• The upgrade to XenForo 2.3.7 has now been completed. Please report any issues to our administrators.

recasting Bats and Supes: good idea or bad idea?

Should Batman and Superman be recast for the JLA film?

  • Yes, recast the world's finest heroes!!!

  • Nah, Routh and Bale for JLA!!!!

  • Dunno, I'm not sure


Results are only viewable after voting.
Well, this is one for the record books. Certainly the earliest display of antagonism against a film nobody knows squat about. This is one fanboy sentiment I will never understand.

If they go with older version of Batman and SUperman then its fine as long as there are no significant contradtictions... but if they are casting Tom freaking Welling and Jake G... then my sentiments will simply be the stone cold facts... if they want to go young... establish an entirely NEW universe... don't leave anything open... completely separate yourself from Singer/Nolan... new actors... new characters... new world... no overlaps... no continuity... are they dumb enough not to realize that's probably the best thing to do if this is the route they indeed take? If they do something like that I can live with it... but Talia in this movie (while just a rumor) certainly does not distinguish a JLA from BB... that is one of many problems I am having with this movie and all the rumors circling it..
 
Thanks :yay:

but i did it from memory ..that said, i was not sure about the exact date of the release of the two movies .and i was not right about the title of the Riddley Scott movie .I have corrected it.

now , i had some time to kill and i dug a little more :

1968 :Tarzan and the Jungle Boy by R. Day with Mike Henry /Tarzan and the Four O'Clock Army by Alex Nicol with Ron Ely.


1967 :Tarzan's Jungle Rebellion by William Witney with Ron Ely/Tarzan and the Great River by R. Day with Mike Henry


1962: La Venganza del Zorro by Joaquín Luis Romero Marchent with Frank Latimore /Zorro alla corte di Spagna by Luigi Capuano with George Ardisson


1959 : Tarzan's greatest adventure by John Guillermin with Gordon Scott/ Tarzan, the Ape Man by Joseph Newman with Denny Miller

1938 : Tarzan and the Green Goddess by E. Kull with Herman Brix /Tarzan's Revenge by D. Ross Lederman with Glenn Morris

1931 : Dracula by Tod Browning with Bela Lugosi / Drácula by George Melford with
Carlos Villarías

ps: it's Maze not Matt :cwink:

I told you guys there were more.
 
ideally i'd like to have Bale and Routh reprise their roles, but if the JLA movie will be CG/MoCap the quality of Beowulf i'll go with that.

if Superman and Batman for JLA will be live action and WB will push for recasting there could be a backlash to this since both actors have been accepted by the GP with such high regard (specially for Bale).
 
"recasting" is a misleading word here
it wouldn't be a recast (as in a replacement of the current actors, who are in they own movies) its just a different cast, or new cast for this movie (which isn't connected to the those movie) its an alternate version, alternate storyline

so, i don't see the big deal
if people can't wrap they minds around the concept of two different storylines, that happen to include some of the same characters of other movies, then that’s they own problem :whatever:
 
Either way it works out I would like to see a GOOD movie over actor wishing.
 
But WB/the creators of superhero films should not have to bend over backward and halt their creative processes because ignorant or unintelligent people might get confused when they refuse to logically think an issue through.

Come on, now. You act as if people here are stifling some great artistic vision of Warner's. As if some WB execs are sitting around saying "I have a burning desire for Justice League! It is a vision I must share with the world, post haste!"

The film, which may or may not turn out to be a worthwhile endeavor, is motivated by only a few key (and all financial) reasons-

1.) Beat the writers' strike. Get something going to fit that Summer '09 slot. All studios are doing this now, gobbling up screenplays for fodder for the next year or two.

2.) Beat Marvel to the punch. This film must be released before any Avengers film.

3.) Test the waters for new characters. Instead of taking a gamble on solo films, they're going to see who sticks (my guess - The Flash).

And for all of these reasons, they will bypass a true possibility for great, creative vision.

WB has had a rare oppportunity for decades now and have yet to take advantage of it. And from the looks of this, they will continue to misappropriate it. They have the opportunity to create an expansive, unprecedented movie universe unlike anything that's been done before. But it would take time and patience (something they seem to greatly lack). A slow, methodical building up of a film universe that would interlock the stories of Batman, Superman and others. But instead, they choose to minimize their hassle and maximize their profits (or so they think).

