Note that it is a different Batman symbol then the one from The Dark Knight Trilogy.
Zac Snyder also had an actor read a line from The Dark Knight Returns:
I want you to remember, Clark…in all the years to come…in your most private moments…I want you to remember…my hand…at your throat…I want…you to remember…the one man who beat you.
So it seems like they may not be the best of buds in this film, or at least not initially.
nomsheep wrote: It has Snyder involved, I'll probably give this one a pass.
That's why I said "Well Done."
I don't have much faith in Snyder. But maybe after the reception Man of Steel got, one could hope he might have learned a thing or two. Doubtful, but not impossible.
Really, as unlikely as it seems for a proper TDKR movie happening, it really would be fantastic.
The problem is that Hollywood needs to have an origin story for everything. The thing is, everyone knows who Batman and Superman are. Even if it's just the specific universe of one movie series, we don't need to have that origin retold over and over again. We get it. We don't need an origin story for every single new Bond, why should we need one for every iteration of a superhero? We don't need a movie showing how Supes and Batman met one another. Let the audience put that together themselves.
But Batman's origin is easy and quick: Kid and his parents come out of the movie theatre having just seen Power Rangers the movie(insert movie older than 95 if you want him older), family goes down dark alley, gets shot in botched robbery. Montage.
At this point, I don't think we need a retelling of their beginnings. We just came off of three Batman movies and a Superman movie so why waste time on origins; they need to focus on how they end up in the same movie.
Flashman wrote: Man of Steel had its moments, but overall I found it disappointing. I'm not going to get excited over this.
My reaction. ANd I guess I go the opposite of others. When I heard the line from "The Dark Knight" I wasn't excited I face palmed, mostly because I'm just baffled how they'd jump to that level of contention in just the first film. Doesn't Superman first have to establish himself as a real hero before Batman can really go after him? I'd think Metropolis would still be kind of PO'd about their city being leveled to the ground. And what about Lex?
I guess part of me is kind of confused cause I thought they'd be following Marval's film model, because to me it makes sense. Now they just seem to be jumping to the biggest headline they can think off regardless of whether it makes sense.
I'm with a couple of others here: I'm not too excited at the premise of this after Synder's Man of Steel. If it had Nolan directing or Bale still as Batman, it could have been a different story, however, but we'll see...
Superman AND Batman?...the movie might as well be called 'superhero cafe' from How It Should Of Ended.
Batman-"but im not a bulletproof alien from another planet that can defy gravity......but you wanna know what i can do?"
Superman-"Whats that?"
Batman-"Make an incredibly awesome movie!"
orkdestroyer1 wrote: Superman AND Batman?...the movie might as well be called 'superhero cafe' from How It Should Of Ended.
Batman-"but im not a bulletproof alien from another planet that can defy gravity......but you wanna know what i can do?"
Superman-"Whats that?"
Batman-"Make an incredibly awesome movie!"
Batman- "No one cared who I was, until I put this mask on..."
Superman- "but...."
Batman- "They still don't care who you are, because I have the mask"
LordofHats wrote: I'm just baffled how they'd jump to that level of contention in just the first film
You aren't sure how a Lawful Good beacon of hope and a Lawful Evil terror in the night might not get along?
I can see it but jumping right into it at this point seems to quick (but then I've always favored slower pacing which is at times unrealistic for films).
So...you missed the part earlier with Batman's comment to Supes, eh? Batman is, was, and always will be a superior to Superman.
That was from TDKR, a batman centric elseworlds story.
Batman had help from green arrow, kryptonite and three weeks planning while superman just flew in, weakened by being hit by a nuclear explosion and having to draw his power from flowers.
LordofHats wrote: I'm just baffled how they'd jump to that level of contention in just the first film
You aren't sure how a Lawful Good beacon of hope and a Lawful Evil terror in the night might not get along?
I can see it but jumping right into it at this point seems to quick (but then I've always favored slower pacing which is at times unrealistic for films).
I don't think they will actually have them just go at it, but have Batman be distrustful of Superman instead of being best buds. The quote wasn't to say that they are going to fight like the end of Reterns so much as say that they aren't going to be brofist Bats and Supes, at least not yet.
Gotta agree with this. I've found a lot of the recent Marvel animated adaptations lacking over the past couple years, but DC has continually put out a good showing. Under the Read Hood, The Dark Knight Returns, New Frontier, and Apocalypse were all pretty good in my book.
ProtoClone wrote: At this point, I don't think we need a retelling of their beginnings. We just came off of three Batman movies and a Superman movie so why waste time on origins; they need to focus on how they end up in the same movie.
Superman crashes a Wayne party, makes out with a babe Brice is sweet on and Batman is pissed.
Gotta agree with this. I've found a lot of the recent Marvel animated adaptations lacking over the past couple years, but DC has continually put out a good showing. Under the Read Hood, The Dark Knight Returns, New Frontier, and Apocalypse were all pretty good in my book.
The newest DVD release is supposed to be fantastic from the people who got to see it at SDCC.
