‘Superman & Batman’ movie will follow ‘Man of Steel’

[Captaindemotion]

I can't help but feel that while it is clearly successful enough to warrant a sequel, WB have decided that the best way to maximise income is to bring in the assured box-office pull of the Dark Knight. And simultaneously relaunch that hero on the big screen.

In doing so, they are neither replicating Marvel's approach with the solo movies leading up to an Avengers/JLA epic nor are they taking the gamble of one film being used to introduce and launch all of their heroes at once. This approach strikes me as very sensible and shrewd and if this film is a hit, it will springboard new Batman films and probably set up a JLA one.

You know, that's a thought. I've been wondering what approach they could take that was neither a copy of Marvel's (solo hero films followed by mass team-up) nor a simple inversion of it (mass team-up followed by solo films). Maybe what they could do is the equivalent of a team-up comic: Do several Superman films, each of which teams Superman with a different guest hero. So that Batman is introduced in the second Superman film, Wonder Woman in the third, etc., and then it eventually builds to a JL film.

I'm not saying that's what I think they are doing, but it just occurs to me as something that might be suitably distinct from the Marvel approach.

Yes, that could work too. I'm not sure that they will do that though - I think Batman is different from their other gallery of heroes in that he is a proven box office draw in not just one but two series of successful (financially anyway) movies. No other comic strip hero has achieved that yet (Spider-man is on his way, admittedly). I still tend to the idea that in this movie Superman is getting a boost from him as much as the other way round, even if this is an as yet-unseen version of Batman.

Of course, if the next film follows the Dark Knight route of the sequel being way more successful than the first in the series, then Superman is well placed to springboard Wonder Woman etc onto the big screen. And, as you say, in a totally different fashion to how Marvel have done it.

 

[Christopher]

Well, not totally different, since Marvel introduced Black Widow in a similar way in Iron Man 2, and spent most of the series building up Fury and Coulson in other characters' movies -- and arguably used The Avengers as a vehicle for rehabilitating the Hulk after his disappointing solo film. But it would be different enough.

 

[Captaindemotion]

^ True. But those characters were very much supporting characters and I don't believe (but an subject to correction) that solo films are planned for any of them beyond general 'maybe' replies to interviews. The logo for the Superman/Batman one contains both of their symbols so it really looks to me (at this admittedy very early stage) like a joint movie, as oppose to the Marvel approach of supporting roles from other characters from that universe.

 

[Christopher]

^Yeah, it's different. I'm just saying that it's an overstatement to call it "totally different." Somewhat different, significantly different, but not totally different.

Although there would be a Black Widow solo movie in the works if there were any justice. And an Anne Hathaway Catwoman solo movie, and a Wonder Woman movie, and a Carol Danvers/Captain Marvel movie. But for some reason, the studios have a blind spot about the appeal of female-led superhero movies, even though we get things like Tomb Raider and Underworld and The Hunger Games.

Well, at least they say that Widow is going to be an equal partner to Cap in The Winter Soldier.

 

[Greg Cox]

Oh, please. It's a time-honored comic-book tradition for superheros to clash at first before teaming up against a common foe.

Remember Thor and Iron Man and Captain America knocking each other around in THE AVENGERS, and the Hulk taking on Thor and Black Widow later on? And Hawkeye fighting everyone for most of the movie?

But the title of the movie presented them as a team. This and the Miller quote about boots on necks doesn't give the right vibe.

Heck, why give a merged-symbol logo if they're supposed to be fighting? Shouldn't they be head-to-head or something?

"Frankenstein Meets the Wolfman" wasn't titled "Frankenstein Vs. Wolfman," but they still ended up fighting in the end, because that's what audiences want to see.

Remember that scene in "Stand By Me" where the kids are arguing about who would win in a fight, Superman or Mighty Mouse? Fans have been wanting to see their favorite superheroes test themselves against each other for probably as long as there have been comic books.

And it may be cliched in the comics by this point, but we haven't really seen it on the big screen much . . . .

Plus, of course, it's just more dramatic that way. Does anyone really want to see a movie where Superman and Batman work together without any conflict from Day One?

"Nice to meet you, Batman. I've heard nothing but good things about you."

"Likewise, Superman. I'm looking forward to our team-up. Let's shake hands and go save the world!"

That's great if you're doing a Hanna-Barbara cartoon aimed at eight-year-olds, but . . . .