It's insane that Marvel, who's properties have been scattered all over Hollywood for many years, is actually pulling it all together in the way DC should've years ago. Of course this all up in the air for now, but it's pretty likely.

I just find it utterly absurd that Marvel may be willing to wait for an Avengers movie to include Robert Downey's Iron Man and Ed Norton's Hulk, yet WB simply refuses to wait for Bale's Batman and Routh's Superman. Not only is it creatively idiotic, but it undermines Bale and Routh's positions as their respective characters. I don't blame Bale for seeming pissed over this. While the character will always be more important than the actor, it seems to me like WB is going out of their way to shout at Bale "You ain't THE Batman, buddy!"

And for all the hoopla over "Who will replace Chris Reeve? The mantle is passing down!", to just slap another red cape on another guy and call HIM Superman too, it's just laughable. And anyone can make all the excuses they want about their being an animated Superman, and a Smallville Clark, and all that crap. We're talking concurrent live action Red and Blue's. There's a reason for Smallville's no tights rule. And it's not because spandex makes Tom Welling itchy.
 
Come on, now. You act as if people here are stifling some great artistic vision of Warner's. As if some WB execs are sitting around saying "I have a burning desire for Justice League! It is a vision I must share with the world, post haste!"

The film, which may or may not turn out to be a worthwhile endeavor, is motivated by only a few key (and all financial) reasons-

1.) Beat the writers' strike. Get something going to fit that Summer '09 slot. All studios are doing this now, gobbling up screenplays for fodder for the next year or two.

2.) Beat Marvel to the punch. This film must be released before any Avengers film.

3.) Test the waters for new characters. Instead of taking a gamble on solo films, they're going to see who sticks (my guess - The Flash).

And for all of these reasons, they will bypass a true possibility for great, creative vision.

WB has had a rare oppportunity for decades now and have yet to take advantage of it. And from the looks of this, they will continue to misappropriate it. They have the opportunity to create an expansive, unprecedented movie universe unlike anything that's been done before. But it would take time and patience (something they seem to greatly lack). A slow, methodical building up of a film universe that would interlock the stories of Batman, Superman and others. But instead, they choose to minimize their hassle and maximize their profits (or so they think).

It's insane that Marvel, who's properties have been scattered all over Hollywood for many years, is actually pulling it all together in the way DC should've years ago. Of course this all up in the air for now, but it's pretty likely.

I just find it utterly absurd that Marvel may be willing to wait for an Avengers movie to include Robert Downey's Iron Man and Ed Norton's Hulk, yet WB simply refuses to wait for Bale's Batman and Routh's Superman. Not only is it creatively idiotic, but it undermines Bale and Routh's positions as their respective characters. I don't blame Bale for seeming pissed over this. While the character will always be more important than the actor, it seems to me like WB is going out of their way to shout at Bale "You ain't THE Batman, buddy!"

And for all the hoopla over "Who will replace Chris Reeve? The mantle is passing down!", to just slap another red cape on another guy and call HIM Superman too, it's just laughable. And anyone can make all the excuses they want about their being an animated Superman, and a Smallville Clark, and all that crap. We're talking concurrent live action Red and Blue's. There's a reason for Smallville's no tights rule. And it's not because spandex makes Tom Welling itchy.

AMEN... but yeah I can't wait for the day Iron Man, The Hulk, Captain America, and Thor are united on the big screen with the same solo franchise cast returning (but my fingers are crossed)... I am confident Marvel will get it done though and make the biggest and grandest comic book live action epic of all time.
 
Come on, now. You act as if people here are stifling some great artistic vision of Warner's. As if some WB execs are sitting around saying "I have a burning desire for Justice League! It is a vision I must share with the world, post haste!"

The film, which may or may not turn out to be a worthwhile endeavor, is motivated by only a few key (and all financial) reasons-

1.) Beat the writers' strike. Get something going to fit that Summer '09 slot. All studios are doing this now, gobbling up screenplays for fodder for the next year or two.

