The Dark Knight Rises The TDKR General Discussion Thread - - Part 151

[shauner111]

I may be a Nolan fanboy but i dont love everything he has done. Most, yes. But i would be like "wtf Nolan?". Anyways that wouldn't happen and i dont think Neeson will be asked since they want to keep it seperate from film. They would have to contact Nolan as well and he would probably just shrug it off as "No".

It's nice to hear that Liam is so fond of the character though. Seems like he really enjoyed playing Ras.

 

[shauner111]

So guys, it's gonna be a while until we get another solo Batman movie. 5 years i'd say. Ill be surprised if it's sooner. 2019 is my guess, directed by the man himself: Ben Affleck. That's 7 years after The Dark Knight Rises. It's almost the gap between Batman and Robin/Batman Begins. But at least we'll have 2 other team-up movies featuring the new Batman. So we probably won't feel the wait.

Im a bit worried about Justice League, as a Batman fan. I dont know how he'll be used. A lot? A little? A mix of Captain America and Nick Fury in his role? Will we see Gotham or Alfred at all? Will we see public Bruce Wayne at all, or just private? Especially without Darkseid in the first movie, im not too excited to see Justice League and im a bit worried for Batman here. How he'll be portrayed. Batman v Superman?? I have high hopes for that one when it comes to the Batman side of things. Looks like we'll see enough of Gotham, Alfred, the batcave, his vehicles, two suits, an actual fight in Gotham City & im sure a good introduction for Bruce Wayne.

I just really want to see a solo batman movie at this point. To get these Gotham characters by themselves without interference or references to such futuristic, sci-fi concepts. I sort-of wish that Avengers wasn't so successful where every other studio feels the need to compete with their own shared universe. That way we could have been getting a new trilogy with older Affleck without other superheroes. A bit selfish as a fan, i know...but im starting to think these team-up stories are just a waste of time. Is there a real story begging to be told? Or are these films being made for money and because they'll look "awesome" (in the words of Zack Snyder). Is there something new to say here, when we already have the Avengers showing us "the world needs superheroes to protect it from danger, powered or simply human". The question is, what can Justice League add to that if anything??

My point which leads me back to Nolans universe and Batman as a whole is a 3 part question to the folks who spend time in this thread

-Are you looking forward to the upcoming team-up films? Solos? Or both?
-What are your preferences when it comes to seeing Batman on film? In his own universe like Nolan did? Shared universe?
-And what style/genre do you prefer to see Batman in? Horror/fantasy (including monsters, Batman/Bruce treated almost like Dracula), Sci-Fi (Mr. Freeze, drones, potential Batman Beyond, easy to mesh with the Trinity/Justice League), Crime-Drama (more naturalistic, cops/robbers, gangsters, serial killers, theatrical psychopaths) or Camp/Comedy?

 

[Travesty]

But what if....JGL played Robin John Blake on Arrow?

 

[shauner111]

But what if....JGL played Robin John Blake on Arrow?

 

[georgec]

My answers might be a little shallow or too non-committal, but here goes.

-Are you looking forward to the upcoming team-up films? Solos? Or both?

Both. I'm really just excited to see the new take overall and how it will factor into the DCCU. Given that we won't need to go through origins, there's some potential there to have Batman do more "cool things", for lack of better description.

-What are your preferences when it comes to seeing Batman on film? In his own universe like Nolan did? Shared universe?

Again, both. Solo universe works better for focusing more on Bruce and his personal/emotional journey, while shared universe allows you to do more with the character and rogues gallery. Both have their purposes and I'm happy to see as many interpretations as possible. That's the great thing about Batman - he's universal. You can have all these different takes on the character that satisfy our various preferences, and while they might be disconnected in terms of "canon" they all contribute overall to the general mythos of Batman.

