Topics

Fans too often ignore the numerous animated Batman TV shows that preceded Batman: The Animated Series, so I thought it was about time we looked back at some of those older cartoons and gave them their due. I'd like to start with The Super Powers Team: Galactic Guardians. This series was notable for several reasons. For one, it was the last of the Super Friends shows produced by Hanna-Barbera between 1973 and 1986. It was also the last screen version of Batman before the 1989 film and the last cartoon before B:TAS. Unlike the earlier Batman cartoons, the Galactic Guardians had a more serious and dramatic tone, which, in retrospect, feels like a bridge between the old Filmation and Hanna-Barbera shows and the Warner Bros. Animation series that would succeed them.

Galactic Guardians is also notable for being the final Batman TV series to star Adam West. West would later guest voice Batman in shows like Animaniacs and The Simpsons, and he would also reprise the role in the animated Lego short Batman: New Times (2005) and the feature films Return of the Caped Crusaders (2016) and Batman vs. Two-Face (2017). But this was the last time he starred as Batman in a regular TV series. He'd previously played Batman in two earlier Hanna-Barbera productions: the animated Super Friends: The Legendary Super Powers Show (1984-85) and the live-action miniseries Legends of the Superheroes (1979). I mentioned before that Galactic Guardians had a more serious tone than earlier Batman cartoons, and West's performance is consistent with that. If you ever wanted to see him play a darker and more dramatic take on the character, then look no further than this series.

There's one particular episode titled 'The Fear' that every Batman fan should watch. The script was written by Alan Burnett, who would go on to serve as writer and script editor on B:TAS. According to Burnett, 'The Fear' was originally conceived as a pilot for a new Batman series. The story begins with Batman and Robin fighting Scarecrow on a dark and stormy night in Gotham City. They pursue the villain into an alleyway where Batman is suddenly overcome with terror.

Dick wonders what is so special about that particular alley that it holds such powerful sway over Batman's nerves, and the answer forces Bruce to reveal the tragic events that drove him to become the Dark Knight. 'The Fear' marked the first time Batman's origin story had ever been depicted outside of the comics. The portrayal contains several recognisable elements from the source material: the murder in Crime Alley, the image of Bruce and Alfred standing over Thomas and Martha's graves, Bruce training his body and mind to peak condition, and the bat flying through the window of his study as he sits ruminating at night. Alan Burnett would recycle some of these images a few years later when he revisited Batman's origin in Mask of the Phantasm (1993).

The Galactic Guardians was the last Batman cartoon before Batman: The Animated Series came along, and while it marked the end of one era of DC animation it also paved the way for the new era that was to come. There's some definite foreshadowing of B:TAS in the dramatic tone and dark visuals of 'The Fear'.

Considering the show's makers were prohibited by the usual rules of Saturday morning cartoons (e.g. no guns or on-screen killing), I think they did a great job of implying the darker aspects of the story. Another strong episode of Galactic Guardians – and one that deals with darker themes than you might expect from a Super Friends era show – is 'The Death of Superman', inspired by the comic story of the same name from Superman Vol 1 #149 (November 1961).

The series is worth checking out if you haven't already.

We all know about Batman Unchained, and we've already discussed ways the film series might have course corrected in the late nineties. The premise of this thread is different. I want you to imagine that Batman & Robin was a huge critical and commercial success and that fans loved the direction in which the franchise was heading. They loved the expanded Bat Family, the multiple villains, the costume changes, new vehicles and general toyetic feel of the film. They loved the lighter tone, the Silver Age comic influences and evocation of the sixties TV show. They loved how cartoonish and over-the-top it all was, and they didn't have a problem with the way Bane was depicted.

Your challenge now is to brainstorm ideas for a spiritual sequel that would have been released around 1999-2001. It has to take all the things that characterised Batman & Robin and go even further with them. It needs to be toyetic. The Bat Family must be expanded further. There must be multiple villains, but you need to choose characters that will fit the increasingly goofy and family-friendly tone. There have to be costume changes and new vehicles, and you must come up with reasons to justify them. If you're going to adapt plot points from a comic, it should either be a Silver Age story or one that you can alter to fit the lighter tone. Above all, it has to be a marketable crowd pleaser catering to audiences that loved B&R.

The idea here is not to create a good film, but to create a popcorn movie that continues the B&R approach and satisfies your affiliates at the McDonald's Corporation. Imagine we're a bunch of clueless Hollywood suits sitting around a boardroom responding to focus groups and market research analysts who are all telling us the same thing: that audiences loved B&R and want more of the same.

Which character(s) would you bring in to expand the Bat Family? Batwoman, a new Robin, Azrael, Ace the Bat-Hound? In keeping with the increasingly cartoonish trajectory of the series, I'd have gone with Bat-Mite. There was a trend in the late nineties and early noughties for live action movies based on cartoon shows which often featured real actors interacting with fully or partially animated characters. The Casper films (1995-98), The Adventures of Rocky and Bullwinkle (2000) and the Scooby-Doo movies (2002-04) being just a few examples. Alan Cumming's performance as the Great Gazoo in The Flintstones: Viva Rock Vegas (2000) is a good example of a Bat-Mite-esque movie character from that era.

I'd make Bat-Mite entirely CG and have him serve as the movie's Jar Jar. Officially I'd say he was in the film to make audiences laugh, but his real function would be to annoy everyone above the age of ten. As for who'd voice him, I'm not sure. The Simpsons was very popular back then, so maybe someone like Dan Castellaneta, Harry Shearer or Hank Azaria. Or how about Burt Ward? His storyline would more or less follow his debut story – 'Batman Meets Bat-Mite' (Detective Comics Vol 1 #267, May 1959) – in depicting him as a well-meaning troublemaker who keeps getting in the way but ultimately redeems himself. He'd also get his very own suit-up montage.

I'd also bring in Aunt Harriet for extra comic relief. Doris Roberts would have been good in the role. There'd be lots of humorous scenes of Alfred trying to distract Aunt Harriet from what's really happening in stately Wayne Manor. Bat-Mite's shenanigans would naturally complicate matters.

For villains, I'd follow the B&R formula of having two main bad guys (Freeze and Ivy), a third henchman villain (Bane) and a cameo by a fourth minor villain (Floronic Man). For one of the main villains, I'd choose King Tut. Movies and TV shows with an ancient Egyptian flavour were popular around that time. For example, Stargate SG1 (1997-2007), The Mummy (1999) and The Mummy Returns (2001). Batman 5 could have adopted a similar aesthetic to those productions.

I'd skip Tut's origin story and have Gordon recap it verbally. That way he could show up fully formed like Two-Face and Mr. Freeze did in the previous Schumacher films. His hideout could resemble an ancient temple and be located in the abandoned Egyptian wing of one of Gotham's old museums.

My top pick for an actor to play him would be Jeff Goldblum. He would have been a box office draw at the time thanks to his lead roles in Independence Day (1996) and the Jurassic Park movies. It actually wouldn't have been all that different from his performance as the Grandmaster in Thor: Ragnarok (2017), only he'd have been younger and a lot crazier.

His goons could have dressed like the Jaffa from the Stargate franchise.

Plot wise, you could adapt aspects of 'Secret of the Sphinx Sinister' (Detective Comics Vol 1 #508, November 1981), since the villain in that story, Pharaoh, was created as a stand-in for King Tut. There's also a scene in Bat-Mite's debut story where he conjures several giant objects in a warehouse, including a model sphinx. When the villains try to flee, Bat-Mite uses his powers to make the sphinx move. He does this in an attempt to assist the Dynamic Duo, but the plan backfires and enables the criminals to get away. I can imagine a similar scene occurring in the movie.

For the second main villain, I'd use Clayface. Only I'd combine elements from different versions of Clayface instead of basing the character on just one incarnation. To begin with, I'd use the alter ego of the fourth Clayface, Sondra Fuller (aka Lady Clay), so that we could have a glamorous female villain to play off against King Tut. Fuller's Clayface had all the same powers as the more famous Matt Hagen version, and that would allow for some spectacular special effects sequences.

I'd completely disregard Fuller's back story from the comics and instead base her cinematic origins on those of the Basil Karlo Clayface. Only instead of having her be a washed-up horror movie star, I'd make her more like Norma Desmond (Gloria Swanson) in Billy Wilder's Sunset Blvd (1950) – a washed-up starlet whose looks have faded and whose career is on the rocks.

Roland Daggett could appear in a similar capacity to Woodrue in B&R. I'd present him as a corrupt cosmetics mogul who persuades Fuller he can revive her career through an experimental rejuvenation process (this whole storyline would derive influence from the Evelyn Grayce subplot in Batman: Bride of the Demon (1990)). The process would backfire and she'd be reborn as Clayface. Most of the time she'd resemble her beautiful younger self, but she'd occasionally revert to her monstrous clay form during action scenes or times of emotional stress. She'd kill Daggett (and as a nod to Sunset Blvd, I'd have her say, "All right, Mr. Daggett, I'm ready for my close-up" as she delivers the coup de grâce) before forming an alliance with Tut.

As for how and why Tut and Clayface would team up, I'd have it so that Fuller had portrayed Cleopatra in an old Hollywood epic, similar to Liz Taylor's performance in Cleopatra (1963).

She'd transform herself back into this guise and use the movie to convince the mentally unstable Tut that she's the real Cleopatra. Through her alliance with him, she'd set out to reclaim the glory that the film industry is presently denying her. For casting, I think Jennifer Lopez might have been a good pick. She was a rising star at the time and had great chemistry with Clooney in Out of Sight (1998).

Schumacher would have had a blast overseeing the design of all her glamorous costumes. There could even be a scene where she captivates King Tut by performing a big musical number from one of her old Hollywood movies. In fact J-Lo could have produced an entire album to tie in with the film like Prince did for the 1989 movie.

