Not camp like Batman and Robin though. Or Thor: Ragnarok.
DC Movies - To Infinity and Beyond
- Thread starter dahj
- Start date
Not camp like Batman and Robin though. Or Thor: Ragnarok.
Yes, she WAS a DC character.
No, she was an original Filmation character that was then added to the Shazam! comics universe for a brief period of time in 1976-8 or so, and then reintroduced in the main DC universe in 2006.
Yes, it does. Any valid argument needs to be grounded in accurate information.
Case in point: The "Batgirl" character was originally made/created specifically for the live action BATMAN TV series (1966-69). She NEVER appeared in any Batman of DC comic prior to the series, yet over the last 50 or so years she's become a major character in the DC comics universe.
This is incorrect. Batgirl was introduced in a comics story published in January 1967, "The Million-Dollar Debut of Batgirl." The TV show first mentioned the character in "King Tut's Coup," airing March 8, 1967, and debuted her onscreen in the third-season premiere, "Enter Batgirl, Exit Penguin," on September 14, 1967. It's widely believed that she was created for the comics at the request of the show's producers, but per Wikipedia:
If you want characters that started in adaptations and were then added to core comics, there are plenty of legitimate examples you could've chosen: Jimmy Olsen, Perry White, Bill Henderson, Harley Quinn, Renee Montoya, and Livewire in DC; Hot Dog in Archie Comics, Firestar, Phil Coulson, and others in Marvel.
^^^
To be fair, WRT "Batgirl" - I think we're both right to a degree:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Batgirl
IE - It appears "Barbra Gordon" (and that take on 'Batgilrl' was created for/because of the BATMAN series.
In a way, yes, but that doesn't make it any less wrong to say that she appeared on the show first. You don't get to fudge or finesse the facts to fit your argument. That just invalidates your argument. The facts are non-negotiable.
Every Batman casting thus far HAS been debated. Even Bale.
No, by that time in the comics Batman was trying to be a more serious character. So they went half-way and made a film that tried to combined camp with darkness. Hence, Burton.
Er, yes. Very much so.
Debated is one thing, but maybe you weren’t there or you don’t remember the idea of a comic actor being cast as Batman and the confusion, and not just in the fan community. A little different than Bale.
The general population, who the movie was for, didn’t read comics. Most people didn’t know anything about Batman except what he looked like and Adam West.
Burton was a risk.
Nope. Put on the Batman tv show next to Batman 89. Talk to me then.
Given that Justice League depicted the Flash as someone who was afraid of fighting, I can totally see him being too scared to get involved with something as big as the Enchantress. Maybe he was running around the city helping evacuate stragglers and was just so fast that no one saw him. (Meanwhile, we didn't see it because it's not relevant to the story being told.)
As for Batman & Wonder Woman, I think that is a pretty good question. In my headcanon, they were both stuck on a submarine searching for Aquaman at the time. (As for Aquaman, Midway City is hundreds of miles from any major saltwater body, so he DGAF!
)Granted, I feel like Batman would be ill-equipped to handle something on the level of Enchantress but that didn't stop him from trying to fight Doomsday or Steppenwolf. And he would still be better equipped for that fight than pretty much every actual member of the Suicide Squad apart from Diablo.
I agree. Suicide Squad is my favorite of the DCEU movies but I would agree that the plot for the sequel doesn't really need to tie into anything. I'd just like to see most of that lineup come back, maybe with a couple additions.
I love it! This should totally be a thing!I really like Leto's version of the Joker but I don't think he's really necessary at this point. He was important for Suicide Squad because he's a vital part of Harley Quinn's backstory but we don't need him any more now that she's established. But Birds of Prey or Suicide Squad 2 could just as easily begin with Joker & Harley having broken up off-screen (much like Thor & Jane in Thor: Ragnarok or Tony & Pepper in Captain America: Civil War). Mostly, I'd like to see Harley's next movie introduce a possible romance between her & Poison Ivy.
