How would you reboot Batman?

It's changing, but there is an anti-gay bias in Hollywood. A lot of actors have stayed closeted for the sake of their careers. Not because Hollywood execs dislike gay people, but they fear America does. Hollywood is a town notorious for playing it safe and underestimating the tolerance of middle America and international markets.

Another example. Will Smith and Denzel almost always plays opposite white/Latina actresses for the same reason. They don't want America to think those movies are "too black."

Is this backwards thinking changing? I like to think so, but not as fast as we like to think. Sure, they make movies with positive messages about tolerance and equality, but writers/filmmakers tend to be more progressive than executives, who only focus on trying to keep their jobs. Which, they do, by making as few waves as possible. That's why Hollywood doesn't change very quickly.

Would I have a problem with a gay man playing Batman? No. Would most of America? I don't think so. Would most people in international markets? I doubt it. But, that's what Hollywood executives are genuinely afraid of.
 
I think there's generally an anti-minortiy-of-any-kind...except for maybe Jews...in Hollywood driven by marketing. If not actively anti-, then at least considerably less-ethusiastic than much of the rest of society when it comes to 'diversity'. Again, they're not bending over backwards to 'lead the way'. But....maybe people shouldn't be asking them, either.
 
Exactly. It's all marketing-driven. That's why the story of a black Civil War squad was told through the eyes of Matthew Broderick (Glory), the death of the Samurai through Tom Cruise (The Last Samurai), and the African blood diamond trade through Leo DiCaprio (Blood Diamond).
 
Exactly. It's all marketing-driven. That's why the story of a black Civil War squad was told through the eyes of Matthew Broderick (Glory), the death of the Samurai through Tom Cruise (The Last Samurai), and the African blood diamond trade through Leo DiCaprio (Blood Diamond).

Well...by that token, there are also other products that are predominantly marketed towards certain minorities...should they all broaden their scopes as well to include more white customers, or is that up to their preference?
 
Well...by that token, there are also other products that are predominantly marketed towards certain minorities...should they all broaden their scopes as well to include more white customers, or is that up to their preference?

Honest answer is that those movies aren't trying to appeal to everyone. Movies targeted to certain demographic (teen, women, black, Latino, etc.) come with a built-in audience and a certain expectation for box office return. Tyler Perry, for example, makes movies on a relatively microbudget, designed to attract his audience.

A studio tentpole movie is different. It has to attract EVERYONE. Every demographic. GI Joe went from an American team to an international force in the film. Even Captain America was given a team of racially diverse soldiers to fight beside, which isn't historically accurate as WWII platoons were segregated.

Blockbusters need to appeal to everyone, and Hollywood is thus afraid to alienate anyone.
 
all 3 of those films were made by the same director LOL

Haha, I know. And they're always the three most prominent films that come to mind. Either he likes to filter history through white, American eyes, or he wants to tell international stories, and that's how the studio system lets him do it.
 
Honest answer is that those movies aren't trying to appeal to everyone. Movies targeted to certain demographic (teen, women, black, Latino, etc.) come with a built-in audience and a certain expectation for box office return. Tyler Perry, for example, makes movies on a relatively microbudget, designed to attract his audience.

A studio tentpole movie is different. It has to attract EVERYONE. Every demographic. GI Joe went from an American team to an international force in the film. Even Captain America was given a team of racially diverse soldiers to fight beside, which isn't historically accurate as WWII platoons were segregated.

Blockbusters need to appeal to everyone, and Hollywood is thus afraid to alienate anyone.
Yeah, they DO appeal to 'everyone' in that they're not anti-whatever, even if they quietly don't choose to include such-and-such. People of all creeds will still go and see these movies as they always have because...well...that's the way movies are, and it's always worked.

Also...it's apparent that they are reacting to (or preempting) a growing anti-US sentiment which they may perceive a possible backlash and larger, more distinct affect on revenue. It's one thing if y may indirectly alienate domestic Black-Americans or Asian-Americans, it's a much bigger issue if you're going to lose out on foreign sales, which make up a larger portion of revenue for bigger movies.

