Justice League Rumor: Bale may be back as Batman in JL - Part 1

[Rodrigo90]

I liked the ending to TDKR.

But we know more can be done with the story.

Am I satisfied that Bruce Wayne is going to sit around and see crime happen and NOT feel compelled to do something about it and just leave it up to somebody else? Honestly? No.

That's why I would want to see him go on to form JL and Batman Inc.
¨The function of leadership is to produce more leaders, not more followers¨

 

[Dusty_Lane]

Combination of things.

1. Nolan's Batman isn't smart enough to fit in Justice League.
2. I don't want them retconning Nolan's story to make it fit.
3. Bale's Batvoice is annoying and I'm ready for a new version.

1. That's a poor excuse. No offense but it really is. They could always apply the super-intellect quality to his character. That's no big deal at all. Who's to say that he really wasn't anyway? It's not like any of the stories in the trilogy really needed to make that point. He wasn't an idiot by anymeans. Plus, Batman being the supreme intellectual isn't really the only reason he's needed in the JL. The JL needs a human amongst the superpowered to keep them honest.

2. It wouldn't be a retcon. It would just be expanding on the story. Sure he retired, but given the right push there could be a need for him to suit up again. That idea given to professional writers like Goyer to explore could be very intriguing.

3. Personally what I find annoying is not the voice itself, but rather the fans who make a big deal out of it. Seriously, people make a bigger deal out of this than it really is. I don't even notice it. It's just a distinct trait that identifies his portrayal of Batman. People over exaggerate the "absurdity" of it.

 

[redfirebird2008]

1. That's a poor excuse. No offense but it really is. They could always apply the super-intellect quality to his character. That's no big deal at all. Who's to say that he really wasn't anyway? It's not like any of the stories in the trilogy really needed to make that point. He wasn't an idiot by anymeans. Plus, Batman being the supreme intellectual isn't really the only reason he's needed in the JL. The JL needs a human amongst the superpowered to keep them honest.

2. It wouldn't be a retcon. It would just be expanding on the story. Sure he retired, but given the right push there could be a need for him to suit up again. That idea given to professional writers like Goyer to explore could be very intriguing.

3. Personally what I find annoying is not the voice itself, but rather the fans who make a big deal out of it. Seriously, people make a bigger deal out of this than it really is. I don't even notice it. It's just a distinct trait that identifies his portrayal of Batman. People over exaggerate the "absurdity" of it.

1. Then why don't we get rid of Lucius as Q? Morgan Freeman was perfect. I loved that aspect of the trilogy, and it wouldn't be there if Bruce was the genius that comic fans want him to be.

2. It would be a retcon. My interpretation on Nolan's version is that Batman is a temporary pscyhological outlet for Bruce's depression/anger. Once he is finally able to find peace, he doesn't need it anymore. Changing this would be a retcon to me.

3. I loved Batman Begins and even liked the Batvoice in that film. I loved TDK/TDKR, but I hated the Batvoice in those two films. They took it over the top with the two later films and I wish they had left it the same as it was in BB.

 

[Mikelus]

I shouldn't speak for Redfire, but it's obvious when a Nolan fan doesn't want their Batman used, it's because theyre satisfied with the ending so much that they want it to remain a stand-alone trilogy. And possibly welcome the reboot.

I was like that after TDKR until the Bale rumors hit, and now I see potential in story and box-office to include him.

If not, then so be it. But at least do the reboot justice.

The reboot should be good if Goyer and Snyder are involved, they can make Batman more... awesome like Zack would say. t:

At least you are reasonable enough, others seem to have this unhealthy obsession that creates great frustration afterwards.

 

[Aztec]

1) I liked the ending to TDKR.

2) But we know more can be done with the story.

3) Am I satisfied that Bruce Wayne is going to sit around and see crime happen and NOT feel compelled to do something about it and just leave it up to somebody else? Honestly? No.

