Batman Beyond with Michael Keaton

[thecolorsblend]

Sam Raimi wants to make a Batman film:

"I've always loved Batman. If I ever saw the Batsignal up in the air, I'd come running."

https://www.empireonline.com/movies/news/sam-raimi-wants-to-make-batman-movie-exclusive/

I say let him do it. Obviously I want Matt Reeves to continue with his trilogy, but Raimi would be perfect for Batman Beyond. Few filmmakers have directed, written and/or produced as many superhero projects as he has (the Darkman trilogy, M.A.N.T.I.S., the Spider-Man trilogy, Doctor Strange in the Multiverse of Madness) and he's a massive comic book fan and collector. I read somewhere that he applied to take over the Batman franchise following Burton's departure in the nineties but was turned down in favour of Schumacher. I'd have a lot more faith in Raimi to deliver a good Batman movie now than I would in Burton.

Mmm. I'm curious about the timing of this thing. The newest Batman film is projected to hit $500 million ww by Saturday night. Is now truly the best time to make public statements like this?

Don't get me wrong, I'm very curious what Raimi would do with the character. I'm just thinking that 2018'ish would've been a better year to campaign for a shot at Batman. At least, a better year than 2022 is shaping up to be.

Side note: It's a crying shame that Raimi never got his Shadow film off the ground.

[The Laughing Fish]

A THR reporter said that WBD cancelled a Wonder Twins streaming movie project because its budget was going to cost $75 million, and the new regime wants all HBO Max originals to cost $35 million or less. The reason why I'm writing this here is because I remember reading some rumours that a potential Keaton Batman Beyond project could be produced as an HBO Max project, but I'm not sure it that will happen now if the budget projections for streaming originals are limited. I guess it could be done within a small budget, but would it be any good? If it can't be done what are the prospects for a theatrical distribution?

[The Laughing Fish]

https://www.latestly.com/socially/entertainment/hollywood/a-solo-batman-movie-starring-michael-keaton-has-reportedly-been-canceledvia-latest-tweet-by-culture-crave-4563713.html

Knowing that rumour about a Batman Beyond project with Keaton getting cancelled by Gunn was stated by Umberto "Snyder cut doesn't exist" Gonzalez gives me suspicion he's trolling the already agitated DC fanbase. Still, I'm pretty sure Keaton's version of Beyond would've been far more celebrated and preferable than another season of goddamn Peacemaker.

[Silver Nemesis]

Some more details have emerged on the cancelled Batman Beyond film.

According to The Hollywood Reporter, the movie was pitched by Christina Hodson, the same screenwriter behind the execrable Birds of Prey movie and the "irredeemable" Batgirl film. Unfortunately she's also written The Flash, which explains reports of it being very jokey and full of sex humour. Anyway, Hodson pitched the idea and the suits at WB loved it. She was working on the screenplay until about two weeks after Gunn and Safran were hired, whereupon she was told to stop. Apparently her pitch focused on the romance between Batman and Catwoman, and it seems likely that Michelle Pfeiffer would have returned. The screenplay was never finished and the latest word is that this project has been canned.

Source: https://view.email.hollywoodreporter.com/?qs=27dca022a3daaae65e34d5c9adf6995782cfc61eaab8e66b93ed110a566a36487c5002ec1041eaacb72a1fac5e6705b8e5b3f6e7f40ac625a682a43edd070fcd7620c8b034afd68c

An unconfirmed detail that is not mentioned in the THR article, but which is circulating as a rumour, is that the film would not have taken place in the future. Rather it would probably have taken place in the present in order to fit in with Keaton's other DCEU movies. If this is true, then we might have dodged a bullet with this one. Batman Beyond needs to be set in the future. It needs the dark cyberpunk atmosphere that defined the source material. Otherwise it's not Batman Beyond. Like the Star Wars sequel trilogy, there's only going to be one chance to get this right. If they waste Keaton on a bad BB film, then that's it – he won't get another shot at it.