-And what style/genre do you prefer to see Batman in? Horror/fantasy (including monsters, Batman/Bruce treated almost like Dracula), Sci-Fi (Mr. Freeze, drones, potential Batman Beyond, easy to mesh with the Trinity/Justice League), Crime-Drama (more naturalistic, cops/robbers, gangsters, serial killers, theatrical psychopaths) or Camp/Comedy?

I like the mix of crime-drama and sci-fi most, with dashes of horror/fantasy. Camp/comedy can work and lighten some of the brooding, but too much of it can be a detriment. I think the tone of Batman Returns is one of the best overall takes on the character and universe - it's dark, it's fantastical, it has elements of sci-fi, it incorporates the crime/politics angle, and it's hilarious in spots.

 

[BatLobster]

-Not especially looking forward to any of it yet. If I end up loving Batfleck then I'll probably get very excited for the eventual solo film. For now it still just feels a little soon and I haven't had a chance to catch my breath yet.

-Solo universe by a mile, hands down. No sense in me even trying to sugarcoat that one. Batman's world is so vast and rich unto itself, there are endless fascinating stories you can tell in that world using the rogues and Bat-family as the supporting cast without ever needing to send Batman to space or have him deal with alien threats. Granted, I understand it's a part of the character's history and respect that, but it tends to move away from the elements of Batman that I truly love the most. The Batman/Superman relationship is very interesting and has a lot of potential, though it's still pretty much genre-bending by its very nature. Not that that's a bad thing.

-Pretty much agree with georgec here, a crime drama/sci-fi blend with some dashes of horror/fantasy tickles my fancy the most. I'll also add "mystery" to that. When I think "crime drama" I tend to think of stories that heavily involve the mob like Y1, TLH or TDK, but there are plenty of stories that use the more 'grounded' villains without any mob involvement. I enjoy it when there's an element of mystery, it capitalizes on Batman's detective roots.

 

[shauner111]

I also like the mix of crime/mystery/horror/sci-fi. Without getting too futuristic or too involved with the "monsters". Just little hints of it here and there. But mainly focusing on the crime drama/detective mystery element.

The League of Assassins + Bane are the exterior villains. But for Gotham's own..

I prefer the types of villains such as gangsters (Falcone, Maroni, Zucco, Cobblepot, Sionis), nutcases (Joker, Riddler, Strange, Two-Face, Scarecrow, Ventriloquist). And of course throw in Catwoman for good measure.

That's my bag.

 

[Travesty]

....so you want a remake of the Nolan movies?

 

[BatLobster]

I think the discussion is what your overall preferences are, not necessarily what you want to see in the new movies.

 

[Kane52630]

I'd take all the above.

 

[shauner111]

....so you want a remake of the Nolan movies?

How is that a remake of the Nolan movies?

 

[Pfeiffer-Pfan]

I may be a Nolan fanboy but i dont love everything he has done. Most, yes. But i would be like "wtf Nolan?". Anyways that wouldn't happen and i dont think Neeson will be asked since they want to keep it seperate from film. They would have to contact Nolan as well and he would probably just shrug it off as "No".

It's nice to hear that Liam is so fond of the character though. Seems like he really enjoyed playing Ras.

What?

Nolan doesn't own the character or Liam Neeson... He has absolutely NO say on any aspect of the franchise moving forward.

WB could do a continuation of Nolan's trilogy and retcon everything he did without a seconds thought... if they wanted. That would be like Sony phoning Sami Raimi for permissing to use J.K. Simmons in The Amazing Spider-Man 3.

Nolan was hired to do a job... now that jobs over.

 

[shauner111]

Nolan was one of the main reasons the last Justice League movie didn't happen, because he didnt want it confused with his universe. It's still a part of Nolans Batman, it's his Ras Al Ghul. WB would never continue Nolans trilogy without asking permission. There are two directors that WB treat in a very high regard, and that's Nolan and now Affleck. Your comparison to Raimi is not even close.

