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

[metaphysician]

I'm not particularly fond of Black Mask. If they wanted to use a weird crimelord, I'd rather they used the Penguin, and if they wanted to use a "legitimate businessmen", I'd rather see Roland Daggett or Rupert Thorne. Black Mask, sadly, is too tied to the War Games debacle in my mind.

 

[cryptic name]

I like the idea of Black Mask. He's not only a cool parallel for Bruce Wayne (a billionaire playboy by day with a dark, masked alter ego who comes out at night) he's also a great way to introduce some lower level villains since he's a boss-type character. You could have Killer Croc as hired muscle or a body guard, and somebody like Firefly or even hired killers like Deadshot or David Cain.

 

[shauner111]

I like the idea of Black Mask. He's not only a cool parallel for Bruce Wayne (a billionaire playboy by day with a dark, masked alter ego who comes out at night) he's also a great way to introduce some lower level villains since he's a boss-type character. You could have Killer Croc as hired muscle or a body guard, and somebody like Firefly or even hired killers like Deadshot or David Cain.

Exactly, he can be a perfect villain in one of the next couple of movies. There's so much you can do with him. And if you write it properly you can add Penguin to it and not have Black Mask overshadow him.

The problem arises when you have Black Mask in 1 movie, then follow it up with Penguin. It gets too repetitive. That's why i suggest maybe having Riddler as the villain for the first flick of the reboot and introduce Roman Sionis in a small way. Then for a sequel you have Sionis and Cobblepot as rivals.

The alternative could be holding off on one of those characters til the next round of movies, in the same way that Nolan didn't touch Riddler. But we'll see how they write each crimelord.

 

[Shikamaru]

I would personally prefer if the next movie doesn't not follow the formula of every other comic book movie we've had so far - basically 1 or 2 villains per movie. Instead, I would love it if it jumps right in with Batman already being Batman for a while now and encountering some of his villains. It should be like a story arc from the comics (such as Long Halloween, No Man's Land, Knightfall, War Games, Court of Owls, Batman RIP, whatever comic arc you can think of) and like the Arkham games, in the sense that it should have multiple villains. Some being major and others being minor. That is personally what I would like to see instead of another "This character/these 2 characters are the villain(s) of the story in this movie" which is what we got so far. I think Batman's popularity has reached that point where you can jump right in and do stuff like that without having to do any of the villains' origins or anything like that. I think the GA will be ok with even an already established Robin.

I would also like it if future Batman movies follow a loose continuity similar to the James Bond movies.

 

[The Joker]

Batman the movie showed how partnership can work.

Love that movie but it was a spin off from the show where the four villains had already been established and didn't need any introduction or origins etc. They just put the four of them together.

 

[TruerToTheCore]

Batman 66 is largely a Penguin and Catwoman movie. Riddler and the Joker aren't that important.

 

[Rodrigo90]

I don't believe TDK trilogy was where Batman was at his most noble...it was 66 where he saved the drunks in the bar and risked his own life!

"They may be drinkers, Robin, but they're also human beings, and may be salvaged."

 

[The Joker]

Batman 66 is largely a Penguin and Catwoman movie. Riddler and the Joker aren't that important.

Joker in particular. At least Riddler concocted the kidnap Bruce Wayne scheme and taunted Batman and Robin with the sky written riddles. Joker did sod all except stand around giggling and bring Commodore Schmidlapp his tea!

 

[Rodrigo90]

He gave the orders from the Penguin to fire the torpedos as well

 

[DarkSovereignty]

hey, who else would you WANT to bring commodore schmidlapp his tea?

 

[Rodrigo90]

Well I've learned never to drink anything if Joker's been near it...what with Schmidlapp's pill and Loeb's acid.

 

[shauner111]

I would personally prefer if the next movie doesn't not follow the formula of every other comic book movie we've had so far - basically 1 or 2 villains per movie. Instead, I would love it if it jumps right in with Batman already being Batman for a while now and encountering some of his villains. It should be like a story arc from the comics (such as Long Halloween, No Man's Land, Knightfall, War Games, Court of Owls, Batman RIP, whatever comic arc you can think of) and like the Arkham games, in the sense that it should have multiple villains. Some being major and others being minor. That is personally what I would like to see instead of another "This character/these 2 characters are the villain(s) of the story in this movie" which is what we got so far. I think Batman's popularity has reached that point where you can jump right in and do stuff like that without having to do any of the villains' origins or anything like that. I think the GA will be ok with even an already established Robin.