The fact this particular BB project has been abandoned does not necessarily mean that the concept as a whole has. At least now we have confirmation that the studio is hearing pitches for a Keaton Batman Beyond film and that they're keen on the idea. Hopefully Gunn and Safran with give the go ahead to a more promising take; one that's set in the futuristic metropolis of Neo-Gotham and isn't a romantic comedy.

[thecolorsblend]

Some more details have emerged on the cancelled Batman Beyond film.

According to The Hollywood Reporter, the movie was pitched by Christina Hodson, the same screenwriter behind the execrable Birds of Prey movie and the "irredeemable" Batgirl film. Unfortunately she's also written The Flash, which explains reports of it being very jokey and full of sex humour. Anyway, Hodson pitched the idea and the suits at WB loved it. She was working on the screenplay until about two weeks after Gunn and Safran were hired, whereupon she was told to stop. Apparently her pitch focused on the romance between Batman and Catwoman, and it seems likely that Michelle Pfeiffer would have returned. The screenplay was never finished and the latest word is that this project has been canned.

Source: https://view.email.hollywoodreporter.com/?qs=27dca022a3daaae65e34d5c9adf6995782cfc61eaab8e66b93ed110a566a36487c5002ec1041eaacb72a1fac5e6705b8e5b3f6e7f40ac625a682a43edd070fcd7620c8b034afd68c

An unconfirmed detail that is not mentioned in the THR article, but which is circulating as a rumour, is that the film would not have taken place in the future. Rather it would probably have taken place in the present in order to fit in with Keaton's other DCEU movies. If this is true, then we might have dodged a bullet with this one. Batman Beyond needs to be set in the future. It needs the dark cyberpunk atmosphere that defined the source material. Otherwise it's not Batman Beyond. Like the Star Wars sequel trilogy, there's only going to be one chance to get this right. If they waste Keaton on a bad BB film, then that's it – he won't get another shot at it.

The fact this particular BB project has been abandoned does not necessarily mean that the concept as a whole has. At least now we have confirmation that the studio is hearing pitches for a Keaton Batman Beyond film and that they're keen on the idea. Hopefully Gunn and Safran with give the go ahead to a more promising take; one that's set in the futuristic metropolis of Neo-Gotham and isn't a romantic comedy.

I choose to regard her ouster as good news. Maybe it's an indication that someone high up at WBD doesn't want her brand of ethics branded onto the new movie. You know what I'm referring to here. We're not out of the woods, obviously. But this is good news.

This BB idea seems to have been bouncing around WB (or whatever they're called at any given moment) for over twenty years now. I'm sure you recall the Keanu Reeves rumors from circa 1999-2001. There seems to be genuine enthusiasm for someone there to do this up as a movie.

Since we're on the subject, it's fair to ask what you consider the core essentials of the Batman Beyond concept to be. Because for as much as I enjoy the show, the stuff that I consider to be non-negotiable is actually fairly small.

* Bruce must be too old and too semi-crippled to carry on
* Terry must be a young, male, semi-orphaned high school student
* It's preferable for the original rogues gallery to be either dead, MIA or otherwise too old to continue menacing Gotham
* It's also preferable for the original Batman family/allies to be largely MIA, retired or (in a minority of cases) dead

Aside from those things, I think I'm pretty flexible on the whole Beyond concept.

But in terms of stuff that I'd be happy to delete, canon be damned, I *NEVER* liked the idea of Terry being indirectly Bruce Wayne's son through the contrived and utterly incomprehensible machinations of Amanda Waller. Ultimately, Terry is just another of Bruce's sidekicks. Babs, Dick and Tim didn't come into Bruce's life as the result of some nefarious conspiracy. Fate brought them together. That should apply to Terry too.

I also was never crazy about Blight as a villain or Terry's rivalry with him. You need Terry to have a vendetta of his own, I guess. But it just seemed a little too convenient that the exact same guy who's a rival for Bruce is also a rival for Terry. Yes, parallel narrative construction is as old as narrative itself. But I just don't buy it in Blight's case. Never have, never will.

