Your top 5 things that needs to be "fixed" for the Batman reboot

[Squaremaster316]

It was clearly indicated in Batman Begins that Burce had learned various martial arts before he came upon the League, Ras just took his training to the next level.

 

[Squaremaster316]

I dunno, I think 10 years is more than enough time, especially if you don't try to "top Heath" and instead go with a completely different version of the character. It's already been four years since TDK; I think by the time a reboot comes along, there will have been plenty of time to move on.

And if Harley Quinn shows up, she should be by her puddin's side.

No, Harley's barely tolerable in the show, I don't care to ever see a live action version of her in any film.

 

[EssayM]

Think you might be alone on that. A lot of people seem to like her and want her in a movie.

 

[shauner111]

Harley's awesome. She was a highlight in BTAS. She's a very popular character and she should be there with Joker this time around.

 

[Snow Queen]

Harley was one of the two best things about BTAS. Her and Mr. Freeze's new origin.

 

[Matt Mortem]

Harley was one of the two best things about BTAS. Her and Mr. Freeze's new origin.

Both things I want in the new Batman film series

 

[Snow Queen]

Both things I want in the new Batman film series

Agreed.

 

[regwec]

Harley was one of the two best things about BTAS. Her and Mr. Freeze's new origin.

Yep, it is no coincidence that they are the two principle innovations made by TAS that have survived into the comics.

 

[shauner111]

Totally agree with you guys. Im dying to see Joker with Harley and a serious Freeze with that origin.

I think the staples for the new reboot should be Dick Grayson, Mr. Freeze, Harley Quinn, Harvey Bullock, Riddler, Penguin, World's Greatest Detective Batman, slightly more gothic city and sleeker batmobile.

That's my list. They can do anything else they want, I really don't care. I just think the next trilogy or so should have all of those elements at one time or another. I prefer the classic grey/black suit but if they surprise me with a new invention again I wont complain.

 

[Steamteck]

Not any more than Nolan's trilogy. Notice that TDK was much better received than Mask of the Phantasm.

There are numerous problems with both. I'll stick to BTAS for now, as someone else already commented on Arkham Asylum.

- Some episodes are downright atrocious (ex. Batman in My Basement, Cat Scratch Fever)
- Until her last couple of appearances Catwoman was reduced to a standard damsel in distress type
- They went with the terrible Tim Burton Penguin
- The animation quality varied widly depending on what animation house did that particular episode
- Many of the more complex villains lose their primary motivations after their origin episodes (ex. Mad Hatter, Two-Face) and just because standard criminals
- Batman isn't any more of a detective than he is in the Nolan films
- Late in the series the supporting cast becomes bloated and Batman's role is reduced in favor of Robin and Batgirl
- Killer Croc is a joke
- Bane is almost as bad
- The show is too childish in many spots and not dark enough.
- The character design after the revamp is wretched for nearly every character (Scarecrow being the main exception). Does anybody think this is a good Joker?

I'd give more examples, but I have to go for the time being. I can list more later if you want.

I got so much more out of BTAS than you did. For its medioum I think it did a much better job than Nolan did. Note I am not a big fan of the trilogy though. BB is the only one I really like and I consider it way behind the Marvel movies and MOS.I get you don't care for the TAS take much but even you have to see how much Mr. Freeze was improved.

 

[hafizbat]

.....well. BTAS is one the most well recieved and adored animated series ever. You can pick it apart like that, but you have to consider the context. This was a kids tv show that came after the Adam West era. It revolutionized the way kids saw Batman and was a big part of why Batman is now a huge global icon. You say it's not dark enough when it was A CHILDREN'S SHOW. The emotional weight in the stories is unmatched by any cartoon. The origins of Mr. Freeze and Two-Face in particular were brilliant (after the way both characters were portrayed in Batman Forever and Batman and Robin). When most young adults who aren't comic readers think of Batman, they think of the batman of TAS or the Nolan films. The cartoon heavily inspired the Arkham games, which are tremendously successful in both critical acclaim and sales. When most people criticize the Nolan trilogy, it's cuz they want something more like BTAS. IMO most of your complaints are completely off point...

Batman: The Animated Series was and will always be awesome.

 

[EssayM]

Here's my list:

1. Go back to black and grey. If Marvel can have the original costumes, so can DC.

2. Make Batman a badass again. A core aspect of the character is how he can face all the surreal and bizarre enemies of his world and not bat an eyelash, even when he's genuinely scared or confused. He can be vulnerable, but he tries his darndest to hide it.