Supposedly "Arrow" has revitalized the idea of doing "Green Arrow: Supermax" as an animated release.
I already have Flashpoint on preorder. If its as good as Red Hood, it'll be perfect. That's a damn high goal to strive for though. Doom came close, but didn't quite make it. I think Flashpoint will meet it though. Superman unbound was disappointing though. Maybe I'll try rewatching and hope that helps.
You feel...*consults chart*
Optimistic, yet cautious.
I'm cautiously excited. I want to see Green Arrow get some love on the big screen though, if only so Stephen Amell gets to carry Oliver Queen over from the small screen to the large screen.
Call me crazy, but I actually like Zac Snyder's approach to films, at least based on the ones I've seen. Granted, Sucker Punch is what I wanted to give to Snyder after seeing that movie, but I think the Dawn of the Dead remake and Watchmen were worth watching.
Batman says in it that he had been working on artificial Kryptonite for years. Batman's real superpower is planning ahead.
So his main superpower is having an unfair advantage in prep time, and making good use of it?
Superman has taken batman apart many more times than batman has beaten him.
I can't tell if you think I was serious or not; pre-planning isn't a super power. The part about it taking years is why I posted it, because that is way longer than three weeks, and is specifically stated in the story as such.
I've seen MoS twice, and I still think it's a really good film and both better and smarter than its critics think. It seemed much better paced the second time...and better paced than the Avengers or The Dark Knight Rises.
I'm really looking forward to this one, although doing Supes/Bats already seems a little rushed. I'm sure that WB is in a rush to generate some Avengers-like moolah with their franchises. Then again, they might have a good story angle. And Lex is a pretty good angle as a business rival to Bruce and the archenemy of Clark. Supes/Bats also establishes what is the most important relationship within the Justice League. So maybe it isn't that rushed after all if you look at it as the setup for the JL movie.
Batman says in it that he had been working on artificial Kryptonite for years. Batman's real superpower is planning ahead.
So his main superpower is having an unfair advantage in prep time, and making good use of it?
Superman has taken batman apart many more times than batman has beaten him.
I can't tell if you think I was serious or not; pre-planning isn't a super power. The part about it taking years is why I posted it, because that is way longer than three weeks, and is specifically stated in the story as such.
Yeah, not really a super power, but an asset. I mean, he even created files on how to neutralize any one of the JL members if they went rogue; then someone stole them and used them, and the plans worked. It seems like the moment Batman meets someone he is already analyzing them for strengths and weakness. If this movie pans out like I am suspecting, Batman will have seen the news about Superman and started to study him as a safety measure long before they will meet.
After this, when/if we have the JL movie, I could see Superman making the recommendation to invite Batman because to have such a mind with you is better than against you.
Batman says in it that he had been working on artificial Kryptonite for years. Batman's real superpower is planning ahead.
So his main superpower is having an unfair advantage in prep time, and making good use of it?
Superman has taken batman apart many more times than batman has beaten him.
I can't tell if you think I was serious or not; pre-planning isn't a super power. The part about it taking years is why I posted it, because that is way longer than three weeks, and is specifically stated in the story as such.
Yeah, not really a super power, but an asset. I mean, he even created files on how to neutralize any one of the JL members if they went rogue; then someone stole them and used them, and the plans worked.
And he had plans just in case those plans got stolen.
Batman says in it that he had been working on artificial Kryptonite for years. Batman's real superpower is planning ahead.
So his main superpower is having an unfair advantage in prep time, and making good use of it?
Superman has taken batman apart many more times than batman has beaten him.
I can't tell if you think I was serious or not; pre-planning isn't a super power. The part about it taking years is why I posted it, because that is way longer than three weeks, and is specifically stated in the story as such.
It's pretty difficult to argue with Imhotek's man-crush on Supes, but I'm gonna try. Here, Imho, let me break it down: Batman ALWAYS carries a piece of Kryptonite in one of his pouches. Superman knows this and is okay with it, in case he ever loses control, he knows Batman is the one guy capable of taking him down. Do you see any other DC hero carrying Kryptonite with Superman's blessing? You don't? Huh. Maybe it's because Superman has acknowledged Batman's superiority and ability to get the job done, if it ever comes to that. Superman's biggest fear is losing control. Who do you trust to stop you if that happens? Oh yeah...the one guy who can beat you, but who you trust to do so only if 100% necessary.
Batman is the only modern successful DC franchise. The drop off in movie attendance after the first couple of weeks for MoS has them panicked so they are just reaching now. Sadly the DK Rises already did the DKR story and not very well at all, so yeah, also not excited. The synopsis for X-men DofP has me more excited and I've pretty much hated all the X-men movies.
At least Universal is doing Spider-Man the justice he deserves.
I love that we are at the point where we act like $700 million is a pittance. If it makes you feel any better Batman Begins only made a paltry $350 million, so god only knows why they green lit a sequel to such a disaster.
Batman Begins was also universally praised by most critics and fans alike, The same cannot be said for MoS. MoS also made the majority of its money in the opening week, but had an abnormal drop likened to that of Green Lantern.
