The Dark Knight Rises Batman 3: Where does the story go from here?

[Lungrocket]

According to Moviehole (and they do have WB sources) RISES is going to be the last Batman film for sometime...

Joel Schumacher won’t be answering to the call of the illuminated but foggy Bat Signal this time. When “The Dark Knight Rises” is completed, Warner Bros are said to be putting the “Batman” film franchise to bed for a while – they won’t, unlike the last time, add some civil war bandage to the bat’s decrepit wings to keep it flying. Nope, they’re as keen as director Christopher Nolan is to see the series go out on top.

Naturally Batman will return to the big screen sometime – but that film, be it the long-rumoured “Batman vs. Superman” or a new take on the character, likely won’t happen for quite a few years, and most likely, Nolan won’t be involved. He’ll be handing in his keys to Wayne Manor after 2012′s “Dark Knight Rising”.

http://www.moviehole.net/201033598-new-live-action-batman-tv-series-on-the-way

Hmmm... Could that be because Batman dies? LOL.

 

[Mr. Earle]

According to Moviehole (and they do have WB sources) RISES is going to be the last Batman film for sometime...



http://www.moviehole.net/201033598-new-live-action-batman-tv-series-on-the-way

Hmmm... Could that be because Batman dies? LOL.

Could it be that they wont be making bat films for some time without killing batman?

On another note, i hope they take 4-5 years and plan a reboot. Not from the origin, but start from year 3, bring in Robin and go forward. God i hope they dont take too long though, and if they make a tv series, it will be very long.

Does anyone else think that Nolan might have persuaded DC to keep their hands off his movie and not make another one soon after?

 

[Lungrocket]

Could it be that they wont be making bat films for some time without killing batman?

Yes, but the franchise is a juggernaut for WB, so the real question is, why would they need to stop for a while? Why not line up a new director/writer with a new approach for 3 years later (about the time between films so far)?

Going out on top is a vague. More to it than that. Makes me think they will need time to let things calm down following what happens in RISES' story.

 

[Mr. Earle]

Yes, but the franchise is a juggernaut for WB, so the real question is, why would they need to stop for a while? Why not line up a new director/writer with a new approach for 3 years later (about the time between films so far)?

Going out on top is a vague. More to it than that. Makes me think they will need time to let things calm down following what happens in RISES' story.

My guess is that they know that hiring someone to continue the story has many chances of failing, and probably Nolan convinced them (or didnt sign a contract until they agreed) not to.

Also, a reboot so soon would be overkill, so i suppose they'll drop the franchise for a while. It would let the audience catch a break so that it wont get tired of Batman.

 

[The Guard]

I kind of assumed it would be at least 4-5 years before we saw another Batman movie.

 

[batman11]

Also, a reboot so soon would be overkill, so i suppose they'll drop the franchise for a while. It would let the audience catch a break so that it wont get tired of Batman.

Not to mention that it would give WB and DC some time to focus on their other characters that they've been trying (or so we've told) to get off the ground for some time now. Plus, if Superman is successful and well-received in 2012, you can bet that WB will want to work on a sequel for it. It would be interesting if Nolan remained an active member in Superman's development, and we get the beginning of a potential Superman trilogy in the year that Nolan's Bat trilogy comes to a close. Not that everything needs to be a trilogy, but it would be one way to ease the flow away from Bats for a little while.

 

[Wolverine1988]

If WB was smart they would wait longer than 4 or 5 years before another take on the character, other wise you risk the chance of people being sick of Batman movies. Especially since that person is going to want to use Joker, and Ledgers Joker would still be very much in peoples minds.

Give it a good 10 years before doing another Batman franchise.

 

[PreK]

Even if WB decided to give us another film 3 years after TDKR, that's only 4 films in the span of a decade. That's honestly not that much at all if you think of how long ten years is.

As long as the stories are great, the people will keep coming. Doesn't matter in what frequency they come in. Harry Potter is definitive proof of this.

 

[Bruce Malone]

At least 5 years. There's gonna be 5 years btw spider-man films and i feel like we've been too over laden with spider-man the past decade.

 

[jmc]

5 years minimum between Rises and whatever the follow up is, whether it's a new interpretation or semi-continuation of the Nolanverse. Personally I would love to see a period Batman film set in the 30's, just to do something different for once. It'd be a smart move on WB part to let things breath a little.

 

[CrimsonDeath]

At least 5 years. There's gonna be 5 years btw spider-man films and i feel like we've been too over laden with spider-man the past decade.

Even some of the general audiences were skeptical of yet another Batman film when Begins was going to debut. "Another one?!" That is, until they truly saw the difference compared to Batman and Robin.