So yes...fear of alienation is stronger than the need for more 'appeal'...since the domestic numbers for the bigger productions indicate that appeal is doing just fine. As harsh as it may seem...yeah they're more concerned with how audiences in Belgium or Thailand will react to the film than non-whites at home. So unless someone can get minorities in the US to boycott certain film outright and actually make a dent in gross take, it's unfortunately not going to change anytime soon.

In a way...big deal...it's only movies, they're not even real...they're fantasy and escapism. On the other hand...fantasies do represent concrete illustrations of inspiration in a lot of ways, and the 'American Way' is supposed to offer equal opportunities for all groups to pursue it and partake in it.
 
They cast a straight man as a gay Batman (George Clooney), so there's no reason why they wouldn't cast a gay man as a straight Batman.
Despite what jokes Clooney made, despite Schumacher's obvious sexual orientation and despite Robin appearing in the film, Batman isn't gay in Batman and Robin. If you're pointing to Robin, I seem to recall Grayson fighting for Ivy and Wayne having to punch him out because of it. I also recall Grayson being attracted and interested in Barbara, going as far as stalking her and saving her life in a motorcycle race. There was also Julie Madison, Wayne's girl friend. Depp said that nearly all his characters were played as homosexuals, most notably Jack Sparrow but we know that's not true . . . There should never be a homosexual association with Batman unless it involves Batwoman and Montoya, the only two gay characters in the Batman universe. As far as having a gay actor playing Batman, why? There are so many people that could play a great Batman/Bruce Wayne straight and gay, why pick a gay one specifically if the studio would have a problem with it?
 
Last edited:
I'd be in the camp that'd go with a much more sci-fi-slanted take on Batman - just to do something different with the film portion of the Batman franchise and not get pigeonholed into trying to carry on Someone Else's Vision. By that nature I'd probably also be in the minority that would have the guts to set it 25 to 30 years in the future. However, that does not equate to there being flying cars and robots and laser guns as far as the eye can see, either, and setting it in the future does not mean that I'd be interested in even attempting to adapt "The Dark Knight Returns" or "Batman Beyond" or "Kingdom Come" or any other Elseworldish take on the whole 'Bat to the Future' concept (pun totally intended) - maybe I'd crib elements out of them here and there, but for the most part I'd want this to be as much its own thing as TRKReturns and BBeyond and KC were. Although at least one ground rule would have to be set firmly in stone - any villain who's been used in the previous films, regardless of continuity, is off-limits, out of the picture, gone...meaning dead, in most cases: Joker, Penguin, Catwoman, Two-Face, Riddler, Mr. Freeze, Bane, Poison Ivy, Ra's Al Ghul, Scarecrow...all gone.

An opening text card a la "The Terminator" and "Blade Runner" would basically serve to get the GA up to speed as well as alert them right from the start that this Batman movie's going to be a little different: Gotham City, as well as much of the rest of the world, was leveled in an alien invasion 25 to 30 years earlier, and the world's greatest superheroes - including Batman - joined forces to repel the threat...which they did, but at an horrific cost. By the time the movie takes place, most capes are either dead, crippled, missing, or just plain don't have it in them anymore. Using technology cannibalized from the invaders, Gotham City was rebuilt as New Gotham, a towering Raygun-Gothic megapolis filled with the promise of a new era for Gotham citizenry (especially with Arkham Asylum and most of the Rogues in it obliterated in the attack)...but while you can change the skin, you can't change the animal, and within the space of two-and-a-half decades the grunge and dilapidation have taken over once more, the streets lit by broken neon lights and those aforementioned flying cars and robots and laser guns belonging largely to New Gotham's elite...and, by extension, the underworld. The end result is that New Gotham is a deadlier place than Gotham City was.