So now it is up to critic rating to determine whether a movie gets a sequel? How did Grown Ups get a sequel then? It was reviewed worse than any of these.
Ahtman wrote: So now it is up to critic rating to determine whether a movie gets a sequel? How did Grown Ups get a sequel then? It was reviewed worse than any of these.
I think, and this is just a guess okay. I'm not really sure. But! I think it might involve money.
Ahtman wrote: So now it is up to critic rating to determine whether a movie gets a sequel? How did Grown Ups get a sequel then? It was reviewed worse than any of these.
Because Grown Ups was hilarious?
Plus Adam Sandler, Chris Rock, and Kevin James are fairly reliable names for the marquee.
Notice how rarely you see David Spade or Rob Schneider mentioned as part of the movie.
Ahtman wrote: So now it is up to critic rating to determine whether a movie gets a sequel? How did Grown Ups get a sequel then? It was reviewed worse than any of these.
Because Grown Ups was hilarious?
Plus Adam Sandler, Chris Rock, and Kevin James are fairly reliable names for the marquee.
Notice how rarely you see David Spade or Rob Schneider mentioned as part of the movie.
But entertainment was not the standard given, only how critics responded, which in this case was with venom and hate.
Ahtman wrote: I love that we are at the point where we act like $700 million is a pittance. If it makes you feel any better Batman Begins only made a paltry $350 million, so god only knows why they green lit a sequel to such a disaster.
For what it's worth, had Batman Begins and its profits come after a superhero movie as successful as The Dark Knight, it probably wouldn't have gotten a sequel either.
Fafnir wrote: For what it's worth, had Batman Begins and its profits come after a superhero movie as successful as The Dark Knight, it probably wouldn't have gotten a sequel either.
Actually it would, as it usually does, depend on the cost to return ratio.
Other movies that didn't crack a billion dollars that are, or did, getting sequels:
Captain America ($370)
Thor ($449)
Iron Man ($585)
The Amazing Spider-man made over $700 million, like Man of Steel, and is getting a sequel but no one seemed to question why. The idea that if a film doesn't break the billion dollar barrier it is a failure is a fairly silly idea.
Huh. Well maybe it has something to do with DC only knowing how to make good Batman movies then. Because good god, they seem to have problems with everything else.
Just pull out all the stops already, and give us a damn good Sandman movie. Or HBO series. I'll take either, really.
Frankly, it wasn't DC having inconsistency at all...they gave Chris Nolan the helm andhe kicked arse with it. This is presumably why he was producer for Man of Steel.
The guy makes fantastic films. They brought in other, less amazing people for Green Lantern and Superman Returns. That's all there is to it.
Ahtman wrote: I love that we are at the point where we act like $700 million is a pittance. If it makes you feel any better Batman Begins only made a paltry $350 million, so god only knows why they green lit a sequel to such a disaster.
Agreed, how could they have greenllit the Dark Knight after Begins bombed like that.
And despite Nolan having a hand in Superman, it turns out it was panned as well. I haven't seen the movie yet, so I can't comment on its quality myself, but I doubt that Synder alone can be blamed for its poor response.
Fafnir wrote: And despite Nolan having a hand in Superman, it turns out it was panned as well. I haven't seen the movie yet, so I can't comment on its quality myself, but I doubt that Synder alone can be blamed for its poor response.
It hasn't been panned so much as been incredibly divisive. It seems to be a love it or hate it proposition. Usually with the few critics I follow I can see where they are coming from even when I don't agree with them, but I have been surprised with the general lack of rigor involved in much of the criticism leveled at it. It has its problems, and is certainly got areas worth criticizing, but to much of it is 'comics should only be colorful and funny', 'Christopher Reeve wouldn't do that', or some variation on what their idea of Superman should be. I suppose it makes sense when we consider Superman is a much more inspirational figure, and that each person would have an idea what that is supposed to mean deeply imbedded into their brain. I think the main failing of this Superman is that he is incredibly human, and not perfect. He is just learning what it means to be Superman, and people want the God-like character of All-Star Superman who is at the zenith of his powers.
Fafnir wrote: And despite Nolan having a hand in Superman, it turns out it was panned as well. I haven't seen the movie yet, so I can't comment on its quality myself, but I doubt that Synder alone can be blamed for its poor response.
But the main reason it was panned by half the critics was that it was actually a Superman the Comic movie, not a Christopher Reeve movie.
It has a 77% rating with audiences. So it didn't bomb and wasn't panned by the majority of people actually paying money to go see it.
Fafnir wrote: And despite Nolan having a hand in Superman, it turns out it was panned as well. I haven't seen the movie yet, so I can't comment on its quality myself, but I doubt that Synder alone can be blamed for its poor response.