Bruce's gun temptation also never rang true for me. Yes, the show needed a reason for Bruce to hang it up. But I never accepted the gun incident in the first episode. It seemed like someone was trying too hard to force Bruce into retirement.

I'm also not married to Old Man Bruce as a cantankerous a-hole. I think after all those decades of losing everyone he ever loved or was close to, time would have softened Bruce a lot. Maybe he wouldn't have Adam West's warmth and approachability. But he wouldn't be such a cold-hearted prick either. By that stage in life, I think he will have seen the error of at least some of his ways. If you ask me, Bruce would see Terry as his last chance to "get it right this time" when it comes to being a surrogate father to a troubled kid.

Dana is a challenge for Terry to contend with. She represents the desire Terry has for a normal life. But she and Terry are teenagers ffs, they're probably not the great loves of each other's lives. They're ships in the night. Let's not overthink this.

[Travesty]

An unconfirmed detail that is not mentioned in the THR article, but which is circulating as a rumour, is that the film would not have taken place in the future. Rather it would probably have taken place in the present in order to fit in with Keaton's other DCEU movies. If this is true, then we might have dodged a bullet with this one. Batman Beyond needs to be set in the future. It needs the dark cyberpunk atmosphere that defined the source material. Otherwise it's not Batman Beyond. Like the Star Wars sequel trilogy, there's only going to be one chance to get this right. If they waste Keaton on a bad BB film, then that's it – he won't get another shot at it.

I agree. The future tech of the Beyond suit, along with it in a cyberpunk setting is what sets it apart.

[Silver Nemesis]

Since we're on the subject, it's fair to ask what you consider the core essentials of the Batman Beyond concept to be. Because for as much as I enjoy the show, the stuff that I consider to be non-negotiable is actually fairly small.

* Bruce must be too old and too semi-crippled to carry on
* Terry must be a young, male, semi-orphaned high school student
* It's preferable for the original rogues gallery to be either dead, MIA or otherwise too old to continue menacing Gotham
* It's also preferable for the original Batman family/allies to be largely MIA, retired or (in a minority of cases) dead

Aside from those things, I think I'm pretty flexible on the whole Beyond concept.

But in terms of stuff that I'd be happy to delete, canon be damned, I *NEVER* liked the idea of Terry being indirectly Bruce Wayne's son through the contrived and utterly incomprehensible machinations of Amanda Waller. Ultimately, Terry is just another of Bruce's sidekicks. Babs, Dick and Tim didn't come into Bruce's life as the result of some nefarious conspiracy. Fate brought them together. That should apply to Terry too.

I also was never crazy about Blight as a villain or Terry's rivalry with him. You need Terry to have a vendetta of his own, I guess. But it just seemed a little too convenient that the exact same guy who's a rival for Bruce is also a rival for Terry. Yes, parallel narrative construction is as old as narrative itself. But I just don't buy it in Blight's case. Never have, never will.

Bruce's gun temptation also never rang true for me. Yes, the show needed a reason for Bruce to hang it up. But I never accepted the gun incident in the first episode. It seemed like someone was trying too hard to force Bruce into retirement.

I'm also not married to Old Man Bruce as a cantankerous a-hole. I think after all those decades of losing everyone he ever loved or was close to, time would have softened Bruce a lot. Maybe he wouldn't have Adam West's warmth and approachability. But he wouldn't be such a cold-hearted prick either. By that stage in life, I think he will have seen the error of at least some of his ways. If you ask me, Bruce would see Terry as his last chance to "get it right this time" when it comes to being a surrogate father to a troubled kid.

Dana is a challenge for Terry to contend with. She represents the desire Terry has for a normal life. But she and Terry are teenagers ffs, they're probably not the great loves of each other's lives. They're ships in the night. Let's not overthink this.

The clone thing should be ditched. We didn't need it in the original series, and we don't need it now.