Is this all sounding terrible enough so far?

We've got Goldblum as King Tut and J-Lo as Clayface for our two main villains, with Daggett also making a cameo. For the fourth henchman villain I'd choose Solomon Grundy. He's big, dumb, strong and has comedic potential. To explain his inclusion, there could be a scene where King Tut reads from the Scroll of Life/Book of the Dead/whatever in an attempt to resurrect a mummy in the museum, but instead accidentally resurrects Grundy from the swamps outside Gotham. Since Tut was the one who spoke the sacred words, it would be to him that Grundy pledges his loyalty. I don't know who could have played him. Maybe the Big Show or another wrestler of similarly immense proportions.

Schumacher tended to apply a signature colour to each of his villains. For Riddler it was green. For Two-Face it was purple-red. For Freeze it was blue. And for Ivy it was pink, red and green. In keeping with that tradition, the dominant colours in my movie would be yellow and red: sand yellow/gold for King Tut and clay red for Clayface.

Moving on to our heroes, I saw this manip posted on another site.

I'd re-colour Clooney's costume to give it the classic grey and blue colour scheme from the comics, including the trunks. Robin would start out with his red and green outfit before becoming Nightwing halfway through the film and getting a new costume similar to his B&R suit (the more outfits, the more action figures we sell). Batgirl's outfit would need an upgrade too. It could be coloured purple and yellow like Yvonne Craig's or black and yellow like Dina Meyer's. Either way, the cowl could become a more permanent fixture of her ensemble.

We need some new vehicles too, so I'd have King Tut's master plan involve hijacking the newly launched Wayne Enterprises Watchtower space station (obviously based on the JLA Watchtower). Batman and Robin almost went into space courtesy of Mr. Freeze, but this time I'd have them go there for real. During the final act, King Tut would somehow reach the Watchtower and take control of it. Why? I don't know. Maybe he wants to use it to whip up a giant sandstorm or somehow distort time by manipulating Earth's gravity field. Something dumb like that.

Bat-Mite apologises for inadvertently frustrating Batman, Nightwing and Batgirl throughout the movie. To make amends, he magically creates new Bat-spacesuits and spaceships for them to use against Tut (and for WB to sell more toys). In a climax inspired by Moonraker (1979), the four heroes would fly into space and board the Watchtower for the final showdown.

They defeat Clayface and Solomon Grundy in zero-g combat and prevent Tut's plan from reaching fruition. Tut then flees the Watchtower in an escape pod locked on a collision course with Gotham. Batman pursues him in his own Bat-rocket, but as Tut is re-entering the Earth's atmosphere he bangs his head and reverts to his original identity of Professor William Omaha McElroy. Batman ejects from his own ship and glides to the outside of Tut's escape pod. He rescues the frightened professor, plants a Bat-bomb that destroys the pod at high altitude, then safely glides down to Gotham in time to watch the burning wreckage fall harmlessly into the sea.

Tut goes back to teaching, Clayface goes to Arkham, Grundy goes back to the swamp, Batgirl kisses Nightwing, Bat-Mite returns to his own dimension, and the heroes join Alfred and Aunt Harriet in time for breakfast at stately Wayne Manor. The movie ends with Batman, Nightwing and Batgirl running in front of the Bat-Signal like the final shot of B&R, only this time Bat-Mite appears in the air above them to tease his possible return in a sixth movie.

Running time 120 minutes. Rated PG for very mild violence and sensuality.

A few more ideas.

Batman mentioned Metropolis in Batman Forever, then namedropped Superman in B&R. I'd take it a step further and have him give a shout out to the Justice League in the fifth film. As they're flying up to the Watchtower, Nightwing could say something like, "Couldn't you have built this thing closer to home?" and Batman could reply, "I'll suggest moving it at the next JLA meeting." Something along those lines would be delightfully lame.

I also feel McDonald's should feature prominently in at least one scene. We saw the logo in the background of Schumacher's earlier films, but perhaps this time Batman, Nightwing and Batgirl could actually enter a McDonald's restaurant while pursing King Tut's men? Or at the very least we could have a scene where the three of them pass a drive-through, Batman flashes his 'Forever' credit card and Nightwing could shout "yoink!" as he and Batgirl grab the takeouts. We could then use that footage in the Happy Meal promos.

Finally, what about the title? Batman Immortal. Batman Resurrected. Batman: Age of Heroes. Batman Millennium. Batman Ascends.

Anyway, those are just a few of my ideas to use as an example. Feel free to expand on them if you like. Or if you can come up with a better (i.e. worse) idea for a B&R sequel, then go for it. Brainstorm something completely different if you like, using any villains or characters you think would be appropriate for this type of a film. Maybe you could have the finale take place underwater and have the heroes wear Bat-scuba gear as they pilot Bat-water-skis and a Bat-submarine. Maybe you'd like to bring in Tim Drake as the new Robin, or have Batwoman join the team.

But it's got to be camp, it's got to be toyetic, and it's got to sell Happy Meals.

The most obvious one to start with here is the Keysi Fighting Method, often abbreviated as KFM. This is the foundation of Bruce's martial philosophy in Batman Begins and The Dark Knight, though the stunt team modified it for The Dark Knight Rises to allow for the fact that Bruce was meant to be older and slower. The classic KFM stance involves holding the arms up to protect the head with the elbows projecting forwards.

The Nolan Batman adopts this stance in numerous fight scenes.

KFM incorporates elements of barroom brawling, and this is clearly evidenced in the Nolan Batman's fighting style. Note that he often allows himself to get hit, then channels his anger into his counterattack. This exemplifies one of the core psychological components of Keysi.

Christian Bale had already been training in Wing Chun Kung Fu under the tutelage of Sifu Eric Oram for some time prior to making Batman Begins. I believe he began training in Wing Chun for his own personal benefit rather than for any specific film role. But since he was already training before and during the making of The Dark Knight trilogy, it inevitably influenced his fighting style on screen.

According to online sources, Christian Bale has also trained in Krav Maga, a martial art developed by the Israeli Defence Force. Examples of him using this can be seen when the Nolan Batman disarms opponents carrying guns.

His prominent use of hammerfist strikes is also typical of Krav Maga and KFM.

Bale's stunt double, world Ju-Jitsu champion Buster Reeves, confirmed that they expanded his fighting style for The Dark Knight Rises to include Silat, Jeet Kune Do and Thai boxing.

"Because Bane's his biggest adversary yet, Chris wanted Batman to evolve his fighting style. We've added a bit of Jeet Kun Do, some Silat [an Indonesian martial art], a bit of Thai boxing."

https://www.theguardian.com/film/2012/jul/14/dark-knight-rises-behind-the-scenes

Ra's describes Bruce's stance as "Tiger" when they first fight at the League of Shadows headquarters. Tiger is one of the main forms of Five Animals Shaolin Kung Fu. Later in the same fight, Bruce adopts a different stance which Ra's identifies as "Panther". This is another less common form of Animal Kung Fu. So Bruce has definitely trained in Shaolin Kung Fu, and specifically the Animal forms. He occasionally strikes with his forearm instead of his fists, which I believe is also typical of Tiger Kung Fu.

When Ra's intercepts Bruce's attack, Bruce responds by twisting his opponent's limb to try and throw him off balance. Ra's identifies this manoeuvre as "Ju-Jitsu". The Nolan Batman frequently uses similar joint locks to disarm and incapacitate his enemies throughout the trilogy. Most of his joint locks are derived from Ju-Jitsu.

The scene where Bruce is defending himself while balancing on wooden poles evokes a balance training method used in Shaolin Kung Fu.

Bale's Batman primarily uses his upper body for striking, but he does occasionally employ kicks. He generally uses simple front and push kicks, though he does execute a spinning hook kick and several side kicks when fighting the League of Shadows in Batman Begins. These are fairly basic kicks that are taught in many martial arts.

The Nolan Batman is explicitly stated to be a practitioner of Ninjutsu. We see him learning these techniques from Ra's in the first half of Batman Begins.  When training with the League of Shadows, Bruce wears a shinobi shozoku, which is the traditional attire of a ninja. He's shown to use stealth, smoke pellets, ninja bracers and throwing blades throughout his career as Batman.

On the subject of throwing blades, the Nolan Batman is clearly skilled at Shurikenjutsu.

When Bruce duels against Ra's on the ice he uses a Japanese katana and holds it with a two-handed grip. This is typical of modern day Kendo. But since they're using real blades and not bamboo swords, or shinai, then I'm going to list this as Kenjutsu.

Bruce is also clearly proficient at boxing.

So that gives us Ninjutsu, Keysi, barroom brawling, Kenjutsu, Shurikenjutsu, Wing Chun, Five Animals Kung Fu (Tiger and Panther), Ju-Jitsu, Thai boxing, Silat, Krav Maga, Jeet Kune Do and boxing. Baleman is proficient in over a dozen different styles, most of which have been confirmed by the stunt team or in the films' dialogue. That means that the Nolan Batman displays the broadest range of fighting techniques of any live action Batman to date. On paper he's the most skilled fighter among the movie Batmen. Batfleck obviously faced the strongest and most power opponents (Superman, Doomsday, Parademons, etc), but Baleman defeated the most skilled (the League of Shadows, Ra's al Ghul, Bane).

Overall, the Nolan Batman has a well-rounded strategic fighting style that encompasses strikes, throws and submission holds, as well as both armed and unarmed techniques. He makes good use of stealth, weaponry and his environment to give himself an advantage in combat, and he's shown to be capable of handling multiple opponents at the same time. There aren't any obvious weaknesses in the combination of styles he employs, though we can perhaps identify some weaknesses in the way he implements them.

