Click HERE to see this thread with all of the graphics, features, and links.

Man of Steel. Who will be the director of JLA? David Yates (Harry Potter) might be the man.

Mark Millar's quote about the new JLA movie:

"According to Variety, The Flash, Aquaman, Green Arrow, Lobo, the Suicide Squad, and Shazam are all in different stages of development as films at Warner Bros."

http://www.superherohype.com/news/articles/171033-warner-bros-planning-even-more-dc-movies

It looks like this could all hang on how well Superman does on hte big screen this time around.

Originally posted by Newjak
It looks like this could all hang on how well Superman does on hte big screen this time around.

Yeah, though hoping it's good either way. Superman needs a good movie.

Originally posted by Prep-Man
Man of Steel. Who will be the director of JLA? David Yates (Harry Potter) might be the man. Thanks for the info. I'm sure that The Avengers being a HUGE blockbuster has nothing to do with DCEs decision. Originally posted by -Pr-
"According to Variety, The Flash, Aquaman, Green Arrow, Lobo, the Suicide Squad, and Shazam are all in different stages of development as films at Warner Bros."

http://www.superherohype.com/news/articles/171033-warner-bros-planning-even-more-dc-movies Sweet! woot

I dont care how the other movies do as long as the flash movie is good

Originally posted by -Pr-
Yeah, though hoping it's good either way. Superman needs a good movie. Yes he does.

Originally posted by Prep-Man
Mark Millar's quote about the new JLA movie:

You know how many times Mark Millar has shot his mouth off about various upcoming DC movie projects, only to be proven wrong time and again? Last year at this time, he was jumping on the bandwagon to criticize Green Lantern, saying it's failure was the result of DC characters being better suited to animation than live action.

Never mind his opinion. DC & Warners love to put out press releases, but it's all just talk for now.

So, whatever happened to that Doom Patrol move they got Akiva Goldsmith to develop, hmm? Or that Sgt. Rock movie set in the future?

Originally posted by roughrider
You know how many times Mark Millar has shot his mouth off about various upcoming DC movie projects, only to be proven wrong time and again? Last year at this time, he was jumping on the bandwagon to criticize Green Lantern, saying it's failure was the result of DC characters being better suited to animation than live action.

Never mind his opinion. DC & Warners love to put out press releases, but it's all just talk for now.

So, whatever happened to that Doom Patrol move they got Akiva Goldsmith to develop, hmm? Or that Sgt. Rock movie set in the future?

I don't really pay attention to what he says in general. A writer is already assigned to JLA, so time will tell if it will fall through or not.

Originally posted by roughrider
Last year at this time, he was jumping on the bandwagon to criticize Green Lantern, saying it's failure was the result of DC characters being better suited to animation than live action.



Well, that's a ridiculous statement, superheroes, no matter what the costume/powers can be translated easily to screen, Marvel have shown that repeatedly now.

It's the lack of will to come up with anything but origin stories and not having the style and atmosphere being the same all across the board. Don't want to tread on anyone's toes but had the Nolan Batman project been a bit more JL-friendly then with GL already in the bag and Superman coming up more DC characters would have been able to be fleshed out. As it is with it being disconnected from the other two it kind of halts the whole thing with having to do Batman yet again as well as taking a shot at other characters.

It sounds fake to me. That website has reported wrong information in the past so this wouldn't be the first time.

Seriously, they want a $270 million budget for the JL movie when the script most likely isn't even done yet. That's one of the reasons why it sounds fake to me.

DC needs to learn to stop overspending on their movie budgets. Green Lantern and Superman Returns were both ridiculous in terms of budgets.

They can't just assume Superman will make a Billion and Green Lantern Half a Billion. They need to take risks but not in a way that if something fails it will take them right back to the drawing board.

Right now everything's resting on Superman's shoulders. I still think they should capitalize on the success of Nolan's series and use Bale as Batman to lead the JL alongside a hopefully successful Man of Steel. I don't think audiences will like a Batman reboot so soon after a Batman franchise they loved.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
DC needs to learn to stop overspending on their movie budgets. Green Lantern and Superman Returns were both ridiculous in terms of budgets.

They can't just assume Superman will make a Billion and Green Lantern Half a Billion. They need to take risks but not in a way that if something fails it will take them right back to the drawing board.

Right now everything's resting on Superman's shoulders. I still think they should capitalize on the success of Nolan's series and use Bale as Batman to lead the JL alongside a hopefully successful Man of Steel. I don't think audiences will like a Batman reboot so soon after a Batman franchise they loved.


Bale has always said that if Nolan does it so will he.. I understand the need to reboot however all WB/DC needs to do is have Nolan/Bale return and then get out of their way so they can continue their great work together

I don't think I would like the idea of the Nolan/Bale Batman in a JL movie. His take on Batman is too grounded in reality to fit in a JL film. Plus, I don't think the suit he wears in the Nolan trilogy can translate well into a JL film. The suit never looked that good to begin with IMO, as well as any other Batman suit used in live action IMO, but they weren't a big problem for me either because Batman spends most of his time in darkness so you can't clearly see his suit. But in a JL film, I'm going to assume he won't spend as much time in the shadows and more time during daylight or in a bright setting.

Originally posted by spidermanrocks
I don't think I would like the idea of the Nolan/Bale Batman in a JL movie. His take on Batman is too grounded in reality to fit in a JL film. Plus, I don't think the suit he wears in the Nolan trilogy can translate well into a JL film. The suit never looked that good to begin with IMO, as well as any other Batman suit used in live action IMO, but they weren't a big problem for me either because Batman spends most of his time in darkness so you can't clearly see his suit. But in a JL film, I'm going to assume he won't spend as much time in the shadows and more time during daylight or in a bright setting.

Remember Nolan "Godfathered" The Man of steel film

if the rumors are true he is also "Godfathering" the JLA film so it is very conceivable that he might have a lot of sayso and obvious WB should listen to what he has to say

Originally posted by spidermanrocks
I don't think I would like the idea of the Nolan/Bale Batman in a JL movie. His take on Batman is too grounded in reality to fit in a JL film.

Not sure why people think this. Batman is by nature quite a grounded character.

His world always has been the most "realistic" but that doesn't mean you can't include him in the JL.

I just think if WB/DC are serious about making a successful JL movie then they would be wise to have the Bale/Nolan Batman leading the way.

Look how heavily Marvel capitalized on the huge success of Iron man to lead the way for the Avengers movie. Despite Iron man not being the most powerful Avenger, and despite his movie suit not being on par with the comic version.

Even the trailers for Avengers and the movie itself had Downey's Iron man at the forefront.

Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
Remember Nolan "Godfathered" The Man of steel film

if the rumors are true he is also "Godfathering" the JLA film so it is very conceivable that he might have a lot of sayso and obvious WB should listen to what he has to say

Just because he is godfathering Man of Steel doesn't necessarily mean that he will make sure Man of Steel will fit in the same universe as BB, TDK, and TDKR. The DC cinematic universe (if the info in the link is accurate) has only been announced after the success of the Avengers. Man of Steel is now in post-production. In other words, chances are Nolan didn't even know there would be a DC movie universe until recently. Plus, he himself has stated that Batman is the only superhero that exists in the world he created in his trilogy. So it looks like he didn't bother to connect the franchises. On top of that, it also looks like TDKR will be the final chapter and other directors won't be able to continue the franchise from there.

Nolan did say that he will stay as producer for the next Batman, if it reboots. It's possible that he may godfather the reboot to a path that leads to a JL movie but it's unlikely he'll do that to his first trilogy. The first Nolan trilogy seems to be a sealed deal.

Not saying that it definitely won't happen. Just saying that it's unlikely.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Not sure why people think this. Batman is by nature quite a grounded character.

His world always has been the most "realistic" but that doesn't mean you can't include him in the JL.

I just think if WB/DC are serious about making a successful JL movie then they would be wise to have the Bale/Nolan Batman leading the way.

Look how heavily Marvel capitalized on the huge success of Iron man to lead the way for the Avengers movie. Despite Iron man not being the most powerful Avenger, and despite his movie suit not being on par with the comic version.

Even the trailers for Avengers and the movie itself had Downey's Iron man at the forefront.

I never said you can't include him in a JL film just because he's grounded. I said I don't think Nolan's Batman will fit too well in a JL film because he is TOO grounded in reality to exist in a JL universe.

It's true that he is by nature a grounded character. However, despite him being grounded, he can do stuff that no real human being can do. He can jump from rooftop to rooftop, jump from a building and land safely on his feet, dodge machine guns while gliding, is so fluid in martial arts to the point where he makes Chuck Norris and Bruce Lee take notes, goes 2 - 3 days without sleep and still fight at the peak human level, etc. All those feats have yet to be displayed by Bale's Batman.

Plus, the main reason why Batman is able to keep up with all the other superheroes in the JL despite not having any powers is his intelligence. While Bale's Batman is pretty intelligent, he has yet to show that he is the world's greatest detective.

I'm not bashing on Bale's Batman. I'm just saying that his Batman's nature is to be very grounded in reality. That is fine but we need a take on Batman that is both grounded in reality by nature but also able to fit in a less grounded setting such as a JL movie. The DCAU version of Batman would be a good example of a Batman like that. If you take a look at BTAS, it is very grounded in reality but at the same time, the DCAU version of Batman is also unrealistic enough to fit in the JL and JLU episodes.

Originally posted by spidermanrocks

Nolan did say that he will stay as producer for the next Batman, if it reboots. It's possible that he may godfather the reboot to a path that leads to a JL movie but it's unlikely he'll do that to his first trilogy. The first Nolan trilogy seems to be a sealed deal.

Not saying that it definitely won't happen. Just saying that it's unlikely.

it's not really a matter of "if" they reboot it at this point. WB has more or less decided to reboot it.

I think it would be a great Idea to hand a DC shared universe in the hands of of a very great and savvy director. Someone that can consider the source material. TDK series however will not be tied in that's a sure thing...but I would say the current series wont have an entirely "tied up" ending as WB has announced they want the series to have an "ongoing" feel after its overs.

Originally posted by spidermanrocks
I never said you can't include him in a JL film just because he's grounded. I said I don't think Nolan's Batman will fit too well in a JL film because he is TOO grounded in reality to exist in a JL universe.

It's true that he is by nature a grounded character. However, despite him being grounded, he can do stuff that no real human being can do. He can jump from rooftop to rooftop, jump from a building and land safely on his feet, dodge machine guns while gliding, is so fluid in martial arts to the point where he makes Chuck Norris and Bruce Lee take notes, goes 2 - 3 days without sleep and still fight at the peak human level, etc. All those feats have yet to be displayed by Bale's Batman.

Plus, the main reason why Batman is able to keep up with all the other superheroes in the JL despite not having any powers is his intelligence. While Bale's Batman is pretty intelligent, he has yet to show that he is the world's greatest detective.

I'm not bashing on Bale's Batman. I'm just saying that his Batman's nature is to be very grounded in reality. That is fine but we need a take on Batman that is both grounded in reality by nature but also able to fit in a less grounded setting such as a JL movie. The DCAU version of Batman would be a good example of a Batman like that. If you take a look at BTAS, it is very grounded in reality but at the same time, the DCAU version of Batman is also unrealistic enough to fit in the JL and JLU episodes.