3. When it comes to villains, bring out the big guns from the start: Freeze, Penguin, Riddler, Two-Face, Poison Ivy, and of course Joker and Harley Quinn. I'm tired of having to plod through lame villians like Scarecrow and Carmine Falcone to get to the good stuff.

4. For that matter, it would be cool to instill a sense of the larger rogues gallery, that Batman has a whole army of costumed psychopaths that he faces every night. Some scenes in Arkham of the different villains interacting on their off time would be a fun little add on, and maybe even a good place for some plot setup and character development.

5. Really, above all, just make it FUN! The thing about TAS is that, like The Avengers, it was a good action-adventure story that just happened to have complex characters and dark elements. That's what I want on screen. You can have realism, you can be psychological, you can even be dark, but that doesn't mean you have be depressing or dull. TAS sure isn't, so why should a movie be?

 

[regwec]

I sort of agree with you, up to your mention of The Avengers. I couldn't live with a Batman movie that was so insipid.

 

[shauner111]

.....well. BTAS is one the most well recieved and adored animated series ever. You can pick it apart like that, but you have to consider the context. This was a kids tv show that came after the Adam West era. It revolutionized the way kids saw Batman and was a big part of why Batman is now a huge global icon. You say it's not dark enough when it was A CHILDREN'S SHOW. The emotional weight in the stories is unmatched by any cartoon. The origins of Mr. Freeze and Two-Face in particular were brilliant (after the way both characters were portrayed in Batman Forever and Batman and Robin). When most young adults who aren't comic readers think of Batman, they think of the batman of TAS or the Nolan films. The cartoon heavily inspired the Arkham games, which are tremendously successful in both critical acclaim and sales. When most people criticize the Nolan trilogy, it's cuz they want something more like BTAS. IMO most of your complaints are completely off point...

Batman: The Animated Series was and will always be awesome.

Good post. BTAS will always be genius. It always baffles me that we got those versions of Mr. Freeze, Two-Face, Riddler and then after they do completely comical versions of each of those villains.

But I agree with the criticisms too. Theyre all there. There's plenty of stuff that's fleshed out more in the comics or Bruce Timm/Paul Dini, etc took from Burton's films when visually creating Catwoman and Penguin. But we should let those things go, because the pros outweighed the cons. BTAS did so much more than the live-action films of that era and it was a cartoon. WB should have been embarrassed. Not because the general audience didn't respond well to the movies or because they didn't make money, but because animation was treating the characters with more emotion and maturity than the real life actors in the damn films.

 

[shauner111]

Here's my list:

1. Go back to black and grey. If Marvel can have the original costumes, so can DC.

2. Make Batman a badass again. A core aspect of the character is how he can face all the surreal and bizarre enemies of his world and not bat an eyelash, even when he's genuinely scared or confused. He can be vulnerable, but he tries his darndest to hide it.

3. When it comes to villains, bring out the big guns from the start: Freeze, Penguin, Riddler, Two-Face, Poison Ivy, and of course Joker and Harley Quinn. I'm tired of having to plod through lame villians like Scarecrow and Carmine Falcone to get to the good stuff.

4. For that matter, it would be cool to instill a sense of the larger rogues gallery, that Batman has a whole army of costumed psychopaths that he faces every night. Some scenes in Arkham of the different villains interacting on their off time would be a fun little add on, and maybe even a good place for some plot setup and character development.

5. Really, above all, just make it FUN! The thing about TAS is that, like The Avengers, it was a good action-adventure story that just happened to have complex characters and dark elements. That's what I want on screen. You can have realism, you can be psychological, you can even be dark, but that doesn't mean you have be depressing or dull. TAS sure isn't, so why should a movie be?

1- I agree that they should go black and grey, but it needs to work as a function and not just a visual. That should be easy to do.

2- Nolan's Batman was plenty badass. But yes, they can take it up a notch.

3- Ive been saying for a while now. Bring out the villains from the start. Have most of them there, already existing in that world. However I don't think Scarecrow or Falcone are lame villains. Especially Scarecrow.

4- Exactly.

5- I don't mind the fun but saying "the animated series has it, so why cant the movies!" that's a childish argument because you have to realize at some point that these films are not tv shows that are written with children and fans in mind only. The fans are not in their minds. The general audience has been responding to TDKT films more than anything else. Fans who want more fun, theyre coming to see the movie regardless and theyre a small percentage. When the GA starts complaining that it's not fun enough, they'll add more in. Or if the next director is a fan of the animated series then we all win. But im not expecting it.

