Well of course! Reboot means it can do anything. Batman will be an alien and Superman will be human.
Christopher Nolan says no to Batman reboot and Justice League film
- Thread starter Dream
- Start date
Well of course! Reboot means it can do anything. Batman will be an alien and Superman will be human.
There's more than one way to market a film what worked for Marvel may not work for DC. Justice League will succeed or fail on its own merits not because they did or didn't do it like Marvel.
It's hard to get more than three movies from any franchise without some kind of new direction/team change.
While the news about "Justice League" doesn't surprise me, he has stated that he wouldn't do that film before, it does surprise me that he said he would be done with Batman after "The Dark Knight Rises". I guess this means he has changed his mind now about "godfathering" the reboot? That was supposed to be the plan after the trilogy concluded. Guess that has changed.
Nolan has mulled over a number of possible projects to do next, including revisiting his long rumored Howard Hughes bio-pic.
Nolan has mulled over a number of possible projects to do next, including revisiting his long rumored Howard Hughes bio-pic.
Only if he has time to prepare.And Nolan's definitely right that Batman will outlive us all.
Despero.
I always thought issues #37-40 of Justice League America would be a great basis for a big screen outing.
Or issues #5-7 of Justice League International featuring the Grey Man.
this is hardly surprising. He's been saying he's done with the character after TDKR for a while now. I like that he's a guy who can recognize when to leave a great product alone and not ruin the legacy by adding sequels designed to cash-in.
The Nolan trilogy will stand for a long time as the best take on Batman to ever reach the screen. I still find the Burton films entertaining, but they're not in the same league.
The Nolan trilogy will stand for a long time as the best take on Batman to ever reach the screen. I still find the Burton films entertaining, but they're not in the same league.
You know as far as Justice League goes it occurs to me that DC could do what Marvel did in reverse: Begin with a group film, and on based on the success of that film, give that movie's Batman, Wonder Woman, etc. their own features (ignoring Superman here since I'm randomly assuming that the caped crusader of Man of Steel is going to be in that movie).
For me Batman Returns was by far the most entertaining of the four pre-Nolan films, and Pfieffer's Catwoman is the standard I'll be judging Hathaway against. The first Batman could get fairly boring and I felt Jack Nicholson phoned in his performance far more so than the scenery-chewing antagonists of Batman Returns (which also lacks the Prince music and has an even better Elfman score than the first film).
Batman Forever I have a vague fondness for because it was the first Batman film I saw in theatres and at the time I saw every other Jim Carrey movie. Hasn't aged quite as well for me.
For me Batman Returns was by far the most entertaining of the four pre-Nolan films, and Pfieffer's Catwoman is the standard I'll be judging Hathaway against. The first Batman could get fairly boring and I felt Jack Nicholson phoned in his performance far more so than the scenery-chewing antagonists of Batman Returns (which also lacks the Prince music and has an even better Elfman score than the first film).
Batman Forever I have a vague fondness for because it was the first Batman film I saw in theatres and at the time I saw every other Jim Carrey movie. Hasn't aged quite as well for me.
Perhaps he should reunite with Inception star Leonardo DiCaprio for that featue.
I find Burton's sequel to be an exercise in stylistic excess. Worse, it's so obsessed with its many villains that it relegates Batman/Bruce Wayne to a supporting role; when he finally appears at the fifteen minute mark he doesn't even get a decent entrance!
I wish I could like the film, which takes more risks than a comic book movie like this has ever been allowed before or since, but it's just too much of a mess.
It certainly doesn't have the appeal for me that it did when I was nine, but I think it's a passable blockbuster entertainment -- i.e. something I'll never own, but would watch for a bit if I stumbled across it on TV.
None of which are really a problem for me. Hell in Batman a lot of the scenes about the title character are pretty dull, especially in his dull-as-dishwater Bruce Wayne persona and his rather trite romance with Vicki Vale. And I think Batman actually gets more interesting material with in his relationship with Catwoman.
(Speaking of indlugence: Naming a villain 'Max Schreck' and getting Christopher Walken to play him. There's one bit of shameless fondness for German Expressionism that still pays off as a pretty fun side character.)
It's Tim Burton at his most Tim Burton in ways that really pay off (and along with Ed Wood and Edward Scissorhands I'd put it among his best work).
That's what I was talking about. Such an attempt is going to fail. Marvel managed that ALL films, from Iron Man to Thor, were successful with the audience (well, ok, except for The Hulk). And then it was a given that Avengers would work.
They haven't even managed to get a decent Superman film out there yet.
If DC were to copy exactly what Marvel did that would be unoriginal and fans would scream "copycat.' So DC has to do something different and creative with a JL movie.
My opinion is that the DC characters are more well known in the general population than Marvel's characters so that already gives them a foundation to work from.
