I'm Reading Your Stuff: General News and Discussion Thread

[SwordOfMorning]

Gunn continues to say things that lead me to believe he's trying to get Battinson in the DCU.

I straight up don't think they know yet. There's some element we're not privy to that is clearly in flux.

 

[Boom]

I straight up don't think they know yet. There's some element we're not privy to that is clearly in flux.

Yeah I'm really curious to know what is happening at this stage that is still causing uncertainty.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

Yeah I'm really curious to know what is happening at this stage that is still causing uncertainty.

Part of me wonders if Reeves is unsure he'll want to make a third movie regardless of II's performance at this point. It seems doubtful that his third movie wouldn't be a super definitive ending for his take that'd make a merger impossible.

The big thing I'm curious about is what Pattinson wants. Gunn would probably side with Reeves wishes over Pattinson's - which is unfortunate, I don't want him in the DCU at all but Pattinson's the person whose opinion on the matter is most relevant to me - but I do wonder if there's been a clear indication of interest from Pattinson.

Very curious. Especially because I do, sincerely, believe that Gunn is highly supportive of Reeves. He talks about Reeves with far more affection and respect than most people.

 

[flickchick85]

I definitely think the uncertainty is over The Batman III. And the nice thing about having Batman II going into production is that they don’t really need an answer anytime soon at all. So we probably shouldn’t expect one lol.

 

[BobJM]

I straight up don't think they know yet. There's some element we're not privy to that is clearly in flux.

Agreed. I don't think Gunn is purposefully being coy; I genuinely think it's up in the air at the moment.

 

[Boom]

I also wonder about Reeves' enthusiasm to continue after Part II at this point. The first movie started production in early 2020. It took two years to get it to the screen. Then it took three and a half years to finish the sequel script. That movie is two years away still. I bet even Reeves didn't think it would take this long to hammer out two movies. The universe seems to keep getting in his way.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

I definitely think the uncertainty is over The Batman III. And the nice thing about having Batman II going into production is that they don’t really need an answer anytime soon at all. So we probably shouldn’t expect one lol.

Another factor on top is that because it isn't DCU, it feels like we sometimes forget II is still a major Batman movie for the same studio that will make the same people a massive amount of money that a DCU Batman would. Gunn has to thread a needle about how the DCU is absolutely going to have a Batman and keeping that in people's heads without undercutting II by making it sound like old news or a red-headed stepchild.

The pressure on having a DCU Batman, imo, is lessened by Superman's success. There has to be a ton of confidence that Corenswet can carry the DCU as its primary lead and have the Superman mythos be the central focus for the first few years.

 

[Boom]

Yeah he probably wishes he didn't have to talk about DCU Batman at all right now, but it keeps coming up. Large elephant in the room.

 

[BobJM]

Gunn even mentioned in a recent interview that he doesn't mind replacing an actor if the need arises. I'm not advocating for this, but what if DCU casts a Pattinson-type & dresses him in a similar enough Batsuit so there is an implied 'loose continuity' with the Reeves saga?

In an ideal world, it'd be Pattinson under the cowl in the DCU (alongside the his gritty solo stories directed by Reeves) but just trying to think of all possibilities.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

Gunn even mentioned in a recent interview that he doesn't mind replacing an actor if the need arises. I'm not advocating for this, but what if DCU casts a Pattinson-type & dresses him in a similar enough Batsuit so there is an implied 'loose continuity' with the Reeves saga?

In an ideal world, it'd be Pattinson under the cowl in the DCU (alongside the his gritty solo stories directed by Reeves) but just trying to think of all possibilities.

Hideous idea that'd defeat the point, imo. My preference is for the Pattinson take to end permanently whenever Reeves stops making the movies but if its Pattinson as Batman or meant to be that version it has to be that version. Otherwise its not really that character anymore so what's the point?

 

[solidsnake86]

As of right now, there is no need to address the DCU Batman. Gunn is working on some form of superman related sequel.

The Batman II is moving forward so no sense in announcing a dcu Batman to shift attention away from that.

Wonder woman moving forward also tells me that Zaslav probably told Gunn you need to have your 3 biggest IP characters in order with films coming out. Especially if he is positioning the company for a sale.

You have 2 of the 3 now successfully established on film. All they have to do is get Wonder Woman right and you would be 3 for 3. Makes no sense to try your luck again and attempt Batman again. Especially with comic book based movies doing poorly at the box office which this year cemented.

