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

[BatLobster]

Flashbacks would be very Godfather Part II and MOTP-coded. Plus, The Penguin had a flashback so it's already been done in this world.

I'm also warming more to the idea of adding layers to Bruce's character through flashbacks. I don't think it needs to be the case that he's been exactly the same miserable shell of a man we see in The Batman for his whole life. I think being disillusioned after two years in the cowl can answer for a lot of that. How we meet him in the first movie doesn't mean he couldn't have been in love or been torn by the notion of living a normal life at any point in his past. I think a story that expands in both directions would give Pattinson a lot to chew on to craft a more three-dimensional character and give a more coherent throughline to arrive at the public persona Bruce vs. just conjuring a new personality out of thin air.

 

[Luke995]

I think Godfather Part II will be a reference and yes, it could be somehow parallel to the present.

But I don't think that having Andrea or a similar figure force the story to go to the past.
I think that, trying to be the Bruce-persona and finding difficult to be the Batman, Bruce could embrace the idea to abandon Batman in the present (as in MOTP is the storyline in the past), since he realizes in the third act he must continue.

Like in Spiderman 2, but in a more tragic way. He understands that he needs to balance Bruce and Batman.
I still think that Dick Grayson, in this context, for the arc of Bruce would be just gold.

 

[dhandler01]

I could be completely wrong of course, but I'm frankly not sure if I buy such radical departures from the comics that people are proposing with an A-list villain like Two-Face after how faithful Penguin, Catwoman and just to a lesser degree Riddler were.

If it was a villain like Mad Hatter, Professor Pyg or Black Mask, sure.

But Two-Face?

Eh.

It also seems to me that the main motivation for these radical departures is to differentiate it from The Dark Knight rather than it actually being a good story.

I kind of agree. Most of these ideas seem very thin and more trying to get previous hopes and ideas to match what we (think we) know already.

And to be honest...a lot of it feels unneeded and rather overstuffed imho.

I think the story is going to be way more straightforward than people around here seem to think.

 

[BobJM]

Would love MOTP/Godfather Pt II type flashbacks.

And I agree that, given the current rumors, Dent Sr. is likely a key suspect. As Batman investigates Dent Sr., he learns more about his friend Harvey's troubled past (including a stint at Arkham that opens old wounds for Bruce re: his mother)

Dent. Sr is a mover & shaker from Gotham City's old guard, so Bruce re-enters high society circles to investigate. Or maybe he's the Valestra character from MOTP--he brings in the Joker when Phantasm starts killing his peers. Oz can be the Maroni figure that ends up scarring Dent Jr. in court.

 

[BatLobster]

Would love MOTP/Godfather Pt II type flashbacks.

And I agree that, given the current rumors, Dent Sr. is likely a key suspect. As Batman investigates Dent Sr., he learns more about his friend Harvey's troubled past (including a stint at Arkham that opens old wounds for Bruce re: his mother)

Dent. Sr is a mover & shaker from Gotham City's old guard, so Bruce re-enters high society circles to investigate. Or maybe he's the Valestra character from MOTP--he brings in the Joker when Phantasm starts killing his peers. Oz can be the Maroni figure that ends up scarring Dent Jr. in court.

I can't help but feel like this is starting to get warmer. Sounds pretty awesome to me anyway. I think when you can start finding organic ways to mash up/update and bridge together various established story arcs is when you start getting a window into the thought process of how a filmmaker is likely to mine the source material to distill it into a movie.

I think that, trying to be the Bruce-persona and finding difficult to be the Batman, Bruce could embrace the idea to abandon Batman in the present (as in MOTP is the storyline in the past), since he realizes in the third act he must continue.

The only thing is that this then does start to feel a bit close to TDK/Spider-Man 2 to me. Doesn't mean it can't work but I do feel like expanding using the sequel to expand on the backstory could really unlock a lot of doors for the story. Flashbacks are tricky because you don't want to undercut the urgency of the present day story too much, but if weaved together in the right way where it's sprinkled in just enough to always be driving the story forward and illuminating character (think the first act of Batman Begins) then it can really add a lot of richness.

 

[Boom]

Just gonna compile some Matt Reeves quotes together, now that we're starting to get some character rumors here.

It's going to dig into the epic story about deeper corruption and it goes into places he [Bruce Wayne] couldn't even anticipate in the first one. The seeds of where this goes are all in the first movie and it expands in a way that will show you aspects of the character you never got to see. Batman is constantly battling these forces, but those forces can’t be entirely exorcised. So the next movie delves deeper into that.

