SpiderMan
Civilian
- Joined
- Jul 25, 2007
- Messages
- 307
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 11
Shia LaBeuf as Bats AND Supes (hey they're casting him for everything else!!!).
Thats not the issue. The issue is that they are casting for these characters while there is already two actors playing them.
Think of it like this. While Spielberg is making the new Indy movie, Paramount decides to green light a new movie starring the Indy character with a new actor and director.
Or how about while Iron Man is currently being made, Marvel announces a new Avengers movie feature Iron Man but they are going to recast a new actor.
If I was Nolan I would be pissed. This potentially sabotages his current movie and the third. Let say for argument sake that a new actor is featured to play Batman and the script absolutely nails this new characterization and this actor nails the role and this Batman out bats Nolan's version.
Now does Nolan alter his vision of Batman to appease moviegoers or stick to his guns and have the audience be disappointed that his Batman is not like the Justice League version and as a result the box office suffers?
WB is wrong to do a movie with a competing version of Batman with Nolan's. They should wait to feature Batman until Nolan has completed his trilogy.
If they do it, I hope it crashes and burns horrible and I will not see this movie at the theaters. Thats a promise.
By the way, I'm not so upset when it comes to Superman as I thought Superman Returns sucks, though Brandon Routh has kind of grown on me. I feel bad for him. If the Justice League Superman is a hit, take my word that WB will want to do a solo movie with the new actor, and Routh will be the odd man out.
Watch.
Unless Bale was Batman in a JLA film during the making of the franchise, I fail to see how a JLA film will actually impact Nolan's Batman franchise that deeply.
Couldn't disagree with you more. WB isn't scared of an Avengers movie, because for one We don't even know what characters can be used in the a live action film because Marvel sold their characters out to different studios. Also why in the world would you funnel at the least 80 million to do a solo movie of GL, WW, Aquaman, The Flash and maybe the Martian man Hunter? None of these solo films can be done for a cheaper budget and be done justice fx wise. Also these characters aren't popular enough that WB will take a risk and put down a 100 mil to get it into theaters, save for WW. I think they'll do it if the JLA flick is a huge hit, but not before.
Also considering the amounts SR and BR cost, and their return wasn't the best, Wb is skeptical. SR had a budget of 200-250 mil, but only grossed 200 mil domestically, while BR had a budget of like 150 mil probably more and that made just a little over 200 mil domestically.
It also hasn't been a 100 percent confirmed that the JLA film will be motion capture/cgi, if one even gets made.
I for one don't mind Welling as Supes. He's a capable enough actor. i also like Routh, and don't understand why Wb wouldn't use him considering his career didn't take off. I really don't care much about Bale. He was a good batman, butthe man is not a big star in my opinion. He's a good actor but to many is giving this man to much power and popularity. I bet you'll get more people on the street who have no idea who bale is then you would who do, and talking without making any refernces tp BR, and what ever other non memorable films he's been in.
All this is really moot and to much speculation is going on, so until I hear some confirmed news, I'll just hold off judgement.
I definatly agree. There is nothing in BB that says directly says that there are no other Superheroes. They also mostly dont talk about supes in the comics. I dont see a continuety conflict. And don't you guys forget, you can say anything about SR, but fact is this was the only Superman movie where another fictional DC City is mentioned besides Metropolis, and that's Gotham. Hmm I wonder why Supes would go there?A continuity "nightmare"?
It's long been my personal belief that anyone who cannot tell the difference in continuities between movies like BATMAN and BATMAN BEGINS upon actually thinking about the movies basically deserves their confusion, because they're simply not looking at the situational aspects of the movies.
Sheer ignorance tends to be the result of these misinterpretations. If you think about the key story details of BATMAN and BATMAN BEGINS, the differences become all too obvious. I've also got no sympathy for people who watch a film, can't or don't bother to remember any of it, and then try to make some ignorant statement about how it relates to a completely different film.
I still fail to see how a Batman in JLA will make people somehow doubt the continuity of Nolan's Batman universe, any more than a Batman in the JLA in the comics affects people's perception of a given individual Batman monthly title. Are people suddenly stupid? Do they watch the cartoon Justice League and wonder how it fits into BATMAN BEGINS? No? Then why would they just conveniently "become confused'" when Batman is both working on Gotham and working with the JLA? The answer? Usually sheer ignorance, in which case...they deserve their confusion.
Hmm...
Sheer ignorance tends to be the result of these misinterpretations. If you think about the key story details of BATMAN and BATMAN BEGINS, the differences become all too obvious. I've also got no sympathy for people who watch a film, can't or don't bother to remember any of it, and then try to make some ignorant statement about how it relates to a completely different film.
Batman was played by 4 actors in 5 movies. People got used to inconsistencies and dramatic changes in tone. Watch Batman 89 and then follow it up with Batman and Robin. If that massive shift can occur within the same continuity, it's no wonder that some people got confused.
Go take a look at Rotten Tomatoes and see how many reviewers referred to Batman Begins as a prequel.
Sure it's pretty obvious to you or I, that they are complely separate entities. But you give far too much credit to the movie going public.
Joe Shmoe who saw Batman 89 (once and only) in 89 and then saw BB in 2005, might not be so quick to grasp the different universe concept.
I can't wait to hear all the confusion when The Incredible Hulk comes out next year.
I think it is safe to say that confusion between live action and the television cartoon is hardly comparable to multiple live action movies.
Even having a television series and a movie about the same character isn't two bad. Most people can expect that.
But two ongoing live action movie series about the same character in different continuities?? Please provide an example of that.
"Octopussy" (1983 - James Bond was played by Roger Moore)
"Never Say Never Again" (1983 - James Bond was played by Sean Connery)
Hollywoodland (2006)
Superman Returns (2006)
I am sure there are others.
Seems to me that what you're saying is, "But Guard, people who can't be bothered to THINK LOGICALLY might get confused!". Again, that's tough. That's their fault. If they can't be bothered to FIND OUT the situational differences in the films (and it's a simple, simple process), they DESERVE to be confused. In reality, most people probably won't even care. They'll simply see it as a different Batman story with a different actor. They don't think in terms of "alternate realities" and "universes" and "continuity". That's a fanboy's brain talking.
It's a continuity nightmare.
I know intelligent, educated people who saw Batman Begins, and still thought it was a prequel to Batman 89.
I imagine the general public will still assume that this is the same Batman from the Nolan films, regardless of who plays him.
With "The Dark Knight" ending in a way that supposedly directly ties into it's sequel, releasing a Batman JLA film in between will confuse the hell out of the average movie goer.
I hope I'm wrong, but I really don't think I am.
Yeah, it didn't help that many reviews/articles casually described it as a prequel either.The prequel to 89 assumption is a valid argument... so many people who don't follow the hype and rumors as much as we do thought that film was a prequel.. and when I told those people they are making sequels they were shocked... people will think this is a continuation beyond Nolan's films... it will be a nightmare for average viewers to follow.
Yes, those Bond movies are probably the closest example That was caused by two studios fighting over the rights to the same franchise. If I remember correctly, Never Say Never was an abysmal failure.
Holywoodland and Superman returns? C'mon now you're grasping at straws.
But they are still making James Bond films - almost 25 years later. This proves that doing such a thing won't hurt a franchise.
Both of these films are related to Superman and had different actors dressed as the character. You asked for an example and I gave you two.
Yes, but that was the first and last time they tried to have two competing James Bond movies
I said two examples of "ongoing live action movie series about the same character in different continuities", not different actors dressed as the same character. Hollywoodland was about Goerge Reeves not Superman.
But okay whatever, you've convinced me![]()