One would be his overreliance on hammerfist and elbow strikes, which risks making his moveset predictable. His method of allowing himself to take hits – of compromising defence in favour of attack – is also flawed, as was demonstrated when he went up against Bane. This technique is fine when dealing with low-level goons who can be kayoed with one punch, but it's less effective against fighters who can take a hit and keep on coming.

Another weakness I've noticed is how little he uses his feet in combat. Baleman only ever performs low and mid-level kicks, never once raising his feet to connect with an upright adversary's face. I understand that the fights were choreographed this way for the sake of realism, but it doesn't change the fact that all the other cinematic Batmen were shown to be proficient at high-level kicking techniques while the Nolan Batman isn't.

I've also noticed that while Baleman does often shield his head and torso, he tends to leave his lower body unprotected. The Burton Batman was shown to use his shin guards to protect his legs against low-level attacks, but I don't remember ever seeing the Nolan Batman do this. His enemies exploited this gap in his defences on several occasions. Ra's was able to kick his legs out from under him when they fought on the train in Batman Begins...

...the Joker was able to knock him to the ground by striking his legs with a metal bar...

...and Bane was able to knock him down by punching his knee during their first fight in The Dark Knight Rises.

So I'd say Baleman's lower body is clearly his weak spot when it comes to both attack and defence. He also shares the limited agility of the Burton Batman and relies on his grapple gun and cape glider for most of his manoeuvrability.

But how would he do in combat against the villains from the other Batman movies? Is there anyone in the Burton or Schumacher films that might give him trouble? What about the Batmen themselves? Baleman might display the broadest range of martial arts techniques, but the skill gap isn't so big that the Burton, Schumacher and DCEU Batmen couldn't present a good challenge. The DCEU Batman in particular is very close in skill level, and the Burton version isn't too far off. Could Baleman's talents prevail over the metahuman strength and durability of Bat-Keaton and Batfleck, or against the gravity-defying agility of the Schumacher Batman?

Yet another Batman Returns video has appeared among my YouTube recommendations, this time from the Nostalgia Critic.

I'm not sure why so many YouTubers have been focusing on BR lately, other than it being Christmas. It's not like it's a major anniversary or anything. Perhaps the news of Keaton's return inspired some of them to revisit the movie and rethink their opinion of it. I noticed another five reviews have also been added to the BR Rotten Tomatoes page in 2020, and all of them were fresh. I suspect the improved transfer on the 4k release might have something to do with this, as it helped restore the cinematography that was diluted somewhat in the previous Blu-ray release. The decline in hype surrounding The Dark Knight Trilogy might also be a factor in helping people re-evaluate BR on its own merits, rather than judging it in terms of what Nolan was trying to do. Either way, it's nice to see the film getting some attention.

Here's another Batman Returns video that's appeared on YouTube over the past few days.

Fans on this site will already know all this stuff, but a few points are worth correcting.

15) The narrator says that the members of the Red Triangle Gang were canonically inspired by the Joker. The newspaper Bruce reads concerning earlier Red Triangle Gang activity makes reference to "an aquatic bird boy", implying that Oswald was only a youth when those crimes took place. That would suggest that the Red Triangle Gang's earliest trip to Gotham predates the Joker's reign of terror, or even Batman's debut, so I don't see how they could have been inspired by Napier.

10) The "hot time on the cold town" line is not Selina referencing the Joker. Both characters were referencing a famous 1896 ragtime song. Also, the line isn't exactly the same in both films as the narrator claims. The Joker accurately quotes the lyrics by saying "old town" while Selina changes the quote to "cold town".

6) The narrator cites the old criticism of Alfred letting Vicki into the Batcave in the 1989 movie. This never bothered me, since by that point in the story Vicki had already figured out that Bruce was Batman and went to stately Wayne Manor to confront him about it. She realises he's Batman during the scene where she and Knox are looking at the newspaper report on the Wayne murders, as Burton himself confirms in the following interview (at the 3:03 mark).

Perhaps Alfred should have called Bruce up to the manor instead of taking Vicki down to the Batcave. At any rate, it isn't the monumental betrayal of trust some critics paint it as, since Vicki already knew Bruce's secret.

2) The narrator says that Shreck's electrocution was originally conceived as a way of scarring Harvey Dent. While Burton and his writers did consider including Dent during the early stages, he was never featured in any of Daniel Waters' drafts. Waters himself debunked this particular myth during an interview with Diabolique Magazine back in August. From the 28 minute mark.

"I read some of these deep, deep articles and they make a big deal of like 'oh, we were going to have Billy Dee Williams do this and do this' and, like, I mean, I think it was like an afternoon like 'hey, should I have a scene where Billy Dee Williams gets in an accident, is scarred and flips a coin?' [...] We thought about it a couple of days and were like nah, let's not do that. So it really wasn't a big part."

https://diaboliquemagazine.com/episode-13-a-conversation-with-daniel-waters/

1) The narrator says that the $250,000 spent on the final shot was 5% of the film's budget. Batman Returns' budget was $80 million. 5% of $80 million is $4 million. $250,000 would be about 0.3%.

I dig the idea of Max's animal totem being a rat. The German actor Max Schreck modelled his body language on a rodent when he portrayed Count Orlok in Nosferatu (1922), so that was an interesting connection I'd not given much thought to before.

I also didn't know that the handwriting on Batman's note was Bob Kane's.

Inspired by the 'is Die Hard a Christmas movie' debate (it is), James Rolfe, the Angry Video Game Nerd, has made a new video about Batman Returns. I'm posting it in a separate thread from all the AVGN Batman videos because this one's about the movie itself and is unrelated to the games.

Hayden Christensen is returning as Darth Vader in the upcoming Obi-Wan series.

I'm not sure how this is going to work. Presumably he'll be playing Anakin or burnt Vader in the form of visions/flashbacks.

While I'm glad to hear Hayden's getting another shot at the role, do we really need an Obi-Wan TV series in the first place? Wasn't Obi-Wan's story already told in Episodes I-IV? Do we need to see him fighting Tusken Raiders and brooding over flashbacks to Mustafar? Do we need to see adolescent Luke throwing out fan service references to power convertors and Tosche Station as he bullseyes womp rats in his T-16?

This sounds slightly more interesting than most of the other Star Wars shows that are currently in production, but still just as superfluous.

I'll rename this thread once the film's title is announced.

There have been a lot of rumours lately that Tobey Maguire and Alfred Molina will be appearing in the third MCU Spider-Man film, and now The Hollywood Reporter has confirmed that Molina is indeed reprising his role as Doc Ock: https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/spider-man-3-alfred-molina-returning-as-doctor-octopus

It now seems very likely that Maguire will also be returning. Disney is scheduled to reveal some of its plans for upcoming Marvel and Star Wars movies on Thursday, so perhaps we'll get confirmation then.

Paul Verhoeven's Total Recall narrowly edges out Terminator 2 as my favourite Schwarzenegger film. I didn't like the movie all that much when I first saw it during my teens. Back then, I was into more grounded action movies where the heroes suffered and constantly had their backs against the wall. Movies like Die Hard, Aliens and First Blood. Of course from an adult perspective none of those films are truly realistic either, but they seemed comparatively so to my teenage self. By contrast, Total Recall was one of those one-man-army flicks where the hero breezes through every obstacle without much difficulty. It was only on repeated viewings in my twenties that I really came to appreciate and love this film. It's been described as the thinking man's action movie, and with good reason. Strip away the action packed veneer and there's a layered thought-provoking story underneath.

The film explores themes of the reality principle, solipsism, identity confusion and mnemonic influence. The main character is constantly questioning whether the events he is experiencing are real or merely the product of an artificial memory implant. He doesn't even know who he really is: Quaid or Hauser? What constitutes either of these identities? Is each of them merely the sum of their memories, or do motive and moral factors define them? Total Recall is one of those films that invites interpretation rather than dictating it. The viewer is asked to decide whether the events they're witnessing are really happening or merely a dream. Total Recall is also one of the earliest examples of the red pill symbol being used as an image of an individual's desire to awaken from a false reality.

From the New Brutalist architecture of Mexico City to the cyberpunk fusion of neon, rock and metal displayed on the Martian colony, this movie's production design contributes to the harsh and ultra-masculine atmosphere that defines its tone. It's a tone that is perfectly suited to Arnold's screen presence, and I like to think of this as Schwarzenegger's answer to space adventure franchises like Star Wars and Star Trek. It's got all the key ingredients you would want from a classic Arnold movie – r-rated violence, explosions, one-liners ("Consider that a divorce" being my favourite Arnold line ever), machismo, beautiful female co-stars and cool stunts – but it also has all the classic ingredients of a sci-fi flick: interplanetary travel, futuristic vehicles, alien mutants, hi-tech weapons and gadgets. The depiction of Mars is one of the most effectively realised alien worlds I've ever seen in a sci-fi movie. It looks incredible and is both beautiful and terrifying.

The practical special effects by ILM and Rob Bottin are mind blowing and deservedly won the Special Achievement Award at the 1991 Oscars. I've always felt that the early-to-mid nineties represented the pinnacle of special effects, before the overuse of digital animation became commonplace. Total Recall ranks alongside T2 and Jurassic Park as one of the most impressive special effects films of that era. Jerry Goldsmith's score is also good, and there's a particularly effective leitmotif he uses throughout the film to punctuate moments of uncertainty whenever Quaid is questioning the reality of what is happening. Overall, the film looks and sounds fantastic.