He could show those extra abilities when he's in a JL movie. I remember when people were saying Norton's Hulk can't compete with Thor. And yet come Avengers he did. They just amped him for the movie. (Even though it wasn't Norton, but was same continuity).

Originally posted by spidermanrocks
Just because he is godfathering Man of Steel doesn't necessarily mean that he will make sure Man of Steel will fit in the same universe as BB, TDK, and TDKR. The DC cinematic universe (if the info in the link is accurate) has only been announced after the success of the Avengers. Man of Steel is now in post-production. In other words, chances are Nolan didn't even know there would be a DC movie universe until recently. Plus, he himself has stated that Batman is the only superhero that exists in the world he created in his trilogy. So it looks like he didn't bother to connect the franchises. On top of that, it also looks like TDKR will be the final chapter and other directors won't be able to continue the franchise from there.

Nolan did say that he will stay as producer for the next Batman, if it reboots. It's possible that he may godfather the reboot to a path that leads to a JL movie but it's unlikely he'll do that to his first trilogy. The first Nolan trilogy seems to be a sealed deal.

Not saying that it definitely won't happen. Just saying that it's unlikely.


well there is only a year or so to truly find out..

Originally posted by spidermanrocks
It's true that he is by nature a grounded character. However, despite him being grounded, he can do stuff that no real human being can do. He can jump from rooftop to rooftop, jump from a building and land safely on his feet, dodge machine guns while gliding, is so fluid in martial arts to the point where he makes Chuck Norris and Bruce Lee take notes, goes 2 - 3 days without sleep and still fight at the peak human level, etc. All those feats have yet to be displayed by Bale's Batman.

Plus, the main reason why Batman is able to keep up with all the other superheroes in the JL despite not having any powers is his intelligence. While Bale's Batman is pretty intelligent, he has yet to show that he is the world's greatest detective.



This is key, you can't just take Bale's Batman and have him do outlandish feats like the comic book verson in a JL movie after 3 films of relying heavily on technology and grounded contraints. Iron Man was different because the very nature of Iron Man's tech from the suits, the arc reactor, the slick 3D displays in his house, they all are in the realm of pseudo-science (Nolan's films had pseudo science too of course but not on the level of IM) and this largely opened up possibilties for more outlandish ideas. Add that with the cameo of NF at the end of the first and more cameos in the other franchises and you had a shared universe in the making.

Had Nolan even made tiny references to other comic book universes/locations/characters (which wouldn't have compromised any of the films), then three characters Batman, GL and Superman would already be in the bag leaving time to bring other characters on board.

As it is you have GL which I haven't seen but I think it would have been mentioned if there was a JL link, and Superman, which is unclear as to if it will link to JL. Nolan's Batman came first and if that had linked to other DC universes the other two would have for definite. TDKR may be the one to 'reach out' but following the his closed universe rules I doubt it.

^ It seems you guys are more bothered about the feats the character can do rather than just making the JL a big hit.

Fact is it's very very unlikely that any other DC hero will be anywhere near as successful as Nolan's Batman. At the moment they're struggling just to make a hit of any other hero. Even the last Superman couldn't make Half a Billion.

So if they don't capitalize on the huge success of Nolan/Bale's Batman then I really don't see JL being anywhere near as big as Avengers was. They will be more powerful in terms of feats though if that makes you happy.

^ I would want to rephrase my statement a bit then. Can you make a JL movie using the Nolan Batman? Probably. You can probably tweak a few stuff here and there to make him fit. But is using the Nolan Batman the best choice for the JL movie? No. So while Nolan's Batman can maybe fit in somehow, I would personally go with a bit less of a realistic Batman for a JL movie because he would fit better and it would make more sense.

"Fact is it's very very unlikely that any other DC hero will be anywhere near as successful as Nolan's Batman. At the moment they're struggling just to make a hit of any other hero. Even the last Superman couldn't make Half a Billion."

At this point in time, Batman has become a character so popular with the mainstream audience that you don't even need that much hype for his movies in order to attract an audience. So anything to do with Batman that portrays him as dark, gritty, and like the comics (from the comics all the way to TV shows, to video games like Arkham City, to the Nolan movies and to future live-action movies, etc.) will attract an audience. My point is that you don't specifically need Nolan's Batman to make half a billion at the box office. All you need is Batman. Any dark and gritty version of Batman. People will show up simply because it's Batman. Just look at how little advertisement they have for TDKR and it looks like it's going to make at least half a billion when it comes out. It already sold 6 times the amount of IMAX tickets Avengers sold and it didn't have anywhere the amount of hype and promos the Avengers had.

Batman has become such an iconic character to the mainstream audience at this point - especially in recent years mostly thanks to the Nolan movies and the Arkham games - that you don't specifically need Nolan's Batman for your movie to be successful. You just need Batman. Period. As long as the JL movie has Batman in it, people will show up regardless of whether or not it's Bale in the suit. Plus, if the rumors are true, Nolan is godfathering the JL movie which means you can still attach Nolan's name to the new Batman, which will attract even more people.

^ I'm not sure I buy that just the name Batman will equate to huge box office success.

Batman Begins wasn't a huge success (though it was a hit). The same goes for Superman Returns. Just the name Superman didn't make it some huge hit.

Also we have yet to see audiences reaction to rebooting the much loved Nolan Bat franchise. But it's too early to tell I guess.

Anyway I'm still not very clear on why Nolan's Batman can't fit into a JL world. Batman doesn't have any superpowers anyway, so he'll never compare to the rest of the league in that sense.

It's his wealth, technology, resources and understanding of the criminal mind that is useful to them (and his badassness which puts the rest of the league in line).

I remember people saying exactly the same about the movie Avengers before it came out. That movie Iron man and Hulk would be utterley useless next to movie Thor and so would not really fit together.

But look at the result. It worked wonderfully. And I'm sure a huge part of it's financial success was capitalizing on the big success of Robert Downey's Iron man (the original script gave Cap a much bigger role than IM), plus capitalzing on Hulk being probably the most famous and recognizable character on the team.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
^ I'm not sure I buy that just the name Batman will equate to huge box office success.

Batman Begins wasn't a huge success (though it was a hit). The same goes for Superman Returns. Just the name Superman didn't make it some huge hit.

Also we have yet to see audiences reaction to rebooting the much loved Nolan Bat franchise. But it's too early to tell I guess.

Anyway I'm still not very clear on why Nolan's Batman can't fit into a JL world. Batman doesn't have any superpowers anyway, so he'll never compare to the rest of the league in that sense.

It's his wealth, technology, resources and understanding of the criminal mind that is useful to them (and his badassness which puts the rest of the league in line).

I remember people saying exactly the same about the movie Avengers before it came out. That movie Iron man and Hulk would be utterley useless next to movie Thor and so would not really fit together.

But look at the result. It worked wonderfully. And I'm sure a huge part of it's financial success was capitalizing on the big success of Robert Downey's Iron man (the original script gave Cap a much bigger role than IM), plus capitalzing on Hulk being probably the most famous and recognizable character on the team.


Just my opinion but I believe Nolanverse can fit very well into the Justice League filmverse... It shouldn't take too much for whoever writes it too make it all work

Rumor has it, Barry Sonnonfeld will be directing Metal Men. Nice choice.

http://geek-news.mtv.com/2012/06/21/metal-men-movie-dc-comics/

Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
Just my opinion but I believe Nolanverse can fit very well into the Justice League filmverse... It shouldn't take too much for whoever writes it too make it all work






I think people forget his technological resources. His vehicles in the series have been awsome.

It wouldn't take much imagination for him to make a Batbot type thing based on his previous vehicles (for a JL movie).

And I think with his more serious tone and experience in dealing with psychos, he could definitely intimidate the rest of the league.

As for his combat skills BB made it clear he's a frigging top-rate Ninja!

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
^ I'm not sure I buy that just the name Batman will equate to huge box office success.

Batman Begins wasn't a huge success (though it was a hit). The same goes for Superman Returns. Just the name Superman didn't make it some huge hit.

Also we have yet to see audiences reaction to rebooting the much loved Nolan Bat franchise. But it's too early to tell I guess.

Anyway I'm still not very clear on why Nolan's Batman can't fit into a JL world. Batman doesn't have any superpowers anyway, so he'll never compare to the rest of the league in that sense.

It's his wealth, technology, resources and understanding of the criminal mind that is useful to them (and his badassness which puts the rest of the league in line).

I remember people saying exactly the same about the movie Avengers before it came out. That movie Iron man and Hulk would be utterley useless next to movie Thor and so would not really fit together.

But look at the result. It worked wonderfully. And I'm sure a huge part of it's financial success was capitalizing on the big success of Robert Downey's Iron man (the original script gave Cap a much bigger role than IM), plus capitalzing on Hulk being probably the most famous and recognizable character on the team.


Batman Begins wasn't a huge success due to Batman's image on the big screen being ruined by Batman & Robin. It took a while for Bats to rise (pun intended) again. He reached the "movie-will-be-a-huge-box-office-success-because-it-is-Batman" status only after The Dark Knight was released in theatres.

Superman Returns wasn't a huge success for the same reason Batman Begins wasn't a huge success. The last Superman movie pretty much ruined Supes' image on the big screen. Combine that with the fact that over 50% of the stuff in that movie were just rehashed stuff from the Donner movie and you could point that out from just seeing the trailers.

I think most people will be fine with rebooting Batman. The word "reboot" is heavily misunderstood. A reboot doesn't necessarily mean that you screwed up and have to start from scratch, redo the origin, reintroduce all the characters, redo the origins of the villains, and all of that. A reboot simply means ignoring the previous continuity. And with Batman's popularity, you wouldn't even need to set up any characters or continuity. You can just do a straight adaptation of any comic with all the characters already established and it would be fine. They're already said the Batman reboot (if it gets rebooted; there is no official announcement from Warner Bros yet but they said they're considering it and it will most likely happen) will already have an established Batman. This means we'll most likely get an already established universe where he's been Batman for a while, he's met some of his villains already, etc. I see it more as just a different take rather than a reinventation or redoing of the character. So if they have an already established Batman and an already established rogues gallery in the reboot, I think most people will be fine with it. Plus, Nolan is staying as producer for the reboot, which means it will probably be just as good in terms of storytelling, development, and complexity.