2.) Beat Marvel to the punch. This film must be released before any Avengers film.

3.) Test the waters for new characters. Instead of taking a gamble on solo films, they're going to see who sticks (my guess - The Flash).

And for all of these reasons, they will bypass a true possibility for great, creative vision.

WB has had a rare oppportunity for decades now and have yet to take advantage of it. And from the looks of this, they will continue to misappropriate it. They have the opportunity to create an expansive, unprecedented movie universe unlike anything that's been done before. But it would take time and patience (something they seem to greatly lack). A slow, methodical building up of a film universe that would interlock the stories of Batman, Superman and others. But instead, they choose to minimize their hassle and maximize their profits (or so they think).

It's insane that Marvel, who's properties have been scattered all over Hollywood for many years, is actually pulling it all together in the way DC should've years ago. Of course this all up in the air for now, but it's pretty likely.

I just find it utterly absurd that Marvel may be willing to wait for an Avengers movie to include Robert Downey's Iron Man and Ed Norton's Hulk, yet WB simply refuses to wait for Bale's Batman and Routh's Superman. Not only is it creatively idiotic, but it undermines Bale and Routh's positions as their respective characters. I don't blame Bale for seeming pissed over this. While the character will always be more important than the actor, it seems to me like WB is going out of their way to shout at Bale "You ain't THE Batman, buddy!"

And for all the hoopla over "Who will replace Chris Reeve? The mantle is passing down!", to just slap another red cape on another guy and call HIM Superman too, it's just laughable. And anyone can make all the excuses they want about their being an animated Superman, and a Smallville Clark, and all that crap. We're talking concurrent live action Red and Blue's. There's a reason for Smallville's no tights rule. And it's not because spandex makes Tom Welling itchy.

Good post.
 
Come on, now. You act as if people here are stifling some great artistic vision of Warner's. As if some WB execs are sitting around saying "I have a burning desire for Justice League! It is a vision I must share with the world, post haste!"

The film, which may or may not turn out to be a worthwhile endeavor, is motivated by only a few key (and all financial) reasons-

1.) Beat the writers' strike. Get something going to fit that Summer '09 slot. All studios are doing this now, gobbling up screenplays for fodder for the next year or two.

2.) Beat Marvel to the punch. This film must be released before any Avengers film.

3.) Test the waters for new characters. Instead of taking a gamble on solo films, they're going to see who sticks (my guess - The Flash).

And for all of these reasons, they will bypass a true possibility for great, creative vision.

WB has had a rare oppportunity for decades now and have yet to take advantage of it. And from the looks of this, they will continue to misappropriate it. They have the opportunity to create an expansive, unprecedented movie universe unlike anything that's been done before. But it would take time and patience (something they seem to greatly lack). A slow, methodical building up of a film universe that would interlock the stories of Batman, Superman and others. But instead, they choose to minimize their hassle and maximize their profits (or so they think).

It's insane that Marvel, who's properties have been scattered all over Hollywood for many years, is actually pulling it all together in the way DC should've years ago. Of course this all up in the air for now, but it's pretty likely.

I just find it utterly absurd that Marvel may be willing to wait for an Avengers movie to include Robert Downey's Iron Man and Ed Norton's Hulk, yet WB simply refuses to wait for Bale's Batman and Routh's Superman. Not only is it creatively idiotic, but it undermines Bale and Routh's positions as their respective characters. I don't blame Bale for seeming pissed over this. While the character will always be more important than the actor, it seems to me like WB is going out of their way to shout at Bale "You ain't THE Batman, buddy!"


And for all the hoopla over "Who will replace Chris Reeve? The mantle is passing down!", to just slap another red cape on another guy and call HIM Superman too, it's just laughable. And anyone can make all the excuses they want about their being an animated Superman, and a Smallville Clark, and all that crap. We're talking concurrent live action Red and Blue's. There's a reason for Smallville's no tights rule. And it's not because spandex makes Tom Welling itchy.

Dude You freaking rock, Preach The Damn Truth Brother . :woot: :cwink:
 
recast them. bale's too skinny and wears a terrible costume. as for routh he just sucks.
 
recast them. bale's too skinny and wears a terrible costume. as for routh he just sucks.