The casting is perhaps the most contentious aspect of the movie, while also being one of its greatest strengths. The original script presented Douglas Quaid as an unremarkable everyman, and the revelation that he is actually a superspy was meant to come as an unexpected twist. But when you've got someone like Arnold, who is clearly already a superman, you lose that everyman quality and the character arc that goes with it. The same goes for the casting of Sharon Stone as Lori, Quaid's everywoman housewife. Stone was in her prime when she shot this film, and she and Arnold look too much like a glamorous Hollywood power couple to be taken seriously as an ordinary blue-collar husband and wife. Arnold offered his own interesting response to this particular criticism, arguing that it made his character more interesting to have him be physically powerful but mentally compromised; in effect making him an unstable super weapon that's unsure of its target. Personally, I like the performances by Schwarzenegger and Stone, and the film clearly wouldn't have been the same without them. Sure, they don't look like the ordinary couple described in the original script, but what they bring to their roles in place of that – namely characters who appear almost perfect on the outside but are deeply damaged and unstable on the inside – is equally interesting in its own way.

Now let's address the film's central question: is what happens real or a dream? I read the short story on which the film is based – 'We Can Remember It for You Wholesale' by Philip K. Dick – a long time ago, but it only really resembles the first ten minutes of the movie, up to where Quaid goes to Rekall, and it doesn't offer any additional insight as to whether or not the events of the film are real. There seem to be three basic interpretations of the movie:

1) Everything that happens after Quaid goes to Rekall is a dream/fantasy resulting from the memory implant.

2) Everything that happens is real.

3) It starts off as a dream created by the implant, but then Quaid suffers a schizoid embolism and gets lobotomised.

I'll try to summarise the key points supporting each of these views. If you can think of any others, by all means share them.

Arguments to support the 'it was all a dream' interpretation:

•   Prior to the memory implant, McClane tells Quaid that the ego trip will allow him to kill the bad guys, get the girl and save the planet Mars. This is exactly what happens.

•   An image of Melina appears on the screen at Rekall when the technicians are calibrating Quaid's ideal woman. An image of the Martian reactor also appears on the screen, even though its existence is meant to be secret at that point. This occurs before Quaid receives the memory implant.

•   One of the technicians at Rekall refers to the ego trip as the 'Blue sky on Mars' programme before implanting it. Quaid's story ends with him looking up at a blue sky on Mars, suggesting that this was all part of the predetermined narrative.

•   The spy fantasy that plays out is too over the top to be real. Quaid is repeatedly shot at and beaten, and yet aside from the scar on his forearm he sustains no major injuries over the course of the film. The over-the-top gore is also evidence of it being unreal, as Quaid is able to singlehandedly massacre endless hordes of bad guys with relative ease.

Arguments to support the 'it was all real' interpretation:

•   Quaid dreams about Melina before he goes to Rekall. Her face only appears on the monitor after Quaid had been administered the anaesthetic, and could therefore be a projection of the dream state he is entering as he loses consciousness.

•   The story is not entirely told from Quaid's perspective. The viewer witnesses events that Quaid does not, such as the scene where the staff at Rekall decide to erase his memory and refund his money, or the conversations between Cohaagen and Richter. The fact Quaid himself does not witness these events, but the audience does, implies that they really happened.

•   The ego trip begins with the technicians at Rekall erasing Quaid's memory without his consent. It seems unlikely that the corporation would implicate themselves in such illegal activity if these events were a scripted component of an artificial narrative. Similarly, a scripted ego trip would be unlikely to entail Quaid murdering Harry and Lori. Once the ego trip was over, and he saw that they were still alive, he would know the memories were false. Therefore it seems likely their deaths were not part of a scripted narrative.

•   Lori and Harry both attempt to dissuade Quaid from undergoing a memory implant before he goes to Rekall. It's possible they do this simply out of concern for his health, but it's also possible they do it out of fear his memory cap will be compromised.

Arguments to support the 'Quaid gets lobotomised' interpretation:

•   This argument predicates on the 'it was all a dream' theory being true. What we're seeing can't be part of the intended ego trip, since we see Quaid slaughter his co-worker and wife. There's no way he could resume his former life after doing these things. This suggests that Quaid has indeed suffered a schizoid embolism, and that his brain is corrupting the ego trip to replace the fictitious villains with real people in his acquaintance. In effect, his subconscious is hijacking the ego trip to express its dissatisfaction with his former life.

•   If this interpretation is true, then everything Dr. Edgemar says to Quaid at the hotel on Mars is also true. The bead of sweat Quaid sees on Edgemar's face could be a projection of his subconscious desire to remain in the dream. This would mean that the Lori who appears in the hotel room is the real Lori. At least until Quaid spits out the red pill, whereupon he rejects the reality of their marriage and she is replaced by the homicidal psycho Lori from his free-form delusion. It is only then, after choosing to remain in the delusion, that he is finally able to kill the evil Lori and permanently sever himself from the reality of the life they shared. If this interpretation is true, then the real Lori and Dr. Edgemar are alive and well at Rekall.

•   Dr. Edgemar tells Quaid that if he remains in the dream "The walls of reality will come crashing down. One minute you'll be the saviour of the rebel cause, and right after that you'll be Cohaagen's bosom buddy. You'll even have fantasies about alien civilisations, as you requested. But in the end, back on Earth you'll be lobotomised." Everything Edgemar says here comes true. The wall of Quaid's hotel room comes crashing down as soon as he spits out the red pill. He then discovers that he is really Hauser, Cohaagen's best friend, before exploring the ruins of an alien civilisation. The fact Edgemar knew all of these events would transpire supports the idea that they were scripted components of the ego trip.

•   The light that appears during the final shot symbolises the end of the dream as Quaid is lobotomised.


What does everyone else think? Are there any other fans of this movie on the site? If so, do you think the story was real or merely the results of the implanted memory?

I'd never even heard of this film before today, but a YouTube recommendation has brought it to my attention. Black Angel is a short fantasy film that was commissioned by George Lucas to be shown in theatres before The Empire Strikes Back (1980). The movie was shown before TESB in many UK cinemas before disappearing and being thought lost. In late 2011 it was rediscovered, and writer/director Roger Christian has since posted it on YouTube for audiences to watch for free. He's been trying to finance a feature length remake on crowdfunding sites for the past few years.

Christian cites Russian filmmaker Andrei Tarkovsky – one of my favourite directors – as an influence on the movie, and I can certainly see shades of Andrei Rublev (1966) and Stalker (1979). Equally noteworthy is the influence Black Angel had on other filmmakers. Apparently the use of step printing during the fight scene inspired Lucas to adopt the same technique during the phantom Vader scene on Dagobah in TESB, and John Boorman had the film specially screened for the cast and crew of Excalibur (1981) before they began shooting their own movie. I suspect the location photography, and in particular the shots of Eilean Donan, might also have influenced Russell Mulcahy when he made the first Highlander (1986) movie. Black Angel was the first film of cinematographer Roger Pratt, who went on to serve as director of photography on movies such as Brazil (1985), Batman (1989), Shadowlands (1993), 12 Monkeys (1995) and two of the Harry Potter films.

This is a fascinating piece of overlooked cinema history and I'm amazed that I hadn't heard of it until now. Here's the entire film for anyone who's interested.

The final twist has obvious similarities with Ambrose Bierce's short story 'An Occurrence at Owl Creek Bridge' (1890), but it's executed well. I'd love to see an accurate adaptation of the Pearl Poet's Sir Gawain and the Green Knight made in this same style.

[Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan]

I thought it was about time we had a thread for all things Star Trek. Classic Doctor Who and Star Wars were my favourite franchises growing up, but the older I get the more I gravitate towards Shatner-era Star Trek for my science fiction fix. I know most fans regard The Next Generation as the best of the Star Trek TV shows, but my preference has always been for the Original Series.

I was introduced to Star Trek at a very young age, back in the late eighties, through seeing the movies, The Next Generation and reruns of the Original Series on television. Like the Indiana Jones and James Bond films, the Star Trek movies and TV shows always seemed to be on in our house. When I was six my mum took my brother and I to see Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country (1991) at our local cinema, and I vividly remember watching the first episode of Deep Space Nine when it premiered in the UK. I was less of a fan of Voyager, though I still watched it on a semi-regular basis. The first Star Trek show I didn't bother with was Enterprise, and I've hated pretty much everything else Star Trek related since then.

Rather than explain why modern Trek is so awful, I'd prefer to highlight my favourite corner of the entire Star Trek franchise, and that's the 'Genesis Trilogy' of movies from the eighties. For those who aren't familiar with classic Trek, this is a great place to start. The trilogy consists of Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan (1982), Star Trek III: The Search for Spock (1984) and Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home (1986). Most Star Trek films are standalone adventures, but these three flow into one another to form a narrative trilogy.

These three films encapsulate Star Trek at its finest – dramatically compelling space adventure constructed around well-written plots interwoven with thought-provoking themes, memorable characters and imaginative visuals. The story told across this trilogy takes the viewer on an epic interplanetary journey from 23rd century Earth to Ceti Alpha V...

...to Regula I...

...to the Genesis cave...

...to the Mutara Nebula...

...to Earth Spacedock...

...to the Genesis planet...

...to Vulcan...

...to 20th century Earth...

...and finally back to 23rd century Earth.

This is the sort of good quality science fiction adventure we seldom see in modern cinema. Here are my thoughts on each film.

Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan

Simply put, this is one of the greatest science fiction films ever made. It came out the same year as Blade Runner and The Thing and is easily worthy of standing alongside those classics.

Nicholas Meyer, author of The Seven-Per-Cent Solution (1974), brings a literary sensibility to the narrative that ensures the protagonists and central themes are never eclipsed by the special effects the way they arguably were in Star Trek: The Motion Picture (1979). His direction is confident and the script full of quotable lines and poignant moments that highlight the characters' relatable humanity amid the alienness of their surroundings. The central themes are death and creation, as well as the cyclical relation between the two. We get to see Kirk experience a midlife crisis as he struggles to come to terms with growing older and being an absent father, and we see him confront the inevitability of death in a way he's never before experienced. The film begins with the false death of Spock during the Kobayashi Maru test and concludes with his real death when he saves the Enterprise from the Genesis Device. The themes work in perfect harmony with the human drama element to weave a story that is both intelligent and emotional.

