Do you think Batman will hamper MOS2?

[Xak-Ell]

in the end, it's still superman's movie. so i think it'll be a solid 60-30 (the other 10 will be for lex of course)

 

[Batmannerism]

I agree with those who said that BM v SM will be more like Avengers, (so It's not MOS 2)

Personally, I agree with what Nolan said a few years back that Supes and Batman are such big characters they deserve their own films. It will really depend on how they approach the movie, is it a Superman film with a Batman cameo, a Batman film with a Superman cameo, or a 50/50 split ?

they'll still need some other villains because even the DKR Batman/supes throwdown, can't be as epic as Superman vs Zod, for sheer apocalyptic destruction (no apologies,
from me, I liked that !).

It'll be interesting to see just how Batman figures in this upcoming film, I think it's success/failure will greatly depend on casting. I'm pushing for Gerard Butler myself, but
who knows ?

I reckon an essential issue is source material, and the problem with Dark Knight returns is that it's a Batman story, if not THE Batman story, possibly the best Batman story ever. If anything it would be good source material for a final film (end of a trilogy ) of films featuring Bats and Supes.

I reckon better source material might be "For the Man who has everything" , but that's just me.

As some have said, this film could be a winner if Jonah Nolan comes on board. He and Chris were the genius team behind TDK, arguably the greatest Batman film if not greatest Superhero film ever (although I alternate between TDK and MOS depending on my mood, man I loved MOS).

Anyway, I agree with the guy who said, "wait until you see it" I went into MOS all "Superman doesn't kill. This is wrong, this movie is going to be crap." and came out
a true believer, I absolutely loved it. If BM vs SM is as good as MOS, I'll be cheering.
Peace.

 

[Tobias]

I assume the focus will be more on Batman as this film seems to be mainly intended as a launching pad for a new Batman franchise.

Where does this leave the Superman franchise? No more stand-alone films? Just team-ups for Superman. Cavill is optioned for just 2 more films. The coming WF and one after that. I'd guess WB would want to use him in a JL film rather than another MOS film. Cavill did not exactly do great in the Supes role so more MOS films are probably on the backburner.

 

[Tra-El]

I assume the focus will be more on Batman as this film seems to be mainly intended as a launching pad for a new Batman franchise.

Where does this leave the Superman franchise? No more stand-alone films? Just team-ups for Superman. Cavill is optioned for just 2 more films. The coming WF and one after that. I'd guess WB would want to use him in a JL film rather than another MOS film. Cavill did not exactly do great in the Supes role so more MOS films are probably on the backburner.

You guess, you assume, you seem to guess..

as you guess and assume and probably guess?

Must be true.

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

I assume the focus will be more on Batman as this film seems to be mainly intended as a launching pad for a new Batman franchise.

Where does this leave the Superman franchise? No more stand-alone films? Just team-ups for Superman. Cavill is optioned for just 2 more films. The coming WF and one after that. I'd guess WB would want to use him in a JL film rather than another MOS film. Cavill did not exactly do great in the Supes role so more MOS films are probably on the backburner.

Contracts can be renegotiated and new ones made.

 

[sf2]

in the end, it's still superman's movie. so i think it'll be a solid 60-30 (the other 10 will be for lex of course)

How about Lois? The people? N most important the new threats?

 

[Batmannerism]

How about Lois? The people? N most important the new threats?

First, to Sf2, again sincere apologies for the rant in the "Little things" thread.

Can't see BM v SM being MOS 2. Again, Thor and Captain America only got
one film before Avengers (yes, there's a huge hole in my logic, that the "new" Batman won't get a film before BM v SM, unless of course it's Bale or a version of the Nolan Batman, although there's a rumour Warner Bros is offering him the GDP of some small countries to play Bats again - wow I hope Ryan
Gosling doesn't get the part, he'd just look like Henry Cavill's younger sister
in a Batman costume).

