The Dark Knight Rises Should the Nolanverse Continue After Batman III?

[BH/HHH]

There's no need to reboot Batman again. All they have to do is continue a story, the style may change but thats ok. Look at Bond and theres your answer.

 

[horrorwriter]

agreed...

 

[KalMart]

Start over, about 5-7 years after Nolan's Batman 3, at least. Doesn't have to be another origin, but at least a completely separate storyline/history with a fresh canvas. They could do a different Harvey Dent if they want to, or another Joker, or as yet unused characters. But I'd like Nolan's trilogy to stand as its own unique take on Batman in both style and storyline. Batman doesn't have to be an ongoing movie series like Bond (which I feel was sullied, creatively, by having so many installments)...which had to start over themselves after running themselves into the ground. Let different creators have their own individual take on them for different generations and not be obligated to continue/adhere to any storylines from previous takes.

They should take a break for a while from Batman movies after the next/last Nolan ones. It'll be a fresher introduction, and better for them overall as films first and foremost. There will always be plenty of serial Batman in comics/TV/games/etc, but let the films be more rare as events. It helps them be richer when they're good, and less redundant when not so good. As good as these films are, I think it would be a greater honor to them to let them close out on their own terms and maintain their own unique place in their cinematic generation, than to keep trying to build off of it. Let future filmmakers do what they want with their storyline/style/etc, and give this one the space it deserves.

 

[ALP]

We don't want another Schumacher mistake. Definitely not best to continue the Nolan universe without Nolan.

As I said before, please not another origin story. If anything, the next series can take place in its own universe where Batman is just there without a full introduction.

 

[Blitzkrieg Bop]

If anyone were to have an origin in the reboot, it should be Robin.

 

[Figs]

We don't want another Schumacher mistake. Definitely not best to continue the Nolan universe without Nolan.

As I said before, please not another origin story. If anything, the next series can take place in its own universe where Batman is just there without a full introduction.

This is what I want as well. There should have been a third option in the poll for just WB making another Batman film. Not a redo of his origin or connected in any way to Nolan's films but just show Batman doing his thing in a new story.

 

[TX85]

I say re-boot it But no whole origins!,Make it TIH style where it's a reboot with the origins in the opening credits,Then make it even more dark as in Del Torro or even Miller dark yet....Less realistic with almost Forever style(Kinda like the city look&feel!..Which would be perfect for Del Torro to direct).

Have an older Wayne/Batman(40-50yo),While introduce a serious(BB&TDK serious&humor Bale)pretty young Dick Greyson or Jason Todd Robin(17-24 yo),Have Batman decide to train Robin/get him out of crime fighting/be partners or retire and pass the torch!.

Have villains like comic-book version kick&bad-ass Bane/Killer Croc/Man-Bat(atleast minor villian).

OR....A Batman&Superman cross-over movie where Batman&Gotham is a bit less darker than BB&TDK while Superman&Metro.is a bit less style as SR!,40-50yo Bat&Supe's and BOTH villains of Joker&Luthor....With little villain cameos for Brainiac&Catwoman.......
..And a little cameo for WM/GL/Flash or Green Arrow in the end to set-up a possible JL movie!.

 

[ALP]

Good ideas, not sure how much I'd want to see a 50 year old Batman thought. lol, especially not at the start of the series.

It would definitely be cool if Nolan and Bale revisit Batman two decades from now for Dark Knight Returns. I've heard many people suggest a DKR film, even Zack Snyder has shown interest. But I would much much rather it be set in a batman universe that we already know of and are accustomed to as opposed to just starting out a series with DKR.

 

[KalMart]

I'd love to see elements of DKR used for this next film as the end of the trilogy...but not 20-something years in the future, more like 4-6 years after the events of TDK with Batman being gone that whole time. But as the city nears total self-destruction, he returns one last time to restore order.

 

[Avengers-Report]

If Nolan does not do a 4th, which he won't, then do not continue this series. I don't want anyone but Nolan touching it, even if it ends up being his brother.

 

[BH/HHH]

The style, acting and tone can change but the series can continue.

 

[spiderfan970]

Nolan said that after his three movies his version of Batman's story will be done. He's going to end it in a way that the "nolanverse" cannot be continued. I'm cool with that though, I think each director should be allowed to leave their mark on the character. Hopefully next time we get kinda 40s deco films.

 

[Gianakin_]

He never specifically said he'd end it in a way it couldn't be continued.

 

[TheFuture]

He never specifically said he'd end it in a way it couldn't be continued.

Thank **** for that.

 

[ALP]

That would be impossible unless he kills Batman lol

They could continue the series with mostly the same actors, only directors change who will give the film his own style. Similar to what Schumacher did.

