Should Warner Bros. Ever make a Batman movie that fits into the larger DC Universe?

[Xybernauts]

After the Nolan run of Batman movies is over, should DC comics try and make a Batman movie which fits into the larger DC superpowered Universe? I think it would be interesting to see a Batman movie that is based in the superpowered supernatural universe. They'd call it Batman: Blackbook :rolleyes: :wink:

[Choppa]

No. That's not what Batman is about and it makes no sense.

That would be no different than what Schumacher was going for with his films.

[JohnRD]

I think you can keep realism and still have superpowers. I mean, obviously some suspension of belief would be required, but even based in realism is it not still required? I'd much rather see a Nolan Clayface than a Schumacher(sp) one...

[joe27]

Definitely not. It's bad enough the Batman comics have to be part of the larger DC Universe.

[Dr Cthulwho]

Warner Bros. can do that if they want, but they shouldn't with the Nolan Batman series.

I think "if it's not broke" applies to that one. It doesn't need the more super powered elements, and has by and large been built in a setting without them. There is no feel of "this is good... but something is missing. I know, Superman!" If WB suddenly decided to change things it would be worse for this series of films.

No, if they want a Batman as part of large DC setting with Superman and Wonder Women, Green Lanterns and everything else they should start a new franchise where that fits the setting, tone and themes.

[Damiean Dark]

Batman is DCs favourite character for a reason its because he isnt some godlike character who is vurtualy unbeatable he is very human it makes me wonder why fans of his who revel in his "realness" even are fans of DC.

[Layzie Kidd]

Yes they should. Atleast ONE fake ass movie that bends reality would be good. We would be able to see guest appearances by Green Arrow, Flash, Nightwing and shit. And lets not forget, we could see a Batman vs. Superman fight! And have Batman win!

[spidervenom]

no, please don't. really, chris nolan and his batman movie's are fine the way they are. And don't even mention this kind of stuff, if Nolan get's any crazy idea's for incorperating it into a larger dc unvivese, because you'll be more hated than a winnick/mcfarlance love child.

[Omega Alpha]

In Nolan's films, no, not at all.

If they want to do it 20 years from now or something, go for it, but as these films are done, it just wouldn't work.

[NeoStar9X]

I think they might have to do this if they want to do a Justice League type of film. They really should have taken the Marvel approach by trying to tie their movies into a large universe from the get go. For example a series of DC Universe: <enter character name> movies and then finishing up with a Justice League film.

If they add Batman into the JL film they are doing he isn't and can't be the Nolan version. It wouldn't fit with the world where characters such as Superman, Wonder Woman, Flash, and Green Lantern exist in.

[AlistairCrane]

I already operate from the assumption that BB and TDK exist in the same world as Superman Returns.

[Libaax]

Hollywood cant do a Batman like that today.

I would love to see a Batman movie that has real fantastic elements,freaks everywhere,NW,Robin,Green Arrow etc

Nolan and his kind with their realism talk cant do that kind of Batman.


Like a guy in Bat suit with Two-Face,Joker type villains is realism.....

[Vidocq]

I don't like the Idea. I woudn't mind they mixed Nolan's Batman with Synger's Superman. BUT ONLY THOSE TWO.

But living in the same world as Green Lantern, Flash etc? Nah. Honestly I think Supes is the only Character who Could fit in the Batverse and that's only because they have been teaming up since the 1940's and they have become integral parts of each others Mythos (Not to mention that we got used to the Idea that a crossover will happen). On a personal level I like the Idea of TWO Characters so drastically diferent living in the Same world and fighting to achieve the same goal.

But when you mix them up with the rest of The DC univerese, that Magic is gone.

[Siddon]

Yes, but I think they should do the 4th film as Frank Miller's DKR(with a little Allstar Batman wrapped in there). It would also be a great way to cast an older actor as the Joker (Russel Crowe maybe).

[AlistairCrane]

Why would anyone pay to see a movie with Grandpa Batman?

[Libaax]

Maybe because Dark Knight Returns is one of the best Batman stories ever writen ;)

[Vidocq]

Why would anyone pay to see a movie with Grandpa Batman?

Because that Grandpa Batman would be Fighting The Joker, Two Face, A Gang, the Police, a mob of people going nuts and SUPERMAN, Because it would be the long awaited Movie of one of the Best Batman stories ever told, Because Now a days the Names of Frank Miller and Batman might as well be spelled $$$$$$, Etc.

[Xybernauts]

Well, technically I was talking about after the Nolan run. So no one thinks characters like Clayface, Killer Croc, and Manbat deserve to shine on the big screen? I always wanted to see a realistic Batman; a batman that fits into the real world. TDK and BB gave me that. I'm not saying I don't want to see more real world Batman, but when Nolan and Bale decide to hang up there cape and cowl, I'd like to see that superhigh tech, supernatural Batman. It should still have that real world feel that Nolan has, but add a horror movie/sci-fi element to it. i don't think adding a supernatural element would make Batman campy at all, unless you give the story to a writer who can't write and a director who can't direct and producers who don't give a rats ass.

Also does anyone else think Comic book movies should have their own genre separate of sci-fi fantasy action adventure,etc.? With all the comic books movies coming out on a regular basis you'd think they would.

[carabas]

Why would anyone pay to see a movie with Grandpa Batman?
Because it stars Clint Eastwood as the Batman?

[Spiffy]

Only if its animated. And if it IS it probably doesn't have to wait until after the Nolan run, it can run on parallel tracks, the way the old DCAU did to the earlier Bat movies.

[Seraku]

I just figure they'll build the entire DC filmverse around the Begins series, I mean Bale has stated he'd do a JLA movie if offered

[Dr. Banner]

No, why would they do something so stupid?

Nolan's given them the best, most profitable version of Batman. It's a version that demonstrates what all true Batman fans have always known: that Batman is a serious character, gritty and real.

