan says no to 'Justice League' film

by Associated Press

Now that Christopher Nolan is done with his epic Batman trilogy, the filmmaker has quashed speculation that he might be involved in aJustice League movie featuring the Dark Knight.

Writer-director Nolan said his take on Batman wraps up with The Dark Knight Rises, his third and final film centered on the DC Comics superhero. In an interview over the weekend to promote the finale, Nolan said he has noJustice League plans.

“No, none at all,” Nolan said. “We’re finished with all we’re doing with Batman. This is the end of our take on this character.”

Fans have conjectured that Nolan might return to Batman by producing a big-screen take onJustice League, DC Comics’ Avengers-style ensemble whose key superheroes include the Dark Knight, Superman, Wonder Woman and Green Lantern.

Nolan guesses that the Justice League rumors started because of his involvement as a producer on next summer’s Superman relaunch, Man of Steel.

He also said he does not intend to get involved with any future solo Batman films when distributor Warner Bros., which owns DC Comics, decides the time is right to launch a new take on the masked vigilante.

“Batman will outlive us all, and our interpretation was ours. Obviously, we consider it definitive and kind of finished. The great thing about Batman is he lives on for future generations to reinterpret, and obviously, Warners will have to decide in the future what they’re going to do with him,” Nolan said. “We’ve had our say on the character. …

“I’ve got no plans to do anything more, and certainly, no involvement with any Justice League project.”

After Disney’s success with The Avengers, the big-screen round-up of Marvel Comics superheroes that has pulled in $1.45 billion worldwide, speculation has grown that Warner Bros. would get its own ensemble flick on the drawing board.

[Rockstar]

This doesn't sound like good news.

Nolan splits, yet only a few weeks ago Variety announced Nolan would assist with all of DC's upcoming features.

Looks like things didn't work out.

Something fell through in the negotiations.

[metaphysician]

My guess is, Nolan decided he has enough cred to tell the WB big wigs to shove it if they started getting pushy.

[Crazy Flakes]

I really do think that if there's a JLA movie they'll reboot the Batman franchise first. Even if Nolan was willing to be a part of the movie it would be pretty ridiculous to see his gritty, realistic take on Batman alongside characters like Superman and Wonder Woman who are rooted in supernatural or divine elements.

[Rodrigo90]

Oh well. If Nolan feels that way, then that's fine. All we can do is thank him for pulling Batman out the ****** trenches and entertaining us for the past 7 years.

[Travesty]

It's not like he was going to be directing the new ones anyways, so I really don't care, either way.

[MessiahDecoy123]

I look forward to a new continuity and inspired, imaginative style.

We'll always have the Nolan trilogy to look back on for the ultimate realistic take on Batman.

[Rodrigo90]

It's not like he was going to be directing the new ones anyways, so I really don't care, either way.

I thought he would have produced or had something to do with the story.

But at least there is the opportunity for something completely 100% different.

[TheComicbookKid]

I think the next relaunch should focus on the gothic angle. If Nolan's was the more crime drama Bats, then the next would should use the more noir angle and interpretations of the villains.

That way we can see new villains introduced but hold on to a common theme through a new trilogy.

[Rodrigo90]

I doubt things will be too over the top...but since Nolan is no longer involved, I sense the realism angle being lowered drastically.

But apparently Batman and MOS will be connected to a JL movie, so I think we should look at that to give us a taste of what to expect. Cause it be out of place to see a stylised and gothic world of Batman be shifted to a more realistic looking Superman one. Saying that though, I don't even think MOS will look anything like Nolan's (since he is producer) world as I first imagined, since Zack Synder is the director.

They'll probably get someone like Aronofsky or Del Toro onboard, to make it look more fantastical and match it with Synder's look...or they might not :hehe:


I just know now when I write scripts for Batman in my spare time I dont have try and match to what Nolan would expect for a reboot :D

[TheComicbookKid]

I doubt things will be too over the top...but since Nolan is no longer involved, I sense the realism angle being lowered drastically.

