The next Batman

[johnnygobbs]

No, not Smallville, definitely not. Like Batman TAS but live-action. A sweet dream.

If it was made today who would you cast, bearing in mind its a TV production rather than a big Hollywood film, and what characters would make up the regular cast?

[Edd Grayson]

I'm not good at current actors, and especially not TV actors.


Batman, Robin, Batgirl, Gordon, Joker, Two-Face, Catwoman, Riddler as the main heroes and villains with other villains like Pengy, Freeze, Scarecrow and so on appearing as well.

[Catwoman]

No, not Smallville, definitely not. Like Batman TAS but live-action. A sweet dream.

i have thought that millions of times

[thecolorsblend]

I think TV is a better vehicle for serialized characters and stories like comic books anyway. It's tough to find a way to get a "wide" audience on TV these days so if you were to do a Batman show now, I think cable would be your best bet. You could do outlandish characters like Mr. Freeze, Clayface, Killer Croc and others once or twice per season while spending the bulk of your time doing easier villains.

One question you could ask is what kind of rating would you go for? Something akin to PG-13 (mild language, violence) or a hard R-rating could both apply to Batman depending on how you handle it.

[johnnygobbs]

I think TV is a better vehicle for serialized characters and stories like comic books anyway. It's tough to find a way to get a "wide" audience on TV these days so if you were to do a Batman show now, I think cable would be your best bet. You could do outlandish characters like Mr. Freeze, Clayface, Killer Croc and others once or twice per season while spending the bulk of your time doing easier villains.

One question you could ask is what kind of rating would you go for? Something akin to PG-13 (mild language, violence) or a hard R-rating could both apply to Batman depending on how you handle it.

If you went for an R or even a PG-13 you'd end up with the usual soccer-mom complaints, "Batman is for KIDS!...wahhhh!" 

However, I do agree that ideally cable would be the best format if you were going to do a decent Batman on TV.  My only concern about the 'easier villains' suggestion is that the show turned into a 'freak-of-the-week' type series akin to friggin' 'Smallville' and 'Buffy'. 

[thecolorsblend]

My only concern about the 'easier villains' suggestion is that the show turned into a 'freak-of-the-week' type series akin to friggin' 'Smallville' and 'Buffy'.

What's wrong with that approach?

[johnnygobbs]

My only concern about the 'easier villains' suggestion is that the show turned into a 'freak-of-the-week' type series akin to friggin' 'Smallville' and 'Buffy'.

What's wrong with that approach?

Maybe it's a matter of personal taste but I don't care for the rigid formula and winking, cliquey, over-familiar approach of shows like 'Smallville' and 'Buffy' in particular.  I would prefer a more ambitious, sophisticated, multi-character, high-budget/semi-cinematic approach that appeals to a much wider audience than teens and fanboys/girls akin to the type of shows one finds on cable TV (i.e. 'Game of Thrones', 'Boardwalk Empire' and 'Mad Men') rather than the CW.  I would like the next Batman reboot to embrace the more fun, fantastical elements Nolan perhaps ignored but not at the risk of becoming campy, self-reverential or gimmicky as per 'Buffy'. 

Whilst I would welcome space for some of the more minor villains to make one-off, or two/three episode-arc appearances now and again the focus should always be on an overarching narrative and perhaps one big villain or storyline per season.  Admittedly, 'Buffy' did do something similar to this approach by always building up to a climactic 'big-bad' each season but the first few seasons of 'Smallville' often got bogged down in 'freak-of-the-week' storylines that ignored the overall Lex versus Clark narrative. 

[thecolorsblend]

Maybe it's a matter of personal taste but I don't care for the rigid formula and winking, cliquey, over-familiar approach of shows like 'Smallville' and 'Buffy' in particular.  I would prefer a more ambitious, sophisticated, multi-character, high-budget/semi-cinematic approach that appeals to a much wider audience than teens and fanboys/girls akin to the type of shows one finds on cable TV (i.e. 'Game of Thrones', 'Boardwalk Empire' and 'Mad Men') rather than the CW.

The approach you're talking about sounds pretty ambitious and epic. Unfortunately, TV doesn't usually lend itself to epic. It does small and intimate.

Whilst I would welcome space for some of the more minor villains to make one-off, or two/three episode-arc appearances now and again

Which, unless my memory fails me, is more or less the approach I originally advocated.

the focus should always be on an overarching narrative and perhaps one big villain or storyline per season. Admittedly, 'Buffy' did do something similar to this approach by always building up to a climactic 'big-bad' each season but the first few seasons of 'Smallville' often got bogged down in 'freak-of-the-week' storylines that ignored the overall Lex versus Clark narrative.

Smallville was intended to follow Clark's journey to becoming Superman. There is (or can be) overlap/contrast with Lex's descent into villainy but matters relating to Lex are at best second priority. The Clark/Lex thing was done well but that wasn't the show's intended purpose. Don't get me wrong, I ate that stuff up with a spoon but that wasn't what SV was supposed to be about.

The other thing is that what you're saying may sound great to core audience types and obsessive fans but you can rest assured that new viewers find self-contained episodes with one-off villains easier to handle when they first start watching. Any TV show has to appeal to both their diehard fans and newbie viewers. The type of layered story you're talking about necessarily must include occasional (or even frequent) self-contained episodes to keep everybody happy and to throw rookies a lifeline.

A show that eschews self-contained episodes risks alienating new viewers. Exhibit A- Veronica Mars. There's a strong argument that the public was simply never going to accept that show... but it's undeniable that they shot themselves in the foot, especially in the second season, by relying so heavily on season-long arcs at the expense of one-and-done stories. Some call this "gimmicky" but it was arguably lifeblood for SV and Buffy over the years.

For myself, I love SV but it's sometimes hard when you just want to watch an episode out of context and without thinking too much about who's doing what to whom in which episode or what dastardly scheme Lex or whoever has in mind this season. In those cases, the self-contained episodes are what the doctor ordered. The early seasons have several such episodes and those are the ones I tend to come back to when I just want to watch the show and be entertained without having to wiki government agencies, Luthorcorp projects or whatever else.

[johnnygobbs]

A show that eschews self-contained episodes risks alienating new viewers. Exhibit A- Veronica Mars. There's a strong argument that the public was simply never going to accept that show... but it's undeniable that they shot themselves in the foot, especially in the second season, by relying so heavily on season-long arcs at the expense of one-and-done stories. Some call this "gimmicky" but it was arguably lifeblood for SV and Buffy over the years.

Personally, I preferred the season-long arcs, such as the Lily Kane murder investigation in S1 and the even more compelling IMHO baseball team bus crash investigation in S2 (that season sure made me think of The Stonecutters favourite Steve Guttenberg in a whole new light), to the individual investigation stories on 'Veronica Mars' even though I wasn't a regular viewer by any means.  I dipped in and out of the show but by-and-large I was still able to follow the overall narrative. 

However, I accept your point about throwing casual viewers a line when it comes to one-off story episodes.  I just think a character like Batman deserves an ambitious approach whether it's done on TV or on film.  I'm not talking about the overly-portentous, overly-earnest approach taken by Christopher Nolan.  We've been there, done that.  But something with ambition and scope that goes beyond appealing primarily to the teen crowd.

[Edd Grayson]

Maybe some of the lesser villains would be hired by Rupert Throne or some other boss to keep Batman busy. That way they'd have a purpose as villains and not just pop up randomly.