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

[Anno_Domini]

If you have to bring up Green Lantern, you're not doing a great job justifying calling TIH and IM2 hits, lol.

 

[JAK®]

I thought IM2 did well at the box office?

 

[cryptic name]

I want to see a new series of films be more formalistic than the Nolan films, without sacrificing seriousness or depth. You can have more sci-fi or otherwise outrageous elements as long as the reactions they inspire in the characters is some way believable. I also desperately want to see the burgeoning "City of Freaks" element in Gotham and I really want to see Robin done well, and possibly have the Bat family developed further throughout the series.

Here's what I think would be cool for a first movie: Batman has been active in Gotham for three years and has made significant headway in the fight to wrest control of the city from rampant crime and corruption. However, Bruce is faced with a crisis of faith in his war; a new breed of "freak" criminals emerging in the city, and his cyclical interactions with foes like the Joker cause him to wonder if he's doing more harm than good in the city. Making matters worse, the grand philanthropic overtures of fellow billionaire-playboy, Roman Sionis, makes Bruce further question what positive effect he's had on the city. In the midst of this, new gang lord, calling himself Black Mask, has filled the vacuum left by Batman and Gordon's crusade. He's a new kind of gangster who doesn't balk at working with "freaks", unlike the old guard, even going so far as to hire Waylon "Killer Croc" Jones as muscle. He begins a campaign to unite the new Gotham underworld beneath him. The major B plot to the story would be the origin of Dick Grayson as Robin. After witnessing the boy lose his parents to a mob shake-down (Tony Zucco being in the employ of Black Mask), Bruce petitions to take the 15-year-old into his custody, as the boy is considered a witness and may not be safe in a state home. Not knowing anything about Bruce or his alter ego, Dick develops the Robin persona based on the old Erol Flynn Robin Hood movie he enjoyed watching with his father, and begins hunting down Zucco. Bruce would find redemption in Grayson, finally coming to accept that he can have a positive effect on the boy, stopping him from growing up to be consumed by vengeance and possibly saving Gotham from a serious threat if Dick were to go astray, breaking a cycle of tragedy. The action climax of the film would feature a wounded Batman facing a small army of rogues, locked in Arkham with Robin serving in a support role from outside the Asylum walls.

Batman's detective skills and intellect would be highlighted as he attempts to uncover the secret of Black Mask. Other characters would include Gordon's daughter, Barbara; beautiful and mysterious socialite, Selina Kyle; arms dealer and sometime snitch, Oswald "Penguin" Cobblepot; and possibly a love interest in Silver St. Cloud. I see the tone of the movie tending toward the Steve Englehart or Denny O'Neil vein. Serious but with room for levity, and depicting an athletic, genius Bruce Wayne/Batman.

For a sequel I would explore Batman's origins through intriguing flashbacks to his years training due to villains David Caine and Lady Shiva, brought to Gotham by big bad, Hugo Strange in a rough adaptation of the Prey and Many Deaths of Batman storylines.
For a third movie, a legit Ra's al Ghul and Talia story. Possibly a partial adaptation of the Daughter of the Demon story. (I'm not dissing Nolan, because I unashamedly love the trilogy, but come on, I need lazarus pits, "Detective", and "Beloved" in a Ra's/Talia story.)

Thoughts? Bitter hatreds?

 

[Anno_Domini]

^ Immediately thought of The Batman when you said the film starts already when he's been around for three years, but that's not a complaint since I actually liked The Batman as well

I thought IM2 did well at the box office?

When someone says hit, I think of financially and critically and...Iron Man 2 was more of a hit and miss kind of film. Did great on one end, but a different story on the other. IM2 is probably the worst film of the MCU, followed closely by TIH.

 

[Rainer7]

I want to see a new series of films be more formalistic than the Nolan films, without sacrificing seriousness or depth. You can have more sci-fi or otherwise outrageous elements as long as the reactions they inspire in the characters is some way believable. I also desperately want to see the burgeoning "City of Freaks" element in Gotham and I really want to see Robin done well, and possibly have the Bat family developed further throughout the series.

