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

[C Prometheus]

See, I thought Arkham Asylum / Hugo Strange when I saw “scarier” in that post ... we’ve never seen Batman locked up beside the criminals he’s put there. Plus, it gives the Joker a moment to shine.

Though you could replace the Court’s Labrinyth with Arkham and get a similar effect.

See, I'm really frustrated here, because I WANT your idea here to be legit, as I think it's long overdue for Hugo Strange to get his flowers in live action.

Unfortunately, I struggle to think that's what we're likely getting here after I also remembered Reeves' previous comments from last year at the Penguin press tour, namely how the film's mystery continues on from pieces of information we had in the first film and explores a "deeper corruption" that was lying underneath it.

 

[OnLeatherWings]

I'm sure Reeves will make it compelling, it's just that on paper, the idea of "We did corruption in the first film...but we're going to corruption even harder!" isn't that exciting to me so far.

'How deep does it go?' stories feel played out, these days.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

Idk, I think it could easily be less literal ancient conspiracy Court stuff (please God) and more just other sides of what’s wrong with Gotham. Could be exploring the role corporations and big money play in the city rather than organized crime.

Reeves whole thing to me seems like a big pulpy allegory for America, using Gotham as a kind of failed state to explore it.

 

[Mindreaper21]

Being that all the clues are in the first film and the main villain has personal ties to Bruce and his past, I still believe it’s Hush. Though, I believe this film is also going to take us deep in the bowels of Arkham Asylum.

 

[donuts]

I do not look forward to the fan wars of DCU's Batman VS Reeves' that we'll have to endure until the end of time. We know it's coming.

And yes, Batmen were always compared to one another and fans fought - but never in real time with two simultaneous ones ongoing. That's a whole different ballgame.

I can see some fans 'boycotting' one over another. Ugh.

Fans need to grow up and get over it already.

That's like complaining that you had stories like Batman: The Imposter coming out simultaneously to Ram V's Detective Comics or Mark Waid's World's Finest or whatever.

Complete non-issue. Just more goodness for us to experience in theaters.

 

[solidsnake86]

Audiences are absolutely more choosy than ever with their money at the BO - but they're still choosing to throw their cash at stuff like Jurassic World and Minecraft. to push those into $1B territory, not Batman, Superman or Fantastic 4 despite far better reviews.

They're literally saying with their wallets "Yes, I know this CB film is a better film, but I would rather see a worse film featuring dinosaurs duking it out instead."

If that isn't some form of genre-fatigue, I don't know what is. It was inevitable. We'll still have our big hits here and there, but.

Nothing stays on top forever.


Yes, we call that fatigue.

Truthfully, comic book movies aren't really bringing anything new to the table. Even when superman returns came out, we hadn't really seen flying done all that often. Now every hero has some form of flight so the uniqueness has worn off.

I was a big comic book fan growing up, but as life changes you don't have time for everything. I would never have believed that I would be skipping most of the marvel stuff now but I don't have a burning desire to watch it.

My point is, if I'm bored with it, the general audience may not have an appetite for it and in this quest to have a DCU batman, they may end up screwing both the reevesverse and the DCU up. But, I still think no ceo will allow 2 batman franchises and before anyone says that Gunn is in charge, give me a break, he clearly has been told to focus on superman and get wonder woman going because that wasn't part of his initial plan.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

Thing is: doesn't matter if we think its a bad idea or that a CEO wouldn't allow it, they're doing two separate Batmen simultaneously. DCU Batman will probably get cast at some point during the build up to or right after the release of Part II. I'm sure there's trepidation, but I'm also sure that they also see dollar signs at the prospect of MORE BATMAN ENDLESS BATMAN ALL THE TIME.

It's one of the dumber scenarios but all evidence points to it being what is happening.

 

[Erik Lensherr]

I don't like how Colin always says how small his role is. He said the same thing before The Batman. It's like a spoiler for me. Why he doing this everytime?

 

[SwordOfMorning]

I don't like how Colin always says how small his role is. He said the same thing before The Batman. It's like a spoiler for me. Why he doing this everytime?

How is knowing that a minor supporting character is a minor supporting character a spoiler?

Part of it is downplaying expectations that this movie is a sequel or very direct followup to The Penguin, as well, I'd say.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

How is knowing that a minor supporting character is a minor supporting character a spoiler?

Part of it is downplaying expectations that this movie is a sequel or very direct followup to The Penguin, as well, I'd say.

And yet we will still get people swearing they are his biggest fans complaining, "he was barely in it!"

 

[OnLeatherWings]

Fans need to grow up and get over it already.

That's like complaining that you had stories like Batman: The Imposter coming out simultaneously to Ram V's Detective Comics or Mark Waid's World's Finest or whatever.

Complete non-issue. Just more goodness for us to experience in theaters.

It's a non-issue for us hardcores. But if you want these stories to be successful, they have to consistently appeal to casuals and not confuse them or make them choose.

This is why comics nearly died in the '90s. The barrier for entry was too high and confusing.

