The SuperHeroHype Forums  

Go Back   The SuperHeroHype Forums > Batman > Batman World

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 01-13-2014, 09:36 PM   #1
Goshdarn Batman
Hm...?
 
Goshdarn Batman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: A fictional city in a fictional country
Posts: 3,331
Default Was it really necessary to reboot Batman?

Controversial opinion:

I actually think it's a bit sad that they decided to reboot the movie series that started with Batman in 1989. I get why they did it, Batman and Robin was pretty crappy (with some good parts).

But.. I would have liked it if they gave Schumacher a chance to make Batman: Triumphant or Batman: DarkKnight. From the description of it, DarkKnight sounded pretty interesting:

"The idea involved Bruce Wayne abandoning his role as Gotham’s protector – realising that he had lost his greatest weapon against his enemies – fear. Dick Grayson, now at Gotham University, comes face to face with Professor Jonathan Crane, who tests out various fear toxin experiments on his class – eventually transforming into his masked persona of the Scarecrow. Crane also unknowingly initiates his colleague, Dr Kirk Langstrom’s transformation into Man-Bat – and as the devious creature terrorises the Gotham, citizens view it as Batman’s ‘bloodthirsty’ return to crime fighting; thus with his status as fearful demon of the night reinstated, Wayne must come out of retirement, save Robin and clear his name."

The series could have been like the older James Bond movies. You change the actors, but it is still the same characters. If one movie is terrible, you make a better one the second time. That way we could've had Batman 10 or something today. Imagine what a huge Batman movie universe that would have been! This is how I imagine it:

Batman 6, Year One: set before Batman 89, this origin story tells what happened to Bruce after Jack Napier killed his parents. Bruce travelling the world, training etc. At the same time we get the story of Jack Napier, kind of a parallel story. Bruce comes from a rich family, Jack from a poor. Bruce trains hard to be the best, while Jack cheats, steals and murders his way to the top. The main villain in this movie would be a mob boss or something.

Batman 7, Return of the Joker: Robin has moved to Blüdhaven, and is now known as Nightwing. Barbara and Alfred is still with Bruce. A new villain called Harley Quinn terrorizes Gotham City. One day when the batsignal lights up, Batman finds Gordon murdered by Harley Quinn. He chases her over the rooftops, but she gets away. When he gets home, he finds Alfred dead, and Barbara paralyzed. On the wall is a message: "hahaha, something-something". It turns out that the Joker is alive, Harley Quinn was a distraction.

Halfway into the movie Catwoman shows up. She teams up with Batman. The Joker delivers a message, he's going to gas the entire city again. Batman shows up at Joker's HQ: The Belltower from the first movie.

We get a fight scene between Catwoman and Harley, and Batman vs The Joker. This time he takes The Joker alive. Joker and Harley is locked up in Arkham, and the wheelchair-bound Barbara becomes the new "Alfred" called Oracle. It ends with Bruce standing in front of Alfred's grave, remembering the good things Alfred did for him.

Batman 8: I have no idea, but it would have been cool to have Clayface as the main villain. Batman could visit the reformed Victor Fries (his wife is cured now), who invents a freezegun that can be used to defeat Clayface. I don't know! Now that Selina Kyle is back, she and Bruce can start dating. She's not crazy anymore, but more like Batman, no killing and stuff.

Batman 9: The inmates take over Arkham Asylum. Poison Ivy has replicated the "Venom". They create supersoldiers and unleash them on the city. This would be a movie where Batman has to fight all of his enemies who are still alive; Joker, Harley Quinn, Poison Ivy, Clayface, Scarecrow... Maybe the delusional Riddler could transform into a literal Bat-Man, like Man-Bat? Anyway, Batman, allied with Nightwing, Catwoman, Man-Bat and Mr Freeze fights the forces of evil.

Batman 10: Batman vs Superman?


What do you think? Do you agree with me? Should we reboot entire movie series because of one bad movie, or is it better to just make a better sequel?

And don't be too hard on me and my silly ideas, please? I know I'm bad at this...

Goshdarn Batman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2014, 09:48 PM   #2
Senator Pleasury
Banned User
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 2,846
Default Re: Was it really necessary to reboot Batman?

I think it was great, because it gave a chance to have a new approach to the character. And that new approach was excellent.

Senator Pleasury is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2014, 10:11 PM   #3
GREEN =w= DAY
Side-Kick
 
GREEN =w= DAY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Tijuana/San Diego
Posts: 5,709
Default Re: Was it really necessary to reboot Batman?

gotta say, the premise for that planned Batman film that takes place after Batman & Robin sounds pretty awesome

would have loved to see how they would have pulled off Man-Bat

but alas, Schumacher killed the franchise with 2 back to back disappointments

GREEN =w= DAY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2014, 10:47 PM   #4
Goshdarn Batman
Hm...?
 