Here we are praising the greatest post ever made in this thread and there you come shoving in your two cents worth of an opinion, totally killing the vibe. I thought the hypsters on these boards could do a little better than that...
 
Here we are praising the greatest post ever made in this thread and there you come shoving in your two cents worth of an opinion, totally killing the vibe. I thought the hypsters on these boards could do a little better than that...
well for what its worth ill play along with any idea of wb if they are recasting routh. sure this movie will probably be rushed and suck but i shouldnt really expect any more from the wb. they already ruined the superman franchise with singerman and now they look to be screwing up the batman one with the sequel. i dont expect this to be good but it would be still quite cool to see welling in the tights if those rumours are true.
 
A couple comics poking fun about the rumors, please don't take them too seriously lol

whatshegotav2.png


castingwars002db8.png
 
A couple comics poking fun about the rumors, please don't take them too seriously lol

whatshegotav2.png


castingwars002db8.png
the second one is funny. they really look like TW and BR.
they should make a comic where BR is crying and TW is smiling.
 
Come on, now. You act as if people here are stifling some great artistic vision of Warner's.

Actually, I have said nothing of the kind. I'm saying their reasoning for waiting, in context of "people will be confused", is absurd. Avoiding the real issues and talking points. I'm simply saying that delaying a movie solely because some people might get confused is a bad idea. I'm not saying there aren't other valid reasons to delay JLA.

As if some WB execs are sitting around saying "I have a burning desire for Justice League! It is a vision I must share with the world, post haste!"

I never said that. Never even remotely implied it.

The film, which may or may not turn out to be a worthwhile endeavor, is motivated by only a few key (and all financial) reasons-

1.) Beat the writers' strike. Get something going to fit that Summer '09 slot. All studios are doing this now, gobbling up screenplays for fodder for the next year or two.

2.) Beat Marvel to the punch. This film must be released before any Avengers film.

3.) Test the waters for new characters. Instead of taking a gamble on solo films, they're going to see who sticks (my guess - The Flash).

What's your point? For a studio faced with the idea of making a superhero team-up, these could be valid concerns. And it's not like BATMAN BEGINS and SUPERMAN RETURNS were completely motivated by their artistic relevance.

And for all of these reasons, they will bypass a true possibility for great, creative vision.

Depends on what you mean. If you mean they're rushing into production with the first script someone threw together, you could be right. I don't know, as I haven't read the script. But if you mean recasting will automatically destroy the movie's greatness, you're going to have to convince me a little more. And if you mean that somehow JLA will simply suffer because there haven't been 8 or 9 solo films beforehand...I don't buy that either.

WB has had a rare oppportunity for decades now and have yet to take advantage of it.

So has Marvel.

And from the looks of this, they will continue to misappropriate it. They have the opportunity to create an expansive, unprecedented movie universe unlike anything that's been done before.

At absolutely enormous cost and risk. Making JLA will not prevent this expansive universe from happening.

But it would take time and patience (something they seem to greatly lack).

That seems to be an assumption on your part. WB has been nothing but patient lately when it comes to making DC films happen. The patience you seem to be speaking of involves years of waiting and hoping. By the end of which, the precious Bale and Routh and other hero actors and actresses may not want to return for JLA anyway.

A slow, methodical building up of a film universe that would interlock the stories of Batman, Superman and others. But instead, they choose to minimize their hassle and maximize their profits (or so they think).

You really think it's that easy, don't you?

It's insane that Marvel, who's properties have been scattered all over Hollywood for many years, is actually pulling it all together in the way DC should've years ago.

Marvel's properties are still largely scattered through different studios. For all their talk, they have yet to mount a great film from their own inhouse studio, or a team effort besides X-MEN.

I just find it utterly absurd that Marvel may be willing to wait for an Avengers movie to include Robert Downey's Iron Man and Ed Norton's Hulk, yet WB simply refuses to wait for Bale's Batman and Routh's Superman.

WB is smart enough to realize that Bale and Routh may well not want to return by the end of their respective franchises. After the recent "failure" of SUPERMAN RETURNS, they may also realize that those franchises are no longer guaranteed to be extremely profitable.