It hasn't been panned so much as been incredibly divisive. It seems to be a love it or hate it proposition. Usually with the few critics I follow I can see where they are coming from even when I don't agree with them, but I have been surprised with the general lack of rigor involved in much of the criticism leveled at it. It has its problems, and is certainly got areas worth criticizing, but to much of it is 'comics should only be colorful and funny', 'Christopher Reeve wouldn't do that', or some variation on what their idea of Superman should be. I suppose it makes sense when we consider Superman is a much more inspirational figure, and that each person would have an idea what that is supposed to mean deeply imbedded into their brain. I think the main failing of this Superman is that he is incredibly human, and not perfect. He is just learning what it means to be Superman, and people want the God-like character of All-Star Superman who is at the zenith of his powers.
Well said!
It is possibly also worth noting that NL3 really hates MoS, and, well...
People are talking about what deserves and doesn't deserve a sequel?
We live in a world where C.H.U.D II exists.
Now shut up.
Man of Steel was a decent movie. Batman: TDK was far better, but that was mainly due to Ledger's amazing Joker performance (and an excellent story). MoS was better than Batman vs. Bane, though.
Fafnir wrote: And despite Nolan having a hand in Superman, it turns out it was panned as well. I haven't seen the movie yet, so I can't comment on its quality myself, but I doubt that Synder alone can be blamed for its poor response.
It hasn't been panned so much as been incredibly divisive. It seems to be a love it or hate it proposition. Usually with the few critics I follow I can see where they are coming from even when I don't agree with them, but I have been surprised with the general lack of rigor involved in much of the criticism leveled at it. It has its problems, and is certainly got areas worth criticizing, but to much of it is 'comics should only be colorful and funny', 'Christopher Reeve wouldn't do that', or some variation on what their idea of Superman should be. I suppose it makes sense when we consider Superman is a much more inspirational figure, and that each person would have an idea what that is supposed to mean deeply imbedded into their brain. I think the main failing of this Superman is that he is incredibly human, and not perfect. He is just learning what it means to be Superman, and people want the God-like character of All-Star Superman who is at the zenith of his powers.
Well said!
It is possibly also worth noting that NL3 really hates MoS, and, well...
Wonder who is gonna play batman and wonder if they are going to reboot batman or what? Bale could come back and they essentially could tie them in, who knows
Fafnir wrote: And despite Nolan having a hand in Superman, it turns out it was panned as well. I haven't seen the movie yet, so I can't comment on its quality myself, but I doubt that Synder alone can be blamed for its poor response.
It hasn't been panned so much as been incredibly divisive. It seems to be a love it or hate it proposition. Usually with the few critics I follow I can see where they are coming from even when I don't agree with them, but I have been surprised with the general lack of rigor involved in much of the criticism leveled at it. It has its problems, and is certainly got areas worth criticizing, but to much of it is 'comics should only be colorful and funny', 'Christopher Reeve wouldn't do that', or some variation on what their idea of Superman should be. I suppose it makes sense when we consider Superman is a much more inspirational figure, and that each person would have an idea what that is supposed to mean deeply imbedded into their brain. I think the main failing of this Superman is that he is incredibly human, and not perfect. He is just learning what it means to be Superman, and people want the God-like character of All-Star Superman who is at the zenith of his powers.
Batman Begins only scored a 70 on Metacritic, IIRC. And I maintain that it was better than that. With some perspective, critics probably would rate it higher now. But if you look, I believe it got a lot of complaints about being "too dark," "not fun," etc.
I agree with you about people's relationship with the character being different than with Batman. Batman's always been a little more mutable, or at least people have been more open to other interpretations of the character. I remember an interview with Grant Morrison in which he and the interviewer agreed that someone could probably do a "gay disco Batman" and somehow make it work. Joel Schumacher tried and failed, but the point remains. They had to break some Super-eggs to make this new omelet, and some viewers were really, really attached to those eggs for whatever reason.
IMO, another major factor with MoS reviews is the director. Some critics just have it out for the guy and view him as the second coming of Michael Bay. His career has certainly been spotty, but IMO both Mos and Watchmen were really solid efforts that involved some tricky material. I figure Nolan could have made exactly the same Superman film and it probably would have been bumped up to a 70 right alongside BB just because he's more in favor with critics.
pities2004 wrote: Wonder who is gonna play batman and wonder if they are going to reboot batman or what? Bale could come back and they essentially could tie them in, who knows
Batman says in it that he had been working on artificial Kryptonite for years. Batman's real superpower is planning ahead.
So his main superpower is having an unfair advantage in prep time, and making good use of it?
Superman has taken batman apart many more times than batman has beaten him.
Show your work.
Kay.
Out of the 8 times they have faced off in the comics, superman has won 6 and drawn 1(Babel).
Hush: Batman breaks his hand punching superman, then tries to take hostages, while ADMITTING he has no chance.
Superman: King of The World: Batman fails miserably, using kryptonite and prep and has his throat nearly crushed before being saved by green lantern and others.
Sacrifice: Batman's much vaunted anti-superman plans all fail when supes goes rogue, and gets beaten to near death.
Lex Luthor:Man of Steel : Batman gets annihilated by superman, even with both kryptonite and prep
Superman/Batman #2: Batman is nearly killed by future supes, only saved by the past superman
Red Son: Batman is beaten handily by superman's allies, despite all his prep
------
Batman won in DKR, but with help from green lantern, kryptonite and an already weakened supes
-----
Babel is a wash because it was not batman's plan, but ghul's. In addition, batman's plan resulted in a rock that ENHANCED superman's powers.
