WB to announce Batman/Superman movie for 2015

[Leo656]

I agree; that's why I wished they'd started the build back around 2006. But WB got timid after "Superman Returns" fell short of its hoped-for $6 or 700 million gross worldwide (while STILL being one of the Top 10 highest-grossing films in theaters and on DVD that year), and started ignorantly believing that the only "safe" thing to do was focus on Batman exclusively. Even then, they planned to branch out into JLA territory, but then as now, they had no plans to build it up like Marvel was already doing with Iron Man and the rest. The plan even back then was to still rush it out and hope everyone was awestruck by the spectacle of seeing a half-dozen super-heroes in one movie. Now they won't even be able to claim that, since it's already been so long since "Avengers" came out.

They absolutely have to do a JLA movie. NOT doing one would be the stupidest decision ever. But they're kind of stuck, because no matter what, they'll be compared to and accused of "copying" Marvel. I almost feel like that's a huge reason they WON'T do the "slow build" like Avengers' individual films. If they do it that way, the internet laughs and says "They're copying Marvel", and everyone knows that Hollywood, while being nothing at all original, hates to be portrayed as "copying" anyone. So WB, in its haste to be "different" while still carbon-copying a proven formula for success, subscribes to a shoddier model of planning and execution for the sole sake of cashing in quickly while not being compared *too* much to the competition.

They're stuck in a no-win situation. They have to do the movie, and they no longer have the luxury of doing it like Marvel did Avengers. It's a shame. I haven't given up hope, though; as fun as it was, "Avengers" was no classic of modern cinema, and even a weak JLA film would easily compare favorably as long as the effects were good.

[CyberCubed]

Well its obvious Lois Lane will take a backseat in this movie. Instead of a Superman/Lois dynamic it will be a Superman/Batman one.

Since there were hardly any Clark Kent scenes in the movie its disappointing since we'll never see the Lois and Clarke relationship portrayed at the Daily Planet.

Most likely Lois will have a small role, at best.

[Leo656]

Well, along with red trunks and human parents who are still alive, his relationship with Lois is one of the things that makes him "boring" to "teh kidz", so it was tossed out for the most part because it won't directly lead to more explosions. That's Hollywood for you.

[The Stryker]

Originally Posted by Leo656

Well, along with red trunks and human parents who are still alive, his relationship with Lois is one of the things that makes him "boring" to "teh kidz", so it was tossed out for the most part because it won't directly lead to more explosions. That's Hollywood for you.

I don't think thats for kids. More likely the 20 something net-crowd that require everything to be joyless and cryptic to consider it good.

[Leo656]

Yeah, that too. Probably moreso, yeah.

[NinjaPug]

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

Well its obvious Lois Lane will take a backseat in this movie. Instead of a Superman/Lois dynamic it will be a Superman/Batman one.

Since there were hardly any Clark Kent scenes in the movie its disappointing since we'll never see the Lois and Clarke relationship portrayed at the Daily Planet.

Most likely Lois will have a small role, at best.

None of that is obvious at all. I'm concerned they'll do some Lois/Bruce/Clark triangle.

[CyberCubed]

Lois was too low key in the film. She was just there. There was no dynamic.

[NinjaPug]

I thought this was the best film version of Lois to date. I'm glad they finally made her a credible investigative journalist.

That said, I don't care if they cut her role to give more screen time to Batman/Bruce.

[Leo656]

She was "the best", but that's not saying much. To qualify, she only need not be as dumb as a brick (Kidder's Lois) or flat as cardboard (Bosworth, in more ways than one ).

[CyberCubed]

At least this Batman is not a reboot. I don't think I could tolerate going through the origin story yet again.

When they made the next set of Batman movies they should do the same. Batman is already experienced and into his career, with the Nolan films being in a loose continuity in that those events happened, just differently for this new universe.

I'm sure they're going to use the villains they didn't use in the Nolan films too. Like Riddler, Penguin, etc. just to keep away from redundancy.

[Jester]

Why? They're putting freakin' Batman in a Superman movie to bolster his sales numbers. It's not a continuation of the Batman movies, so it could give us a different take on an already used famous Bat-villain.

Besides, how often when Batman and Superman team-up are the Superman villain not Lex and the Batman villain not Joker? If they do "heroes team up to stop their greatest foes" it'll be Lex and Joker.

[MikeandRaph87]

While I am tired of Joker and Lex Luthor, the reason they keep on using thme is because those two are the biggest threats to the biggest heroes. The two villians worked together in the late 60s' in the Worlds' Finest title a few times and then again in a 1990 updated mini series. Finally in the Superman/Batman:World's Finest film with the uneasy alliance of Lex Luthor and The Joker. So there actually is some material for Goyer to look at for Superman and Batman teaming up against Lex Luthor and The Joker.

[chrisdude]

Originally Posted by Jester

Why? They're putting freakin' Batman in a Superman movie to bolster his sales numbers. It's not a continuation of the Batman movies, so it could give us a different take on an already used famous Bat-villain.

