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

[Bathead]

Most people aren't worried about Miller because they fear a TDKRt adaptation, they're worried because Miller's suggestions will probably suck, for Batman, Superman, or the story.

And if his suggestions do suck, Snyder could simply ignore them.

 

[BatLobster]

And if his suggestions do suck, Snyder could simply ignore them.

Exactly. People freaking out over this reflects more of a distrust of Snyder than a distaste for Miller.

If Snyder can't think independently and filter out things if they're bad ideas, then he has no business directing a movie of this magnitude.

He's going to chat with the guy, not surrender himself over to him.

 

[Marvin]

People seem to forget this is a big studio picture complete with a hand full of executives and producers(one of which is Nolan).

Miller didn't just get his hands on a small film project about batman's last days. The studio will not be making a miller batman film here. They already turned that down. Nolan still have more say than most in this regard imo.

 

[ЯɘvlveR]

[YT]2L8q7dY2MnU[/YT]

 

[FlawlessVictory]

^Of course he would answer like that, he was promoting a Superman movie. Let's see what his answer is if he is asked that now. t:

 

[BatLobster]

[YT]2L8q7dY2MnU[/YT]

From David Goyer's Reddit AMA this year:

Q:Who would win in a fight between Batman and Blade?
A: Batman would kick the **** out of Blade. I mean, come on. Given a head start and some planning, Batman might even be able to take down Superman. Seriously, are you REALLY asking that question?????

Goyer and Snyder might have to fight this one out.

 

[Pfeiffer-Pfan]

Batman will definitely win the battle before they team up... but at the end of the movie Superman could have a little cool/comedic moment showing that he could end Batman if he so wished.

As long as he doesn't snap is neck.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

I'm worried about both Miller AND Snyder.

I think they're both hacks at this point.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

From David Goyer's Reddit AMA this year:



Goyer and Snyder might have to fight this one out.

I hardly think a few kicks is "taking Superman down." If Superman wanted to harm Batman, he would have burnt him with his heat vision, or throw him across the city.

TDKR is just one novel, and there are many stories where Batman's face goes squishy, even inside the armor due to Superman's impact.

 

[Loki882]

If they mean DD, Wolverine, Ronin, Y1 Frank Miller, then that's fantastic. IF they mean ASBAR, TDKSA, Holy Terror Miller, then hell no.

 

[Glassjaw]

I can tell my excitement and concerns for this film are going to be all over the place, going up and down depending on each bit of news released.

 

[BatLobster]

I hardly think a few kicks is "taking Superman down." If Superman wanted to harm Batman, he would have burnt him with his heat vision, or throw him across the city.

TDKR is just one novel, and there are many stories where Batman's face goes squishy, even inside the armor due to Superman's impact.

But that's what's so interesting about that particular fight. Superman doesn't want to kill Batman, but that's what his orders are. If it weren't for Superman's moral center, he would kill him. But Bruce knows that, and that's the point.

The conflict between the two characters should never be a purely physical "who's tougher?" contest. It's more of a philosophical question.

 

[Skrilla31]

The conflict between the two characters should never be a purely physical "who's tougher?" contest. It's more of a philosophical question.

Right. Superman is a real hero, Batman isn't. Superman actually does what he does because he cares about other people. Batman does what he does because it brings him a sick joy.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

Right. Superman is a real hero, Batman isn't. Superman actually does what he does because he cares about other people. Batman does what he does because it brings him a sick joy.

And that's what I want to be implied. I'm sure Snyder will bring that-if his meeting with Frank Miller is any indication.

Superman is a MUCH better person in the inside. If Gotham didn't rob Batman, he probably wouldn't care to redeem it. But Clark wants to make sure everyone behaves and is satisfied with life. That's a far more ambitious goal than merely making one city safe. But then again, Batman's just a "regular guy" who happens to have a lot of money, athleticism, intellect, and heroism at his disposal

 

[Skrilla31]

And that's what I want to be implied. I'm sure Snyder will bring that-if his meeting with Frank Miller is any indication.

Superman is a MUCH better person in the inside. If Gotham didn't rob Batman, he probably wouldn't care to redeem it. But Clark wants to make sure everyone behaves and is satisfied with life. That's a far more ambitious goal than merely making one city safe. But then again, Batman's just a "regular guy" who happens to have a lot of money, athleticism, intellect, and heroism at his disposal

If Bruce really wanted to save the world he'd have done it already. He has enough money to completely change the world ten times over... at least enough to save Gotham. He could pump money into more refined educational programs, resource centers, and all but erase poverty at the drop of a dime. He could pay yearly salaries to every family in Gotham so that moms and dads can spend more time with their kids. He could give the police dept. all the money they need so that they don't have to rely on crooked means to get the job done. Bruce Wayne has real power to change Gotham, and that kind of change would last forever. If Bruce wanted to, he could really plant the seeds for a Gotham that no longer needed Batman.

But he doesn't. He fights crime because it fills a void in his life, not because he wants to help people. Helping people just comes with the job.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

^ That's probably why TDKR had him become a humanitarian at the end.