While The Motion Picture was clearly influenced by 2001: A Space Odyssey (1968), I suspect The Wrath of Khan was influenced more by Alien (1979). Ceti Alpha V looks a bit like LV-426, and the parasitic Ceti eels evoke the invasive body horror of the facehuggers in Scott's film. The script is full of literary allusions to works ranging from Herman Melville's Moby Dick to Charles Dickens' A Tale of Two Cities, and none of these references feel forced or out of place. The cinematography favours murky oranges and reds – the colours of sand and dried blood – which contributes to the film's dark ambience. This is the most explicitly violent Star Trek movie, though I'd argue the gore is justified by the intensity of the subject matter and never feels excessive.

As well as bringing back the familiar heroes, The Wrath of Khan also does a good job of introducing some younger characters who go on to feature prominently in the trilogy: namely Dr. David Marcus and Lieutenant Saavik. The acting is excellent across the board, and special mention has to be given to Ricardo Montalban as the eponymous villain (I'll come back to him later in this post). Shatner delivers an uncharacteristically subdued performance that is well suited to his character's midlife ennui. I think this is his best acting as Kirk, and the script gives him a lot more dramatic meat to sink his teeth into than the previous film did. The special effects by ILM are great and James Horner's score is magnificent. I'm fairly certain he recycled some of it for James Cameron's Aliens (1986).

As I say, one of the greatest science fiction films ever.

Star Trek III: The Search for Spock

This film continues the theme of Saṃsāra – the cyclical nature of life – by presenting the viewer with another major death (David) as well as a major rebirth (Spock). A lot of people seem to struggle with the Vulcan mysticism in the film and find the plot difficult to understand, but I never had a problem with it. Kirk has to reunite Spock's regenerated body with his incorporeal soul to fully resurrect him. It's a fairly straightforward quest narrative motivated by the hero's desire to help his two best friends. It works for me.

Another prominent theme in The Search for Spock can be found in its allegorical parallels with the Soviet-American arms race that was topical at the time. The Federation and the Klingon Empire are fighting a cold war, and their struggle to gain control of the Genesis Device presents an interesting metaphor for the race for nuclear supremacy. A major player throughout this battle is the Klingon Bird-of-Prey, which makes its screen debut in this movie. In the Original Series cloaking devices were synonymous with the Romulans, and I believe the back story behind the Klingon Bird-of-Prey is that it was designed using technology stolen from the Romulans. This explains why it features the Romulan Bird-of-Prey feather design on its exterior while retaining the overall shape of the earlier Klingon D7-class battle cruiser.

The end result is a superior hybrid of the two designs.

Robin Curtis takes over from Kirstie Alley as Saavik, and when comparing their performances I have to say I do prefer Alley's interpretation. Alley played Saavik with a hint of sass that reflected the Romulan side of the character's mixed heritage, while Curtis plays her more robotically as though she were wholly Vulcan. Curtis isn't bad in the role, but I liked Alley's original take on Saavik better. The scenes of her and David exploring the Genesis planet are among my favourite in the film, as they evoke the 'strange new worlds' aspect of the TV show's premise. On the trivia side, Dean Cain's mother Sharon Thomas also appears in a small role as the waitress who flirts with Bones during the bar scene.

Overall The Search for Spock is not as good as The Wrath of Khan, but I still like it a lot. The plot does delve into mysticism, which might be off-putting for some sci-fi fans, and the recasting of Saavik is a little jarring. But overall, I think it holds up very well. For years there a commonly held attitude that every odd numbered Star Trek film was bad, but as far as I'm concerned Star Trek III disproves that theory (as does The Motion Picture). Its main disadvantage lies in being sandwiched between two superior films. Which brings me to...

Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home

Leonard Nimoy helmed both The Search for Spock and The Voyage Home, and I consider the second of these to be his best work as a director. On paper, it sounds terrible – a comedy in which the crew of the Enterprise travel back in time to save the whales. And yet somehow it works. I think the key is that it doesn't come off as too preachy and that the fish-out-of-water humour succeeds at being funny. Often the final entries in trilogies simply retread material from the previous two films but on a bigger scale. This can result in underwhelming conclusions that feel repetitive and overblown. But with Star Trek IV, the filmmakers took an entirely different approach to the earlier films and ended the trilogy on a satisfyingly inventive and upbeat note.

I've always loved science fiction with an oceanic feel. My favourite Doctor Who story is The Sea Devils, and I enjoy aquatic sci-fi films like Solaris (1972) and The Abyss (1989) and novels like Jules Verne's Twenty Thousand Leagues Under the Sea (1869). I always wanted a Star Wars movie that was set primarily on an ocean planet and which would explore the practicalities of naval warfare in that universe, but sadly we never got to see that. But with The Voyage Home we get an oceanic Star Trek movie full of cetacean imagery and an appropriately maritime atmosphere. The cinematography reflects the oceanic theme and lighter tone, employing a colour palette than emphasises fresh greens, blues and whites over the murkier hues of the previous two films. There's also some great lighting and use of haze during the night scenes and the sequences on board the Bounty. I love how this film looks.

In addition to the obvious ecological themes, The Voyage Home also explores the idea of miscommunication in various forms. The space probe struggles to communicate with an extinct species of whale, the crew of the Enterprise struggle to communicate with the people of the 20th century, Spock struggles to communicate with the human side of his personality, and so forth. Although this is the most nonviolent Star Trek movie to date, it still contains some exciting set pieces, such as the time warp sequence and the final splashdown of the Bounty where Kirk has to swim through the flooded cargo deck to release George and Gracie into the sea. There's plenty of excitement and spectacle sprinkled in among the laughs.

I think the change in tone from the previous two films was a smart move. After all the pain Kirk suffered through in Star Treks II and III, it's nice to see him enjoy a relaxing meal with an attractive woman. Catherine Hicks as Dr. Gillian Taylor makes a likeable foil for Shatner, and the dialogue between them and Nimoy is some of the best in the trilogy. I'd be remiss for not also mentioning the scene with the punk on the bus, which is one of the greatest moments in Star Trek history.

The Voyage Home is an uplifting time travel adventure that provides a perfect ending to the trilogy while offering proof that you don't need violence to make a great sci-fi film. The plot is well paced and makes good use of all the main cast members by giving them each their own little missions to accomplish. I rank this as the second best Star Trek movie after The Wrath of Khan.

Now on to the subject of the trilogy's main villains.

The mysterious space probe in The Voyage Home is less of a true villain than a plot catalyst, but it exudes a sinister aura and is sufficiently different from the threats posed in the other Star Trek films to make an impression. If nothing else, it looks and sounds very creepy.

Commander Kruge is my favourite evil Klingon. It's funny to think that just one year later Christopher Lloyd would play the loveable Doc Brown in Back to the Future, because here he's downright horrible. The final fight between him and Kirk is what my childhood self envisaged Obi-Wan and Vader's fateful duel to have been like before the Prequel Trilogy came out.

And then there's Khan Noonien Singh, my favourite character in the entire Star Trek mythos. I rank him up there with Darth Vader and Sauron as one of the all-time greatest villains in genre fiction.

Many people say that Ricardo Montalban should have received an Academy Award nomination for his work on The Wrath of Khan, and I wholeheartedly agree. It's a magnificent performance that imbues the character with an inhuman savagery offset by all-too human emotional weaknesses. He's a Nietzschean archetype whose intellectual superiority is compromised by hubris and passion. He manages to be extremely intimidating while still being somewhat sympathetic and relatable, which I think is the mark of a great bad guy. Khan only made two screen appearances, and yet between them he undergoes an interesting character arc. In 'Space Seed' he's a princely and arrogant tyrant, but is also charming and has a sense of honour and fair play.

In The Wrath of Khan he's matured into a grizzled throat-slashing renegade hell-bent on revenge above all other considerations. The older Khan is just as strong and intelligent as he was in 'Space Seed' and ten times more brutal, but prone to irrational judgements his younger self might have risen above. On a purely visual level, Khan's appearance in Star Trek II is his most iconic look. And yes, those were his real muscles. Montalban was in his early sixties when he shot the film, but he was still in amazing physical shape.

Also worth checking out is Khan: Ruling in Hell, a comic book miniseries that explores the fifteen year period between 'Space Seed' and The Wrath of Kahn. It depicts Khan's attempts to tame Ceti Alpha V and build a new civilisation, his struggle to deal with the catastrophe caused by the destruction of Ceti Alpha VI, the emergence of the Ceti eels and a rebellion led by one of his former followers, and his gradual disillusionment with the belief that Captain Kirk will one day come back and help his people. If you didn't already feel some measure of sympathy for Khan, then this comic will instil it in you.

But why is Khan so cool to begin with? For one thing, he's a genetically-engineered superman. He has five times the strength of an ordinary human and is capable of crushing phasers with his bare hands. My one major criticism of 'Space Seed' is the way Kirk beat him during their final fight. There's no way that flimsy plastic pipe should have overpowered a man strong enough to turn Shatner into a bowling ball.

In addition to his physical prowess, he also possesses superhuman intellect. Khan hails from the 20th century, and yet he's able to immediately familiarise himself with 23rd century science and technology. He spends a few minutes examining the Enterprise plans in 'Space Seed', and based on that perusal he was able to figure out how to override its security and anti-intruder devices to take control of it. He later used his knowledge of the Enterprise to devastate the original 1701 model during the Battle of the Mutara Nebula. Granted, it was Commander Kruge who delivered the crippling blow in Star Trek III, and Kirk himself who actually destroyed it, but it was the damage inflicted by Khan in Star Trek II that set the Enterprise on the path to the scrap heap.