But apparently Batman and MOS will be connected to a JL movie, so I think we should look at that to give us a taste of what to expect. Cause it be out of place to see a stylised and gothic world of Batman be shifted to a more realistic looking Superman one. Saying that though, I don't even think MOS will look anything like Nolan's (since he is producer) world as I first imagined, since Zack Synder is the director.

They'll probably get someone like Aronofsky or Del Toro onboard, to make it look more fantastical and match it with Synder's look...or they might not :hehe:



I don't think you have to go drastic for gothic Bats. Villains like ManBat or Penguin can easily do it. You can still film it in a real location like Chicago.

[metaphysician]

I don't know, I think Burton already did plenty of 'gothic' Batman. I think, for tone, they should probably go more pulp than gothic. Not necessarily darker or zannier than the Nolan films, but with the emphasis not on the limits of a man, but on his potential.

[Rodrigo90]

I like the thought of that :up:

[Travesty]

I just hope it's more aesthetically pleasing, or I should say, closer to the comics. I want a Gotham that feels like a Gotham, not a modern Chicago. I want more fantastical characters to be used, and not in a "how can this work in the real world" type of setting. The last thing I want, is a Nolan/Burton 2.0.

I think getting away from the black rubber suits may help set it apart from the others, and I hope it's an approach the new director takes.

[Rodrigo90]

It's pretty sad when you look at Gotham in TDKR trailer and see the MetLife building :hehe:

[OptimusPrime114]

This is just a random question:

Would you be interested in seeing Robin and Batgirl if their characters were written VERY well?

[Travesty]

This is just a random question:

Would you be interested in seeing Robin and Batgirl if their characters were written VERY well?
YES! Robin more than anything, but I wouldn't mind seeing both.

[Rodrigo90]

I would like the look of Gotham to be Dark Deco, not Gothic, for the reboot, like TAS. But instead having the entire look be modern, not stuck in some obscure 40's setting.

So imagine Gotham having the Dark Deco, but slapped with obvious modernism and a few elements of futurism.

[Jick09]

I just want a more fantastical Batman after Nolan's.
A world where any villain could work without worrying about realistic or grounded details.

[Travesty]

I would like the look of Gotham to be Dark Deco, not Gothic, for the reboot, like TAS. But instead having the entire look be modern, not stuck in some obscure 40's setting.

So imagine Gotham having the Dark Deco, but slapped with obvious modernism and a few elements of futurism.
I actually wouldn't mind having a 40s style in the new one. One thing I loved about BTAS, is how everybody is less advanced to Batman in just about every way possible.

[Rodrigo90]

We already saw that with Burton's movies.

And if this reboot is going to be connected to the same universe as MOS, I doubt things will be too far fetched. But then again, I am expecting a more fantastical DC world, thanks to Synder's style. Cause I can't imagine everything looking too different and obscure when it's supposed to be set in the same world.

[Shikamaru]

Regardless of which direction they take the reboot in, I think we can all agree the reboot has to have these things in it with no exception whatsoever:

1) A Batman suit that's more like the comics. No more rubber or armor suits. Take the suit from the comics and put it straight onto the screen (minus the underwear) and no one will have a problem. I don't see how it would look silly. No one found the suit in the fan film City of Scars to look silly and it was straight from the comics. No one found the suit in the Arkham games silly either (and that suit would look GREAT in live-action minus the bulky gauntlets). Plus, it shouldn't be much of a problem even if it did look silly, since Batman spends most of his time in the dark and you wouldn't see it much.

2) A Batman that is the world's greatest detective and consistently uses those skills throughout the film. We haven't seen this in live-action since the 60s show. He did use a bit of detective work every now and then in both the Burton and Nolan films (and even in Batman Forever) but we have yet to see a Batman that proves he is the world's greatest detective and a Batman that is forced to use detective work throughout the movie. All we got were cameos of that so far.

3) A universe that is perfectly consistent in using both grounded & crime-drama villains (like the Nolan films) but is still able to do a lot of non-realistic villains & fantasy elements (Clayface, Ra's al Ghul with his Lazarus pits, Man-Bat, Poison Ivy, etc.) The best example of this being done are Batman TAS and The Long Halloween.

4) A Batman that can alter his voice to sound good when in the suit.

5) A Batman that makes his own weapons.