Why would they go make a movie where he's got to run around with a bunch of silly people in tights and ruin all that? Might as well just bring Joel Suck-macher back to make another bad gay joke.

[Xybernauts]

They pull of Superman movies right. Not Superman Returns, but I mean the Reeve movies. Imagine taking a Nolan movie and combining it with a Superman movie with taste, like the Reeve movies and wallah. It's like peanut butter and jelly, a masterpiece. It'd only become a "Joel Suck-macher bad gay joke" if they screw it. But they can pull it off with the right effects and casting. Marvel has pulled off movies like Hulk and Iron Man without being campy. Besides the only reason the Joel Suck-macher movies were campy was because he was trying to adapt the 60's Batman show, not the comics as he should have.

[gorthon616]

I'll get back to you when they have one other decent DC movie. But hell no, until we get something better than Superman Returns. And by better I mean, good, not "just slight;y better than a sign of the apocalypse."

[Vidocq]

Damn, am I the only one who loved Superman Returns?

[Vidocq]

Wow, exaggerate much? Anyway I liked it, it felt a lot like trying to pick up were Donner's Superman left on. Sort of like Superman III instead of ''Singerman''.


You are exaggerating, The film got nothing less than 75% positive reviews, which by Internet standards is really good. And while Nolan's View on the character is great it's severly overrated, Specially Batman Begins. But that's just me.

[Tetsuo_man]

Wow, exaggerate much? Anyway I liked it, it felt a lot like trying to pick up were Donner's Superman left on. Sort of like Superman III instead of ''Singerman''.


You are exaggerating, The film got nothing less than 75% positive reviews, which by Internet standards is really good. And while Nolan's View on the character is great it's severly overrated, Specially Batman Begins. But that's just me.

That not just you i pretty much have the same attitude. Particularly about begins.

[gorthon616]

Wow, exaggerate much? Anyway I liked it, it felt a lot like trying to pick up were Donner's Superman left on. Sort of like Superman III instead of ''Singerman''.

You are exaggerating, The film got nothing less than 75% positive reviews, which by Internet standards is really good. And while Nolan's View on the character is great it's severly overrated, Specially Batman Begins. But that's just me.

I'm opening to hearing why you liked Superman Returns. For me...

1) Lois Lane was horrible character. Boring. Typical.
2) Clark had an almost non-existent acting role. His role was "stand there and look like Christopher Reeve." Which he did.
3) The whole child thing was dumb.
4) If Kevin Spacey decided "I'm going to try to mimic Gene Hackman exactly" then he did an okay job. But it's been done. And I don't think it played particularly well or was particularly interesting.
5) That goon will always be Kumar to me.
6) The plot was some bright colors and songs away from being up along with "Batman and Robin." I mean really... He's going to build his own continent. It seemed like a color dulled version of Mr. Freeze freezing Gotham in it's cheesiness.
7) I can't think of anything I liked about the movie.

I DO agree with you that Batman Begins was overrated. I consider it to be around the top of the 2nd tier comic movies.

[Dr. Banner]

You forgot Singerman stalking Lois Lane and trying to get her to cheat on her fiancee with him after he left her without saying good bye.

Also, that whole thing about Supes being a deadbeat dad and abandoning his kid.

[Dr Cthulwho]

They pull of Superman movies right. Not Superman Returns, but I mean the Reeve movies.

Well, Superman I and II were achievements. Superman III and IV are best forgotten.

Damn, am I the only one who loved Superman Returns?

I didn't hate it, I thought it was ok, in an average, unambitious kind of way. Kind of bland, but not especially awful.

And I liked Kevin Spacey Luthor. I just wish they'd given him a better eeeevil plot though (and gotten rid of that annoying women he dragged around with him. And given him better henchmen.).

[Sean Whitmore]

Wow, exaggerate much?

Yes, he does.


Also, that whole thing about Supes being a deadbeat dad and abandoning his kid.

He also has trouble understanding narratives, apparently.


SEAN

[Captain Jim]

Hey people, this is the Batman board, remember? Detailed analysis of the Superman movies should be done elsewhere.

[brundlefly]

No. I love the grittier "Batman operating in the real world" feel of Nolan's films and his Batman fighting alongside brightly-costumed flying men against giant alien starfish doesn't jibe with that approach. No reason to incorporate those ill-fitting elements into the Batman movies just to match Marvel's apparent need to link all of their movies together so that they can do an "Avengers" team up later. An animated JLA movie is the better approach; maybe Bale can just do the voice for Bruce Wayne/Batman for that instead and leave the live-action films out of it.

Definitely not. It's bad enough the Batman comics have to be part of the larger DC Universe.

True, as the majority of the better solo Batman comic stories don't involve the likes of the JLA or the rest of the DCU. While I like Batman appearing in the JLA or Superman books, for instance, I don't necessarily want to see the JLA or Superman appearing in Batman books and disrupting his "dark urban vigilante versus a city of crime" theme. Dini's repeated use of Zatanna fighting alongside Batman in Detective is an example, imo, since I think her ability to just "magic" away most of Batman's antagonists makes them appear less formidable and then Batman appears less competent for not being able to handle them as easily.

[gorthon616]

Hey people, this is the Batman board, remember? Detailed analysis of the Superman movies should be done elsewhere.

Or in the alternative should not be done anywhere.

But it is pertinent to the thread. If they are going to make Batman part of a persistent larger DC movie universe, what that universe would entail is a determinant factor.

[Captain Jim]

Or in the alternative should not be done anywhere.

But it is pertinent to the thread. If they are going to make Batman part of a persistent larger DC movie universe, what that universe would entail is a determinant factor.

I think the key words in my post are "detailed analysis."

[kusanagi6913]

I already operate from the assumption that BB and TDK exist in the same world as Superman Returns.

I hope to God not..Superman Returns is everything wrong with Hollywood's comicbook approach.