Enter into this world Thomas Wayne, New Gotham's champion boxer, raised on the streets by his trainer and father figure Ted Grant. Tom's known that the AWOL Bruce Wayne is his biological father, but he's learned to live with the shadow: he doesn't have the intellectualism or wealth that his Dad inherited (and enhanced considerably), nor is he aware at this point of his Dad's dual identity, but between the fame and fortune that comes with being a pro athlete, he hasn't done too shabbily for himself. So when Ted urges him to throw an upcoming title bout, Tom's not particularly keen to take that advice, and the resulting altercation between Tom, Ted and Tom's manager gets rambunctious enough to be of particular concern to Tom's new ultra-competent personal assistant, Cass Grayson, daughter of Tom's Dad's former ward --- little surprise should it be that Cass knows Tom's Dad's Big Secret before he does, and that Big Secret will come in handy when Tom's manager turns up dead and Ted in a coma following the bout which Tom refuses to toss. All the evidence points to Tom Wayne, and the ruined Batcave will have to serve as Tom and Cass's hideout as they try to puzzle out who framed him; what they uncover is that Ted might have wanted Tom to throw the fight in order to protect him from being the latest 'recruit' into what the pair discover to be a hideous brainwashing program. Furthermore, Wayne's current fugitive status is only serving to draw unwanted attention from the authorities, specifically Police Commissioner Barbara Gordon, who doesn't really believe that Wayne is guilty, necessarily - in fact, when she shows up alone in the Batcave, what's certain is her worst fears about the path Tom has chosen to go down to clear his name. Thus, with a third of New Gotham under mind-control hunting for him, it's a good thing Tom's old man left that unused prototype Batsuit and experimental flight-capable Batmobile in storage...

I'd say that in terms of the tone of this particular version of Batman, it's about Batman less as a force of fear and more as a force of sheer will, so there's room here for a little more humor, wry though it may be, than one would expect out of the character, especially given that it wouldn't be Bruce Wayne behind the mask this time - one of the recurring points of the story is that Tom is NOT his dad, and therefore doesn't cut quite the grim figure Bruce did; he's rough enough around the edges that he has more in common with Harrison Ford in his prime than he does with Christian Bale or even Michael Keaton.
 
Last edited:
why did you invent a son for Bruce Wayne when he actually has a son comics canon you could use?
 
^why did nolan invent a love interest when i am sure Bruce has some love interest in the comics?
 
yeah, and the only purpose her character served was to die, so I wouldn't call that a brilliant creative decision, let along won to be emulated with further installments.
 
I'd play up his intellect. Too any movie goers just see him as a rich guy that has a lot of toys and knows a little karate. I'd have him wear a costume closer to the comics. The body suit would be closter to the Arkham City/Asylum one. And of course I'd make an opening to tie it into a potential Justice League movie.
 
why did you invent a son for Bruce Wayne when he actually has a son comics canon you could use?

Personal preference - Damian wouldn't work for what I had in mind.

The body suit would be closter to the Arkham City/Asylum one.

I've been checking out Carlos D'Anda's dA gallery, and there's a few concepts there from "Arkham Asylum" and DCUO that I think would fit in with I what I'd do...like the suit on the far right from "Arkham", complete with no cape (he'd have energy-based wing-foils instead); also the Batmobile and his GCPD stuff from DCUO...I can see a Robocop/Mad Max vibe to some of that stuff.
 
Last edited:
^why did nolan invent a love interest when i am sure Bruce has some love interest in the comics?
I think Nolan or somebody mentioned that they wanted a love interest that the "real" Bruce would have been open and honest with. That's why Rachael was created as a friend of Bruce's since childhood. I'd rather it have been some love interest from the books as well but the character served her purpose I suppose.
 
the next film must include Robin.. i'm sick of the hostility toward including the character, and the hypocritical sentiment of 'fans' who read the comics but swear that including Robin would be 'unrealistic' on film..
 