Anyway, my original point (not that I really had one) was BM v SM won't be an MOS 2. An MOS 2 film has to focus on Supes, a team-up with Batman would have to split time too much between the two characters, in order
to be a proper sequel. By thinking of it like that, I've kind of dealt to my
fears that after 3 superb Dark Knight films, and the amazing MOS, that DC
will **** it up and BM v SM will turn out like.....Batman and Robin. for now

The other big difficulty (besides having the two greatest super-heroes
share the screen, and balancing that effectively) with that is that it requires a villain who would work for both Batman and Superman (probably not Braniac then, but maybe Luthor, although I hope not, because Luthor is such a big character that he and Supes need a movie to themselves
- on that note, who votes Cranston ? who votes Strong ? ).

Your guess is as good as mine ! Strangely, I think Darkseid might work...
but I'm not sure how.

As part of that , there seems to be a problem with the scale of the
action with BM v SM. It just might not live up to the epic scale of
MOS. I can see Snyder re-creating the smackdown from Miller's DKR, but
that just won't match the epic Supes v Zod fight from MOS.

As for Lois, maybe she solves the "Who is Batman mystery ?" Could see
her work in a movie with BM and SM, but it's the villians who are the
problem,..... well let's hope not (or at least that they're more Joker than Bane). Peace.

 

[shyerychen]

I think so.

 

[Tobias]

First, to Sf2, again sincere apologies for the rant in the "Little things" thread.

Can't see BM v SM being MOS 2. Again, Thor and Captain America only got
one film before Avengers (yes, there's a huge hole in my logic, that the "new" Batman won't get a film before BM v SM, unless of course it's Bale or a version of the Nolan Batman, although there's a rumour Warner Bros is offering him the GDP of some small countries to play Bats again - wow I hope Ryan
Gosling doesn't get the part, he'd just look like Henry Cavill's younger sister
in a Batman costume).

Anyway, my original point (not that I really had one) was BM v SM won't be an MOS 2. An MOS 2 film has to focus on Supes, a team-up with Batman would have to split time too much between the two characters, in order
to be a proper sequel. By thinking of it like that, I've kind of dealt to my
fears that after 3 superb Dark Knight films, and the amazing MOS, that DC
will **** it up and BM v SM will turn out like.....Batman and Robin. for now

The other big difficulty (besides having the two greatest super-heroes
share the screen, and balancing that effectively) with that is that it requires a villain who would work for both Batman and Superman (probably not Braniac then, but maybe Luthor, although I hope not, because Luthor is such a big character that he and Supes need a movie to themselves
- on that note, who votes Cranston ? who votes Strong ? ).

Your guess is as good as mine ! Strangely, I think Darkseid might work...
but I'm not sure how.

As part of that , there seems to be a problem with the scale of the
action with BM v SM. It just might not live up to the epic scale of
MOS. I can see Snyder re-creating the smackdown from Miller's DKR, but
that just won't match the epic Supes v Zod fight from MOS.

As for Lois, maybe she solves the "Who is Batman mystery ?" Could see
her work in a movie with BM and SM, but it's the villians who are the
problem,..... well let's hope not (or at least that they're more Joker than Bane). Peace.

Good points.

No way do I see this as an MOS sequel. It's a team-up film and the best we can hope for is that Supes get half the time. Remember this is meant to launch a new Batman actor so there is going to have to be a lot of focus there.

That focus means the Lois and Clark relationship which was barely touched on in MOS will get crimped for screen-time. Plus development of Superman's character from where it was left off in MOS may get short changed.

The problem for the MOS franchise is that by the timcharacters in films you really can't back to an MOS2 for 6 or more years. MOS forgotten by then. WB would basically have to reboot.

I see this as WB sacrificing the MOS franchise to get to JL. Its not just Avengers but look at the huge boost IronMan 3 got. You gotta know WB is going to be looking closely at Thor2. That film looks incredible and if it is and if Avengers does similar things for it as it did for IM3, 800 million WW may be doable for Thor.

If Thor blows away the BO then I expect WB will redouble efforts to get JL out ASAP. Maybe 2 years after WF. Three at most.

 

[ConnorKon-El]

in the end, it's still superman's movie. so i think it'll be a solid 60-30 (the other 10 will be for lex of course)

Lol at the people who aren't considering this a Superman film.
It's the next chapter in this Superman saga, it's just that Batman will be in it.