It's pretty difficult to argue with Imhotek's man-crush on Supes, but I'm gonna try. Here, Imho, let me break it down: Batman ALWAYS carries a piece of Kryptonite in one of his pouches. Superman knows this and is okay with it, in case he ever loses control, he knows Batman is the one guy capable of taking him down. Do you see any other DC hero carrying Kryptonite with Superman's blessing? You don't? Huh. Maybe it's because Superman has acknowledged Batman's superiority and ability to get the job done, if it ever comes to that. Superman's biggest fear is losing control. Who do you trust to stop you if that happens? Oh yeah...the one guy who can beat you, but who you trust to do so only if 100% necessary.
Batman confesses in Hush that superman is stronger. Nowhere does superman 'acknowledge batman's superiority'. Superman gives batman the responsibility because he trusts that batman has the best chance. See my above list for cases where batman has failed miserably to deal with supes, despite the talk of his planning and kryptonite.
Superman Annual #3 (by Jurgens and penciller Dusty Abell; Superman attempts to rid the world of nuclear weapons, but is instead killed by Batman at the government's behest. The plot was the inverse of Frank Miller's Batman: The Dark Knight Returns, and contains homages to that story.)
Superman Annual #3 (by Jurgens and penciller Dusty Abell; Superman attempts to rid the world of nuclear weapons, but is instead killed by Batman at the government's behest. The plot was the inverse of Frank Miller's Batman: The Dark Knight Returns, and contains homages to that story.)
pities2004 wrote: Wonder who is gonna play batman and wonder if they are going to reboot batman or what? Bale could come back and they essentially could tie them in, who knows
Bale has said in the past that he's done with Batman, but that doesn't mean he'd say no to the right amount of Dough.
But considering how they ended that Batman franchise, it wouldn't make a lot of sense.
Yeah, I think you back up the Brinks truck for him, and tell him that he's a great actor and that other scripts/roles will always be there for him. But in the meantime, wouldn't it be fun to put on the suit again?
He's still the Bruce Wayne/Batman that current audiences know. Changing the actor again so soon risks taking things down the Schumacher path. Nolan (and Snyder) have said that the DK movies took place in their own universe. So then this would be an alternate universe in which Bruce also looks a lot like Christian Bale. It doesn't need to have perfect continuity.
Batman won in DKR, but with help from green lantern, kryptonite and an already weakened supes
It was Green Arrow, not Green Lantern.
Babel is a wash because it was not batman's plan, but ghul's. In addition, batman's plan resulted in a rock that ENHANCED superman's powers.
Uhm, no. Ras Al Ghul stole Batman's contingency plans to defeat the different members of the JLA and used them. The rift of mistrust this created between Batman and the other members is a huge element of the story and sets up following JLA stories; it is a key element to the story. Also, the synthetic Red Kryptonite enhanced Superman's senses to the point of being completely paralyzed. He couldn't control what he was hearing, seeing, et al to the point where he was getting all the stimulus at once and his brain was shutting down.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
rubiksnoob wrote: Superman just punches gak. Batman actually uses his brain.
And Warhammer ripped off Warcraft, Blizzard should sue.
rubiksnoob wrote: Superman just punches gak. Batman actually uses his brain.
This shows a distinct ignorance of Superman, the man who built a machine that could transport the entire planet into the Shadow Zone in case of emergency, from scratch mind you, and forgot he built it because that was just a side project to things like curing cancer. Seriously, his mind just works on an entirely different level from humans. It's why he's held as the ultimate "canon-sue".
He tends to "just punch gak" because he tends to want to just get fights done with. And even then, he's holding back. He rarely actually fights at full capacity out of fear.
IF Clark wanted Bats gone, he'd never see it coming.
And that's coming from someone who used to buy every Bat Family book and never touched Supes outside of crossover events.
Seaward wrote: Bale's confirmed not to be involved. Nolan's executive producing.
I'm betting they'll have the guy who played Robin in TDKR cast as Batman.
~Tim?
I don't think anything from The Dark Knight Trilogy will be used; it is a self contained universe and story never intended as part of some greater DC universe.
AduroT wrote: Thanks to this thread I looked up and watched the animated The Dark Knight Returns Part 1. Will definitely have to watch Part 2 now as well.
It's one of the best Batman films period and a great adaptation of one of the best Batman stories ever. I feel it makes a better sequel to DK than DKR was. Enjoy!
Seaward wrote: Bale's confirmed not to be involved. Nolan's executive producing.
I'm betting they'll have the guy who played Robin in TDKR cast as Batman.
~Tim?
Last week was going round that Marvel wanted him to play Dr. Strange.
I reckon the title is somewhat misleading.
I'm sure they'll have a misunderstanding or two, and each will have the advantage over and have to save/be saved by the other x number of times.