6) A Batman that can move and fight as fluid as in the comics. We have yet to see a Batman in live-action that can do all the feats comic book Batman has. Like jumping from to building using only his legs, jumping from a building and landing with feet on the ground, being able to dodge bullets while gliding in the air, etc. Only then we can have a Batman that is to be believable that he can keep up with the rest of the JL members.

So can we all, regardless of which direction we want the reboot to go in, agree that it must definitely have these things?

[DawnWarrior]

^Each of those things sounds excellent. I don't have as much of a problem with the armor suit, but it's worth a try.

[RachelDawes]

I prefer a Batman who buys his weapons. Between crime-fighting, detective work, his charity, and job at WE I don't know where he'd find time to make his own weapons.

[CConn]

It would make sense for Batman to invent a weapon or two depending on the circumstance.

[Rodrigo90]

It's Batman...with Nolan no longer involved, he can build whatever he wants without Fox and realism involved...implausibility all the way!

[Juicy J]

I just want a more fantastical Batman after Nolan's.
A world where any villain could work without worrying about realistic or grounded details.

Agreed.
I greatly enjoy Nolan's films, but his whole 'realistic, pragmatic' approach has worn out it's welcome, IMO. Three films of that is enough. I'm dying to see a Batman film with some fantastical, supernatural elements. I mean it's a comic book movie, after all..

[Jordacar]

One thing I know for sure, the next film where Batman appears is gonna be in 3D

[GREEN =w= DAY]

one thing is for sure, I DO NOT WANT an origin story. we already got that with Batman Begins and it did it perfectly. i don't want the new set of films starting off like Amazing Spiderman with another damn origin. have this film sort of start out like Burton's 1st Batman film in which Bruce is already Batman and we get a flashback to the night his parents died.

in fact, i think a pretty cool opening for the reboot would be Bruce at his parent's grave and we get a flashback to the night his parents were gunned down.

[SGTchef]

One thing I know for sure, the next film where Batman appears is gonna be in 3D

Day one:awesome:

[Optimus_Prime_]

I prefer a Batman who buys his weapons. Between crime-fighting, detective work, his charity, and job at WE I don't know where he'd find time to make his own weapons.
That's kind of the point, isn't it? That's what makes him so amazing.

[TheWatcher]

Agreed.
I greatly enjoy Nolan's films, but his whole 'realistic, pragmatic' approach has worn out it's welcome, IMO. Three films of that is enough. I'm dying to see a Batman film with some fantastical, supernatural elements. I mean it's a comic book movie, after all..
I agree with this entirely. I want to see Killer Croc,Clayface,etc

[Midnight Black]

Next up Justice League Batman...make it happen!

[Destructus86]

Primarely, what I want from a Batman film after Nolan is done...is to UNground it from reality. I'm not saying make it crazy...but let's comic-book it up a lot more than it is currently. I want Mr. Freeze...the one from the comic, not a previous film we will not mention. :)

[Shikamaru]

Regardless of which direction they take the reboot in, I think we can all agree the reboot has to have these things in it with no exception whatsoever:

1) A Batman suit that's more like the comics. No more rubber or armor suits. Take the suit from the comics and put it straight onto the screen (minus the underwear) and no one will have a problem. I don't see how it would look silly. No one found the suit in the fan film City of Scars to look silly and it was straight from the comics. No one found the suit in the Arkham games silly either (and that suit would look GREAT in live-action minus the bulky gauntlets). Plus, it shouldn't be much of a problem even if it did look silly, since Batman spends most of his time in the dark and you wouldn't see it much.

2) A Batman that is the world's greatest detective and consistently uses those skills throughout the film. We haven't seen this in live-action since the 60s show. He did use a bit of detective work every now and then in both the Burton and Nolan films (and even in Batman Forever) but we have yet to see a Batman that proves he is the world's greatest detective and a Batman that is forced to use detective work throughout the movie. All we got were cameos of that so far.

3) A universe that is perfectly consistent in using both grounded & crime-drama villains (like the Nolan films) but is still able to do a lot of non-realistic villains & fantasy elements (Clayface, Ra's al Ghul with his Lazarus pits, Man-Bat, Poison Ivy, etc.) The best example of this being done are Batman TAS and The Long Halloween.