It's not that he can't possibly fit into the JL world in any way. It's that he wouldn't be the best choice for a Batman that exists in a JL world. As I said before, he needs to be a lot faster. Even faster than he was in Begins. Take the Arkham games for example. I'm sure you played them or at least saw some footage of them. He has to be THAT fast. Or at least as fast as Black Widow and Hawkeye were in Avengers (and they didn't have powers either). And he also has to prove that he is the world's greatest detective. As I said before, Bale's Batman still has to display those feats. You may argue that he can just display those feats in the JL movie. True but it's not being consistent. It wouldn't make sense to have him be like that for 3 movies and have him get his technology from Lucius Fox and then all of a sudden he is perfected in every field. And based on what we've seen from TDKR so far, he still doesn't seem to display those feats he needs for JL. I don't think we saw him do even a full body flip yet. TDKR takes place 8 years after TDK. How will you explain him not achieving this in 8 years (as well as in all the other years he was travelling worldwide training) but he suddenly learns how to do all this just in time for an alien invasion (or whatever villains they'll use in JL) strong enough to make him have to team up with 4 to 6 superpowered heroes in order to stop? That wouldn't make sense from a logical standpoint. Anyone professional critic who would look into this would realize the problem with this and would criticize the JL movie for that. Plus, the suit Bale wears wouldn't translate well to a JL movie. It was fine in BB, TDK, and I'm assuming it will be fine in TDKR but that's because he spends most of his time in the shadows and darkness and it looks good in there. It wouldn't look good in broad daylight or even in a place surrounded by a lot of lights (which is how I'm assuming the JL movie will look like). There is also the age factor. Bruce Wayne will be in his very late 30s/early 40s in TDKR and there are parts in the trailers and TV clips where you can see his hair turning gray. We know Superman will be in his 20s and I'm going to assume the other heroes will be younger too. Would you want a Batman that's almost twice the age of all the JL members? I personally would prefer a Batman closer to the other superheroes' ages.

Iron Man is a different case. Robert Downey Jr and Iron Man pretty much go hand in hand these days in terms of capitalizing off the character. It was Robert Downey Jr's great performance that made Iron Man a mainstream success. People think of Robert Downey Jr when they think Iron Man (including most comic book fans) just like how most people thought Christopher Reeves when they thought Superman (at least back in the day) and how people thought Robert Englund when they thought Freddy Krueger. Before that, IM wasn't exactly unknown but he wasn't one of Marvel's top 5 guns either. The movie gave us a definitive version of the character and even a lot of comic book fans only got into Iron Man once the movie came out. Batman is a whole different case. He's been an iconic mainstream success for decades now. People don't think Christian Bale when they think Batman. They think of everything involving Batman from Bale to Adam West to the Burton films to the comics to Batman TAS to other cartoons to the video games. Nolan did not create that iconic image of Batman. He simply just beautifully reintroduced it on the big screen after it was destroyed in the last decade.

The only people I heard say that about Iron Man and Hulk only said that months before Thor even came out. I don't think anyone said that once they saw Thor.

Sorry for the long post. I'm kinda tired after all that writing.

I don't see how Nolan-verse Batman could fit in to the JLA universe at all; the Noloan movies are almost completely grounded in reality, something a JLA movie wouldn't be.

Nolan's Batman would look stupid talking to Reynold's GL imo.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER




I think people forget his technological resources. His vehicles in the series have been awsome.

It wouldn't take much imagination for him to make a Batbot type thing based on his previous vehicles (for a JL movie).

And I think with his more serious tone and experience in dealing with psychos, he could definitely intimidate the rest of the league.

As for his combat skills BB made it clear he's a frigging top-rate Ninja!


agreed..


Originally posted by -Pr-
I don't see how Nolan-verse Batman could fit in to the JLA universe at all; the Noloan movies are almost completely grounded in reality, something a JLA movie wouldn't be.

Nolan's Batman would look stupid talking to Reynold's GL imo.


Nolanverse would fit very well, it just takes a good writer to make it work,, besides WB would look foolish if they did not at the very least attempted to include Nolanverse in the first script version

Originally posted by -Pr-
I don't see how Nolan-verse Batman could fit in to the JLA universe at all; the Noloan movies are almost completely grounded in reality, something a JLA movie wouldn't be.

Nolan's Batman would look stupid talking to Reynold's GL imo.



He would be so out of place. Keaton, Kilmer, and even Clooney could have worked in a JLA setting.

Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
Nolanverse would fit very well, it just takes a good writer to make it work,, besides WB would look foolish if they did not at the very least attempted to include Nolanverse in the first script version

How would it fit well?

Even in the comics, JLA Batman is so ridiculously OP so he can contend with his team-mates in the first place.

Besides, aren't they rebooting anyway?

Originally posted by JakeTheBank


He would be so out of place. Keaton, Kilmer, and even Clooney could have worked in a JLA setting.

Agreed.

Though I shudder to think about a Tim Burton Superman. Or Aquaman.

Originally posted by -Pr-
I don't see how Nolan-verse Batman could fit in to the JLA universe at all; the Noloan movies are almost completely grounded in reality, something a JLA movie wouldn't be.

Isn't that the direction they're taking all the DC heroes now though.. They've even got Nolan overlooking Supes to try and make it more "real."

Originally posted by -Pr-
Nolan's Batman would look stupid talking to Reynold's GL imo.

Then they should reboot GL, not Batman! Reboot the superhero joke so he fits with Nolan's Batman.

Don't reboot the superhero who has become the single most successful superhero on the big screen (might even single handedly give the Avengers a run) to fit in with the highest budget superhero joke we've seen in a long time.

Originally posted by JakeTheBank


He would be so out of place. Keaton, Kilmer, and even Clooney could have worked in a JLA setting.

What dis Keaton Bats do that would have him fit better. Bale Bats looks a lot more impressive to me combat wise and technologically.

As for Kilmer and Clooney... Do you want a JL movie to flop??

Originally posted by -Pr-


Though I shudder to think about a Tim Burton Superman. O

Almost happened with Nick Cage.

Uh, does this make anyone else nervous?

"Real World" and "Not at all what you might expect" is not what I look for in Superman, Wonder Woman, Flash, and so on. Makes me think of a 90s take.




The reason DC's animated does better is the animated people seem to get the characters so much better. They don't feel the need to meddle with them for the sake of it, they just take 'em and make 'em work.

(This comment applies to Justice League, Young Justice, the animated films... you name it)

Originally posted by Prep-Man
Rumor has it, Barry Sonnonfeld will be directing Metal Men. Nice choice.

http://geek-news.mtv.com/2012/06/21/metal-men-movie-dc-comics/

I have to repeat the reaction of Topless Robot and say that if they make a successful Metal Men movie before a Wonder Woman one, then everyone at WB deserves to be shot for being mind-numbingly incompetent at their jobs.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
As for Kilmer and Clooney... Do you want a JL movie to flop??

Kilmer didn't do anything wrong in the role at all, in fact he even managed to deliver his lines in a clear concise way instead of Bale's mangled, lisping overdone growling. People online and in general make fun of Bale's Batman more than they do Kilmers; so Kilmer must have been doing something right.

Originally posted by spidermanrocks
It's not that he can't possibly fit into the JL world in any way. It's that he wouldn't be the best choice for a Batman that exists in a JL world. As I said before, he needs to be a lot faster. Even faster than he was in Begins. Take the Arkham games for example. I'm sure you played them or at least saw some footage of them. He has to be THAT fast. Or at least as fast as Black Widow and Hawkeye were in Avengers (and they didn't have powers either). And he also has to prove that he is the world's greatest detective. As I said before, Bale's Batman still has to display those feats. You may argue that he can just display those feats in the JL movie. True but it's not being consistent. It wouldn't make sense to have him be like that for 3 movies and have him get his technology from Lucius Fox and then all of a sudden he is perfected in every field. And based on what we've seen from TDKR so far, he still doesn't seem to display those feats he needs for JL. I don't think we saw him do even a full body flip yet. TDKR takes place 8 years after TDK. How will you explain him not achieving this in 8 years (as well as in all the other years he was travelling worldwide training) but he suddenly learns how to do all this just in time for an alien invasion (or whatever villains they'll use in JL) strong enough to make him have to team up with 4 to 6 superpowered heroes in order to stop? That wouldn't make sense from a logical standpoint. Anyone professional critic who would look into this would realize the problem with this and would criticize the JL movie for that.



All of the reasons why it wouldn't work in one place. Almost-retired Batman (with 8-year career gap) in a grounded universe suddenly acquiring extreme agility, strength, speed, experience of JLA matters and characters, a new thinner pseudo-science suit with no grounded explanation (suddenly making the switch at the end of his career?), a sudden upsurge/belief in fantastical characters (when Nolan's tried so hard to deny these in his universe and downplay the theatrical/comic aspects of characters) etc.

With the grounded Batman on the team, what would they actually need him for? Make coffee?

Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
Nolanverse would fit very well, it just takes a good writer to make it work,, besides WB would look foolish if they did not at the very least attempted to include Nolanverse in the first script version.


They probably already attempted it and reached the same conclusions I did. That's probably why they might reboot Batman if they want to have a DC movie universe. I know that they wanted a Batman/Superman crossover with Christian Bale as Bats and Brandon Routh as Superman to tie in Batman Begins and Superman Returns together. But that got canned due to Superman being rebooted.

Let's keep in mind that we still don't know whether or not Warner Bros will do a shared movie universe. There hasn't been any official announcement yet. All we have so far is rumors that they want to do it because they saw how successful Avengers was. Before these rumors came out, Warner Bros officially came out and said that they wouldn't do a DC movie universe. Their original plan was to release a JL movie after they introduce all the JL members on screen that would be separate from the Snyder Superman, from the Nolan Batman, from the Batman reboot, from the upcoming Flash movie, from the Reynolds GL movie, etc. This means that their plan to reboot Batman had nothing to do with doing a JL movie because both the Nolan Batman and the Batman from the reboot wouldn't have been the Batman we would have seen in JL. So even if the new rumors that they now want a DC movie universe is false, we still won't see the Nolan Batman in a JL movie. And even if they decide not to reboot Batman after TDKR, we still won't see the Nolan Batman in the JL movie (once again, assuming that the rumors about them doing a shared movieverse are false).

Originally posted by JakeTheBank
He would be so out of place. Keaton, Kilmer, and even Clooney could have worked in a JLA setting.

lol They're even slower than Bale's Batman.


Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Isn't that the direction they're taking all the DC heroes now though.. They've even got Nolan overlooking Supes to try and make it more "real."

By "real", they don't mean more grounded. They mean more real in terms of how the characters act and in tone. They want to make it more believable that the characters and tone are real. Superman Earth One is a good example. They made it more "real" by giving Clark a reason to why he chose that specific costume, to why he got a job at the Daily Planet, and all of that other stuff. But they didn't necessarily make it more grounded or took out elements of fiction from it. They still kept him hiding his identity with the glasses and all of that. Another example if the Ultimate Marvel universe. It's definitely more "real" but I wouldn't say it's any less grounded than the regular Marvel universe.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Then they should reboot GL, not Batman!

They're probably going to reboot both.

Originally posted by Nephthys
I have to repeat the reaction of Topless Robot and say that if they make a successful Metal Men movie before a Wonder Woman one, then everyone at WB deserves to be shot for being mind-numbingly incompetent at their jobs.


"But we can't make a Wonder Woman movie until we find so way to reinvent her to be more 'edgy'! We gotta try every concept that isn't 'do the core character well' first! The 'CEO vigilante with personal problems' didn't work, so maybe a grim avenger type..."

Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
Kilmer didn't do anything wrong in the role at all, in fact he even managed to deliver his lines in a clear concise way instead of Bale's mangled, lisping overdone growling. People online and in general make fun of Bale's Batman more than they do Kilmers; so Kilmer must have been doing something right.

Oh please. Batman though heroic is supposed to be a little disturbed. Bale portrayed that far far better than Kilmer did. Not to mention body type Bale was much more built up and believable as the guy who can kick anyone's ass.