1. Filmmakers egos' actually outweigh the reality of a character property with 60 years of history. If this were a fiction book, children's book or fairy tale you can best believe that the filmmakers would be heavily watched as to not alter without significant reason--the source material. How Warners let Singer, who had only two successful superhero movies and has stated clearly he wasn't a fan of comics (and X-men fit him given his understanding of prejudice), create a kid for superman--is the most amazing thing of SR--those executives should be fired.

2. Hollywood's needs to take care of friends---why was Millar (a blowhart and ego maniac himself but god knows..he is capable of writing an action packed, fun and witty tale) not approached but Singer was able to get his two buddies to write this?? Likewise, didn't anyone read this?? Superman lifts a continent of Krypton?? Luthor ,after 30 years offscreen and an excellent adoption of the Byrne revamping--has been shown as a menacing Executive (similar to many of our present day Enron types) on Lois and Clark, STAS, JL-JLU, Smallville, but yet for this crap movie is still played as the 70's lol Gene Hackman who wishes nothing more than to own land (???)-- did no one at Warners read the script and ask why in the hell Luthor was not the bad-ass business tycoon untouchable by Superman? Likewise, ask why Singer's two cronies were writing this tale and not putting one comicbook and/or action reference in the work?? U'd think any executive who read the script would have said..."yeah--umm what is this? Why is there a kid in this? Why doesn't Superman with all of today's special effects throw a punch and fight a serious threat??" Hollywood felt they 'could do it better' and while Nolan was a similar case---clearly he and Goyer were adapting the comicbook (and his vision was a simple..I want to make him real and not too supeheroey). There's over 60 years of material but Warners felt that giving it to Singer and his homeboys who wanted to recreate the 70's movie was a wise idea...Hollywood favoritism.

3. The world of Dark Knight and BB is so perfectly realized--I think it can have Superman and Clayface and Robin but like the Ultimates line from Marvel (in the beginning before the hack-Loeb got into it) it will have to be revamped and created from ground up--which is not hard. Again, 60 years of material--imagine if the next Batman film has a throw-away scene of Bruce at a party and meeting a business suit but sufficiently snarling Lex Luthor (I still think Vin Diesel would work) appears, speaks to Bruce and walks off with Mercy by his side..the audience would flip and with one fail and modern swoop you'd create a connected universe. Likewise, Superman has many great villains-- Brainiac could easily be a huge film villain as could Parasite and metallo.

Regardless, Superman Returns will disappear..it's already loathed by fans and mainstream movie goers-- a gritty re-vision more modern, with more modern Luthor and a struggling to adjust but excellent and gritty journalist Superman could really take off.

[kusanagi6913]

Damn, am I the only one who loved Superman Returns?

You're not the only one--I know many women who liked it..but for any fans of Superman from either the animated show or the comicbooks-- SR was a complete travesty.

I love how people quote that it got 75% on Rotten Tomatoes? So what?? For film buffs--it had great soundtrack, was beautifully shot and had some interesting themes--I'm sure if Spielberg made Spiderman a paraplegic it could be a wonderfully moving Oscar contendar--but it's NOT SPIDERMAN and SR is damn sure NOT SUPERMAN.

[The Batman]

Dr. Banner I presume?

[DeadXMan]

Well, Superman I and II were achievements. Superman III and IV are best forgotten.



I didn't hate it, I thought it was ok, in an average, unambitious kind of way. Kind of bland, but not especially awful.

And I liked Kevin Spacey Luthor. I just wish they'd given him a better eeeevil plot though (and gotten rid of that annoying women he dragged around with him. And given him better henchmen.).

actually his Hench men were much better then Otis and Luther's nephew. Ofcourse that's not saying much.

[carabas]

why was Millar (a blowhart and ego maniac himself but god knows..he is capable of writing an action packed, fun and witty tale) not approached but Singer was able to get his two buddies to write this?? Because Mark Millar is not a Hollywood script writer? Not a member of the guild?

Regardless, Superman Returns will disappear..it's already loathed by fans and mainstream movie goers-- a gritty re-vision more modern, with more modern Luthor and a struggling to adjust but excellent and gritty journalist Superman could really take offSuperman Returns has many, many faults, but going gritty simply is not appropriate to a Superman movie.

[kusanagi6913]

Because Mark Millar is not a Hollywood script writer? Not a member of the guild?

Superman Returns has many, many faults, but going gritty simply is not appropriate to a Superman movie.

Actually, you don't have to be a Guild member to write a screenplay, develop a screenplay or consult on a screenplay. Last time I checked, Millar, Bendis and more were involved in Iron Man. Likewise, do you honestly assert that writers cannot become Guild members? Being a part of the guild is about insurance my friend not about keeping qualified writers with credits away from a different medium. Please explain what you were trying to say here because the guild issue is a non issue.

Likewise, define 'gritty' to you? A reporter who is a real investigative reporter and not played for a comedic tool by unaccomplished directors and writers has been done by Bryne and every writer since then (including the STAS show) and likewise, if you actually read any of the original works by Siegel and Shuster you'd know that the crimes and world was very gritty and while Superman played weak..the crimes he investigated with Lois were definitely real world grit.

[Vidocq]

Wow, an awful lot of answers to one little comment. Anyway, I am not saying is the Perfect Superman Movie, I particulary didn't like how that actress portrayed Lois Lane, it didn't had that Energy Lois Lane must have. I liked How Brandom Routhe portrayted Superman as Alienated, It made sense since the world had learned to live without a Superman. I think there was plenty of Clark Kent, but was wearing a Superman suit. My Favorite part was that it kept the same style of the Donner Movies. And About Executives looking at it, Executives wanted tied to Smallville, Executives made Changes in Daredevil to make it more like Spiderman and Executives decided to create Patience Philips as Catwoman, Good thing that Synger said screw the Executives. Kevin Spacey's Lex? Classic, Although I would have liked for him to made some changes to make it somewhat different to Hackman's. About Lex not being Post 80's, I liked Donner's movies more than I liked S:TAS (and I really liked S:TAS), So that was fine by me. And Diesel as Luthor? HELL NO! Just having him in the flick as a supporting character would turn it in to a Direct to DVD quality movie.

