recasting Bats and Supes: good idea or bad idea?

[Spider–Man]

Shia LaBeuf as Bats AND Supes (hey they're casting him for everything else!!!).

 

[moguy]

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.

Good post.

Mostly how I feel as well, although I thought Superman Returns was underwhelming as oppposed to sucking.

I don't however, want this to crash and burn. I hope that if they go this "different universe" method, that it somehow works, and that the public miraculously accepts it.

It's just hard not to imagine the Nolan batfilms being impacted by this.

If Batman wasn't part of this, I'd be much more excited about the film.

Instead I'm more nervous than excited. Still, the idea of a live action JLA film can't help but bring out the kid in me.

 

[The Guard]

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.

 

[moguy]

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.

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.

 

[Ring Deacon]

there will be no confusion if they explain the fact it is a different timeline.

I still say you are all getting worried over nothing.

 

[Darabka]

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.

Okay I do agree with you. Its really not worth making any judgement before know anything oficial. Okay maybe not a Martian Manhunter or Aquaman movie, but they could atleast make a GL and Flash movie. I think they can be made very well, and there were heroes and comic adaptions that were almost unknown to the puplic but whose movie were Great succsess stories (Just think of V for Vendetta, or Hellboy, 300, sin city etc). I think BB and SR didnt do so well because these Characters are overshown. Some new adaptions like GL, Flash or WW, would be great, and they wouldnt have to explain any origin story for them in the JL movie. Thats why marvel is making an Antman, Thor, Ironman, Cap, New Hulk movie to establish the characters and then put them together. You are right many marvel rights were in the hands of other studios, but since marvel has made its own studio they gained many rights back (exept for some, maybe the most lucrative, the X-men and Spidey franchises) and will make the movies how they were intended to (no elektra or hulk f-ups).

I just dont see welling coming, because then the whole Smallville must come. And they made so many mistakes that it will never work. Clark never wore glasses he will be always recognized, his secret identiety will never be safe, thus he cant put on the costume. And there are many more mistakes that just suck. But on the other hand (if they could somehow fix the glasses problem), they have allready a proto league with Green Arrow, Impulse (Proto Flash), Cyborg, Aquaman (wich they should of made the spinoff ) and eaven a Martian Manhunter (not a member yet but he is established). Give them some more classic costumes (exept maybe green arrows hes cool), add in Bats, WW and GL, and viola we got ourself a Justice legue. But would this really work? I am sceptical, and I would rather see an Awsome CGI movie then a crappy Live action movie (if the life action is done well sure do it, but I dont think WB is willing to risk all that money). Whatever Ill wait until we know sometihng more official before I make any more jugdements.

PS: Serioucly Lobo should be made, that would be the greatest.

 

[The Guard]

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...

 

[Darabka]

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...

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?

 

[dnno1]

Some of you guys don't want to realize that there already are 2 Supermen (the version from Smallville and the one currently in the films) and it hasn't seemed to affect the production of either projects. I will admit that they have served to enhance the other in the way of SfX (namely the use of the same heat vison effect). I seriously doubt that replacing Batman would produce a different result. We don't go to watch these films for who is portarying the charcater, but for the charater himself.

 

[The Guard]

Look at the big picture. The following versions of Superman exist.

Comic books (many over the years)
Radio
A musical
Chris Reeve's
Dean Cain's
Tom Welling's
Brandon Routh's
Several cartoon versions, including STAS and JL and JLU.

How often do people actually get confused between those versions?

 

[moguy]

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.

 

[moguy]

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.

 

[The Guard]

Some of you act like the characterizations of the characters in JLA will be so far off what we see in THE DARK KNIGHT and it's sequel that people will somehow become confused. Do you honestly think that will happen? Unless JLA features, say, Ra's Al Ghul using Fear Gas on Gotham, I don't see why anyone would be confused. To most people it will be simply THE CHARACTER KNOWN AS BATMAN in a NEW STORY. And isn't that the point?

Or course I can't name two superhero movies that are running concurrently with different actors, but so what? It's a new concept. But JLA is not going to come out WHILE The Dark Knight's sequel is in theaters.

But here are some quasi-similar comparison.

DIE ANOTHER DAY
CASINO ROYALE

A new actor as Bond in a new Bond story. That simple.

 

[The Guard]

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.

A simple "Hmm...I wonder why a massive shift in tone occurred" would lead them to the obvious answer. They would see that "Hey, BATMAN & ROBIN was made THREE FILMS after BATMAN", and from there, they could do some delving into the real reasons for the inconsistencies. Although, BATMAN and BATMAN & ROBIN did have some very basic things in common, when you think about it.

Go take a look at Rotten Tomatoes and see how many reviewers referred to Batman Begins as a prequel.

So they either didn't do their homework, or completely misused the term. Your point? "Prequel", in the case of "BEGINS", became a buzz word. Most moviesites use prequel to explain any film that retells a story a previous film has told.

The movie was called "BATMAN BEGINS" and included several aspects that directly counteracted what happened in BATMAN. If people are stupid or ignorant, then yes, they might get confused. But the facts of the film speak for themselves if people bother to see what's actually going on.