And seriously, WHY ARE THEY NOT DOING GOTHAM CITY SIRENS!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
"Am I too soon?! I'm too soon!"
Taking the dictionary definition of "camp" as "deliberately exaggerated and theatrical in style," yes, that definitely describes both of Tim Burton's Batman movies. But Tim Burton's "camp" is still miles away from the Adam West version and not at all related.
Question: Once we get past the heroes currently on-screen or in-development--Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Shazam, the Flash, Cyborg, Green Lantern Corps (possibly), Harley Quinn (et al), and any other assorted Batman spinoffs--what would be the next most obvious DC characters to adapt?
Also, unrelated to everything else, I just saw Teen Titans Go to the Movies! last week and that's the most I've laughed at a movie in a while. Just delightfully unhinged from reality and disinterested in its own plot. I love it!
Given that Justice League depicted the Flash as someone who was afraid of fighting, I can totally see him being too scared to get involved with something as big as the Enchantress. Maybe he was running around the city helping evacuate stragglers and was just so fast that no one saw him. (Meanwhile, we didn't see it because it's not relevant to the story being told.)
As for Batman & Wonder Woman, I think that is a pretty good question. In my headcanon, they were both stuck on a submarine searching for Aquaman at the time. (As for Aquaman, Midway City is hundreds of miles from any major saltwater body, so he DGAF!
Granted, I feel like Batman would be ill-equipped to handle something on the level of Enchantress but that didn't stop him from trying to fight Doomsday or Steppenwolf. And he would still be better equipped for that fight than pretty much every actual member of the Suicide Squad apart from Diablo.
I agree. Suicide Squad is my favorite of the DCEU movies but I would agree that the plot for the sequel doesn't really need to tie into anything. I'd just like to see most of that lineup come back, maybe with a couple additions.
I really like Leto's version of the Joker but I don't think he's really necessary at this point. He was important for Suicide Squad because he's a vital part of Harley Quinn's backstory but we don't need him any more now that she's established. But Birds of Prey or Suicide Squad 2 could just as easily begin with Joker & Harley having broken up off-screen (much like Thor & Jane in Thor: Ragnarok or Tony & Pepper in Captain America: Civil War). Mostly, I'd like to see Harley's next movie introduce a possible romance between her & Poison Ivy.
And seriously, WHY ARE THEY NOT DOING GOTHAM CITY SIRENS!?!?!?!?!?!?!?
"Am I too soon?! I'm too soon!"
Taking the dictionary definition of "camp" as "deliberately exaggerated and theatrical in style," yes, that definitely describes both of Tim Burton's Batman movies. But Tim Burton's "camp" is still miles away from the Adam West version and not at all related.
Question: Once we get past the heroes currently on-screen or in-development--Superman, Batman, Wonder Woman, Aquaman, Shazam, the Flash, Cyborg, Green Lantern Corps (possibly), Harley Quinn (et al), and any other assorted Batman spinoffs--what would be the next most obvious DC characters to adapt?
Also, unrelated to everything else, I just saw Teen Titans Go to the Movies! last week and that's the most I've laughed at a movie in a while. Just delightfully unhinged from reality and disinterested in its own plot. I love it!
Teen Titans Go To The Movies was great fun. Though, I was really surprised by the Crime Alley joke when they are putting Batman’s origin back into place. A very dark joke for a kid’s movie. Brilliant.
Edited to add: if we go with the definition of camp you supplied, let’s add Thor, Thor: Ragnarok and the Guardians movies to the list of camp superhero movies. Definitely Ragnarok. Oh, I would concede adding Batman Returns, that’s when I feel the series begins moving into camp like areas.
I was stunned when they ran over & killed that singing cartoon tiger. That was some dark Family Guy/Aqua Teen Hunger Force shit right there. Kids movies need more casual manslaughter. If it was good enough for Looney Toons when I was a kid, it's good enough for today's generation! 
