WB to announce Batman/Superman movie for 2015

[CyberCubed]

Man of Steel wasn't great, and the movie had a number of problems. But it was still decent enough.

Hopefully the sequel humanizes Superman more and gives us more Clark Kent scenes. Also Clark and Bruce interacting will be fun.

[chrisdude]

Originally Posted by Voltron

1. They made it clear that all of Batman's gear was not in production on any level. The tanks, the armor. . . everything. It was all in R and D. In fact, it became a plot point in the second movie when the accountant found all the missing stuff from that department and threatened to blackmail Bats.

Yes, yes. I just mean they weren't his. He was handed a tank. They slapped a bat symbol on a suit. My point is, the stuff was just given to him.

2. I have to disagree with Chrisdude's assertion that it didn't feel like Batman. To me, it TOTALLY felt like Batman. Everything was there. Perhaps not as much of it as some may have wanted, but it was.

Setting Bats in as real a world as possible gave some respectability to the story. It was more relatable than the other movies that came before it. Some of the explanations may not of have been perfect, but it was a lot better than having a Batman credit card or ice skate boots.

That's kind of what I mean. I feel like we respected it before this trend of making things realistic started. The parts that weren't plausible - Bruce's unbelievable intelligence as a detective and gadgeteer (Yes, I'm aware Nolan didn't make up Lucius, but still), along with Bane's venom, Catwoman's affinity for cats, and the dark, frightening personality of Gotham City (It's not just New York), are all parts of the Batman universe. And things were sacrificed, in whole or in part, for the sake of realism and believability. I'm not saying it's bad. And you may consider it better. But things were given up. They straight-up took things out because they weren't realistic.

[JakeSully]

This should be a great crossover, i've been waiting for one for a long time.

[That Matt Guy]

I just want a DC movie where the hero isn't a manic depressive.

[Gin Rummy]

Hopefully this movie will be less like Dark Knight Rises and more like Avengers. The Nolan Trilogy was great, but I always felt they lacked fun. I'm tired of getting deep political insight from a man in a latex suit. I'm not saying make it campy, but to throw realism out the window for this one. Set the tone in line with the more recent Marvel flicks.

With Superman/Batman I hope They just make a straight blockbuster to lead into the Justice League movie.

[NinjaPug]

Couple new rumors out there for this movie:

- Christian Bale has been offered $50 million to reprise Batman. If that's true then I don't think there is any way he turns it down. I know he said he'd never return without Nolan directing but that is an insane amount of money for one movie.

- Mark Strong and Bryan Cranston are the rumored front runners for Lex Luthor. I think both would be a great choice.

[The Stryker]

Really hope Bale doesn't return. It's time to move on from those movies already.

I'll take him over Joseph Gordon Levitt but 50 mill is WAY too much for head-cold voice Batman.

[CyberCubed]

I doubt those rumors are true. Most of the casting has said they want an older Batman for this movie around 40 years old and Bale has said constantly he's done with Batman.

Sounds like some fanboy of the Nolan universe wants it to continue.

[NinjaPug]

Originally Posted by CyberCubed

I doubt those rumors are true. Most of the casting has said they want an older Batman for this movie around 40 years old and Bale has said constantly he's done with Batman.

Sounds like some fanboy of the Nolan universe wants it to continue.

I think it's BS too but Bale is 39 years old so he would fit in with what they want to do. $50 million would make me do a lot of things I said I'd never do again too.

I'd rather have him over JGL or Ryan Gosling, who I've also seen rumored to be up for the role.

I find it odd that they're looking for someone older to play Batman. I would think they'd want someone younger that they can use for a new set of Batman films and a Justice League film. Or they could just have the actor playing the role after they turn 50 a la Downey Jr - Iron Man.

[CyberCubed]

I hope we never see Joseph Gordon Levitt in a DC film again. I can't stand the idea of him being either Batman OR Robin.

Also in terms of the guy himself, it kinda bugs me how small his eyes are compared to his forehead.

[Leo656]

That's absolute bullsh*t. Know why? Because the ONLY reason they have Batman in the Man of Steel sequel is because MoS cost too much and they didn't turn as big a profit as they wanted. Their own people have said MoS needed to earn $1.1 billion globally, and "only" made a bit under $700 million, and that's why they panicked and added Batman to the sequel before MoS was even done playing. WB doesn't "trust" anyone but Batman to carry a movie and have it make money.

A big reason they needed to make so much money back? It cost almost $150 million just to advertise the film after it was finished. Which means they spent that much on the colossal task of informing the entire WORLD that yes, there was in fact a new Superman movie out. Fine, but HOW could they EVER justify spending even 1/3 of that much money on ONE GUY to reprise and sleepwalk through a role he has repeatedly said he does not want to do?

