Justice League Rumor: Bale may be back as Batman in JL - Part 2

[shauner111]

Ah, more lectures about me being a purist.

I find it funny how you assume that getting the essence of a character right is rocket science. It isn't. Keeping the essence of Batman =/= things being 100% accurate. One can do major alterations to a character in his interpretation and I would still be fine with it as long as the essence is there.

Let's take Ra's al Ghul in BB for example. That Ra's is not the same Ra's of the comics. It is Nolan's own interpretation of Ra's. He has an entire different goal and even different tactics than the Ra's of the comics. He also is the head of the League of Shadows as opposed to the League of Assassins. However, the essence of the character is still there. The essence of Ra's would be the lines he crosses in order to get what he wants, the fact that he isn't afraid of killing whoever gets in the way, the fact that he believes he is doing the right thing even if sacrifices are made, and the fact that he wants Bruce to be his successor. All those things are still there in BB despite that Ra's being an entirely different character.

Another example is Batman in The Dark Knight Returns. The Dark Knight Returns portrayed Batman as a psychotic madman on a ridiculous level. However, Frank Miller still respected the essence of Batman in that book (and ONLY in that book; his later work on Batman is another story) by staying true to the message behind Batman and by still staying true to Batman's no-kill policy. I will use one specific scene to prove my point, though there are many other scenes in the book that I could've used to do so. At one point in the story, the Joker pushes Batman to his full limits by finally getting him to use a gun - the one weapon he would never use - to avoid the GCPD. That is a limit that Batman has never touched before. As Batman uses the gun, he looks at the smile on the Joker's corpse and says "Stop laughing". It was a scene that added to the Batman/Joker dynamic and to the theme of guns. Despite being something Batman wouldn't do, the essence was there due to those reasons. It wasn't Miller saying "**** this, let's make my Batman use guns willy nilly cuz that's cool!"

Man of Steel is another example. To my knowledge, the idea of Kal-El being the first natural-born Kryptonian in centuries is not from the comics. However, the essence of Superman is still there because it ties into the idea of Kal-El being a symbol of hope, which is what Superman has always been a symbol of. Lois Lane knowing his identity from the start is not the direction I would've went personally but it still stays true to the essence of their relationship because their feelings and the way they act around each other is still intact. Superman kills Zod, something he would never do. However, that scene in which it happens still stays true to the essence of Superman by having Superman fall on his knees and weep for what he did, which is exactly what the Superman from the comics would do if he was in that situation. By doing that, they stayed true to the essence of Superman.

Having the essence of a character there is not rocket science. It does not mean that things have to be 100% accurate and straight-off-the-page or else the essence is lacking. The essence is indeed present if things do turn out being completely accurate down to the bone, but it is not completely necessary for things to be completely accurate in order for the essence to be present. Getting the essence right is simple. All it takes is to have a few simple and basic things in there.

In TDKR's case, the essence is not there. The whole message of the film goes completely against the message of Batman. If I was to write down on a piece of paper what the message and meaning of Batman was, TDKR would contradict every single one of those points. It is not that TDKR ignored those points or gave its own spin on those points. It is that TDKR deliberately went against all those points. The message of TDKR and the message of Batman are the complete opposite of one another. TDKR is hot while Batman is cold. When you make an entire film with the message that anyone can be Batman and that Bruce should outgrow Batman, that is not keeping the essence there. That is going against the very essence of Batman. Things don't have to be 100% accurate but that doesn't mean that you can completely go against the very essence of something.

When did I say that I get Batman more than Goyer and everyone else here? I never made such statement. I could care less what other people think. I am an individual and I come to conclusions based on my own knowledge and judgments. I don't have to be some puppet or bandwagoner that goes around agreeing with everything Goyer and other people say. Also, it is possible for even the greatest people out there to screw up. I never stated that guys like Goyer don't get Batman but even if Goyer knew Batman better than anyone else in the world, that wouldn't mean he would never screw up with Batman because nobody is perfect. People drop the ball sometimes and that is fine. Even Bruce Timm had a few moments during Batman TAS where I thought Batman did something I don't picture him doing.