 

[EssayM]

regwec: I sort of agree with you, up to your mention of The Avengers. I couldn't live with a Batman movie that was so insipid.

Here's the google definition of insipid:

1. Lacking flavor: "insipid coffee".
2. Lacking vigor or interest: "insipid, shallow books".

How exactly does The Avengers meet either of those criteria?

shauner111: Nolan's Batman was plenty badass. But yes, they can take it up a notch.

To clarify, I don't mean "badass" as in "physically aggressive". I mean it as in "can be face to face with the most insane and bizarre stuff anyone has ever seen and still have the presence of mind to be ready with a plan and three backup plans before his enemy even knew what hit him". That, to me, is Batman's kind of badass. (Note: I'm not bashing Bale again, just the way his character was written.

Ive been saying for a while now. Bring out the villains from the start. Have most of them there, already existing in that world. However I don't think Scarecrow or Falcone are lame villains. Especially Scarecrow.

Fair enough. To me, a scrawny nerd with a can of fear gas isn't very threatening, nor is a run-of-the-mill mob boss with no particular powers outside of a lot of influence. If your villain is a guy Batman could easily take out with one punch, you might want to rethink your villain. Also, neither has a lot of star power; before BB, I only knew of Scarecrow because I watched TAS. They're not your headlining villians, basically. Otherwise, totally agree.

I don't mind the fun but saying "the animated series has it, so why cant the movies!" that's a childish argument because you have to realize at some point that these films are not tv shows that are written with children and fans in mind only. The fans are not in their minds. The general audience has been responding to TDKT films more than anything else. Fans who want more fun, theyre coming to see the movie regardless and theyre a small percentage. When the GA starts complaining that it's not fun enough, they'll add more in. Or if the next director is a fan of the animated series then we all win. But im not expecting it.

I will take back that last bit, it was a little too much. What I meant to ask was why a Batman movie couldn't have the same balance of fun action and complex characters as TAS (or the Arkham games, for that matter). I do realize they're different mediums, I was just wondering why the movies can't have a similar tone.

Also, I think the GA has responded in a way. I mean, both TDKR and MoS got mixed reviews, and what were the big fan criticisms against them? "TDKR is too boring"; "MoS isn't fun." I think TDK's popularity came from how it "intellectualized" comic book movies, but that appeal seems to be wearing off. Not saying audiences want idiot movies, but I think they also want smart movies that are fun, that entertain them, as Marvel proved with The Avengers series and TASM. Fun and strong writing are universal, whether you're going after the fans or the GA.

 

[Snow Queen]

Also, I think the GA has responded in a way. I mean, both TDKR and MoS got mixed reviews, and what were the big fan criticisms against them? "TDKR is too boring"; "MoS isn't fun." I think TDK's popularity came from how it "intellectualized" comic book movies, but that appeal seems to be wearing off. Not saying audiences want idiot movies, but I think they also want smart movies that are fun, that entertain them, as Marvel proved with The Avengers series and TASM. Fun and strong writing are universal, whether you're going after the fans or the GA.

Fun is subjective, for example, I find Avengers to be joyless because any joy is sucked out by how bland and by-the-numbers it feels. And TASM is Sony, not Marvel studios.

 

[regwec]

Here's the google definition of insipid:

1. Lacking flavor: "insipid coffee".
2. Lacking vigor or interest: "insipid, shallow books".

How exactly does The Avengers meet either of those criteria?

I presume you are trying to insinuate that I didn't know what the word means. The definition you have provided is not in fact exhaustive, but the second usage is close enough: I found the film to be superficial and extraordinarily boring.

 

[EssayM]

I'm sure you know what the word means, the definition was meant to be what experts call "a joke". And TASM actually was made by Marvel Studios; Columbia (not Sony) only distributed it. Moving along...

Wow. I mean, I'll admit The Avengers has flaws, but boring? Bland? Joyless? What movie were you two watching that I and the majority of critics and audiences didn't see? As criticisms of the MCU go, I would buy "clumsy and devoid of substance" a lot more readily than "boring and joyless".

 

[Snow Queen]

And TASM actually was made by Marvel Studios; Columbia (not Sony) only distributed it. Moving along...

Wow. I mean, I'll admit The Avengers has flaws, but boring? Bland? Joyless? What movie were you two watching that I and the majority of critics and audiences didn't see? As criticisms of the MCU go, I would buy "clumsy and devoid of substance" a lot more readily than "boring and joyless".