 

[BobJM]

Hideous idea that'd defeat the point, imo. My preference is for the Pattinson take to end permanently whenever Reeves stops making the movies but if its Pattinson as Batman or meant to be that version it has to be that version. Otherwise its not really that character anymore so what's the point?

Lol I don’t think it’s that hideous. Audiences are so caught up now with the actors playing the role; it’d be nice if we could normalize re-casting again.

Absolutely, I hope WB extends an offer to Pattinson in this hypothetical scenario—he’s one of the actors I fancast back in the day, so I was thrilled when he was actually cast and then further blown away when I watched (and rewatched, and rewatched) the actual movie. But there’s too much good going on in that universe to toss it all just because Pattinson might not want to join the DCU or share the screen with another hero.

And honestly, we already got a great Batman trilogy with Nolan that gave the character and his world a definitive ending.

I keep going back to the Daredevil Netflix vs. Disney+ example… Even with Marvel’s spotty track record with original series and all the behind-the-scenes drama on Born Again, they still managed to bring a serious, grounded Daredevil into the MCU. Just a few smoothed edges here and there. And as a diehard fan who rewatches all 3 seasons every year, the merging of those two versions totally worked for me. I feel like DC could easily replicate that—and maybe/probably even pull it off better.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

Lol I don’t think it’s that hideous. Audiences are so caught up now with the actors playing the role; it’d be nice if we could normalize re-casting again.

Absolutely, I hope WB extends an offer to Pattinson in this hypothetical scenario—he’s one of the actors I fancast back in the day, so I was thrilled when he was actually cast and then further blown away when I watched (and rewatched, and rewatched) the actual movie. But there’s too much good going on in that universe to toss it all just because Pattinson might not want to join the DCU or share the screen with another hero.

And honestly, we already got a great Batman trilogy with Nolan that gave the character and his world a definitive ending.

I keep going back to the Daredevil Netflix vs. Disney+ example… Even with Marvel’s spotty track record with original series and all the behind-the-scenes drama on Born Again, they still managed to bring a serious, grounded Daredevil into the MCU. Just a few smoothed edges here and there. And as a diehard fan who rewatches all 3 seasons every year, the merging of those two versions totally worked for me. I feel like DC could easily replicate that—and maybe/probably even pull it off better.

Here's the thing though: the take is heavily built around the fact its Robert Pattinson. Actors are not always interchangeable. Especially when they're as unique as Pattinson. It's a totally different movie and character if, say, Reeves had cast Hoult instead. It's never going to actually feel like the same character, so if Pattinson didn't want to do it then why not just let them totally ground up do a new character?

I don't think its impossible for a merger to work at all but if they're doing Battinson it has to be Battinson. It seems spectacularly pointless to just slap the costume on a different guy and pretend its the same version rather than just building a new take.

 

[donuts]

Thankfully filmmakers, including Gunn, have common sense!

Why would you put someone else in a Pattinson-like suit and pretend it's the same version!?

What would the point be?

 

[SwordOfMorning]

It’s also just a good thing for people to be more invested in the performer and the work they’re doing than the IP. The taboo against recasting is mostly a good thing, imo. There’s exceptions to the rule but in cases like this it’d just feel wrong.

 

[Gandhi]

I also wonder about Reeves' enthusiasm to continue after Part II at this point. The first movie started production in early 2020. It took two years to get it to the screen. Then it took three and a half years to finish the sequel script. That movie is two years away still. I bet even Reeves didn't think it would take this long to hammer out two movies. The universe seems to keep getting in his way.

I was going to make this point. By the time Part II comes out, he will have spent 10 years of his life on Batman. There could be a legitimate question of whether he wants to continue. The speed at which he makes movies also makes it unlikely he could do what Nolan did and film something else between two and three.

 

[solidsnake86]

I was going to make this point. By the time Part II comes out, he will have spent 10 years of his life on Batman. There could be a legitimate question of whether he wants to continue. The speed at which he makes movies also makes it unlikely he could do what Nolan did and film something else between two and three.

Nolan to me always seemed like he had one foot out the door and Batman was a means to doing his own passion projects.

When I hear Reeves talk about Batman, it seems like a guy who genuinely loves it and has a lot of ideas for a Batman universe. To me, a guy who is taking pitches for TV series and solo films about villains, he must actually want to stick around.

Obviously, we don't know what his personal issues were so things may have changed over these past 3 years.

 

[donuts]

I feel like Heath Ledger's tragic demise dampened Nolan's enthusiasm for Batman.