But I prefer that dark implication. It just goes to show that Batman's mind is a labyrinth.

Why not just tie the Joker up in a place where someone else can shoot him?

It's because a part of him doesn't know what he'll do without the Joker. I'm fairly certain of it.

 

[Skrilla31]

^ That's probably why TDKR had him become a humanitarian at the end.

But I prefer that dark implication. It just goes to show that Batman's mind is a labyrinth.

Why not just tie the Joker up in a place where someone else can shoot him?

It's because a part of him doesn't know what he'll do without the Joker. I'm fairly certain of it.

Hoenstly? And I know this is gonna draw criticism. I think Batman is in love with The Joker. There's really no other explanation for it. The two of them are clearly and obviously in love. The Joker even hints at it in The Dark Knight. When a man says to another man, "You complete me"... it's pretty obvious what he's hinting at. And Batman didn't seem too thrown off by it either. The truth is Batman never feels more alive than when he's tangling with Joker.

If Batman really cared about saving people he'd have killed the Joker a long time ago but he doesn't. How do you think this guy always manages to "get away"? Batman lets him get away so the two of them can continue to play their little game. You're talking about the world's greatest detective here and yet after all this time he just can't seem to figure out the identity of this one guy? Obviously he doesn't want to.

And who do you think keeps helping Joker escape from Arkham? It's probably Batman. The guy is a f'n lunatic. Batman's rogues are like girlfriends to him, but none of them make him tick like the Joker does. He's the one that understands him the most. Batman talks a good game how he won't kill him because he won't "stoop down to that level" but in reality it's because he can't imagine his life without him. He loves Joker more than anyone else.

 

[Steelsheen]

*manages to read all 8 pages on a mobile*

The responses in this thread *shakes head*. a lot of you guys are just worried that the hero you're rooting for would look less than the other guy. seriously do you think WB would bankroll a film that is nothing more than a glorified superhero wwf smackdown? no, this is WB's reactionary movements to that little movie called the Avengers and how years of ignoring the fans prodding for a superhero teamup movie led them to play a hilarious game of catch-up.

springboards-- that is the keyword. MOS got a reboot bcz if it did well it will springboard into bringing in a team movie-- Batman first and IF that makes money THEN perhaps a JL movie. fans around these parts know WB too well-- they won't make a move unless it's a sure thing. WB are not innovators unlike Marvel who dares to think outside of the box.

and I wouldn't worry too much about Miller, he isn't running this gig, Nolan is.

 

[hafizbat]

Right. Superman is a real hero, Batman isn't. Superman actually does what he does because he cares about other people. Batman does what he does because it brings him a sick joy.

If Bruce really wanted to save the world he'd have done it already. He has enough money to completely change the world ten times over... at least enough to save Gotham. He could pump money into more refined educational programs, resource centers, and all but erase poverty at the drop of a dime. He could pay yearly salaries to every family in Gotham so that moms and dads can spend more time with their kids. He could give the police dept. all the money they need so that they don't have to rely on crooked means to get the job done. Bruce Wayne has real power to change Gotham, and that kind of change would last forever. If Bruce wanted to, he could really plant the seeds for a Gotham that no longer needed Batman.

But he doesn't. He fights crime because it fills a void in his life, not because he wants to help people. Helping people just comes with the job.

^ That's probably why TDKR had him become a humanitarian at the end.

But I prefer that dark implication. It just goes to show that Batman's mind is a labyrinth.

Why not just tie the Joker up in a place where someone else can shoot him?

It's because a part of him doesn't know what he'll do without the Joker. I'm fairly certain of it.

Wrong, wrong, wrong. Sorry, but this is NOT batman at all. Perhaps the Batman from TDKR, which is an elseworlds tale, but this does not describe the character of Batman at all. I mean, are you serious? Have you only ever read Frank Miller's work?

Batman is a true hero just as much as Superman, if not more so. You're right in the fact that he doesn't have to do what he does, but he still does it, night in and night out. Think about it. Superman is this supremely powerful being, we all know what he's capable of. Almost NOTHING can hurt him. While Batman is just a normal human, capable of pain and loss as much as you and I. Just based on that single fact alone, Batman would be more heroic. Sure, he might not be a boy scout. He doesn't kiss up to the media, he doesn't smile for the camera. But when it comes to doing his job, which is saving lives (his own choosing), no one is more heroic than him.

You sound severely uninformed, because in the majority of Batman comics he isn't portrayed as insane ala Frank Miller's work. He has shown such deep pain and regret at the loss of even a single life COUNTLESS times. In fact, of all the Justice League members, Batman is usually the last one who would turn and do something insane. Superman, GL, etc are far more vulnerable to succumbing to their emotions.

Batman values life so much that he refuses to kill the Joker or any other villain. He doesn't not kill them because he wants to chase them forever. I don't buy that at all. It's ridiculous and completely unrealistic, after the Joker murdered Jason Todd, paralyzed Barbara Gordon for life, murdered Gordon's wife, and caused so much pain to Batman. The fact that he hasn't killed him or ANYONE else shows his true heroism. His undying resolve to never succumb and become a villain himself.