Or just do a 'vague reboot.' Start with a new Batman and all, and it should begin like B'89 where he's already in the suit and maybe just a single flashback or so to his past. That is the best way imo. If they go the other route then the director may be limited in what villains he can use as well as the cast that is already established.

 

[KalMart]

I think it's best for both the next filmmakers and for the films, creatively, if they completely start over fresh. They don't necessarily have to do another full origin, but let them have a completely fresh canvas to work on with no ties to the Nolan films, just like Nolan did in regards to the Burton films. Audiences will roll with the new stuff just fine if they're good films. Just give it ample time between the end of the Nolan films and the start of the new ones. Like seven years or so.

 

[the dmg]

I think it's best for both the next filmmakers and for the films, creatively, if they completely start over fresh. They don't necessarily have to do another full origin, but let them have a completely fresh canvas to work on with no ties to the Nolan films, just like Nolan did in regards to the Burton films. Audiences will roll with the new stuff just fine if they're good films. Just give it ample time between the end of the Nolan films and the start of the new ones. Like seven years or so.

It really depends on what they plan on doing with their DC movieverse. I would rather the new directors treat it like a different take, like the comics often do.

 

[KalMart]

It really depends on what they plan on doing with their DC movieverse. I would rather the new directors treat it like a different take, like the comics often do.

A rather obvious choice would be too keep milking it for money as long a they can by putting out movie #4 and 5 or what have you. But if their other comic movie start to do well, maybe they can give Bats a break for a while and hopefully appreciate that it was that singular director's vision that made it so unique, and look for another really good filmmaker to do their own spin on it for the next go-round.

When you look at it, they got really lucky with Nolan, because if you figure with both BB and Superman Retiurns, you had two talented directors coming in to helm WB's heavy-hitters, each were given complete creative control, one really worked out and the other didn't. I don't know if WB had any idea early on the creative depth that Nolan was going to bring to Batman...or at least they were hoping for something like that from both franchises and ended up .500.

But anyway, I realize that Batman the character is an ongoing thing, and he belongs to everyone, especially his comic fans. But films being what htey are, and with how muych that has to go into them over years of work for just a few hours of final running time...I think that when they are really good and stand out, they earn the filmmaker a certain creative ownership and respect for individuality. They're gems that kind of exclude them from mass commodity production, if you will...even if what they're based on is very mass-production. So artistically, I feel the right thing to do is to let Nolan's movies and on their own without other versions using anything from it....even if it does leave some doors open. But if the next Batman film is a huge hit, they might just take it upon themselves to find a way to continue anyway for the money. And if it's without Nolan, then they're already doing without the main ingredient that made them so successful to begin with, and it's even more likely to go in the direction of this era's Schumacher movies.

 

[Avengers-Report]

Nolan said that after his three movies his version of Batman's story will be done. He's going to end it in a way that the "nolanverse" cannot be continued. I'm cool with that though, I think each director should be allowed to leave their mark on the character. Hopefully next time we get kinda 40s deco films.

So Batman must die? Because you can continue anything as long as he is alive.

 

[KalMart]

So Batman must die? Because you can continue anything as long as he is alive.

They could have him 'die' in one big final battle, but then he secretly lives and goes on in another role...maybe starting a new League Of Shadows or something, kinda' like how the Dark Knight Returns ended.

http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=18647601&postcount=5203

http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=18647747&postcount=5206

 

[maenalus]

That's what I'm betting Nolan does, have Bruce fake Bats death as a martyr and carry on in another capacity in secret.

 

[KalMart]

And if ht movie itself is good, then I'm totally fine with that...and it has the added bonus of making it harder for future films to ride on its coattails.

 

[Avengers-Report]

That's what I'm betting Nolan does, have Bruce fake Bats death as a martyr and carry on in another capacity in secret.

I could see it happening but I'm not really a fan of this ending. To me, Batman is an immortal character and Bruce cannot give him up. The only way he can stop being Batman is if he actually died.

 

[KalMart]

I could see it happening but I'm not really a fan of this ending. To me, Batman is an immortal character and Bruce cannot give him up. The only way he can stop being Batman is if he actually died.

The possibility would still be open, in the reality of that universe, for him to someday return to being Batman. But for now, he has another mission ahead of him. Nice way to end a story, but not end the character's existence, so to speak.

 

[ALP]

Batman faking his death?...maybe

But going to live in the mountains to fight crime is a bit much. I can't see Nolan going that way because its too much exposition for the ending of a film. A film would have to end with him faking his death...the thing about him leading another life is something that would begin another film.

It wouldn't be a wise choice to spend the last 20 minutes of a film showing aftermath for something that isn't a massive deal when you're done with the series.