could Batman: Triumphant have saved the series?

[JokerMeThis]

I think Patrick Stewart or Anthony Hopkins would've been better as Mr. Freeze than Arnold. Both are much better actors too and more suited to playing emotionally deep characters. Arnold's talent as I see it is as an action star.

I think a fifth film in the series could've redeemed it if it went back to the great work Tim Burton did with the first two films. Ideally Michael Keaton as Batman would've been best. But if Keaton wouldn't be Batman again then I would've preferred Kilmer over Clooney in the role. I think Madonna as Harley Quinn would've been a very good choice. I'd rather see Jeff Goldblum as Scarecrow than Howard Stern.

If the fifth film was to be the last in the series then I'd like to see the characters of Bruce, Dick, Barbara and Alfred have a happy ending and perhaps see Batman retire and Dick take over as Nightwing. I'd like to see the plot be connected to that of the first movie in the series as well. Using Harley Quinn and making her Joker's daughter seeking revenge on Batman for her father's death would've been a good choice. Batman seeing the Joker (played by Jack Nicholson) in a hallucination caused by Scarecrow would've been brilliant. I would've liked to see Bruce forgive Joker and find peace over what happened to his parents. Maybe we could've even seen Bruce express remorse for killing the Joker, his henchmen, the fire breather and the strong man.

[Catwoman]

What if Arnie had been Bane and someone else could have been Freeze? I know there would have been bitching about him being Austrian instead of South American lol but he could have done good with that. Could have been the cunning, brilliant Bane.

[JokerMeThis]

Arnold as Bane could have been brilliant if Bane had been written better.

[Slash Man]

The problem with Bane was that he wasn't written as Bane. Arnold playing Bane in a story specifically written for Bane? He could rival Tom Hardy (though for some, that's easier than I make it sound). If Bane was simply some super powered henchman, it would've sit a lot better with comic fans watching it (though this is still the best live action Bane appearance-wise). I think the best change would be making Bane one of Ivy's plant monsters instead. Would've saved a lot of trouble at the cost of omitting one-too-many major Batman villains.

If the fifth film was to be the last in the series then I'd like to see the characters of Bruce, Dick, Barbara and Alfred have a happy ending and perhaps see Batman retire and Dick take over as Nightwing. I'd like to see the plot be connected to that of the first movie in the series as well. Using Harley Quinn and making her Joker's daughter seeking revenge on Batman for her father's death would've been a good choice. Batman seeing the Joker (played by Jack Nicholson) in a hallucination caused by Scarecrow would've been brilliant. I would've liked to see Bruce forgive Joker and find peace over what happened to his parents. Maybe we could've even seen Bruce express remorse for killing the Joker, his henchmen, the fire breather and the strong man.

I like that idea. Bruce in Batman Forever has a very different mindset from Keaton, when he strictly denounces killing when Dick is faced with a comparable situation to Bruce when faced with the killer of their parents. Though remorse for killing the henchmen? I'm not seeing that. Each one was dangerous and had the intent to kill Batman. Joker was the only thing close to cold-blooded. Batman intended to kill him when he was defenseless by knocking him off the Cathedral (though that didn't happen). Afterwards, Joker's death was pretty much an accident, as Batman only tried to restrain him from getting away. It's a tough call on that one.

Though I do like the idea of capping off the series. I guess Batman & Robin did give us some kind of happy ending, though at the same time, it looked like they left room for a sequel (they did).

[JokerMeThis]

Thank you for the kind words. Those aren't my ideas though. I've read that there were ideas about Harley Quinn being in a fifth Batman movie, that she was going to be Joker's daughter seeking revenge on Batman for the death of her father, and about Jack Nicholson appearing as the Joker in a hallucination Batman experiences thanks to the Scarecrow.

As for Joker's henchmen, well, some argue that it wasn't necessary for Batman to kill them. To be honest I don't spend a whole lot of time thinking about the people Batman killed in the two Burton Batman movies though.

[riddler]

The one issue of Arnold playing Bane is that they would need to expand the role and that film already had too many characters.

I love Arnolds old school action films but let's call a spade a spade; he's not a good actor. Hopkins and Stewart would have been infinitely better. Schumacher wanted the biggest names as opposed to the best actors.

[Andrew]

Harley Quinn as the Joker's daughter, never before mentioned and suddenly appearing and vengeful against Batman, to me would have seemed like a waste of the character. I would have loved Jeff Goldblum as the Scarecrow, he could have made a strong climactic villain, and Cage would have been OK but Stern probably pretty bad and too (trying to be) reminiscent of Carrey as the Riddler.

[Azrael]

Harley Quinn as the Joker's daughter, never before mentioned and suddenly appearing and vengeful against Batman, to me would have seemed like a waste of the character.

Yeah, but is this much different than Bane being a deformed lackey of Talia al Ghul, or Doomsday being a Zod Zombie resurrected by Dr. Lutherstein? 

I would have loved Jeff Goldblum as the Scarecrow, he could have made a strong climactic villain, and Cage would have been OK but Stern probably pretty bad and too (trying to be) reminiscent of Carrey as the Riddler.

Even though I think it's for the better this film was never made, 90s Jeff Goldblum as the Scarecrow in a Schumacher Batman movie would be one of the villains people would still include in their top-10 lists.

[The Laughing Fish]

Harley Quinn as the Joker's daughter, never before mentioned and suddenly appearing and vengeful against Batman, to me would have seemed like a waste of the character.

Yeah, but is this much different than Bane being a deformed lackey of Talia al Ghul, or Doomsday being a Zod Zombie resurrected by Dr. Lutherstein? 

Fair point. You could say the same thing about Bane being a lackey to Poison Ivy and Mr. Freeze, Scarecrow being a lackey to the League of Assassins and Two-Face becoming the Joker's protege, more or less.

[thecolorsblend]

If the series never got rebooted and we got Batman: Triumphant, do you think it could have worked?

I don't see what it could've hurt. Obviously WB wanted to protect the brand overall but, honestly, Batman films were a joke for years after B&R.

Schumacher has intimated many times that he never really had creative freedom on either of his movies, least of all B&R. Apparently his taste would've been taking Batman in a not-so-Dayglo direction. The way it's been described, Batman Triumphant would've been a tonal cross between B89 and The Lost Boys, probably done low budget to give it a grittier feel.

We can't know what would've happened. All we know is what did happen. But I don't think Triumphant would've harmed the character any extraordinary degree.

The really weird thing is how well Schumacher's existing Batman movies have aged. Change the title character to somebody from Marvel and those movies would probably make at least $500 mill each worldwide.

We live in strange times.