Just look at the recent movies. The Batman in the TDK trilogy was FAR more heroic than Superman in MoS. That Superman barely showed any care at all for any civilian (taking Zod into a small town with innocent people?), while Nolan's Bruce Wayne was downright paranoid, not willing to take even the smallest risk with any lives, as seen by his decision with the nuclear energy source (more proof that he tried to save Gotham without Batman).

And as for the implication that he can seemingly solve every single problem in the world with his wealth...yeah that sounds really stupid. You really think one man can solve the poverty of the WHOLE world by himself? Why hasn't Bill Gates or Warren Buffet done this yet? They've dedicated their lives to generosity, yet there is still so much indignation and suffering in the world. The fact that you think Bruce Wayne, who would be comparable in wealth to them, can do that. It sounds really idiotic...And he DOES do many of the things you said. He funds all the boy's homes in the city, employs/aids countless individuals in need, etc. Just look at the No Man's Land storyline if you want to see his generosity. He spends BILLIONS in remaking Gotham and helping people get back on their feet. He funds entire apartment complexes for free with free heating, lighting, shelter, etc. He puts thousands and thousands of people on payroll. He even remarks at how guilty he feels having a warm meal when there are people out in the cold. THAT is the Batman I know. Not the "crazy insane obsessed man who does it for a sick joy." That's not the real Bruce Wayne.

It's extremely annoying when people confuse heroism with being a boy scout. Yes, Superman is more polite, smiley, maybe nicer.

But as a hero? Batman is second to none.

 

[Skrilla31]

Batman values life so much that he refuses to kill the Joker or any other villain. He doesn't not kill them because he wants to chase them forever. I don't buy that at all. It's ridiculous and completely unrealistic, after the Joker murdered Jason Todd, paralyzed Barbara Gordon for life, murdered Gordon's wife, and caused so much pain to Batman. The fact that he hasn't killed him or ANYONE else shows his true heroism. His undying resolve to never succumb and become a villain himself.

Right, you would think after the first incident that Batman would have done anything he could to prevent anything like that from happening again. But no, he let's Joker live. Deep down he wants Joker to keep pushing his buttons or else he wouldn't have a reason to live.

Any time Joker harms an innocent, Batman is responsible. Because he's had every opportunity to put a stop to it and hasn't. In fact if you gave Batman an ultimatum which involved sacrificing the lives of hundreds of innocents or killing Joker... how do you think he'd respond? Personally I believe he'd take the Joker's side every time.

If Joker were in a burning building he'd risk his life to save him. That's not heroism. That's love.

 

[BatLobster]

I think this is just an issue of there being multiple interpretations of the character.

I tend to prefer my Batman to be more on the heroic side. He has a lot of traits of an anti-hero for sure, but in my favorite interpretations of the character he wants to make the world a better place too. But he's born out of a city that needs cleaning up and the law isn't going to get the job done.

The Joker is a great foil for Batman, and I think more than any other character he's the one who can make Bruce get lost inside the mission. They have that eternal back and forth thing going on. But I still think Bruce is essentially a good person. A damaged person, yes, but not a villain.

 

[Skrilla31]

The guy is a billionaire. He has more money than God. If he really wanted to, he could "clean up" Gotham as Bruce Wayne more than he ever could as Batman.

 

[Skrilla31]

But I still think Bruce is essentially a good person. A damaged person, yes, but not a villain.

You're right he's not a villain but he definitely cares about himself more than anyone else. If he really saw himself as a father figure to Robin he would do everything he could to protect him. Not take him out on his crime fighting adventures and put him in harm's way against the most devious souls roaming the earth.

 

[BatLobster]

If the problem is rampant and widespread corruption, throwing money at the problem doesn't necessarily make it go away. Money breeds corruption.

That's why I love the Nolan interpretation- it makes sense. He wants to create a symbol that the good people of Gotham can rally behind. Grassroots.

 

[hafizbat]

Right, you would think after the first incident that Batman would have done anything he could to prevent anything like that from happening again. But no, he let's Joker live. Deep down he wants Joker to keep pushing his buttons or else he wouldn't have a reason to live.

Any time Joker harms an innocent, Batman is responsible. Because he's had every opportunity to put a stop to it and hasn't. In fact if you gave Batman an ultimatum which involved sacrificing the lives of hundreds of innocents or killing Joker... how do you think he'd respond? Personally I believe he'd take the Joker's side every time.

If Joker were in a burning building he'd risk his life to save him. That's not heroism. That's love.

Nope, he doesn't kill Joker because he refuses to go down to his level. And why is Batman responsible for every death the Joker causes? People always say it, but can you justify that statement? Why isn't James Gordon responsible? The Gotham Police? He's been caught numerous times, why haven't they killed him? It's not Batman's job to be an executioner. In fact, when the Joker murdered Sarah Essen, Gordon's wife, Gordon had him at gunpoint, ready to end him once and for all. The Batman stood and watched, and he was ready to let Gordon do it. But Gordon didn't do it either...because these men have a sense of morality, they won't go down to the Joker's level. Gordon could be just as responsible as Batman. It doesn't make any sense at all.