Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Justice League' started by Thread Manager, Apr 18, 2013.
This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]455615[/split]
This is a continuation thread, the old thread is [split]454953[/split]
If Nolan's ways are used lol
I'm just making sure, after seeing the Man of Steel trailer I think it's clear Zack Snyder is going to direct Justice League. Agree?
These cycles are getting shorter and shorter. We had what, 16 years with RotJ and TPM from 83' to 99'. Indy 4, which was just a sequel, 19 years later. 8 years from BnR to BB. 5 years for the Hulk and Spidey reboots. I don't think it is sustainable.
The studios have to buy time if they really want to maximize profits. I think 2015 is too soon for Star Wars, but they plan on bringing back the original cast in more than cameo appearances. In that regard, I can forgive it. Right now, I don't touch Batman until after the Superman trilogy, UNLESS they had a story with Bale. I just think you are cutting it too close and audiences will get the "same old" feeling. You want the next set of movies to be watched by the children of predecessors within the audience. If you target the same generation, there is no way you can come close to recouping that box office haul from the previous set of films.
With Goyer writing and Nolan Producing.
Meh on Goyer writing. If Jonathan Nolan or Chris is helping him I'm cool. I think Goyer is ok but his best work comes from when he has someone with him like Nolan.
Just thought I'd share this:
It seems that Goyer and co will already be hinting at this ancient alien idea with this film (MoS). Food for thought for a potential JL or even WF.
Darkseid I hope
Wasn't Darkseid an ancient evil in Smallville? God no ****ing cloud ******** if you do Darkseid.
Absolutely man. I agree 100 %.
Why sacrifice a rebooted Batman in a shared universe, and go for a Batman that the director is saying
"He doesn't work in a shared superhero universe"?
Nolan has stated his Batman shouldn't be in a shared universe. He believes it. He doesn't mind other directors ignoring his sentiments that heroes should be confined to their own unique settings. He's only producing somebody else's vision.
He doesn't want his vision and belief tampered with.
How is that disrespectful to the Batman mythos? The only thing WB has made clear so far with their DC movie plans is that they intend to continue with the grounded approach of TDKT and MoS. To reboot Batman, in order to satisfy comic book purists (which I consider myself to be), would be completely pointless, and it would simply be a retread of Nolan's take. There is no need for a more fantastical Batman in a grounded JL (you're assuming that JL is going to be more fantastical, it most likely will not be), and I bet you money that audiences will not be receptive to a new Batman unless a considerable amount of time has passed. I would say 7 years at the minimum. If JL comes within the next 5 years, people are going to want to see Bale as Batman, not someone else. It's too soon for a reboot.
Let's agree to disagree on this one.
Training is nothing, the will is everything. The Batman of TDKT, when he can muster the will, can accomplish anything he puts his mind to.
You're making way too many assumptions about what the rest of the team will be like. If MoS is any indication, the other DC characters will also undergo changes to fit in this new, realistic take. You make it sound like Bruce is an old fart - he is not. 40 is not old, especially in today's day and age.
Nolan has changed his mind before, and he can change it again. The man is human, after all. As shauner said, he works one film at a time.
And I am positive that if his brother or Goyer pitched him a good story that works, he would definitely come on board. Nolan is a story oriented director first and foremost, and if you convince him that the story is worth it, then why not?
I AM thinking long term. WB seems intent on getting JL out within the next few years. MoS will initiate the shared universe, and who is involved? The very same creative elements that gave this generation its Batman. You have Goyer, Zimmer, and both Nolans. By not connecting MoS to the Nolan trilogy, you're bringing about a sense of creative disjointedness. There are too many connections in place for this not to happen, and in addition to all the others reasons I've stated countless times, rebooting Batman with such similar creative elements would be A WASTE OF TIME. And I am confidant that WB knows this.
We don't need more solo-Bat movies, and the audiences sure as hell won't need them for many years. The market is oversaturated with superhero films as it is, and team up movies seem to be the new big thing now, which WB is trying to capitalize on.
The Nolan films were very successful in part because they spoke to contemporary society's concerns; those films had something to say. And it seems that MoS will potentially make that same connection with audiences. What will a rebooted Batman do? What's the point of rebooting if there is nothing new to say or contribute? If you ask me, there is no point, and I'm standing by that. You are more than free to feel differently.
Nolan and Snyder said the same exact thing about Superman, and now they're playing a completely different tune. Trust me when I say that if all right the cards fall in place, Nolan will come around on Batman as well. It all depends on the story and its execution. Hook Nolan on the story, and you got yourself a deal.
I think the reason why we're hearing Nolan being hesitant about all of this is because of Interstellar. El mayimbe and others are assuming that he doesn't want his trilogy tampered with - I actually don't buy that (although there may be some truth to it). Nolan is completely focused on Interstellar right now, and he probably doesn't even want to consider thinking about getting involved with JL until that film is out of the way.