I would also like it if future Batman movies follow a loose continuity similar to the James Bond movies.

The Bond approach would be smart.

I really like the idea of jumping right into it and not exactly marketing each movie around a specific lead villain. But in the world of film it would probably only work for the first movie then people would have expectations & the studio would want to market the Joker or Riddler more than the others.

At the very least i would like to see Riddler as the main baddie but nearly every villain is established and in Gotham City. And Batman is aware of each of them. A bunch of cameos, and short fight scenes as Nygma leads him on a merry chase. Maybe he wants to be famous and enjoys trying to puzzle Batman. He has information on some mob war that's brewing between 2 rival gangs. Either Black Mask & Two Face or Penguin rather.
We get a taste of them in the movie, along with several other rogues.

Riddler makes Batman play his games because he holds something over him & if he plays, it can lead Bats right to Penguin or whoever. Then the next movie we have Cobblepot/Sionis at the center of it as Riddler gets a small scene in Arkham + a bunch of villains who act as muscle. Like Killer Croc working under Sionis, etc.

Everyone from Mad Hatter to Ventriloquist to Clayface to Joker & Harley to Poison Ivy, Strange, on and on. They would all be established beforehand and there's this familiarity between them and Batman when we first see em together.

 

[Skrilla31]

Everyone from Mad Hatter to Ventriloquist to Clayface to Joker & Harley to Poison Ivy, Strange, on and on. They would all be established beforehand and there's this familiarity between them and Batman when we first see em together.

Sort of like Dick Tracy (1990). The world had already been established and the villains needed no introduction. Guys like Big Boy, Flat Top, Prune Face... they merely "were" and it was implied that Tracy had encountered them numerous times in the past.

The only thing is assuming the next franchise is more in line with the comics, I just don't see how it could work in the same universe as Man Of Steel... which as it stands now appears to be more grounded in reality.

 

[Rodrigo90]

Well Batman would be sharing a universe with an Alien...so anything can happen lol

 

[Viper81]

I want the next set of bat films to involve one main villain who returns in each film, much like earth Vader and star wars. Then pepper the films with various other villains as they weave in and out of the story. I'd love to see a trilogy of batman vs the joker.

 

[shauner111]

Sort of like Dick Tracy (1990). The world had already been established and the villains needed no introduction. Guys like Big Boy, Flat Top, Prune Face... they merely "were" and it was implied that Tracy had encountered them numerous times in the past.

The only thing is assuming the next franchise is more in line with the comics, I just don't see how it could work in the same universe as Man Of Steel... which as it stands now appears to be more grounded in reality.

Pretty much. We'll have to see just how grounded MOS is though. But the approach that we're talking about would be great sometime in the future nonetheless. If not the upcoming trilogy (with Justice League) then at least next decade when they change it again.

I really hope the next series is real close to the comics though.

 

[metaphysician]

Well Batman would be sharing a universe with an Alien...so anything can happen lol

Okay, this is tangential to the topic, and I know what you actually mean. . . but this statement seriously irks me. No, "if alien, then anything" is *not true*. There is not a binary dichotomy between "utter realistic setting" and "everything else." By introducing one fantasy element to a setting, you do not suddenly open the gates to any and all other fantasy elements.

Introducing a fantasy element to a setting, does nothing to the setting other than introduce that fantasy element. To use Man of Steel as an example, so you've added aliens to the setting. This means that having other aliens is an obvious and credible element, sure. You've also added alien technology to the setting, so having alien technology do stuff not radically out of line with what its already shown as being able to do? Also totally fine.

This does *not* automatically make mutants, mad scientists, or magic significantly more credible than they otherwise would be, because those things have nothing to do with the elements already introduced ( unless they do: a piece of alien technology mutating someone, or a scientist getting the collected knowledge of an alien civilization uploaded into his brain ). Each new fantasy element has to be judged separately, in light of prior established elements of the setting and the general portrayed "weirdness" tone. Introduce enough fantasy elements, and if written well, it may make the setting weird enough that any new edition is perfectly credible. . . but the same thing written poorly just means its *all* unbelievable, new and old.

 

[Rodrigo90]

I agree with that

 

[batman_1989_]

I'd like to see easter eggs in the Batcave,such as the suits from the Burton-Shumacker-Nolan movies,the Tumbler,the BTAS batmobile ecc..