I really don't think Robin would work with Christian Bale's Batman. Nolan's series has been about Bruce becoming Batman, and Batman becoming a legend. Robin only makes sense with an older, established Batman worn down by his perpetual war on crime. He's been at it for years, he's even further isolated from humanity. Bruce is nothing but a public facade. He is Batman, only Batman.

Robin reminds Bruce of his humanity, of his old self. He's bitter and angry, out for revenge. In saving and training this brash teenager, Bruce can rediscover his humanity.

So, yeah, in short, I think an established Batman and a rising Robin can be the next trilogy. Batman aging and Robin becoming Nightwing.
 
I really don't think Robin would work with Christian Bale's Batman. Nolan's series has been about Bruce becoming Batman, and Batman becoming a legend. Robin only makes sense with an older, established Batman worn down by his perpetual war on crime. He's been at it for years, he's even further isolated from humanity. Bruce is nothing but a public facade. He is Batman, only Batman.
Sounds to me like you're not even a fan of Robin in the comics. :huh:
 
In comics, even though Batman has been at it for years and years, he doesn't age. It's the nature of the medium. In a movie, introducing Robin to a young Batman is creating partners, not a mentor/apprentice relationship, which is how it needs to start.

Cast someone a little older, like 40's, as Batman. Maybe Eric Bana, Gerard Butler.. Someone in that age range. Have a Robin in his late teens. It makes the dynamic between two very different people that much more interesting.
 
Why is it a rule that all theatrical Batman movies have to be live-action? (With the exception of Phantasm, but that was back in '92) I'd like to see an animated Batman film on the big-screen.

I was watching Batman Forever earlier today and I got an idea. I don't want a Robin movie, but I would like to see the new series start from Dick Grayson's point-of-view. (We've already seen Batman Begin, it would be redundant to do that again)

Show Dick losing his parents, being taken in by the mysterious Bruce Wayne, feeling the same rage Bruce felt towards Joe Chill. Bruce and Dick share a bond, but nothing Bruce says can quell Dick's thirst for vengeance. This is a more rugged "bad boy" Dick Grayson that would redeem the character in the eyes of the general moviegoers, erasing the bad memories of Schumacher's "Batman & Robin" We become invested in Dick's character as the movie begins. He's a tortured soul like Bruce, who would often run away and get himself into trouble, only for Bruce (Or Batman) to bail him out of trouble time and time again.

In a montage, show Dick grow over the years (To about 19 or 20) aspiring to be like The Dark Knight, so nobody else would lose their parents the way he did. After some failed attempts at vigilantism that results in Dick being put in the hospital, Bruce sees a potential apprentice in him, but is weary about putting his life in danger.

Dick eventually learns Bruce is Batman on his own, and begins following him around, suggesting they work together, an idea Bruce isn't sure about. Eventually, they become partners. The movie would be Robin's beginnings, failures, and triumphs. But an equal amount of time would be spent on Batman too. As I said before, this isn't a "Robin" movie I have in mind, it's a Batman one, Robin is just a very important character in it.

I don't have all the ideas worked out yet, but I'd like either Freeze or Scarecrow to be the villains. Freeze is a great character that needs to be redeemed after Batman & Robin, and Scarecrow also needs to be given some dignity after being portrayed as such a wuss in Batman Begins.
 
In comics, even though Batman has been at it for years and years, he doesn't age. It's the nature of the medium. In a movie, introducing Robin to a young Batman is creating partners, not a mentor/apprentice relationship, which is how it needs to start.

Cast someone a little older, like 40's, as Batman. Maybe Eric Bana, Gerard Butler.. Someone in that age range. Have a Robin in his late teens. It makes the dynamic between two very different people that much more interesting.

