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

[shauner111]

If WB wants me to pay full price for a ticket, they can't give me JGL Batman. I actually feel like if that was the route they were going to take, they would have announced it by now.

I'm guessing that, like people have said already, they are really waiting to see how Man of Steel does before deciding how to move on. If it does well, they may either focus on Superman, while putting out a few "side" projects featuring lesser known characters (like Jonah Hex , The Losers, Constantine, even Watchmen, etc) came out during Batman's reign, OR take a risk at doing big movies starring their other franchise players (Wonder Woman, Flash, possibly JLA, etc). The problem here may be, though, that they also tried this in the midst of their Batman films with Green Lantern, and they don't seem too pleased with that result.

You act like full price for a ticket is a big deal. So you're not going to dish out 10 dollars for a Justice League movie? Maybe im assuming here, but i bet if JGL, Christian Bale, a 60 year old Michael Keaton, Ryan Gosling or Jon Hamm were to play Batman in a JL movie..YOU and most people on this forum will still pay their precious 10 bucks to see the movie because it's friggin Justice League. And Batman and Superman and others are in it.

 

[Donnie Darko]

Yes, you are assuming. I like Joseph Gordon Levitt as an actor, but just the thought of a John Blake Batman angers me. With the exceptions of Batman and Green Lantern, there is no Justice League character I care about even half as much as I do Spider-Man, and it took months of people promising me that "it's actually really good" and "it's not the same story" for me to finally give in and go see ASM at a $2 theater. If the John Blake character is Batman in a future movie, it will automatically drop me from a potential midnight premiere showing (like I have done for Avengers, Dark Knight Rises, and many others in the past) to waiting until it's at the $2 place, possibly even waiting until RedBox gets it.

Edit:
As for the other actors, you are absolutely correct. Not only will I pay my "precious 10 bucks," but I will probably be there midnight opening night, unless the movie just looks bad or is a retread of Batman's origin, then we will have another ASM scenario, most likely.

 

[DarkSovereignty]

It honestly baffles me that people are actually entertaining the idea of a batman movie without batman. I'm not even a batman fanboy and I find the idea of someone other than Bruce Wayne being batman just plain troubling. He's just not a legacy character. Green lantern, flash ect. They are legacy characters. But batman is the product of Bruce Wayne's damaged psyche, it's not just some persona, it's a living personality.

 

[Hellion]

It honestly baffles me that people are actually entertaining the idea of a batman movie without batman. I'm not even a batman fanboy and I find the idea of someone other than Bruce Wayne being batman. He's just not a legacy character. Green lantern, flash ect. They are legacy characters. But batman is the product of Bruce Wayne's damaged psyche, it's not just some persona, it's a living personality.

Unless they adapt Batman Beyond, I don't want to see a Batman film w/o Bruce.

 

[Donnie Darko]

It honestly baffles me that people are actually entertaining the idea of a batman movie without batman. I'm not even a batman fanboy and I find the idea of someone other than Bruce Wayne being batman. He's just not a legacy character. Green lantern, flash ect. They are legacy characters. But batman is the product of Bruce Wayne's damaged psyche, it's not just some persona, it's a living personality.

I agree for the most part, but I actually was a big fan of Dick taking over the cowl when Bruce "died." While I was not a fan of RIP or Final Crisis, that was the one thing I really liked that came out of it. To me, at least, it seemed like a much more logical progression than how John Blake was presented in DKR.

 

[DarkSovereignty]

Same here, plus, John Blake ,simply couldn't be batman. Bruce trained to become a f***ing ninja, I'm sorry, I know cops are trained in hand to hand combat, but nowhere near the level at which Bruce was trained by the league of shadows, he'd get killed, unless they want to devote another third of a movie to John Blake Montaging his way to ninja status which would just be be a rehash of batman begins. Also, something I picked up on a few weeks ago...John Blake is a cop, he carries a gun. He's used the gun, we see him discharge it in the film, and it probably wasn't the first time he's done so. Didn't we just spend two f***ing movies establishing that batman only has 'one rule'? I'm not saying that Blake would be carrying a gun, but he's clearly someone who would no problem killing a criminal if the situation called for it. And I don't even hate the character of John Blake, I thought he made logical, thematic sense for the movie. As a bookend for the story Chris Nolan was telling, it worked alright, but only as the end. But to continue would a terrible decision IMO. Just reboot the series, or have John Blake try being batman, but decide to give the cowl back to Bruce, but since bale is finished, that's not happening.

