Official Justice League Status Update Thread

[BATZARRO WWD]

No. I understood your clever little presentation, I was wondering why it was directed to my post, since I never said anything was "fruitless".

Naw, just the first part. I try to get more than one point across in a single post. Saving resources, y'know?

 

[Showtime]

Got it. "Going Green"

 

[biolumen]

Armie Hammer
10 Actors to Watch

By SHAWNA MALCOM

Armie Hammer owes Woody Allen.

To prepare for the title role in "Billy: The Early Years," Hammer watched every Billy Graham sermon he could get his hands on, faithfully studying each gesture and Southern-fried inflection. But it wasn't until the Los Angeles-born actor stumbled across a lively YouTube clip of the director interviewing the evangelist on a 1969 TV special that he really saw the light.

"You look at it and go, 'Man, Billy Graham really has a sense of humor,' '' Hammer says. "He's holding his own with Woody Allen and cracking the audience up. That was the moment when I felt I could see the man behind the preacher."

It's precisely that human side of the venerated icon that the biopic earnestly seeks to capture. And with his all-American good looks and robust enthusiasm, Hammer -- cast after another actor bowed out due to a scheduling conflict -- nimbly nails Graham's transition from a religion-leery aspiring baseball player to world-renowned spiritual leader.

The 6-foot-5 newcomer claims he wasn't intimidated by the prospect of portraying such a towering figure, thanks to actor-turned-helmer Robby Benson.

"Robby's so quiet and humble," Hammer notes of the director, "but he's willing to teach you everything he knows as long as you're willing to listen. I knew I was in good hands."

It was Benson who suggested Hammer have dinner with Oscar winner Martin Landau, who plays Graham's one-time mentor, Charles Templeton. (Because of the flashback nature of the film, the two never share any scenes.)

"Mr. Landau said, 'Do you mind if I say something?'" remembers Hammer, who is the great-grandson of oil tycoon Armand Hammer. "He didn't stop talking for three hours, but at no point was I going, 'Oh, this old guy's rambling.' I was enraptured by every single word. When a legend says anything, you're like, 'That's the most important thing I've ever heard.' "

Hammer had planned to follow up "Billy" by playing Batman in Warner Bros.' "Justice League," but plans for the film have since been delayed. Instead, he's headed to Vancouver to shoot a five-episode guest stint on the CW's "Reaper," where he plays the devil's son.

His move from the heavenly to the hellish isn't lost on him. Says Hammer with a laugh, "Hey, at least I'm not getting typecast, right?"

WHAT ELSE?
An actor should always: "Bathe. You're not gonna get a job smelling to high heaven."

Lucky break: "'Justice League' got all the wheels turning. Whether that (project) happens now or not, I've already experienced the benefits of being cast."

Favorite film character: Gary Oldman's crooked DEA officer in "The Professional." "That's one of the finest bits of acting I've ever seen. He fully embraces the darkness."

http://www.variety.com/article/VR1117994648.html?categoryId=3289&cs=1

 

[Showtime]

I guess he is taking solace in the fact that he was cast to a movie that isn't happening...

I do like the guys look though for Batman or Superman.

 

[Antonello Blueberry]

So Nolan again states that his Batman couldn't and wouldn't be a member of the Justice League.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/herocomplex/2008/10/christopher-n-2.html

 

[cerealkiller182]

Nolan sounds so myopic.

Choosing the symbol of the bat for a purpose isn't the same as choosing to wear a cape and fight crime.

I think its silly and close minded to think it couldn't work. Its definitely more that Nolan and Bale dont want it to work cause they dont want to be apart of it, which is fine.

The whole argument about Nolan's world and a possible shard DC universe has seemed like one side says it could while one side says it shouldn't. And I agree with both. NO reason it couldn't, I'm just not sure it should.

 

[I Am The Knight]

So we go back to the different universes thing...

 

[BATZARRO WWD]

That makes sense. But hey, what does Nolan know about the series of films he produced, anyway? It too can be crossovered.


Also, hooray, more waiting!

 

[protocida]

So Nolan again states that his Batman couldn't and wouldn't be a member of the Justice League.
http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/herocomplex/2008/10/christopher-n-2.html

oH nOEs!!!!1!