Goshdarn Batman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: A fictional city in a fictional country
Posts: 3,331
Default Re: Was it really necessary to reboot Batman?

Quote:
Originally Posted by GREEN =w= DAY View Post
gotta say, the premise for that planned Batman film that takes place after Batman & Robin sounds pretty awesome

would have loved to see how they would have pulled off Man-Bat

but alas, Schumacher killed the franchise with 2 back to back disappointments
I hope we'll get villains like Man-Bat and Clayface in future Batman movies.

Goshdarn Batman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-13-2014, 11:37 PM   #5
AnneFan
Hathaway #1
 
AnneFan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2011
Posts: 15,044
Default Re: Was it really necessary to reboot Batman?

Yes, it was absolutely right to reboot the series.

The 1989-1997 era had run its race and a tonal shift was needed.

__________________
I dreamed a dream and "it came true."
- Anne Hathaway, actress in a supporting role winner 2013 Oscars.

Rio 2 - Song One - Interstellar - The Intern - The Lifeboat - Get Happy - Alice 2
AnneFan is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2014, 12:25 AM   #6
shauner111
Side-Kick
 
shauner111's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 11,221
Default Re: Was it really necessary to reboot Batman?

I think from a business standpoint, it was absolutely necessary. But i gotta say..i dont think they needed to. As a matter of fact, the premise for Batman: Triumphant sounded like it could have been the best batman movie since 1989. It's sad that it didn't come out in 99. But we got a fantastic origin reboot anyway, so no complaints.

shauner111 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2014, 12:48 AM   #7
The Joker
Clown Prince of Crime
 
The Joker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Jollity Farm
Posts: 37,765
Default Re: Was it really necessary to reboot Batman?

If they had not rebooted it I wouldn't have gotten my all time favorite Batman movie; The Dark Knight.

So yes it was not only necessary but a darn good idea to reboot it. The old franchise had it's run. Only half of it was good.

__________________
"Sometimes I remember it one way. Sometimes another. If I'm going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!"

- The Joker

Last edited by The Joker; 01-14-2014 at 01:53 AM.
The Joker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2014, 01:09 AM   #8
GREEN =w= DAY
Side-Kick
 
GREEN =w= DAY's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: Tijuana/San Diego
Posts: 5,709
Default Re: Was it really necessary to reboot Batman?

i wonder what it would take for DC/WB to take a lot of those unused scripts/stories and turn them into animated films

how awesome would it be get Burton's 3rd Batman film in animated form?!

GREEN =w= DAY is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2014, 01:44 AM   #9
milost
Banned User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,005
Default Re: Was it really necessary to reboot Batman?

Yeah, rebooting it after 1997 was necessary I think. Going the Year One or Beyond route was the way to go. Thankfully we got Begins which led to The Dark Knight. I wouldn't have it any other way.

I'm looking forward to the cinematic future of Batman as we enter an even different era of the character.

milost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2014, 01:57 AM   #10
bilbo baggins
Side-Kick
 
Join Date: May 2013
Posts: 85
Default Re: Was it really necessary to reboot Batman?

uhhhh yes. as long as shumaker or whatever his name is was slated to direct super campy movies with bright neon lights with close ups of batmans ass, and felt the need to put on BATNIPS!!! SERIOUSLY!!!??? then yes it was time.

bilbo baggins is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2014, 05:31 AM   #11
Two-Face
Harvey Dent
 
Two-Face's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Location: Courtroom
Posts: 47,765
Default Re: Was it really necessary to reboot Batman?

Actually Batman Forever was a success alas why we got a sequel to it. It was B& R that killed the franchise. I'm glad WB decided to reboot. It let us to BATMAN BEGINS.

__________________
"A man who doesn't spend time with his family can never be a real man."

I am a Batmanite
Two-Face is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2014, 07:39 AM   #12
DaRkVeNgeanCe
Godzilla is coming!!!
 
DaRkVeNgeanCe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2004
Location: Binghamton, NY
Posts: 12,825
Default Re: Was it really necessary to reboot Batman?

One word answer....YES!