And you talk about poeple online making fun of Bale, but I think it's more in the fun sense. When you make jokes about something popular.

I don't think people were watching the movie thinking "oh that's awful"

The success, the anticipation of the new movie, and the critics and fans appraisal says everything about which version of Batman the audience preffered. And you can't pretend that has nothing to do with Bale at all.

Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z


All of the reasons why it wouldn't work in one place. Almost-retired Batman (with 8-year career gap) in a grounded universe suddenly acquiring extreme agility, strength, speed, experience of JLA matters and characters, a new thinner pseudo-science suit with no grounded explanation (suddenly making the switch at the end of his career?)

Well let's just agree to disagree. I personally think none of these things would be an issue to audiences. We already assume he's a damn fast, agile and lethal combatant from his training in BB.

So I don't think people would suddenly assume he's had an upgrade. More likely they will think his abilities are just being portrayed better now.

What I do think would be an issue to audiences is rebooting their favorite big screen take on Batman to date.

Originally posted by Q99
"But we can't make a Wonder Woman movie until we find so way to reinvent her to be more 'edgy'! We gotta try every concept that isn't 'do the core character well' first! The 'CEO vigilante with personal problems' didn't work, so maybe a grim avenger type..."

Imma slap yo ass.

Seriously, just take the animated WW movie and make a movie version. Boom. Done, give me half a billion dollars please.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Oh please. Batman though heroic is supposed to be a little disturbed. Bale portrayed that far far better than Kilmer did. Not to mention body type Bale was much more built up and believable as the guy who can kick anyone's ass.

And you talk about poeple online making fun of Bale, but I think it's more in the fun sense. When you make jokes about something popular.

I don't think people were watching the movie thinking "oh that's awful"

The success, the anticipation of the new movie, and the critics and fans appraisal says everything about which version of Batman the audience preffered. And you can't pretend that has nothing to do with Bale at all.
What I do think would be an issue to audiences is rebooting their favorite big screen take on Batman to date.

Bale acting disturbed, sure, but aside from crucial moments in the comics when the anger is justified does not give Bale/Nolan the excuse to totally over-exaggerate the anger scale. Batman has to be cool, calm and in control no matter what the situation otherwise he is liable to make more mistakes and Bale/Nolan didn't keep that in check, hence the overdone voice and almost embarrassing mouth movements when growling. He's more Jean-Paul Valley than Bruce Wayne (angry all the time, only cares about himself, hardly saves anyone, wraps himself in obvious, bulky armour, doesn't have/need Robin).

Bale's or even Kilmer's physique matters not one jot when they are encased in rubber and physique isn't everything when fighting. You say he had the demeanour but did he really back it up? Bale has 3 films to Kilmer's 1 so there can't be a fair feats comparison.

No, people make fun of things because they find it silly, you wouldn't want to denigrate something you liked. So the people making fun of B&R secretly like it? Wow.

Laughable! Only one man gets referenced ad nauseam as the real star and success behind TDK (which most Nolan Bat-fans refer to) and it ain't Bale. Whether it is 'everyone's' favourite take or not is purely opinion, but it ain't successful because of Bale. Every Nolan Bat-fan says you can't reboot because of Nolan's take or you can't re-cast the Joker ever again because of Ledger's take or Batman because of Bale's - it's defensive BS.

Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
Bale acting disturbed, sure, but aside from crucial moments in the comics when the anger is justified does not give Bale/Nolan the excuse to totally over-exaggerate the anger scale. Batman has to be cool, calm and in control no matter what the situation otherwise he is liable to make more mistakes and Bale/Nolan didn't keep that in check, hence the overdone voice and almost embarrassing mouth movements when growling. He's more Jean-Paul Valley than Bruce Wayne (angry all the time, only cares about himself, hardly saves anyone, wraps himself in obvious, bulky armour, doesn't have/need Robin).

I understand you not liking Batman being portrayed more angrily disturbed but you cannot say that that portrayal is wrong, especially since he has been portrayed like that in modern comics many times. The most well known example if Frank Miller's Batman. And keep in mind that BB and TDK were heavily influenced by stories in Batman's early years as a crimefighter, Year One and Long Halloween being the main influences. And guess who wrote Year One...Frank Miller. So it's not like the anger you saw was something that Nolan came up with to deviate from the comics. It's all right there in the main comic BB was based on and TDK was partly based on (Year One). It's taken straight out of there (actually, he's a bit angrier in Year One than in BB and TDK). Not to mention that other writers portray him as that too. Should I take the example in Batman: Hush where he was planning to bash the Joker's head to the ground until his brain would get splashed to piece after knocking Catwoman unconscious for trying to stop him? You can say that you don't like him being portrayed as a bit angrier but you can't say it's inaccurate.

He's not angry all the time. He may sound angry due to his voice but that's just his way of hiding his real voice (though I agree it sounds silly). But that doesn't mean he's angry. There is nothing in both movies that suggests he is always angry.

Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
only cares about himself, hardly saves anyone

Yeah. Because all the criminals he put away in Arkham after Ra's broke them out at the end of BB, him cleaning the night to the point that some criminals are forced to operate during the day, wanting to show Gotham that "their city doesn't belong to the criminals and the corrupted", saving all of Gotham from a terrorist organization that was going to destroy the whole city, giving up his chance to be with Rachel because Gotham needed Batman, saving Gotham again but from a maniac dressed like a clown this time that almost blew up 2 full ships of people, and taking the blame for Harvey's crimes so that the people of Gotham never lose hope, all that doesn't count. I'll give you that he failed to save Ra's, Rachel, and Harvey but do you really expect him to save everyone? He can't even save everyone in the comics either (Jason as well as all the other people that are killed by the Joker and his rogues gallery each week when they break out of Arkham), just like every other flawed superhero out there (which is pretty much all of them).

Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
doesn't have/need Robin

Let's face it. There is almost a 0% chance for Robin to work in a dark and serious Batman movie. He is dressed in multiple colors, has a jokey attitude, and was originally created simply to lighten up the Batman comics because parents were complaining they were too violent. Would you want that in a dark gritty Batman movie? I'm not saying Robin's not a good character. He did eventually become a good character as decades passed and writers developed him. You can do interesting stuff with him in the comics and the cartoons but it is almost impossible to have him in the movies. Look what happened in the last franchise. He sucked in Batman & Robin. I personally thought he was fine in Forever but that's because they made the tone of Forever lighter than the tone that a movie with a darker and more serious Batman should have. Which proves my point about Robin. And then you also have to come up with a legitimate reason to why Batman would let a kid risk his life every night by jumping off rooftops, gliding from building to building, and attack criminals with weapons head-on. It will be extremely hard for people to buy that. Again, they'll buy it in comics and cartoons but you can't expect that to just buy that in live-action. It has nothing to do with Nolan's realism. As long as a Batman movie is dark and serious, regardless of how grounded or ungrounded it is, it will be almost impossible for people to buy Robin. But even if they did bought all that, what purpose would he serve in the Nolanverse? I don't see how his presence in any of the Nolan movies would change much. He would be more of a filler character. He would serve little to no purpose to the movies' plots whatsoever. The Nolan movies have worked better without him IMO.

Also, your claim that Bale's Batman doesn't NEED Robin completely abolishes the claim you made before - that Bale's Batman is angrier/more aggressive than he should be. The whole point of Robin (at least in modern comics) is that Batman needs someone with a more jokey and calm attitude to hold him back if he ever crosses that line and becomes the Punisher. If Bale's Batman doesn't need Robin, then that means he doesn't lack the self-control that he needs to not cross that line he doesn't cross. Which means that he can't be the angry aggresive Batman you seem to think he is. If he really is always angry as you claim he is, then he would need a Robin by his side. Otherwise, he doesn't need Robin. You can't have it both ways and say he's always angry and too aggresive but that he doesn't need Robin.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Imma slap yo ass.

Seriously, just take the animated WW movie and make a movie version. Boom. Done, give me half a billion dollars please.

I don't think Wonder Woman would make half a billion just because she's Wonder Woman. Many people will disagree with me on this but I don't think Wonder Woman is anywhere as iconic and as loved as people claim she is. I don't think you can sell Wonder Woman as easy as we claim she can. You can probably have a far better chance at selling Green Lantern and Flash to the public and make them become really iconic characters than you have with Wonder Woman. I always felt to me that people want her to be as iconic as the likes of Batman, Superman, and Spider-Man but she just isn't. I find that many people (both the general public and comic book fans) try really hard to like her as if she was one of the big shot superheroes but it never works out. I'm too lazy to explain in detail why I think so since I just responded to Lord Shadow Z. Luckily, I found a video on YT long ago that perfectly sums up why I have this opinion.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-0-Du9R63GA

She can be bigger than Lantern or Flash if they would just actually grow some ****ing balls and do something good with her.

Edit: Wonder Woman is more iconic than Iron man was a few years ago.

Originally posted by Nephthys
She can be bigger than Lantern or Flash if they would just actually grow some ****ing balls and do something good with her.

Edit: Wonder Woman is more iconic than Iron man was a few years ago.

Originally posted by Nephthys

Seriously, just take the animated WW movie and make a movie version. Boom. Done, give me half a billion dollars please.

Yes!

Non-Animated DC is convinced you need to change her in some drastic way to get people to follow her, so comics puts her through two reboots and an elseworld in 2 years, and the TV and movie divisions toss around comic ideas.

Animated DC has already done everything they need to do and it worked!


She won't get by on icon status alone, but she's got major name recognition so all you need to do to make a ton of money is pair that name recognition with something good. You might not get Iron Man movie levels but Captain America and Thor movie levels should be no problem at all.

"BUT NOOOO, A FEMALE LEAD IN AN ACTION MOVIE WOULD NEEEEEVER WORK!"

coughkillbillcough

I never said a Wonder Woman movie won't work. I said that you can't expect it to make half a billion simply because it's Wonder Woman. That's what some people here seem to believe. They seem to believe that just because she is Wonder Woman, people will go see her movie like they do with Batman and Superman. You can make a good Wonder Woman movie that will do well but it will require a lot of work like Iron Man did. And before that, we need at least a basic version of Wonder Woman in the comics. Every writer does something completely different with her and yet we expect Warner Bros to be able to be consistent and do her justice. Although I still Flash has the best chance to reach Iron Man movie levels and followed by Green Lantern (if they do him justice in the sequel/reboot/whatever they're doing next).

There is no damn reason why Wonder Woman should be this extremely difficult project to translate into live action. Seriously, just look at the animated solo DVD she did or George Perez' run or even Gail Simone's.

Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
Kilmer didn't do anything wrong in the role at all, in fact he even managed to deliver his lines in a clear concise way instead of Bale's mangled, lisping overdone growling. People online and in general make fun of Bale's Batman more than they do Kilmers; so Kilmer must have been doing something right.

Same with Clooney he was perfect for Batman, Blame everbody else behind the scenes.

Originally posted by JakeTheBank
There is no damn reason why Wonder Woman should be this extremely difficult project to translate into live action. Seriously, just look at the animated solo DVD she did or George Perez' run or even Gail Simone's.

did anyone check christopher nolans IMDB page? he is listed as one of the writers for the batman reboot. hes probably only the producer, since he is going to oversee all dc movies.

http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/9076/14eb91d.jpg

Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z


Bale's or even Kilmer's physique matters not one jot when they are encased in rubber and physique isn't everything when fighting.

