The Dark Knight Rises Life after Nolan: What comes next... - Part 1 Unless it's actually Part 2...o - Part 2

[Boom]

I can promise you that WB won't wait ten years to make the next Batman film - considering it has been proven to be one of their most bankable franchises.

Granted, we probably shouldn't be talking about life after Nolan in this specific board, but I see no reason not to be excited about the future, nor do I see any problem with discussing it.

 

[Liam_H]

I think this topic belongs in another section but WB has already stated they're gonna have another Batman out there pretty soon after Nolan. There's a lot of money for them not to keep going.

 

[The Joker]

It's mainly coming from people who are not seeing what they want to see in this movie. They don't like the way Catwoman looks. Or Bane. Or that Batman isn't getting a new suit. Or the design of the Batwing.

So they start talking about what it could be like in the reboot.

 

[JackWhite]

I could care less about a new franchise, at least right now.

In all honesty, they could never make another Batman movie if TDKR is as awesome as I'm thinking/hoping it will be.

 

[RedSkull]

It's mainly coming from people who are not seeing what they want to see in this movie. They don't like the way Catwoman looks. Or Bane. Or that Batman isn't getting a new suit. Or the design of the Batwing.

So they start talking about what it could be like in the reboot.

Those people have other issues, and I hope they are never justified and continually disappointed by filmmakers with taste doing the opposite of what they want.

 

[Boom]

Cool story .

 

[Bat-Mite]

Ten years? They didn't even wait ten years after B&R almost killed the franchise... they decided to give Bats another go because they still thought there was money to be made there. Turns out they were right. Their main motivation is money, so there's no way in hell they're going to wait that long out of some perceived sense of respect. You don't just drop a character that made you a billion dollars due to reasons of sentimentality. After TDKR, I give them a year or two at most before they begin production on a new Batman.

I don't even think Nolan would want them to wait to work on a new film. Besides, if I remember correctly, he's going to be a "godfather" to the new Batman just like he is to the new Supes.

 

[Boom]

If by "godfather the new Batman" you mean "hire David Fincher or Tomas Alfredson to direct," then I would love that very much.

 

[KRIM]

That's just the general sense I get browsing the Bat-Boards. Seems like in every thread there's a fair amount of talk about the possibilities and directions of the franchise after Nolan's films.
Now, while that's all well and good, must we forget the fact that TDKR is still an entire year away from being released?
It just seems... odd to me. Almost like talking about all the fun stuff you're going to do after a guest at your home leaves before you've even started dinner.

You'd rather the fans do what, precisely? Act as if the property ends with TDKR? I see nothing wrong with looking forward to prospects of an inevitable new shift in the franchise.

And while we're on the topic, I'd rather not see a new Batman franchise for AT LEAST a good 10 or so years. Let these Nolan films sit for a while, let them become the classics they (hopefully) deserve to be.
I want there to be an entire new generations of Bat fans before talk of a new movie is even started. That way when it comes out, all us old farts can complain about how Nolan was better. And the even older farts can complain about how Burton was better.
Just my two cents.

Or people could actively sit out on the next series. Pretend there isn't a new crop of films and wait out that allotted time you've set for yourself to catch up. It makes no difference, really. Ten years isn't going to do anything for the property except place it on a hiatus.

There are several talented people at any given moment in Hollywood that could feasibly make great films. You wait too long or fail to strike at the right time, and you've let go of a grand opportunity. No thanks.

 

[Brain Damage]

Or people could actively sit out on the next series. Pretend there isn't a new crop of films and wait out that allotted time you've set for yourself to catch up. It makes no difference, really. Ten years isn't going to do anything for the property except place it on a hiatus.

There are several talented people at any given moment in Hollywood that could feasibly make great films. You wait too long or fail to strike at the right time, and you've let go of a grand opportunity. No thanks.

By that logic there will be talented people at any given moment, so the time becomes irrelevant. Or perhaps we should start throwing franchises at any talented director that passes by, simply because they have the potential to do something great?
Letting time pass keeps the character and his story fresh. If The Godfather films were "rebooted" every couple of years with a fresh setting and the same characters, would they be looked upon as the masterpieces they are now? Surely, you might get some great films out of it, but you cant deny that it would lesson the cultural impact these huge spectacles (such as Batman) have if they just became recyclable franchises that restart every few years when the creative juices of one team run out.
Obviously WB isn't going to wait very long to restart things, as everyone has stated already that Batman is just worth too much money, but I certainly don't believe we should be encouraging them.