 

[Christopher]

Personally I'd rather see Superman and Batman recognize their mutual good intentions but disagree over methods and values. An emotional and philosophical conflict, a clash of characters and worldviews, is a lot more exciting to me than two guys punching each other. Even aside from the obvious consideration that a fight between Superman and Batman is like a fight between Muhammad Ali and an actual butterfly. Even the fight in The Dark Knight Returns, with all the advantages and cheats Batman had on his side, was only possible because Superman had been substantially weakened beforehand and was way off his game. And yet Superman's victory was still a foregone conclusion.

I liked the way Byrne did it in The Man of Steel #3. Batman knew he didn't have a chance against Superman physically, so he used a bomb threat to keep Superman from touching him, and thus their tension was strictly on a personal and moral level rather than being your typical superhero slugfest.

 

[Showdown]

Can't wait to see it and the JL movie. I really enjoyed Man of Steel. I want to see how they will reboot Batman. Maybe they should have Green Lantern make a cameo in the Flash movie. Okay, nevermind.

[ Speculation ]
I wonder if they want to make it Man of Steel 2: World's Finest, with it being a Superman movie with Batman in it. Wayne Enterprise, Lex Corp, and others will help rebuild Metropolis. Superman will have to deal with the consequenses of the first movie and the xenophobia that follows. Maybe Batman will have an Iron Man type suit and have a short fight with Superman, before teaming up and fighting the villains. Although I do agree with Christopher
[ /Speculation]

 

[Warped9]

I think it's far too soon to be projecting or making predictions about how this will turn out. It sounds like all they have at present is a basic idea: putting the two characters together.

While certainly not perfect overall I quite liked the recent Nolan Batman trilogy. I went into MoS with a mixture of hope and trepidation because of different things I'd read and heard, but in the end I thought it was pretty decent. It certainly wasn't perfect and there are a few little things I'd liked to have seen as well as a few things I wish they'd done differently. In the end my biggest gripe is with the final action scene: totally redundant and overdone. But the rest of it I can live with.

Regarding this announced project, I'll wait and see. I think it's reasonably certain it will be a Bruce Wayne Batman and not anyone else. I think it's likely he'll be a more than cameo like character in the story. It's simply what most people will expect and line up for.

While they might indeed reboot Batman for this---and thereby open the door for further solo Batman features---I certainly wouldn't mind seeing Christian Bale come back for this one more story (assuming they decide to keep it all the same continuity). Bale did say he was done with the character, but I'm pretty sure he also said that if Chris Nolan were involved and it was a good story then he'd be up for it. We'll see. That said I'm not keen on seeing a Joseph Gordon-Levitt as Batman simply because he's not Bruce Wayne (in that continuity) and he just doesn't have the right look to him (in my eyes).

It could work in the same continuity as the Nolan trilogy simply because fantastical elements were introduced into that continuity and the events of MoS can be seen as happened sometime after TDKR. Bruce Wayne could see the appearance of Superman as a potential threat and be convinced that he's the one who has to look into it. In the beginning it could indeed be versus each other, but then come together to combat a larger threat. Saying that it could be loosely based on Frank Miller's work might only be a way of conveying the general story idea they're considering without adapting the exact original story point-for-point.

For now I'm cautiously hopeful for this even knowing that it likely won't be everything I think it should be and will likely do some things I'd wish they would do differently. Pretty much like MoS and the Nolan trilogy.

 

[Trekker4747]

I think it's far too soon to be projecting or making predictions about how this will turn out.

Awww, it's someone's first day on the internet.

 

[Rincewiend]

^They shouldn't touch the Joker so soon, and there's no need to, if they're not doing another Batman series.

There'll likely be new Batman solo movies that spin out of this and Justice League. The prospect of a free hand with the Joker and other Batman elements down the line may lead them to establish that this is a new non-Nolanverse Batman. 2018 or 2019 may well be the earliest we'd see a new solo Batman movie.

Nor me...I don't want to see a fanwankish Batman beats Superman scenario onscreen...I want to see them work together.

My guess is they'll have the relationship start out antagonistic and then have them become allies by the end of the movie.

Superman is the ultimate boy-scout and Batman is a vigilante, so their differnt ways most likely will result in them being suspicious of each-other at first, then learning to work together...
It's been done in the comics...

 

[Captaindemotion]

I think it's far too soon to be projecting or making predictions about how this will turn out.

