How would you reboot Batman?

[Boy Scout]

Here's how I would do it.

• I would have an established Batman (30-35).
• I would give him an established rogues gallery.
• I would include Robin (either Dick Grayson or Damian Wayne).
• I would want the Batsuit to take inspiration from the Young Justice and New 52 designs, with the neck mobility of the TDK suit, and perhaps even the material of the MOS suit.
• I would want the Robin suit to take inspiration from Dick Grayson's Young Justice suit (shown below).
• I would include references to a wider DCU. Nothing distracting or obvious. The most you would get is Bruce reading the morning edition of The Daily Planet).
• Mr. Freeze would be the villain (and maybe Black Mask).
• The tone of the film would be identical to Under the Red Hood's.
• I would make Gotham look like a real-life city. But I would also make it visually distinct.

Spoiler

Spoiler

Credit: http://death-eats-food.deviantart.com/

 

[ChickenScratch]

My take would be more down to earth, less tech, more detective work and ninja stuff. I would make the setting sorta steampunk with big cg backgrounds like Sky Captain, Casshern or Goemon, really play with the lighting and color pallate.

Batman himself would be of course more ninja influenced. Lamelar armor, cutting scallops on the gauntlets, pretty much everything not related to detective work would be traditional, simple weapons.

 

[Fudgie]

No Batman origin as detailed as what they did in Begins, which was a bit too detailed in my opinion.

 

[Victarion]

Here's my idea for that Backstory on Thomas and Martha:

Spoiler

Thomas Wayne was born a destitute youth with no prospects for the future. His street savvy allowed him to work his way up in the Gotham underworld.

It brought him to the attention of a newcomer to the mob scene, Antonio Falcone. Antonio adopted Thomas and gave him funding for a college education. Thomas returned to Gotham City as a prospective businessman.

Wayne Enterprises was soon established and firmly entrenched in Gotham’s local economy. Their area of expertise was Applied Sciences with a focus on weapons both of both the local law enforcement and military.

Thomas Wayne regularly took batches of the weaponry back to Wayne Manor. There he removed all indications that they were produced by his company. Then the weapons were given to an agent in the employ of Antonio Falcone.

News would periodically surface of corruption in the GPD. However, those who reported on it never had another story published in the newspapers. Word of riots in the Narrows and impending turf wars would also appear from time to time.

Like those who reported on corruption in the GPD, these reporters turned up missing or their news agency, along with the reporter who issued it, would retract the story and cite logical reasons for the retraction.

Thomas Wayne had an idea as to why these stories were really pulled, and why some of these reporters were turning up dead. In order to assuage his guilt, Thomas attended medical school and returned to Gotham. He began doing work in the hospital, having left the running of Wayne Enterprises to a trusted member of the Sionis family.

The Falcone empire continued to get its weapons from Wayne Enterprises while Thomas Wayne set up a clinic in the Narrows. Many of his patients were victims of the Falcone-Zucco turf war. Wayne meets a former prostitute and befriends her.

She tells him she knows about his deal with Falcone. She convinces him that even if he isn’t directly tied to the weapons development in Wayne Enterprises, he’s still letting the guns flood the streets. This in turn provides him with patients in order to alleviate his guilt.

Soon the wounds of those coming into the clinic become much more severe. The war between Falcone and Zucco reaches its crescendo. Falcone himself visits Thomas and Martha at the clinic.

He’s got enough money to put Martha through a drug rehab program. Martha refuses the offer, and Thomas tells Falcone that he can finance her time in rehab. After Martha leaves, Falcone lays out an Ultimatum:

He’ll cut all ties to Wayne Enterprises in exchange for one last weapons cache and any information Wayne can get on the Sionis family. Thomas readily agrees, being blinded by the light at the end of the tunnel. Thus the information is given to Falcone and Wayne’s involvement with Antonio Falcone is at an end.