 

[Skrilla31]

Okay, this is tangential to the topic, and I know what you actually mean. . . but this statement seriously irks me. No, "if alien, then anything" is *not true*. There is not a binary dichotomy between "utter realistic setting" and "everything else." By introducing one fantasy element to a setting, you do not suddenly open the gates to any and all other fantasy elements.

Introducing a fantasy element to a setting, does nothing to the setting other than introduce that fantasy element. To use Man of Steel as an example, so you've added aliens to the setting. This means that having other aliens is an obvious and credible element, sure. You've also added alien technology to the setting, so having alien technology do stuff not radically out of line with what its already shown as being able to do? Also totally fine.

This does *not* automatically make mutants, mad scientists, or magic significantly more credible than they otherwise would be, because those things have nothing to do with the elements already introduced ( unless they do: a piece of alien technology mutating someone, or a scientist getting the collected knowledge of an alien civilization uploaded into his brain ). Each new fantasy element has to be judged separately, in light of prior established elements of the setting and the general portrayed "weirdness" tone. Introduce enough fantasy elements, and if written well, it may make the setting weird enough that any new edition is perfectly credible. . . but the same thing written poorly just means its *all* unbelievable, new and old.

Exactly. Great post.

The MOS trailer has a similar tone to the Nolan Bat-films and yet that doesn't mean they could exist in the same universe. Nolan's films wouldn't allow it. The in-universe logic had already been established. There's simply no room for aliens and superhumans within that continuity. Imagine if Superman had made an appearance in The Dark Knight. It's simply not plausible.

If the next Batman film is to take place within the same continuity as MOS, it has to follow the rules MOS sets in place and it has to be very careful with the liberties it takes. Judging from the MOS trailer, I'm not quite sure if it will allow for a Batman film that's so closely tied to the comics. And that's a shame, because that was probably the most logical direction to take Batman franchise in.

So I'm very curious to see what is they do exactly. And that's assuming MOS is a hit. If it's a hit, you can expect Batman to fall in line with whatever universe it establishes. If it's a flop, I'd say shoot for the moon and just go comic book on us. But we'll see.

 

[shauner111]

Well, from what i see so far, MOS looks like Nolans realism with some fantasy thrown in without over-doing it. It is definately more far-fetched than Nolans world but the world around Superman seems to be realistic.

The next Batman movies will probably be the same. The grit will be there but certain things from Batmans arsenal of weapons or the villains will be more "out there" than Nolans. Like a bit of Arkham City where it's a nice balance between grit & serious and fantasy elements.

I seriously doubt Clayface, Man-Bat, etc will be present or anything like the comics/animation. Mr Freeze will be an existing villain but they'll make sure there's logic to it.

 

[Human Torch]

I'd love to see Clayface,Man-Bat & Freeze,but-

I really want to see a Flash film.And it needs to have Captain Cold.Freeze will seem too similar,so I'm willing to sit him for a few years,till CC gets in a Flash film.

Clayface probably needs to be in a sequel.I can't see them opening with him.

Man-Bat may need another villain to give the film a little balance.

 

[shauner111]

I just think it's a big mistake to get into the "C Villains" if that's what you want to call them, before you finally show the potential of the big leaguers like Riddler, Penguin and Mr Freeze. I say do them before you
A)Revisit villains that Nolan already gave meaning to
B)Bring in the obscure names that only certain fanboys know or care about

 

[Young Superman]

I hope we don't see the Joker for a couple of films.

 

[shauner111]

Didn't know where to bring this. But i was reading this older thread (it had more to do with who could be a villain in TDKR back in 2009) but it's a Penguin vs Black Mask thread...

http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=318447

To continue it here (but centering the argument towards the reboot since Nolan didnt use them) what are your preferences for Penguin vs Black Mask?

Can't believe im saying this, but i actually agree with Joker and The Guard in everything they say. Ive been a Penguin fan since i was a kid and he is just more classic and interesting to me. Even though i like Black Mask and im curious to see what they do with him in the future, he isn't the most unique villain they can use.

Everything Black Mask does, Penguin can pretty much do. Black Mask has a cool look most of the time but what about originality? Sometimes he's written to be too similar to the Joker or too similar to Two-Face or especially too similar to Penguin.

I just think Penguin deserves a shot first in the next round of movies. Even if Nolan had to use one of them in the third Batman, or if it went to a fourth, or Blakes story would continue...i see Penguin as a more exciting, logical and classic foe in that world.