 

[jmc]

Nolan sounds so myopic.

Choosing the symbol of the bat for a purpose isn't the same as choosing to wear a cape and fight crime.

I think its silly and close minded to think it couldn't work. Its definitely more that Nolan and Bale dont want it to work cause they dont want to be apart of it, which is fine.

The whole argument about Nolan's world and a possible shard DC universe has seemed like one side says it could while one side says it shouldn't. And I agree with both. NO reason it couldn't, I'm just not sure it should.

It's Nolan's baby, he set out to create a universe for Batman, not for DC, his series was never intended to have superheros in it, it's not close minded of him at all to not want to force superheros in.

 

[The Guard]

I think its silly and close minded to think it couldn't work. Its definitely more that Nolan and Bale dont want it to work cause they dont want to be apart of it, which is fine.

Clearly he doesn't want his Batman in the JLA or mentioning other heroes during this franchise, but he seems to realize it could work, because it has worked. Which is fine.

No, correct, it’s a different universe. It’s a different way of looking at it. Now, it's been done successfully, very successfully, in the comics so I don’t dispute it as an approach. It just isn’t the approach we took. We had to make a decision for "Batman Begins."

I fail to see why Nolan insists on implying that somehow other heroes existing at some point would create a problem with Batman creating himself. Besides, his Batman was essentially handed the idea of being "more than a man" by someone else, as well as handed the idea to help Gotham. The "bat" elements would always be Wayne's. But being a masked freedom fighter or a vigilante isn't a "new" concept, even in the DC Universe, or Nolan's.

We wanted nothing that would undermine the idea that Bruce came up with this crazy plan of putting on a mask all by himself.

Which is why, in BATMAN BEGINS, he almost gets handed the idea to do so. I occassionally wonder if Nolan's ever actually sat down and watched the movies he talks about.

 

[dnno1]

It's Nolan's baby, he set out to create a universe for Batman, not for DC, his series was never intended to have superheros in it, it's not close minded of him at all to not want to force superheros in.

Not to want to include or make reference to a universe of other heroes is closed minded.

 

[jmc]

No, what it is is one man's interpretation of how he sees a character portrayed, which to him doesn't include super powered beings.

 

[Crook]

I fail to see why Nolan insists on implying that somehow other heroes existing at some point would create a problem with Batman creating himself.

Agreed. Nolan only addressed the issue of "who came first?" rather than the co-existence of all these heroes. This has no bearing on whether or not JL could plausibly be integrated with Bale's Batman.

 

[biolumen]

If Nolan doesn't want to incorporate superheroes into his Batman movies, so be it. It's a creative decision on his part that I'm perfectly fine with. He's earned it. Regarding the rest of the DC superheroes, the onus is now on WB to move past Nolan's movies and carry on. If Nolan wants to make a third movie, let him. But don't hold the rest of the movies hostage to it.

 

[dnno1]

No, what it is is one man's interpretation of how he sees a character portrayed, which to him doesn't include super powered beings.

I agree, but it is still closed minded (he won't let other heroes in to his world). Let's hope that he won't try to block the use of Batman in other properties.

 

[Crook]

It's close-minded in the strictest sense of the word. But I wouldn't call it such since it's his world and vision. Now, banning his character from being used in future movies because he doesn't believe it fits his interpretation, is being close-minded.

 

[I Am The Knight]

Which is why, in BATMAN BEGINS, he almost gets handed the idea to do so. I occassionally wonder if Nolan's ever actually sat down and watched the movies he talks about.

LOL, exactly! I inmediately thought of The League Of Shadows training when he said that. I guess he hasn't seen BB in a long time...

 

[Anita18]

I fail to see why Nolan insists on implying that somehow other heroes existing at some point would create a problem with Batman creating himself. Besides, his Batman was essentially handed the idea of being "more than a man" by someone else, as well as handed the idea to help Gotham. The "bat" elements would always be Wayne's. But being a masked freedom fighter or a vigilante isn't a "new" concept, even in the DC Universe, or Nolan's.