 

[Bat-Mite]

By that logic there will be talented people at any given moment, so the time becomes irrelevant. Or perhaps we should start throwing franchises at any talented director that passes by, simply because they have the potential to do something great?
Letting time pass keeps the character and his story fresh. If The Godfather films were "rebooted" every couple of years with a fresh setting and the same characters, would they be looked upon as the masterpieces they are now? Surely, you might get some great films out of it, but you cant deny that it would lesson the cultural impact these huge spectacles (such as Batman) have if they just became recyclable franchises that restart every few years when the creative juices of one team run out.
Obviously WB isn't going to wait very long to restart things, as everyone has stated already that Batman is just worth too much money, but I certainly don't believe we should be encouraging them.

Let's not compare comic books to the Godfather. The Godfather's based on a Mario Puzo novel. The material to work with there is extremely limited. Batman has more than 70 years of history and many different interpretations (including Elseword tales) to work with. Besides, the Godfather is definitive. It will never be rebooted. No sane director would even attempt it, and any director insane enough would never get the funding.

 

[KRIM]

By that logic there will be talented people at any given moment, so the time becomes irrelevant.

Great. So you understand why placing a time qualifier for an appropriate continuation past Nolan, is unfounded.

Or perhaps we should start throwing franchises at any talented director that passes by, simply because they have the potential to do something great?

Was this supposed to be a counter-point? What better reason would WB have to give someone the reigns to Batman, other than being talented and showing potential greatness? What is the alternative to that? The complete opposite, which by all reasoning is bound for failure?

Letting time pass keeps the character and his story fresh. If The Godfather films were "rebooted" every couple of years with a fresh setting and the same characters, would they be looked upon as the masterpieces they are now?

You know damn well that's not an answer anyone can give. Furthermore your comparison is not too great considering Godfather doesn't even approach the longevity and rich history Batman has held for 70+ years. There are hundreds of proven and heralded narratives coming from this property. It is a matter of translating that to film. Since we bring up Godfather, however, how do you think the reaction would be if the first film was released to as much financial success and critical acclaim today, with the announcement that a sequel was immediately heading into production? I would bet my life savings the internet would have likely erupted in flames and would have vocalized against any proceedings. Alas, Godfather 1 and 2 are back-to-back cinematic classics two years apart. Speaking of time, how did those 16 years of a creative break, fare for Godfather 3?

Surely, you might get some great films out of it, but you cant deny that it would lesson the cultural impact these huge spectacles (such as Batman) have if they just became recyclable franchises that restart every few years when the creative juices of one team run out.

The impact is cheapened as a result of faulty products. Not with time. Harry Potter dominated this decade with 8 films. Suffice to say, it went out on top. Time is only a contributing factor in susceptibility to decline in creative flair, but that is all probability. Quality is not inherent to the actual number of films released, or the period in which they are produced.

 

[Boom]

Brain Damage, the great thing about comic books is that they're constantly changing. That's why characters like Batman have stuck around for so long. There is a wealth of diverse material to go through.

And just as many artists and writers have come forth with their own ideas and interpretations for this mythology on paper, I would love to see great directors come in and give us their own ideas and interpretations on screen.

It's nothing personal against Nolan.

I just want as many quality Batman films as I can get - with each offering something new and different.

 

[Brain Damage]

I agree that I would love to see a new Batman franchise. I've never said I wouldn't. But I'm arguing that, lets assume for a moment that no matter when it was made we would get the same quality film, it would be more effective if it was released with more distance from the Nolan trilogy. The Godfather films were a bad example, I admit. But my point still remains that with time, audiences will again become interested in the character. It's the difference between people saying "gee, they havent made a new batman film in a while" and "god, they're making another batman movie?"

 

[KRIM]

I agree that I would love to see a new Batman franchise. I've never said I wouldn't. But I'm arguing that, lets assume for a moment that no matter when it was made we would get the same quality film, it would be more effective if it was released with more distance from the Nolan trilogy. The Godfather films were a bad example, I admit. But my point still remains that with time, audiences will again become interested in the character. It's the difference between people saying "gee, they havent made a new batman film in a while" and "god, they're making another batman movie?"

