what kind of film should the next one be? (TDKR spoilers)

[Catwoman]

what about a batman beyond movie?

[riddler]

unless it's an arkham asylum film, I'd prefer to see Robin brought back for the next film. We still haven't seen an entire film with only batman and robin teaming up since the adam west film. Not sure if an origin is required as schumacher already did it but it would be nice to have a more serious take on Robin.

[Azrael]

If they ever go that route, it's maybe time to go with a young Robin. Not a 18year old playing a teenager, or someone in his late 20s playing an 18-year old, but a child Robin. It's funny, but Kick-Ass sold me on the idea that a child sidekick can work.

The only downside is that if they make such a film and it succeeds, and then make a sequel 2 years later (this is the minimum gap between comic films of the same series, I think), the child actor will be noticeably older.

[riddler]

If they ever go that route, it's maybe time to go with a young Robin. Not a 18year old playing a teenager, or someone in his late 20s playing an 18-year old, but a child Robin. It's funny, but Kick-Ass sold me on the idea that a child sidekick can work.

The only downside is that if they make such a film and it succeeds, and then make a sequel 2 years later (this is the minimum gap between comic films of the same series, I think), the child actor will be noticeably older.

Wasn't dick grayson 12 in the comics when he first signed on as robin and played the character well into his 20's before donning Nightwing? And I think people prefer Nightwing to Robin, there's a debate about which one makes the better sidekick although some people are hoping for a solo Nightwing film which would definitely be better than a Robin film. Also according to the comics didn't Robin join batman in year three for the bat, or was that just one run?

I know at the time of the dark knight (which is supposed to be one year into batman), he claimed dick grayson should be in a crib somewhere so by the dark knight rises he'd be around 10. Doesn't seem that they continue that series but if they do, he'd be about the proper age.

[thecolorsblend]

Nolan's philosophy with Batman Begins seemed to be that if Burton or Schumacher did it, by and large he'd avoid it. The next director might do well to have a similar approach.

I realize the Nolanverse has a lot of fans but if there's one thing that bugged me, it's the seeming handwringing, borderline apologetic psychology underlying the movies. "We'll put a chick named Selina into a tight black outfit but we won't call her 'Catwoman'. That'd be too comic booky." Bite me, you insecure jerks.

Assuming a Marvel-style shared universe is off the table, I think a neat approach for future Batman films is to eschew continuity entirely. Do an anthology franchise along the lines of what Legends of the Dark Knight was back in the 90's. Do self-contained, unrelated stories where a director comes onboard, makes his version of Batman and then moves on to something else. One and done. No continuity, no ongoing narrative, a brand new (or mostly new) cast each time out.

You could have a David Fincher ultra-gritty, ultra dark thriller one time and then have Robert Rodriguez do a Sin City-style move the next time, on and on and on. Hell, I can't be the only one wondering what a Guillermo del Toro Batman film might be like. Don't try to top Nolan. In the public eye, it's not likely to happen. Just do a new thing every time out. Batman's the most versatile character in all of comics. Other characters probably couldn't survive this type of treatment. Batman? He'd thrive in it.

[Azrael]

Or Shadow of the Bat, this comic had some good self-contained stories too. This is a GREAT idea that would lead to much more interesting films than a copycat of Marvel's "filmverse", but maybe it wouldn't work with general audiences, and these audiences bring the money for WB.

[The Dark Knight]

I'd like to see a movie that is fun to watch. I'm all for darkness but TDK Rises was just too drab for my tastes. Yet Batman Returns gets blasted for having nothing to cheer about. Fantasy ala Arkham Asylum/Arkham City has to come back. Again for the twenty billionth time: I can watch the Burton flicks over and over and they hold my interest. Things in TDK Rises stick out like a beaten down thumb when you apply logic to it.

