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

[Jordacar]

Originally Posted by 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.

^I like the way you think

[KalMart]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by Jordacar

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by KalMart

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]

Originally Posted by Optimus_Prime_

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.

Originally Posted by KalMart

40's period-piece.

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.

Originally Posted by 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.

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.

Originally Posted by 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.

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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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_]

Originally Posted by 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...

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!

[KalMart]

Originally Posted by Rodrigo90

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]

Originally Posted by ThePhantasm

I think Andrew Scott would be a terrific Joker:

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

[Rodrigo90]

Originally Posted by KalMart

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]

Originally Posted by Rodrigo90

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

[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]

Originally Posted by 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.

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)