You don't know what the essence of something means. Not for Batman you don't. If you don't like the end to Rises, fine, more power to you but to say that it goes against the essence means you're getting too detailed with what you think Batman means. The character doesn't have an ending because the comics don't allow it. He's written specifically to go on forever so they don't have to stop selling stories, then within that they work the writing around it and act like he would never pass the torch. Which is why he never fully passes the torch to his sidekicks for long because they need to get the Bruce-Batman back into the issues being sold. Batman Beyond was made as a concept that was new to sell. They still needed Bruce Wayne involved that way the fans don't feel too iffy about some random teenager taking over the role. Then they work a story around why Bruce is still 80 and dark, not having moved on. In film you're able to do what the comics can't do. Believe it or not the comics may have freedom to tell unlimited stories but they're actually limiting themselves once Bruce is written to be older because they cant actually finish his reign as the Batman completely. The Dark Knight Returns sort-of did and Frank Miller had the balls to do it, but that was one interpretation...it doesn't mean that it's the only one that can be allowed. It's not gospel. Nolan interpretation is no less valid than Millers or anyone elses.

By what you're tell me, it's as if you're saying it's wrong, it's not the essence, that's not Batman...I don't see Uslan & others complaining. In fact I see them crying because of how beautiful the ending was and they've been fans for like 60 years and guaranteed have read more Batman comics than you have. Are you going to say that somebody like Uslan is wrong if he says it's still the essence of Batman?? If you are then you're beyond arrogant and you think you know the character more than people who are diehard fans since ALMOST ITS INCEPTION. That's delusional.

ESSENCE
A property or group of properties of something without which it would not exist or be what it is.

It goes back to why Bruce is who he is. He had a fear of bats, he feels responsible for his parents death, which they got shot in a alley when he was a little boy, through that pain he becomes the Batman to strike fear into the hearts of criminals. THAT is the essence. Guns or no guns doesn't matter even though a lot of us prefer no killing, because he was created to kill. So Burton, Shumacher, Nolan, they're all valid in that regard. Nothing else matters. Joker can have scars or perma-white. They can go through many Robins. They're supporting characters and they can be changed to serve the world that a specific batman is operating in because it revolves around him as a character, just like the city of Gotham. ANYTHING ELSE that happens after in Batmans career is subjective, it's up to the writer, as long as the essence that made him who he was is intact. How you end or not end the story is irrelevant to said essence. Who he faces, what his decisions are when he gets older, the progression of his character is free to go wherever direction. If he stays depressed, angry, finds happiness, stays in the cowl, drops the cowl..is up to the WRITERS.

That is the essence of a character. I can say the same about Peter Parker and why he is who he is, Kal-El/Clark Kent, whatever. It's all the same.

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

It always fascinates me how people can have such different interpretations of a movie.

I for one think that TDKR is great at its core, and that it does understand the 'essence of Batman'. However, it also addresses that the 'essence of Batman', while lending itself to great heroism in Batman's obsession/guilt, etc, is also problematic; Being Batman is indeed emotionally unhealthy, and TDKR gave us the circumstances for Bruce to confront that. They do this by giving us something that isn't from the comics, that being Batman is permanently physically damaging as well. Bruce has to learn to trust people (to go against his 'essence').

I don't think the movies are saying that 'being Batman=bad', retirement=good. Rather it's saying that both are needed, just at different times.

 

[Dusty_Lane]

So speculating about something that was confirmed to happen is a far bigger waste of time than speculating about the nonexistent chances of Bale coming back?

If you're expecting Bale back, you're setting yourself up for a far bigger disappointment.