Not only is it creatively idiotic, but it undermines Bale and Routh's positions as their respective characters.

How so?

I don't blame Bale for seeming pissed over this. While the character will always be more important than the actor, it seems to me like WB is going out of their way to shout at Bale "You ain't THE Batman, buddy!"

If Bale was angry that WB wanted to replace a third Batman film with JLA, I'd understand him being upset. But you are correct about one thing there: Characters are always more important than actors. Bale is not Batman. He's an actor, who has done a good job playing a version of the character. However, since he has shown obvious reluctance to spend his career playing Batman, and to make a JLA film in the future...is it any wonder WB is looking elsewhere? Seems to me WB is doing him a favor by allowing BATMAN 3 to happen and thinking about casting someone else as Batman in JLA, rather than obliterating Bale's franchise at it's high point and moving ahead with JLA.

And for all the hoopla over "Who will replace Chris Reeve? The mantle is passing down!", to just slap another red cape on another guy and call HIM Superman too, it's just laughable. And anyone can make all the excuses they want about their being an animated Superman, and a Smallville Clark, and all that crap. We're talking concurrent live action Red and Blue's. There's a reason for Smallville's no tights rule. And it's not because spandex makes Tom Welling itchy.

So because it's not something that has been tried before, we should run in fear of it? Good strategy.
 
So if something has never been done before, even if it's completely stupid (Bale as Batman in TDK, someone else as Batman in JLA, and then Bale as Batman again in BB3), we should give it the benefit of the doubt? By that rationale, someone proposing to build a Skynet-like artificial intelligence, that could potentially conquer the technological world and destroy mankind, should not be shot down immediately, because it's never been done before. Spare me.

There's a reason no one's ever tried to take a brisk walk into a volcano or eat plutonium: BECAUSE IT IS STUPID. Same thing goes for having two different Batman's and two different Superman's running amok in theaters in the span of a year or two.
 
"Because it is stupid". No explanation whatsoever. Wow, what sound, sound logic. Normally you need a reason to brand something as stupid, but whatever...

Here's a question to ponder: What if you got what you want...WB holds off and makes solo films...and then Christian Bale doesn't WANT to hang around and make JLA five, six years from now? What if Bale doesn't want to make JLA at all? Would you ***** about recasting Batman then? If WB waited till 2012 to make JLA?

You all seem to be about immediacy issues, which fade with time, but many of you haven't considered that. In ten, fifteen years, heck, several years after the fact, it won't MATTER that there are multiple actors in the Batman franchise and JLA. The only way it could possibly matter if is you completely lack imagination, or if the films literally come out right on top of each other and the actors are faced with that issue.

Some of you seem to live in mortal fear that THE DARK KNIGHT and JLA are going to come out the same week or something, and that all of Bale's thunder will be stolen or diminished. I don't get that attitude.

So why are you against this so intently?
 
What I don't get is how anyone on these boards can really pretend to know the nature of Bale's and Routh's relationship with WB.
 
Now that's just pure evil TW4S ^

Anyways moving back on topic

recasting Bats and Supes: good idea or bad idea?
 
If it were in continuity with Begins and Returns, then it wouldn't be a great idea. If JLA is specifically not in continuity, then I would think you'd pretty much have to recast.
 
Actually, I have said nothing of the kind. I'm saying their reasoning for waiting, in context of "people will be confused", is absurd. Avoiding the real issues and talking points. I'm simply saying that delaying a movie solely because some people might get confused is a bad idea. I'm not saying there aren't other valid reasons to delay JLA.

Would you agree that one of these reasons is that a JLA film is not the next logical step immediately following BB, TDK and SR and preceeding Batman III and Man of Steel?That a project of that scope might benefit from more build up from (what should be) it's supporting series'?

I never said that. Never even remotely implied it.

You referred to WB "bending over backwards/halting their creative processes," terms which, to me, imply that WB would somehow be compromising their artistic integrity to appease certain people. Which is, ironically, exactly what they're doing by making JLA now.
 

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,263
Messages
22,074,749
Members
45,875
Latest member
kedenlewis
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"