Martha begins attending drug rehab. She eventually completes it successfully. The Falcone empire manages to take out the Zucco family’s power base and gains dominance over the Narrows.

The Sionis family is ousted as having leaked chemical and biological weaponry into the Gotham Underworld (a last courtesy of Antonio Falcone to Thomas Wayne). Then the announcement of Thomas’s engagement to Martha is made public. Gotham sees it as a fairy-tale romance. In addition they view Thomas as a Hero for his work in the Narrows Free Clinic.

In Wayne Manor the rooms where Thomas Wayne did his work on the arms shipments for Falcone are decorated so that they are reminiscent of the Hells from Dante’s Inferno.

Quoting this so it doesn't get breezed over. Goemon was a beautiful movie; a Gotham partially CGI'd in that style would look nice.

 

[Kyle Rayner]

Don't reboot the character anymore! Is the same character different interpretation every time. A regular guy who loses his parents, becomes a vigilante, battles crimes using his unlimited financial resources. GOT IT!!!

If anything Batman should be used as the guy who connects the dots for a JL movie thru different characters.

 

[Lord]

This is not a thread about wether there should be a reboot, it's to see the different visions brought by other people, i would use Batman Begins and The Dark Knight as back story and consider them Year One (which they sort of are)

 

[DrCosmic]

I think an interesting part of the idea of a 'Robin' character, who functions as a gateway to an established Batman narratively, I think part of what would make him interesting is taking inspiration from someone other than Batman. The light, jovial, trickster part of his persona coming from one of the rogues would be fascinating, imho.

 

[Boy Scout]

This is not a thread about wether there should be a reboot, it's to see the different visions brought by other people, i would use Batman Begins and The Dark Knight as back story and consider them Year One (which they sort of are)

I think an interesting part of the idea of a 'Robin' character, who functions as a gateway to an established Batman narratively, I think part of what would make him interesting is taking inspiration from someone other than Batman. The light, jovial, trickster part of his persona coming from one of the rogues would be fascinating, imho.

Well...most of Batman's villains are pretty bat**** crazy and not the least bit like Robin, so who would he possibly take inspiration from?

EDIT: Also...someone (I don't remember who) came up with an awesome idea about how Robin should be known in the criminal underworld as a supernatural presence that is used to announce the coming of Batman. I love the idea and I hope it's incorporated into the next franchise.

 

[DrCosmic]

^Well for instance, a Robin might learn the advantage of taunting his enemies from the Joker. He might learn to use the distracting theatricality of bright garish colors from Riddler. He could learn any number of techniques without necessarily being crazy. And strictly speaking, both Robin and Batman exhibit quite a few symptoms.

That said, as far as battle tactics, having Robin appear to be an apparition sounds plenty cool. How would that work practically? Holograms? Smoke and mirrors? What keeps thugs from pulling out guns and dispelling the illusion before it becomes an instrument of fear?

 

[Boy Scout]

^Well for instance, a Robin might learn the advantage of taunting his enemies from the Joker. He might learn to use the distracting theatricality of bright garish colors from Riddler. He could learn any number of techniques without necessarily being crazy.

I like the way you think.

And strictly speaking, both Robin and Batman exhibit quite a few symptoms.

I'd rather they both be completely sane.

That said, as far as battle tactics, having Robin appear to be an apparition sounds plenty cool. How would that work practically? Holograms? Smoke and mirrors? What keeps thugs from pulling out guns and dispelling the illusion before it becomes an instrument of fear?

The way I picture it in my head, Robin simply pops up out of nowhere and takes out everyone but the big man in charge, one by one. No one would be able to lay a finger on him. He glides, flips, rolls, jumps, and dodges, without making a single sound. He's nothing more than a blur of red and green. And when he finally stops...the Batman steps out of the shadows.

That's how I would do it.

 

[Cain]

I actually like that idea and had a similar one where if TDKR has an ending then the new series would follow Batman Begins and The Dark Knight in the same style of the James Bond movies.