I also agree that it's all too soon for another Spider-Man franchise of films. To me, it's just not that long ago the first one came out, and it was what, almost 9 years ago? Yeesh, the time flies for me.

But the next Spider-Man movie might be so good it's irrelevant. As long as it's good, it should find an eager audience, I think, willing to forgive over-saturation.

 

[Mr. Earle]

I kind of assumed it would be at least 4-5 years before we saw another Batman movie.

If we have 4-5 between each of Nolan's movies, i imagine it will be longer now that they said that they wont be making any more. Also, i imagine that it will take them a lot of time to set up the next bat-franchise.

Which director do we choose, do we continue from Nolan, reboot, etc?

 

[ALP]

If WB was smart they would wait longer than 4 or 5 years before another take on the character, other wise you risk the chance of people being sick of Batman movies. Especially since that person is going to want to use Joker, and Ledgers Joker would still be very much in peoples minds.

Give it a good 10 years before doing another Batman franchise.

Just like people have gotten so sick of the Harry Potter films? 8 films in the span of 10 years. And each thus far(6 films in 7 years) have made close to a billion dollars each. Yeah, sure.

If you think WB is really going to wait another decade for what will be their highest grossing franchise that can possibly go on and on without forever ending(like HP) then you're nuts. The biggest break I see WB taking for Batman is maybe three or four years after DKR...and then they will start production on a new series. Like I said, with HP now leaving that is even more reason to continue Batman. Other than those two, Superman is the only possible billion dollar franchise WB has...and even that has a very long shot from happening. And if Snyder's Superman is not a mega-hit WB probably won't even wait that long.

 

[The ?ion]

@Joker

1) Dragon Ball has been on American television since 1990. It carried on to Dragon Ball Z, and eventually was renewed by Warner Bros (Cartoon Network) well into the early 2000s. In other words, the show has been on television here for a decade. Recently (last year) a re-edited (for pacing) version of DBZ was released, called Dragon Ball Kai (airs on Nickelodeon). Between the PS2 generation and the PS3 generation, ten video games have been released for the franchise (on PS2, Wii, Playstation 3 and Xbox 360).

Also, since it was released in 1984 (the original year for the first manga) Dragon Ball has gone on to sell 200 million copies. And they don't do what American publishers do and release seven titles for the same character (e.g. Batman, Detective Comics, Gotham Knights etc.). You compare any single Batman title to the Drgaon Ball franchise for the same time frame and I assure you that there isn't one Batman book that has sold 200 million copies in total from 1984 till now.

Don't get me wrong. As an American icon, Batman is an important part of our culture. Batman is my favorite super hero. I even wrote an academic paper on Batman for one of my graduate courses. However, your original argument was that no iconic characters die in comic books, and I assure you, Son Goku is among the canon of iconic comic super heroes. You can continue to occupy the realm of obliviousness that you seem stuck in, but for the rest of us, Dragon Ball is a long standing piece of pop culture, not just for Japan, but for America and Europe.

2) For all intents and purposes, when Darkseid used the Omega Beam on Bruce, everyone thought he was dead. Of course, this was later revealed to be false when they started solicitations for "The Return of Bruce Wayne" but prior to that, we all thought he was effectively dust. So your point is moot. Batman was killed, and his death was retconned.

 

[Gianakin_]

2) For all intents and purposes, when Darkseid used the Omega Beam on Bruce, everyone thought he was dead. Of course, this was later revealed to be false when they started solicitations for "The Return of Bruce Wayne" but prior to that, we all thought he was effectively dust. So your point is moot. Batman was killed, and his death was retconned.

I'm pretty sure that before the comic ended, in the last frame, they showed Bruce alive painting the Batsymbol on the cave walls. I nver thought he died.

 

[Mr. Earle]

Batman 3: Where does the story go from here?

My take:

- Bruce did everything for Gotham to have its legitimate hero: Dent, but he failed.
- Batman is the hero Gotham deserves like Gordon puts it, so he is the hero Gotham will have, and both he and the people will realize it.
- To me that means that Batman stays forever and becomes one with the city, not just as Bruce, but as an idea. And here comes Robin, his future, his successor, the protector of his legacy. Because Gotham will always need a Batman, and if Bruce isnt around, someone else must be.
- Now all that's left is to exonerate Batman so that the city will accept him and stop chasing him. But how do you do that? Well it has to be done in an honourable way, not "lets pin it on the next villain that shows his face."


That's how far i got. I dont know how to exonerate Batman to be honest.

 

[craigdbfan]

You bring up Robin?