Dude, if you've read any of my previous posts I've stated that in all likelihood Bale is finished. However, again there is always a slight chance that things could change. There is still a lot of time before we even see a Justice League movie, if we see one at all. However, yes I do think throwing out a series of random names when only one actor will get the role is a waste of time. Sorry but it kinda is.

 

[dnno1]

We're Not Buying That Christian Bale Will Never Be In A 'Batman' Film Again
http://finance.yahoo.com/news/were-not-buying-christian-bale-185000529.html

 

[Travesty]

Which one of you guys wrote that article?

 

[Rodrigo90]

My. That really made me chuckle. It's like Karras thumping a dead Merrin in The Exorcist. So desperate, so unwilling to accept things, that the man is gone

And I suspect Dusty - Great Minds -Shauner

 

[dnno1]

Which one of you guys wrote that article?

Kirsten Acuna
(Reporter at Business Insider)

Kirsten Acuna is a reporter for Business Insider. She's been writing for at least 3 year in the industry and has a degree in journalism for Syracuse University. She was the one who wrote the article. Not just some comic book fan-boy.

 

[dnno1]

My. That really made me chuckle. It's like Karras thumping a dead Merrin in The Exorcist. So desperate, so unwilling to accept things, that the man is gone

And I suspect Dusty - Great Minds -Shauner

I will be honest with you, Batman is a multi-billion dollar franchise. You just don't up and say that you are going to reboot it with out a good plan that will show that a rebooted film will still be as profitable. I am sure a Stanford MBA grad like Kevin Tsujihara is going to ask why Bale is not playing Batman or why no one tried to talk to him before he signs off on any reboot with an actor other than Christian Bale.

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

who says she can't be a fangirl? Having yahoo finance at the job of the page doesn't make that rant any more valid.

 

[Rorschach2012]

You can't be a fangirl if you suggest John Blake continue the Batman franchise.

That's like wanting the little kid in Superman Returns to be Superman.

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

Nolanverse fangirl*

 

[Monicabbm]

You can't be a fangirl if you suggest John Blake continue the Batman franchise.

That's like wanting the little kid in Superman Returns to be Superman.

 

[dnno1]

who says she can't be a fangirl? Having yahoo finance at the job of the page doesn't make that rant any more valid.

You can't be a fangirl if you suggest John Blake continue the Batman franchise.

That's like wanting the little kid in Superman Returns to be Superman.

First of all, the article was from Business Insider. Yahoo Finance only re-printed it on their website. As far as being a fangirl or not, she (Kirsten Acuna) hasn't disclosed that, but what you can gather from the article it is reasonable to think that she has seen her share of comic book movies. Then again, she does write for the entertainment section so that's her job to be up on films.

 

[shauner111]

I still think a Batman Beyond movie would work in the Nolan-verse just toned down. No, not with JGL. When he's like 50 (playing a 45 year old) he can have his cameo scene. Hathaway too, who will be around the same age. Bale would be like 60 playing a 70 year old. Oldman around 75 with a couple of short scenes, no, not as Commissioner...that would be his daughter Barbara. You don't even need Jim Gordon honestly.

Same thing as the source. Terry McGinnis, futuristic Gotham but not as exaggerated for live-action. 30 years after the events of TDKR.

I don't see how that's a laughable suggestion to think that WB won't be asking Nolan and Bale to return in 20 years to do a Batman Beyond with an aged Bruce Wayne and a young Terry McGinnis.

 

[Rodrigo90]

It's an idea worth checking out in a few years.

 

[Majik1387]

No, it isn't. Not in the slightest.

 

[Rodrigo90]

Yes it is, casting hater...sort of

 

[Shikamaru]

Dude, if you've read any of my previous posts I've stated that in all likelihood Bale is finished. However, again there is always a slight chance that things could change. There is still a lot of time before we even see a Justice League movie, if we see one at all. However, yes I do think throwing out a series of random names when only one actor will get the role is a waste of time. Sorry but it kinda is.

