News Variety Reports Robert Pattinson is the new Batman
- Thread starter auntiehill
- Start date
- Status
(Just to stir the pot)
Unless it’s a flashback scene, those cars suggest a period early enough for the new Batman to be the earlier version of Batfleck.
Wasn't that the original idea for the new stand alone Batman flick anyway??
And is it me, or is the first picture of most Batman movies always one of a GPD policecar?
Yes, it was supposed to be in-universe, though no real connections to the universe were expected. They might as well keep it that way - you can assume it's in the DCU... or not. Won't matter to this particular story.
Considering how the trailer for Wonder Woman 2 is already retconning things said in BvS and JL I think we can safely asume that the interconnected DCU won't be on the same level as the MCU.
IIRC all of the exterior Gotham scenes were done on soundstages at Pinewood, so yes, technically Gotham was in London, but not quite. Though for what it's worth I think an old Gothic mansion up in Herefordshire "played" Wayne Manor.
I wouldn't go that far. The difference is that Tony at least tries to transcend his ego and intermittently succeeds, while everything Lex does is in service to his ego. Tony is arrogant enough to believe he can save the world and compassionate enough to believe he needs to. Lex knows he could save the world, but doesn't care enough to try because he's too busy trying to kill the one being he can't feel superior to.
If so, it kind of makes sense. The first production photos we see from movies are usually from location shoots, since those can't be hidden from the public very easily, especially if they're on city streets. And street-level outdoor scenes in a Batman movie have a good chance of involving the police.
Nothing new there. We went from BvS and "Superman is still an unknown, alien phenomenon that half of humanity mistrusts or fears" to Justice League and "Superman was so universally beloved and relied upon that his death threw humanity into the deepest despair in its history."
The difference between the MCU and the DCEU is that the MCU got it pretty much right from the start. Its early movies mostly worked (aside from a couple of casting choices), so it benefited the later movies to follow up on them. But the early DCEU movies were deeply flawed, problematical, and controversial. There was a lot that needed to be corrected or discarded in order to improve the series going forward.
Which means we can't necessarily assume that future DCEU movies will disregard each other's continuity. Any movie that worked has a good chance of being referred back to and built on. If the series stabilizes at its current level of quality and popularity, then we can probably expect to see more interconnections among the newer films, even if they continue to disregard the earlier ones.
Come to think of it, didn't early Marvel comics do the same thing? There were a lot of rough patches in those earliest issues that got ignored or retconned away later on, while the parts that worked were kept. Eventually there was a tight, consistent shared universe, but it wasn't beholden to its early mistakes. Similarly with Star Trek, which built up a well-drawn, cohesive universe but glossed over early hiccups like James R. Kirk, lithium crystals, and UESPA.
Or they could play against expectations and he's the only survivor of the core cast by the end of the film and goes onto many more appearances.
Frankly, I found Zemo in Civil War to be a better take on the idea of Lex Luthor. Some versions of Luthor have made him into an Anti-Superhuman person completely, opposed to not just Superman but all Metas and aliens as well. Zemo has the same mentality, not without sympathy but still not right.
Well, there isn't a Superman in the MCU. And while Luthor will always ends up paying for his BS, the MCUs Stark is responsible for a whole lot of crap that he commits deliberately and also loads onto other people and then gets a pass from the script. A good example is Civil War, where Tony commits a whole raft of obviously criminal acts (forcible confinement, recruiting a child soldier, attempting to murder a brainwashing vicitim), and then is gifted with an apology at the end of the film from the guy who's brainwashed friend he tried to murder and a pass from the very real failures of leadership he exhibited throughout the film from the man he got crippled. Luthor pulls the crap Tony gets away with, and he ends up vilified and in jail.
Doesn't have to be. The point is, Luthor cares more about his ego than about humanity, and that would be the case whether or not there was a Superman. Stark (at least post-2008) cares enough about humanity to try to put it above his ego, though with limited success. For Stark, his ego is an obstacle to his priorities; for Luthor, his ego is his priority.
After my last post I decided to check Wikipedia, so based off of that, my memory, and your posts we've got:
Batman '66: Los Angeles
Burton/Shumacher films: Mostly closed sets
Dark Knight trilogy: Mostly Chicago for the first two, then a combination of Pittsburgh, LA, NYC, Newark, London, and Glasglow in The Dark Knight Rises
Gotham: New York
Titans: Toronto
Arrowverse: Chicago and Vancouver
What about the DCEU?
Both JL and Suicide Squad were partially filmed in Chicago, so it's maybe where the Gotham exteriors were shot.
And of course, Joker was filmed in New York.
And of course, Joker was filmed in New York.
Colin Farrell now officially Penguin/Cobblepot https://batman-news.com/2020/01/06/colin-farrell-penguin-the-batman/
These might be all fine appointments but it's like the casting director has never actually seen Batman before in any form.
Or perhaps they're deliberately trying to break the mold and do something different?
It's not like this is the first time this happened with Penguin. Remember Batman Returns' take on him? Where he was Killer Croc in Penguins' mutated skin?
- Status