I don't like this. Leave Nolan's narrative alone in it's own box. That way it keeps it's integrity intact. You do NOT need to even vaguely reference his continuity to already have an established Batman. You could already start with an established Batman and explore his world from there like with the animated shows and movies or the 1960's tv series or the Burton movies etc.

I like the guys movies as much as the next person but they should never be an authority in Batman movie media. No one interpretation should be. It would cripple the whole charm of it all in the first place. No one director has told the story the same way and that should never change cause Batman will never die and it's not fair for movies from one generation to be restricted by rules from the generation of a former (Ie: Two-Face is dead). That's what almost killed Bond till they grew balls and just restarted from scratch with the new actor.

My idea is a trilogy from Dick's parents deaths and his adoption by Bruce Wayne, to him discovering Bruce's identity, training with him and in the end becoming Robin.

This I do agree with though. An entire trilogy with everything from taking Dick Grayson in during the first movie to him becoming Robin during the sequels. It brings a dynamic not properly explored in any live action film. How all that affects and changes Batman as a character making him a stronger and more effective human and crime fighter in the process. There is so much potential there.

 

[Smylex]

Simple - Make a dark horror esque Arkham Asylum (the game) into a movie and also use the sucsessful game brand to sell it

 

[DrCosmic]

I don't like this. Leave Nolan's narrative alone in it's own box. That way it keeps it's integrity intact. You do NOT need to even vaguely reference his continuity to already have an established Batman. You could already start with an established Batman and explore his world from there like with the animated shows and movies or the 1960's tv series or the Burton movies etc.

I like the guys movies as much as the next person but they should never be an authority in Batman movie media. No one interpretation should be. It would cripple the whole charm of it all in the first place. No one director has told the story the same way and that should never change cause Batman will never die and it's not fair for movies from one generation to be restricted by rules from the generation of a former (Ie: Two-Face is dead). That's what almost killed Bond till they grew balls and just restarted from scratch with the new actor.

Even if you don't reference it, this vision of Batman and his origins is firmly entrenched in the public consciousness. If we separate from that, we invite comparison, and if we have something that's not every bit as successful and resonant as Baleman, we are on the losing side of that comparison, which drives away business.

The reason reboots work is because they work in a vacuum, after a franchise has had rest and the new version is assumed superior. That can't be assumed when rebooting a billion dollar franchise. James Bond is a good example in that it went on successfully for several decades changing actors without changing the storyline. Soft reboots, sliding origin timelines. Batman is a character that could benefit from such a format, rather than inviting comparisons that come with a reboot.

 

[Cain]

Even if you don't reference it, this vision of Batman and his origins is firmly entrenched in the public consciousness. If we separate from that, we invite comparison, and if we have something that's not every bit as successful and resonant as Baleman, we are on the losing side of that comparison, which drives away business.

Dude this is faulty logic. There will be comparison anyway because it's a character that will go on forever and have many interpretations. With that scenario; comparison is impossible not to exist. People compare to this day all the different interpretations yet have no trouble following them or enjoying them on their own merits.

Batman has been interpreted in media for over 60 yrs now; EVERYBODY knows him; he's the most popular superhero of all time at this point. Present an entertaining vehicle with him and it will find an audience. The movies from the previous film series were "firmly entrenched in the public consciousness" when Batman Begins came out and BB still found an audience.

Every year there is a new animated movie starring Batman and it always remains amongst the best sellers for WB animation despite all of them not being in continuity with each other. The majority of audiences for these animated movies are just general people and not comic book fanatics.

The reason reboots work is because they work in a vacuum, after a franchise has had rest and the new version is assumed superior. That can't be assumed when rebooting a billion dollar franchise. James Bond is a good example in that it went on successfully for several decades changing actors without changing the storyline. Soft reboots, sliding origin timelines. Batman is a character that could benefit from such a format, rather than inviting comparisons that come with a reboot.

