WHEN They Do Decide To Reboot Batman Then...

Here's another idea. I was never all that high on Batman Begins but one thought I've had is that I'd probably like it more if it had been a starting point which gradually led to more comic book type of concepts being introduced in subsequent films. By that, I mean if realism had gradually been replaced by sci-fi, supernatural and other concepts, this franchise would probably be a lot more palatable for me. Obviously things didn't play out that way.

Still, maybe there's something to that concept. Do a warm reboot of Batman set in a more or less realistic world similar to (but, in a continuity sense, divorced from) the Nolanverse. Then in the sequel, introduce a bit more comic booky stuff. Man-Bat, for example. In the third one, include yet more. On and on and on.

Something else? I can't be the only one who's sick and tired of Batman wearing all kinds of armor and stuff. I can buy into the idea that he might have padding or what have you for crucial areas (such is implied and even outright shone in comics too numerous to mention) but this idea that he wears that bulky shit every night? No way. We've seen that way too much in live action in my opinion. I'd rather see a costume along the lines of Batman- Dead End in a reboot. It'd be different, if nothing else.

We don't need another Batman series where they show his origins AGAIN.

I still think my idea is best.

thecolorsblend wrote:Here's another idea. I was never all that high on Batman Begins but one thought I've had is that I'd probably like it more if it had been a starting point which gradually led to more comic book type of concepts being introduced in subsequent films. By that, I mean if realism had gradually been replaced by sci-fi, supernatural and other concepts, this franchise would probably be a lot more palatable for me. Obviously things didn't play out that way.

Still, maybe there's something to that concept. Do a warm reboot of Batman set in a more or less realistic world similar to (but, in a continuity sense, divorced from) the Nolanverse. Then in the sequel, introduce a bit more comic booky stuff. Man-Bat, for example. In the third one, include yet more. On and on and on.

Something else? I can't be the only one who's sick and tired of Batman wearing all kinds of armor and stuff. I can buy into the idea that he might have padding or what have you for crucial areas (such is implied and even outright shone in comics too numerous to mention) but this idea that he wears that bulky shit every night? No way. We've seen that way too much in live action in my opinion. I'd rather see a costume along the lines of Batman- Dead End in a reboot. It'd be different, if nothing else.

I kind of thought TDK was exactly as you described. With BATMAN BEGINS it's mostly the mob that is Gotham's problems. TDK signals the beginning of the elaborate and eccentric villains like The Joker and the mob's demise is because of their rigidness and wanting to be civilized and criminal. That bank heist scene sums it up. The mob bank man is a guy who believes in "honor and respect", that there's rules to follow, while the Joker has none of those delusions and just goes for what he wants which makes him more dangerous and makes Batman's battle against crime much harder.

I was in the belief that the follow up film would show that evolution, that the mob was all but gone and that more elaborate and colorful villains became common. Well, I was half I right.


As for Batman's costume. I think the perfect costume between Nolan's and the comics is in the Arkham video games. It's practical while being true to the look of the comic book version. I'd love to ditch the black rubber suits finally.

James Stocks wrote:I kind of thought TDK was exactly as you described. With BATMAN BEGINS it's mostly the mob that is Gotham's problems.

I'd say that's arguable. The mob is central to TDK's storyline. Besides that, the Joker in the comics isn't (or wasn't) much at all like the Ledger version (whether it's the bleached skin or the characterization). The comics Joker is criminally insane, motivated by a joke only he understands. TDK's Joker is an anarchist in makeup. It's a pretty big difference.

James Stocks wrote:As for Batman's costume. I think the perfect costume between Nolan's and the comics is in the Arkham video games. It's practical while being true to the look of the comic book version. I'd love to ditch the black rubber suits finally.

Guess I should finally check out that video game and see what the fuss is about. Either way, the color scheme should be black and gray. You read the Golden Age comics and it's clear that his outfit is intended to be black and gray. The blue was meant to be a highlight to provide detail and texture to the black elements of his suit. At some point, the black elements were substituted entirely for the blue elements but I've never liked that depiction as much as black and gray.