4) That's why I would want to see him go on to form JL and Batman Inc.
¨The function of leadership is to produce more leaders, not more followers¨

1) We'll have to agree to disagree here. I found the entire ending (and much of the film quite frankly) very "un-Batman".
2) Agreed.
3) There's not a chance of that happening if you are going to be true to the character.
4) I'll disagree on Batman Inc; however him forming the Justice League as an opposite to the League of Shadows I feel would be excellent symmetry to the overall narrative.

Again though, I'll stress that they need to start with just Bats and Supes in a World's Finest film. They can then whet the appetites of the audience and go from there.

 

[Dusty_Lane]

1. Then why don't we get rid of Lucius as Q? Morgan Freeman was perfect. I loved that aspect of the trilogy, and it wouldn't be there if Bruce was the genius that comic fans want him to be.

2. It would be a retcon. My interpretation on Nolan's version is that Batman is a temporary pscyhological outlet for Bruce's depression/anger. Once he is finally able to find peace, he doesn't need it anymore. Changing this would be a retcon to me.

3. I loved Batman Begins and even liked the Batvoice in that film. I loved TDK/TDKR, but I hated the Batvoice in those two films. They took it over the top with the two later films and I wish they had left it the same as it was in BB.

I've always viewed a retcon has meaning a certain element was erased from the continuity timeline. As for Batman being a psychological outlet for Bruce's depression or anger....in this version...not so much. I would actually equate that more to Burton's vision of Batman. Much like the scene in the 3rd act of the 1989 film where Bruce can't exactly explain to Vicki why he does what he does. Nolan's take on Bruce Wayne was someone who used the Batman persona with a finite goal in mind. He wanted to use the persona as a symbol to shake the people of the city out of apathy. He wanted to show that one man could make a difference in corrupt society. I don't doubt that there is some truth in it being an outlet for his scarred psyche, but that was more or less in TDKR after a few years of being a recluse. Just keep in mind that he did retire when he felt that he wasn't needed anymore. Provided another reason required his attention as Batman I think he would answer the call.

 

[Rodrigo90]

1) We'll have to agree to disagree here. I found the entire ending (and much of the film quite frankly) very "un-Batman".
2) Agreed.
3) There's not a chance of that happening if you are going to be true to the character.
4) I'll disagree on Batman Inc; however him forming the Justice League as an opposite to the League of Shadows I feel would be excellent symmetry to the overall narrative.

Again though, I'll stress that they need to start with just Bats and Supes in a World's Finest film. They can then whet the appetites of the audience and go from there.

It was un-Batman. Too much a happily ever after ending.
I stopped believing in them after Metal Gear Solid 4 lol

Don't take the Batman Inc. dream away!

If Bruce forms the JL, feeling the world needs heroes to protect it. Then to me also, what he did for Blake and Gotham, he would do that for others out there.
Don't have him go back to bed between JL 1 and 2. It's all to natural if those were the stages lol

 

[Dusty_Lane]

Now as for those complaining about how Batman would NEVER quit! Well, this is somewhat false because he has quit in the comics on more than one occasion. As a matter of fact in Knightfall after his back was healed he was ready to go on living the rest of his life as Bruce Wayne. It wasn't until Tim Drake came to him with the news that Azbats had totally flipped his lid.

In Batman Returns, Batman Forever, and Mask of the Phantasm he's ready to throw it all in for love at some point in each of those films.

 

[georgec]

The retirement/return story was already done for Nolan's Batman. I like that trilogy being self-contained. Bringing back the Nolanverse Batman takes away a lot of the meaning of TDKR and its ending.

I say just recast a 30-year-old to play Batman, dive right in, and don't "reboot" until the next cycle of JL/DC films 10-15 years from now.

 

[redfirebird2008]

Now as for those complaining about how Batman would NEVER quit! Well, this is somewhat false because he has quit in the comics on more than one occasion. As a matter of fact in Knightfall after his back was healed he was ready to go on living the rest of his life as Bruce Wayne. It wasn't until Tim Drake came to him with the news that Azbats had totally flipped his lid.