Yes but when we see the body under the suit it makes a difference. You have to believe Batman is this guy who can kick anyone's butt.

Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
You say he had the demeanour but did he really back it up? Bale has 3 films to Kilmer's 1 so there can't be a fair feats comparison.

I've felt that way since Batman Begins.

Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
No, people make fun of things because they find it silly, you wouldn't want to denigrate something you liked. So the people making fun of B&R secretly like it? Wow.

What I didn't mean that's how it always works. Yes a lot of fun making is because of how silly something is. But a lot of the time they just like making fun of something that's popular. Look at how often people make fun of the "My precious" line from LOTR. Or how often Star Wars fans make fun of Star wars.

Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
Whether it is 'everyone's' favourite take or not is purely opinion, but it ain't successful because of Bale.

Well it's impact and success and the anticipation each movie has created is fact and not opinion. What's opinion is Bale's impact on this most successful take on Batman.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Isn't that the direction they're taking all the DC heroes now though.. They've even got Nolan overlooking Supes to try and make it more "real."



Then they should reboot GL, not Batman! Reboot the superhero joke so he fits with Nolan's Batman.

Don't reboot the superhero who has become the single most successful superhero on the big screen (might even single handedly give the Avengers a run) to fit in with the highest budget superhero joke we've seen in a long time.



What dis Keaton Bats do that would have him fit better. Bale Bats looks a lot more impressive to me combat wise and technologically.

As for Kilmer and Clooney... Do you want a JL movie to flop??

No. Nolan (finally) specifically said that Superman doesn't exist in a world like the one his Batman inhabits. And Zack Snyder is directing.

Nolan's Batman just doesn't fit in a JLA movie; They can't do it well without rebooting it imo.

Originally posted by Kazenji
Almost happened with Nick Cage.

Yep, and it looked shit.

Originally posted by Kazenji
Same with Clooney he was perfect for Batman, Blame everbody else behind the scenes.

Clooney's a great actor and a great director, but he had the wrong idea about Batman and how to play him.

I think Clooney could play a great Wayne/Batman under the right script and director, especially an older Bruce.

But yeah, Nolan's Batman is just too drastically different from the kind of world Superman and the rest of the JLA will inhabit on the big screen.

Originally posted by Prep-Man
did anyone check christopher nolans IMDB page? he is listed as one of the writers for the batman reboot. hes probably only the producer, since he is going to oversee all dc movies.

IMDB is not that good of a source. There is a whole laundry list of stuff they got wrong in the past.



As for Clooney, I think he would make a good Bruce Wayne but I don't think he would be a good Batman.

While it would be nice to have the comics first, it's not even close to necessary. Young Justice doesn't have any problem with versions that don't match the comics. Heck, Batman Begins was not not based on the Batman of the time and Batman has a whole lot of versions, yet no-one says it's impossible to do him.

You act like it's so hard to do her consistently and do her justice... but, it's a movie. You pick one take, you stick with it, you make a good script, and you use it. Done. Rhe comics aren't nearly as different as you make ou eithert- Perez, Jimenez, Rucka, Simone, if I pick them up I clearly have the same characters. Ditto her from Waid's Justice League run or Kelly's or Morrison's or League of One.


If you can't figure out how to decide on a take of a character who has multiple, you have no business making a movie in the first place, because every movie has to decide on a take for their characters without exception.


Originally posted by JakeTheBank
There is no damn reason why Wonder Woman should be this extremely difficult project to translate into live action. Seriously, just look at the animated solo DVD she did or George Perez' run or even Gail Simone's.

Or Greg Rucka's. Heck, Rucka's done novels and comics, I'm sure he could do a script too! (If it'd be willing to),

Gail Simone, obviously, did do the animated DVD.


Hm, or for a non-WW writer, I bet John Rogers, who started as a screenwriter in addition to writing the Blue Beetle comic, could do a great job.


Originally posted by Nephthys
"BUT NOOOO, A FEMALE LEAD IN AN ACTION MOVIE WOULD NEEEEEVER WORK!"

coughkillbillcough

Hunger Games too.

Originally posted by spidermanrocks
They probably already attempted it and reached the same conclusions I did. That's probably why they might reboot Batman if they want to have a DC movie universe. I know that they wanted a Batman/Superman crossover with Christian Bale as Bats and Brandon Routh as Superman to tie in Batman Begins and Superman Returns together. But that got canned due to Superman being rebooted.

Let's keep in mind that we still don't know whether or not Warner Bros will do a shared movie universe. There hasn't been any official announcement yet. All we have so far is rumors that they want to do it because they saw how successful Avengers was. Before these rumors came out, Warner Bros officially came out and said that they wouldn't do a DC movie universe. Their original plan was to release a JL movie after they introduce all the JL members on screen that would be separate from the Snyder Superman, from the Nolan Batman, from the Batman reboot, from the upcoming Flash movie, from the Reynolds GL movie, etc. This means that their plan to reboot Batman had nothing to do with doing a JL movie because both the Nolan Batman and the Batman from the reboot wouldn't have been the Batman we would have seen in JL. So even if the new rumors that they now want a DC movie universe is false, we still won't see the Nolan Batman in a JL movie. And even if they decide not to reboot Batman after TDKR, we still won't see the Nolan Batman in the JL movie (once again, assuming that the rumors about them doing a shared movieverse are false).



lol They're even slower than Bale's Batman.




By "real", they don't mean more grounded. They mean more real in terms of how the characters act and in tone. They want to make it more believable that the characters and tone are real. Superman Earth One is a good example. They made it more "real" by giving Clark a reason to why he chose that specific costume, to why he got a job at the Daily Planet, and all of that other stuff. But they didn't necessarily make it more grounded or took out elements of fiction from it. They still kept him hiding his identity with the glasses and all of that. Another example if the Ultimate Marvel universe. It's definitely more "real" but I wouldn't say it's any less grounded than the regular Marvel universe.



They're probably going to reboot both.


i don;t think they have... otherwise they would not have Chris Nolan still around..


Originally posted by Prep-Man
did anyone check christopher nolans IMDB page? he is listed as one of the writers for the batman reboot. hes probably only the producer, since he is going to oversee all dc movies.


not really a surprise.. WB trusts him wholeheartedly and should let him do what he does so they can create a shared universe starting with Man of Steel..


Originally posted by Kazenji
http://img822.imageshack.us/img822/9076/14eb91d.jpg


nice fake

They already have a JL writer and he has such films like Gangster Squad under his belt, which I hear is fantastic.

Nice fake poster. I would love to see that at one point,.

Originally posted by Prep-Man
They already have a JL writer and he has such films like Gangster Squad under his belt, which I hear is fantastic.

Nice fake poster. I would love to see that at one point,.


i believe he could very well write something fantastic

Originally posted by JakeTheBank
I think Clooney could play a great Wayne/Batman under the right script and director, especially an older Bruce.

But yeah, Nolan's Batman is just too drastically different from the kind of world Superman and the rest of the JLA will inhabit on the big screen.

It was Clooney's attitude towards the character that put me off. I think he's capable, just not sure about his mindset.

Originally posted by Q99
While it would be nice to have the comics first, it's not even close to necessary. Young Justice doesn't have any problem with versions that don't match the comics.

True. Young Justice does do that well. I take that back then. You don't need that to happen in the comics before it happens in the movie.

Originally posted by Q99
Heck, Batman Begins was not not based on the Batman of the time and Batman has a whole lot of versions, yet no-one says it's impossible to do him. You act like it's so hard to do her consistently and do her justice... but, it's a movie. You pick one take, you stick with it, you make a good script, and you use it. Done. Rhe comics aren't nearly as different as you make ou eithert- Perez, Jimenez, Rucka, Simone, if I pick them up I clearly have the same characters. Ditto her from Waid's Justice League run or Kelly's or Morrison's or League of One.

I wasn't talking about the movie. I was talking about the comics. She's not written consistently in the comics. While Batman and Superman are not always written the same and have many different takes, they still have the basic traits that make them Batman and Superman (unless the story isn't in canon continuity). I feel Wonder Woman is almost completely written different through the DC universe. I feel that sometimes she doesn't even have her basic traits while being written. Maybe it's just me. Hopefully this changes with the current run. Though I haven't read it yet.

I never said it's hard to do her in a movie. I said that it won't be as easy as people think it would be. People seem to think her movie will automatically make half a billion just because it's Wonder Woman. It can definitely do well (maybe even make half a billion or more) but only if you advertise it right and do her justice (like Iron Man). She hasn't yet reached Batman and Superman status. Their movies can make at least a decent amount of money at the box office solely by selling the movies on their names.

Originally posted by spidermanrocks
People seem to think her movie will automatically make half a billion just because it's Wonder Woman.

If only that were true. Then WB wouldn't be so scared to just make it! I heard they had Joss Whedon on board to make it once, but he got fed up of them waiting to make a move on it.

Originally posted by -Pr-
No. Nolan (finally) specifically said that Superman doesn't exist in a world like the one his Batman inhabits. And Zack Snyder is directing.

Nolan's Batman just doesn't fit in a JLA movie; They can't do it well without rebooting it imo.




Well seems to me like they're back to the drawing board then as far as a JL movie goes. Without even one big hit to back it up so far.

Drawing on the mega success of the Bale/Nolan franchise would have brought a JL movie forward and given it some good backing imo.

I wonder how they will link all the movies together to build up, like the Avengers had Shield and Fury and the ending credits showing all the movies connected

Originally posted by -Pr-
It was Clooney's attitude towards the character that put me off. I think he's capable, just not sure about his mindset.

Clooney has said that he played Batman gay. Maybe thats it (not that I'm calling you homophobic).

Originally posted by spidermanrocks

I wasn't talking about the movie. I was talking about the comics. She's not written consistently in the comics. While Batman and Superman are not always written the same and have many different takes, they still have the basic traits that make them Batman and Superman (unless the story isn't in canon continuity). I feel Wonder Woman is almost completely written different through the DC universe. I feel that sometimes she doesn't even have her basic traits while being written. Maybe it's just me. Hopefully this changes with the current run. Though I haven't read it yet.

Uh, other than her current run and Odyssey before it, I'd say this is very much not true. She's been fairly consist from the Crisis to Simone. Some variation, but not that huge. This is very much a thing that people act like is this huge issue with her... but I question whether most of these people read much WW.

I mean, I'm talking roughly a 30 year period where aside from some experimentation (which *every* character has) she's written fairly consistently, outside of some annoying bits like her overly-rotating supporting cast (seriously DC, tell new writers they can't just scrap everyone from the previous writer's supporting cast).



And, general note: One doesn't get things more consistent by re-inventing things and doing a new take rather than working with what you've got. It leads to this:
http://imgs.xkcd.com/comics/standards.png




I'm pretty sure people said "And make it a good movie" about a half-dozen times.

Basically people are saying there's a two step process: "Make the movie about Wonder Woman," and "Make it good."

And the main trip-up that keeps occurring is people keep on trying to not do 1, in a way that violates 2 as well.



Well, yea. People have been emphasizing that too.