Feels like this has the most relevance here.

http://movies.cosmicbooknews.com/content/toldja-3-warner-bros-reboot-batman-possibly-connect-justice-league-movie-and-man-steel

While nothing specific was mentioned by THR, regarding Batman we were told by a DC Entertainment insider that a new Batman movie is slated for some time around 2016 following the Justice League movie; that it will not be an origin story, but will feature a Batman who is entering his second year as a hero, with the title tentatively named "The Batman."

And the new Batman movie will be set within the same universe as the Justice League movie and the Man of Steel, with new Superman Henry Cavill to star in both.

In addition to the mention of a connected universe with the Justice League, Batman and Superman, it's been rumored that Wonder Woman may cameo in the new Man of Steel movie as well.

Not sure I buy any of this but there you have it.

Sounds too good to be true. Probably just the usual fanboy fantasies until we get something concrete. Will Wonder Woman even cameo in MOS? If she does, we may have something to go on there.

non_amos wrote:Sounds too good to be true. Probably just the usual fanboy fantasies until we get something concrete. Will Wonder Woman even cameo in MOS? If she does, we may have something to go on there.

I completely agree. Besides, a reliable WB source has informed me personally that not only will Wonder Woman make a cameo appearance, but the mayor of Metropolis will be played by Dean Cain (although it'll be an unnecessarily CG'ed version of him rather than the flesh and blood actor), Noel Neill will reprise her role as Lois Lane in a brief flash forward sequence taking place far in the future and at the end of MOS after the credits Max Lord and his trusty sidekick L-Ron (both of whom are played by Ed Asner... for some reason) will invite Superman to join up with The Justice Initiative.

It's on the Internet and I said it comes from a WB source... so it all must be true, right?

Yep! Gotta love them Internets! Won't Elvis also get off of a UFO & request a peanut butter & jelly sandwich?

Nice read and would be nice for one to be out by then. But coming frrom cosmicbook site they are even more crappy them comicbookmovie site. So I take that as far as I throw it. And ffor me personally I rather hold batman off to we can have mos/and a mos sequel out, and at least shoot for one or two more solo dc films before we bring batman back. So we have a little longer time away like some others where.

As for armor suits I never had a issue for that from burton to nolan films. It does make some sense for him having full armor suit since he is just a normal man and all that. But it would be cool if they did change it up a little saying parts of suit ie chest/back/head had armor. But the rest of suit is different material ie like spiderman suit and all that. I would like that. Plus it would be sweet to have a full grey body suit. With black gloves/cowl/boots. So then it makes the bat logo pop more. I didn't like in nolan suits you could barely notice the bat logo.

Now as for tone and setting of film I do it like marvel studios has done things. Characters are world and live in a world that is pretty normal and real place. But they work through and survive throw crazy fantastic things happening to them. Like we saw in ironman/thor/cap. So then we have it seeming real but doesn't throw out the more crazy scifi/fantasy stuff of the comics from working. But this also has to be a working deal across all dc films. If they are doing a shared universe there writers/producers have to work to make it all gell together.

As for the body armor thing, I actually agreed with that ever since the 1989 Burton film. For Batman that is, not for Superman. Personally from the comics I always liked the traditional suit that Batman had with the gray/black color scheme. I also preferred the yellow oval symbol but didn't mind the other one on the Earth-2 version. Please note that Bats also wore trunks. But back to the initial Burton film. When it first came out it was very obvious that they changed the suit. No trunks for one thing, which didn't seem to get the uproar then that we're getting concerning Superman now. Anyway, even more noticeable was the body armor. But I believe I accepted it immediately because it was functional. Like Webhead pointed out, Batman is just an ordinary man. Bullets would kill him like everyone else. Remember the scene where Batman was 'shot' & the Joker's goons started poking at him & realized it was body armor, thus realizing he was human after all? And then 'Bob' says to 'take his wallet'. Well, the body armor just made sense in a real world setting even back in '89. Nevertheless Keaton's suit looked a lot better than Bale's and it had the yellow oval! Which seems to be non-existent everywhere today. On Bale's suit it's like he just as well not even have a Bat symbol!