 

[hopefuldreamer]

Lol at the people who aren't considering this a Superman film.
It's the next chapter in this Superman saga, it's just that Batman will be in it.

Lol yourself!

It'll be a Superman story in the sense that it will still be set in Metropolis, Lois will still the leading female role, Lex will be in the background controlling the activities of the villain/villains etc.

But i'd bet good money the plot and character arcs will revolve around the dynamic between the TWO of them.

Thinking it will be a Superman film with a plot that revolves around a Superman centric character arc, and Batman will just have a feature role... That's worthy of an LOL IMO.

Especially since it will have been 3 years since their last Batman film, he is the only DC property that has made them really big bucks, and they have nothing else 'in the bag' right now.

All the other characters they could play with from here on are a gamble. Batman is their only sure thing. They are not going to give Batman a bit part in any movie.

 

[STARMAN]

It's a Superman film...and a Batman film.

 

[Batmannerism]

Good points.

No way do I see this as an MOS sequel. It's a team-up film and the best we can hope for is that Supes get half the time. Remember this is meant to launch a new Batman actor so there is going to have to be a lot of focus there.

That focus means the Lois and Clark relationship which was barely touched on in MOS will get crimped for screen-time. Plus development of Superman's character from where it was left off in MOS may get short changed.

The problem for the MOS franchise is that by the timcharacters in films you really can't back to an MOS2 for 6 or more years. MOS forgotten by then. WB would basically have to reboot.

I see this as WB sacrificing the MOS franchise to get to JL. Its not just Avengers but look at the huge boost IronMan 3 got. You gotta know WB is going to be looking closely at Thor2. That film looks incredible and if it is and if Avengers does similar things for it as it did for IM3, 800 million WW may be doable for Thor.

If Thor blows away the BO then I expect WB will redouble efforts to get JL out ASAP. Maybe 2 years after WF. Three at most.

That's a good analysis. It does seem to be about the money. Kind of sad really, as I agree we really do need at least 1 more MOS film to further develop his character, before introducing Batman (who probably needs a film to himself) Mind you, I had no expectations going into MOS and was amazingly pleased with the result, loved it. So, I'm not ruling out the possibility of it being great (reckon they need to get Jonathan Nolan in on the script ).

I'm not so sure that MOS 2 would be as difficult as you might think after a BM v SM film, there was a 5 year lag between Dark Knight and DKR. So maybe 2 -3 years would work.

As far as JL films go, the question in the back of my mind is how the other JL characters will be introduced. Heard rumours that the JL film comes first, and then the individual films......not sure if that approach will work.

BUT
Here's a thought. Snyder also did Watchmen, a multi-character superhero
(well, really anti-superhero ) film, which establishes characters as it goes along, and did a damn good job IMO (although that was by sticking to
Moore's source material, which is the greatest graphic novel, Ever !).
With MOS already established, and maybe as the main character, the other
JL members could be supporting roles.

I have a lot of faith in Nolan's understanding of the source material, and of fan expectation. His films deliver, and MOS is Snyder's best film, so trend wise, things look up.

Be interesting to see how Thor 2 turns out - I remember the source material when it came out in the 80's, not sure if I like the look for Malekith the Accursed, although Christopher Eccelston is legendary for his portrayal of bad guys ! It looks good from the trailers, but I've been fooled that way before.
The key to Thor's success is having a lead who looks the part and can act a bit, and a terrific villain (****, Loki steals the show, he's so good they've used him in every film Thor shows up in). IF the castings for BM v SM are done correctly ( if it's Wes Bentley he's going to have to hit the gym, HARD ! I'm still pulling for Gerard Butler) anyway, if they cast it right, it could be great.

On that note, Iron Man 1 is IMO one of the best superhero movies ever, Iron man 2 was vastly inferior - yet same cast and director (Same with Pirates of the Carribbean 3, garbage). So there is a degree of hit and miss, but I'm quite hopeful for BM v SM and subsequent MOS films.

Peace.

 

[sf2]

Good points.