There's a lot of unrest and there's a lot of clamoring because of the revelations of what we find out at the end of the first movie. There's unrest in the streets to say, 'Well, how could this be?'. The idea that this corruption extends as deep as it extends. In the first movie, Batman views things very simplistically, he sees things in black and white. What he can represent and how he can affect that. As we enter into the next movie, there's a lot more gray. There's a lot more people at odds. There’s a lot more division in the city. It's a lot more like our world is now, there's a lot of turmoil because people are in their camps, and they're not communicating. How does Batman fit into that? Where do you fit? It's not as clear as going, 'Oh yeah, bad guy, I go after bad guys'. And when things are in gray, it makes it very hard to be Batman, so this is part of the challenge as we enter it.

Picking the right villain that digs... into his past and his life, that was what sort of drove that discussion, and I won't tell you where we ended up but I'm super excited about it. And I will say it’s never really been done in a movie before. So we’re excited.

 

[BatLobster]

Thanks @Boom. I keep thinking about the "deeper corruption" part but I had forgotten about "those forces can't be entirely exorcised" part of the same quote.

Not going to help my Derangement Syndrome unfortunately.

 

[Lily Adler]

Thanks @Boom. I keep thinking about the "deeper corruption" part but I had forgotten about "those forces can't be entirely exorcised" part of the same quote.

Not going to help my Derangement Syndrome unfortunately.

 

[Boom]

After Thomas Wayne died, they all went after it like vultures. The mayor, Falcone, Maroni - everyone got in on it. It was perfect for making bribes, laundering money. A huge charitable fund with no oversight? Everybody got a piece. But Falcone wanted more. So we orchestrated a play to take Maroni down, big. He ratted out his drops operation, made the careers of everybody that went after him, then installed them all as his puppets. You think this goddamn election matters? Falcone's the mayor. He's been the mayor for the last twenty years.

Through the Renewal Program, Falcone was able to take down his biggest rival, consolidate organized crime under his control, and place lackeys in key positions of power within Gotham's political and criminal justice systems so that he and his operations were effectively untouchable. The implication here is that Carmine Falcone basically ran Gotham City.

If the Court of Owls exists, and they're the real movers and shakers of Gotham, wouldn't they have had the means and resources to take Falcone down if he was weakening or outright contesting their hold on the city? So why couldn't they? And if they could've stopped him but didn't, why was he allowed to run Gotham for twenty years? How would they have stood to benefit? Was he completely oblivious to their existence or was he a knowing participant in their schemes?

The first movie focused on corruption within Gotham's political and criminal justice systems, and I think this thread was essentially tied up with The Penguin. Falcone is dead, Maroni is dead, Gigante is in Arkham Asylum, and Oswald has made moves to consolidate organized crime under his control and plant seeds of influence within City Hall. I don't think there's more to uncover here, unless it comes out that Falcone was in league with the Court. So where does Oswald fit into their plans moving forward?

I think whatever deeper corruption Reeves is talking about extends beyond Gotham's political and criminal justice systems and has more to do with its broader sociopolitical spheres. That's where you're talking about the social elite - the wealthy families that have built their influence into the very foundations of the city over the course of generations.

If I'm on the right track here, then the question comes down to this: How do the Dents factor into that?

 

[WatchProtect]

Agree with everything Boom just said the “deeper corruption leading him to places he never imagined.” Always seemed like to me that it would lead into different infrastructures besides Politics, like Arkham for sure, which is technically the medical industry, and eventually we maybe see more of Blackgate, which would obviously be criminal.

 

[Luke995]

I also wonder: the system will target Nashton for having killed Falcone?
Or, on the other side, Nashton was somehow a pawn?

Anyway yes, everything leads to Arkham.

 

[SwordOfMorning]

Agree with everything Boom just said the “deeper corruption leading him to places he never imagined.” Always seemed like to me that it would lead into different infrastructures besides Politics, like Arkham for sure, which is technically the medical industry, and eventually we maybe see more of Blackgate, which would obviously be criminal.

This. Reeves, to me, feels like he'd be a lot more interested in doing something more akin to The Wire than Eyes Wide Shut. An overly lofty comparison and also Eyes Wide Shut is not about what people big into conspiracy theories think its about, but point stands. More grounded institutional corruption than a a literal Conspiracy or Cult.