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

Same here, plus, John Blake ,simply couldn't be batman. Bruce trained to become a f***ing ninja, I'm sorry, I know cops are trained in hand to hand combat, but nowhere near the level at which Bruce was trained by the league of shadows, he'd get killed, unless they want to devote another third of a movie to John Blake Montaging his way to ninja status which would just be be a rehash of batman begins. Also, something I picked up on a few weeks ago...John Blake is a cop, he carries a gun. He's used the gun, we see him discharge it in the film, and it probably wasn't the first time he's done so. Didn't we just spend two f***ing movies establishing that batman only has 'one rule'? I'm not saying that Blake would be carrying a gun, but he's clearly someone who would no problem killing a criminal if the situation called for it. And I don't even hate the character of John Blake, I thought he made logical, thematic sense for the movie. As a bookend for the story Chris Nolan was telling, it worked alright, but only as the end. But to continue would a terrible decision IMO. Just reboot the series, or have John Blake try being batman, but decide to give the cowl back to Bruce, but since bale is finished, that's not happening.

Regarding the training thing...Can't they just set it a few years later....ya know, once he's got more training?

 

[Bruce Malone]

I think TDKR leaves you to believe Blake will spend some time training in the environment bruce left him, not just using his cop skills.

 

[shauner111]

It doesnt really suggest that Blake would spend time training. Not at all. Only that Bruce is willing to pass it to him, and that Blake is interested. And finally it leaves you believing that he could use those computers in the cave, especially because of his past as a detective.

Nothing else is suggested. No hints at training with or without Bruce there to guide him. No new suits or old suits waiting for him. He's there to take care of the batcave, make sure the tech is put to use and if Gotham needs someone to suit up within the next 10 or 15 years or whatever...then Robin is there and willing.

 

[cryptic name]

Same here, plus, John Blake ,simply couldn't be batman. Bruce trained to become a f***ing ninja, I'm sorry, I know cops are trained in hand to hand combat, but nowhere near the level at which Bruce was trained by the league of shadows, he'd get killed, unless they want to devote another third of a movie to John Blake Montaging his way to ninja status which would just be be a rehash of batman begins. Also, something I picked up on a few weeks ago...John Blake is a cop, he carries a gun. He's used the gun, we see him discharge it in the film, and it probably wasn't the first time he's done so. Didn't we just spend two f***ing movies establishing that batman only has 'one rule'? I'm not saying that Blake would be carrying a gun, but he's clearly someone who would no problem killing a criminal if the situation called for it. And I don't even hate the character of John Blake, I thought he made logical, thematic sense for the movie. As a bookend for the story Chris Nolan was telling, it worked alright, but only as the end. But to continue would a terrible decision IMO. Just reboot the series, or have John Blake try being batman, but decide to give the cowl back to Bruce, but since bale is finished, that's not happening.

I want to preface this by saying I don't want a John Blake Batman movie at all and don't think its even a possibility. But, they make a pretty big point of Blake rejecting the gun in TDKR, mirroring it to the moment in Begins when Bruce tosses his gun into the ocean. It was the big tip off for me that his character was going to end up where he did.

 

[DarkSovereignty]

I haven't seen the movie since the premier, so I don't remember that scene, my mistake.

 

[Travesty]

I want to preface this by saying I don't want a John Blake Batman movie at all and don't think its even a possibility. But, they make a pretty big point of Blake rejecting the gun in TDKR, mirroring it to the moment in Begins when Bruce tosses his gun into the ocean. It was the big tip off for me that his character was going to end up where he did.

Yes, but you know he didn't give them up, because 30 seconds later, he gets a call about Gordon, and he grabs a shotgun to go save him. It was kind of a head scratcher for me. What was the point of showing us that he hates using guns, if he goes right back to using one 30 seconds later?

 

[shauner111]

He's not Batman, he can't just suit up, run to the hospital and try to take down multiple armed mercenaries with his bare hands when Gordon needs to be saved. And he's not trained or big enough to have the confidence to do so either. It's a cops natural reaction to grab his gun (whether he wants to use it or not). He goes to save Gordon.

Earlier, he tosses the gun because he killed 2 people and in that moment he realizes what he's done and he doesn't like it one bit. It's 2 different situations. He's still a cop when he's racing to the hospital, he still has a duty no matter what he feels about killing.

 

[The Guard]

Yes, but you know he didn't give them up, because 30 seconds later, he gets a call about Gordon, and he grabs a shotgun to go save him. It was kind of a head scratcher for me. What was the point of showing us that he hates using guns, if he goes right back to using one 30 seconds later?