In Batman Returns, Batman Forever, and Mask of the Phantasm he's ready to throw it all in for love at some point in each of those films.

There are different takes on the character. Some fans don't want to see the character ever quit. They have valid reasons for wanting it to be that way, but I don't have a problem with him quitting.

 

[Shikamaru]

I'd be upset clearly. What about you on the reverse side?

It depends.

If Bruce Wayne is coming back, then I'll just suck it up and deal with it even though I'll be very upset. It will be up to the trailers and first reactions to get me excited for the film.

If John Blake is coming back as Batman, then I'll refuse to even go near the film and will do everything I can in my power to boycott it (which is nothing since I'm your average Joe with no power ).

Same. I accepted that TDKR was the end of that Batman story and was all set for a reboot as well. However, I think it hit me when I saw the 2nd trailer for Man of Steel late last year, and I was like my god this belongs in the same family as TDK Trilogy. Suddenly it was like, how awesome would Bale and Cavill look as the World's Finest team! I got to thinking that despite the ending of TDKR, there wasn't anything there that truly said Bruce couldn't comeback to the cape and cowl given the right motivation. Then the idea of taking Nolan's realistic world and adding a new twist to it where fantastical things could in fact exist was intriguing. Actors come and go, but there is always something extra special about the ones who hang around a longtime. That's what I want for Bale. If it happens great, and if not I have no choice to but to accept it as a Batfan first and foremost. However, I must admit that because I'm turning 30 in a couple months it does scare me that the next actor to play the role could be younger than me? Does that sound odd? lol!

I don't think you should base the belief that MOS fits in with TDK trilogy on anything that came out prior to Trailer #3. This is because Trailer #3 was the first time they used Zimmer's score. Prior to that, the score wasn't finished so they used scores from Lord of the Rings and Gladiator in their trailers. Soundtracks can be very deceiving. They change the entire mood, tone, and feel of the film. Imagine if you never saw anything from the TDK Trilogy in your whole life and then I showed you a clip from it with the 1960's Batman theme in the background. Heck, imagine I played that during Batman's fight with Bane. The entire tone and feel of the scene would change.

I think a lot of people are basing the idea that MOS fits in with the TDK trilogy on the tone and feel of the first 2 trailers. We shouldn't do that because they're both inaccurate representations of the film. Trailer #3 and the TV Spots that came after it is what should count because they use Zimmer's score thus they're an 100% accurate representation of the film's tone and feel. The people that saw the early screenings back in January and February even said that the film is nowhere as dark and moody as the first few trailers suggest.

 

[Shikamaru]

Now as for those complaining about how Batman would NEVER quit! Well, this is somewhat false because he has quit in the comics on more than one occasion. As a matter of fact in Knightfall after his back was healed he was ready to go on living the rest of his life as Bruce Wayne. It wasn't until Tim Drake came to him with the news that Azbats had totally flipped his lid.

In Batman Returns, Batman Forever, and Mask of the Phantasm he's ready to throw it all in for love at some point in each of those films.

He temporarily quit in Knightfall due to the damage Bane did to him. Once he was able sit in a wheelchair, he began training to become Batman again. Azrael was just there temporarily until Bruce would fully recover from the injuries.

Mask of the Phantasm is never an example you want to source for Batman quitting. Complaining that Batman wanted to quit in that movie is the same thing as calling a book racist because it uses the N word even though the whole message of the book is that racism is wrong. The whole point of MOTP is that he had to come to the realization that he can never quit and that he has to be Batman. The is the exact opposite of the message in TDKR. TDKR supports the idea of Bruce quitting; MOTP doesn't. Before you accuse of a Batman story of trying to make Bruce quit, look at the story as a whole. What is message? What is it saying about the idea of Bruce quitting? Is it supporting it or is it against it? MOTP is against it; TDKR isn't. Batman Forever is also against the idea of Batman quitting to an extent (though the idea is not executed that well there).