4) A Batman that can alter his voice to sound good when in the suit.

5) A Batman that makes his own weapons.

6) A Batman that can move and fight as fluid as in the comics. We have yet to see a Batman in live-action that can do all the feats comic book Batman has. Like jumping from to building using only his legs, jumping from a building and landing with feet on the ground, being able to dodge bullets while gliding in the air, etc. Only then we can have a Batman that is to be believable that he can keep up with the rest of the JL members.

So can we all, regardless of which direction we want the reboot to go in, agree that it must definitely have these things?

Added one more that I forgot.

[Rodrigo90]

A Batman suit that's more like the comics. No more rubber or armor suits. Take the suit from the comics and put it straight onto the screen (minus the underwear) and no one will have a problem. I don't see how it would look silly. No one found the suit in the fan film City of Scars to look silly and it was straight from the comics. No one found the suit in the Arkham games silly either (and that suit would look GREAT in live-action minus the bulky gauntlets). Plus, it shouldn't be much of a problem even if it did look silly, since Batman spends most of his time in the dark and you wouldn't see it much.

The suit in the comics now IS composed from armour and other things. You can find it on wiki what it's made from.

I've said before, I don't think the grey suit looks good in real life, just like the black suit doesn't look good in the comics.

And we most certainly can't afford to have Batman's suit look 'silly' and hopes the lighting will somehow hide it!

Just give me the current look of the costume, which is good, in black.

[The Guard]

And we most certainly can't afford to have Batman's suit look 'silly' and hopes the lighting will somehow hide it!

Yes...that would be awful.

[Rodrigo90]

It would :hehe:

I mean, I get accused of not being a true Batman fan when I say I don't think the grey costume will work in live action. Everybody more or less wants it just to be grey for comic accuracy, which is fine. But I think we can agree, if it didn't look good, didn't translate well, wether it was the colour or materials...none of us want Batman to look silly, just for the sake of being comic accurate?!

It's like what Stan Lee said, some things just don't translate from the comics into film, and things to compromise.

But who knows? Maybe with the right creative team, the grey suit will work for the film?
But from what I've seen from B89 to BB, it wouldn't of. But as I said, perhaps all it needs is the right creative team, differing from the likes of Burton, Shumacer and Nolan?

[GREEN =w= DAY]

the gray & black suit being used on that porn parody looks awesome

[Travesty]

You can't say for sure if a grey suit would work or not, because nobody has done it in a big budget film.

[Rockstar]

If TDKR is a huge success,

Warner Bros will predictably get the next director to stay close to Chris Nolan's approach.


You don't try to fix what isn't broken. They aren't going to drastically shake up a winning formula. It's a bad business move.

[Midnight Black]

Yeah, but in 5 or 6 years time I can see them wanting to incorporate more of the DC Universe and compete or go the route Marvel has gone. What better character to do that with than Batman.

Also, I think the gray suit will work on film if it is a dark gray or gun metal color suit. Movie lighting and the fact the suit will constantly be covered by shadows or in motion will not make the suit look as bad as many would think. I think having an armored suit, that looks more fabric than bare hard armor would look fantastic.

[ЯɘvlveR]

If TDKR is a huge success,

Warner Bros will predictably get the next director to stay close to Chris Nolan's approach.


You don't try to fix what isn't broken. They aren't going to drastically shake up a winning formula. It's a bad business move.

when has batman making money ever been a problem though? even schumaker cheese fests made a ****load. if anything, the over saturation of bats on film might actually start boring people.

[Shikamaru]

The suit in the comics now IS composed from armour and other things. You can find it on wiki what it's made from.

I've said before, I don't think the grey suit looks good in real life, just like the black suit doesn't look good in the comics.

And we most certainly can't afford to have Batman's suit look 'silly' and hopes the lighting will somehow hide it!

Just give me the current look of the costume, which is good, in black.

I mean, I get accused of not being a true Batman fan when I say I don't think the grey costume will work in live action. Everybody more or less wants it just to be grey for comic accuracy, which is fine. But I think we can agree, if it didn't look good, didn't translate well, wether it was the colour or materials...none of us want Batman to look silly, just for the sake of being comic accurate?!