Which is why, in BATMAN BEGINS, he almost gets handed the idea to do so. I occassionally wonder if Nolan's ever actually sat down and watched the movies he talks about.

Crook led me to this post via a thread in the TDK forums, and so now I am here to offer a rebuttal in person.

The "decision" that Nolan is referring to is the one where Wayne chooses to put on a suit that makes him look like a giant bat. Nobody even in the League of Shadows had gone far enough with their beliefs to do that. Ra's even said so himself: "You took my advice about theatricality a bit literally!" Their theatricality was only used to make them seem more than human as a group, not individually. They don't make any effort to differentiate themselves from one another - they're all ninjas.

This is important because even though Batman shares many of the same work methods as the LoS, he differs from them in one major way - he has an identity. Ra's Al Ghul, as portrayed in BB, is simply a title for the current LoS leader. If one dies, another takes over. In Nolan's version, guy with ninja skills who dresses up as a bat = Batman = Bruce Wayne. He is identifiable. If Wayne dies, Batman ceases to exist. The same can be said for Superman. Superman IS Clark Kent. If Kent disappears, a substitute cannot step in as Superman.

Having an identity makes Wayne's decision in BB a momentous one, because he's devoting his entire life to this mission, and he is a mortal human being. If there are crimefighters with super-powers already existing in Bruce Wayne's world, that lessens the importance of that decision. In fact, it almost cheapens it, making him seem like a little whiny kid who only wants to play dress-up with the big boys, when the movie says that it's anything but.

 

[FaT_tONle]

Only more reason why Bale won't be back. When JLA rolls around it's gonna be like Marvel dumping RDJ as Stark for Avengers... WB should be thankful enough if they get a third Batman film.

 

[dnno1]

It's close-minded in the strictest sense of the word. But I wouldn't call it such since it's his world and vision. Now, banning his character from being used in future movies because he doesn't believe it fits his interpretation, is being close-minded.

You won't say it because you are a fan of Nolan. I don't think that his version of the Batman character would be used in other films due to the legalities and the fact that another director may likely have another vision and direction he may want to go with the character. The door is closed (in his mind) on other superheroes entering the Nolan Batman world because he has admitted it publicly. Therefore hes is closed minded on this matter.

 

[Crook]

You won't say it because you are a fan of Nolan.

I don't see how that at all has relevance. Especially when I've repeatedly defended the vision of JL, in contrast to Nolan's, in which his Batman wouldn't be part of the team.

The door is closed (in his mind) on other superheroes entering the Nolan Batman world because he has admitted it publicly. Therefore hes is closed minded on this matter.

As I said, close-minded in the most strictest sense. This is like saying straight or gay people are sexually close-minded because they're not bi-sexual. Is it technically true? Yes. But it doesn't jive with the conventional use of the word.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

So, Batman can be the first superhero in this DC Universe, then others can pop up after him. No big deal. And it's similar to, as someone pointed out in the TDK forum, to the DCAU where it as acknowledged that Batman is in existence before Clark becomes Superman.

You won't say it because you are a fan of Nolan. I don't think that his version of the Batman character would be used in other films due to the legalities and the fact that another director may likely have another vision and direction he may want to go with the character. The door is closed (in his mind) on other superheroes entering the Nolan Batman world because he has admitted it publicly. Therefore hes is closed minded on this matter.

Which legalities are those? I thought ultimately WB owned Batman, not Nolan. If Nolan completes his trilogy and WB then proceeds with JLA and convinces Bale to sign on, there would be a legal issue to using Bale's Batman?

 

[cerealkiller182]

Obviously its Nolans project and he can do what he wants. His reasoning is just dumb. Theres no reason why a crossover couldnt be plausible outside of Nolan not wanting it to be. Its not something that can be reasoned unless specifically mentioned in the context of the films. An easily more truthful and/or reasonable justification is Nolan does not want his continuity undermined by a crossover which is what is really at stake with a crossover.

 

[kyuubijavi1]

A easy way to have Nolan's world fit into the dc universe is just have hero's like superman, flash and so on inspire to change like Batman. I mean Nolan already introduced the copy cats in TDK why would it be far fetched to see others copy Batman but more succesful since they'd actually poses powers.