The Dark Knight Rises Warner Bros would love to have up to SEVEN Batman movies

[[A]]

(CEO Jeff Bewkes) says Dark Knight was the second most profitable film in history. Close to Titantic. "The obvious thing we're goign to take from it is more Dark Knight." We look at Harry Potter It's fantastic to have franchises that last that long. We want to do that with Batman and Superman and perhaps Sherlock Holmes. The sequals are as good, with new characters added, as were the originals. That wasn't the case in the years ago. "Warners has more tentpoles as an on-going strategy taht very much lifts its distribution and peformance." We think that's going to hold up our slate in the 2009 - 2010 period. We've got four more big tentpoles coming this year.

http://www.alleyinsider.com/2009/2/...own-time-warner-reports-16-billion-losses-twx

 

[Wesley Dodds]

And so it begins... The slow, greedy money-minded decline of yet another Bat franchise..

 

[ND Irish]

can you clarify to me where you saw SEVEN Batman films?
Or if youre talking the Bat franchise in total and then this would be pointless because everyone knows theyll be making another film after Dark Knight

 

[thedrizzle59]

NO! it ends after 3...that's it! if you greedy a** holes want more money, make new dc comic movies, or wait until 20 years and reboot the franchise again. Making more than 3 of these batman films is....SUICIDE

 

[Ace of Knaves]

NO! it ends after 3...that's it! if you greedy a** holes want more money, make new dc comic movies, or wait until 20 years and reboot the franchise again. Making more than 3 of these batman films is....SUICIDE

Well what if Nolan said he wanted to carry on? I'm sure you would change your tune then.

 

[Crook]

Let Nolan finish his trilogy. It's more than obvious this cast is loyal to him, and him only.

After a few years of break, I'd love for the Bat-franchise to open up to a sequential series akin the Bond and HP movies. Same cast, same general "look", and different directors/writers.

 

[Laderlappen]

Doubt that would happen.

 

[thedrizzle59]

Well what if Nolan said he wanted to carry on? I'm sure you would change your tune then.

No, actually I wouldn't. My theory is that a film series that was not previously a book (like harry potter) should end after 3 films. Any more after that, people get bored and eventually everyone looses. Like spiderman 4! Sam Raimi is coming back, but i have no faith that sp4 will be a good film. no faith!

 

[TheBatman072]

I'm cool with that. Let Nolan finish his trilogy, and start adapting stories.


DKR under Zach Snyder for example.

Any other stories they can think of.

 

[Crook]

No, actually I wouldn't. My theory is that a film series that was not previously a book (like harry potter) should end after 3 films.

Ok, let's just all assume this makes sense. Since this is a theory, I assume you have some logical reasoning behind this?

 

[Deaths Head II]

I wouldn't be surprised if Batman ended up like Bond. The two are usually compared with their constantly changing girlfriends, their gadgets, and whatnot. In Nolan's films, Fox is often compared to Q. And both series rebooted in a more realistic manner around the same time following a previous extremely cheesy film that lost sight of what the series was about.

It's kind of naive to expect a studio to be like "Ok, we've done several good films. We could probably still get a ton of money for doing sequels but lets just stop it here for artistic grounds." Even if that's how we would want it to work, it never does. The series goes until it stop making money. Then a few years down the line it gets a reboot and the process starts all over again. All we can do is that they get a decent replacement for Nolan after he leaves and we get as many good films as we can until the gravy train crashes.

 

[Crook]

The reboot process didn't really come to fruition until BB spearheaded the movement. Now it's a second chance for franchises to reinvigorate their name and garner new audiences.

 

[Deaths Head II]

The reboot process didn't really come to fruition until BB spearheaded the movement. Now it's a second chance for franchises to reinvigorate their name and garner new audiences.

They still had remakes, sequels to the remakes, and late sequels that were trying to retry the series again for a newer market and with fresh appeal, which is more of what I was getting at. The point is that studios make sequels until people are sick of it, the studio lets the idea die, the studio then looks it up in a few years and someone says "hey, lets do that again."

 

[Crook]

Well, again, can you cite some examples of this method before BB came along?

 

[Excel]

Nolan never said a word about a "trilogy", I dont know why fans think theres going to be one. His goal all along was to simply make a world for Batman where anything can happen. I agree, his story needs to end after the 3rd one, but all that should happen is Batman is finally who he is: alone, bros with Gordon, cops after him, winged avenger of a dark city.

