Ronny Shade
back for a limited time
- Joined
- Sep 8, 2004
- Messages
- 18,767
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 31
Who's Next?
Okay, we hate to think about it, but one day Christopher Nolan is going to quit doing Batman. When that day comes, Who should take over? By all accounts this will probably happen after BB3. Unless you want this beautiful franchise to end with only three movies, there should be another director who actually knows what he's doing in que so Bale et al don't quit along with Nolan.
Here's my 2 cents (or should I say 5 cents?) on the matter. My top five:
Joss Whedon
Joss Whedon reportedly once pitched a Batman movie to WB before Nolan took over. That tells me he has a vision, which is really important for a Batman film. We need somebody wiith a vision. I can't vouch for the fact that all these directors have a vision for Batman, with Whedon it seems likely. He's also experienced in comics (Writing and directing Wonder Woman as well as has written books like Fray and Astonishing X-Men) And he's very good at fleshing out characters and giving them a voice. I've always felt that superhero villains need a very distinctive voice and motivation. Otherwise they may slip into cliches.
POSSIBLE DRAWBACKS: Whedon may be a little too comedically oriented for Batman. I've never felt that Batman should be completely devoid of humor, but it should be a wee more serious that Whedon usually is. That doesn't mean he can't do it, but it's something to look out for.
Ridley Scott
Ridley Scott is a visionary if ever there was one. Having brought to life the raw brutal action of Gladiator and the dripping urban vision of Blade Runner, he's basically ideal for Batman. Couple the machinistic dark metropolis with the action we know he's capable of, and the mystery aspect of Matchstick Men and you've got a perfect Batman film.
POSSIBLE DRAWBACKS: Scott may be too high profile for this job. I'm not sure if he'd want to take over a franchise second hand. Hopefully, though, Nolan will be steady until he wants out and the critical acclaim will make the job appeal to the likes of Mr. Scott.
William Friedkin
William Friedkin directed both The Exorcist and The French Connection Neither of these movies exactly scream Batman, but they do both connect on this brutal, visceral level that Batman needs. Both movies gave me this raw painful milieu that would work very well for creating a Gotham City that very convincingly needs a savior.
POSSIBLE DRAWBACKS: I've never seen Friedkin do any action really. There's a great car chase in French Connection but there's nothing that's really on the level of Batman.
Alex Proyas
Both Dark City and The Crow presnt the right kind of environment for Batman. He's basically done Gotham twice already via these two films. We've seen Proyas do raw, back-alley action. He's no stranger to comics (The Crow was adapted from one) He's also worked with a big budget ([/i]I, Robot[/i]) and that movie was very successful. I haven't seen it, so I can't exactly make a judgement, but I've heard pretty good things about it.
POSSIBLE DRAWBACKS: Like I said, I haven't seen I, Robot but from the trailers for that film as well as seeing Dark City, it seems like Proyas might get a little too CG-happy when he's got the money to use it. I'm fine with CG in my Batman films, but I don't want it over-used or obvious.
J.J. Abrams
Abrams is my first choice. He'd great at making you really feel the action and what the characters are going through. Watch M:I3 if you don't belive me. This movie isn't Batman, but it really shows that Abrams has what it takes to do Batman. He's also terrific and making really imposing and memerable villains, which is important for a rogues gallery like the one we're working with. My favorite aspect about Abrams, though, is that he's very good at taking a world that seems completely grounded in reality and putting a supernatural or mysterious spin on it. This is exactly what the Batman franchise is going to need once Nolan leaves. Nolan's "realistic" world needs to stay, but it needs to get that twinge of weirdness that will allow villains like Bane, Poison Ivy and Mr. Freeze to be done correctly without camp and with being "too realistic."
POTENTIAL DRAWBACKS: Abrams has a way of starting a project out strong and finishing it off ...well... less strong. I get the feeling he's doing too many things at once, and once he gets them off and running (I'm talking about his TV shows, here) he let's his underlings take over and there isn't as much kick to it.