__________________
MY VIDEO REVIEW SHOW: EPIC FILM GUYS
www.youtube.com/epicfilmguysny www.facebook.com/epicfilmguys
1939-2014: 75 YEARS OF THE BATMAN
SUMMER MOVIES - Captain America TWS 8/10 I The Amazing Spider-Man 2 7.5/10 I Godzilla 9/10 I X-Men: DOFP 9.5/10 I Maleficent 4/10 I Edge of Tomorrow 8.5/10 I 22 Jump Street 9/10 I Transformers 4 3/10
DaRkVeNgeanCe is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2014, 03:38 PM   #13
LuisTX85
Anti-Hero
 
LuisTX85's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 15,674
Default Re: Was it really necessary to reboot Batman?

Si!

__________________
I'm not bad nor good,I'm just rough around the edges!
LuisTX85 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2014, 04:20 PM   #14
Human Torch
The Boss in Blue
 
Human Torch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,696
Default Re: Was it really necessary to reboot Batman?

Yes and no.(But mostly yes)

I don't think studios need pull the plug and play the reboot card too often.There's no reason to believe a good script,cast and director can't produce a good movie,even after a dud.So I have every reason to believe we could've had a great Batman 5.

Having said that....the thing had gotten too unwieldy.There was virtually no consistency among cast (3 Batmen in 4 movies?I'm all for replacing actors "Bond" style,but that's crazy.)and tone.

Batman: Batman that bears little resemblance to his comic counterpart,kills with all the remorse of a Terminator,and a middle aged Joker that kills his parents

Batman Returns: Basically Batman as reveled in Burton's unrestrained macabre imagination,complete with bastardized "freak show" Penguin .

Batman Forever: The only decent effort,made mostly to atone for the previous movie's sins.Of course,it had problems of it's own,including a poor take on Two Face and a Riddler at the height of Jim Carrey's excess.

Batman & Robin: Schumacher basically taking the flaws of his previous film and turning them up to a excruciating level.Not a horrible film,imo,but by now the series had shifted from TDK into Batman 66.

So,in my view,the series never was off on the right foot from the get go,and with the poor choices made all along the way,they pretty much ran their course (right into the ground,I hasten to add).

__________________
We always need to hear Both Sides of the story.

We are T. H. E. M.
Human Torch is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2014, 05:15 PM   #15
milost
Banned User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,005
Default Re: Was it really necessary to reboot Batman?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Human Torch View Post

Batman: Batman that bears little resemblance to his comic counterpart,kills with all the remorse of a Terminator,and a middle aged Joker that kills.

Terminator didn't kill anyone, neither did Batman.






None of the films are accurate to the comics. Joker's age varies depending on the story. First appearance looked like he was older than middle aged, then there was Romero. There aren't many "young" Jokers per se. Those iterations have been pretty recent.

milost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2014, 05:29 PM   #16
Goshdarn Batman
Hm...?
 
Goshdarn Batman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: A fictional city in a fictional country
Posts: 3,331
Default Re: Was it really necessary to reboot Batman?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Human Torch View Post
Yes and no.(But mostly yes)

I don't think studios need pull the plug and play the reboot card too often.There's no reason to believe a good script,cast and director can't produce a good movie,even after a dud.
I'm a little worried that the same thing will happen to Batfleck. Maybe Superman vs Batman is good, and the first two solo movies, but then the third one is pretty bad... Suddenly they decide to reboot Batman again. I think it's better to stick with the same universe, that way there's no need to tell the same origin story again and again.

Spider-Man is one example, when I watched Amazing Spider-Man, I thought the origin part was boring. Uncle Ben dies, blabla... I have seen it already. Just show us flashbacks instead.

Goshdarn Batman is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2014, 07:28 PM   #17
Human Torch
The Boss in Blue
 
Human Torch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,696
Default Re: Was it really necessary to reboot Batman?

Quote:
Originally Posted by milost View Post
Terminator didn't kill anyone, neither did Batman.




Not being a particular fan of the Terminator franchise (I liked T2,never really sat through the others) I'll defer to your judgement there,but all the 3,000 word posts in the world are never gonna convince me that Bats wasn't a stone cold killer in the films.(particularly Batman 89.Bombing a whole factory full of people?Really,Bats?)

__________________
We always need to hear Both Sides of the story.

We are T. H. E. M.
Human Torch is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2014, 07:32 PM   #18
Human Torch
The Boss in Blue
 
Human Torch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,696
Default Re: Was it really necessary to reboot Batman?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Goshdarn Batman View Post
I'm a little worried that the same thing will happen to Batfleck. Maybe Superman vs Batman is good, and the first two solo movies, but then the third one is pretty bad... Suddenly they decide to reboot Batman again. I think it's better to stick with the same universe, that way there's no need to tell the same origin story again and again.