And Superman Returns is having a Sequel sometime next year. Is going to be called Man of Steel (Yeah, I know like Batman's Dark Knight).

[carabas]

Actually, you don't have to be a Guild member to write a screenplay, develop a screenplay or consult on a screenplay. Last time I checked, Millar, Bendis and more were involved in Iron Man. Likewise, do you honestly assert that writers cannot become Guild members? Being a part of the guild is about insurance my friend not about keeping qualified writers with credits away from a different medium. Please explain what you were trying to say here because the guild issue is a non issue.Bendis and Millar were involved with Iron Man, but they don't appear on the credits. Writing movie scripts and writing comics scripts are entirely different things. And you can write hundreds of screenplays, but i you're not a guild member, you aren't going to sell them to anybody.


A reporter who is a real investigative reporter and not played for a comedic tool by unaccomplished directors and writers has been done by Bryne and every writer since then (including the STAS show) and likewise, if you actually read any of the original works by Siegel and Shuster you'd know that the crimes and world was very gritty and while Superman played weak..the crimes he investigated with Lois were definitely real world grit.
I think there is an astounding difference between keeping things real-worldy, and making them all gritty and grim. What you describe I don't consider gritty. Batman's gritty. Lois Lane doing journalism, is not. Or at least, should not be.

[kusanagi6913]

Wow, an awful lot of answers to one little comment. Anyway, I am not saying is the Perfect Superman Movie, I particulary didn't like how that actress portrayed Lois Lane, it didn't had that Energy Lois Lane must have. I liked How Brandom Routhe portrayted Superman as Alienated, It made sense since the world had learned to live without a Superman. I think there was plenty of Clark Kent, but was wearing a Superman suit. My Favorite part was that it kept the same style of the Donner Movies. And About Executives looking at it, Executives wanted tied to Smallville, Executives made Changes in Daredevil to make it more like Spiderman and Executives decided to create Patience Philips as Catwoman, Good thing that Synger said screw the Executives. Kevin Spacey's Lex? Classic, Although I would have liked for him to made some changes to make it somewhat different to Hackman's. About Lex not being Post 80's, I liked Donner's movies more than I liked S:TAS (and I really liked S:TAS), So that was fine by me. And Diesel as Luthor? HELL NO! Just having him in the flick as a supporting character would turn it in to a Direct to DVD quality movie.

And Superman Returns is having a Sequel sometime next year. Is going to be called Man of Steel (Yeah, I know like Batman's Dark Knight).

Many disagree with you (especially about the Executives bit--Singer didn't say screw the execs..they gave him what he wanted from the get-go thanks to X-men--part of the reason he left Marvel/ Fox--it was in his contract to have his two buddies write, that he wanted to add the kid and that he got x amounts of merchandising---told the execs to screw off...please...they should have told him to go to hell..when u are working on a legendary property--u don't get to make demands) and I certainly disagree with you..based on facts and opinions. Likewise, you can't go off IMDB my friend..neither financing, production scheduling or anything has occurred with Superman-Man of Steel as a film. It's as up in the air as Speed Racer 2.

I know where you are getting it from (IMDB and spare comments by an out of work Routh) and I believe an answer will be delivered soon (given how big Dark Knight was and Warner is a public company after all). My understanding which does indeed come from Warner Bros. insiders is that the leaning is a straight reboot ala the Incredible HULK (no one internally likes the kid, fans don't and the 'execs' agree it's damn near impossible to explain him or move forward in a sequel without him unless they just re-start the thing).

I somewhat that understand some people are Singer apologists or Superman fans and love the technical mastery of SR's look (I agree that the film was shot beautifully..actually in some ways better than Dark Knight)...but please, on the fantasy elements of believing that the film was a success and will have a sequel..there is nothing substantial to this...it's not in Warner's earnings plans nor is it contractually signed with Singer--and what makes it more egregious to me was how that idiot blamed the film's performance on Marketing and how he deliberately made it dull because he want's to go all wrath of Khan/ angry God on the next film. Singer should have been beat down for that silly ass comment..that's like the Lakers saying--"we lost the championship when we had a chance because we deliberately planned to underperform--thanks to the marketing for the Celtics and partially because we want to really play in the next championship and go all ass-kick on 'em next time." No one would buy that and no one should have bought Singer's non-admission of a boring story 30 years in the making.

Singer's movie sucked and Donner's Superman while great is just a version of Superman--the character is 70+ years long..how do you call yourself a fan when u want a sequel to an adaptation of a popular character that was around before you and will be around long after you? Talk about hubris.

[kusanagi6913]

Bendis and Millar were involved with Iron Man, but they don't appear on the credits. Writing movie scripts and writing comics scripts are entirely different things. And you can write hundreds of screenplays, but i you're not a guild member, you aren't going to sell them to anybody.

I think there is an astounding difference between keeping things real-worldy, and making them all gritty and grim. What you describe I don't consider gritty. Batman's gritty. Lois Lane doing journalism, is not. Or at least, should not be.

I'm not understanding your point about the Guild? Millar could have been involved in the script like he was with IronMan if WB execs valued comicbook input..they didn't and you're trying to shoehorn the Guild into it where it means nothing. Millar may very well write the script for the next Superman or Wanted 2 based on his success with Wanted--so what is your point? Do you know how difficult it is to join the Guild? Not very my friend. He wasn't kept out by the Guild..he was kept out by prejudice against comicbook writers by Execs and an over reliance on hacks in the guild like Singer's boys--who just were incapable of writing a quality Superman script true to the comic/ character.