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.

Maybe I do. But is it WB's fault that stupid or ignorant people are stupid or ignorant?

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.

Let's try a new word, other than universe. "Version". "Different version".

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.

I can't wait to hear all the confusion when The Incredible Hulk comes out next year.

I think most people will see it for what it is. A quasi-sequel.

 

[dnno1]

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.

 

[moguy]

"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.

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.

 

[moguy]

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.

Sorry if I don't have as much faith in the general public as you.

I just wish that the logical thought you speak of was used for more than just figuring out movie continuity. Hell, a little logical thought applied before the invasion of Iraq might have been useful.

It's pretty amusing how defensive people are on these boards, especially considering that we're all talking about comic book movies that might not even happen.

Excessive use of ALL CAPS does little to sway my opinion. People really need to lighten up. Personally, I'm just saying what I think. I might be right, I might be wrong. I'm not arrogant enough to speak in absolutes. No one really knows what will happen two years from now.

The funny thing is, that I would love for this movie to work, and to be a success. I'm just concerned that it might not succeed, and in the proccess adversely affect another film series that I care about.

So, I think I'm right, but I really hope I'm wrong.

Flame away.

 

[union_jak]

I think it's laughable how much the Bat-Embargo was imposed on JLU and The Batman around the time of Begins, as well as the Aquaman one with JLU because of his failed pilot. Yet Superman is allowed to be in Smallville, Superman Returns, JLU and the JLA movie?

You can't have the same Bat-characters in Begins and The Batman, and The Batman and JLU... but you can have two seperate live action Batman films?

 

[FaT_tONle]

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.

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.

 

[union_jak]

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.

Yeah, it didn't help that many reviews/articles casually described it as a prequel either.

 

[dnno1]

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.

But they are still making James Bond films - almost 25 years later. This proves that doing such a thing won't hurt a franchise.

Holywoodland and Superman returns? C'mon now you're grasping at straws.

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.

 

[toddly6666]

To hell with actor continuity. I'm sure it doesn't stop people from buying the Batman DVD Boxset which includes the Schumacher travesties (batman 3 & 4). You don't actually like those movies, you just like the idea that they are sold in a boxset, as if they were "continuity."

Sure it's nice to have contrasting actors such as Bale and Routh, but Routh is just a bad actor and not charasmatic. He's a walking manaquin. People will watch the JLA movie and ask, "why isn't Batman the leader?" And I've seen all the Justice League cartoons - it's not the same. In the cartoon, Batman is smarter than Superman, and kicks more ass than Superman. But the cartoon Justice League Superman has more life than Routh. Thank god they get Tom Welling for the motion capture. If you motion capture Brandon Routh, it will be the same as watching a character from FINAL FANTASY:SPIRITS WITHIN - a lifeless, boring CGI character.

People's obsession with all the superhero movies/shows/cartoons connecting is out-of-hand. It does not matter. These movies should not be like your action figure collection where everyone is standing next to each other like one big happy family - all it looks like is a big mish-mosh. It would be the same if all the superhero movies/shows/cartoons had to be connected somehow - one big mish mosh.

Are people fascist movie watchers? "We must have Order, ya! Ve must vatch Batman Begins, Batman, Batman 2, Batman 3, Batman 4 in this order! That is how the fuher wants us to watch them, ya! And zen ve must watch Smallville, Superman 90s cartoon/Batman 90s cartoon, Justice League cartoon, Batman Beyond in zis order, ya!!"

 

[moguy]

But they are still making James Bond films - almost 25 years later. This proves that doing such a thing won't hurt a franchise.

Yes, but that was the first and last time they tried to have two competing James Bond movies

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.

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

 

[Diamondhead]

Forget about JLA
I'd rather see
Pipi longstoking meet Peter Pan with that girl from yellow brick road or OZ !

No seriously!
A JLA movie means they’d have to find a way to make all superhero equals
And that's means doing a lot of demeaning thing toward Superman to make the Batman the flash even Wonder woman look good
Just like they did in that JLA animation series

C’mon now not every superhero were created equals OK specially in the DC univers

If Siegel and shooter were bold enough to created something ahead f its time
And the creator of Batman was still caught in is 1930's idea
And wonder woman creator had fetish about woman in seclusion and other weird stuff

Siegel and shooter creation don't have to suffer for it.

Anyway most DC concept is way too old
They just can't be mix.

Long live the X men

 

[dnno1]

Yes, but that was the first and last time they tried to have two competing James Bond movies

But it does sound like it is happening again (only with another character).

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

Actually you said "an" example (meaning one). I gave you two. There could be more. Furtermore, they are live action films and in different continuities. BTW, the DC Multiverse does have a alternate universe like ours where Superman is just a comic book character. What you said can be interpreted to mean that the two films ("Hollywoodland" and "Superman Returns") are related. Wikipedia describes how the making of "Hollywoodland" could have had a detrimental influence on the Superman franchise had certain elements that were proposed been used in the film. Also, although the film was centered around George Reeves. If the two films weren't related in any way, this would not have been an issue to the WB.