The versus will be a set up by Luthor/similar and the obligatory thematic examination of their their somewhat opposing philosophies, light versus dark, trust versus fear blah blah but at the end of the day more in common/agreement than in disagreement and hey a loo a flag ! etc etc.
For me I'd have an enraged Luthor unleashing all types of gimmicks etc on Supes to study him and also have him trying to frame him for evildeed#123, which leads to Bat's investigating -- he can even figure out the ( not so ?) secret identity -- I'm assuming from the end of MoS that Perry and a couple of the others at least are truly in the know about Clark being a cover story, he helped them, he's good to ahve around etc etc .
Mark Steel for Luthor for me, turns out he's been in contact with Braniac or Solaris all along of course, who can be the bad guy in the next film/ JLA movie.
Seaward wrote: Bale's confirmed not to be involved. Nolan's executive producing.
I'm betting they'll have the guy who played Robin in TDKR cast as Batman.
~Tim?
Last week was going round that Marvel wanted him to play Dr. Strange.
I reckon the title is somewhat misleading.
I'm sure they'll have a misunderstanding or two, and each will have the advantage over and have to save/be saved by the other x number of times.
The versus will be a set up by Luthor/similar and the obligatory thematic examination of their their somewhat opposing philosophies, light versus dark, trust versus fear blah blah but at the end of the day more in common/agreement than in disagreement and hey a loo a flag ! etc etc.
For me I'd have an enraged Luthor unleashing all types of gimmicks etc on Supes to study him and also have him trying to frame him for evildeed#123, which leads to Bat's investigating -- he can even figure out the ( not so ?) secret identity -- I'm assuming from the end of MoS that Perry and a couple of the others at least are truly in the know about Clark being a cover story, he helped them, he's good to ahve around etc etc .
Mark Steel for Luthor for me, turns out he's been in contact with Braniac or Solaris all along of course, who can be the bad guy in the next film/ JLA movie.
Yeah Gordon might be playing Doctor Strange so he may be out of the batman mix. If Warner Bros offered Bale a Downey paycheck he could come back. But if Bale doesn't come back we we might finally get away from IM BATMAN in a low groggy voice all the time
Seaward wrote: Bale's confirmed not to be involved. Nolan's executive producing.
I'm betting they'll have the guy who played Robin in TDKR cast as Batman.
~Tim?
Last week was going round that Marvel wanted him to play Dr. Strange.
I reckon the title is somewhat misleading.
I'm sure they'll have a misunderstanding or two, and each will have the advantage over and have to save/be saved by the other x number of times.
The versus will be a set up by Luthor/similar and the obligatory thematic examination of their their somewhat opposing philosophies, light versus dark, trust versus fear blah blah but at the end of the day more in common/agreement than in disagreement and hey a loo a flag ! etc etc.
For me I'd have an enraged Luthor unleashing all types of gimmicks etc on Supes to study him and also have him trying to frame him for evildeed#123, which leads to Bat's investigating -- he can even figure out the ( not so ?) secret identity -- I'm assuming from the end of MoS that Perry and a couple of the others at least are truly in the know about Clark being a cover story, he helped them, he's good to ahve around etc etc .
Mark Steel for Luthor for me, turns out he's been in contact with Braniac or Solaris all along of course, who can be the bad guy in the next film/ JLA movie.
Yeah Gordon might be playing Doctor Strange so he may be out of the batman mix. If Warner Bros offered Bale a Downey paycheck he could come back. But if Bale doesn't come back we we might finally get away from IM BATMAN in a low groggy voice all the time
They probably won't give him Downey money though, just because RDJ was almost single-handedly responsible for lifting that character from the "C" list to the "A" list. Put anyone else in that role, and Iron Man isn't nearly as big of a franchise (movies or merchandising), the Avengers movie isn't as fun, and there aren't even multiple Iron Man comic books in stores. It's kinda insane how much money he's made Marvel.
But hey, it's not my money. So I say pay the man.
And yeah, I think putting Gordon-Levitt in the role is too confusing, and misses the point. He wasn't supposed to be the new Batman in movies going forward, he was just the new Batman within that universe. In these new movies, Bruce Wayne will be Batman...whether that's Bale or someone else only time will tell.
Seaward wrote: Bale's confirmed not to be involved. Nolan's executive producing.
I'm betting they'll have the guy who played Robin in TDKR cast as Batman.
~Tim?
Last week was going round that Marvel wanted him to play Dr. Strange.
I reckon the title is somewhat misleading.
I'm sure they'll have a misunderstanding or two, and each will have the advantage over and have to save/be saved by the other x number of times.
The versus will be a set up by Luthor/similar and the obligatory thematic examination of their their somewhat opposing philosophies, light versus dark, trust versus fear blah blah but at the end of the day more in common/agreement than in disagreement and hey a loo a flag ! etc etc.
For me I'd have an enraged Luthor unleashing all types of gimmicks etc on Supes to study him and also have him trying to frame him for evildeed#123, which leads to Bat's investigating -- he can even figure out the ( not so ?) secret identity -- I'm assuming from the end of MoS that Perry and a couple of the others at least are truly in the know about Clark being a cover story, he helped them, he's good to ahve around etc etc .