Here's what I think would be cool for a first movie: Batman has been active in Gotham for three years and has made significant headway in the fight to wrest control of the city from rampant crime and corruption. However, Bruce is faced with a crisis of faith in his war; a new breed of "freak" criminals emerging in the city, and his cyclical interactions with foes like the Joker cause him to wonder if he's doing more harm than good in the city. Making matters worse, the grand philanthropic overtures of fellow billionaire-playboy, Roman Sionis, makes Bruce further question what positive effect he's had on the city. In the midst of this, new gang lord, calling himself Black Mask, has filled the vacuum left by Batman and Gordon's crusade. He's a new kind of gangster who doesn't balk at working with "freaks", unlike the old guard, even going so far as to hire Waylon "Killer Croc" Jones as muscle. He begins a campaign to unite the new Gotham underworld beneath him. The major B plot to the story would be the origin of Dick Grayson as Robin. After witnessing the boy lose his parents to a mob shake-down (Tony Zucco being in the employ of Black Mask), Bruce petitions to take the 15-year-old into his custody, as the boy is considered a witness and may not be safe in a state home. Not knowing anything about Bruce or his alter ego, Dick develops the Robin persona based on the old Erol Flynn Robin Hood movie he enjoyed watching with his father, and begins hunting down Zucco. Bruce would find redemption in Grayson, finally coming to accept that he can have a positive effect on the boy, stopping him from growing up to be consumed by vengeance and possibly saving Gotham from a serious threat if Dick were to go astray, breaking a cycle of tragedy. The action climax of the film would feature a wounded Batman facing a small army of rogues, locked in Arkham with Robin serving in a support role from outside the Asylum walls.

Batman's detective skills and intellect would be highlighted as he attempts to uncover the secret of Black Mask. Other characters would include Gordon's daughter, Barbara; beautiful and mysterious socialite, Selina Kyle; arms dealer and sometime snitch, Oswald "Penguin" Cobblepot; and possibly a love interest in Silver St. Cloud. I see the tone of the movie tending toward the Steve Englehart or Denny O'Neil vein. Serious but with room for levity, and depicting an athletic, genius Bruce Wayne/Batman.

For a sequel I would explore Batman's origins through intriguing flashbacks to his years training due to villains David Caine and Lady Shiva, brought to Gotham by big bad, Hugo Strange in a rough adaptation of the Prey and Many Deaths of Batman storylines.
For a third movie, a legit Ra's al Ghul and Talia story. Possibly a partial adaptation of the Daughter of the Demon story. (I'm not dissing Nolan, because I unashamedly love the trilogy, but come on, I need lazarus pits, "Detective", and "Beloved" in a Ra's/Talia story.)

Thoughts? Bitter hatreds?

Great ideas. If they have to tell the origin again in some way, I'd like them to go the Court of the Owls route. I think that could play out really well on screen.

 

[shauner111]

I think the recent rumors (whether true or false) should happen. The first movie should be based on Arkham Asylum with perhaps Riddler as the lead villain, playing a game with Batman inside the institution and with Gordon on the outside. Bats is locked up with all the crazies that he's put away thus far. Including Joker. A little appearance or reference to him would be great.

Im not sure if i would place Penguin in Arkham (he's not exactly crazy) so maybe he can be in the city on the outside and Gordons men have to tend to this guy and the Black Masks, etc. While Batman tends to Strange, Croc, Man-Bat, Clayface, Harley, Nygma.

Supporting characters should be important. Harvey Bullock, Barbara Gordon, Viki Vale and/or Silver St. Cloud, Dick Grayson.

The serious depth will never be explored as much as Nolans trilogy but we still need some of it in the next series. While maintaining a dark, fantastical look from animation.

The origin doesnt need to be addressed unless it's done like Batman 89' or Forever. No villain repeats besides a build up to the Joker within the series.

 

[The Guard]

I kind of just shake my head when its suggested that Batman movies will never be as deep as Nolan's franchise. It's entirely possible for them to go even deeper into the psychology of the character.

The movies weren't really that deep. They were archetypal, with some basic psychology.

 

[Anno_Domini]

I think it's quite possible for a Batman movie to be deeper, but there is also a bigger chance they will never get in that range of TDK trilogy.

 

[cryptic name]

I kind of just shake my head when its suggested that Batman movies will never be as deep as Nolan's franchise. It's entirely possible for them to go even deeper into the psychology of the character.

The movies weren't really that deep. They were archetypal, with some basic psychology.

There's no question that a Batman story can be told with more depth and characterization, but one can also be told with much less. That's where that fear would come in.

 

[cryptic name]

Great ideas. If they have to tell the origin again in some way, I'd like them to go the Court of the Owls route. I think that could play out really well on screen.

I would love to see Court of Owls on the big screen.

 

[metaphysician]

When someone says hit, I think of financially and critically and...Iron Man 2 was more of a hit and miss kind of film. Did great on one end, but a different story on the other. IM2 is probably the worst film of the MCU, followed closely by TIH.

The degree of critical panning is vastly exaggerated. It managed a 75% on RT, only slightly lower than Thor and Cap. It didn't review as well as IM1, but that is because IM1 was both innovative and an exceedingly good movie.