James Bond is a bad example because it's a franchise that drove itself into a corner by always limiting it's scope with the rules it kept establishing for itself with each film. Let's be clear here with an example

In the last Bond iteration

Felix was dead
Tracy Bond was killed
Q was replaced

If by chance someone wanted to tell a new story involving any of those 2 frequent supporting players as anchors to the plot or if you wanted Bond to get married again you couldn't successfully pull it off. You couldn't tell the stories because either the character's are not in around anymore or cause Bond getting remarried would seem redundant within the same continuity considering his outlook on such a thing post-Tracy's death. Limitation.

Where as in this new iteration that began in 2006

Felix is still around
Bond has never married and Tracy doesn't even exist
Q is about to be introduced

You have the freedom to play ball with all those elements again without worrying about contradicting stuff that came earlier & throwing the tone off. One of the reasons Living Daylights and License to Kill couldn't work on their own merits with most people was because you had to believe the Dalton Bond was the same guy as Connery or Moore at some point and they are just way too different for that to be truly plausible without angering some people.

Make it clear that it's something that is establishing something new and bringing a new spin to the tale however like they did in 2006 and people are more open to it.

People will get over "Baleman" the moment something "new and shiny" hits so long as it entertains them. You think it's a coincidence that Sony didn't just go ahead and make a Spidey 4 with a new cast & crew? from a creative standpoint it would do their new director and writers no favor having to adhere to previous continuity despite how successful that continuity was. Because they could never truly tell the Spidey story that is really in their heart due to lack of freedom.

So there is no need to be confined to the continuity of previous movies regardless of how successful they were at their time. Characters like James Bond, Spider-Man and Batman are successful intellectual properties now. Pop culture staples that will go on forever. You don't have to depend on anything but the character himself to sell the product anymore.

In the long run it's healthier to reinvent franchises and adapt them to the sensibilities of audiences of THAT current generation then have them vaguely connected to each other and thus limited by the continuity of previous films. It's just much more liberating creatively and increases the chance of getting a better film out of it cause the creative minds could really do what they want without having any real laws of "respecting continuity".

 

[Fudgie]

Simple - Make a dark horror esque Arkham Asylum (the game) into a movie and also use the sucsessful game brand to sell it

Turning video games into movies nearly always come out crappy.

 

[Micromind]

My advice would be to tell a stand alone Batman story with an already established Batman, no origin story, Burton movies already covered origins, then Schumaker's Batman forever did that , then animated Batman movie - mask of phantasm showed the Batman's Origins, then Batman begins did the same thing and finally, direct to DVD animated Batman Year One had origin story again.

Many people are already aware of Batman's origins, and if some people exist who are not, then they could always watch the old movies by buying, renting DVD's.

Make a Batman movie where Batman is established in Gotham City, but he has been fighting regular criminals and he encounters Man-Bat or Clay or Killer Croc some villain who is not a regular human, and who has not been shown in any of the Batman movies.

 

[DrCosmic]

Dude this is faulty logic. There will be comparison anyway because it's a character that will go on forever and have many interpretations. With that scenario; comparison is impossible not to exist. People compare to this day all the different interpretations yet have no trouble following them or enjoying them on their own merits.

Batman has been interpreted in media for over 60 yrs now; EVERYBODY knows him; he's the most popular superhero of all time at this point. Present an entertaining vehicle with him and it will find an audience. The movies from the previous film series were "firmly entrenched in the public consciousness" when Batman Begins came out and BB still found an audience.

Every year there is a new animated movie starring Batman and it always remains amongst the best sellers for WB animation despite all of them not being in continuity with each other. The majority of audiences for these animated movies are just general people and not comic book fanatics.

James Bond is a bad example because it's a franchise that drove itself into a corner by always limiting it's scope with the rules it kept establishing for itself with each film. Let's be clear here with an example

In the last Bond iteration

Felix was dead
Tracy Bond was killed
Q was replaced

If by chance someone wanted to tell a new story involving any of those 2 frequent supporting players as anchors to the plot or if you wanted Bond to get married again you couldn't successfully pull it off. You couldn't tell the stories because either the character's are not in around anymore or cause Bond getting remarried would seem redundant within the same continuity considering his outlook on such a thing post-Tracy's death. Limitation.