 

[FaT_tONle]

I think they are probably thinking Justice League trilogy... after the trilogy and maybe a Superman reboot. Get rid of Bale but sign a new guy that can play Superman in solos as well as a JLA franchise. 7 more solos total of Bat/Supes is overkill, and that is an understatement.

 

[FlawlessVictory]

I don't even see how this is news. So WB wants to make more Batman movies. Wow, really, I would have never guessed. Because after Batman 89, we only got BR, BF, B&R, BB and TDK. Did someone think WB would stop making Batman movies after the inevitable BB3?

Of course, they are going to keep making Batman movies. They are going to be making Batman movies until the end of time. Whether or not they will be any good is the only thing to wonder about.

 

[Deaths Head II]

Well, again, can you cite some examples of this method before BB came along?

Well off the top of my head I can think of the Fly as a remake with a sequel and the Star Wars prequels might also fit as late sequels. Maybe even the Godfather III. I could do an extensive study on the films that follow the pattern of "hey look its that film you liked from way back", but these are just are just a few examples. Hollywood has always revisited old ideas. Batman is different because there is no definitive Batman film so you can't remake it. You just reboot the series as a whole. The James Bond films didn't have a continuity reboot until after BB but there was a long Bond-less gap until Goldeneye and that was defined as a new Bond style for the 1990s I believe. So there was a lot of reinventing for new audiences too. BB just decided to to completely ignore the old films as well as set a new style. Thats when it created the new reboot craze going on.

The point is still there though. Old ideas will eventually pop up. I should have said that instead of using the word "reboot".

 

[alexdunn]

As long as the films are quality, make as many as you want.

 

[Cunning Stunts]

I love how everyone's saying, "Nolan MUST stop after film three." You guys would **** yourselves if he said he'd be back for a fourth, and I'd bet money on that. Why is everyone around here SO SURE about what Nolan does/should do?

If he feels that he can work on the story afterward (and I don't feel the story MUST end after Batman 3, because there is SO MUCH in Batman's mythos that can be touched on), and make a damned good film, then he'll be back. If he can't, and Warner Brothers feels that they can expand on this franchise without him, they will.

We don't know what WB will do, and at this point, I'm not sure they do either.

 

[CorpusBlack]

As long as the films are quality, make as many as you want.

Agreed. Nolan isn't going to do this forever but that is no reason to end the franchise or make us wait 20 years for a new film. F--k that, give another quality director a shot. I think WB is too smart to fall into another greed driven cash cow Schumacher fiasco.

 

[jmc]

Nolan never said a word about a ''trilogy'', I dont know why fans think theres going to be one. His goal all along was to simply make a world for Batman where anything can happen. I agree, his story needs to end after the 3rd one, but all that should happen is Batman is finally who he is: alone, bros with Gordon, cops after him, winged avenger of a dark city.

Two reasons 1) No-one seems to want to believe Nolan when he says time and time again that he only does one film at a time (god knows why), and 2) It's because trilogies have become the expected norm with franchises now so fans automatically assume 3 films will happen, it's more or less a cliche now.

 

[Christmas]

MAybe Nolan just uses that phrase, one movie at a time, as a security thing. Who knows what'll happen in his professional career or personal life, ya know? He's covering his bases if for whatever reason he decides that it's over.

 

[Deaths Head II]

Two reasons 1) No-one seems to want to believe Nolan when he says time and time again that he only does one film at a time (god knows why), and 2) It's because trilogies have become the expected norm with franchises now so fans automatically assume 3 films will happen, it's more or less a cliche now.

I actually feel that always having a trilogy is an extremely tired concept anyway. One film at a time makes way more sense. Nolan said he doesn't want to do a sequel unless he feels the story is there, and that is how it should really be handled. Determine it per film instead of trying to make a trilogy just because its the norm.

 

[jmc]

I actually feel that always having a trilogy is an extremely tired concept anyway. One film at a time makes way more sense. Nolan said he doesn't want to do a sequel unless he feels the story is there, and that is how it should really be handled. Determine it per film instead of trying to make a trilogy just because its the norm.

Totally agree, I don't quite get this obsession that franchises need three films, look at Terminator, film one and two were perfect, you didn't need that ordinary as hell film three, the story was done, as far as I'm concerned that third film never happened.