No way do I see this as an MOS sequel. It's a team-up film and the best we can hope for is that Supes get half the time. Remember this is meant to launch a new Batman actor so there is going to have to be a lot of focus there.

That focus means the Lois and Clark relationship which was barely touched on in MOS will get crimped for screen-time. Plus development of Superman's character from where it was left off in MOS may get short changed.

The problem for the MOS franchise is that by the timcharacters in films you really can't back to an MOS2 for 6 or more years. MOS forgotten by then. WB would basically have to reboot.

I see this as WB sacrificing the MOS franchise to get to JL. Its not just Avengers but look at the huge boost IronMan 3 got. You gotta know WB is going to be looking closely at Thor2. That film looks incredible and if it is and if Avengers does similar things for it as it did for IM3, 800 million WW may be doable for Thor.

If Thor blows away the BO then I expect WB will redouble efforts to get JL out ASAP. Maybe 2 years after WF. Three at most.

I hate to agree with u.
N i see people around me are interezted in Thor2.

 

[JOE]

I want Batman Arkham Origins as the new costume. Bad. Ass.

 

[Mysteryman]

I hate to agree with u.
N i see people around me are interezted in Thor2.

WB is playing the long game.
They are not sweating over Thor 2,
They have a universe of their own to build .

 

[Rephe]

I'm a HUGE Batman fan. In fact, I don't even know that I LIKE Superman, considering that my exposure to him has been through Batman comics. I wasn't in love with the Christopher Reeve character, and I didn't really understand the point of Superman Returns.

That said... I LOVED Man of Steel. I've watched it five times in the last three days. I'm happy that Batman is going to be in the new movie (even if it's not specifically a "Man of Steel Sequel" it's going to be a sequel to Man of Steel), and I don't want to see a whole lot of Batman in it. I don't want Batman to steal the show and make it a huge Batman thing. Batman's got some great movies out. Three of them in the last decade. So I feel like we know Batman. Even if it's not Christian Bale, we know the guy under the cowl is Bruce Wayne, he's got a company, a butler, billions of dollars, a manor, a badass car, and a cave under his house. I would prefer that kind of stuff to be saved for the solo Batman films in this universe and keep Batman's involvement in THIS film to how his character pertains to the ramifications of Man of Steel's ending.

You can say a LOT about the character, sure. But if he's in this next movie, I would think speaks to both his character as Bruce Wayne, philanthropist, and as Batman, cynical force of vengeance, to investigate on his own what happened in Metropolis. Hell, he might even be able to piece together that Superman is Clark Kent in the same way that Lois did in Man of Steel, but it'd be easier since, hey, look at that, Smallville had some serious ***** go down there, too.

I'm just saying, just by Batman BEING in the movie, you've got potentially effortless characterization of his "Worlds Greatest Detective" side, his philanthropy as Bruce Wayne, AND his darker, more apprehensive side that can put him at temporary odds with Superman. Add to that a potential Wayne Enterprises / LexCorp joint project to rebuild Metropolis, and you have Bruce at odds with Kal long enough for him to go after him, get smacked around (as a Batfan, yeah, I'll admit it--Smacked. Around.). Then he realizes that Kal's got humanity's best interests at heart, realize that Lex has been just Eddie Haskell-ing him the whole time to get to Superman, etc. Along the way, you can have some really great scenes involving Bruce and Kal talking about killing Zod and coming to an understanding.

They say Bruce is going to be 'older and wiser' but that doesn't have to mean he's a geriatric, and it doesn't mean he has to be all training Superman or whatever, that's horsecrap. Just enough of a "You know, killing is wrong, right?" "Yeah... everyday I wish I could take it back, but I had to do it. I had to. I had to or he was going to kill every single person in my city. I couldn't stop him." I'd imagine a more heartfelt monologue there or something after a heated discussion, but yeah. I think Bruce would really see Kal's pain and regret and realize, just as Col. Hardy did.... "This man is not my enemy."

You don't need to show the Batcave, Wayne Manor, Alfred, Gotham in that huge of detail at all. THIS film, in my opinion, shouldn't be about Batman, it's about the meeting of two giants, and one of them... we know pretty well already. That's my take.

