BvS Zach Snyder plans to speak with Frank Miller for MoS Sequel

Will be purely for some advice/opinions on how to do Batman's story

 

Does this really need it's own thread, it's being discussed in the open discussion thread.

 

Oh, no.

Frank Miller lost his f***ing mind several years ago. I wouldn't consult him for... anything.

 

hope he also plans to speak with Bruce Timm and Paul Dini

those 2 KNOW the characters

 

And Jeph Loeb and Scott Snyder are also good.

 

I disagree about Jeph Loeb (tied to Marvel now anyway), but I'd be all for Scott Snyder consulting. He seems to "get" both characters equally.

 

Yes for Batman but definitely not for Superman.

 

Superman going to get owned

 

Exactly.

I bet the story is that after what happened in Metropolis, Superman tried to do things his own way for a while as he told Swanwick, then the people kept hating him and then he decided to become a government puppet to improve his image. From all this, Batman becomes the hero of a Superman movie and the 12 year old BatFans get what they want.

Yeah I agree. Jeph Leob did Public Enemies among other stuff, the BETTER go-to comic than what a mad man wrote in his mid-life crisis. I've heard good things about Scott Snyder, I have not yet read The Court of Owls story arc(mainly because of my strong preference for Superman comics first and my now on-going hatred for Batman because of what is likely to happen in this movie), but I found myself enjoying Superman Unchained.

 

Superman will be fine. He wont be a puppet for anyone.

 

Or worst Superman is used with the aid of the military to take down a terrorist plot to blow up the Metropolis subway and Superman crushes their skulls causing a massive earthquake in Africa.

 

Except for WB.

I wish the OP would get Snyder's name right, though.

 

i'm pretty much expecting the relationship between batman and superman to be like it is in smallville season 11. not so much friends, but if something is gonna go down, they won't hesitate to call each other if they feel like they need to

 

I wish I could agree with that sentiment. But I can't.

 

It's funny. Of course Superman fans don't want to see Batman come onto the scene, steal the spotlight and make Superman look bad.

But at the same time, as a Bat-fan do you think I want to see my favorite character rushed into a reboot only to serve as fodder for Superman in a Superman movie? The mere idea of putting Batman on the same screen as a god-like hero is nerve-wracking to me, because it's so easy to unintentionally make Batman seem impotent and comically inadequate next to someone like Superman. It's happened in the comics so many times. So you're damn right I want to make sure Batman gets his moments to shine and is shown to be a worthy adversary to Superman. It makes sense too- why should someone as powerful as Superman eventually respect and value Batman as an ally if Batman can't find a way to go toe to toe with him? If Batman manages to beat Superman at some point, then Superman knows he's a worthy ally going into the future.

I want Batman to be given his due respect in this movie not for the sake of some sort of fanboy fap-fest, but because it's what's right for the story. And I don't think Batman and Superman only having "minor" disagreements and then teaming up is what best suits the nature of their relationship. These two need to have it out in a big way. It's Man vs. God. The potential is epic.

This is going to be tricky as hell to pull off. And a lame compromise situation where they just have a few scuffles but then have to pull it together in the third act sounds SO tired, predictable and corny.

It seems like no matter which way they go, there's a downside for someone.

 

Umm no. It's a downside for Superman.

Your argument would have a lot more power if Batman had not just HAD a critically acclaimed, successful trilogy that made over a billion dollars at the box office and is considered one of the greatest if not THE greatest superhero franchises of all time.

Your argument would also have a lot more power if historically Batman had been put in a position in comics where he was made to look stupid/out of character in order to raise up Superman. He hasn't. It's the opposite. There is historical precedent wherein people sacrifice Clark Kent at the altar of the Bat.

I'm a Batman fan too but at some point complaining as a "Bat fan" just starts to look...greedy. You guys just GOT an amazing trilogy.

I think the concerns about Batman taking over this film and stealing focus from what the REAL story should have been for a Man of steel sequel is totally justified.

The Man of STeel sequel SHOULD have been focused on the the introduction of Clark/Lex and the developing love story of Clark/Lois. Now the central relationship is going to be Superman/Batman.

The loser in this is only Superman. It's going to be Superman.

 

^ "make Batman seem impotent and comically inadequate next to someone like Superman."

That idea doesn't make me worried at ALL. If anything, the other situation tends to happen in media.

In fact, Batman seeming very weak in comparison is realistic. Making him a formidable opponent against Superman is pretty over the top, IMHO.

Batman should be a master strategist. Not necessarily smarter, but unconventional in thinking.

 

What a terrible idea. Miller is clueless and hasn't done anything decent since the 80's. All of his Batman stories since the 90's have been embarrassingly bad.

 

We all make mistakes, your only human.

 

I'll just say, to be nice, Superman:TAS never set the world on fire.

However, I think Timm and Dini do their best Superman work when he isn't alone, so talking to them about a Superman/Batman move could work.

 

Yep. They can still make a killer sequel. Just not as a WF movie. That should be its own film.