Obviously, you could do this with the Court. We all know a Reeves Court would be massively understated.

 

[Luke995]

Do you think we'll have a Christmas present from Reeves? Or we'll wait the new year?

 

[BobJM]

I don't like the idea that Riddler was a pawn in some bigger scheme... feels like Spectre when Blofeld was like "oh yes, and Silva from the movie you all liked better--that was my plan too!"

It would just be interesting for Reeves to explore how deep Gotham City corruption runs beyond the Falcone family.

 

[BatLobster]

Through the Renewal Program, Falcone was able to take down his biggest rival, consolidate organized crime under his control, and place lackeys in key positions of power within Gotham's political and criminal justice systems so that he and his operations were effectively untouchable. The implication here is that Carmine Falcone basically ran Gotham City.

If the Court of Owls exists, and they're the real movers and shakers of Gotham, wouldn't they have had the means and resources to take Falcone down if he was weakening or outright contesting their hold on the city? So why couldn't they? And if they could've stopped him but didn't, why was he allowed to run Gotham for twenty years? How would they have stood to benefit? Was he completely oblivious to their existence or was he a knowing participant in their schemes?

The first movie focused on corruption within Gotham's political and criminal justice systems, and I think this thread was essentially tied up with The Penguin. Falcone is dead, Maroni is dead, Gigante is in Arkham Asylum, and Oswald has made moves to consolidate organized crime under his control and plant seeds of influence within City Hall. I don't think there's more to uncover here, unless it comes out that Falcone was in league with the Court. So where does Oswald fit into their plans moving forward?

I think whatever deeper corruption Reeves is talking about extends beyond Gotham's political and criminal justice systems and has more to do with its broader sociopolitical spheres. That's where you're talking about the social elite - the wealthy families that have built their influence into the very foundations of the city over the course of generations.

See, I don’t think the existence of the mob negates the relevance of some older elite power factions in Gotham at all. I mean just for instance- you could say that where the mob represents the aspect of the 20th century immigrants carving out their piece of the pie in Gotham, while the Court would represent the old money power. There could’ve been some sort of power struggle or turf war there. Maybe the mob diminished The Court’s power but now with both Falcone and Maroni gone, remnants of the Court see an opportunity to grab it back and Oz has kicked up a hornet’s nest without realizing it. There are multiple plausible ways to fill out a history there. Some of Falcone’s last words alluded to secrets he’s taking to his grave- this after he’s already been exposed in the Renewal thing. It also seems highly unlikely to me that nobody before Edward Nashton was able to piece that all together. It seems that maybe a better question to ask is how/why had that story not come to light much sooner? I think at the root of Reeves’ comments is the question of *why* does Gotham stay stuck in this perpetual loop of corruption? I think the answer almost has to be that there’s a more complex history and deeper roots to it than what was uncovered in the first movie, which Reeves more or less says flat out. I think it could make for something extremely prescient when you look at something like Epstein, and the fact that it’s seemingly only become a bigger story in recent years even though the evidence of his actions and some of his associations hasn’t ever been too hard to find.

Either way, I think we’re talking about the same thing- exploring the corruption of the social elite and how that has played in role in creating the present day state of Gotham. Just different ways of getting there. I’m not saying it has to be The Court, but I do happen to think it’s just an inherently cinematic way to make those kinds of ideas pop more for a Batman movie and from a writing standpoint it’s a useful device for connecting a bunch of seemingly disparate threads. But I mean there are ways you can loosely adapt it too. “The Court of Owls” could just be a codename for a tight circle of elite families and you don’t go all the way with Talons and all the rest. I just think thematically, we’re essentially talking dealing about the same thing and it’s just a question of how much do you turn up the creepy, comic booky knob on that. I feel there is definitely room to crank that way up in the sequel. And just to be clear, no I’m not saying this movie should to go full Eyes Wide Shut and make it about weird sex stuff. But I think the trope of a nefarious elite secret society is just sitting right there with zeitgeisty vibes all over it, begging to be put in arguably the darkest cinematic take on Batman we’ve had yet. I think it’s an interesting debate though and totally open to be wrong.

 

[Gandhi]

Do you think we'll have a Christmas present from Reeves? Or we'll wait the new year?

I think if we don’t hear anything by the end of this week, that’ll be it until at least mid January. We might get a post on Christmas Day but not to reveal any news.