 

[Willi Berg]

I'm a HUGE Batman fan. In fact, I don't even know that I LIKE Superman, considering that my exposure to him has been through Batman comics. I wasn't in love with the Christopher Reeve character, and I didn't really understand the point of Superman Returns.

That said... I LOVED Man of Steel. I've watched it five times in the last three days. I'm happy that Batman is going to be in the new movie (even if it's not specifically a "Man of Steel Sequel" it's going to be a sequel to Man of Steel), and I don't want to see a whole lot of Batman in it. I don't want Batman to steal the show and make it a huge Batman thing. Batman's got some great movies out. Three of them in the last decade. So I feel like we know Batman. Even if it's not Christian Bale, we know the guy under the cowl is Bruce Wayne, he's got a company, a butler, billions of dollars, a manor, a badass car, and a cave under his house. I would prefer that kind of stuff to be saved for the solo Batman films in this universe and keep Batman's involvement in THIS film to how his character pertains to the ramifications of Man of Steel's ending.

You can say a LOT about the character, sure. But if he's in this next movie, I would think speaks to both his character as Bruce Wayne, philanthropist, and as Batman, cynical force of vengeance, to investigate on his own what happened in Metropolis. Hell, he might even be able to piece together that Superman is Clark Kent in the same way that Lois did in Man of Steel, but it'd be easier since, hey, look at that, Smallville had some serious ***** go down there, too.

I'm just saying, just by Batman BEING in the movie, you've got potentially effortless characterization of his "Worlds Greatest Detective" side, his philanthropy as Bruce Wayne, AND his darker, more apprehensive side that can put him at temporary odds with Superman. Add to that a potential Wayne Enterprises / LexCorp joint project to rebuild Metropolis, and you have Bruce at odds with Kal long enough for him to go after him, get smacked around (as a Batfan, yeah, I'll admit it--Smacked. Around.). Then he realizes that Kal's got humanity's best interests at heart, realize that Lex has been just Eddie Haskell-ing him the whole time to get to Superman, etc. Along the way, you can have some really great scenes involving Bruce and Kal talking about killing Zod and coming to an understanding.

They say Bruce is going to be 'older and wiser' but that doesn't have to mean he's a geriatric, and it doesn't mean he has to be all training Superman or whatever, that's horsecrap. Just enough of a "You know, killing is wrong, right?" "Yeah... everyday I wish I could take it back, but I had to do it. I had to. I had to or he was going to kill every single person in my city. I couldn't stop him." I'd imagine a more heartfelt monologue there or something after a heated discussion, but yeah. I think Bruce would really see Kal's pain and regret and realize, just as Col. Hardy did.... "This man is not my enemy."

You don't need to show the Batcave, Wayne Manor, Alfred, Gotham in that huge of detail at all. THIS film, in my opinion, shouldn't be about Batman, it's about the meeting of two giants, and one of them... we know pretty well already. That's my take.

Interesting. Well said.

At first I was skeptical, but now I am seeing it as having great potential, if it is treated seriously (and I believe it will be.)

It can move beyond a simple plot like an alien invasion or a villain with a dastardly scheme and really explore what we've seen for many years in the comics. Opening up this shared universe allows the idea of the "superhero" and their beliefs/moral codes to be explored extensively. Plus it ups the ante in terms of action.

In the comics, we see the team-up stories have evolved and open up a lot of story possibilities.

 

[Rephe]

Thanks! I guess I should've said this earlier, but when Affleck was first cast, I had my doubts, then that approach to Batman in Man of Steel 2 (or whatever) popped into my head and then Ben Affleck made sense. That would be the type of characterization I would expect to be a forte of his.

 

[Black Light]

I'm not sure. I think the traditional notion that a Batman story is more focused on Batman's inner turmoil and struggle and a Superman story is focused more on the worlds reaction to a messiah figure means that this will be an interesting problem. We already have come considerable development of Superman but we have no development for the new Batman. The Batman aspect of this move almost has to be a cameo. Either that or there has to be way to establish a decent amount of this Batman's backstory before hand with out taking up to much time. Otherwise, I don't think this will work.