It's like what Stan Lee said, some things just don't translate from the comics into film, and things to compromise.

But who knows? Maybe with the right creative team, the grey suit will work for the film?
But from what I've seen from B89 to BB, it wouldn't of. But as I said, perhaps all it needs is the right creative team, differing from the likes of Burton, Shumacer and Nolan?

Technically, Batman has had armor components in his costume for years already but the difference between that and the armor in the movies is that:
1) It's not too noticeable. A lot of the times, the aritsts make it looks indistinguishable from plain simple fabric.
2) The suit in the comics has armor parts, as opposed to being full armor.

It's fine to have add a bit of armor to it as long as it doesn't become too noticeable and doesn't cover up most of the body (for good reasons too; Batman not wearing a lot of armor allows him to move more fluid, be lighter, and do more stuff). And it doesn't have to be the same shade of gray as the comics suit. You can make it dark gray or gun metal color like someone else said.

http://s3.amazonaws.com/coolproduction/ckeditor_assets/pictures/6981/original/batbbig.jpeg?1336745962
This is a good example of a Batman suit that can work well and have all the requirements. It has a few rubber/armor components added to it while still keeping the suit mostly spandex and changes the grey color of the suit in the comics to dark grey/gun metal color. And if the suit still doesn't work after all of that, then make the whole suit black while still being made out of the same material and/or get rid of the underwear.

I personally would like the underwear to not be used regardless of how the suit looks like and what it's made out of.

[The Guard]

We've seen the gray attempted.

Batman's "batbra" in TDK and TDKR is clearly an attempt to get gray design elements into the suit.

[Rodrigo90]

Hmm, that could work. I'm getting a spooky Keaton vibe, even with the colour. :up:

[Midnight Black]

We've seen the gray attempted.

Batman's "batbra" in TDK and TDKR is clearly an attempt to get gray design elements into the suit.

Actually the Batbra is a very poor attempt in incorporating gray into the suit. You can't say that small piece and poor attempt is indicative of what a gray sit would translate too.

I'm all for a gunmetal or dark gray suit with black accents or no black at all.

I WANT MY JUSTICE LEAGUE FILM NOW!!!!

[Rodrigo90]

I would definitely be onboard with a gunmetal colour for the costume. Not too black and not too grey. That would certainly be an interesting look.

[DaveMoral]

I want a Batman conceived after the style of Matt Wagner but with elements of New 52 and Arkham tossed in. And oddly, I still think the Bat-manip of Cap best represents that look. It's a step toward JL too.

Honestly, I don't know if I'd go with a new Batman standalone film to reintroduce him either. Reintroduce him in World's Finest. Follow that up with Trinity to intro Wonder Woman then JL.

It's probably a fooloah dream to see that incorporated into a similar approach to realizing the JL but doing things a bit different than Marvel by introing our principles in a new DC film universe by banking on the audience's familiarity with the characters and doing team-up films as lead-ins for the JL movie.

[GREEN =w= DAY]

i have a pretty cool idea to introduce the new Bruce Wayne in the next Bat franchise and having it set up a shared DC Universe. i think the best way to introduce Bruce Wayne would be in the sequel to Man Of Steel. now, we first have to see how well the film does in the box office next year and whether or not WB wants to have a shared universe. but i figure a sequel to MOS will come out somewhere between 2015-2017. i think by then WB would want to start up a new series of Batman films and what better way to introduce Bruce Wayne than having him do a cameo in the MOS sequel? with Lex supposedly being saved for the sequel, i think it'd be pretty cool to have a scene between Lex & Bruce - 2 businessmen with vastly different views. this scene alone can give the audience a nod to a shared universe. if the MOS sequel were to come out in 2016, then the Bat reboot could come out the following year in 2017. this would help WB/DC test the waters if a shared universe can be attainable or not.

[cryptic name]

I doubt things will be too over the top...but since Nolan is no longer involved, I sense the realism angle being lowered drastically.