Who knows. Maybe because he didn't like killing he's similar to Bruce Wayne or something. Just another one of the movie's half-baked concepts. Introduced, milked for melodrama, and then not really explored.

 

[shauner111]

 

[netsurfr42]

I know people are really focused on the next batman movie.....

But Lately I've been really contemplating how good a batman t.v. series could be, maybe done on HBO, Showtime, or cinemax....and if not maybe on AMC a place that can do a lot on a small budget.

Here are some of my reasons....

1) multiple story arc's: so many people argue over what they'd like to see we could have the option to do so many favorite story lines i.e. HUSH, the killing joke, a death in the family....and many more.

2) Properly do Robin: a lot of fans are wanting robin to be in the next movie, but honestly I really don't see how it could be done. I think in a t.v. series we could slowly see how Bruce agrees to have a kid go fight crime with him, and properly explore how messed up it is. To me the robins have been bruce's attempt at having a family/sons but his unwillingness to give up his mission leads them to having pretty messed up childhood.

3) The possibility of having a live action bat family: I mean in a t.v. series we could slowly work up to the bat family which would be awesome.

4) seeing batman as a detective/master planner: I still feel we need more detective batman who searches for clue's analyzes and when we think he's beaten turns out he had a contingency plan that just saved himself.

5) see how insane batman is: now I don't mean all-star insane but he literally is fighting a battle he can never win. In the comics his parents death was just a random crime and seeing how there will be an end to malcontent he never stops

and many more reasons.

I think it would have the versatility of cartoons but we could get the grittiness of the movies. even look at bringing Dini or other BTAS alum and stuff. I don't know just an idea for something different.

 

[The Guard]

That would be amazing. It'll never happen as long as WB can make a billion with a Batman franchise.

 

[Rorschach2012]

If Bruce Timm and Paul Dini were the creators of a live action Batman series on HBO, Showtime, or AMC, that would be the greatest Batman incarnation of all time.

 

[metaphysician]

I've said for a while that a Batman TV show could be good. In fact, I find it weird that nobody has tried since the 60s, whereas the ostensibly more expensive Superman has gotten something like four shows in the same time. Hell, he's been on the TV airwaves almost continuously from 1990 on.

 

[Shikamaru]

The problem with a Batman TV show would be the budget. TV doesn't yet have the budget to do full justice to Batman on the small screen other than in animation. Even Arrow, which is a pretty good show with good special effects, still can't do full justice to the show's fights and special effects like comics, cartoons, and big budget live-action movies can.

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

batman is the one superhero that makes sense for tv, budget wise.

He's a detective.

No cg needed at all.

Supes and Ww make far less sense

 

[Shikamaru]

No CG needed until you get to guys like Clayface, Man-Bat, Poison Ivy, Scarecrow (if you want really good special effects), etc.

 

[Jordacar]

Don't forget Killer Croc. Probably.

Clayface could be done on a TV budget easily, he just wouldn't be the TAS version. Which is fine, as that version was a mishmash of the many comics iterations. A live-action TV version would just be a different, budget-friendly mishmash. It could still make for a tense imposter-driven mystery, even if his powers are paranormal in nature (which I would prefer). It would be like John Campbell's "Who Goes There?"/John Carpenter's "The Thing". Just imagine a bunch of people gathered in a room as Batman states, "One of you is the killer".

 

[netsurfr42]

I Really think with a smart script you wouldn't have budget problems...and like someone above said the powers could be done in a more supernatural sense...plus if we had a show on a premium channel I really think you could handle at least poison Ivy and scarecrow....also like I said before AMC style shows actually have pretty good effects. hell even show's like grimm and once upon a time have decent enough special effects

I really think it would also be more driven on more of mystery basis.....

I think the real problem about it ever happening is what people said about WB would rather make movies...but I think DC is really missing out not doing a new bat tv series...it could even work like how i'm assuming shield will work for the MCU(except its more badass cuz we see a superhero every week)....maybe they could do a season of episodes, and then for like a batman crossover do big budget movie. I don't know but if anyone know's any execs really wish they'd think about it.

 

[RustyCage]

You act like full price for a ticket is a big deal. So you're not going to dish out 10 dollars for a Justice League movie? Maybe im assuming here, but i bet if JGL, Christian Bale, a 60 year old Michael Keaton, Ryan Gosling or Jon Hamm were to play Batman in a JL movie..YOU and most people on this forum will still pay their precious 10 bucks to see the movie because it's friggin Justice League. And Batman and Superman and others are in it.

There. That's better.

Now I'll dish out 10 bucks for a Justice League movie.