The cast and mythology need to be streamlined. It's one thing to introduce lots of new characters for an ongoing TV show, but if we're talking about a two-hour movie that mightn't get a sequel then it'll need to be more focused. Obviously keep Terry and his parents. His younger brother isn't essential, so he could be left out. I wouldn't mind amalgamating Max and Dana into a single character and making her Terry's best friend and possible love interest. Barbara Gordon should appear, but I'd leave Catwoman out of it. I'd love to see Pfeiffer return to the role, but I don't think there'd be room for her in the BB movie. The perfect film for her and Billy Dee Williams to have returned in would have been The Flash, but it looks like the studio squandered that opportunity.

Derek Powers and the Jokerz should be included. If the plot is a mixture of the first few episodes of the TV series and Return of the Joker, then Powers can stand in for Jordan Pryce. Powers could enter into a secret alliance with the resurrected Joker in order to rid himself of his enemies (Warren McGinnis, Bruce Wayne) and consolidate his hold on Wayne-Powers. Instead of being exposed to nerve gas, Powers could be exposed to Smilex after the Joker betrays him. He then attempts to secretly treat himself to prevent the public from learning of his dealings with the Joker, and the experimental radiation therapy he uses transforms him into Blight. If this takes place in the future of the Burtonverse, then they could tie Derek Powers to the earlier films by revealing he's the grandson of Chip Shreck.

Regarding the characterisation of Bruce, if it's Keaton then I think he'll have to be more affable than the animated version. According to The Flash leaks (SPOILERS) Bruce is depicted in that movie as a cantankerous recluse living alone in Wayne Manor. When the two Barrys first approach him, Bruce physically attacks them and refuses to help save the world. Following some goading, he agrees to reassume the mantle of Batman and assist them. Then during the final battle he thanks Barry for bringing him out of retirement. If that's his character arc in The Flash, then having him go through the exact same arc in BB would be pointless. So I wouldn't object to a more avuncular portrayal, as long as his dark sarcastic sense of humour is preserved.

The cyberpunk aesthetic is essential. If the Burtonverse Gotham looked like this in the early nineties...

...then it's not much of a stretch to believe it might look like this in the future.

When should the movie be set? I'd say 2039 or 2040, which would put Bruce in his mid-to-late eighties.

The prologue should take place in the present day. I'd scrap the idea of Batman having to use a gun, simply because we've seen Keaton's Batman use guns before. Using them again would hardly be grounds for him retiring. The heart attack should be sufficient incentive.

I'd have Batman remain invisible for most of the prologue. We'd begin the sequence with shots of the criminals patrolling their industrial hideout in the pouring rain.

One goon suddenly notices that the rain is no longer showering him, yet the deluge hasn't ceased. He extends his arm and sees that the drops are still falling on his fingertips, just not on the spot where he's standing. Slowly, he looks up and sees a blurry outline in the rain, as though something invisible were clinging to the wall directly above him. Before the goon can open fire, the thing above swoops down and hoists him off his feet. We then see raindrops bouncing off Batman's outline as he stalks the site taking down the other criminals one by one.

Occasionally we see shots of Bruce's POV inside the suit. We hear his breathing and see his vital signs displayed on the HUD. His heartbeat is growing more erratic as he exerts himself. Eventually there's only one criminal left guarding the hostage. The bad guy aims his gun at the girl's head and demands Batman show himself. Now we finally get our first proper look at Bruce in his new batsuit as he steps out of the shadows, eyes glowing, dripping with rainwater, and disengages his optic camouflage.

A tense standoff ensues, and it's during that standoff that the heart attack occurs. The criminal doesn't know why Batman's suddenly incapacitated, but he makes the most of the situation and tries shooting him in the head at point-blank range. The hostage pushes his rifle aside at the last moment, saving Batman, and Bruce uses a final burst of energy to take down the criminal.

The hostage is saved. She turns towards Batman to see if he's all right, but he's nowhere to be seen. As police vehicles converge on the area, we see Batman slumped on a nearby rooftop. The mask comes off and we see Keaton underneath gasping for air as the rain pelts against his aging features.