Marvel was involved but they weren't the big company behind it. They didn't call the shots is what I mean like they can with the MCU. Sony has more control than they do over the project, at least from what I've read and heard.

I find no joy in something that, as you put it and I consider it, is clumsy and devoid of substance. I see no fun in something that felt like it came off of an assembly line, as The Avengers felt for me. I find something like that boring and I can see no joy in something that feels this way, the same way I don't find joy in the Transformers movies.

 

[Ledlunar]

I found the suit in TDK & TDK fine, functional made sense, looked cool.

I guess Id just want the reboot to be as well crafted as Nolans but with a more fantastical element as well. Id love it if they hammered out a solid 6 scripts, find a actor in his late 20's or youthful looking early 30's , a talented actor (doesn't have to be a big name could be a unknown) who would dedicate himself to these movies body, mind & spirit and also be okay with filming back to back the way the actors from Harry Potter had to, so we can have them filmed relatively quick. Id like to see the movies shift through his early years capturing great moments like the first meeting of the joker and the transformation of harvey dent. Id like Dent to be Dent in a few movies, allies with Batman before Gordon. Id love it if Batman wasn't racing around in a tank on the streets of Gotham. show he has a sleek cool means of transportation but Id rather see Batman gliding off rooftops more so and using his grapple gun. Id love for famous rogues to turn up and develop naturally some with origins, others you can take a bit of a hint of why they are the way they are (Riddler) and some just totally unexplained (Joker). Id love for these villains to build up organically and have them stick around showing up throughout the 6 films they way they do in the comics, I don't like the way superhero movies seems to have a batch per movie. I always wished Nolans movies gave us a walk through Arkham after Batman Begins. villains Id love to see established throughout a reboot franchise are The Riddler, Joker, Twoface, Catwoman, Clayface, Black Mask, Penguin, Scarecrow, Mad Hatter.... maybe even Mr Freeze and Posion Ivy. also the mob as well. Id like to see Dents wife in there as well. it would be great if they could build a gigantic mystery story to tie all the films together or at least have that kind of aspect in each film, Id like to see Batman using the darkness, his equipment and just watch some crazy **** unfurl with Batman having to use his mind, body and soul to stop it or at least control it.

 

[shauner111]

I also don't care for Avengers. I get bored after 5 minutes because it's just a popcorn movie trying to fun and funny. Not my cup of tea.

But to say if Batman can take out a guy with one punch then they should rethink their villain? That's stupid as bad place. Riddler and Penguin and many others fall into that category. Being physical, tough on the exterior, isn't necessary in being a threatening or well written villain.

 

[regwec]

For me, The Avengers had the same detrimental flaw as all Marvel Studio stuff: it didn't feel like a real film at all, but an advert for things yet to come. All of those movies are designed to offer just enough to get a pass while setting up the next product for distribution. It is all about keeping the assembly line running; minimum wage and a ten minute coffee break every four hours. Quality control makes sure everything is exactly the same. Movies that misfire are trucked off to the reboot department.

I would hate to see Batman turned into something so hollow, predictable and cynical.

 

[EssayM]

Marvel was involved but they weren't the big company behind it. They didn't call the shots is what I mean like they can with the MCU. Sony has more control than they do over the project, at least from what I've read and heard.

I find no joy in something that, as you put it and I consider it, is clumsy and devoid of substance. I see no fun in something that felt like it came off of an assembly line, as The Avengers felt for me. I find something like that boring and I can see no joy in something that feels this way, the same way I don't find joy in the Transformers movies.

You do realize that almost everyone on the planet has compared the Avengers to Transformers with the exact opposite intention? Specifically, to point out how Transformers has stupid comedy, annoying/bland characters, and incomprehensible action scenes, whereas Avengers has clever humor, likable characters, and thrilling action scenes? I mean, you're entitled to your opinion and all, but comparing it to a Michael Bay film is kind of a weak accusation.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

Avengers to me was like reading a comic book. It showed people what makes goofy concepts like Avengers appealing to geeks of all ages.

Batman is a somewhat less goofy concept but there are other ways to show the public what makes the the comics and BTAS so appealing to geeks of all ages.

Embracing the comics and portraying them accurately means something different to the Batman universe than it does the Avengers' universe but it can be done.

Use the dark imaginative world of Batman to touch something real within us. A Batman movie shouldn't be a 2-hour apology for being a comic book.