But apparently Batman and MOS will be connected to a JL movie, so I think we should look at that to give us a taste of what to expect. Cause it be out of place to see a stylised and gothic world of Batman be shifted to a more realistic looking Superman one. Saying that though, I don't even think MOS will look anything like Nolan's (since he is producer) world as I first imagined, since Zack Synder is the director.

They'll probably get someone like Aronofsky or Del Toro onboard, to make it look more fantastical and match it with Synder's look...or they might not :hehe:


I just know now when I write scripts for Batman in my spare time I dont have try and match to what Nolan would expect for a reboot :D

If I read an announcement that Del Toro was doing Batman I'd drop dead from the sheer excitement.

[Rodrigo90]

If I read an announcement that Del Toro was doing Batman I'd drop dead from the sheer excitement.

He would be a very good choice. Would most certainly bring the comic book world to life :)


BTW regarding the costume. It's only sprung to my mind...it's not even grey in the comics...the colour IS gunmetal.


If anybody has the time, could you bring the Captain America/Batman manip here and change the colour from grey to gunmetal please? Cheers :D

[TheWatcher]

Del Toro directed Batman is a dream of mine.

[Léo Ho Tep]

I would be glad if Del Toro or Aronofsky was directing the reboot.

[JerseyJoker]

I have no idea why people would want Aronofsky on the project, he would want to to turn Batman into his own original idea. Look at his Year One film, it's ****in horrible.

[Rodrigo90]

WB wouldn't allow that happen nowadays. Besides, I have confidence in his directing skills and writing skills. His Batman idea was pretty much a blip in his judgement, but no way would WB allow that now.

Now, if you'll excuse me...I have to go google some pics of Scarlett Johansson ;)

[Destructus86]

I think gray works but only a darker gray. Batman should also be the greatest detective, a near super genius and a master at martial arts and cloak and dagger,

[SGTchef]

You can't say for sure if a grey suit would work or not, because nobody has done it in a big budget film.

Yeah, and with the armor that Nolan fits on Batman will be very very very difficult to see this grey suit again ...

[Rodrigo90]

I think gray works but only a darker gray.

If it's just going to be dark grey, then it might as well be black.

But as I say, that Gunmetal grey is a very specific tone. Which is perfect for people like me who wants the black to remain and others who want a grey costume :up:

NOW SOMEBODY DO A DAMN MANIP SO WE CAN GO HOME!!! :D

[Midnight Black]

Hahah...looks like I added fuel to the fire. I think Batman should have a bunch of different suits like Tony Stark has.

However, if we ever get a JL/JS movie then I think having a gray/gunmetal batman will fit better given the other colors of the team.

I think the problem with a JL/JS movie is that it can/should not be a single film even if given a trilogy or 4th or 5th film. I think they should do a LOTR style film and shoot it back to back and make it that more epic.

[The Guard]

The obvious answer is to have a Batsuit that is black, but looks somewhat black and gray due to different materials, etc.

[Rodrigo90]

The comics costume is based on TDK's costume. With the kevlar plates attached to a fibre suit. However, Nolan's suit was designed to give Batman some sort of 'Knight in shining armour' look. The comics design hasn't followed that. The armoured plates aren't as 'chopped up' as Nolan's suit, they're more closer together.

The armour still going for the reboot costume is fine. You can easily get the gunmetal colour or whatever from that, since armour is that colour anyways.

I also think, if that happens, the cape shouldn't be all black either. Make it a dark grey on the inside, like in The New Batman Adventures cartoon. This would give Batman more stealthy means to blend if he hasn't got the cape wrapped around himself.

[Optimus_Prime_]

Quite frankly, after hearing what Bruce does at the end I think frankly Nolan wrote the single worst Batman characters of all time. A Batman that doesn't want to be Batman. I hope they never ever entertain such a foolish notion again.

[Paradoxium]

There is only one answer.

Grant Morrison's Prep-Time Batgod (http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=287808)

[owlbungeechord]

After TDKR Batman will retire from the big screen for a while. DC will continue to do animated movies with him, and other heroes, that go straight to video.
DC will concentrate it's big screen efforts into, mostly, Superman and maybe a GL sequal. Eventually (a few years), either Batman will come back or if we are really lucky (I doubt it) we may get a JL movie.