Please don't compare great stories like Knightfall and Mask of the Phantasm, as well as the messages in them, to the insulting ending of TDKR that completely goes against everything that is the essence of Batman. Batman is the last superhero out of all the superheroes there are that would ever quit.

 

[Great Mind(s)]

I agree I also don't remember him saying he quit...and because of that there is still room to continue. Since you didnt like the end anyway, would it change your opinion of TDKR if it was revealed in a Justice League that it wasn't the end? I mean youre saying Bale Batman shouldn't be Batman again because his Batman isn't true to the essence by quitting... but his being Batman in JL would contradict that entire point

 

[dnno1]

Without Fox wiping his ass, I can totally see Bale's Bruce pull his own **** together lol

Bond needs Q
Batman does NOT need Fox!

Bale always had the potential to really shine with his intellect and genius, as it has been shown in clumps. But I would expect him to show his cunning a lot more now without Fox around.

If he has the means, he can do it no problem.

Today's moviegoer is a lot smarter than that. They will question where Batman gets all his toys and know good and well that he doesn't have the time to build that stuff by himself. Furthermore, you a good detective or a smart criminal would be able to trace the weapons back to its source, unless it is covered up properly. That is why Batman needs his own Q, and that would be Lucius Fox. Now, with that being said, there is no need to have said character be involved in the Justice League franchise outside of the fact that Wane Industries might be bankrolling part of the Justice Leagues facilities.

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

Batman quitting at the end is the same reason that Bruce quits as an old man in Batman Beyond. His health.

His body has reached its limit and it would be selfish of him to continue when there's someone else there to replace him.

I can understand the complaint about Bruce not staying behind to help out Blake from the cave. However, I think the movie sets up that the more important thing is that there is simply a symbol there for Gotham.

---

On another note, if Nolan-Bats moved and was shot like in the Arkham Origins trailer, would anyone cry foul because he didn't move quite like that before?

 

[Great Mind(s)]

But it kind of undermines Bruce 's long ass training in Batman Begins...if a rookie cop who accidentally shoots people takes over as Batman....I mean...whauh? It doesn't work really ... For a supposed 'realistic' trilogy it ends on a really unrealistic note.

 

[redfirebird2008]

But it kind of undermines Bruce 's long ass training in Batman Begins...if a rookie cop who accidentally shoots people takes over as Batman....I mean...whauh? It doesn't work really ... For a supposed 'realistic' trilogy it ends on a really unrealistic note.

What is realistic about the Joker rigging a hospital to blow up? Or the microwave emitter in Batman Begins? It has never been a realistic series of movies.

 

[Great Mind(s)]

Youre right not much. Just saying, neither of those lessened another plot point by showing how pointless it was. Joker was quasi supernatural in his essence anyway. The microwave emitter was a Sci FI tool. Blake being Batman shows either a) Bruce's training wasn't needed b) Blake has superpowers or c) Bruce will train him... I like c best...
There's also d) where he trips over his cape on the first night and breaks his neck...

 

[redfirebird2008]

Youre right not much. Just saying, neither of those lessened another plot point by showing how pointless it was. Joker was quasi supernatural in his essence anyway. The microwave emitter was a Sci FI tool. Blake being Batman shows either a) Bruce's training wasn't needed b) Blake has superpowers or c) Bruce will train him... I like c best...
There's also d) where he trips over his cape on the first night and breaks his neck...

I'll go with D.

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

But it kind of undermines Bruce 's long ass training in Batman Begins...if a rookie cop who accidentally shoots people takes over as Batman....I mean...whauh? It doesn't work really ... For a supposed 'realistic' trilogy it ends on a really unrealistic note.

Blake would be fine. He has the resources (the suit, the Batpod), and he could get some training in the next few years.