I've never been big on casting but I don't think it is a waste of time. None of us are saying that a certain actor should play Batman and end of story. We are simply throwing some suggestions out there. If another actor is cast, so be it. As long as he seems at least decent for the part based on his looks and career, most of us will give him a chance. Very few people here will drop their expectations from the new Batman just because the specific actor they had in mind wasn't cast. If anything, more people will be dissapointed by clinging on to the small chance of Bale coming back.

Yes, there is a slight chance but it is ridiculously small. Assuming that Bale wants to and is able to come back, the only thing that will bring him back at this point for JL is if MOS 2 and/or the Batman reboot ends up being a disaster. However, why would you wish for any DC film to fail just so that Bale could be brought back?

It is pointless to cling onto such small chances IMO. The people that do that are only setting themselves up for dissapointment. We all have hopes that our personal wishes will come true despite their chances being very small. Hope is good but there needs to be a point in which we accept reality. You want Bale back and I want the Maple Leafs to win for once, but the reality is that both of those things will most likely not happen.

 

[DChero]

Yep. There's a big difference between preferring Bale to come back versus believing he will. I think that most of the Bale supporters are in the first camp.

 

[shauner111]

No, it isn't. Not in the slightest.

Why not? You can basically do a Batman Beyond with any universe. Keaton's, Bale's, the upcoming reboot or another universe entirely.

If you don't think WB will at least entertain the idea of Bale being the older Bruce Wayne YEARS from now with Terry..then you're not fully aware of simple business. He's their 2.5 billion dollar Bruce Wayne, of course they'll keep going back to him even if he says NO over & over.

They may look the other way now, over the next decade or so with Nolan/Bale because they just can't win that argument. But they'll revisit the idea at one time or another. Even if it's in 20 years or more.

 

[Majik1387]

We've already went over this, and you got whiny because no one liked the idea. Not getting into it again.

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

I like the idea

 

[shauner111]

Nobody liked the idea of using JGL's character, Majik. But that's not what im saying right now. Im saying do the whole Beyond thing with Terry/Bruce with Bale. There are people who like the idea. Ive seen many people online (and in person) talk about using Keaton as the older Bruce or Bale when the time comes.

If WB announced tomorrow that they're doing a Beyond with a different director and Keaton...it would be the biggest thing on the planet. If 20 years from now they announce a Beyond with Nolan/Bale it would also be the biggest thing on the planet. You Majik and the rest of the haters would be in the minority.

 

[ThePhantasm]

Why the obsession with continuing the Nolanverse in some loosely related form? I don't get it. I mean, I love the Nolanverse, but all these ideas for how to make it keep going... ugh.

 

[shauner111]

Why the obsession with continuing the Nolanverse in some loosely related form? I don't get it. I mean, I love the Nolanverse, but all these ideas for how to make it keep going... ugh.

Loosely related form? No.

I have no problem with the trilogy being it. But if there ever was a way to continue the Nolanverse while maintaining the end that has Bruce retiring without being some shared universe with Superman & a Justice League....it would be a Batman Beyond decades after the fact.

It couldn't realistically be made with JGL's character because a Robin or Nightwing movie is not going to sell as much or be worthy of a spin-off because the "Nightwing" role should debut with Dick.

JGL as Batman is always a iffy subject. That's not going to happen because he's an original character. WB has moved on to a reboot. The point of the ending of Rises was so Blake becomes anything you have in your mind. We don't need to see him dress up.

But a Batman movie, promoted as such, with Christian returning as an older man...with 20/30 years of peacetime with Selina (20 or so years in real life). It honors Nolan's ending. He can return to Gotham to live his final days where it all began for him. That sounds like something WB would try out and something fans would go bonkers for once this new reboot is winding down.

It's the only scenario that would work if the Nolan-verse continued because it doesn't retcon anything and gives the actors/filmmakers 20 years away from the franchise.