The main problem is that while we're focusing on "take what's there and do it well, ala several times it's been done well before," DC seems to focus on, "Ok, what we need to do to make Wonder Woman do well is do something other than Wonder Woman!" rather than on focusing on assembling a team that can simply do WW well.

Originally posted by Newjak
I wonder how they will link all the movies together to build up, like the Avengers had Shield and Fury and the ending credits showing all the movies connected



if truly The Man of Steel starts their shared universe, I have got to believe that at some point during the film, unless they wait and its a post credit scene, their will be something regarding Batman or Flash at the very least

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=phnXO-SR_5Y

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
Yes but when we see the body under the suit it makes a difference. You have to believe Batman is this guy who can kick anyone's butt.


What I didn't mean that's how it always works. Yes a lot of fun making is because of how silly something is. But a lot of the time they just like making fun of something that's popular. Look at how often people make fun of the "My precious" line from LOTR. Or how often Star Wars fans make fun of Star wars.


Well it's impact and success and the anticipation each movie has created is fact and not opinion. What's opinion is Bale's impact on this most successful take on Batman.

But when fighting his physique is covered (and enhanced) by the suit so your claim that his physique adds to his demeanour when fighting is a contradiction. We might see his physique when training but as soon as that suit goes on it's meaningless when beefing up his image. You couldn't see his pecs and abs after putting the BB and TDK suit after all. In fact Bale looks quite gaunt at times as Bruce Wayne, especially in the face.

Not quite sure with the Gollum example as that's a readily identifiable quote and is repeated often but not made fun of. What is made fun of more is the actual performance of an actor and how they perform in a particular scene, like if an actor delivers a really bad accent/voice. They don't laugh at Bale because of what he says, it's how he says it.

I can't deny it has because it has generated excitement but even Nolan has fallen into some of the same mistakes as the previous franchise and did many things similar - but doesn't get taken to task for it. A reboot would hopefully put Batman in a thinner, more comic-book oriented suit and rely on psuedo-science to make it work, or keep his identity secret, or have an actual Batmobile, or skip love stories (and saving girlfriends), or have him be a martial arts master, or a great detective etc. I could go on but I believe we've discussed this before so...

Who says they will link all the movies together just because they're doing a shared universe? There's a possibility they won't connect the movies at all (or at best just a few names and locations being mentioned) until the JL movie. Kinda like how Alien and Predator both existed in the same universe but weren't linked at all in any way until the Alien vs Predator movie came out (yes, the movie sucked but I'm trying to think of a similar example here). So people might not know these movies exist in the same universe until the JL movie shows they do.

It would make a lot more sense if they do this. How exactly would you set up for a Batman movie in a Superman movie? Or set up for a Flash movie in a Batman movie? I don't think they would go the same route Marvel did and do that even if they are doing a shared universe. And in my opinion, it's better off this way. Marvel crossovers are easier to do because the characters were created by the same group of writers and are all mostly found in the same location (NY) while DC characters were created separate and are spread further apart from each other (Gotham, Central, Metropolis, Star City, etc.).

Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
A reboot would hopefully put Batman in a thinner, more comic-book oriented suit

Please please please please please do that DC!!!

I'm also tired of all the rubber/armor suits we get in live-action. It's time to finally do a good Batman costume on the big screen. It shouldn't be that hard. The fan film City of Scars did it great so I don't see why Hollywood can't do it. If they really think it would look that silly (which doesn't make sense since Batman spends most of his time in the dark and you wouldn't notice the tights that much), just get rid of the underwear and everything will be fine. Or just do the costume from Arkham Asylum and Arkham City. It's the costume from the comics but with a bit of touch to it.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
If only that were true. Then WB wouldn't be so scared to just make it! I heard they had Joss Whedon on board to make it once, but he got fed up of them waiting to make a move on it.




Well seems to me like they're back to the drawing board then as far as a JL movie goes. Without even one big hit to back it up so far.

Drawing on the mega success of the Bale/Nolan franchise would have brought a JL movie forward and given it some good backing imo.

They've already said that Superman would be the anchor movie.

Nolan himself admitted that the world his Batman existed in had no place for Superman. He'd have made wholesale changes himself AND would have had to direct a JLA movie himself to get that kind of backing, imo.

Originally posted by Nephthys
Clooney has said that he played Batman gay. Maybe thats it (not that I'm calling you homophobic).

I hadn't even heard that. I was talking more about how he said Batman wouldn't be as dark as he was, and so on. He didn't get the whole "Bruce Wayne is the identity" thing.

Originally posted by spidermanrocks
Who says they will link all the movies together just because they're doing a shared universe? There's a possibility they won't connect the movies at all (or at best just a few names and locations being mentioned) until the JL movie. Kinda like how Alien and Predator both existed in the same universe but weren't linked at all in any way until the Alien vs Predator movie came out (yes, the movie sucked but I'm trying to think of a similar example here). So people might not know these movies exist in the same universe until the JL movie shows they do.





Yeah I don't get why people think you HAVE to have camoes/major references in the individual films for the group film to work.

Marvel did that as more of a clever Marketing technique than anything else. And it kind of ruined Iron Man 2 Imo.

Originally posted by spidermanrocks
Who says they will link all the movies together just because they're doing a shared universe? There's a possibility they won't connect the movies at all (or at best just a few names and locations being mentioned) until the JL movie. Kinda like how Alien and Predator both existed in the same universe but weren't linked at all in any way until the Alien vs Predator movie came out (yes, the movie sucked but I'm trying to think of a similar example here). So people might not know these movies exist in the same universe until the JL movie shows they do.

It would make a lot more sense if they do this. How exactly would you set up for a Batman movie in a Superman movie? Or set up for a Flash movie in a Batman movie? I don't think they would go the same route Marvel did and do that even if they are doing a shared universe. And in my opinion, it's better off this way. Marvel crossovers are easier to do because the characters were created by the same group of writers and are all mostly found in the same location (NY) while DC characters were created separate and are spread further apart from each other (Gotham, Central, Metropolis, Star City, etc.). First off Alien vs Predator is a bad example imo not only because it wasn't that good, I actually kinda liked it myself but mostly for nostalgic purposes, but because when these movies were first created they had no intention of a shared universe. That came way later after fans wanted it because of an Alien Skull prop in the second Predator's movie which was just thrown in there for fun.

That spawned the comics, the game which led into the movies. This kind of showed to as they were basically trying to shoehorn in two separate Universes into one movie.

Now while some would say the time and effort given to showing that the Avengers were a combined universe detracted from the overall story for the individual movies it served to help create a really great one.

Showing them as a shared Universe throughout helped add some depth to the Avengers movie personally. People like Agent Choulson, items like the Cosmic Cube helped link the world a lot better. Howard Stark in Captain America was a brilliant move imo.

Not to say it has to be this way but I do think that marketing choice by Marvel did help give the Avengers movie and the fans a little extra which the JL movie could use.

You could possibly link them all together by say Cademus considering them a threat and deciding to build a super weapon (Doomsday/Amazo) to help the world should these super gods go bad except it gets out and can't be stop. The linkage in every movie could be a Cademus Agent being shown doing something taking something. Superman's DNA or Kyrptonian Tech, GL's bad guy's power source, Wonder Woman DNA Sample, piece of Batman tech or Batman Villain tech, Flash DNA sample stuff like that. Maybe not even that straight forward.

Or you could go a very low brow type of thing and just include a teaser trailer at the end of every movie for the next JLer individual movie coming out.

Just something to get people excited.

Originally posted by Newjak
First off Alien vs Predator is a bad example imo not only because it wasn't that good, I actually kinda liked it myself but mostly for nostalgic purposes, but because when these movies were first created they had no intention of a shared universe. That came way later after fans wanted it because of an Alien Skull prop in the second Predator's movie which was just thrown in there for fun.

That spawned the comics, the game which led into the movies. This kind of showed to as they were basically trying to shoehorn in two separate Universes into one movie.

Now while some would say the time and effort given to showing that the Avengers were a combined universe detracted from the overall story for the individual movies it served to help create a really great one.

Showing them as a shared Universe throughout helped add some depth to the Avengers movie personally. People like Agent Choulson, items like the Cosmic Cube helped link the world a lot better. Howard Stark in Captain America was a brilliant move imo.

Not to say it has to be this way but I do think that marketing choice by Marvel did help give the Avengers movie and the fans a little extra which the JL movie could use.

You could possibly link them all together by say Cademus considering them a threat and deciding to build a super weapon (Doomsday/Amazo) to help the world should these super gods go bad except it gets out and can't be stop. The linkage in every movie could be a Cademus Agent being shown doing something taking something. Superman's DNA or Kyrptonian Tech, GL's bad guy's power source, Wonder Woman DNA Sample, piece of Batman tech or Batman Villain tech, Flash DNA sample stuff like that. Maybe not even that straight forward.

Or you could go a very low brow type of thing and just include a teaser trailer at the end of every movie for the next JLer individual movie coming out.

Just something to get people excited.

Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
But when fighting his physique is covered (and enhanced) by the suit so your claim that his physique adds to his demeanour when fighting is a contradiction. We might see his physique when training but as soon as that suit goes on it's meaningless when beefing up his image. You couldn't see his pecs and abs after putting the BB and TDK suit after all. In fact Bale looks quite gaunt at times as Bruce Wayne, especially in the face.

I meant from the audience's perspective. The audience see's Bale topless, see's he has a built but toned and agile looking physique, then they believe "yeah this guy could seriosuly kick some a**"..

Kind of like Daniel Craig as Bond, even though in a suit you can't tell he's that muscular.

Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z
Not quite sure with the Gollum example as that's a readily identifiable quote and is repeated often but not made fun of. What is made fun of more is the actual performance of an actor and how they perform in a particular scene, like if an actor delivers a really bad accent/voice. They don't laugh at Bale because of what he says, it's how he says it.

I know it was mainly Nolan who made this such a legendary Batman series. But do you really think everyone would admire this Batman series so much if they thought the casting as Batman was bad, and that he sounds stupid??

I don't. I think people have fun with the Batman voice. You might have seen the Big Bang Theory when Sheldon says "I'm Batman".. There was no mention of Bale, him being a silly Batman making a stupid Batman voice. People are just having fun with the Batman voice.

Yes It's something that has probably cropped up more since Bale played him. Clooney didn't even put on a Bat voice. In fact I can't think of anything in particular that people make fun his Batman about. And yet we know how popular Clooney was as Batman.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
I meant from the audience's perspective. The audience see's Bale topless, see's he has a built but toned and agile looking physique, then they believe "yeah this guy could seriosuly kick some a**"..

Kind of like Daniel Craig as Bond, even though in a suit you can't tell he's that muscular.



I know it was mainly Nolan who made this such a legendary Batman series. But do you really think everyone would admire this Batman series so much if they thought the casting as Batman was bad, and that he sounds stupid??

I don't. I think people have fun with the Batman voice. You might have seen the Big Bang Theory when Sheldon says "I'm Batman".. There was no mention of Bale, him being a silly Batman making a stupid Batman voice. People are just having fun with the Batman voice.

Yes It's something that has probably cropped up more since Bale played him. Clooney didn't even put on a Bat voice. In fact I can't think of anything in particular that people make fun his Batman about. And yet we know how popular Clooney was as Batman.