[riddler]

there's definitely a balance to be found between gritty and fantasy. Throughout the Nolan series a lot of people didnt like his 'everything must be grounded' rule and of course Schumacher gave us too many moments where we rolled our eyes saying "seriously?" Batman Returns did get slightly too far off the deep end. Definitely enjoyable to watch as a popcorn film but once you start analyzing (especially the notion that the Penguin could be raised in the sewer, learn to speak english and somehow rarely get sighted for 33 years) it does stray from realism. Ideally the first batman film has the right mix IMO.

Why can't comic book movies do what the comics do? It's not like the comics always follow the same continuity and pick up where the last one left off. Nor do they reboot themselves constantly after a bad comic of a storyline/run is finished. I brought it up before but the Hush comics are a great example of it; they have panels featuring the Adam West, Michael Keaton, and Christian Bale batmobiles side by side basically encompassing all those versions. Obviously those are 3 separate universes but instead of over analyzing the writers just expected the reader to just go with it. And since it was such an excellent comic, the reader is forgiving and doesn't need to over analyze.

So why not do something like that with the next film? Bruce Wayne is Batman, he has these bat toys, a cave, a butler, a utility belt and a batmobile. We all know this, we've alreay been told how he got them, we dont need to know again. Start out the film with Bruce Wayne as batman.

Now as for how to handle the villain, that's a tougher one. Schumacher got heavily criticized for having Two Face and Mr. Freeze start out as villains at the start without any kind of back story. Now granted it's probably because those villains have an interesting backstory. If it were the Joker or Bane or Deadshot that would have been fine. If it's the type of film where 1 or 2 villains play a big role I'd say give them an origin but if it's an Arkham type plot where you'll have multiple villains, nothing wrong with having them in villain state.

[thecolorsblend]

Or Shadow of the Bat, this comic had some good self-contained stories too. This is a GREAT idea that would lead to much more interesting films than a copycat of Marvel's "filmverse", but maybe it wouldn't work with general audiences, and these audiences bring the money for WB.

I liked Shadow of the Bat a lot. If I've got a criticism of the Batman books in the 90's, it'd be that stuff like SOTB and, to a lesser extent, Legend of the Dark Knight didn't always have the opportunity to be their own entities. I thought of Batman and Detective as the core franchise books while the other two had a more unique, separated identity. I'd have preferred it if SOTB have been used as a dumping ground for Batman stories set in the more modern day but not necessarily worry too much about how it fits in continuity-wise. Forcing it into crossovers like Knightfall, Zero Hour, and other things didn't necessarily help the book, if you ask me.

I'd like to see a movie that is fun to watch. I'm all for darkness but TDK Rises was just too drab for my tastes. Yet Batman Returns gets blasted for having nothing to cheer about. Fantasy ala Arkham Asylum/Arkham City has to come back. Again for the twenty billionth time: I can watch the Burton flicks over and over and they hold my interest. Things in TDK Rises stick out like a beaten down thumb when you apply logic to it.

Maybe it's because I'm finally acclimated to the formula but I guess I don't see how TDKRises is any worse than TDK from a logic standpoint. I've only seen it once but I enjoyed it when I did. I'm not going to become some ardent Nolan defender though.

I wouldn't mind seeing something more in line with BTAS. There was darkness to spare but it never overpowered the coolness of seeing Batman do his thing.

Why can't comic book movies do what the comics do? It's not like the comics always follow the same continuity and pick up where the last one left off. Nor do they reboot themselves constantly after a bad comic of a storyline/run is finished.

Have you read any DC stuff from the last, oh, thirty years or so?

I brought it up before but the Hush comics are a great example of it; they have panels featuring the Adam West, Michael Keaton, and Christian Bale batmobiles side by side basically encompassing all those versions. Obviously those are 3 separate universes but instead of over analyzing the writers just expected the reader to just go with it. And since it was such an excellent comic, the reader is forgiving and doesn't need to over analyze.

I'd love to see something like that in a movie. I'd even award bonus points if they threw in something a little more esoteric like those weird ice glide vehicles from B&R. And not anything to make a big production out of. Just tuck 'em away in the background as easter eggs for those paying attention.

[GBglide]

what about a batman beyond movie?

With Keaton as Bruce Wayne?  Sounds cool, but he's about 19 years too young.