Where as in this new iteration that began in 2006

Felix is still around
Bond has never married and Tracy doesn't even exist
Q is about to be introduced

You have the freedom to play ball with all those elements again without worrying about contradicting stuff that came earlier & throwing the tone off. One of the reasons Living Daylights and License to Kill couldn't work on their own merits with most people was because you had to believe the Dalton Bond was the same guy as Connery or Moore at some point and they are just way too different for that to be truly plausible without angering some people.

Make it clear that it's something that is establishing something new and bringing a new spin to the tale however like they did in 2006 and people are more open to it.

People will get over "Baleman" the moment something "new and shiny" hits so long as it entertains them. You think it's a coincidence that Sony didn't just go ahead and make a Spidey 4 with a new cast & crew? from a creative standpoint it would do their new director and writers no favor having to adhere to previous continuity despite how successful that continuity was. Because they could never truly tell the Spidey story that is really in their heart due to lack of freedom.

So there is no need to be confined to the continuity of previous movies regardless of how successful they were at their time. Characters like James Bond, Spider-Man and Batman are successful intellectual properties now. Pop culture staples that will go on forever. You don't have to depend on anything but the character himself to sell the product anymore.

In the long run it's healthier to reinvent franchises and adapt them to the sensibilities of audiences of THAT current generation then have them vaguely connected to each other and thus limited by the continuity of previous films. It's just much more liberating creatively and increases the chance of getting a better film out of it cause the creative minds could really do what they want without having any real laws of "respecting continuity".

Excellent points. Well said. On the whole, I agree with you, and I stand corrected. A couple points though:

1) The logic would be faulty, if a such thing as 'magnitude' did not exist. Without magnitude, since comparison will always exist, it doesn't matter if I release a new Batman continuity to follow up a billion dollar Batman movie two years later, it will be as easily received as a follow up to a 200K Batman movie eighteen years later.

With magnitude of course, we understand that there will be more and less favorable comparisons if we reboot a highly rated movie or franchise, or if we follow up in a short amount of time. If we do both, have mercy!

2) There is a such thing as too soon. It is very likely that the new Spider-Man will suffer, monetarily from that. The Hulk reboot certainly did. Shiny and new doesn't work as well when the old still has some shine on it. It still works, yes, but not nearly as well.

3) People watching animated movies do not represent the general audience. Adults who still watch cartoons are generally going to be people into genre television and have read comics as a child, even if they don't currently. Or they're children. It's not the general audience, and their tastes and tolerances are not indicative of the generic masses.

 

[tekken]

i'd have a batman movie with already establish vigilantes in gotham - main characters batman (bruce), robin (tim), nightwing (dick), and oracle. i'm not sure who the villain would be, but damnit i want to see the robins!

the way robin was handled in arkham city was perfect.

i wouldn't be opposed to a live action version of the brave and the bold batman either. he's actually not really campy. he's bad ass, but his surroundings are just ridiculous.

 

[bunk]

Lot of good ideas flying around. If it were up to me I would skip the origin and start with an experienced Batman with a lot of implied history. The story would begin with Bruce training tim to be Robin. Dick would already be Nightwing naturally, and living in Bludhaven. Jason's death would be shown in a flashback.

 

[uniqueweasel]

I think an idea could be introducing Batman with the Riddler as the main villain, who has been studying Batman who at that moment has only been pursuing normal kinds of robbers, etc. And has come up with a unique game, with obviously riddles and challenges that will eventually lead Batman to him. Perhaps beforehand it could be a kind of who done it kind of affair with the viewers never seeing the Riddler fully just glimpses in shadows, etc so the reveal towards the end when Batman solves the clues can play out. I'd have the film centre around his detective nature instead of mainly the combat side.