Maybe before the suit is put on yes, but at that point he's Bruce and your argument was about how Batman is perceived and with the suit it's not clear. Had he been wearing a thinner suit like Captain America then his physique would be more about Bale and not the suit. Regarding Craig's bond I'm not sure I agree with that either because his physique comes through pretty well especially the upper body and shoulders.

Well every take of every character has fans and they may not like the voice but stick with it because they like other things within the movies.

But the justification for using the voice to that extreme is absurd because a. the script would hold the key to if his identity is discovered because of it and b. he has the lower half of his mouth in full view (which if he cuts himself shaving or has recognizable stubble/lips then he's blown anyway) and with that an obvious lisp it makes the overblown voice unnecessary. This what Nolan leaves himself open to when using justification for some things and not others - for option b. for example, using his own rules he should have had a full face mask. The Burton/Schumacher films didn't work with this justification BS so they can get away with a lot more 'factual error's' or 'fails in logic'.

But people weren't gruffing their voices up to insane degrees when Keaton/Kilmer/were in the suit (Clooney didn't bother) and if Sheldon did say that then I'm guessing he said that post TDK. Even if that is not true he wouldn't be referring to late-80s, early-90s movies since BBT started in 2007 and even thats two years after BB.

Originally posted by Newjak
First off Alien vs Predator is a bad example imo not only because it wasn't that good, I actually kinda liked it myself but mostly for nostalgic purposes, but because when these movies were first created they had no intention of a shared universe. That came way later after fans wanted it because of an Alien Skull prop in the second Predator's movie which was just thrown in there for fun.

That spawned the comics, the game which led into the movies. This kind of showed to as they were basically trying to shoehorn in two separate Universes into one movie.

Now while some would say the time and effort given to showing that the Avengers were a combined universe detracted from the overall story for the individual movies it served to help create a really great one.

Showing them as a shared Universe throughout helped add some depth to the Avengers movie personally. People like Agent Choulson, items like the Cosmic Cube helped link the world a lot better. Howard Stark in Captain America was a brilliant move imo.

Not to say it has to be this way but I do think that marketing choice by Marvel did help give the Avengers movie and the fans a little extra which the JL movie could use.

You could possibly link them all together by say Cademus considering them a threat and deciding to build a super weapon (Doomsday/Amazo) to help the world should these super gods go bad except it gets out and can't be stop. The linkage in every movie could be a Cademus Agent being shown doing something taking something. Superman's DNA or Kyrptonian Tech, GL's bad guy's power source, Wonder Woman DNA Sample, piece of Batman tech or Batman Villain tech, Flash DNA sample stuff like that. Maybe not even that straight forward.

Or you could go a very low brow type of thing and just include a teaser trailer at the end of every movie for the next JLer individual movie coming out.

Just something to get people excited.

I know Alien vs. Predator wasn't originally planned. But it's the same idea if you pretend like you didn't do any research on why the crossover was made. Movies taking place in the same universe having either no connection whatsoever or small cameos and references (like the Alien skull in Predator 2) until the big crossover comes out. It's the exact same case except that unlike Alien vs. Predator, DC would have JL planned out from the start.

I disagree that showing a shared universe being present = bigger box office success. It worked with Marvel because it was the first time something like this was ever done. It was something new that hasn't been tried in live-action before. But now we've already seen it. Not saying it won't work again but just that it's not a guarantee that this marketing can work again now that it's been already used.

I said as long as they don't show it's a shared universe or they have just small cameos/few names being mentioned, it should be fine. I would count the Cadmus thing and the after-credits trailer as being more of a cameo. As long as it's not "in your face" about it like the Marvel movies were (especially Iron Man 2), then it should be fine. But when you have Superman showing up in a Batman movie to have a talk with him or something like that, that's where the problem would be IMO.

And maybe not showing all the movies taking place in the same universe just might be a good marketing technique. Imagine if you weren't a comic book fan, you saw a bunch of (hopefully) great DC movies for the past couple of years all having little to no connection to each other, and then while you're sitting in theatres waiting for a movie to start while watching the trailers, all of a sudden you see Batman, Superman, and the rest of the JL members (who by that time, if their movies have been successful, would have reached the iconic status and popularity of someone like Iron Man or at least Thor or Captain America) standing side by side fighting against something/someone. Unlike the Avengers movie, which you knew would happen from the start, JL would take you by surprise. Kinda like how the Joker card at the end of Batman Begins took many by surprise. It wasn't expected. Not saying this marketing will definitely work but hey, you never know...

Originally posted by Lord Shadow Z

Well every take of every character has fans and they may not like the voice but stick with it because they like other things within the movies.

But the justification for using the voice to that extreme is absurd because a. the script would hold the key to if his identity is discovered because of it and b. he has the lower half of his mouth in full view (which if he cuts himself shaving or has recognizable stubble/lips then he's blown anyway) and with that an obvious lisp it makes the overblown voice unnecessary. This what Nolan leaves himself open to when using justification for some things and not others - for option b. for example, using his own rules he should have had a full face mask. The Burton/Schumacher films didn't work with this justification BS so they can get away with a lot more 'factual error's' or 'fails in logic'.

But people weren't gruffing their voices up to insane degrees when Keaton/Kilmer/were in the suit (Clooney didn't bother) and if Sheldon did say that then I'm guessing he said that post TDK. Even if that is not true he wouldn't be referring to late-80s, early-90s movies since BBT started in 2007 and even thats two years after BB.

I admit that the voice does suck but the problem with it IMO isn't that it's growly but that it just doesn't sound good. You can make a voice sound growly and good at the same time. The voice is a problem because it sounds bad, not because it's growly. Batman himself talks with a growly voice in the comics, as it has been stated in many comics before. The examples I can think of from the top of my head are Knightfall (Robin tells Jean-Paul Valley, who is dressed as Batman, to "talk with that growly voice Bruce always talks with" while in the suit) and Batman & Son (Alfred says "Master Wayne, remember that growly voice you had to practice before going out as Batman? You're using it all the time now, sir" and later on in the comic, while at a party as Bruce Wayne, Alfred once again reminds him to "lose that growly voice".

But I personally prefer the Kevin Conroy voice over any other Bat voice .

(cont. from yesterday's post)

Found this today:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=k8UNfAKVpPQ

Now THAT is an example of a Batman voice being really deep and growly but badass at the same time. Or at least something similar to that.

Originally posted by spidermanrocks
I admit that the voice does suck but the problem with it IMO isn't that it's growly but that it just doesn't sound good. You can make a voice sound growly and good at the same time. The voice is a problem because it sounds bad, not because it's growly. Batman himself talks with a growly voice in the comics, as it has been stated in many comics before. The examples I can think of from the top of my head are Knightfall (Robin tells Jean-Paul Valley, who is dressed as Batman, to "talk with that growly voice Bruce always talks with" while in the suit) and Batman & Son (Alfred says "Master Wayne, remember that growly voice you had to practice before going out as Batman? You're using it all the time now, sir" and later on in the comic, while at a party as Bruce Wayne, Alfred once again reminds him to "lose that growly voice".

But I personally prefer the Kevin Conroy voice over any other Bat voice .

Well Robin said 'hoarse, grating voice' rather than 'growly' but I see your point about the references. I thought Rorschach from Watchmen had a good 'Batman voice', agressive but clear. But what is clear was the fact that the voice wasn't helped by Bale's extra mouth movements which clearly made it sound more mangled.

Kilmer's Bat-voice is my favourite, deep, dark and easy to understand while also being different to his Bruce Wayne. He even slipped into the voice while out of the suit in the Bat-cave while tallking to Dick - there was a clear distinction in that scene that he was still coming out of the Batman persona.

it would have been fun if Nolanverse had been a part of the Justice League film, but it won't be...

http://www.superherohype.com/news/articles/171575-chris-nolan-says-no-to-justice-league

^ Yeah read that earlier. Looks like back to the drawing board for JL. Right now they have nothing to draw on it from. Everything will depend on the success of Man of Steel next year.

Thank god for that.

Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
it would have been fun if Nolanverse had been a part of the Justice League film, but it won't be...

http://www.superherohype.com/news/articles/171575-chris-nolan-says-no-to-justice-league I'm ok with that. Nolan's Batman wouldn't be a good fit for JL movie.

He would be almost useless.

It's more than that. Christopher Nolan was pouring cold water over the whole shared DC Universe idea. And that he won't be involved in any capacity.
I have to think he'll be gunning for the next James Bond project.

Originally posted by roughrider
It's more than that. Christopher Nolan was pouring cold water over the whole shared DC Universe idea. And that he won't be involved in any capacity.
I have to think he'll be gunning for the next James Bond project. That's ok as good as Nolan is he isn't the only good director around and perhaps his directing style could have hindered instead of helped a JL movie. I don't know for sure,

But I never believed the success of a JL project hinged on Nolan being a part of it though.

Originally posted by Newjak


But I never believed the success of a JL project hinged on Nolan being a part of it though.

Well at the moment it's hinging on nothing. All they have towards a big screen JL team up so far is a flop GL movie.

A Batman reboot is not going to be welcomed any time soon.

So everything now rests on the success of Man of Steel next year.

Dwayne Johnson quoted on twitter as saying the rumours about Lobo are true:

"Rumors of me possibly playing LOBO are true. Joel Silver and Brad Peyton working on it now. That could be fun.. "

http://www.superherohype.com/news/articles/171817-dwayne-johnson-says-he-may-play-lobo

Do you smell what the Main Man is cookin'?

well lets hope this doesn't get pushed back... lol

If they're going to make a Lobo movie, it needs to be R rated and very gory.

This could potentially be a lose/lose here, with Batman being the main issue. People will NOT accept a non-Bale Batman. And i agree with everyone's sentiment who say that Bale's Batman will most likely NOT work in a JL/fantasy universe. Still i'm curious about the project.

Originally posted by dynamix
This could potentially be a lose/lose here, with Batman being the main issue. People will NOT accept a non-Bale Batman. And i agree with everyone's sentiment who say that Bale's Batman will most likely NOT work in a JL/fantasy universe. Still i'm curious about the project.

Why wouldn't they accept a non-Bale batman?

I don't see why people can't accept a non-Bale Batman. Batman is one of the biggest iconic characters of all time and has been very iconic long before Bale even got the part. If people were fine with a different actor as James Bond every decade, I don't see why Batman would be a problem.

Batman fans will eventually move on from Christian Bale, even if he has been the definitive version.

Fans may want to see a shared DC universe, but Warner Bros. hasn't shown the ambition for it, as yet. Christopher Nolan's departure from it all may be an insight in how they feel about solo vs. shared films.

Bale didn't even play the best Batman. That was Michael Keaton. Bale was good, though.

bale would have been so much better as batman if he would have toned down his overly gravely 'bat-voice'. otherwise, he was the perfect batman, imo.

Originally posted by Galan007
bale would have been so much better as batman if he would have toned down his overly gravely 'bat-voice'. otherwise, he was the perfect batman, imo.

You know, it's in the comics that Bruce puts on a voice; it's part of his 'becoming.'

I think Bale was the best Batman by far. Batman needs to be someone who can pretend to be nothing more than a playboy billionaire, but at the same time you can tell "this guy has serious issues."