If quality is upheld, that last question will never be uttered. Ever. I challenge anyone to cite such a case when people actually got tired from "too many" good products.

It's an illogical response.

 

[Brain Damage]

If quality is upheld, that last question will never be uttered. Ever. I challenge anyone to cite such a case when people actually got tired from "too many" good products.

It's an illogical response.

The Amazing Spider-Man. While it's not really a fair judgment because the movie hasn't been released yet, and might very well be awesome, a large portion of the general public is confused and curious as to why they're seeing the origin of Spidey again, something they saw not too long ago. I don't really have a proper example to work off here since this new trend of rebooting superhero franchises so quickly has only recently started and I think it's too early to tell accurately how this will affect the movie industry.
But I can say that if people were surprised and questionable of something like The Incredible Hulk, a reboot of a generally very poorly received movie, how are they going to feel about rebooting the most critically acclaimed series of comic book based movies to date?
Unless TDKR really bombs, following up Nolan isn't going to be an easy task for anyone, and frankly, no matter when the next batman franchise starts, comparisons will be inevitably made. But if you reboot too quickly, the comparisons will be far greater in number and I think the general public will be too distracted by this to truly appreciate the movie. To us, it will make sense, an entirely new Batman movie, hopefully much closer to the comic books, a new vision, blah blah, but to many it will simply be another Batman movie.
I hope the new franchise happens, I genuinely do, but I just don't want WB to lessen the impact it has because they got too greedy too quick.

 

[Boom]

We don't need to see Batman's origin again.

Just tell a different story arc with a new vision.

 

[spideyguy16]

What kind of a new version of bats could we possibly see on screen?

 

[KRIM]

The Amazing Spider-Man. While it's not really a fair judgment because the movie hasn't been released yet, and might very well be awesome, a large portion of the general public is confused and curious as to why they're seeing the origin of Spidey again, something they saw not too long ago.

It's following Spider-Man 3. A universally panned film. The dried response is fitting, as the series name is currently tainted. Had SM3 actually met expectations, do you think people would be so quick to attack another film?

But I can say that if people were surprised and questionable of something like The Incredible Hulk, a reboot of a generally very poorly received movie, how are they going to feel about rebooting the most critically acclaimed series of comic book based movies to date?

The lukewarm response is a result of not wanting to be fed crap...after just tasting crap. The audience can only react to what they know, and to their latest memory. That is why it doesn't matter that they loved SM1 and SM2. SM3 was garbage, so people simply said "Ok, I don't want anymore". That goes double for a series that wasn't on good-standing in the first place. People don't generally give a second shot so willingly.

Unless TDKR really bombs, following up Nolan isn't going to be an easy task for anyone, and frankly, no matter when the next batman franchise starts, comparisons will be inevitably made. But if you reboot too quickly, the comparisons will be far greater in number and I think the general public will be too distracted by this to truly appreciate the movie. To us, it will make sense, an entirely new Batman movie, hopefully much closer to the comic books, a new vision, blah blah, but to many it will simply be another Batman movie.
I hope the new franchise happens, I genuinely do, but I just don't want WB to lessen the impact it has because they got too greedy too quick.

I can understand the hesitancy in risking a sharp decline once Nolan departs, but that is way too early to call. They are hardly rushing these out on a yearly basis. That alone gives them ample time to consider smart choices in the plans ahead.

 

[Boom]

That may be why WB wants to keep Nolan on as a producer.

EXEC: "Hey Nolan. We really lucked out with you. Any chance you could point us to our next director and keep the good times rollin'?"

NOLAN: "Just call me Rollin' Nolan."

 

[John McGuirk]

Holy s*** a David Fincher Batman would be amazing.

I'd kill to see that.

 

[howl]

Deadshot is already in jail after the events of Gotham Knights

deadshot's portrayal in this was rubbish. i enjoyed gotham knight, up until they made floyd freak out after his mask is smashed off.

 

[terry78]

Reboots with new directors shouldn't mean origins all over again, that just gets redundant. Most people know the origins of most of the popular heroes, and like the comics they should just jump right into the action.

 

[howl]

Holy s*** a David Fincher Batman would be amazing.

I'd kill to see that.

yeh, i'd be keen to see that too

 

[web_head83]

I'd love to see a batman film done in the style of what they did with Sin City.