Mark Steel for Luthor for me, turns out he's been in contact with Braniac or Solaris all along of course, who can be the bad guy in the next film/ JLA movie.
Yeah Gordon might be playing Doctor Strange so he may be out of the batman mix. If Warner Bros offered Bale a Downey paycheck he could come back. But if Bale doesn't come back we we might finally get away from IM BATMAN in a low groggy voice all the time
They probably won't give him Downey money though, just because RDJ was almost single-handedly responsible for lifting that character from the "C" list to the "A" list. Put anyone else in that role, and Iron Man isn't nearly as big of a franchise (movies or merchandising), the Avengers movie isn't as fun, and there aren't even multiple Iron Man comic books in stores. It's kinda insane how much money he's made Marvel.
But hey, it's not my money. So I say pay the man.
And yeah, I think putting Gordon-Levitt in the role is too confusing, and misses the point. He wasn't supposed to be the new Batman in movies going forward, he was just the new Batman within that universe. In these new movies, Bruce Wayne will be Batman...whether that's Bale or someone else only time will tell.
Exactly, plus if Gordon is going to continue on in the world Nolan created for Batman I would hope it is as Nightwing.
I don't think they will need to reboot Batman since they just had three Batman movies recently, and a ton of other Batman movies, that have made it clear who he is and how he came to be. For the S/B movie they need to focus on how their stories end up connecting.
Seaward wrote: Bale's confirmed not to be involved. Nolan's executive producing.
I'm betting they'll have the guy who played Robin in TDKR cast as Batman.
~Tim?
Last week was going round that Marvel wanted him to play Dr. Strange.
I reckon the title is somewhat misleading.
I'm sure they'll have a misunderstanding or two, and each will have the advantage over and have to save/be saved by the other x number of times.
The versus will be a set up by Luthor/similar and the obligatory thematic examination of their their somewhat opposing philosophies, light versus dark, trust versus fear blah blah but at the end of the day more in common/agreement than in disagreement and hey a loo a flag ! etc etc.
For me I'd have an enraged Luthor unleashing all types of gimmicks etc on Supes to study him and also have him trying to frame him for evildeed#123, which leads to Bat's investigating -- he can even figure out the ( not so ?) secret identity -- I'm assuming from the end of MoS that Perry and a couple of the others at least are truly in the know about Clark being a cover story, he helped them, he's good to ahve around etc etc .
Mark Steel for Luthor for me, turns out he's been in contact with Braniac or Solaris all along of course, who can be the bad guy in the next film/ JLA movie.
Yeah Gordon might be playing Doctor Strange so he may be out of the batman mix. If Warner Bros offered Bale a Downey paycheck he could come back. But if Bale doesn't come back we we might finally get away from IM BATMAN in a low groggy voice all the time
They probably won't give him Downey money though, just because RDJ was almost single-handedly responsible for lifting that character from the "C" list to the "A" list. Put anyone else in that role, and Iron Man isn't nearly as big of a franchise (movies or merchandising), the Avengers movie isn't as fun, and there aren't even multiple Iron Man comic books in stores. It's kinda insane how much money he's made Marvel.
But hey, it's not my money. So I say pay the man.
And yeah, I think putting Gordon-Levitt in the role is too confusing, and misses the point. He wasn't supposed to be the new Batman in movies going forward, he was just the new Batman within that universe. In these new movies, Bruce Wayne will be Batman...whether that's Bale or someone else only time will tell.
Exactly, plus if Gordon is going to continue on in the world Nolan created for Batman I would hope it is as Nightwing.
I don't think they will need to reboot Batman since they just had three Batman movies recently, and a ton of other Batman movies, that have made it clear who he is and how he came to be. For the S/B movie they need to focus on how their stories end up connecting.
Well just because we KNOW who batman is, they need to set it up in the Man of Steel Universe.
Well just because we KNOW who batman is, they need to set it up in the Man of Steel Universe.
Why? They don't need to waste the time on reintroducing Batman's background, again...in this universe he has been operating for a while and has finally gained the attention of Superman.
Goyer's recent comments were that in the MoS universe, Clark was the first to put on a suit, and that he's the inspiration for others to come forward. If S/B picks up not long after the end of MoS, then Bruce may already be Batman, but probably not for very long.
Christian Bale has reportedly been offered $50 million (£32m) to reprise his Dark Knight role in the upcoming Superman vs Batman film, despite having previously said appearing in the movie would be ‘greedy’.
The Press Association's $50m figure stems from a comment in a new eBook titled Beyond Batman: The Unauthorised True Story of Christian Bale and His Dark Knight Dilemma, by Vincent Russel. It quotes a source from Legendary Pictures, which partnered with Warner on Nolan's films, suggesting the studio is determined to get their man.
The "insider" said: "Why would Christian Bale walk away from what is certainly going to be either the first or second highest grossing movie in the history of cinema? He could probably make 50 million dollars for being in the movie 20 minutes. And it would be worth every penny to the studio."