Khan is also a well-read man of culture. He knows his Milton from his Melville and his preferred reading materials – Paradise Lost, King Lear, Moby Dick, etc – tend to be works that explore themes of exile and revenge. He also has an incredibly magnetic personality and even Kirk, McCoy and Scotty had to admit that they admired him, despite the fact he was a tyrant who conquered one quarter of the Earth's surface. The gorgeous Lieutenant McGivers, disillusioned with the males of the 23rd century, fell almost instantly in love with him. Khan was one of the few men to out-alpha Kirk, and the way he seduced and manipulated McGivers was at once despicable and awe-inspiring.

Truly one of the greatest villains ever.

Anyway, I just wanted to kick things off by expressing my appreciation for Khan and the Genesis Trilogy as a whole, but feel free to use this thread to talk about anything Star Trek related. Who is your favourite captain? Which is your favourite TV series or film? Are there any specific episodes, characters, storylines, books, novels or games that you particularly like? I'll come back and highlight some of my favourite episodes at a later time, but for now I'll end this ridiculously long post here.

;

The Wrap has posted some extra details about Affleck's involvement in The Flash courtesy of an insider source: https://www.thewrap.com/ben-affleck-to-return-as-bruce-wayne-in-ezra-millers-the-flash-movie/

They're saying that Ben was approached about the project a few months ago, but only signed on last week after receiving a new draft of the script that implemented some suggestions he'd made. The Wrap is also stating that Affleck will suit up and that this will be his final appearance as Batman and won't lead to a movie or miniseries on HBO Max. I think most fans already assumed the HBO Max rumours were unlikely to be true, so there's nothing terribly surprising here.

The Dark Knight is headed to the 1970s for his latest animated adventure, the upcoming Batman: Soul of the Dragon.

The film is an original tale, rather than based on a specific comic book storyline. It sees Bruce Wayne face a deadly menace from his past, with the help of three former classmates: world-renowned martial artists Richard Dragon, Ben Turner and Lady Shiva.

Soul of the Dragon stars David Giuntoli as Bruce Wayne/Batman, Mark Dacascos as Richard Dragon, Kelly Hu as Lady Shiva, Michael Jai White as Ben Turner/Bronze Tiger, James Hong as O-Sensei and Josh Keaton as Jeffrey Burr. Batman: The Animated Series' Bruce Timm is executive producing, with Sam Liu, known for Reign of the Supermen and Batman: The Killing Joke, directing and producing. Mortal Kombat Legends: Scorpion's Revenge writer Jeremy Adams penned the script.

The film will be produced by Warner Bros. Animation, DC and Warner Bros. Home Entertainment — and is the 42nd project in the ongoing DC Universe Movies series.

Batman: Soul of the Dragon is due out in early 2021.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/batman-soul-dragon-sets-voice-cast-1306722

I remember years ago seeing a thread on the IMDb where someone asked who was a better director: Richard Donner or Sidney J. Furie? The immediate responses were ones of outrage that anyone would have the audacity to compare a genius like Donner to a hack like Furie. The OP then answered these attacks by challenging the other people in the thread to look beyond their Superman films and compare their other work. Yes, we all know Superman: The Movie is a better film than Superman IV. I can't imagine anyone would disagree with that. But the OP in that IMDb thread was asking a different question: Superman movies aside, who was the better filmmaker out of Donner and Furie? Personally, I consider them to be roughly on the same level. I wouldn't call either of them an auteur, but they're both talented yet inconsistent directors whose bodies of work comprise a mixture of good and bad films, and whose best efforts have stood the test of time to become classics.

Back when he made Superman, Donner had an impressive list of TV credits directing episodes of Wanted: Dead or Alive, Route 66, Wagon Train, The Twilight Zone, The Man from U.N.C.L.E., The Fugitive, The Wild Wild West, Kojak and many more. But his only really notable theatrical credit at that point was The Omen (1976). By contrast, Furie already had an extensive and diverse cinematic filmography when he made Superman IV. Sadly The Quest for Peace marked the beginning of a decline in his career, and pretty much everything he's done since has been poor, while Superman: The Movie marked an upward turn in Donner's career that led to pictures like The Goonies (1985) and Lethal Weapon (1987). Nowadays most people don't look beyond Superman IV to see the rest of Furie's work, similar to how they ignore Joel Schumacher's accomplishments because of Batman & Robin. But in his prime, Furie was a good director.

The Ipcress File (1965) is one of the greatest spy thrillers ever made. It launched Michael Cain's Harry Palmer film series and deservedly holds a 100% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. It's a classic.

Lady Sings the Blues (1972) is a musical biopic of singer Billie Holiday which earned nominations for 5 Academy Awards, 3 Golden Globes and a BAFTA. The excellent performances from Diana Ross, Billy Dee Williams and Richard Pryor make it a drama worth watching, even if you're not particularly interested in the subject matter.

The Boys in Company C (1978) introduced audiences to the incomparable R. Lee Ermey and is thought to have been an influence on Stanley Kubrick when he directed Full Metal Jacket (1987). I don't know why it's so forgotten these days.

The Entity (1982) is often overshadowed by The Shining (1980) and Poltergeist (1982) when discussions of early eighties ghost movies arise, but it's still one of the best horror films of that era. Martin Scorsese ranked it among the 11 scariest films he'd ever seen, and I think it still packs a punch today.

I don't particularly want to turn this into a Donner vs. Furie thread (though feel free to comment on that if you like). I just wanted to say a word in Furie's defence. He was a talented director who made some very good films, and Superman IV is not representative of his best work. With that in mind, and considering Furie himself has expressed frustration with the theatrical cut of The Quest for Peace, would it be worth revisiting Superman IV and trying to fix what went wrong in 1987? Could the film be improved, and if so would it be worth the effort to do so? Here's a fan trailer that shows a different perspective on the movie.

Perhaps the film itself could be re-cut to match this tone. I don't think Superman IV could ever be a really good film, no matter how much tinkering you did. But maybe it could be improved slightly. How? Well here are a few ideas.

It's no secret that the budget ran out midway through production, and this is reflected in the inconsistent quality of the 'finished' special effects work. Some of the model shots are just as good as those of any big budget movie from that era, but most of the chromo key work is dire. The backgrounds during the aerial scenes are precisely the kind of thing that could be fixed using modern digital effects. For example, the scene where Lacy is dangling over the Earth as Nuclear Man carries her through space. Those changes alone would make a big difference.

I like how they colour corrected Superman's suit and digitally removed some of the visible wires for the Blu-ray release, but there's a lot more that could be done. For one thing, they could fix Superman's cape so that it doesn't flutter when he's in the vacuum of space. They should also replace that one shot of Superman flying towards the camera that's reused throughout the movie. For the Great Wall of China scene...

...you could keep the footage of the wall being rebuilt but add a digital blur to represent Superman moving at super speed as he's reconstructing it (which was the original plan before the budget ran out). Obviously you'd also have to remove the shots of him using his telekinetic vision (which were clumsily mirror flipped anyway - note how his spit curl moves from one side of his brow to the other). But this could quite easily be fixed.

The Fortress of Solitude set in Superman IV was tiny compared to the earlier films.

This is another thing that could probably be fixed with some basic digital tinkering. Even if the effects were only Smallville quality, that would still be a massive improvement.

Nuclear Man himself could also be enhanced with digital effects. The filmmakers originally intended for him to be a darker, scarier character than what we got in the finished film. I've always thought he looked quite menacing when he first emerges from the sun. He's glowing gold in that scene, his eyes are red and he's covered in crackling flames and electricity. You could make it so that he looks like this throughout the entire film, thereby concealing the awkwardness of his costume while still capitalising on Mark Pillow's imposing height and physique. This would almost certainly make him appear more intimidating.

I also wouldn't mind seeing some digital alterations to improve the cinematography.

In terms of deleted scenes, most of them weren't very good to begin with and are better off being left on the cutting room floor. There are exceptions though, and it might be worth restoring some of the material that was featured in the original 134 minute version. My old VHS copy includes the Kansas tornado sequence, complete with finished special effects. It wasn't until I saw the DVD that I realised this scene wasn't in every version of the film. If they could digitally smooth out some of the rougher effects, then they may as well restore this sequence.

The scene of Superman saving the Russian generals from the missile was also in my VHS copy, but not in the DVD version. It's not a bad scene, so I'd restore that one too.

The scene of Clark visiting his parents' graves wouldn't go amiss. It was included in the comic book adaptation, so why not in the film?

I'd also restore the 'Red Alert' scene from the end of the movie, where Nuclear Man almost triggers a war between the US and USSR. That scene gets to the heart of the Cold War anxiety that fuelled the film's central premise, and its restoration would help up the stakes during the final act.

Needless to say the opening title sequence should also be redone in the style of the first movie. Something like this:

So what does everyone think? It's no secret that Hollywood studios are currently looking for old movies to re-cut in the absence of the new projects they've been unable to film in 2020. Would it be worth revisiting Superman IV in this way? Does Sidney J. Furie deserve the chance to go back and finish his film properly, without the crippling budget restraints he had to work with in 1987? Would you buy the 'Furie Cut' if it was released on Blu-ray, and what changes would you like to see made to the theatrical version?

Returning to the Donner vs. Furie issue I began this post with – for me, Donner wins. That's mainly due to his Superman and Lethal Weapon movies, as well as the fact he produced The Lost Boys and has a better overall batting average. Furie has directed almost twice as many feature films as Donner, and consequently he's had far more failures. But comparing their best directorial work objectively, I think they're pretty even.

DC Showcase - Batman: Death in the Family will debut on Blu-ray and Digital HD in Fall 2020.