Still, he managed to make a really good trilogy capper (I'm a TDKR fan), but it does feel like it's a more "distracted" movie.

 

[solidsnake86]

Just saw an interview with Colin Farrell saying he has the script and that he was going to read it tomorrow (who knows when the interview was actually done).

I really can't wait to see which actors they get for the sequel. I feel like the first movie had the baggage of the dceu and the stigma of another reboot which may have turned some actors away from it.

 

[Lily Adler]

Gunn continues to say things that lead me to believe he's trying to get Battinson in the DCU.

 

[Johnny Frost]

Just saw an interview with Colin Farrell saying he has the script and that he was going to read it tomorrow (who knows when the interview was actually done).

I really can't wait to see which actors they get for the sequel. I feel like the first movie had the baggage of the dceu and the stigma of another reboot which may have turned some actors away from it.

Can you tell me where to find the interview?

 

[dhandler01]

Part of me wonders if Reeves is unsure he'll want to make a third movie regardless of II's performance at this point. It seems doubtful that his third movie wouldn't be a super definitive ending for his take that'd make a merger impossible.

The big thing I'm curious about is what Pattinson wants. Gunn would probably side with Reeves wishes over Pattinson's - which is unfortunate, I don't want him in the DCU at all but Pattinson's the person whose opinion on the matter is most relevant to me - but I do wonder if there's been a clear indication of interest from Pattinson.

Very curious. Especially because I do, sincerely, believe that Gunn is highly supportive of Reeves. He talks about Reeves with far more affection and respect than most people.

I agree with all of this.

 

[Sawyer]

Superman’s entire approach (full sci-fi/fantasy in a world of established heroes) is directly at odds with everything Reeves has said about his Batman (grounded, grounded, grounded), so I don’t think Gunn is angling for Pattinson to be in the DCU as much as he’s just kind of kicking the DCU Batman can down the road a bit.

It’s hard enough just to bring Batman to the screen without the added challenge of having him right alongside another take on Batman that’s already successful. I say hold off a bit, let Reeves do his thing, focus on building out Superman’s corner of the universe/bringing back Wonder Woman/etc. Bide your time with Gotham-set, Batman-adjacent projects (Clayface, the animated Dynamic Duo, the potential Cregger film) and pave the way for his eventual debut. At the moment, I believe Batman is the one character from the Big Two who could actually support that kind of strategy (parting shot at Sony).

But I think audiences are overdue for an all-ages Batman take in the same model as what we just saw with Superman. Nolan and Reeves did their dark, grounded thing, Todd Phillips’s Joker was barely palatable for anyone, and the Snyder/Affleck take botched what should’ve been an all-ages superhero Batman. Let’s make good on that premise.

 

[solidsnake86]

Can you tell me where to find the interview?

It's from Josh Horowitz. Not sure if this will work:

 

[donuts]

Superman’s entire approach (full sci-fi/fantasy in a world of established heroes) is directly at odds with everything Reeves has said about his Batman (grounded, grounded, grounded), so I don’t think Gunn is angling for Pattinson to be in the DCU as much as he’s just kind of kicking the DCU Batman can down the road a bit.

It’s hard enough just to bring Batman to the screen without the added challenge of having him right alongside another take on Batman that’s already successful. I say hold off a bit, let Reeves do his thing, focus on building out Superman’s corner of the universe/bringing back Wonder Woman/etc. Bide your time with Gotham-set, Batman-adjacent projects (Clayface, the animated Dynamic Duo, the potential Cregger film) and pave the way for his eventual debut. At the moment, I believe Batman is the one character from the Big Two who could actually support that kind of strategy (parting shot at Sony).

But I think audiences are overdue for an all-ages Batman take in the same model as what we just saw with Superman. Nolan and Reeves did their dark, grounded thing, Todd Phillips’s Joker was barely palatable for anyone, and the Snyder/Affleck take botched what should’ve been an all-ages superhero Batman. Let’s make good on that premise.

Yeah, it's time for a 1989-1997 style "blockbuster" Batman, but this time 'more faithful to the comics' than Burton / with the right amount character development and good writing and less camp than Schumacher.

Also wouldn't mind seeing a new Batman shot in the 1.85/1.90:1 aspect ratio instead of scope.

Ideally, a DCU Batman movie would feel like you've just opened up a regular series Batman issue from certain eras (the best ones, lol).

While The Batman Saga is the Black Label title for mature readers.