The not aging in comics thing isn't true either. In the Post-Crisis DCU (1986-2011) Bruce aged from 21 to 38 as Batman. Richard went from 12 to 27. He was also setting up his own legacy as "The First Batman" by setting up Batman, Inc. and he had allowed Richard and Damian to be Batman & Robin of Gotham, while he took the role of mentor to others. We had also been shown the future that Bruce isn't Batman forever, Richard takes over, then maybe Tim, then Damian, Terry and the legend just continues. It's just that the nature of the medium it takes a long time to tell stories, as just a few days in the comics can equal several months in real time.
 
Last edited:
the next film must include Robin.. i'm sick of the hostility toward including the character, and the hypocritical sentiment of 'fans' who read the comics but swear that including Robin would be 'unrealistic' on film..

This. Robin is as important to the Batman mythos as Gordon, Joker, Catwoman, etc. The ONLY character, other than Bruce himself, that is POSSIBLY more important than Grayson/Robin is Alfred.

If it was entirely up to me, however Dark Knight Rises ends (assuming they don't do something stupid like actually kill Batman), have a brief scene at the end, possibly even after the credits, with a "six months later" or "one year later..." cut. Set it similar to the end of Batman Begins, but instead of giving Batman the Joker's card, have the conversation end with Gordon handing him either a grainy security camera photo of Robin, or one of Robin's "batarangs" (I know they are not actual batarangs, but you get what I mean). Gordon says "Care to explain this to me?" Batman simply answers "That's a story for another night." or "That's not my story to tell." That way, even though Nolan/Bale won't have to use Robin, they can set up the story for someone else.
 
Just thought I'd copy and paste this from the reboot thread in The Dark Knight Rises section:


Title- The Caped Crusader
Story by- David S. Goyer and Christopher Nolan.
Screenplay by- Jonah Nolan.
Director- Darren Aronofsky/Guillermo Del Toro/Matthew Vaughn.
Approach- Requel of The Dark Knight Trilogy.

Plot- Bruce Wayne, now a world renowned philanthropist is targeted by a new breed of mob boss, after Joker destroying the former mob (TDK). Wayne Enterprises is under attack by The Black Mask, a crimelord with seemingly unlimited resources and Harvey Dent's opposition for Mayor, Oswald Cobblepot- The Penguin. In the midst of their war, the owners of Grayson's Circus are killed leaving behind their teenage son, Richard. After seeing the same tragedy befall Grayson as did himself, he offers to take the boy in, and provide him with whatever he needs for the future.

Bruce starts a romance with Vicki Vale, who tries to see who Bruce truly is- the man who absconds with the entire Russian ballet, or the man who pours millions into trying to renovate the city- in doing so, it is explained to the audience VERY CLEARLY there is NO other reason other than sympathy, empathy and pity as to why Bruce took in Grayson. We've had enough of the gay and dick jokes, and the Schumacher films didn't exactly remedy that.

Richard discovers the Cave and along with Alfred and Lucius provides support for Bruce in uncovering Penguins drug trafficking and the other business ventures outside the Iceberg Lounge. But that isn't enough for him, he then goes out pursuing leads on his parents' killer. He is one hired gun Tony Zucco. And with help from Lucius, fashions his own armour.

The Police and Mayor Cobblepot's PMC try to move in on Black Mask but he goes all out in his attempt to draw out Penguin and half the city is levelled by explosives. In the end Batman stops them both and Richard exacts Justice on his parent's killer a hired gun- Tony Zucco.

Gordon and Batman discuss that escalation has now been fully realised in Gotham, Bruce confides in Gordon, saying he trained to be a soldier, but his new partner- Robin- is with him and reminds him he isn't carrying his burden alone.

Cast-

Batman- Michael Fassbender/ Luke Evans
Lucius Fox- Idris Elba
Commissioner Gordon- Bryan Cranston
Oswald Cobblepot- Philip Seymour Hoffman
Black Mask- undecided
Alfred- undecided
Richard Grayson-undecided.

Flame On!
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,268
Messages
22,076,842
Members
45,876
Latest member
Crazygamer3011
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"