We then dissolve to the Batcave where a sombre Bruce takes one final look at his costume before closing the armoury door. The lights in the cave go out and we fade to black.

We then fade in on an establishing shot of Gotham City in the year 2039. A caption reads:

NEO-GOTHAM – THE FUTURE

Seriously, this could be one of the greatest Batman films ever and a very worthy sequel to B89 and BR.

[The Dark Knight]

This is why I'm hoping Keaton is retained for the new DCU. It solves the issue of Batman's presence and keeps the Beyond dream alive. We could have a Wonder Woman 3 situation where the new team ask for a new script and thus a new approach from what was first pitched. Beyond is the type of movie that would be worthy of the hype, and a film I'd be willing to wait to be done properly. Silver's ideas justify that thought. I wouldn't need a direct translation of the TV show, and new film continuity would have to be considered. Just as long as the core framework was in place.

[Silver Nemesis]

I've been thinking about how the Schumacher movies might be incorporated into a Burtonverse Batman Beyond film. I know everyone's saying that BF and B&R are no longer canonical, but for argument's sake let's assume they still are. Unless the studio is planning to contradict the Schumacher movies in The Flash, say by introducing a new Robin or bringing in Billy Dee Two-Face (according to the leaks I've read, they're not doing anything like this), then I see no reason not to consider BF and B&R part of the canon. All this would mean is that between BR and The Flash Keaton's Batman had other adventures that included battling the Riddler, Two-Face, Poison Ivy, Bane and Mr Freeze, and recruiting Robin and Batgirl.

How could these additional elements of the mythos be incorporated into Batman Beyond?

First, we'd have to address the problem of Batgirl. Commissioner Barbara Gordon is an important character in the Batman Beyond story and she should feature in the movie. So do we just introduce a new version of Barbara Gordon (maybe the Leslie Grace version) and ignore Silverstone's Barbara Wilson? That's one way to go.

Alternatively, it could be explained that Barbara Wilson joined the GCPD after graduating college, where she met and fell in love with fellow rookie James Gordon Jr., the son of Pat Hingle's Commissioner Gordon. She then married James Jr. and became Barbara Gordon, Commissioner Gordon's daughter-in-law. Instead of being the sister of James Jr., Silverstone's Barbara would be his wife. I wouldn't object to recasting the role of Babs, perhaps replacing Silverstone with someone like Dina Meyer or Angie Harmon. But I'd make it clear that she was the same character from B&R, while simultaneously shifting her personality towards that of the Batman Beyond Babs.

Instead of Tim Drake being the one possessed by the Joker, it could be Chris O'Donnell's Dick Grayson, who is now middle aged and retired as Nightwing. This would reflect the twist in Frank Miller's The Dark Knight Strikes Again where Dick became the new Joker. I hate that story, but I don't mind borrowing from it.

I've said before that I think the possession angle should be supernatural in the live action movie. The plot point about the microchip injecting DNA into Drake that somehow physically and mentally transforms him never made sense to me. Let's just have it so that Dick is possessed by the ghost of Jack Napier, which causes him to supernaturally transform. That wouldn't work with the grounded sensibility of Nolan's films, but it would suit the more gothic and poetic atmosphere of the Burtonverse.

If the studio got permission from Jack Nicholson, they could use deep fake technology and speech synthesis software to make O'Donnell's face and voice transform into those of Jack's Joker. Nicholson was in his early fifties when he shot Batman '89, and O'Donnell is in his early fifties now. O'Donnell's about the same height that Nicholson was in his prime (5'9). They could always use a taller, lankier actor to play the Joker during the possession scenes (or Leonardo DiCaprio, if he was up for it) and just use O'Donnell for the scenes where he's Dick Grayson.

When O'Donnell was first cast as Robin it was back when Keaton was still on board to play Batman. O'Donnell said they were meant to have a father-son relationship, but that it changed to more of a fraternal relationship when Kilmer was cast. O'Donnell and Keaton worked together on The Company (2007) – which is pretty good, btw – and I'd still like to see them work together on a Batman movie.