Better than in Batman Beyond at least, where he gives the cowl to a 17 year old boy.

 

[Rodrigo90]

Blake would most likely have trained for a number of years before going out and about in Gotham.

Who honestly thinks he would jump straight into **** on his first night?
And major threats to Gotham only happen every 8 years or so in that continuity lol

 

[shauner111]

TDKR ended on a different note. It's film, not comics, so they have the ability to make an ending happen for the character. The comics don't have that luxury.

You either like it or you don't. But it's Nolan saying "What if Bruce Wayne's story had an ending?". Plus even though he wasn't close to 60, there was a point in the story when his body was like a 60 year old. I truly feel like a lot of that was put back into shape but the story was very different but important, in telling a story that says "the torch can be passed onto generations of people. A symbol that can last forever even when Bruce is dead and gone or incapable of doing it himself." It's also a story about Bruce letting go of his pain and anger.

This version of Bruce, since Begins was not the Batman who made a vow to his parents to make sure he does this for life, as a mission, so nobody has to go through what he went through as a child. Since Begins it was about staying in Gotham only for "as long as it takes", to show people that the city doesn't belong to the criminals and the corrupt politicians. It was ALWAYS supposed to be temporary and he was always looking to retire and pass the torch...those plans kept getting delayed until he got himself in such a rut, he had to re-evaluate what the original intention was all about.

The trilogy ended full circle, and it was a perfect ending for THAT version. If Shikamaru or others think it goes against the essence of Batman, guess what? This was a different interpretation. It's not the comics, they could actually END it if they wanted. And if Bale returns to JL what are you complaining about??? It would match your thoughts on Batman. Never quitting.

If he came back, it also wouldn't spit on the trilogy because he could start taking care of different cities in need, in other parts of the world. Creating the Justice League and Batman Inc.

Passing the torch was always the plan in this version. Stop comparing it to the comics constantly.

The haters just want Batman to live forever through Bruce Wayne. For him to be Batman for 30 years straight, but this was a more grounded approach. Nolan took the liberty to have Batman live on forever through multiple people.

And why would a fan of Bruce Wayne not want to pull for him and see him live a happy life? Don't you think the character deserves peace? Even if you want him to return a few years later for JL and get back to the brooding Batman, don't you want to see him at least be happy even if it's for a few years only with Selina?? I find that baffling as a fan. It almost feels like some of you guys are trying too hard to be fanboyish and geeky about it like "I DONT CARE! ITS SO COOL THAT HES ALWAYS DARK! HE SHOULD NEVER HAVE A HAPPY ENDING CUZ MY BELOVED COMIC BOOK SAYS HE CANT!" It's so juvenile to me. Why would a happy ending for this character, permanent or temporary be a horrible thing? It should be an emotional thing to see.

Especially Nolan's version who like I said, never made a vow to his parents. I question if people were even invested in this character during Begins, TDK into TDKR or were you always thinking of where it should go so it matches the source material?

To answer your post Great Mind(s). I don't see why Blake can't get training. He has time. That's not the point. It must start with having the will to do it, and Blake has it. The training is secondary. It'll come. He may not be Batman, but using the symbol in his own way, so his level of training is irrelevant.

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

I get the complaints, but I don't think Bruce made a selfish choice; the selfish choice in this context would be to continue being Batman when he doesn't need to be. And I don't think it flies in the essence of Batman.

I don't think Bruce thought "he needs training, but I don't to wait around, so good-bye". Rather I think that line "the training is nothing, the will is everything" was lingering in his head somewhere. Or he just didn't think about it (the same way that he didn't think about letting Alfred know that he was still alive at first).

 

[shauner111]

How do you know Bruce doesn't plan on training him in some part of the world where he and Selina reside?

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

How do you know Bruce doesn't plan on training him in some part of the world where he and Selina reside?

I don't know that. But there was also nothing in the movie that suggested that he does.