For a future film it might be wise to come up with a new suit. Maybe take some cues from the '89 film as far as the functionality of the thing but simultaneously craft something that's actually appealing to the eye, like maybe also have major influences from the comics. That way you have something that looks enough like the source material but is also 'real world'. And I suggest it have the yellow oval, which even the comics should reconsider.

non_amos wrote:As for the body armor thing, I actually agreed with that ever since the 1989 Burton film. For Batman that is, not for Superman. Personally from the comics I always liked the traditional suit that Batman had with the gray/black color scheme. I also preferred the yellow oval symbol but didn't mind the other one on the Earth-2 version. Please note that Bats also wore trunks. But back to the initial Burton film. When it first came out it was very obvious that they changed the suit. No trunks for one thing, which didn't seem to get the uproar then that we're getting concerning Superman now. Anyway, even more noticeable was the body armor. But I believe I accepted it immediately because it was functional. Like Webhead pointed out, Batman is just an ordinary man. Bullets would kill him like everyone else. Remember the scene where Batman was 'shot' & the Joker's goons started poking at him & realized it was body armor, thus realizing he was human after all? And then 'Bob' says to 'take his wallet'. Well, the body armor just made sense in a real world setting even back in '89. Nevertheless Keaton's suit looked a lot better than Bale's and it had the yellow oval! Which seems to be non-existent everywhere today.

The yellow oval is in Earth One. It was in the post-RIP/pre-Flashpoint comics too but has since been eliminated again with The New 52. Too bad, I really liked that pre-Flashpoint outfit. It had a couple of Nolanized design elements but still mostly looked like the outfit he work in through the 90's. I thought it looked great but apparently I'm in the sad minority on that one.

i would like the yellow oval too myself. but even if they didnt go that route at least have a dam logo that can be viewable on the suit.

Hey, I'm all about the comics as the primary source for any comic book movie. That's probably the worst kept secret around here. But one complication is Robin. Going by the canon, Dick becomes Robin at around 11 or 12. I'm not at all worried about making it convincing that an fifth grader can take down an adult. If you do it right, the audience will buy into it.

However, isn't there some sort of MPAA rule about child endangerment? Doesn't that automatically earn the movie a stiffer rating? My understanding was that this was the reason Singerman had a PG-13 rating. Otherwise, it would've been a PG movie.

Anyway. Just throwing this out there. Could be an issue if they ever want a 12-yr old Robin running around.

Here's a video I came across about a month back that shows with a better cowl, the regular Batman costume CAN work in live-action:



Skip to about the 2:10 mark.

The guy they got to play Batman has more of a "Superman" build, but it works. For the most part.

Apologist Puncher wrote:Here's a video I came across about a month back that shows with a better cowl, the regular Batman costume CAN work in live-action:

If a costume along those lines is what they use in the reboot, I'll have no complaints. Great find!

That would be a cool costume to go with. And change of pace too. And like I said we can always be told head/chest area he has extra prrotection ie from bullets and all that. But then go more spidey/cap suit material for rest of film would be nice break away from full on rubber/plastic armor full suits.

thecolorsblend wrote:Hey, I'm all about the comics as the primary source for any comic book movie. That's probably the worst kept secret around here. But one complication is Robin. Going by the canon, Dick becomes Robin at around 11 or 12. I'm not at all worried about making it convincing that an fifth grader can take down an adult. If you do it right, the audience will buy into it.

However, isn't there some sort of MPAA rule about child endangerment? Doesn't that automatically earn the movie a stiffer rating? My understanding was that this was the reason Singerman had a PG-13 rating. Otherwise, it would've been a PG movie.

Anyway. Just throwing this out there. Could be an issue if they ever want a 12-yr old Robin running around.