As for the gritty comment..this is semantics. The point of the thread is could Superman or any fantastic character fit in the real world of Batman by Nolan and I assert yes, if they play it more straight and gritty as opposed to cartoony and silly and serious journalism, real world threats ala the comics and tv since Byrne's revamp is clear of the success of this. This would mean a ruthless businessman Lex as opposed to hackneyed criminal who wants to create land mass and honestly believe he could own it (China, Russia and US would crucify anyone like that in the real world and less visible countries would just kill his ass), a tough Lois and not a school kid playing grown-up like Kate Bosworth and a Superman who may be alienated to the world but who sees the global warming and war devastation and goes out to save the world from itself..that would not only fit into Nolan's Batman but it would set up an excellent contrast.

[Vidocq]

Many disagree with you (especially about the Executives bit--Singer didn't say screw the execs..they gave him what he wanted from the get-go thanks to X-men--part of the reason he left Marvel/ Fox--it was in his contract to have his two buddies write, that he wanted to add the kid and that he got x amounts of merchandising---told the execs to screw off...please...they should have told him to go to hell..when u are working on a legendary property--u don't get to make demands) and I certainly disagree with you..based on facts and opinions. Likewise, you can't go off IMDB my friend..neither financing, production scheduling or anything has occurred with Superman-Man of Steel as a film. It's as up in the air as Speed Racer 2.

I know where you are getting it from (IMDB and spare comments by an out of work Routh) and I believe an answer will be delivered soon (given how big Dark Knight was and Warner is a public company after all). My understanding which does indeed come from Warner Bros. insiders is that the leaning is a straight reboot ala the Incredible HULK (no one internally likes the kid, fans don't and the 'execs' agree it's damn near impossible to explain him or move forward in a sequel without him unless they just re-start the thing).

I somewhat that understand some people are Singer apologists or Superman fans and love the technical mastery of SR's look (I agree that the film was shot beautifully..actually in some ways better than Dark Knight)...but please, on the fantasy elements of believing that the film was a success and will have a sequel..there is nothing substantial to this...it's not in Warner's earnings plans nor is it contractually signed with Singer--and what makes it more egregious to me was how that idiot blamed the film's performance on Marketing and how he deliberately made it dull because he want's to go all wrath of Khan/ angry God on the next film. Singer should have been beat down for that silly ass comment..that's like the Lakers saying--"we lost the championship when we had a chance because we deliberately planned to underperform--thanks to the marketing for the Celtics and partially because we want to really play in the next championship and go all ass-kick on 'em next time." No one would buy that and no one should have bought Singer's non-admission of a boring story 30 years in the making.

Singer's movie sucked and Donner's Superman while great is just a version of Superman--the character is 70+ years long..how do you call yourself a fan when u want a sequel to an adaptation of a popular character that was around before you and will be around long after you? Talk about hubris.

See what you did there comparing Speed Racer with SR. Cleaver.

The Movie has been green lighted, but with less budget than expected and the fiming was posponed because of the writers Strike. And He didn't say that. And he didn't said that Michael Dougherty said that and he didn't say that. He said: We are taking what we've already established and getting that out of the way. Let's just make it shorter, tighter and more action-packed." Is like What Nolan did in Begins. He spend sometime establishing the character and the World around him, then he used that in The Dark Knight.

And surely you don't mean 70+ years long. It's been around since 1978. I mean sure that's longer than I've been around, but the fact that Basil Karlo's Sherlock Holmes movies are waaaaaay Older than me dosen't mean that I can't find them superior to House MD.

[kusanagi6913]

See what you did there comparing Speed Racer with SR. Cleaver.

The Movie has been green lighted, but with less budget than expected and the fiming was posponed because of the writers Strike. And He didn't say that. And he didn't said that Michael Dougherty said that and he didn't say that. He said: We are taking what we've already established and getting that out of the way. Let's just make it shorter, tighter and more action-packed." Is like What Nolan did in Begins. He spend sometime establishing the character and the World around him, then he used that in The Dark Knight.

And surely you don't mean 70+ years long. It's been around since 1978. I mean sure that's longer than I've been around, but the fact that Basil Karlo's Sherlock Holmes movies are waaaaaay Older than me dosen't mean that I can't find them superior to House MD.

Hey, thanks for the clever bit buddy. I like a good laugh ;). Superman's last news article from an actual news worthy source was that it was in litigation over the family of Siegels. U lost me on who said what...but Singer did blame marketing and he did say that next film will be wrath of khan which both were stupid comments to explain the poorness of the film's success.

Bottom line, if I could bet you, I would but we both know we can't so bottom line is that I wish you luck but if u're on this board when the next film is announced with a director, scriptwriter, actors and schedule--then I'll be sure not to rub it in..but Singer, his boys, his emasculated superman and the silly kid plot will NOT be back in a film unless Singer makes it for his buddies and shows it at house parties.

Likewise, Superman has been around for 70+ years yes..what are you confused about? The movie is since 78 and my point is so what? It's an adaptation -- you liked that superman over any elements of the superman over last 70's years? Not Byrne? Not Geoff Johns? Not Curt Swan?

[Vidocq]

Bottom line, if I could bet you, I would but we both know we can't so bottom line is that I wish you luck but if u're on this board when the next film is announced with a director, scriptwriter, actors and schedule--then I'll be sure not to rub it in..but Singer, his boys, his emasculated superman and the silly kid plot will NOT be back in a film unless Singer makes it for his buddies and shows it at house parties.

Likewise, Superman has been around for 70+ years yes..what are you confused about? The movie is since 78 and my point is so what? It's an adaptation -- you liked that superman over any elements of the superman over last 70's years? Not Byrne? Not Geoff Johns? Not Curt Swan?

Oh I thought you meant that The first Superman movie had been around for 70 years. Sorry about that.

Anyways Singer and his crew will be back. Really wish I could Bet you on that. And if I'm Wrong feel free to rub in, cause I probably would :biggrin: .

[kusanagi6913]

Oh I thought you meant that The first Superman movie had been around for 70 years. Sorry about that.

Anyways Singer and his crew will be back. Really wish I could Bet you on that. And if I'm Wrong feel free to rub in, cause I probably would :biggrin: .