While some of the Marvel movies like Thor: Ragnarok & Guardians of the Galaxy can get incredibly silly in places, I wouldn't quite call them exaggerated enough to qualify as "camp." Comparatively, there's definitely a heavy amount of stylization & theatricality to the Tim Burton & Joel Schumacher Batman movies.
But it does happen every time a new actor is chosen. Keaton, Kilmer, Clooney, Bale and especially Affleck.
Not much of one, really. Maybe I'm looking at this from hindsight.
Both have exaggerated theatrical qualities to them, both fitting the definition of camp.
I was too young to be familiar with Michael Keaton or have much of a read on the fan community back in 1989 but I can certainly imagine the shitstorm that would have erupted amongst serious comic book fans regarding his casting.
I don't recall anyone saying much of anything about Val Kilmer or George Clooney.
Christian Bale actually seemed to be showing up on a lot of people's casting wish lists even before he was cast in Batman Begins. I seem to recall a lot of fans at the time seriously pulling for him to be in Wolfgang Petersen's Batman vs. Superman.
Ben Affleck was only controversial because, sometime in the early 2000s, fanboys decided that it was fashionable to shit on Ben Affleck. I don't know why and I can think of few actors whose overall filmographies deserve it less. I think it came from the constant tabloid coverage of his relationship with J.Lo at the time. But anyone willing to play himself in a Kevin Smith movie and portray himself as an incorrigible prostitute-killer is OK in my book!
Tim Burton's Batman was definitely a risk at the time. It may not seem so in hindsight because Tim Burton is such a bankable brand now. But that brand was largely built on the back of Batman and was largely untested when the movie first came out in 1989. It certainly scared theater exhibitors, who were expecting something brighter-- maybe not Adam West camp but certainly at least something as mainstream as Richard Donner's Superman. Batman and Batman Returns are also something that still hasn't really been repeated since then in the superhero genre in terms of that extreme level of gothic stylization. (Maybe The Crow and bits of Spawn but that's it.)
I don't recall anyone saying much of anything about Val Kilmer or George Clooney.
Christian Bale actually seemed to be showing up on a lot of people's casting wish lists even before he was cast in Batman Begins. I seem to recall a lot of fans at the time seriously pulling for him to be in Wolfgang Petersen's Batman vs. Superman.
Ben Affleck was only controversial because, sometime in the early 2000s, fanboys decided that it was fashionable to shit on Ben Affleck. I don't know why and I can think of few actors whose overall filmographies deserve it less. I think it came from the constant tabloid coverage of his relationship with J.Lo at the time. But anyone willing to play himself in a Kevin Smith movie and portray himself as an incorrigible prostitute-killer is OK in my book!
Tim Burton's Batman was definitely a risk at the time. It may not seem so in hindsight because Tim Burton is such a bankable brand now. But that brand was largely built on the back of Batman and was largely untested when the movie first came out in 1989. It certainly scared theater exhibitors, who were expecting something brighter-- maybe not Adam West camp but certainly at least something as mainstream as Richard Donner's Superman. Batman and Batman Returns are also something that still hasn't really been repeated since then in the superhero genre in terms of that extreme level of gothic stylization. (Maybe The Crow and bits of Spawn but that's it.)
I was stunned when they ran over & killed that singing cartoon tiger. That was some dark Family Guy/Aqua Teen Hunger Force shit right there. Kids movies need more casual manslaughter. If it was good enough for Looney Toons when I was a kid, it's good enough for today's generation!
While some of the Marvel movies like Thor: Ragnarok & Guardians of the Galaxy can get incredibly silly in places, I wouldn't quite call them exaggerated enough to qualify as "camp." Comparatively, there's definitely a heavy amount of stylization & theatricality to the Tim Burton & Joel Schumacher Batman movies.
Maybe I’m having a stroke, but I thought I just read you didn’t think Thor Ragnarok was exaggerated. That rock creature leading a rebellion, Jeff Goldblum, and I disagree.
