The Brave and the Bold News and Discussion Thread

I'm sure people are very familiarized with Batman as a character at this point.

Animated show/movie. Supporting role in other live-action projects. Seems perfectly reasonable to me, though I suspect you'll disagree.
Especially because, again: over exposure is an issue. There should not be two live action Batmen with overlapping solo franchises. You can only stretch audience interest so far.
 
Especially because, again: over exposure is an issue. There should not be two live action Batmen with overlapping solo franchises. You can only stretch audience interest so far.
I'll be curious to see what happens. At this rate, the overlap is inevitable. We can only hope that one doesn't undermine the other, or that they both cut the legs out from one another.

I'm still doubtful Reeves gets to see his trilogy through when all is said and done, but there's no point in even crossing that bridge until we come to it.
 
Last edited:
I'll be curious to see what happens. At this rate, the overlap is inevitable. We can only hope that one doesn't undermine the other, or that they both cut the legs out from under one another.

I'm still doubtful Reeves gets to see his trilogy through when all is said and done, but there's no point in even crossing that bridge until we come to it.
I am a mix because I am both naturally cynical that movies like Reeves is making can survive in this studio atmosphere but also I have literal zero doubts that Part II will be significantly more successful than any of the DCU projects - I really don’t think it’ll be anything other than the classic DC disaster.

Superman would be incredibly lucky to make what The Batman did and all the other projects have a giant red Bomb stamp on them.
 
It’s just inherently deeply funny and says such bad things about the genre and industry that having a successful, critically acclaimed Batman franchise that is at its beginning is insufficient because he can’t hang out with Superman and literally no other reason. Again: all that matters is imaginary MCU money.
 
like maybe Bruce goes MIA or takes an extended break after Jason dies and the bat family is left to deal with the implications of that... then you plant the seeds for something like Red Hood down the line
 
The whole idea behind DCU Batman so far leans into the Batfamily/Batdad aspect. It’s set up to be the exact thing some of you seem to want; an ensemble Batfamily film. I’m not even thinking about him being with Superman. But to act as if lots and lots of DC fans don’t wanna connected set of stories is absurd.

If they made an animated show or film wouldn’t the same convo be happening? “They already did this”, “they’re checking a box”, “it’s just chasing the MCU universe money”, etc etc?

The limited series route would work, but even then, there would still be people whining that they “demoted” Batman to TV. We could even see the cameo route; Arkham is in the works. But even with that idea, people said they shouldn’t introduce Batman on TV or through cameos bc he’s bigger than that, or whatever. They can’t win either way.

I’m not married to the idea of Brave and the Bold, but I don’t think it’s some ruinous venture. I don’t see this coming out any time soon tho nor do I see it stopping Reeves’ work from happening.
 
It’s just inherently deeply funny and says such bad things about the genre and industry that having a successful, critically acclaimed Batman franchise that is at its beginning is insufficient because he can’t hang out with Superman and literally no other reason. Again: all that matters is imaginary MCU money.
Tbh it sort of makes sense from a creative standpoint, but the context is just awkward and not ideal. Why give him a solo movie now? Much better to just wait until Matt Reeves is done. Let other DC characters flourish before bringing Batman in.
 
Tbh it sort of makes sense from a creative standpoint, but the context is just awkward and not ideal. Why give him a solo movie now? Much better to just wait until Matt Reeves is done. Let other DC characters flourish before bringing Batman in.
So until 2032 when there's only like 3 years left in their 10 year plan?
 
It’s just inherently deeply funny and says such bad things about the genre and industry that having a successful, critically acclaimed Batman franchise that is at its beginning is insufficient because he can’t hang out with Superman and literally no other reason. Again: all that matters is imaginary MCU money.

My annoyance with the whole way this has played out comes down to a few things:

1. As a batman fan, we are finally getting a bat-universe with spinoffs in different mediums (i.e. tv and comics). Why put out a second version. You have a successful film in the batman, market that instead of chasing a second version tied to a larger universe that hasn't even come out yet.

2. Oversaturation is real and batman isn't as Teflon as people think. Keaton couldn't save the flash and batman in bvs couldn't get that movie to over a billion. What makes batman a great character is that when you make a good movie it can do really well. But a batman movie doesn't automatically mean a guaranteed success.

3. Watching the batman scenes in the flash, it looked like a video game and frankly terrible. Batman should have some heightened reality to it. Then you hire that director to helm your reboot. The writing was also reminiscent of batman and robin.

4. This may be controversial, but the Morrison stuff in the comics isn't exactly that "commercial" in its approach. Not that jett from batmanonfilm has any bearing on the general audience, but it's ironic that a guy who runs a batman film site couldn't care less about robin. I think you'll find a lot of people may lean towards that line of thinking.

5. You finally have a director in Matt Reeves that seems to be all in on batman. Nolan always seemed to have one foot out the door. Burton always wanted to do his weird stuff.
 
Another option is to restructure this into a live-action limited series on Max. You still get the Bat Family in live-action, but in a different medium and format.
in an ideal scenario, it should be a bat family movie where Bruce plays a supporting role with Dick, Damian and Babs at the forefront

that would be a nice change of pace
A proper Bat Family series is all I want. :weeping: :weeping: :weeping:
 
Or maybe they get extended beyond ten years if Gods and Monsters is successful.
 
Well, maybe they’ll be real desperate in two years when Gunn is gone and we’re discussing their next desperate flailing attempt at a DC Universe!
I really don't think the DCU is as dead on arrival as you're making it out to be. Like I said, Superman does have a path at even surpassing The Batman. I also think the "death of the superhero genre" thing is way overstared (2 years ago even a film as dog**** as Love and Thunder did over 700 million, and minus China did even better than Ragnarok. Last year made people too reactionary)
 
I really don't think the DCU is as dead on arrival as you're making it out to be. Like I said, Superman does have a path at even surpassing The Batman. I also think the "death of the superhero genre" thing is way overstared (2 years ago even a film as dog**** as Love and Thunder did over 700 million, which minus China was better than Ragnarok. Last year made people too reactionary)
If Superman isn't beating a movie that had a 45 day window and the aid of decent inflation, we might have to wait until a new timeline before we see the DCU Batman! :weeping:
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"