We don't know if he has been offered fifty million, just that some insiders and industry analysts believe he would be worth paying that much for.
The Press Association's $50m figure stems from a comment in a new eBook titled Beyond Batman: The Unauthorised True Story of Christian Bale and His Dark Knight Dilemma, by Vincent Russel. It quotes a source from Legendary Pictures, which partnered with Warner on Nolan's films, suggesting the studio is determined to get their man.
The "insider" said: "Why would Christian Bale walk away from what is certainly going to be either the first or second highest grossing movie in the history of cinema? He could probably make 50 million dollars for being in the movie 20 minutes. And it would be worth every penny to the studio."
We don't know if he has been offered fifty million, just that some insiders and industry analysts believe he would be worth paying that much for.
If they're going to keep it in the Nolanverse, they should have JGL doing Batman. If they're not going to have it part of the Nolanverse, I wouldn't want to see Christian Bale in the role anyway. I think he did a pretty good job, but he's done his Batman bit.
Fafnir wrote: If they're going to keep it in the Nolanverse, they should have JGL doing Batman. If they're not going to have it part of the Nolanverse, I wouldn't want to see Christian Bale in the role anyway. I think he did a pretty good job, but he's done his Batman bit.
Even out of the Nolan verse I think it would play better to the masses to have Bale. He is Batman now. Yes, somebody else played Batman a 10-20 years ago but he's now the one identified as Batman to the masses. And while Batman fans might be fine with him not being Batman it'll affect the movie grosses heavily overall if he isn't. If it was me I'd back the money truck up. It worked with Downey.
Agreed. They've gone on record saying that it won't be in the Nolanverse, but that doesn't mean that Bruce Wayne wouldn't look like Christian Bale in an alternate universe, right? Clearly the box office would be best if Bale stayed in the role. So yeah, back up the Brinks truck. I remember reading how he spent a little extra time in the Batsuit the last time he wore it while filming Rises, just because he wanted to enjoy it one last time. So he obviously had some fun in the role. That's how I'd pitch it to him, really..."Come on, man...it'll be FUN. You'll make a mint and of course it'll be hard work. But it'll be FUN. Shoot man, we'll also throw a bunch of money at your favorite charity. That's how stoked we are about this whole thing."
Besides, Batman WILL be Bruce Wayne in any movie. Not some random, invented cop character. The point of that was that Batman would always live on within that universe, not that JGL would be Batman in any future movie.
Of the replacement candidates, Josh Brolin is the most interesting one to me. Of course, an issue there is how old he'll be by the time they get around to a JL2 or whatever. In other news, Bryan Cranston apparently wants a shot at playing Lex Luthor (assuming he's in the next film). But I think I like Mark Strong -- another rumored candidate -- a little better.
Fafnir wrote: If they're going to keep it in the Nolanverse, they should have JGL doing Batman. If they're not going to have it part of the Nolanverse, I wouldn't want to see Christian Bale in the role anyway. I think he did a pretty good job, but he's done his Batman bit.
Even out of the Nolan verse I think it would play better to the masses to have Bale. He is Batman now. Yes, somebody else played Batman a 10-20 years ago but he's now the one identified as Batman to the masses. And while Batman fans might be fine with him not being Batman it'll affect the movie grosses heavily overall if he isn't. If it was me I'd back the money truck up. It worked with Downey.
The other side of the coin is that Bale has gone on record saying that he is interested to see what the next Batman does with the role.
I think if Bale comes out in support of the next actor, it would be a bit easier for the 'newbies' to accept.
Nah, I don't think Bale's seal of approval has anything to do with it. It's not the diehard fans that are the issue, it's all the casual fans who just think of Bale as the guy in the Batsuit now. They aren't going to be on IGN watching for Bale's comments about the movie. They're the ones who'll see the trailer and say "hey, where's Christian Bale, I thought he was Batman."
Fafnir wrote: If they're going to keep it in the Nolanverse, they should have JGL doing Batman. If they're not going to have it part of the Nolanverse, I wouldn't want to see Christian Bale in the role anyway. I think he did a pretty good job, but he's done his Batman bit.
Even out of the Nolan verse I think it would play better to the masses to have Bale. He is Batman now. Yes, somebody else played Batman a 10-20 years ago but he's now the one identified as Batman to the masses. And while Batman fans might be fine with him not being Batman it'll affect the movie grosses heavily overall if he isn't. If it was me I'd back the money truck up. It worked with Downey.
The other side of the coin is that Bale has gone on record saying that he is interested to see what the next Batman does with the role.
I think if Bale comes out in support of the next actor, it would be a bit easier for the 'newbies' to accept.
I think the issue is more one similar to Doctor Who... each new person to come into the role is "omg, I cant believe it! it's horrible! the last [insert character] was the best one" then the first episode/movie comes out and most people are like, "he/she is great, I love them as [insert character here]"
There'll be people who gripe and moan about an actor playing a role that is one of their favorite characters, and will ultimately adjust and come to like the new person.