The most obvious (I don't think she's in development for a movie yet?) is Supergirl. After that I'm not sure there is anyone 'obvious', though I'd personally love to see Martian Manhunter, maybe Swamp Thing, or Firestorm (though, not sure he can carry a movie alone). Zatanna, the Titans and maybe Green Arrow could be considered popular enough to be at or near the head of the line, as well. Lobo was kind of a big deal at one point (at least among edgy pre-teens), but I think he's already in development, right? And Static Shock was definitely big at one point, so he could be worth doing also. Everyone else I can think of would be very much in Guardians of the Galaxy territory, ie, maybe great, but would have to build pretty much its entire audience from scratch.
So, the fact that the character of "Barbra Gordon" appeared on TV before she appeared in a comic book is somehow a lesser fact? That's not fudging anything.
The dates @Christopher mentioned are for Barbara Gordon's Batgirl (Comics in January, TV in September of 1967).
Betty Kane's Bat-Girl first appeared in 1961.
That's not what your link says.
"Schwartz stated that he had been asked to develop a new female character in order to attract a female viewership to the Batmantelevision series of the 1960s.[6] Executive producer William Dozier suggested that the new character would be the daughter of Gotham City's Police Commissioner James Gordon, and that she would adopt the identity of Batgirl.[7] When Dozier and producer Howie Horowitz saw rough concept artwork of the new Batgirl by artist Carmine Infantino during a visit to DC offices, they optioned the character in a bid to help sell a third season to the ABC television network. Infantino reflected on the creation of Batgirl, stating "Bob Kane had had a Bat-Girl for about three stories in the ’50s but she had nothing to do with a bat. She was like a pesky girl version of Robin. I knew we could do a lot better, so Julie and I came up with the real Batgirl, who was so popular she almost got her own TV show."[8] Yvonne Craig portrayed the character in the show's third season.[9] Barbara Gordon and alter ego Batgirl debuted in Detective Comics #359, "The Million Dollar Debut of Batgirl" (1967)."
Barbara Gordon debuted in DC 359 in the comics and in the first episode of season three of the tv show. The comic book was published much earlier than the episode aired.
Again:
Comics: January 1967
TV: September 1967
How much clearer do we have to make this?
Barbara Gordon was created "by request" for the '66 Batman series, but the producers of that series explicitly asked that she make her debut in the comics before they introduced her on television, so, as others have pointed out, your "factual" statement in this regard is anything but factual.
Fair enough.
While I think that Thor: Ragnarok is filled to the brim with silly character moments & bright colors, I don't know that I would consider the overall style of it to be exaggerated enough to qualify as "camp." Certainly not to the degree that various Batman iterations have fit the definition.
I feel like, for the time being, anyone with a live action TV series can be taken off the table. So that means no Green Arrow, Supergirl, Titans, or, despite their best efforts, The Flash. I'd really like to see Swamp Thing & Zatanna. Martian Manhunter could be neat, although I almost feel like it would have been better to do his movie pre-Justice League. They could have used his outsider perspective to further explore the world without Superman.
I didn't realize that they were developing Lobo but I see reports from February that they're looking to get Michael Bay to direct it. I would prefer Guy Ritchie but Bay would be OK so long as we're getting the funny, self-aware version of Bay that directed Pain & Gain and not the CGI-addicted hack who did the Transformers movies. Still, kinda feels like DC playing catch-up because Lobo would basically be their answer to Deadpool & Venom.
I don't know why, but I find myself intrigued by Amethyst, Princess of Gemworld. It sounds like just the right kind of random cosmic fantasy that DC hasn't done yet.
I kinda feel like that's the position that Marvel is in right now too. Now that we've got movies for Ant-Man, Black Panther, Doctor Strange, & Captain Marvel, it feels like the entirety of both their A and B lists have been expended, either by themselves or by other studios. All that's left as far as big names are reboots of Fantastic Four, Silver Surfer, X-Men, and (I'm really hoping) Howard the Duck.