An adaptation of the 1988 comic book storyline of the same name, Death in the Family chronicles the tragic death of second Robin Jason Todd at the hand of the Joker. The film is essentially a prequel to 2010's Batman: Under the Red Hood and will feature several returning voice actors, including Bruce Greenwood as Batman, Vincent Martella as Jason Todd, and John DiMaggio as Joker. The cast also includes Zehra Fazal (Young Justice) as Talia al Ghul and Gary Cole (Veep) as both Two-Face and Commissioner Gordon.

However, Death in the Family isn't a straightforward prequel, but rather an interactive short film with multiple branching story paths (a la Netflix's Black Mirror: Bandersnatch). Viewers will be presented with choices at pivotal moments in the story, allowing them to decide whether Jason lives or dies and determining the course of Jason's life. The trailer hints at some major deviations from established continuity, with Jason returning to Gotham as a bandaged assassin and taking up the mantle of Red Robin.

This interactive element is likely a callback to the original comic's infamous fan-voting campaign. DC established a 1-900 number, allowing fans to call and vote on whether they wanted Jason to live or die. The "die" vote narrowly won out, though DC did eventually resurrect the character in 2005's Batman: Under the Hood (the inspiration for the Under the Red Hood movie). DC also called back to that poll following an episode of Titans: Season 2 last year.

Similar to 2010's Superman/Shazam!: The Return of Black Adam, Batman: Death in the Family will include several other DC animated shorts to make up for its shorter runtime. Also included in this set are the previously released Sgt. Rock, Death, Adam Strange, and The Phantom Stranger short films.

https://www.ign.com/articles/batman-death-in-the-family-trailer

;

Apparently Michael Keaton is in early talks to reprise his role as Batman in The Flash movie and several other upcoming DC films. Several sources are backing this up, including The Hollywood Reporter:

Micheal Keaton in Talks to Return as Batman for 'Flash' Movie

Keaton last played the character in 1992's "Batman Returns" and skewered the idea of a faded superhero actor in 2014's Oscar-winning "Birdman."

There may be new Batman in town. And he's the same as the old Batman.

Michael Keaton, who famously starred as the Caped Crusader in the Tim Burton-directed early 1990s Batman movies, is in talks to reprise the character for Warner Bros.'s DC movie, The Flash.

Ezra Miller is on board to star as Barry Allen, AKA, the Flash, in the feature that will be directed by It filmmaker Andy Muschietti.

But wait, there's more. If a deal makes, Keaton wouldn't just return for Flash but possibly for several other DC-oriented film projects. Sources tell THR that the role being envisioned for the veteran actor is akin to the role played by Samuel Jackson as Nick Fury in the Marvel Cinematic Universe, something of a mentor or guide or even string puller. Batgirl is one the projects in development that could fall under that win.

Warners had no comment.

Keaton was a comedic actor who was nabbed the plum role of Batman for 1989's Batman, something on which he initially took heat from fans who didn't see him as imposing or chiseled. But the movie became a sensation and the actor reprised the character for the 1992 sequel, Batman Returns. For the longest time, Keaton tried to distance himself from the part and even skewered it in 2014's Birdman, where played a faded actor who once starred in superhero movies. The part earned him an Oscar nomination for best actor.

Pattinson's The Batman is currently being looked as separate from Flash or other DC movies but the Flash feature project is offering an intriguing escape hatch to such ideas: the story is said to involve not just time travel but inter-dimensional travel. This posits the idea that those movies existed in their own timeline and, more tantalizing with the Keaton development, the idea that you can cross over from one "movie universe" to another.

https://www.hollywoodreporter.com/heat-vision/micheal-keaton-talks-return-as-batman-flash-movie-1299668

Several other sites, as well as some entertainment journalists on Twitter, are reporting the same thing. I've generally been opposed to the idea of the Flash's first solo film being a Flashpoint adaptation. But if this pans out, and we get Keaton back in the cowl, then count me in.

Are there any other fans of this game on the site? I recently dusted off my old GameCube copy and have begun playing through the story mode again. Back when it first came out in 2005 it was hailed by some critics as the greatest superhero game ever. I personally wouldn't rank it quite as high as the best Spider-Man or Batman games, but it's not far off and is worth getting if you can find a copy.

Ultimate Destruction uses a free-roaming sandbox setting similar to the Spider-Man 2 game, only here it's divided into several large areas rather than just one massive city. And unlike the Spider-Man games, you can destroy vehicles and buildings with reckless abandon. There's a main story mode written by Paul Jenkins, plus countless mini games and side missions similar to those you'd find in a Spider-Man game. There are also lots of unlockable combat moves you can purchase, as well as comic book covers hidden throughout the world.

The game boasts some impressive cut scenes and a voice cast that includes Neal McDonough, reprising his role as Banner from the nineties Hulk cartoon show, along with Ron Perlman and Richard Moll.

I remember enjoying this game a lot when it first came out, and it still holds up nicely in 2020. It should have been the beginning of a Hulk gaming franchise, similar to the Arkham series, but instead the developer ended up reusing many of the gameplay elements as the basis for the Prototype series. As it stands, it's the best Hulk game to date. Does anyone else remember it?

I've been meaning to write a comic-to-screen analysis of this film for years, so here it is at last. I'm going to cover both the theatrical cut and the Director's Cut simultaneously.

Director Mark Steven Johnson is a comic enthusiast and a long-time reader of Daredevil. Commenting on his familiarity with the source material during a 2002 interview, he said:

"I started with Stan Lee, of course, then got hooked on Frank Miller in High School. I was a rabid fan and collector but, like many others, fell out of Daredevil in the 90's. Kevin Smith brought DD back in a huge way and is single-handedly responsible for my passion of comics returning. I've grown to really love both Bendis and Mack's storylines. I thought Mack's "Parts of a Hole" was just terrific."

http://www.manwithoutfear.com/daredevil-interviews/Johnson

It's fitting that he singles out David Mack's Daredevil: Parts of a Hole (Daredevil Vol 2 #9-15, December 1999-April 2001), as this appears to have been a major influence on the movie's Elektra storyline. The influence of the other early Marvel Knights comics, as well as Frank Miler's classic run, are also clearly evident in the finished film.

The opening shot of the movie is a direct recreation of Joe Quesada's cover art for Daredevil Vol 2 #3 (January 1999), depicting Daredevil clinging to a cross atop a church roof.

Many character names in the movie are taken from writers and artists who worked on the Daredevil comics over the years. The first example of this is the priest named Father Everett. This is a reference to Daredevil's co-creator Bill Everett.

Matt Murdock's origin story is largely faithful to the comics, and specifically to Frank Miller and John Romita Jr's Daredevil: The Man Without Fear (1993-1994) miniseries. As in the comics, Matt is raised by his father in the Hell's Kitchen area of New York City. Matt's dad is a boxer named Jack Murdock. In the comics Jack goes by the ring name 'Battlin' Jack', while in the film he's known as Jack 'The Devil' Murdock. In both the comics and the movie, he works on the side – albeit reluctantly – as an enforcer for a local crime boss.

In the movie Jack's robe has devil horns on the hood, suggesting that this is where Matt gets the idea for his cowl. This harkens back to Jeph Loeb and Tim Sale's Daredevil: Yellow (2002), in which Matt was shown creating his original Daredevil costume out of his dad's old robe and boxing gear.

As in the comics, Matt himself is a redheaded Irish Catholic kid who flees from fights at the behest of his father, who encourages him to study and use his brains instead of his fists. In the comics this results in the other local kids dubbing him 'Daredevil'. The following panels are from The Man Without Fear.

The scene where Matt helps his dad to bed after the latter has been drinking was probably inspired by a similar scene in The Man Without Fear.

At one point Jack mentions fighting a boxer named Colan. This is a reference to artist Gene Colan.

The sequence in the movie where Matt loses his sight differs somewhat from the comics. In the comics, Matt pushed a blind man out of the way of an oncoming vehicle. A radioactive substance fell from the back of this vehicle and struck him in the face. In the movie Matt is upset after seeing his father roughing someone up for money, and in his distress he runs in the way of a forklift, which swerves and ruptures a nearby canister of toxic waste. The chemicals hit him in the face and blind him.

The depiction of Matt's accident in the movie reflects the version presented in the Spider-Man: The Animated Series episode 'Framed' (season 3 episode 6, September 1996). In the TV episode the young Matt, upset at seeing his father rough up a store owner for cash, runs in front of a truck which then swerves and spills radioactive chemicals in his eyes.

The depiction of this scene in the animated series includes first person narration from the adult Matt, similar to the narration in the movie. In both stories Matt says, "It was the last thing I ever saw" as he describes the moment where he is blinded. This line originated in Frank Miller's 'Exposé' (Daredevil Vol 1 #164, May 1980). The film adapts several lines of dialogue and plot points from this issue.

The next thing Matt knows, he awakens in hospital with bandages over his eyes. He soon realises his other senses have been heightened to a superhuman level. His father visits him in the hospital and they try to comfort one another.

There is a scene in the film where Matt is shown stopping an old man from stepping in front of a vehicle, perhaps as a reference to the blind man he saved in the comics. The old man in this scene is played by Daredevil co-creator and Marvel legend Stan Lee. Later in the movie, Matt and Foggy discuss a client of theirs named Lee.

Matt quickly adjusts to his new abilities and hones his skills using his father's boxing equipment.

The scenes of the young Matt exploring his sensory powers as he leaps across the rooftops of New York recall the Spider-Man: The Animated Series episode 'Framed'.

In the comics Matt was trained by a blind mentor known as Stick, who was subsequently revealed to be a master of a mysterious ninja clan known as the Chaste. Stick is not referenced in this film, although he does appear in the spinoff movie Elektra (2005) where he is played by Terence Stamp. The scenes in the movie where the young Matt is leaping across the rooftops nevertheless evoke the scenes of him training with Stick in The Man Without Fear.