Let's say it IS true. Let's say WB pays Bale $50 million for ONE movie; keeping in mind they've already said the point of MoS and its sequel is to establish sequels, a "New DCU", and a Justice League movie. Actors do not make LESS money for each movie in a series, they make MORE. So if they have Bale come back for MoS2 at $50 million, he could be conceivably making $80-$100 million, BY HIMSELF, if he does two or three more as Batman. NO. F*CKING. WAY. They already want MoS to come in under a $200 million budget; they can't spend half of that or even a third of that on ONE GUY. It's mathematically impossible, they'd bankrupt and destroy Warner Bros.

I can see Bale returning (and frankly, half-assing it, as he CLEARLY isn't interested any more), but not for those numbers. And if he does, you can bet the plot of Justice League will involve killing him off, so they can replace him with a cheaper, younger actor. Better to start fresh, at this point. The Dark Knight Batman Universe got a lot right, but a lot wrong, too. "Man of Steel" is supposed to represent a fresh start for the DCU in movies, I say we go all the way with it. It's an opportunity to get a "mulligan" on some stuff that didn't work in the Batman and Green Lantern movies.

[CyberCubed]

Also Bruce Wayne is interchangeable like James Bond. Audiences are used to a new actor playing Batman all the time.

This isn't like Iron Man or Wolverine, who have now been typecasted as their actors to the general public that if they ever DO re-cast them there would probably be backlash.

In fact I remember a lot of casuals disappointed that Spiderman was re-casted and didn't even know the new movie was a reboot. I cannot see Iron Man or Wolverine re-casted in the future without some type of backlash from casuals.

[Leo656]

I can. Nerds (of which I am one) get so whiny so easily, and it's also really easy to surpass their expectations and make them feel stupid for thinking the way they did. Remember the whole "You can never top Michael Keaton as Batman/Jack Nicholson as Joker! It's stupid to even try, they should just stop doing Batman movies arrrrrrggghhhh!" thing? MOST of those people feel pretty stupid now, and they should; Bale and Ledger both did a great job, respectively. "Better"? Opinions. But nothing less than "great" in either case.

Iron Man 3's ending was done the way it was so they could continue on without Downey if they had to, either rebooting the franchise or simply leaving the door open for "his" trilogy to end and another to begin. He was not confirmed and signed for Avengers 2 at the time they made Iron Man 3, and frankly, they WANT him gone. He costs too much, and he's gotten into all the other Avengers' actors ears telling them how to conspire and con for more money for Avengers 2 and 3, and they're listening because of how much HE got paid, and they want the same. Anyone would, but frankly, it is already an abomination how much these guys get paid. So it's no shock the studio would LOVE to get rid of Downey, regardless of how popular he is. Thanks to him, there's a slim chance Avengers 3 might be ALL new actors by then, thanks to Downey's greed and the greed he has seeded in others for the right to play make-believe and be treated like a hero for it. Whatever. If he goes, fine.

Jackman is already so old that extensive CGI "airbrushing" is required to make him look younger and more fit on screen, and whether you think it's bad or not, my professional opinion is that he had to undergo some serious "chemical assistance" from either steroids or HGH to get as big as he is in the new movie. Which is common among actors, but at his age, it's not something he should KEEP doing or he's going to get serious health problems. He's probably already debating if it's worth it to keep going. I bet the studio wants to use the new movie as a way to keep the door open, if the timeline changes or whatever, they have an excuse to replace the whole cast if they want to... and again, by the time it happens, I'd say they will have to.

I can see some backlash from some of the more completely delusional fans, but I honestly feel MOST people will understand the simple math: Downey's Greedy + Jackman is old = New Actors and That's That. Everyone is replaceable. They did great in both cases but by now I wouldn't mind seeing others get a try in the roles.

[CyberCubed]

There will be reboots eventually of course, but probably long down the line when the current Marvel movie franchises finally crash and burn. But that may not be for a while yet.

If the Guardians of the Galaxy and Ant-Man movies bomb, it may cause Marvel to rethink their strategy and only focus on the core heroes again.

[Jester]

*coff*Edward Norton*coff*

[Leo656]

Norton might still be playing Hulk if he didn't try and literally take over the entire movie during filming and act like he was the director, too. It's like he was ASKING to get fired. He did a good job, but apparently he has a huge ego and there's no room for that.

[Jester]

And there was some slight grumbling...then Ruffalo knocked it out of the park.

[Leo656]

He was pretty spiffy.

They all have it easy, though, because whoever plays Banner is really only killing time in the audience's mind until the monster shows up. I'd argue all three modern actors did good with the role, but all three were equally replaceable.

[NinjaPug]

This will cause some interesting comments:

Ben Affleck Is The New Batman


AUGUST 22, 2013 | 06:11PM PT
Film will bow July 17, 2015


Ben Affleck is Batman.

The actor will replace Christian Bale as Bruce Wayne in the upcoming untitled Superman-Batman feature for Warner Bros., the studio announced Thursday.

“Man of Steel” actors Henry Cavill, Amy Adams, Laurence Fishburne and Diane Lane are reprising their roles with Zack Snyder on board to direct.

The film is slated to bow on July 17, 2015.

[Jester]

And DC continues to be beaten to a bloody pulp in live action movies by Marvel...if this is true.