Last time I watched BATMAN FOREVER I realized that the role of Robin as written on the screenplay is supposed to be a teenager, through and through. Stuff like him stealing the batmobile, showing it off to a bunch of hookers, ect. Unless you really buy that the 25 year old Dick Grayson is supposed to be a virgin. It's like the filmmakers just decided to cast a college graduate age person and not make any alterations to the script.

He sure doesn't seem 12 or 13 to me...

I'm thinking high school age, like 15.

I believe for batman forever he was about 17 since he could drive but was still a minor so bruce took him in.

Just thought of something. I wasn't really hip to what Nolan was doing in the lead up to Batman Begins. I didn't mind the concept of a reboot, you understand. It was the realism thing that bugged me. But the Nolanites (and yes, they were around even then) made it into an either/or thing. Not being onboard with Nolan automatically meant you were some kind of Burton-obsessed fanboy. It couldn't possibly be because you just weren't interested in Nolan's interpretation. No no, there had to be some deeper, uglier agenda. I remember one Nolanite even saying in exasperation "why can't you Burton fans just ENJOY Begins without acting like you're cheating on your wife or something?!?!" They were all about plurality at the time. Big tent. Room for everyone. They figured nobody should play favorites about this stuff. Just get (and stay) onboard with Nolan.

When the reboot comes out... I wonder. Will they continue being so ecumenical? Or will they become as entrenched about Nolan as they perceived others being about other stuff?

The Verdict? They'll be as passionate (& stubborn) about Nolan's take as they perceive others to be about Burton's take. So in essence they'll be hypocrites. I just hope someone points it out to them when the time for the reboot comes.

"But where's the love, dude?!

Rebooted batman to appear first in JL:
http://www.batman-on-film.com/BATMAN-REBOOTED_rebooted-Batman-to-debut-in-JL.html

Rebooted Batman to Debut in JUSTICE LEAGUE? Posted by: Jett August 29, 2012

0

I received a bit of intel here recently that involves the Batman on film reboot and the inevitable JUSTICE LEAGUE film.

It’s looking as a live-action JUSTICE LEAGUE film -- the one currently being penned by Will Beall for Warner Bros. -- just might be the studio’s first big, DC Comics-based tent pole movie after 2013’s MAN OF STEEL. This JL film would, most likely, hit theaters Summer 2015. So what does this have to do with BATMAN REBOOTED? Read on…

Said reboot will come after the JL film, not before. Therefore, the new cinematic Batman will be introduced in the JL film as opposed to a solo film. This would, according to my industry "FOBOF," assure the new Batman film series will be part of a "DC Cinematic Universe."

Keep in mind that this is based on industry scuttlebutt, so take it with a grain of salt. However, this is not good news for the solo Batman franchise in my opinion. I’d like the next director of the rebooted cinematic Batman to have more creative control over the character -- something that’s not likely to happen of this scenario plays out. I have some very strong opinions about this that I shall reserve for an op-ed piece in the near future.

Keep in mind that this is based on industry scuttlebutt, so take it with a grain of salt. However, this is not good news for the solo Batman franchise in my opinion. I’d like the next director of the rebooted cinematic Batman to have more creative control over the character -- something that’s not likely to happen of this scenario plays out. I have some very strong opinions about this that I shall reserve for an op-ed piece in the near future.

Since this came from that Batman site I can assume this may have some credibility? But I took that above part for a point. This dude wants the director to have more creative control over Batman?! Ain't that what we've had with Nolan now for umpteen years?! Is that really a good thing? You tell me. This doesn't necessarily mean doom for the solo franchise either. It may mean that the director has to include the DCU but so what?! Shouldn't he have to?! As opposed to reinventing the entire mythos as he sees fit? As a matter of fact, we may finally get the definitive Batman film, villains & all. Think about that!

Ya that could be a good thing or it could be a bad thing. Like singerr on sr. To nolan on batman. As nice as it is to have director control. I rather see a more sharred control. With wb/dc folks laying the groundwork/ideals. And the director takes that framework. And makes his marrk on character but still within what the dc/wb folks want.