If you think they wouldn't even ask Nolan to use Neeson as Ras, then you don't know what you're talking about. Or that Nolan was "just hired to do a job". He had full creative control for TDK and TDKR, he not only made them **** tons of money for that and Inception, now Interstellar. He could do what he wants over at WB. Batman is bigger than Nolan, but if Nolan wanted his version to be finished and never used, they respect his decision and reboot.

 

[Kane52630]

Nolan was one of the main reasons the last Justice League movie didn't happen, because he didnt want it confused with his universe.

Sounds like Nolan was pretty selfish on his part if you think about it.

 

[Pfeiffer-Pfan]

Nolan was one of the main reasons the last Justice League movie didn't happen, because he didnt want it confused with his universe. It's still a part of Nolans Batman, it's his Ras Al Ghul. WB would never continue Nolans trilogy without asking permission. There are two directors that WB treat in a very high regard, and that's Nolan and now Affleck. Your comparison to Raimi is not even close.

If you think they wouldn't even ask Nolan to use Neeson as Ras, then you don't know what you're talking about. Or that Nolan was "just hired to do a job". He had full creative control for TDK and TDKR, he not only made them **** tons of money for that and Inception, now Interstellar. He could do what he wants over at WB. Batman is bigger than Nolan, but if Nolan wanted his version to be finished and never used, they respect his decision and reboot.

Yes, Nolan was one of the reason that Justice League didn't happen many years ago... but that was because his version of the franchise was still ongoing and would have diluted any future Ra's/Talia storylines he may have wanted to pursue. THAT makes sense and is largely a professional courtesy.

However, Nolan's time with DC is now over and I doubt he gives a crap what WB does moving forward. It's been well over a year since he has been mentioned in any capacity for Batman V Superman. WB are no longer tied to him and while I don't want to see Neeson on Arrow (He's far too good for that show), he has every right to appear without begging Nolan.

Nolan's not in the game anymore so he can't make the rules. WB love him, that clear to see, but they've moved on and aren't tip toeing around him anymore. You need to get over the sycophantic notion that WB worship Nolan above all else. IF they got Neeson at a reduced price AND it propelled ratings, they why wouldn't they consider it?

 

[shauner111]

Sounds like Nolan was pretty selfish on his part if you think about it.

Im happy he did what he did. You have to be selfish sometimes, if something is going to interfere with your vision. A different Batman in a completely different genre for Justice League was going to be released around the time of TDK. Good for him. It turned out better this way.

 

[shauner111]

Yes, Nolan was one of the reason that Justice League didn't happen many years ago... but that was because his version of the franchise was still ongoing and would have diluted any future Ra's/Talia storylines he may have wanted to pursue. THAT makes sense and is largely a professional courtesy.

However, Nolan's time with DC is now over and I doubt he gives a crap what WB does moving forward. It's been well over a year since he has been mentioned in any capacity for Batman V Superman. WB are no longer tied to him and while I don't want to see Neeson on Arrow (He's far too good for that show), he has every right to appear without begging Nolan.

Nolan's not in the game anymore so he can't make the rules. WB love him, that clear to see, but they've moved on and aren't tip toeing around him anymore. You need to get over the sycophantic notion that WB worship Nolan above all else. IF they got Neeson at a reduced price AND it propelled ratings, they why wouldn't they consider it?

It's not about DC. It's Warner Brothers. DC is not a film studio like Marvel. Nolan will continue to work at WB and be championed by them. His opinion matters over there just like Affleck. Does he have every right to be on that show? Sure, but they wont do it unless Nolan says fine when they ask. Could they have recast Bale, acted like this new Batman is a continuation? Yes, but they wouldnt because they value his opinion. Nolan said no, so they moved on.

Neeson will not be playing Ras again for CW unless A) Arrow's producers are down with the idea and B) Nolan says it's OK to use his Ras. If those two things don't happen, then it will not happen period.