Now what are the chances of Nolan including him?

 

[Mr. Earle]

None, but that's what makes sense to me in terms of how the theme continues from TDK and its epilogue. That TDKR will establish that Batman will forever be Gotham's guardian.

Of course it can be done without him, with Batman "rising" as a hero in Gotham's eyes, but i dont know how to do that without using a cliche like "he saved us and turns out he's not a murderer" or "he died for our sins".

 

[ScarecrowMan666]

after TDKR, and some time in between, I would like to see what Zack Snyder could do with Batman. He's already proven to be a very visionary director, and with Nolan working with him on the Superman movie, it makes sense for Nolan to sort of hand the keys of gotham to him. It would be cool if Nolan was at least producing, again very much in the same capacity as Superman.

 

[The Demon's Head]

I believe DCRanger and a few others have mentioned it in other threads, but if Catwoman is in the film, her arc needs to represent the reverse arc of Harvey Dent. Have her start out as a villain. A vengeful thief who steals from the rich people of Gotham, and from the mob. Just like Dent, Selina is driven by revenge. Perhaps her sister was killed by the mob. Mirroring the hostage scene from TDK, Selina confronts her sister's killer, when Batman comes in and pleads with her not to kill him. She listens to him, and the killer is captured. By saving Selina, Batman is redeemed of not saving Dent, and Catwoman is redeemed, becoming The Narrows' Protector, like in the modern comics.

What do you think?

 

[Sith Scotti]

I believe DCRanger and a few others have mentioned it in other threads, but if Catwoman is in the film, her arc needs to represent the reverse arc of Harvey Dent. Have her start out as a villain. A vengful thief who steals from the rich people of Gotham, and from the mob. Just like Dent, Selina is driven by revenge. Perhaps her sister was killed by the mob. Mirroring the hostage scene from TDK, Selina confronts her sister's killer, when Batman comes in and pleads with her not to kill him. She listens to him, and the killer is captured. By saving Selina, Batman is redeemed of not saving Dent, and Catwoman is redeemed, becoming The Narrows' Protector, like in the modern comics.

What do you think?

Yes. I been saying Catwoman's arc should be the reverse of Dent's. The last movie dealt with the negative influence Batman had on others . It would be nice to see Batman influence others for the better, and Selina fits that perfect , as she has gone from a full fledge villain to a member of the Bat family over the years

 

[Brother Jack]

I believe DCRanger and a few others have mentioned it in other threads, but if Catwoman is in the film, her arc needs to represent the reverse arc of Harvey Dent. Have her start out as a villain. A vengeful thief who steals from the rich people of Gotham, and from the mob. Just like Dent, Selina is driven by revenge. Perhaps her sister was killed by the mob. Mirroring the hostage scene from TDK, Selina confronts her sister's killer, when Batman comes in and pleads with her not to kill him. She listens to him, and the killer is captured. By saving Selina, Batman is redeemed of not saving Dent, and Catwoman is redeemed, becoming The Narrows' Protector, like in the modern comics.

What do you think?

I wouldn't say it needs to be that, but that is a good story avenue.

 

[DCRanger]

I believe DCRanger and a few others have mentioned it in other threads, but if Catwoman is in the film, her arc needs to represent the reverse arc of Harvey Dent. Have her start out as a villain. A vengeful thief who steals from the rich people of Gotham, and from the mob. Just like Dent, Selina is driven by revenge. Perhaps her sister was killed by the mob. Mirroring the hostage scene from TDK, Selina confronts her sister's killer, when Batman comes in and pleads with her not to kill him. She listens to him, and the killer is captured. By saving Selina, Batman is redeemed of not saving Dent, and Catwoman is redeemed, becoming The Narrows' Protector, like in the modern comics.

What do you think?

From your keyboard to Team Nolan's film... I love it. Great job!!!!

That is exactly how I pictured Catwoman's story arc in TDKR... if she's in it... and I personally think she should be... because she's the perfect candidate for the reverse arc of Dent. Catwoman is the one villain that I believe would actually listen to Batman's plea. JMO.

 

[Dark Knight]

The task force would basically be Strange (the criminologist), Gordon, Lawton and Essen.

With Gordon and Essen trying to sabotage what Strange is trying to do, but they would not have an idea of Lawtons' hidden agenda and alliance with Strange. There would be no affair between Gordon and Essen either.

Catwoman would be the wild card who is more of a Batman ally, but does things her own way of course.

 

[Wolverine1988]

Yeah instead of using some lame made up cop villain, why not use a character like Deadshot...I hope they go that right if Prey has some inspiration for this movie.