It's funny how you mention concurrent Batman stories in comics because yes - even comic fans get fatigued at separate canons going on simultaneously. And they usually live for this geeky stuff.

Joe Public doesn't know about all these studio issues or conflicts of simultaneous universes and such.

He just doesn't get why there's 2 Batman film series and that's when he, like many, often tune out.

 

[donuts]

It's a non-issue for us hardcores. But if you want these stories to be successful, they have to consistently appeal to casuals and not confuse them or make them choose.

This is why comics nearly died in the '90s. The barrier for entry was too high and confusing.

It's funny how you mention concurrent Batman stories in comics because yes - even comic fans get fatigued at separate canons going on simultaneously. And they usually live for this geeky stuff.

Joe Public doesn't know about all these studio issues or conflicts of simultaneous universes and such.

He just doesn't get why there's 2 Batman film series and that's when he, like many, often tune out.

James Gunn said it best:

Yeah, but sometimes. But is it causing anybody grief in any way? I think it was the same thing. I think that people are really starting to learn about stuff like that. Will it ever cause? One of the weirdest things for me is that big fans are often like, "Well, listen, I understand this, but normies will never understand this. Casuals will never understand this." But the truth is, guys, that you're the ones that don't understand.

The casuals always understand. You can say, "Oh, yeah, he's changed Peacemaker, there was some Justice League [characters that] was in that. Now it's Justice Gang." And regular people who just like TV shows are like, "Oh, okay. That's weird." And then they're done. But the people who really focus on this stuff, they're in our bubble. And the people in our bubble think that everyone outside of that bubble is too stupid to understand nuance. And it is just totally not the case.

I whole heartedly agree.

I believe that fans need to chill instead of having this weird frustration, belief and need to have some "passive control" about what's "true" about these fictional stories.

The point is and should be to read, watch and enjoy good stories. And then, maybe, discuss its writing, nuances, emotions, themes.

More often than not I see discussions veering into " robotic" territory (" DC and Marvel Studios should structure their slate and release strategy like THIS, because I said so") , losing sight of why we're fans in the first place (THE STORIES).

I find it weird how fandom has been mostly reduced to "I'm playing wannabe studio exec and this is how you run movies and series," with a very cynical edge in addition to that.

And no, that doesn't mean you need to blindly consume and like everything.

 

[OnLeatherWings]

James Gunn said it best.

I whole heartedly agree.

It's not that people are too stupid. They're too busy.

And in a declining genre, making the barrier for following any bit higher, is a risky ask.

It all could go well, don't get me wrong. I'm okay with more Batman.

But I'm still skeptical these two films won't cannibalize each other in some form or another.

 

[donuts]

It's not that people are too stupid. They're too busy.

And in a declining genre, making the barrier for following any bit higher, is a risky ask.

It all could go well, don't get me wrong. I'm okay with more Batman.

But I'm still skeptical these two films won't cannibalize each other in some form or another.

I don't think that the general audience really has much trouble enjoying two different Batman stories.

If they like the trailers and think it looks cool, they'll watch it.

If they have doubts about it or the studio turns one of the two into a musical, they won't.

People have much bigger stuff to think about. They go to the movies to have a good time.

The fandom on the other side.....

 

[Johnny Frost]

I'll be surprised and a little disappointed if Reeves made Bruce an Arkham and didn't do anything really interesting with it, really hoping that Arkham is part of this deeper corruption. There's definitely something strange about the circumstances of Martha's parents' death and how it was covered up.

 

[Gandhi]

See, I'm really frustrated here, because I WANT your idea here to be legit, as I think it's long overdue for Hugo Strange to get his flowers in live action.

Unfortunately, I struggle to think that's what we're likely getting here after I also remembered Reeves' previous comments from last year at the Penguin press tour, namely how the film's mystery continues on from pieces of information we had in the first film and explores a "deeper corruption" that was lying underneath it.

As @Johnny Frost also noted, the “deeper corruption” and seeds from the first film could be Riddler’s video about Martha and the Arkhams. The claim that her mother murdered her father then committed suicide and the Arkhams covered it up.

 

[Boom]

Yeah, I'm thinking the "deeper corruption" will have something to do with the Arkham family. That's the one seed from the first movie that hasn't truly born fruit yet, but we're already seeing a pattern form with The Batman and The Penguin.

-The Arkhams covered up the deaths of Martha's parents.
-The Arkhams covered up Martha's mental illness and her time in the asylum.
-Carmine Falcone framed Sofia for the Hangman murders and had her locked up in the asylum.
-Sofia and Alberto Falcone used the "candy" pills in the asylum as the basis for their Bliss drug.

The Arkham family not only has enormous political influence, but their asylum is used by Gotham's elite to get certain people out of the picture and to launder criminal activity. So there's your corruption, and it's made more personal since Bruce is related to the family.

The Riddler already exposed that the city was run by a "shadow group" of police, politicians, and socialites under the command of Carmine Falcone. To then say "Oh well there's actually a secret society behind that too" seems derivative to me.