Spider-Man is one example, when I watched Amazing Spider-Man, I thought the origin part was boring. Uncle Ben dies, blabla... I have seen it already. Just show us flashbacks instead.
I agree.Especially,since they did it so poorly.That's like Batman Begins.They likely will never do the origin better,better to just give some flashbacks this time.

The only origin that I really think should've been retold was The Hulk.After the crapfest Hulk was,I really wish they would've just told it again,instead of just giving us the flashback intro.It didn't hurt the film,but since Hulk is my favorite character,I just wanted to see them do right by him.

__________________
We always need to hear Both Sides of the story.

We are T. H. E. M.
Human Torch is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2014, 08:48 PM   #19
milost
Banned User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,005
Default Re: Was it really necessary to reboot Batman?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Human Torch View Post
but all the 3,000 word posts in the world are never gonna convince me that Bats wasn't a stone cold killer in the films.(particularly Batman 89.Bombing a whole factory full of people?Really,Bats?)
How about 69 words?

The goons had a chance to run out of there, instead they ran and chased the unmanned Batmobile, guns a blazin'. That ain't Batman's fault. It's kind of like the drone situation that goes on today. I doubt anyone is going to miss or weep for Joker's hired hands.

Yeah, every Batman except West and Clooney have killed, doesn't make them stone cold or remorseless.

milost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2014, 09:18 PM   #20
jonathancrane
I love Marvel, DC & EC!
 
jonathancrane's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Caverns in Arkham Island
Posts: 6,872
Default Re: Was it really necessary to reboot Batman?

I would pay heavily to read a copy of Schumacher's followup; esp. the one where they envisioned Brad Dourif as the Scarecrow. Having said that, while I do feel bad that Schumacher was never given another chance - it was hardly his fault-I am happy we received the Nolan films, as they reinvigorated the franchise and have continued to influence DC-media (Arkham Origins, MOS, Arrow, and so on.)

__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jason Aaron
"I've known since I first took over the series that I wanted to eventually have someone else pick up the hammer," says the writer. "It's kind of a time-honored Thor tradition at this point, isn't it? Going back to the days of Beta Ray Bill."
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geoff Johns
“At DC, we really see film and TV as separate worlds."
jonathancrane is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2014, 10:07 PM   #21
Human Torch
The Boss in Blue
 
Human Torch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 8,696
Default Re: Was it really necessary to reboot Batman?

Quote:
Originally Posted by milost View Post
How about 69 words?

The goons had a chance to run out of there, instead they ran and chased the unmanned Batmobile, guns a blazin'. That ain't Batman's fault. It's kind of like the drone situation that goes on today. I doubt anyone is going to miss or weep for Joker's hired hands.

Yeah, every Batman except West and Clooney have killed, doesn't make them stone cold or remorseless.
That's the most ridiculous excuse I've ever heard.The goons had no reason to believe Bats was gonna blow them sky high.Bat's also had no reason to kill 20 or 30 guys,most of which were probably lab workers.Why not send the cops in,instead of covering your hands in blood?

Keaton's Batman (and I do think he was clearly the best of that franchise despite the films themselves) clearly had no remorse over taking lives.He just didn't give a bleep.

__________________
We always need to hear Both Sides of the story.

We are T. H. E. M.
Human Torch is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2014, 10:41 PM   #22
milost
Banned User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,005
Default Re: Was it really necessary to reboot Batman?

I didn't see any lab workers, just a handful of the Joker's muscle. It was late at night, there's no reason to believe there were Axis personnel in there.

Point is, they shouldn't have chased the Batmobile into the heart of the complex whilst firing. If you see that thing coming at you, you should be running the other way. They had time. But no, they followed it, surrounded it and shot at it even though it was seemingly impenetrable.

A fitting end to their kind. It's not like Batman dropped in there and ripped their hearts out of their chests or pulled out a machine gun from his belt and starting tearing into them Rambo style. He wanted to bring the Joker's operation down and level the source. For his safety, he sends in an unmanned Batmobile to the heart of the factory. Casualties? Sure, but at least Gotham is safe from any tainted chemicals that the Joker might have had up his sleeve.


Pretty much every life Batman takes in the films is justified. Only West and Clooney's hands are clean.