Well until the day WB confirms they don't want anymore solo Batman films, which is still the opposite at this point, I'm not sure.
I think Eradicator and shuaner111 have won me over. I wouldn't want it to come at the expense of the MOS franchise, but if they are absolutely intent on building towards JL... I think I'm in favor now of tying in the Nolanverse. You guys make some pretty good points. You've converted me.
I tend to doubt Nolan will come around on JLA as far as it connecting to TDK triligy. That said , I think his idea of MOS being its own universe, isolated from the exisistance of other heroes is a non-starter for WB . It looks like they're willing to respect Nolan's standpoint on TDK films , but as far as MOS, no so much.
I think as far as WB is concerned ,that film will open the door to a wider DCU on film regardless of whatever the original intention was with making MOS. If Campa's source's info comes to fruitition , that's a sign to me that WB is saying "We want this project done, Nolan or not . Full steam ahead". This project has more lives than Freddy Kruger.
I don't think TDK Trilogy should be tied.
First off no more Joker. You just can't have another actor be Heaths Joker. That was Heath's Joker. He made that role is own.
Second off no fantasy villains. The way Nolan set this up has no fantasy villains. Villains like Mr Freeze, Croc, Clayface, Ivy and others can't work.
Third no more Two-Face. He died in TDK you can't bring him back.
Fourth no more Ra's. The Lazarus Pit doesn't exist.
Fifth no Dick Grayson.
Sixth the ending of TDKR. You can't change that. You can't have Bruce come back.
Seventh the Wayne Manor is full of kids.
Eighth Wayne has no money. He gave it all away.
Ninth, no one wants John Blake.
Tenth people want a Batman more like the Arkham games. If you can do that then it can work and people will love it.
Eleventh, Batman's sacrifice for Gotham doesn't seem as epic.
Twelve, Batman had trouble fighting dogs so you really expect for him to take on Darkseid?
I do think its funny fans are able to accept Bruce coming out of retirement twice, recovering from a broken back by being punched, climbing out of what's practically the grand canyon, and surviving a nuke explosion , yet they think the idea of Bruce coming out of retirement a third time is beyond possibility or far out.
I mean these films are more grounded , but its not act like they were biopics or documentaries.
The End means nothing nowadays
The stuff I highlighted...what the hell does that have to do with anything? We're talking about Justice League.
You cant have Bruce come back? Why not? Until it's confirmed that we have a new actor in place for a bat reboot, I say you can.
What does Wayne Manor have to do with anything? Irrelevant.
Lucius said they'd be able to get there money back in the long run.
No one wants John Blake? For what? He doesn't have to show up in JL.
Fanboys want Batman like Arkham (I do too, eventually) but the majority don't even know that exists or they do but they don't care. The GA will respond more to Bale than a new Batman that's like the comics. The general audience doesn't care about comic Batman.
Batmans sacrifice, if written well, could be enhanced. Leaving Gotham behind for good and moving on to greater things, returning as a "God" to the people even though he's human. People will believe he's immortal or a God in the way they'll look at Superman.
Wow. SO many things to respond to. Prepare for a set of long essays, people.
You trying to argue that Nolan's Batman has more story potential than comic book Batman is disrespectful to the mythos.
Except that MOS is nowhere as grounded as TDKT was. "Grounded" is completely subjective. What Nolan considers grounded is different from what Marc Webb, Snyder, or Joss Whedon would consider grounded.
MOS does not look or feel like TDKT at all. It is a different type of grounded. It looks like a mixed bag of everything. It seems to have the maturity and complexity of the Nolan films with the heart of Iron Man & Donner's Superman with the fun action feel of The Avengers. Even the way they were filmed is completely different. Nolan was all about making everything look like the real world, not a lot of CGI, and certain camera angles while there MOS does look stylized. We know Zack Snyder added CGI buildings in Metropolis that don't actually exist in real life whereas Nolan's Gotham was literally Chicago.
Thus they're 2 different types of "grounded" approaches. MOS is grounded in the sense of how the characters act and how the world around Superman reacts but you can STILL have your Superman, aliens, GL corp, unique looking Metropolis, and the rest of the DCU in this universe. You are not limited outside of things all movies can't done. TDKT was grounded in the sense that they took characters from the comics and convinced them that they could exist in real world, going as far as to even remove Bane's Venom and Ra's immortality to achieve that (not saying this was bad). Thus the defense that MOS and JL will be like TDKT so they shouldn't reboot Batman is false. With that said, you can still have a Batman reboot in line with MOS that is unique. It can still keep the maturity and complexity of the Nolan films while not being limited to anything (Clayface, Mr Freeze, having Batman be world's greatest detective, etc.). Do a "grounded" Batman going by MOS' definition of grounded, not TDKT's definition of grounded, and you won't get a rehash.