Barely any origin, as thats been done, and Batman is well established by now. I'd also have the grey and black look Batman suit to go with a different style from the previous movies.

The sets visually I think a good look would be in the style of the original Crow movies with it's constantly wet looking rainy gothic structures would be interesting with the colour of the film being almost black and white, with very little bright colours.

 

[Airwings]

Cain: Felix Leiter never died in the old films, but he was almost killed (LTK).

There is a lot of talk suggesting Tim Drake to be Robin in the reboot. In my opinion, that is wrong. If there is any other incarnation other than Dick Grayson to be the main Robin in a Batman film, Jason Todd is next in line.

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

EDIT: Also...someone (I don't remember who) came up with an awesome idea about how Robin should be known in the criminal underworld as a supernatural presence that is used to announce the coming of Batman. I love the idea and I hope it's incorporated into the next franchise.

I'm not sure who you were talking about, but when there was a Robin thread for TDKR myself and Mr Earle were discussing how Robin should be approached in a realistic universe. Essentially what I was saying was to show his origins like Bruce in Begins, explore;

Why he wears less armour-

Because Robin doesn't go out into direct gunfire like Batman does. Once Batman takes out the biggest threat, Robin joins in, distracting them while Batman gets his job done easier. Also, he's an acrobat, so he needs freedom of movement and to be agile.

Why Robin?-

Bruce called himself Batman because of the fear that led to his parent's death. That is what haunts him. Dick called himself Robin as a reminder of his parent's undying love. That is what inspires him.

What does he do for the legend?-

He helps promote the fear. For those who start to see Bruce as a man he then drafts an unaging "Laughing Devil" child who beats up your friends, he brings hellspawn with him that masquerades with the name of a harmless bird.

 

[Spider-Kurt!]

i'd have a batman movie with already establish vigilantes in gotham - main characters batman (bruce), robin (tim), nightwing (dick), and oracle.

As stated before,I think this is the best way to go. Even though overall I prefer Batman working mostly solo,I think the next interpretation of Batman needs to differ from the last without blatantly stepping on any toes. Having an established Batman working with a top notch team trained by him has a ton of potential.

As for the villain, I think an elite underground criminal empire led by either Black Mask(with a slight nod to the Black Glove) or possibly the Penguin in a role simular to Marvel's Kingpin would best fit.

 

[Boy Scout]

Why he wears less armour-

Because Robin doesn't go out into direct gunfire like Batman does. Once Batman takes out the biggest threat, Robin joins in, distracting them while Batman gets his job done easier. Also, he's an acrobat, so he needs freedom of movement and to be agile.

I agree that Robin shouldn't wear too much armor. But he shouldn't be running around in spandex either.

Why Robin?-

Bruce called himself Batman because of the fear that led to his parent's death. That is what haunts him. Dick called himself Robin as a reminder of his parent's undying love. That is what inspires him.

Works for me.

What does he do for the legend?-

He helps promote the fear. For those who start to see Bruce as a man he then drafts an unaging "Laughing Devil" child who beats up your friends, he brings hellspawn with him that masquerades with the name of a harmless bird.

Someone (in the context of a Young Justice discussion) brought up the idea of the "Laughing Devil." Suffice to say...I dig it.

 

[Spider-Kurt!]

I'd love to see the Riddler not re-worked as a Saw-like killer or an FBI agent but rather an arrogant,obsessive compulsive mastermind "catch me if you can" thief leaving clues/riddles behind to his temperary whereabouts and next schemes.

Determined to make a name for himself in Gotham on par with the likes of the Joker and Two Face by calling himself "the Riddler",he becomes a target after stealing from Norman Madison,Roman Sionis, Thomas Elliot, Rupert Thorn,Oswald Cobblepot and other rich citizens of Gotham. Even Bruce Wayne. Batman,the GCPD and the millionaire's he's stolen from all see who can get to him first.