- black goon would have taken Bat's head off if he didn't think quickly. He couldn't be stopped

- Two-Face had Robin, Chase Meridian and Batman in his sights, Batman never told Dent to struggle with his coin

- LoS ninjas (possibly imprisoned farmer), casualties of war for Bruce's escape, oh well

- Ra's Al Ghul (sure, he knew the train would come down, but he didn't have to save him, **** Ra's, let him burn)

- Garbage truck driver was threatening the life of Dent, he had to be stopped in the tunnel

- Dent was threatening an innocent boy at gun point, he had to be taken out

- HEMTT driver and Talia (casualties of war, either them or the entire city, no brainer)




Only kill that is cringe worthy and "wrong" is the big strongman that Batman straps a bomb to in Returns. That was horrible AND he smiles sadistically. Bad Batman.


Last edited by milost; 01-14-2014 at 10:46 PM.
milost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2014, 10:46 PM   #23
The Joker
Clown Prince of Crime
 
The Joker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Jollity Farm
Posts: 37,765
Default Re: Was it really necessary to reboot Batman?

Come on, milost, the last thing you'd be expecting is the sleek black car to drop bombs at your feet to blow the whole place up. You might expect it from something like the Tumbler because it looks like a tank. But not the Burton Batmobile. I don't see how Joker's goons had a snowball's chance in hell of running away in time to safety after Batman dropped those bombs. They went off about 3 seconds after they were dropped.

Burton's Batman killed. It's Golden Age early Kane/Finger Batman. A merciless killer.

__________________
"Sometimes I remember it one way. Sometimes another. If I'm going to have a past, I prefer it to be multiple choice!"

- The Joker
The Joker is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-14-2014, 11:07 PM   #24
milost
Banned User
 
Join Date: Mar 2013
Posts: 1,005
Default Re: Was it really necessary to reboot Batman?

Quote:
Originally Posted by The Joker View Post
Come on, milost, the last thing you'd be expecting is the sleek black car to drop bombs at your feet to blow the whole place up. You might expect it from something like the Tumbler because it looks like a tank. But not the Burton Batmobile. I don't see how Joker's goons had a snowball's chance in hell of running away in time to safety after Batman dropped those bombs. They went off about 3 seconds after they were dropped.

Burton's Batman killed. It's Golden Age early Kane/Finger Batman. A merciless killer.

It had machine guns, why wouldn't it have bombs? Cuts in the film make it seem like it's a few seconds, who knows the time frame of it, it certainly wasn't three. If you look, it drives in, has to go threw the gate (passing a thug who . . . . runs at it shooting, then follows), then drive through the loading docks where it shoots through the garage door. It quickly passes 10 - 12 thugs who are on catwalks. The next and final shot has it in a different location, shielding up. What does the next cut show? All those thugs that he passed up are shown running towards it. That takes some time. They all have enough time to catch up and literally surround it. So no, it doesn't drive in and drop a bomb at their feet, that's what it was programmed to do from the get go once it shielded up (which it did before the thugs came into the room it parked at). Batman didn't force them to surround it and fire at it continuously. Their loss. Crime doesn't pay.

Then there's the fact that Batman could have killed Eddie, Nick, 4-5 mobsters, Jack Napier, Joker goons, the Joker himself at the museum, and Bob the goon if he wanted to before the third act. Yet he never did. He even goes as far as grappling a thug at Axis so he doesn't fall to his death over that rail. Coulda just let him fall to his death. So no, not a merciless killer.

And if learning that the Joker killed his parents made him a little blood thirsty for Joker and his men in the final act, can't say I blame him. This guy took his parents away, the gloves are off now. In the few instances the character has come across his parent's killer he always seeks vengeance or retribution. Who wouldn't? Happened in Begins with Chill too (whom Bruce would have killed if the hit lady didn't catch him) and in the comics with Moxon and Chill. Some issues even depict Batman unmasking himself and putting a gun to Chill's head or causing Moxon to run into oncoming traffic instead of just cuffing him. But yeah, Keaton Batman kills nonetheless. And it just wasn't the Golden Age Finger/Kane Bats that killed either. In the 75 years of the characters history he's killed in comics, graphic novels and films purposely and accidentally.


Last edited by milost; 01-14-2014 at 11:40 PM.
milost is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 01-15-2014, 12:40 AM   #25
shauner111
Side-Kick
 
shauner111's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Posts: 11,221
Default Re: Was it really necessary to reboot Batman?


shauner111 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:06 PM.

monitoring_string = "dee460792f24517621e3ca080805de7e"
Contact Us - Mobile - SuperHeroHype - ComingSoon.net - Shock Till You Drop - Lost Password - Clear Cookies - Archive - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Top - AdChoices


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
SuperHeroHype.com is a property of CraveOnline Media, LLC, an Evolve Media, LLC company. ©2014 All Rights Reserved.