I think a Bats/Supes film is the best way to go. If it works, then THINK about a JLA film. But, really, I just think there's too much to fit into one movie.
The Dark Knight Rises Anticipation Station
- Thread starter JacksonArcher
- Start date
Yep. This should motivate Warner to settle the lawsuits pronto, as in real soon, before the script is etched in stone, in order to give the Superman franchise its best chance for success.
I'm sorry, but I don't understand that any perceived clash in tone been Nolan's Batman trilogy and Green Lantern amounts to any reasonable issue. Far more important issues would seem to be finding a set of actors that work well together in an ensemble cast and a story that makes reasonable use of all its characters. Focusing on whether Gotham City, Coast City, Star City, Metropolis, etc. plausibly belong in the same fictional country, before having a compelling story involving characters people care about, is like trying to build the perfect sets for a Star Trek fan film without having word one written of the first shooting script. It's putting the cart before the horse.
Frankly, I'm surprised Warner made a Green Lantern standalone film, given his relative obscurity as far as the public is concerned. I hope GL succeeds. Then again, maybe the relative obscurity works in GL's favor, as it should allow the movie to more easily dictate the depiction, than if viewers collectively bring in a lot of conflicting preconceived notions.
Maybe Timby's right, that GL must be the trial balloon for JL.
I don't agree. Why does the take on Batman, as a character, have to be different? Why should the heroes be homogeneous in tone? Can't you have a boy scout (Supes) team up with a gritty rebel (Bats) and transcend their differences for a worthy common cause? Can't the different cities in the universe each be like different kingdoms: dystopic Gotham, shiny Metropolis, etc.
I don't agree; it would be a waste of time, because there are so many second tier characters. Do we need a Green Arrow and/or Black Canary film first? How about Red Tornado Rises? What about a whodunit featuring the Elongated Man? More to the point, must we wait for Wonder Woman: The Movie?
We've reached the day when SFX technology is no longer an issue in the depiction of any metahuman character. How much longer must we wait? A much better strategy, IMO is simply to populate a JL movie with the second tier characters in the first place. Pick a few of these, the biggies, and make them primary characters along with Supes, Bats, and GL.
Then, make the JL film itself be the trial balloon for the entire universe of DC characters, each of which in theory could be individually spun off.
Didn't X2 work really well?
Green Lantern is considered obscure? Honestly, aside from Batman and Superman, I'd put GL, Flash, and Wonder Woman on essentially the same level. To say that is obscure is to say DC only has two comics worth creating movies for.
I did not say obscure, I said "relatively obscure". To Superman and Batman, GL is indeed relatively obscure.
I would agree, I think my post reflected this belief too. And yet, Warner did not start with a Wonder Woman movie as the trial balloon. WW and Flash have both had stand alone live action TV series. No, for the next movie, they went to a character that never had a stand alone live action TV series. I stand by the characterization of GL as relatively obscure.
I don't believe anything I said implied this.
Well, my point is that WW, Flash, and GL are all at the same level. They just decided to go with GL. I figure the concern for one (as a standalone film) exists for all three.
Treat Williams claims to have been offered a role in TDKR but may not be able to take it, due to other commitments:
http://www.moviehole.net/201139105-...-roles-in-dark-knight-rises-tarantino-western
http://www.moviehole.net/201139105-...-roles-in-dark-knight-rises-tarantino-western
Damn, he better be in it, I like Treat Williams.
Me too, and I'm not ashamed to say ever since seeing him in Hair. I wonder what part he was allegedly offered?
Boy, it'd be tough to turn down The Dark Knight Rises and a Tarantino film in favor of a series on Lifetime, but I wish him well either way.
Gotta pay the bills. Unless you're Brad Pitt, a TV series will always be more attractive than a movie.
I could see him as Thorne. I'd love to see Thorne in "The Dark Knight Rises" even in a limited capacity. He's always been one of my favorite characters.
I can't see Treat Williams as a bad guy. I'll always see him as Andy Brown from Everwood.
Will Warner require every Batman movie to have Dark Knight in the title from here on out like they did with The Dark Knight Rises? It'd be like if Sony required the last Bond to be called Casino Royale of Solace. 
He's played a lot of bad guys though. Even in comic book land -- The Phantom!
He's played a lot of bad guys though. Even in comic book land -- The Phantom!
So are the Talia rumors dead? I've not read anything new on this since last month or so when they were heating up again.
He's played a lot of bad guys though. Even in comic book land -- The Phantom!
I could never take him seriously as the bad guy in The Phantom. To me he seemed like a really disgruntled uncle or something. I never convincingly bought him as a villain.
Will Warner require every Batman movie to have Dark Knight in the title from here on out like they did with The Dark Knight Rises? It'd be like if Sony required the last Bond to be called Casino Royale of Solace.
It would be no worse than having most of the Inspector Clouseau movies bear The Pink Panther in their titles even though the Pink Panther diamond was only a plot point in the first and third ones (first and fourth if you count the Alan Arkin version from '68). Or having The Thin Man in the title of all the Nick and Nora Charles movies. At least, unlike those, the title The Dark Knight actually does refer to the main character himself.
^ You do realize that Aragorn was posting in jest?