 

[OnLeatherWings]

The Riddler already exposed that the city was run by a "shadow group" of police, politicians, and socialites under the command of Carmine Falcone. To then say "Oh well there's actually a secret society behind that too" seems derivative to me.

This is where I'm at.

The idea of it sounds like a repeat, and one that's contrived. The whole 'Golly, how deep does it go???' is a bit of a cliche.

I think Gotham is far more complex and interesting that we can explore other avenues of injustice without going back to the corruption well.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

Yeah, I'm thinking the "deeper corruption" will have something to do with the Arkham family. That's the one seed from the first movie that hasn't truly born fruit yet, but we're already seeing a pattern form with The Batman and The Penguin.

-The Arkhams covered up the deaths of Martha's parents.
-The Arkhams covered up Martha's mental illness and her time in the asylum.
-Carmine Falcone framed Sofia for the Hangman murders and had her locked up in the asylum.
-Sofia and Alberto Falcone used the "candy" pills in the asylum as the basis for their Bliss drug.

The Arkham family not only has enormous political influence, but their asylum is used by Gotham's elite to get certain people out of the picture and to launder criminal activity. So there's your corruption, and it's made more personal since Bruce is related to the family.

The Riddler already exposed that the city was run by a "shadow group" of police, politicians, and socialites under the command of Carmine Falcone. To then say "Oh well there's actually a secret society behind that too" seems derivative to me.

Same. My big issue with Court as a concept in this world is it just doesn’t really click to me with the kind of story Reeves is telling. That all being said: if Court shows up I bet they’ll be so utterly stripped down it’s just visual flair for corporate/upper crust villains to the point it will make a lot of people very mad lol

 

[Boom]

This is where I'm at.

The idea of it sounds like a repeat, and one that's contrived. The whole 'Golly, how deep does it go???' is a bit of a cliche.

I think Gotham is far more complex and interesting that we can explore other avenues of injustice without going back to the corruption well.

Exactly. And while people are concerned that Hush would be too similar to Riddler, I don't see why that same sentiment isn't shared with the Court of Owls. Just because the Renewal Project conspirators didn't have a flashy name or iconography doesn't change the fact that the basic concept is the same. You're getting yet another group of powerful Gothamites pulling the strings behind the scenes. Doesn't sound all that exciting.

 

[OnLeatherWings]

Exactly. And just as people are concerned that Hush would be too similar to Riddler, I don't see why that same sentiment isn't shared with the Court of Owls. Just because the Renewal Project conspirators didn't have a flashy name or iconography doesn't change the fact that the basic concept is the same.

Agreed. And how is the audience supposed to react to this? Surprised?

That hand was played already. You don't want people to just go 'Oh, wow. More corruption, I'm sooo shocked /s'.

 

[Boom]

Doesn't help that literally everybody and their mother is predicting the Court for Part II. Reeves and Tomlin (I think) suggested that the villain would surprise us. I sure as hell hope so.

 

[dhandler01]

Thing is: doesn't matter if we think its a bad idea or that a CEO wouldn't allow it, they're doing two separate Batmen simultaneously. DCU Batman will probably get cast at some point during the build up to or right after the release of Part II. I'm sure there's trepidation, but I'm also sure that they also see dollar signs at the prospect of MORE BATMAN ENDLESS BATMAN ALL THE TIME.

It's one of the dumber scenarios but all evidence points to it being what is happening.

Lets be real...even if we assume that this happens (and right now there is no need for it) it isn't like they will actually be side by side. It will likely take Reeves a long time to even write the script for The Batman III (assuming he even decides he wants to) so its not even really going to be a thing. Most people won't even think about it.

 

[dhandler01]

It's not that people are too stupid. They're too busy.

And in a declining genre, making the barrier for following any bit higher, is a risky ask.

It all could go well, don't get me wrong. I'm okay with more Batman.

But I'm still skeptical these two films won't cannibalize each other in some form or another.

What barrier? You are acting like people can't take 3 seconds to think after watching a trailer. This isn't 1996 people have access to the answers to any possible questions they might have...and 99% of them won't even bother to worry about it.

I think you are way overthinking this.

 

[dhandler01]

James Gunn said it best:



I whole heartedly agree.

I believe that fans need to chill instead of having this weird frustration, belief and need to have some "passive control" about what's "true" about these fictional stories.

The point is and should be to read, watch and enjoy good stories. And then, maybe, discuss its writing, nuances, emotions, themes.

More often than not I see discussions veering into " robotic" territory (" DC and Marvel Studios should structure their slate and release strategy like THIS, because I said so") , losing sight of why we're fans in the first place (THE STORIES).

I find it weird how fandom has been mostly reduced to "I'm playing wannabe studio exec and this is how you run movies and series," with a very cynical edge in addition to that.

And no, that doesn't mean you need to blindly consume and like everything.

Wrestling fans do the same thing. And they get really angry and insufferable when their fantasy booking isn't how it plays out and then blames the powers that be that they didn't do things the way they (the fans) decided it should be done even though The Booker is the guy writing the story and knows what beats to tell. Its painful to deal with sometimes...