Awww, it's someone's first day on the internet.

Well, half the fun in speculation is being proven wrong.

My doubtless-totally-mistaken prediction for now is that, rather than calling this Batman versus Superman or Superman versus Batman etc, they will call this movie World's Finest. After all, the last two Batman movies didn't have Batman in the title nor theist Superman one Superman in the title. So with the same team essentially in charge, WF would seem to be consistent with how they've named the last 3 movies featuring these characters.

 

[Greg Cox]

WORLD'S FINEST is the perfect title--if you're a lifelong comic book fan with a long memory and a working knowledge of DC history. But I'm not sure the phrase screams "Batman Meets Superman" to the average moviegoer.

Certainly, it's more esoteric than, say, MAN OF STEEL or THE DARK KNIGHT.

 

[Out Of My Vulcan Mind]

I'd be surprised if they call it World's Finest. It has too much of a 40s/50s vibe to it. I think they'll call it Superman vs. Batman.

 

[Captaindemotion]

But is it any more obscure than The Dark Knight was in 2008 or Man of Steel was? Especially when the S and the Bat are in the logo and posters?

 

[Dorian Thompson]

^ True. But those characters were very much supporting characters and I don't believe (but an subject to correction) that solo films are planned for any of them beyond general 'maybe' replies to interviews. The logo for the Superman/Batman one contains both of their symbols so it really looks to me (at this admittedy very early stage) like a joint movie, as oppose to the Marvel approach of supporting roles from other characters from that universe.

True, this. Sure sounds like a joint adventure, which isn't going to appeal to everyone who isn't an enthusiastic fan of different comic series. More casual comic fans or non comic fans who might happen to enjoy an individual movie series with Superman, Batman, Ironman et al will look at a title like Superman vs. Batman and ask, "What?"

 

[Out Of My Vulcan Mind]

But is it any more obscure than The Dark Knight was in 2008 or Man of Steel was? Especially when the S and the Bat are in the logo and posters?

It's not more obscure, but it doesn't have a modern ring to it.

 

[Captaindemotion]

^ Yeah but these are the heroes everyone has heard of. I think this will have as much of a headstart with the public as Avengers, though I'm not saying it will definitely be as successful

 

[The Old Mixer]

^^I think it's much more obscure...the general public knows who "The Man of Steel" is, and they might have heard of "The Dark Knight", but they won't be familiar with the title "World's Finest", and unlike the previous two examples, it's very generic-sounding out of context.

"Frankenstein Meets the Wolfman" wasn't titled "Frankenstein Vs. Wolfman," but they still ended up fighting in the end, because that's what audiences want to see.

I'm not denying for a second that they should start out at odds with each other, or that they'll probably fight...but you're making my basic point for me--You can have them fight without putting the very negative "vs." in the title.

I liked the way Byrne did it in The Man of Steel #3. Batman knew he didn't have a chance against Superman physically, so he used a bomb threat to keep Superman from touching him, and thus their tension was strictly on a personal and moral level rather than being your typical superhero slugfest.

Hear, hear!

Maybe they should have Green Lantern make a cameo in the Flash movie. Okay, nevermind.

At this point, they'll count their blessings if they can get away with quietly slipping GL in the JL movie....

Regarding the subject of Kryptonite...I think it will pop up in this film. Used right, it could be an equalizer for Superman and Batman...and at the end they could recreate that classic bit where Superman entrusts Batman with it, a great way of demonstrating the mutual respect and trust that they've earned in spite of the cheesy title. In this version of things, I wouldn't be surprised if Kryptonite were synthetically developed on Earth as a substance to recreate the effects that the Kryptonian atmosphere had on Superman in MoS...a project that could be initiated by the government as a means of controlling Superman, which they could contract out to a research tycoon whose initials are "LL".....

 

[Greg Cox]

But is it any more obscure than The Dark Knight was in 2008 or Man of Steel was? Especially when the S and the Bat are in the logo and posters?

I think so. THE DARK KNIGHT and MAN OF STEEL are both better known phrases, long associated with the characters, and actual descriptions of the protagonists.

WORLD'S FINEST is a bit of publishing history that doesn't actually describe the characters except in terms of a vague superlative.

 

[JoeZhang]

There are all sorts of interpersonal conflicts you can set up - one is an immigrant working stiff and the other is an blueblood and so on.