Bale portrayed that more perfectly than any previous actor Imo. So I don't get what all the Bale hate is about on these boards.

I think Bale played a better Bruce, but Keaton played a better Batman.

Originally posted by Golgo13
I think Bale played a better Bruce, but Keaton played a better Batman.

^This.

Bale tries to hard when he's Batman. The whole voice issue is irritating.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sc_encIvqQ8

I would love this cast (and the director):

http://th04.deviantart.net/fs70/PRE/i/2011/320/d/f/justice_league_movie_poster_by_daniel_morpheus-d4ga8dj.jpg

edit

Originally posted by roughrider
You know, it's in the comics that Bruce puts on a voice; it's part of his 'becoming.'

It's not as bad as Bale's is, though.

Originally posted by Blair Wind
I would love this cast (and the director):

http://th04.deviantart.net/fs70/PRE/i/2011/320/d/f/justice_league_movie_poster_by_daniel_morpheus-d4ga8dj.jpg

Not me, thanks.

Originally posted by -Pr-
Not me, thanks.

That's okay, you obviously like the opposite of good.

Originally posted by Blair Wind
That's okay, you obviously like the opposite of good.

sneer

Some yes, but not all.

while i think bale's "voice change" could've been more subtle, like kevin conroy's voice in batman tas, it works so well when he's yelling..

Originally posted by roughrider
You know, it's in the comics that Bruce puts on a voice; it's part of his 'becoming.'

Originally posted by -Pr-
It's not as bad as Bale's is, though.



How do you know? It's not like you actually hear his voice through the comic

Anyway guess I'm the only one here who doesn't think Bale's Batman voice was bad.

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
How do you know? It's not like you actually hear his voice through the comic

Anyway guess I'm the only one here who doesn't think Bale's Batman voice was bad.


i have never had a problem with Bale's bat voice, after all that was one of the reasons he was hired

seems to be confirmed about Batman reboot

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

Hadn't we known this already?

Originally posted by -Pr-
Hadn't we known this already?

Yes, but since comic book movie news are slow at DC things have to be rehashed. It was either this, Superman, or Lobo Rock.

Originally posted by Blair Wind
I would love this cast (and the director):

http://th04.deviantart.net/fs70/PRE/i/2011/320/d/f/justice_league_movie_poster_by_daniel_morpheus-d4ga8dj.jpg

Ewww, Bradley Cooper and Ryan Renolds in the same film? Is it a comedy? No? IT'S A WHAT?!??! JL MOVIE!? GTFOH!!!!!! NO!!!!!! NO!!!! NOOOOOOOOOO!

If they recast Reynolds as Wally West then sure. Put in Nathan Fillion as Hal Jordan. The rest you can keep. We've had atleast something to look forward to.

I don't want any comedic actor as Wally. Seriously.

Originally posted by -Pr-
I don't want any comedic actor as Wally. Seriously.

they will and you know it

Originally posted by -Pr-
I don't want any comedic actor as Wally. Seriously.

What about Chris Pine? Maybe Chris Evans?

Originally posted by Lek Kuen
they will and you know it

They can die.

Originally posted by WhiteWitchKing
What about Chris Pine? Maybe Chris Evans?

Either of those might be all right.

how about the young hemsworth.. the one in the hunger games?

If DC really does do a shared universe, the chances of Green Lantern being rebooted are 100% because the GL film would heavily contradict Man of Steel. Snyder and Goyer have said Man of Steel will be mankind's first encounter with superpowered aliens and it would show how humans would realistically react to the appearance of guys like Superman and Zod. We also know the existence of the Kryptonians will be revealed and there will be at least 1 fight between Superman and Zod in public. Thus the movie wouldn't make sense at all if it took place after Parallax's attack on Earth. Even if you were to set the GL film after Man of Steel, it still wouldn't make sense since Amanda Waller said Abin Sur is mankind's first encounter with aliens. There's literally no chance for the GL film to get a sequel if DC's shared universe is happening.

Originally posted by spidermanrocks
If DC really does do a shared universe, the chances of Green Lantern being rebooted are 100% because the GL film would heavily contradict Man of Steel. Snyder and Goyer have said Man of Steel will be mankind's first encounter with superpowered aliens and it would show how humans would realistically react to the appearance of guys like Superman and Zod. We also know the existence of the Kryptonians will be revealed and there will be at least 1 fight between Superman and Zod in public. Thus the movie wouldn't make sense at all if it took place after Parallax's attack on Earth. Even if you were to set the GL film after Man of Steel, it still wouldn't make sense since Amanda Waller said Abin Sur is mankind's first encounter with aliens. There's literally no chance for the GL film to get a sequel if DC's shared universe is happening.

And I'm completely okay with that

GL is my favorite super hero and Ryan Reynolds did a great job - unfortunately, the editing to that movie sucked hardcore.

I wish they had gone more Star Wars with GL and kept him as a space cop in an epic space opera.

I'm fine with that too. I wasn't a fan of the movie either but I have a mixed opinion on Ryan Reynolds as Green Lantern. Hal Jordan is a bit more serious than the way Reynolds portrayed him. However, you can argue that it is the script's fault and not Reynolds'. Maybe he has the potential to pull off a better Hal Jordan if the reboot is good and portrays Hal better but I'll believe that when I see it.

And they should definitely go more Star Wars with the reboot. That would make a fantastic GL movie .

Originally posted by super pr*xy
how about the young hemsworth.. the one in the hunger games?

liam as flash, i told my sister i wouldn't be at all surprised if that were to happen

Originally posted by Blair Wind
And I'm completely okay with that

GL is my favorite super hero and Ryan Reynolds did a great job - unfortunately, the editing to that movie sucked hardcore.

I wish they had gone more Star Wars with GL and kept him as a space cop in an epic space opera.

Pretty much. I just hope that the bad experience with the movie doesn't put them off using Hal Jordan; or worse, with JLA on the horizon they feel pressured to use John.

Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
liam as flash, i told my sister i wouldn't be at all surprised if that were to happen

might as well keep it in the family.. one for marvel and one for dc..

Originally posted by super pr*xy
might as well keep it in the family.. one for marvel and one for dc..


yep.. just think of all the tabloid stories that they'll come up with

Superman. Would love to see a good supes movie. We'll see.
Wonder Woman. Ehhh, could be really easy to mess up.
Flash. Could flop bigtime.
Aquaman. I think this would be one of the easiest JL characters to pull off
Green Lantern. Definitely should reboot.
Batman. Who knows what they'll do with him.
Martian Manhunter. I havent seen anything about him. Thats lame. My fav JL member

Originally posted by DARTH POWER
How do you know? It's not like you actually hear his voice through the comic

Anyway guess I'm the only one here who doesn't think Bale's Batman voice was bad.

I've been re-reading the collected Knightfall saga in bookstores, and when Jean Paul Valley starts substituting as Batman, Tim Drake is giving him advice on how to act the part ( just before the first meeting with Commissioner Gordon), right down to dropping his voice down when he talks 'as Bruce does', Tim says.

Is DC actually doing this or is this some fan hype?

Originally posted by juggernaut74
Is DC actually doing this or is this some fan hype?

It's the imagination of the fans running wild, more than anything real. DC said all the right things at the time - about how they were going to mobilize their characters in the wake of the Avengers box office smash - but they've been good at talking more than acting for several years, now. Marvel is actually acting.

We will get some more info in a month or so. Probably less than a month, since the head guy behind the JLA movie said this a week or so ago. The marketing will begin in the next Batman game and probably Injustice.

Originally posted by roughrider
I've been re-reading the collected Knightfall saga in bookstores, and when Jean Paul Valley starts substituting as Batman, Tim Drake is giving him advice on how to act the part ( just before the first meeting with Commissioner Gordon), right down to dropping his voice down when he talks 'as Bruce does', Tim says.

Yes, and Conroy did the same thing. Bale just took it to an extreme that a lot of people didn't like.

Correction, he said this almost a month, so if we don't get any info soon, I will have my doubts. WB won't have any more super hero films for 3 years, but at least they have been working on the script for more than a year.

If he gets the gig, I would be happy. Ben is a really good director PLUS he's a super hero fan.

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Justice-League-Movie-Could-Have-Ben-Affleck-Director-32374.html

Yeah. I'm not exactly sold on the idea yet, but maybe I'll warm up to it if it actually happens.

Originally posted by Golgo13
If he gets the gig, I would be happy. Ben is a really good director PLUS he's a super hero fan.

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Justice-League-Movie-Could-Have-Ben-Affleck-Director-32374.html

simply.. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

thought i was gonna get a good film and a great story, guess not

Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
simply.. NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

thought i was gonna get a good film and a great story, guess not

Why not? Affleck has made a name for himself as a quality director at the very least.

Daredevil was a long time ago.

Originally posted by Golgo13
If he gets the gig, I would be happy. Ben is a really good director PLUS he's a super hero fan.

http://www.cinemablend.com/new/Justice-League-Movie-Could-Have-Ben-Affleck-Director-32374.html

Lord - does DC & Warner Bros. feel the need to try & out-scoop Marvel & Disney at every turn? Just because it got announced Joss Whedon has signed on to do Avengers 2, they just have to put out a news release about YET ANOTHER director interview for a JL movie(that could happen...someday)



Jealousy...it looks a lot like Lex Luthor.


I don't know if Ben Affleck is the right choice to direct a JL movie - though we should at least count on him never returning for another Daredevil. Which is fine by me. But it does demonstrate Warner Bros. strange obsession with only working with in-house directors (Christopher Nolan, Zack Snyder, Ben Affleck etc.), moving them around like pieces to match with projects. The fact Ben Affleck has a new film about to be released by Warner Bros...just a coincidence?

I mean, whatever happened to turning the JL project over to David Yates and the Harry Potter production crew, to finally get the wheels creaking?
That was news...for a minute, anyway.

Yeah, because Marvel never try to do the exact same thing when it comes to comics... Oh.

Originally posted by -Pr-
Yeah, because Marvel never try to do the exact same thing when it comes to comics... Oh.

Ouch.

Relax, it's not even confirmed yet. And there are a few directors you can say that with Marvel, but it worked out in the end. A script is already in the bag, all WB needs is a director. Ben would be a good fit.

Originally posted by roughrider
Ouch.

vin

Originally posted by -Pr-
Why not? Affleck has made a name for himself as a quality director at the very least.

Daredevil was a long time ago.


well i just can;t see Affleck be the Flash or god forbid Bruce Wayb]ne/Batman, maybe John Jonzz and yeah he has been a pretty good director but this has major flop written all over it because I don;t think Affleck can handle $300 million dollars for a budget .. I might be wrong but this the way I feel right now

Originally posted by BruceSkywalker
well i just can;t see Affleck be the Flash or god forbid Bruce Wayb]ne/Batman, maybe John Jonzz and yeah he has been a pretty good director but this has major flop written all over it because I don;t think Affleck can handle $300 million dollars for a budget .. I might be wrong but this the way I feel right now

There is nothing confirmed that he will be a hero or even directing it. He's just going in for a talk and don't mention Daredevil, because he didn't direct that movie.

Ben Affleck is an actor/director, taking the lead role in films he directs; just like Clint Eastwood. So if he does this, who would he play...?