LOL then it's a net bet....but I will concede u this..as much as I loathed SR--I have it on DVD because I'm a supporter of DC comics and characters and therefore would most likely do the same should another Singer Supes get made...but I am hearing from execs at Warners that it's a very strong likelihood (even Letterier had been approached as recently as June to direct a superman movie) that Singer nor his story will be back and they'll go reboot like Nolan.

[Monty_Cristo]

i think it would be a bad idea. Batman's more of a Marvel character than a DC character. they should just leave him his own universe to play in.

[humpa]

I wouldn't mind a cameo, but no way should he ever start dealing with laser blasts.

[Xybernauts]

Superman Returns is everything wrong with Hollywood's comicbook approach.

3. The world of Dark Knight and BB is so perfectly realized--I think it can have Superman and Clayface and Robin but like the Ultimates line from Marvel (in the beginning before the hack-Loeb got into it) it will have to be revamped and created from ground up--which is not hard. Again, 60 years of material--imagine if the next Batman film has a throw-away scene of Bruce at a party and meeting a business suit but sufficiently snarling Lex Luthor (I still think Vin Diesel would work) appears, speaks to Bruce and walks off with Mercy by his side..the audience would flip and with one fail and modern swoop you'd create a connected universe. Likewise, Superman has many great villains-- Brainiac could easily be a huge film villain as could Parasite and metallo.



I agree totally, I mean I for one believe it could work. I mean Hollywood is like tossing a coin. You can't really tell how a movie can come out unless you try. And even then there are no guarantees. I mean how can you ever portray an accurate version of Mr. Freeze if you don't. I mean don't those stories deserve to be told. You have to live on the edge, Dare to dream. It sounds like many of you are so afraid they'll screw up the movie that you believe they should never even try. True failure is never to try.

I also think it's possible Vin Diesel could make a great Lex.

Also, as for Superman Returns, I hated that movie, but I do think it had potential. If it was edited properly and if a few scenes were added it could have been a great movie. Do you remember that trailer. It was 100 times better then the actual movie. They should have let whoever edited that trailer, edit the movie also.

I also don't think the kid was Superman's son. I think he was the son of another alien who Lane was making nookie with; Lane's boyfriend (Cyclops). I say this because I believe the guy who played Cyclops in the X-Men movies left X-Men 3 to be in Superman Returns. Something about the way X-Men 3 story so abruptly killed Cyclops out of no where leads me to believe that he left X-Men 3 to be in Superman Returns. If my theory is true then you have to ask yourself, why would Cyclops (I don't know his name) leave a leading role in X-Men 3 to play a two bit part in SR as Lane's boyfriend. I think it's because his role in SR was supposed to develop into a leading role in the Superman Returns sequel. I think it would have revealed that he was actually an alien and that the child was his, not Superman's. If that's true it would explain why his son isn't effected by Kryptonite. Who knows, maybe he's Mon-El.

[Jmacq1]

Actually, I was under the impression it was pretty well known that James Marsden got the axe in the X-Men franchise because he went with Singer to the Superman "franchise." Reports vary as to whether it was actually mean-spirited or if it was the studio being nice and giving him only a little bit in X-3 so that he wouldn't have a schedule conflict, but the two are definitely linked regardless.

However, I wouldn't call his role in Superman Returns "two bit" by any stretch. He was one of the main characters of the film, with as much (or almost as much) screen time as Lois, Lex, and Superman himself, and was probably more heroic within that film than he got to be in all three X-Men films combined.

However, I really doubt the "alien" thing. He's Perry White's son, for starters...which has its' own baggage if you're familiar with the comics (let's just say he didn't come to a good end, and oh...Perry wasn't actually his father, either). However more to the actual point, Superman's child being raised by a different, human man draws the parallels to Superman's own "adopted" upbringing.

[The Batman]

Perry White's nephew actually and yeah, he was given more to do in this film as Lois's fiancee and Jason's "Pa Kent" than he ever was as Cyclops.

Also, the kid is Superman's.

I mean, I guess they could say that it isn't, that it's the son of Richard White who is actually a different superpowerful alien that's been disguising himself as Perry's nephew for years now or a Brainiac construct or some sort of prank played by a 5th Dimensional Imp but they really shouldn't. That sort of thing ranks higher even than killing the kid on a list of bad ideas to appease the fanboys who don't want Superman to have a kid.

[The Batman]

Oh and yeah, sure they should. I mean if they're going to make it well, why not?

There's more options out there for Batman than Nolan or Schumacher and more directions that either dour, hyper-realism or over-the-top fluff. If nothing else, the Timm stuff has shown us that you can encorporate an element of the fantastic into Batman and still tell a very good Batman story.

[carabas]

However, I wouldn't call his role in Superman Returns "two bit" by any stretch. He was one of the main characters of the film, with as much (or almost as much) screen time as Lois, Lex, and Superman himself, and was probably more heroic within that film than he got to be in all three X-Men films combined.He had a bigger part in Superman Returns than he had in all three X-films combined.

[Xybernauts]

He had a bigger part in Superman Returns than he had in all three X-films combined.

Perry White's nephew actually and yeah, he was given more to do in this film as Lois's fiancee and Jason's "Pa Kent" than he ever was as Cyclops.

Also, the kid is Superman's.

I mean, I guess they could say that it isn't, that it's the son of Richard White who is actually a different superpowerful alien that's been disguising himself as Perry's nephew for years now or a Brainiac construct or some sort of prank played by a 5th Dimensional Imp but they really shouldn't. That sort of thing ranks higher even than killing the kid on a list of bad ideas to appease the fanboys who don't want Superman to have a kid.

I feel a little guilty straying off topic like this, but I seriously doubt James Marsden (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Marsden) got more screen time in SR then he did in the X-Men movies. And his part in SR certainly wasn't a bigger role then a great superhero like Cyclops. Is Richard white even in the comics and even if he is he exists in comic book obscurity. Richard White doesn't even have a wiki on wikipedia. It just redirects you to the SR page. Cyclops is clearly a greater role then being Richard White (some super-powerless guy whose related to another super-powerless guy). Now if he was Perry White, maybe you might have something there and even that's a pretty big maybe.