 

[Pfeiffer-Pfan]

It's not about DC. It's Warner Brothers. DC is not a film studio like Marvel. Nolan will continue to work at WB and be championed by them. His opinion matters over there just like Affleck. Does he have every right to be on that show? Sure, but they wont do it unless Nolan says fine when they ask. Could they have recast Bale, acted like this new Batman is a continuation? Yes, but they wouldnt because they value his opinion. Nolan said no, so they moved on.

Neeson will not be playing Ras again for CW unless A) Arrow's producers are down with the idea and B) Nolan says it's OK to use his Ras. If those two things don't happen, then it will not happen period.

I meant Nolan's time with DC CHARACTERS, not the company.

Carry on, Shauner. Just... carry on.

 

[shauner111]

Well sorry, but you're wrong. It ain't happening without Nolans permission. They're going to turn their back on the guy who makes them billions of dollars, who always completes his films on time and under budget? Not a chance.

The only way Nolan says yes anyhow is if they agree that Neeson is playing a different Ras Al Ghul in a different universe. No references to the trilogy. But even then im not so sure.

 

[BatLobster]

I do think that if Nolan actually objected to it they'd back off, but I also honestly don't think Nolan would care at this point. There's no real conceivable way it could be tied to the continuity of the trilogy even with the same actor reprising a role. I think the only thing he would object to is if they tried to retroactively mess with his continuity (which is why he wasn't on board with connecting his universe with MoS). But yeah, WB does want to stay in the "Nolan" business and I'm sure they wouldn't be crass about this kind of stuff considering there are other studios that may be currently vying for Nolan's affections.

And besides, we already established that the Neeson thing is almost definitely not happening anyway.

Sounds like Nolan was pretty selfish on his part if you think about it.

I'm pretty sure after the phenomenal success of TDK, WB would have looked like complete fools if they went ahead with George Miller's Justice League so soon after, and set up a completely different universe simultaneously. I bet the movie would've been canned regardless after TDK became so huge. Nolan probably saved them from themselves there, before they spent even more money on it.

 

[shauner111]

Exactly. If they say Chris, it will be a different Ras, they just want Liam and he's down for it too. Then he could say yes. Maybe. Nolan could leave WB in a heartbeat if they do something he's not happy about. They know this and they won't cross him. It has nothing to do with me liking Nolan or hating him, it's just the way it is. Which is why i mention Affleck in the same breath as well.

 

[BatLobster]

And just for the record, if they brought back Liam as Ra's on Arrow and gave him the green coat, Laz pit and all the rest I'd totally watch the hell out of that! Again, Liam Neeson playing a character on a CW show= priceless. Plus seeing him reprise the role would give me nostalgia feels for the trilogy, even if it ended up being bad.

It's not gonna happen though.

 

[shauner111]

I would watch those scenes and probably enjoy the character because it's Neeson playing Ras. But i dont even think i would watch a full episode, even if Neeson was involved.

 

[BatLobster]

I gave up on Arrow midway through Season 1. Not because it was "bad" per se, but it was pretty mediocre. Now I hear people raving about Season 2, so I'm sort of curious, but I still can't find the motivation to plunge through the rest of Season 1. Everyone swears to me that it gets better....it's just the thing with network TV...23 one hour episodes is a huge time investment with a lot of inevitable filler, and it's hard to justify if the product isn't absolutely stellar. Especially with the embarrassing amount of good TV there is out there.

 

[Pfeiffer-Pfan]

I gave up on Arrow midway through Season 1. Not because it was "bad" per se, but it was pretty mediocre. Now I hear people raving about Season 2, so I'm sort of curious, but I still can't find the motivation to plunge through the rest of Season 1. Everyone swears to me that it gets better....it's just the thing with network TV...23 one hour episodes is a huge time investment with a lot of inevitable filler, and it's hard to justify if the product isn't absolutely stellar. Especially with the embarrassing amount of good TV there is out there.

I kind of want to get caught up on Arrow again because The Flash looks so damn good.

But you're right... I fizzled out after the halfway point of season 1. It was just too mediocre for me. Stephen Amell's a nice guy but his acting ability is severely lacking.