Warner Bros. shouldn't underestimate the nostalgia a lot of people have for the Schumacher movies, and especially for Batman Forever.

But why would Dick become possessed by the Joker, considering he didn't become Robin until after Napier's death? And how do we deal with the presence of James Jr., since Babs is meant to be an embittered old maid in Batman Beyond?

In the comics James Gordon Jr. turned out to be a psychopath, and at one point he even used Joker venom to imitate the Joker's MO and make his father think the real Joker was responsible for one of his crimes. Instead of the real Joker kidnapping Tim in the flashback scene, we could have a similar flashback where Batman, Nightwing and Batgirl – all digitally de-aged – go to Arkham Asylum to investigate a Joker copycat, which turns out to be James Jr. Just as the flashback scene in Return of the Joker took place in the abandoned Arkham, so this one would take place in the Arkham Asylum from the Schumacher films.

There could be a throwaway line explaining that the facility was abandoned after Poison Ivy and Bane attacked it in B&R. Another option would be to have the flashback scene take place in the abandoned Axis Chemicals plant, where Napier was reborn as the Joker.

The Joker knew Batman's true identity in the original animated film, but this copycat Joker, being James Jr., has learnt the identities of the entire Bat-family after discovering his wife's secret double life. He might even have kidnapped Alfred as bait to lure them into his trap. He's somehow got his hands on Smilex (maybe he teamed up with Jonathan Crane to create it, which would offer us a chance to include a Burtonised Scarecrow in the flashback). During the confrontation, James Jr. exposes Nightwing to the new Smilex/fear gas hybrid. James Jr. falls to his death (as he did in Batgirl V5 #49), and Bruce and Babs rush Nightwing back to the Batcave to treat him before he succumbs to the Smilex.

Back in the present, Babs would tell Terry that Bruce developed a Smilex antidote that he used on Dick. But the antidote was imperfect, and consequently Dick suffered from long-term side effects that forced him to retire as Nightwing. It would gradually be revealed that these side effects included psychosis that left him mentally and physically susceptible to possession by the vengeful spirit of the real Joker, Jack Napier. Later Derek Powers would use a sample of this imperfect Smilex antidote to try curing himself, and its psychotic properties would contribute to his transformation into Blight.

After Bruce learns of the Joker's return, he goes to the Batcave laboratory and starts working to perfect the Smilex antidote. It would be this refined antidote that Terry uses to save Bruce after the Joker attacks him in the Batcave, and it would be this antidote that Terry injects into Dick Grayson at the end of the movie to permanently cure him and exorcise the spirit of Jack Napier. I'd much rather have Batman save Dick than kill him like he did in The Dark Knight Strikes Again. Dick, now free of the Joker's curse, would regain full health and reconcile with Bruce.

I reckon these ideas could work. We'd then have a series of six Batman films, beginning and ending with Joker movies, and all but two of them starring Keaton. Batman Beyond could connect the previous five films and tie them all together. Admittedly it might be easier to just ignore the Schumacher films and use B89, BR and The Flash as the springboard for Batman Beyond, but a part of me would like to see O'Donnell and the Schumacher Arkham make a comeback.

There could also be a line of dialogue where Bruce explains to Terry that the Jokerz street gang was originally formed from the remnants of the Red Triangle circus gang.

[The Joker]

^^^

I like A LOT of this, Silver. I appreciate the post.

Course, with comics and this type of stuff, I tend to subscribe to the notion of it's not how you much you can throw away, but how much you can keep. Admittedly, I've gone back and forth on the Schumacher films being in the same universe as the Burton films. Generally speaking, I'm ok either way, but I grew up recognizing the 1989-1997 Batman films as being in the same continuity. So, as a consequence, it will pretty much always be my initial proclivity when it comes to that debate. I especially like your ideas for how to reintroduce Chris O'Donnell's Dick Grayson into the Beyond concept fold.

Also, 100% agree on "The Company". Watched it for the first time just last year. Very well done movie, with some strong performances.