Jack Murdock's death in the film follows the version depicted in The Man Without Fear miniseries. In the mainstream canon, Jack was killed when Matt was an adult at college. But in The Man Without Fear miniseries, Miller rewrote the story so Jack was killed when Matt was still a boy. In both the film and the comics, Jack is told to throw his latest fight by a corrupt promoter he had signed with. In the comics this promoter was named Roscoe Sweeney (aka, The Fixer) and was the first criminal Daredevil ever fought. In the film Sweeney is replaced by a mobster named Fallon.

In the movie Fallon lists some of the fighters Jack has defeated in rigged bouts: Miller, Mack and Bendis. These are all named after Daredevil comic writers: Frank Miller, David Mack and Brian Michael Bendis. The boxer Jack fights during his fateful bout is named Romita; a reference to John Romita and his son, John Romita Jr., both of whom worked on the Daredevil comics.

Conscious that his son is watching, Jack defies Sweeney/Fallon and wins the fight anyway. He then says, "This one was for you, Matty" which is a line taken from the aforementioned 'Exposé' story by Frank Miller.

Jack is then murdered in an alleyway outside the stadium. In the original story, Jack was simply shot to death. But in The Man Without Fear, the Fixer had him brutally beaten and then shot. In the movie Fallon has him beaten to death.

Unlike the comics, the movie presents Wilson Fisk as the one who actually kills Jack. This is yet another detail taken from the Spider-Man: The Animated Series episode 'Framed', in which Fisk was also portrayed as being responsible for Jack's death.

The notion of Fisk being involved in Jack's death was also explored in a 1997 Daredevil film treatment by J. M. DeMatteis. Several other things from this treatment appear to have influenced Mark Steven Johnson's movie. You can read more about it here on DeMatteis' web site: http://www.jmdematteis.com/2012/04/man-without-fear.html

The image of the young Matt kneeling beside his father's bloodied corpse – consciously evoking the pietà – is taken from the cover of The Man Without Fear Vol 1 #1.

The film then transitions to the present where we see an adult Matt Murdock awakening in a sensory deprivation tank. Matt doesn't generally sleep in one of these in the comics, though he did use one in the Frank Miller story 'The Widow's Bite' (Daredevil Vol 1 #188, November 1982). Miller and Mike W. Barr also showed Matt sleeping in a sensory deprivation tank in 'Matt Murdock, Agent of... S.H.I.E.L.D.' (What If? Vol 1 #28, August 1981).

Matt's home is decorated with works of art and has a secret rooftop entrance, just like his brownstone residence in the comics.

In the movie he is shown organising his money by folding the notes according to their value. Matt was later shown doing this in the comics in Daredevil Vol 3 #22 (January 2013).

Daredevil used to be listed as 6'0, though the most recent editions of The Marvel Encyclopaedia list his height as 5'11. Either way, Ben Affleck is slightly taller than the comic book Matt, standing as he does at around 6'3. The main problem with the height disparity is that it undermines the David and Goliath dynamic between Daredevil and Kingpin. Despite this, Affleck does bear a resemblance to Alex Ross' depictions of the character.

His Daredevil costume is mostly faithful to the source material, except that it's made from leather and he wears his billy club holster on his right leg instead of his left.

The first courtroom scene in the movie sees Matt representing a woman who has been assaulted by a criminal called Jose Quesada. This character is named after comic artist and editor Joe Quesada.

Matt's best friend and law partner is Foggy Nelson, played here by John Favreau. Favreau would later go on to help create the Marvel Cinematic Universe, directing two of the six Phase One movies and paving the way for the 2015-2018 Daredevil Netflix show.

As in the comics, Matt and Foggy's secretary is Karen Page. Karen's role was all but deleted from the theatrical version of the film, but she features more prominently in the Director's Cut.

The first time we see the costumed Daredevil in action (aside from the prologue in the church) is when he tracks Quesada to a bar and attacks him and his allies. The image of Daredevil leaping off the top of the skyscraper reflects the cover of 'Fall From Grace – Prologue: Temptation' (Daredevil Vol 1 #319, August 1993).

The bar Quesada goes to is identified as Josie's Bar, which is the same dive frequented by many of Hell's Kitchen's criminals in the comics. Josie herself makes a brief appearance in the film. She and her establishment debuted in 'In the Hands of Bullseye' (Daredevil Vol 1 #160, September 1979).

Incidentally, it's unclear whether the Josie in the Daredevil comics is intended to be the same Josie who tends bar at Kadie's in Frank Miller's Sin City books. They look practically identical and were both created by Miller, who sprinkled several Daredevil and Elektra references throughout the Sin City books. So it's possible they are meant to be the same character.

The fight in the bar is analogous to Daredevil's very first costumed appearance in the comics, way back in Daredevil Vol 1 #1, where he launched a similar attack on the Fixer and his men. This scene was later retold in Daredevil: Yellow. As in the original comic, the Affleck Daredevil surprises his prey and engages multiple opponents in combat as he pursues one specific target: Fixer/Quesada. The panel below is from Daredevil: Yellow.

The image of Daredevil standing on the burning table as he taunts Quesada recalls a scene from 'No Rest for the Wicked!' (Daredevil Vol 1 #364, May 1997).

Fixer/Quesada flees the joint and seeks refuge in an underground railway station, but Daredevil pursues him.

The subterranean acoustics interfere with Matt's radar sense in the movie. This also happened when he pursued Bullseye into an underground railway station in Frank Miller's 'Devils' (Daredevil Vol 1 #169, March 1981).

The confrontation between Daredevil and Fixer/Quesada takes place on a railway platform in both the comics and the film.

Both confrontations end with the criminal dead. In the comics Fixer died from a heart attack, while in the movie Daredevil intentionally murders Quesada.

Matt does this by knocking him onto the railway track and leaving him to be run over by the train. The Daredevil in the comics would never do this owing to his moral code. The scene in the film may have been inspired by Daredevil's fight against Bullseye in the aforementioned Daredevil Vol 1 #169, which ended with Matt knocking his opponent unconscious on an underground railway line. Daredevil wanted to leave Bullseye to die, but pulled him out of the way of an oncoming train at the last second. Obviously the movie scene ends very differently.

Quesada's death is subsequently investigated by Detective Nick Manolis, another character created by Frank Miller. Manolis first appeared in the comics in '... The Mauler!' (Daredevil Vol 1 #167, November 1980) and was later murdered by one of Kingpin's agents during the events of Frank Miller and David Mazzucchelli's Daredevil: Born Again (1986). Also present at the scene of Quesada's death is Ben Urich, who debuted in 'Betrayal' (Daredevil Vol 1 #153, July 1978). As in the comics, Ben is shown to be a chain smoking reporter who gradually figures out the truth behind Daredevil's secret identity. The antagonistic relationship between Manolis and Urich in the movie reflects their strained interactions during the events of Born Again.

The moment where Ben ignites the 'DD' emblem on the ground was almost certainly inspired by a similar scene in Alex Proyas' The Crow (1994). The flaming 'DD' symbol also references an image from David Mack's Parts of a Hole.

When Matt returns home he finds a message waiting for him on his answering machine from a woman named Heather. This is likely a nod to Heather Glenn, Matt's love interest in the comics during the Miller/Janson run. In the film Heather uses the answering machine message to end her relationship with Matt on the basis that he's never there for her. In the comics Heather eventually committed suicide, in part due to Matt's inattentiveness towards her emotional needs, as depicted in Denny O'Neil's story 'Fog' (Daredevil Vol 1 #220, July 1985).

The theatrical cut then shows Matt going to confession. He is shown doing this several times throughout the movie, though all of these scenes were removed from the Director's Cut and replaced with another scene where Matt is shown praying in solitude with a rosary. The following panels are from Kevin Smith's Daredevil: Guardian Devil (1998-1999).

The Director's Cut also contains a number of things that were intended to set up a sequel based on Born Again. One of these is a brief flashback scene in which a nun (Sister Maggie) visits Matt in hospital. As she leans over him, he feels the cross dangling from around her neck. This scene is adapted directly from Born Again.

During their conversation in the coffee shop, Foggy mentions once buying Matt a guide dog that ran away. Foggy also bought Matt a guide dog in the comics named Deuce, who first appeared in 'Unfinished Business' (Daredevil Vol 1 #361, February 1997).

The Director's Cut includes a prominent subplot in which Matt and Foggy agree to defend a small-time criminal accused of murdering a prostitute named Lisa Tazio. Lisa was created for the movie, though she does somewhat resemble a character named Joanie who appeared in the classic Frank Miller story 'Gangwar!' (Daredevil Vol 1 #170-172, May-July 1981). Lisa and Joanie are both prostitutes whose clients include criminals associated with Wilson Fisk, and both women secretly act as informants. Joanie was an informant for Daredevil in the comic, while Lisa is an informant for Ben Urich in the movie.

Matt finds a clue to the identity of Lisa's killer in the form of the word 'MOM'. Later in the film the significance of this clue is made clear when the letters are turned upside down to spell 'WOW', the initials of Wesley Owen Welch. This recalls an almost identical plot point in the Daredevil/Spider-Man Vol 1 miniseries (January-April 2001) where Matt is given a clue to the identity of a criminal in the form of the message '7MO'. Later in the story the letters are inverted to spell 'OWL', thus identifying the criminal in question as Leland Owlsley.

A key witness in the trial is a police detective named Robert McKensie. Roger McKenzie was the writer of the Daredevil comics when Frank Miller first joined the series as an artist in the late seventies.

During the trial, Matt and Foggy's client mentions a friend named Turk. This is a reference to the comic character Turk Barrett, who was also namedropped in the first chapter of Frank Miller's Batman: The Dark Knight Returns (1986).