Why...

[DigificWriter]

.... reboot the Batman franchise at all? Although he might say otherwise, I'm actually firmly convinced that Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight Trilogy universe would merge very well with Man of Steel, the only caveat being that JGL's John Blake/Batman be the one to meet Clark/Kal-El and take part in a Justice League film.

Bruce Wayne might be the 'iconic' Batman, but I think there is still a lot that could be gotten out of the TDKT universe and John Blake's Batman both in the context of a JLA appearance as well as in solo films. JGL has the talent to carry a movie or series of movies, and you don't necessarily have to have the involvement of the Nolans or Goyer to make further stories set in the TDKT universe work.

 

[Llama_Shepherd]

Because it's a silly idea to have the first iconic on screen crossover of the two franchises featuring Superman..... and Robin.

However, I'd be more than welcoming for Christian to return.

 

[DigificWriter]

Because it's a silly idea to have the first iconic on screen crossover of the two franchises featuring Superman..... and Robin.

However, I'd be more than welcoming for Christian to return.

John Blake isn't 'Robin'; he's Batman. I don't know how Nolan could've made that any more clear without flat-out showing JGL don the suit, cape, and cowl.

Also, this wouldn't be the first time a Batman who isn't Bruce Wayne would join forces with Superman et all; it happened in Batman Beyond, and you didn't see people whining about it then or calling it 'silly'.

You're really not going to lose anything in terms of significance if you were to take advantage of what's already been established and merge the post-TDKR TDKT universe with MoS to create the first two pillars of a shared cinematic DCU even if Bruce Wayne isn't in the Batsuit.

 

[Wesley Dodds]

I don't want the landmark moment Superman and Batman first meet in live action to use anyone other than Bruce Wayne.
Sorry, I'm all for new ideas and everything but putting literally anyone else under the cowl is just... just utter bull ****, really.

 

[DigificWriter]

putting literally anyone else under the cowl is just... just utter bull ****, really.

Nolan's already done it; all I'm asking is 'why should WB go to the trouble of rebooting the Batman franchise when they have an already-established and existing universe that is still viable storytelling ground with or without its original creators and that would actually merge very well with MoS and would give them a 'leg up' on creating their cinematic DCU'?

 

[uniqueweasel]

Superman goes to Florence and drags Bruce's ass back to Gotham *Hans Zimmer Music Begins*

 

[Shikamaru]

.... reboot the Batman franchise at all? Although he might say otherwise, I'm actually firmly convinced that Christopher Nolan's Dark Knight Trilogy universe would merge very well with Man of Steel, the only caveat being that JGL's John Blake/Batman be the one to meet Clark/Kal-El and take part in a Justice League film.

Stopped reading after that.

 

[Wesley Dodds]

Nolan's already done it; all I'm asking is 'why go to the trouble of rebooting Batman when, as per the ending of Nolan's trilogy, you have an already-established and existing universe that is still viable storytelling ground with or without its original creators and that would actually merge very well with MoS and would give WB a 'leg up' on creating their cinematic DCU'?

I'm not talking about what Nolan's already done or hasn't done. What I said I said in regards to this "merging with Man of Steel" idea you're suggesting.

Batman and Superman have never met onscreen before. Say that out loud. Because it's kind of amazing considering how popular both characters are (and how long they've been around)

So, yeah... when they do it'll be a big deal and it should be done properly.

 

[DigificWriter]

Please put aside all dislike of the idea of JGL's John Blake as Batman and just answer the question I posed. Nolan's universe is still very viable, so why shouldn't WB take advantage of that?

 

[Human Torch]

.... reboot the Batman franchise at all?.

Because Nolan,in his Infinite Wisdom thought it was better to give us a Batman who fought crime for 1.5 years,came back with a bum leg and gave the mantle over to another guy while he went off to sip champagne in France....instead of leaving the series open ended,so other DC characters might have a chance to use it's success to lead us to a World's Finest/Justice League movie.

 

[DigificWriter]

Batman and Superman have never met onscreen before.

Batman TAS, Superman TAS, and the rest of the DCAU disagree with you.

It's true that there has yet to be a feature film meeting of the two characters, but a World's Finest or JLA live-action film would hardly be the characters' "first onscreen meeting".

 

[Wesley Dodds]

Batman TAS, Superman TAS, and the rest of the DCAU disagree with you.

It's true that there has yet to be a feature film meeting of the two characters, but a World's Finest or JLA live-action film would hardly be the characters' "first onscreen meeting".

Oh, now you really are reaching. I meant properly onscreen. But I suspect you already knew that.

 

[DigificWriter]

Because Nolan,in his Infinite Wisdom thought it was better to give us a Batman who fought crime for 1.5 years,came back with a bum leg and gave the mantle over to another guy while he went off to sip champagne in France....instead of leaving the series open ended,so other DC characters might have a chance to use it's success to lead us to a World's Finest/Justice League movie.

Even without Bruce Wayne in the suit, Nolan's universe still remains viable storytelling ground. Whether or not 'fanboys' like the idea, Bruce passed the mantle of Batman on, and Nolan left things open-ended enough that his universe can still be utilized with or without him and with or without his Bruce Wayne.

 

[DigificWriter]

Oh, now you really are reaching. I meant properly onscreen. But I suspect you already knew that.

The DCAU IS 'properly' onscreen.

 

[Human Torch]

I don't think anyone would be onboard for a "Blakeman"/Superman movie.But it could still be salvaged,if they have Bruce come back to Gotham to face some new threat and Blake is now calling himself Nightwing.I think it could work.