Besides, how often when Batman and Superman team-up are the Superman villain not Lex and the Batman villain not Joker? If they do "heroes team up to stop their greatest foes" it'll be Lex and Joker.

I sort of doubt this. Yeah, Batman makes more money than Superman. And yeah, I wholeheartedly believe that this Superman/Batman movie is a scrambled effort. But I'm not totally ruling out the possibility that Affleck's Batman is a recasting of a Dark Knight trilogy Batman.

Yes, Snyder said that TDK and MoS weren't in the same world. But, I don't think this Superman/Batman was their plan, back when he said it. The Man of Steel's tone was very similar to TDK (So even if it is a "different take" on Batman, it probably won't be too much different). The Dark Knight Batman would fit right in that world. Are Nolan and Goyer really going to try to reinvent their own Batman right after the success of the Dark Knight trilogy? In a world their own Batman is already suited for? After leaving their Batman story fairly open-ended? Yeah, Spider-Man and Hulk were rebooted after just five years, but people hated Spider-Man 3 and Hulk. But this is something people loved. If they don't use that Batman, they have to live up to it, while establishing him in a movie that features Superman, or just skipping it and confusing casuals. If they do use that Batman, only Affleck has to live up to it.

I'm just saying it's not out of the question.

And I think we can forget about seeing the Joker anytime soon.
For the same reason, just times 100.

[CyberCubed]

That's why its called a loose continuity. Same way TMNT 4 acknowledged the live-action trilogy.

The new Batman movies aren't a reboot, it'll be a recasted Batman fighting villains they didn't do in the Nolan trilogy. I'm certain the writers would much rather go for villains like Riddler, Penguin or Mr. Freeze over using Twoface and Joker again...for example.

[chrisdude]

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

That's why its called a loose continuity. Same way TMNT 4 acknowledged the live-action trilogy.

The new Batman movies aren't a reboot, it'll be a recasted Batman fighting villains they didn't do in the Nolan trilogy. I'm certain the writers would much rather go for villains like Riddler, Penguin or Mr. Freeze over using Twoface and Joker again...for example.

I'm just saying that there's just as much risk in using a new Batman character, as there is in continuing from TDK with a new actor. I don't think either option is the obvious no-brainer, but everyone seems to assume that since this isn't Bale or Levitt, that this must be an entirely new character. After all, there have been plenty of rumors since The Dark Knight Rises that WB has been throwing money at Bale and Levitt. Yeah, the loose continuity thing may be the way they go (though I think it made more sense for TMNT, as they didn't have one single prominent version that was fresh in everyone's mind), but at that point, they may just have old Bruce come out of retirement after the events of Man of Steel.

I don't see a reason to feel certain about how it will be handled.

[CyberCubed]

Also in the original Batman movies, they recasted Michael Keaton as Batman....yet Batman Forever and Batman and Robin were treated as sequels to Batman 1989 and Batman Returns. And those movies also had a much campier and goofier setting than the first two.

I expect something similar.

[Slade]

Originally Posted by chrisdude

I sort of doubt this. Yeah, Batman makes more money than Superman. And yeah, I wholeheartedly believe that this Superman/Batman movie is a scrambled effort. But I'm not totally ruling out the possibility that Affleck's Batman is a recasting of a Dark Knight trilogy Batman.

Yes, Snyder said that TDK and MoS weren't in the same world. But, I don't think this Superman/Batman was their plan, back when he said it. The Man of Steel's tone was very similar to TDK (So even if it is a "different take" on Batman, it probably won't be too much different). The Dark Knight Batman would fit right in that world. Are Nolan and Goyer really going to try to reinvent their own Batman right after the success of the Dark Knight trilogy? In a world their own Batman is already suited for? After leaving their Batman story fairly open-ended? Yeah, Spider-Man and Hulk were rebooted after just five years, but people hated Spider-Man 3 and Hulk. But this is something people loved. If they don't use that Batman, they have to live up to it, while establishing him in a movie that features Superman, or just skipping it and confusing casuals. If they do use that Batman, only Affleck has to live up to it.

I'm just saying it's not out of the question.

And I think we can forget about seeing the Joker anytime soon.
For the same reason, just times 100.

I've read a few articles stating that it's been confirmed that this will be a new batman. Don't know how reliable any of it is though.

[chrisdude]

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

Also in the original Batman movies, they recasted Michael Keaton as Batman....yet Batman Forever and Batman and Robin were treated as sequels to Batman 1989 and Batman Returns. And those movies also had a much campier and goofier setting than the first two.

I expect something similar.

Personally, I'd love to see both Batman and Superman handled in a more lighthearted manner. I'd take another Batman Forever any day.

[shuriken]

Originally Posted by chrisdude

Personally, I'd love to see both Batman and Superman handled in a more lighthearted manner. I'd take another Batman Forever any day.

I agree. I haven't seen Man of Steel but just looking at the trailers it didn't look like a Superman movie to me. Superman should be a foil to Batman's darker persona. That dynamic works well.

[CyberCubed]

I haven't watched Batman Forever in like 15 years. I don't remember how the movie was other than it being a bit goofy. Was it as bad as Batman and Robin or was it decent?