 

[Travesty]

I kind of just shake my head when its suggested that Batman movies will never be as deep as Nolan's franchise. It's entirely possible for them to go even deeper into the psychology of the character.

The movies weren't really that deep. They were archetypal, with some basic psychology.

Agreed. I still find BTAS to be more "deep" than any of the live Batman movies that have been made.

 

[shauner111]

I disagree with that. But ill say this, i dont think it will be as deep in the reboot or the next "trilogy" or whatever. Maybe even a bit beyond that. Yes it will get deeper, it has to because this is a character that will probably be on the big screen 100 years from now. There's plenty of time. But i dont think we'll get that for a long while.

Regardless it doesn't necessarily need to, next time around. We can get an Arkham style trilogy then a Batman Beyond (and Justice League) for the next 15 years..and have it not so deep in comparison to Nolans trilogy. And ill be fine with that. The next go at Batman needs to be very different without getting really goofy.

 

[TheGuy]

I kind of just shake my head when its suggested that Batman movies will never be as deep as Nolan's franchise. It's entirely possible for them to go even deeper into the psychology of the character.

The movies weren't really that deep. They were archetypal, with some basic psychology.

Although I disagree with most of your opinions, I agree with you on this. Nolan's films barely scratched the surface of Bruce's psychology. The Burton/Schumacher films, however, did.

 

[Anno_Domini]

The degree of critical panning is vastly exaggerated. It managed a 75% on RT, only slightly lower than Thor and Cap. It didn't review as well as IM1, but that is because IM1 was both innovative and an exceedingly good movie.

That's what makes Iron Man 2 a bad film when it's so lower critically than the previous Iron Man installment.

 

[cryptic name]

^ Immediately thought of The Batman when you said the film starts already when he's been around for three years, but that's not a complaint since I actually liked The Batman as well

Haha, right on. I actually just went with three years because I think that was when Robin joined him in Post-Crisis, Pre-New 52 continuity.

 

[PC Valkyrie]

My advice? I would not bring back Batman to the big screen for a while. Nolan's trilogy was brilliant. Let it be remembered as one of the best (if not the best) set of comic book films. Do not try to continue Nolan's view of the Batman universe, as it is done. Sure, Batman can be "rebooted" by different creators and filmakers but please give it some time befoe doing so.

History has shown us that too much of anything often does not end well, as good ideas simply run out. Examples include Superman The Movie and Superman II being very decent films, while III an IV absolutely sucked. Indiana Jones should have ended with The Last Crusade, instead of the crap which was Kingdom of the Cyrstal Skull. Star Trek II, IV, VI, First Contact, and the rebooted Star Trek were good, but the rest of the Star Trek films were not.

If a Justice League films materializes, I hope the Batman that we see will be a completely different take on the character. Frankly, any Justice League film should be less focused on realism and more about fantastic entertainment......perhaps something like the Avengers.

 

[shauner111]

I think a good 3 or 4 years after TDKR is fine if Batman is a supporting character in a team up movie. As for the solo film, i guess it will be 5 years after the recent movie. That's long enough. The Arkham Asylum concept is a great way to kick things off.

 

[metaphysician]

That's what makes Iron Man 2 a bad film when it's so lower critically than the previous Iron Man installment.

"Average reviews and slightly more money" does not a bad film make. There are more categories than "good" and "bad."

 

[Optimus_Prime_]

I never got all the Iron Man 2 hate. It's pretty darn good in my opinion, just didn't make the splash the first one did.

 

[Anno_Domini]

"Average reviews and slightly more money" does not a bad film make. There are more categories than "good" and "bad."

One makes excuses when a sequel to a very well done and well received film gets mediocre reviews and only makes up for it in the box office.

 

[Doc Ock]

I never got all the Iron Man 2 hate. It's pretty darn good in my opinion, just didn't make the splash the first one did.

Yeah I don't get it. I loved it.

 

[A Necessary Evil]

That's what makes Iron Man 2 a bad film when it's so lower critically than the previous Iron Man installment.

The same can be applied to TDKR as well. Therefore, that argument is not a compelling one, lol

 

[shauner111]

I never got all the Iron Man 2 hate. It's pretty darn good in my opinion, just didn't make the splash the first one did.

It's pretty damn generic at best.

 

[A Necessary Evil]

IM2 is hands down, next to TIH Marvel's worst...but it's not bad. It's a solid 8/10 entertainment, but there's some pretty gaping flaws / plot contrivances in it. However, it's not as if these flaws don't exist in every other superhero movie, and it still stands as a really good movie, with some missteps.