[carabas]

I feel a little guilty straying off topic like this, but I seriously doubt James Marsden (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Marsden) got more screen time in SR then he did in the X-Men movies. And his part in SR certainly wasn't a bigger role then a great superhero like Cyclops. Is Richard white even in the comics and even if he is he exists in comic book obscurity. Richard White doesn't even have a wiki on wikipedia. It just redirects you to the SR page. Cyclops is clearly a greater role then being Richard White (some super-powerless guy whose related to another super-powerless guy). Now if he was Perry White, maybe you might have something there and even that's a pretty big maybe.
It seems we have a difference of opinion on what constitute having an important part in the movie.

Richard White has an integral part in the Superman film. He is important to the story.
If you cut all Cyclops's scenes from the X-Men films, one would have to be very attentive to notice someting was missisng - Cyclops lifts right out. He had a handful of neat special effects and a few lines designed to make Wolverine look good, and that was it. He had no role in any of the X-films. He was scenery.

I don't see what or if someone has powers has got anything to do with their role in the story.

[The Batman]

Cyclops is a great character, I think you and I are two of like twenty people that actually like the guy, but in the X-Men movies he was given the thankless job of being there to make Wolverine look cool and badass. I mean, in the course of those three movies we got a Cyclops who was the guy that everybody loves to hate: an overbearing, preppy douche that listens to N'Sync in his fancy car. That, and when they killed him, offscreen no less, nobody in the movie seemed to care.

Richard White on the other hand got to be Pa Kent with a seaplane, the guy so awesome that he could very nearly compete with Superman for Lois Lane's affections.

[Your Imaginary Pal]

see the thing is you don't have to adapt batman to fit into the greater DC Movie universe, or vice versa. He operates with his own set of rules. In his small corner of the world. He was described as the "guardian avenger" in the Voice over at the end of TDK. A near mythical figure that operates in the shadows and gets things done. His mission isn't to save the world, but to keep Gotham free of violent criminals. In the event he is called upon by more powerful heroes he could be gruff and over judgemental of them, very short with them using a very direct, down to business approach. Instead of them bringing out the best in his personality, you see a bit of envy, where he wishes he had the powers at their disposal, so he overcompensates by pushing himself harder and pushing his allies away. An average man getting caught up in the affairs of godlike beings. It's in the first written heroic epics. And I think it can be conveyed well with a competent team on film. The problem I see here is making batman the main figure in the film following his journey to be a team player and therefore a greater hero. And him taking on a world level threat would probably make him a more mystical figure in the eyes of Gotham. Not only is Batman, completely fricking scary, he can hang with superman and beat the crap out of aliens. Knowing that, he's the type of guy you want to stay away from in a dark alley.

[Xybernauts]

It seems we have a difference of opinion on what constitute having an important part in the movie.

Richard White has an integral part in the Superman film. He is important to the story.
If you cut all Cyclops's scenes from the X-Men films, one would have to be very attentive to notice someting was missisng - Cyclops lifts right out. He had a handful of neat special effects and a few lines designed to make Wolverine look good, and that was it. He had no role in any of the X-films. He was scenery.

I don't see what or if someone has powers has got anything to do with their role in the story.

I agree that having superpowers doesn't define the importance of a character within a movie, but I disagree the Cyclops' role wasn't integral to the X-Men movies. He was necessary because he helped to create rivalry with Wolverine. Cyclops rigid adherence to command structure conflicted with Wolverine's rouge go-it-alone attitude allowing us to see the insubordinate part of Wolverine more clearly. He defeated Sabretooth in the Statue of Liberty and he defeated Magneto which in turn allowed Wolverine to save Rouge. Cyclops had a relationship with Jean Grey that made Wolverine jealous. Without him that classic romantic tension wouldn't be there between Wolverine, Jean, and Cyclops. This relationship also made Jean's death even more tragic in X2. Cyclops' most important role would have been in X3, but they phased him out because he wanted to do the SR movie also. X3 would have been 100 times better if Cyclops had been in the movie, cause the role Wolverine played in relation to the Pheonix Entity should have been played by Cyclops. To me, phasing him out so early in the movie ruined X3.

Cyclops is synonymous with X-Men. Richard White isn't synonymous with Superman.

Yeah you can edit Cyclops out, but you can do the same with Richard White in SR. I mean I read that Singer had edited Zod from the original plot of SR because Jude Law (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jude_Law) wouldn't take the part. If you can phase out Zod you can phase out Richard White. The tension between Lois and Clark could have been created without him. Just make her so angry at Superman that she doesn't accept him into his life, blah, blah, blah. And to fly the helicopteror seaplane, just put Lois on a boat instead of a copter so she can save Superman.

I really didn't like Richard White at all.

[carabas]

I really didn't like Richard White at all.Your personal feelings are affecting your judgement here. What is true for the comics isn't true for singerman's films.

I mean I read that Singer had edited Zod from the original plot of SR because Jude Law wouldn't take the part.There is a vast difference between rewriting a scipt and reediting an existing moie. That said, I didn't know this. Interesting, given the parentage of the kid's comics counterpart.

Cyclops is synonymous with X-Men. Richard White isn't synonymous with Superman.While this is true for the cmics version, Cyclops didn't seem important at all in the films. His only functions were SFX eye candy and making Wolverin look good (which Jackman was perfectly capable of doing on his own).

[edited to remove some uncalled for snark]

[The Batman]

Yeah you can't really edit either character out of either movie without changing them a bit. That said, I still think you're sugar coating the treatment that Cyclops was given in the X-Men movies a bit. More often than not he was just there to make Wolverine look good.

And really, as an actor do you want to be the guy, lazerbeam eyes or not, that's just there to make Hugh Jackman look good or do you want to be the guy that looks good on his own?