Of course,the "bum leg" and "no cartilage" would have to be ignored.But hey-Rocky was half blind and brain damaged and he still made it through 6 films.t:

 

[Wesley Dodds]

The DCAU IS 'properly' onscreen.

As a lifelong DC fan who love those shows, I couldn't disagree more.
The DCAU is fun. Lots of fun. But they've got absolutely nothing to do with DC's live action movies, particularly with what you're suggesting.

How you could even entertain the idea they're the same thing is sort of mind-boggling to me.

 

[Shikamaru]

Please put aside all dislike of the idea of JGL's John Blake as Batman and just answer the question I posed. Nolan's universe is still very viable, so why shouldn't WB take advantage of that?

1) Because it would be the biggest middle finger in the history of comic book movies not just to the fans but to everyone. Justice League will not be any ordinary movie. It will be the first time in over 70 years when Batman and Superman meet on the big screen. This moment has been hyped up for so long not just by fans but by people in general. To not have both the true Batman and the true Superman after all that hype would be just one big middle finger on a bigger scale than anything we've seen before.

2) The fact that Batman is Bruce Wayne is what makes the Superman/Batman dynamic so interesting. Despite what Nolan wants you to think, wearing a Batman costume and having the will to do good is not what makes you Batman. The character of Batman is what is important, and John Blake will never have the exact same character and personality traits of Bruce Wayne.

3) Rebooting Batman will be a much better financial choice for WB. Click on the first link in my signature:
http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=25864531&postcount=377

 

[DigificWriter]

As a lifelong DC fan who love those shows, I couldn't disagree more.
The DCAU is fun. Lots of fun. But they've got absolutely nothing to do with DC's live action movies, particularly with what you're suggesting.

How you could even entertain the idea they're the same thing is sort of mind-boggling to me.

You said "Batman and Superman have never met onscreen"; that is blatantly false, as the characters have met numerous times in DCAU movies and non-DCAU animated works, all of which were presented on a screen (the size of the screen is irrelevant).

I'm through arguing with you on this issue.

Shikamaru, thank you for answering my initial question(s). I disagree with some of what you've said, but it's still an actual answer.

 

[Shikamaru]

The size of the screen is relevant. How many people do you know that watched the Justice League cartoons compared to the overall population?

 

[DigificWriter]

^ Not in terms of the context of the assertion that I disproved. If the DCAU films and television series - and the other non-DCAU animated properties in which Batman and Superman have met didn't exist, the assertion of "Batman and Superman have never meet onscreen" would be true, but it's not because the two characters HAVE met onscreen; they may not have ever met on on the 'big screen' in a feature film, but they've still met onscreen.

 

[Wesley Dodds]

You said "Batman and Superman have never met onscreen"; that is blatantly false, as the characters have met numerous times in DCAU movies and non-DCAU animated works, all of which were presented on a screen (the size of the screen is irrelevant).

I'm through arguing with you on this issue.

Shikamaru, thank you for answering my initial question(s). I disagree with some of what you've said, but it's still an actual answer.

Sorry, who's arguing?

Here's what's happened in a nutshell:

You: 'How would you feel about about Nolan's Bat movies merging with his Superman movies with John Blake as Batman?'

Me: 'Batman and Superman haven't met onscreen before, so it should be Bruce.'

You: 'They've met plenty in a bunch of childrens tv cartoons that ended 10 years ago and thats the same thing.'

Me: 'No it isn't... at all.'

You: 'This conversation is over.'

 

[Shikamaru]

^ Not in terms of the context of the assertion that I disproved. If the DCAU films and television series - and the other non-DCAU animated properties in which Batman and Superman have met didn't exist, the assertion of "Batman and Superman have never meet onscreen" would be true, but it's not because the two characters HAVE met onscreen; they may not have ever met on on the 'big screen' in a feature film, but they've still met onscreen.

You're missing the point. The point is that the vast majority of people haven't seen it before so it will be something new for a lot of people. Animation on television also doesn't leave the same long lasting impact on you that big budget epic-in-scale movies do.

 

[DigificWriter]

You're missing the point. The point is that the vast majority of people haven't seen it before so it will be something new for a lot of people. Animation on television also doesn't leave the same long lasting impact on you that big budget epic-in-scale movies do.

I'm not missing the point at all, because, contrary to what Wesley Dodds might claim, I never said that the characters meeting in a feature film was the same thing as them having met in the DCAU or other non-DCAU properties. I brought up the DCAU specifically in relation to the claim "that the characters have never met onscreen" as a means of disproving said claim and only as a means of disproving said claim.

 

[Shikamaru]

I'm not missing the point at all, because, contrary to what Wesley Dodds might claim, I never said that the characters meeting in a feature film was the same thing as them having met in the DCAU or other non-DCAU properties. I brought up the DCAU specifically in relation to the claim "that the characters have never met onscreen" as a means of disproving said claim and only as a means of disproving said claim.

Dude, it was clearly obvious that he meant to say they never met on the big screen. You are nitpicking for flaws in his post.

 

[DigificWriter]

Dude, it was clearly obvious that he meant to say they never met on the big screen. You are nitpicking for flaws in his post.

Taking what he said LITERALLY is not nitpicking anything. He made a claim that was rendered blatantly false because of the term he used, and I cited examples which pointed out that his claim was rendered blatantly false because of the term he used.

At any rate, I'm done talking about this entire issue. You answered the question(s) I posed as to why Warner Bros. shouldn't just continue to use the TDKT universe and incorporate it into its cinematic DCU, and I'd like to get back on topic so that others have a chance to do so as well should they feel so inclined.

I also plan on putting forth examples of why/how, specifically, I think the TDKT universe remains viable and could very easily merge with MoS to create two of the pillars of a cinematic DCU.