Okay, we hate to think about it, but one day Christopher Nolan is going to quit doing Batman. When that day comes, Who should take over? By all accounts this will probably happen after BB3. Unless you want this beautiful franchise to end with only three movies, there should be another director who actually knows what he's doing in que so Bale et al don't quit along with Nolan.
Here's my 2 cents (or should I say 5 cents?) on the matter. My top five:
Joss Whedon
Joss Whedon reportedly once pitched a Batman movie to WB before Nolan took over. That tells me he has a vision, which is really important for a Batman film. We need somebody wiith a vision. I can't vouch for the fact that all these directors have a vision for Batman, with Whedon it seems likely. He's also experienced in comics (Writing and directing Wonder Woman as well as has written books like Fray and Astonishing X-Men) And he's very good at fleshing out characters and giving them a voice. I've always felt that superhero villains need a very distinctive voice and motivation. Otherwise they may slip into cliches.
POSSIBLE DRAWBACKS: Whedon may be a little too comedically oriented for Batman. I've never felt that Batman should be completely devoid of humor, but it should be a wee more serious that Whedon usually is. That doesn't mean he can't do it, but it's something to look out for.
Ridley Scott
Ridley Scott is a visionary if ever there was one. Having brought to life the raw brutal action of Gladiator and the dripping urban vision of Blade Runner, he's basically ideal for Batman. Couple the machinistic dark metropolis with the action we know he's capable of, and the mystery aspect of Matchstick Men and you've got a perfect Batman film.
POSSIBLE DRAWBACKS: Scott may be too high profile for this job. I'm not sure if he'd want to take over a franchise second hand. Hopefully, though, Nolan will be steady until he wants out and the critical acclaim will make the job appeal to the likes of Mr. Scott.
William Friedkin
William Friedkin directed both The Exorcist and The French Connection Neither of these movies exactly scream Batman, but they do both connect on this brutal, visceral level that Batman needs. Both movies gave me this raw painful milieu that would work very well for creating a Gotham City that very convincingly needs a savior.
POSSIBLE DRAWBACKS: I've never seen Friedkin do any action really. There's a great car chase in French Connection but there's nothing that's really on the level of Batman.
Alex Proyas
Both Dark City and The Crow presnt the right kind of environment for Batman. He's basically done Gotham twice already via these two films. We've seen Proyas do raw, back-alley action. He's no stranger to comics (The Crow was adapted from one) He's also worked with a big budget ([/i]I, Robot[/i]) and that movie was very successful. I haven't seen it, so I can't exactly make a judgement, but I've heard pretty good things about it.
POSSIBLE DRAWBACKS: Like I said, I haven't seen I, Robot but from the trailers for that film as well as seeing Dark City, it seems like Proyas might get a little too CG-happy when he's got the money to use it. I'm fine with CG in my Batman films, but I don't want it over-used or obvious.
J.J. Abrams
Abrams is my first choice. He'd great at making you really feel the action and what the characters are going through. Watch M:I3 if you don't belive me. This movie isn't Batman, but it really shows that Abrams has what it takes to do Batman. He's also terrific and making really imposing and memerable villains, which is important for a rogues gallery like the one we're working with. My favorite aspect about Abrams, though, is that he's very good at taking a world that seems completely grounded in reality and putting a supernatural or mysterious spin on it. This is exactly what the Batman franchise is going to need once Nolan leaves. Nolan's "realistic" world needs to stay, but it needs to get that twinge of weirdness that will allow villains like Bane, Poison Ivy and Mr. Freeze to be done correctly without camp and with being "too realistic."
POTENTIAL DRAWBACKS: Abrams has a way of starting a project out strong and finishing it off ...well... less strong. I get the feeling he's doing too many things at once, and once he gets them off and running (I'm talking about his TV shows, here) he let's his underlings take over and there isn't as much kick to it.