[Phantom Druid]

Batman is DCs favourite character for a reason its because he isnt some godlike character who is vurtualy unbeatable he is very human it makes me wonder why fans of his who revel in his "realness" even are fans of DC.

You act as though DC doesn't have any heroes that are not "Super Uber" characters. They have tons of metahumans, vigilantes & sorts. Not everyone is a Superman or Captain Marvel, lol. In fact, "very human" characters are exactly why I read a bit more DC.

[spiderman_rj]

just so you know a batman superman movie is already in contract,so all you "realist" fanboys enjoy while you can,from there JLA is possible.

[Vidocq]

just so you know a batman superman movie is already in contract,so all you "realist" fanboys enjoy while you can,from there JLA is possible.

The Superman Batman Movie was a failed project that was dropped years ago.

A JLA movie is in the making though. It wont be tied to either Singer's Superman or Nolan's Batman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jla_movie#Film

The Cast.

Adam Brody had been cast as Barry Allen / The Flash
D. J. Cotrona as Clark Kent / Superman
rapper Common as John Stewart / Green Lantern
Australian supermodel Megan Gale as Diana Prince / Wonder Woman
Newcomer Armie Hammer was controversially to be cast as Bruce Wayne / Batman
with Heroes actor Santiago Cabrera as Arthur Curry / Aquaman
and Hugh Keays-Byrne playing J'onn J'onzz / Martian Manhunter.
Teresa Palmer and Zoe Kazan had been cast in the supporting roles of Talia Al Ghul and Iris Allen
respective.

The Story will be based in The OMAC project and Tower of Babel.

[Jmacq1]

The Superman Batman Movie was a failed project that was dropped years ago.

A JLA movie is in the making though. It wont be tied to either Singer's Superman or Nolan's Batman.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jla_movie#Film

The Cast.

Adam Brody had been cast as Barry Allen / The Flash
D. J. Cotrona as Clark Kent / Superman
rapper Common as John Stewart / Green Lantern
Australian supermodel Megan Gale as Diana Prince / Wonder Woman
Newcomer Armie Hammer was controversially to be cast as Bruce Wayne / Batman
with Heroes actor Santiago Cabrera as Arthur Curry / Aquaman
and Hugh Keays-Byrne playing J'onn J'onzz / Martian Manhunter.
Teresa Palmer and Zoe Kazan had been cast in the supporting roles of Talia Al Ghul and Iris Allen
respective.

The Story will be based in The OMAC project and Tower of Babel.

Even that info is outdated. The last word that was heard on that project was that:

A: Production has been halted, due to a variety of factors, not least of which was no longer being able to film on the cheap in Australia, which was what they'd intended to do. The writer's strike didn't help, either. Nor did the horrendously poisonous word-of-mouth that was starting to circulate in the fan community over many of the casting decisions, particularly for Superman and Batman.

B: The script was undergoing review and re-writing, potentially to remove Superman (due to the Siegel lawsuit) and Batman (to avoid confusion with the ongoing Batman franchise) from the film entirely (or reducing Batman to a cameo). Which is gonna make doing OMAC/Tower of Babel kinda hard without some serious tweaking.

Also, the Superman/Batman project may not have disappeared entirely. I seem to recall comments from Brandon Routh and (maybe, but the memory is more sketchy) Christian Bale that they were contracted to do one sequel apiece, then do a "team-up" film. But with the future of the Superman franchise in limbo that very well may have gotten tossed out the window.

[The Batman]

I think it's safe to say that, with the exception of the inevitable Batman 3, nobody knows what's going on with DC's film properties.

I don't think WB even knows.

[Dr Cthulwho]

I think it's safe to say that, with the exception of the inevitable Batman 3, nobody knows what's going on with DC's film properties.

I don't think WB even knows.

Which is something of a shame. Recent films based on marvel characters and TDK certainly show that it is possible to do great movies (and some good and not so good movies) in the genre. DC has a lot of untapped potential and some iconic characters that could be crying out for some good quality films.

Admittedly I think more along the lines of examining and portraying single characters rather then a movie that features lots at once (since I still think something like JLA works better in an animated medium then it would in live action), but still.

[Phantom Druid]

I remain optimistic about the future of DC movies and I think they are on the right track. TDK, The Watchmen, The Spirit, all look/were good, and we even have a Shazam movie in the works featuring Dwayne "the Rock" Johnson likely as Black Adam. I think they will make the right moves. But I will say this... Warner Brothers needs to warn'a brother if they ever plan to put out a crappy film like Shaq's Steel, lol.

[kusanagi6913]

I remain optimistic about the future of DC movies and I think they are on the right track. TDK, The Watchmen, The Spirit, all look/were good, and we even have a Shazam movie in the works featuring Dwayne "the Rock" Johnson likely as Black Adam. I think they will make the right moves. But I will say this... Warner Brothers needs to warn'a brother if they ever plan to put out a crappy film like Shaq's Steel, lol.

Amem brother....but I still think Singer's Supes Return was the worst DC movie made in years. Catwoman was a doomed project as was Steel but the fact that Superman has had several successful iterations in comics and tv over the last twenty years, that WB execs approved Singer's demands (the kid???) and his buddies ridiculously lame script and effectively mangled the franchise that was a 'can't miss' is just mind numbing.

I would like to say likewise, that while I hear this Guggenheim guy is taking a stab at a GL flick--but I still think the character's possibilities and exposure were best delivered by John Stewart of the Timm verse. That guy in a film could not just catapult DC movies (thanks to delivering a new type of hero and exposing a huge audience of minorities AND mainstream) but it would help to tell a cool Star Trek meets superhero fusion. I just can't see Hal being that guy.

Lastly, please god make a Flash film..this is another can't miss that one cannot understand why WB has not jumped on this. Practical effects, perfect costume, kid-friendly appeal and villains second only to Batman and Spiderman in sheer charm.