Audience won't be receptive to a new Batman? I highly disagree. History proves you wrong. The difference between Batman and Spider-Man is that prior to the Spider-Man reboot, a new version of Spidey with a new actor was something the GA hasn't seen before. Raimi's version was the only version of Spidey that made it big prior to TASM. EVERY single generation so far has had to adapt to the idea of a new version of Batman/new actor playing Batman within a short difference of time. It is not anything new for Batman. He has had multiple different versions that made it mainstream including the Arkham games which were popular simultaneously with the Nolan films. Batman is not defined by the Nolan films. I would say Batman is in fact the first superhero that has reached Bond status (meaning it won't be a problem). If Bond can have like a different actor/take every 5 years, Batman will be fine as long as the reboot still keeps the dark serious tone and smart storytelling of the Nolan films.
Training is everything. You need the will to get the training though but it is far too late for Bruce to get that because 1) he is happily retired AKA his will is gone and 2) his body is broken and if he wasn't able to become the world's greatest detective for the 7 years he traveled and then the 8 years retired, it is absolutely pointless by now and will just be a stupid plot contrivance to make Batman smart for JL. "Oh BTW I just happen to be comic book Batman now!"
I already explained why MOS is clearly not the same as TDKT. See above paragraphs.
40 is not old but it is old in comparison with Superman who is in his late 20's. His relationship with Superman changes from a brother/brother relationship (close in age) to a father/son relationship or a much older brother/much younger brother relationship. Plus, Nolan's Batman has over 10 years of experience on top of Superman. That would already make Batman look like a mentor as opposed to a equal partner to Superman. Another thing interesting about their dynamic is that they started out around the same time and grew into the people they are now simultaneously. The grew together despite being completely different. That element would also be gone.
Nolan has consistently been against his Batman in a shared universe since 2005. He went as far as to interfere with the production of the last JL film (Justice League: Mortal) when he found out it had his Batman in it even though he wasn't even played by Bale and looked like a different Batman visually. The chances of Nolan being ok with his Batman used in JL are extremely low. You guys are literally praying for a miracle to happen that would make Nolan change his mind. That is what it has become. You are trying to convince yourself so hard that he may change his mind that it has become a false sense of hope for you guys. I agree with JMC that it is getting pathetic.
You can still get out JL within the next few years. Reboot Batman for 2016 and then have JL in 2017. It took Marvel 5 years to from Iron Man to The Avengers.
This is not the work of the Nolans; it is mainly the work of Snyder. Nolan himself has said this multiple times and that it is mainly Snyder's movie. He even said that Snyder and one of the writers from 300 did a few changes to the script. Goyer is still there, that's true, but he doesn't count because he is a writer for superhero stories in general. He wrote a story for the Nolan films that fit into Chris Nolan's vision and now he is writing a story for MOS that is meant to fit into a shared universe.
Also, I never thought I would say this but for once I am confident WB knows better than some of the fans by rebooting.
You underestimate Batman's iconic status to the GA. Batman, Superman, and Spider-Man have far transcended the superhero genre at this point. They are equally as iconic as characters like James Bond, Sherlock Holmes, and Mickey Mouse (maybe even a bit more iconic). They may come a time when the GA grows tired of superhero movies but these 3 characters have become so iconic that they will live on. The superhero genre no longer solely defines them. You may have a time when the GA grows tired of a specific version of these characters but they'll never grow tired of Batman, Superman, and Spider-Man in general.
I just love how you seem to think that the Nolan films speaking to contemporary society's concerns is something new that Nolan integrated into Batman that now it made him cool. It isn't. That has been the norm in Batman comics since the 1980's. A lot of Batman stories are a lot heavier and deeper with those messages than any of the Nolan films.
About that last part, Shikamaru. He wasn't talking about the comics, he said on film. Forget the comics, it's used for inspiration yes, but this is a different medium. It will never be exactly like the comics.
The "deep stories" from the comics are irrelevant to the discussion, we're talking about what Nolans Bat films offered to all audiences, including the general public who don't read comics yet saw these movies.
We just feel that it's bizarre to have a Nolanized Superman with a non-Nolan more comic booky Batman when we have a Nolan-Batman right in front of us. Now, Nolan/Bale saying no is a whole other thing, but there's still a year or two left to convince him. If it's not happening already and just kept hush hush.
I say this, somebody should ask Nolan about this subject and if he gives his January type answer where he smiles and says no comment, or he cant discuss that...then we'll know this is one big smoke screen. If he gives a straight detailed answer then fine but even then I wouldn't trust it until we get a press release.
As long as the joker is still alive unlike Burton's Joker I could care less. I admit Heath's Joker was the greatest but his wasn't end all be all.