Discussion in 'Off-topic Zone' started by theogt, Jul 20, 2013.
As long as they don't cast Ryan Gosling, I'm okay with that. Ironically, the only two actors I'll miss the most in a recast are Michael Caine's Alfred and Morgan Freeman's Fox.
I saw Idris Elba's name somewhere and I think he'd be a great, great Batman. I'm also pretty sure there would be riots in the streets if he were to get the part.
Bring back Michael Keaton if Batman needs to be older.
This shows one of the many key differences between Marvel and DC. Marvel changes with the times, DC is stuck in the 50's.
The concept of a secret identity was quaint up to about 30 years ago, but is now seen as mostly absurd. Marvel responded by virtually doing away with the concept of secret identities. Thor, Iron Man, Captain America, Daredevil, Hawkeye, Hulk all used to have secret alter-egos but now none of them do. But DC still holds on to the notion that a guy can put on a pair of glasses and completely fool everyone around him.
Ugh. You've got to be joking.
They're not going to make a movie adaptation of Dark Knight Returns, but if they did, then Bruce Willis would be the perfect Batman. Heck, he played a similar role already in Frank Miller's Sin City.
If they got a good writer, like Frank Miller, to put together a story, it would be a good movie. Unfortunately, however, I have no doubt whatsoever it will be a typical lame misunderstanding that leads the heroes to fight each other in the first half of the movie before teaming up to defeat the real enemy in the 2nd half.
That's probably the top reason why a Justice League movie would be an abysmal failure. DC's problem is that their most popular character, Batman, simply could never plausibly exist in the same arena as Superman. Then throw in another ridiculously overpowered character like Green Lantern, and now Batman is not even a boy among men, he's more like a flea among men.
OK except, using your analogy, how would Batman have helped fix that situation? Superman promised he would get the nuke headed for Hackensack and he threw it into space, so what's Batman going to do? Fly to California and throw that nuke into space also?
Look, it's not impossible, the Avengers balanced it quite well with Thor/Hulk and the useless Hawkeye. Maybe Clarke getting corrupted into the peanut flicking bad guy in 3 while Batman tries to stop him and talks him round could work, or maybe not. But at least they are trying. If they play Bats off a the psyco that has plan to beat all of the other memebers of the JLA that would be cool.
DC holds on to the notion that people don't expect a guy capable of flying around at super speeds, shooting lasers out of their eyes while being able to move mountains to even have an alter ego.
I think it can work, but it's going to be difficult.
I mean, even you mentioned Hawkeye was useless. Batman would essentially be Hawkeye, which is the problem. You can't have arguably your biggest name guy be rather useless.
Also the avengers tuned down how powerful Thor is. The first movie actually made him a bit weaker than he was in the comics (Thor is basically superman's equivalent), and then they tone him down even more for the Avengers. Outside of brawling with Banner, he didn't accomplish the same kind of feats in the Avengers as he did in 'Thor', became noticeably fatigued, and actually bled. Maybe they can do that with supes for this next film, but so far the bar was set pretty high.
I like Millers style, I just do not think it translates to big budget movies.
Sorry, but that's just weaksauce which does nothing to explain how people like Commissioner Gordon and Perry White are simply the biggest morons on the planet. (I'm not including Lois Lane in there because I've lost track of her relationship to Superman in the current iteration of the comic books)
I don't get why so many around here try and over think these things. It's stories and movies about superheros. They're not supposed to be plausible or make complete sense. Unless you believe that someone can actually have superhuman strength, can fly, and move faster than the speed of sound.
Also why wouldn't Batman work in a movie with superheros yet would in a comic or a cartoon? Is he less human and more powerful in written word and on cartoons? They played off very nicely in cartoons how Batman was an important part of the Justice League despite being the only one of the group that didn't have super powers.
I'm not sure how that would be any different in a movie form but to each their own I suppose.
For me personally the biggest reason I've always been a bigger fan of Batman than any of the others is the fact that he does what he does without the benefit of superpowers. I love the fact that everything he does, or accomplishes, is done from his own mind and with the help of the technology that is created by the money from his company. I like that he's a hero and does all those things without the benefit of knowing that he's stronger or faster than anyone else and without the safety net of knowing that the bad guys can't really kill him without some space rock.
To me the biggest thing that made Batman better than all the others was that he was actually risking himself in doing what is right while guys like Superman, with all their powers, aren't really taking any risks to their own well being. Hell he's faster, stronger, and invinsible so what exactly is heroic about what Superman does?
I'd personally love to see them make a movie with them where Batman is featured in a way that shows him off as good, or really better, than the rest because he accomplishes what he needs to without the aid of being a super being.
I'm not sure what you mean by that since he hasn't really had a big budget movie. He had a pair of low-to-medium budget movies which did quite well at the box office and were high quality films, each of which were stylistically a radical departure from the usual Hollywood nonsense.
Because in order for a movie to be good, it has to be internally consistent. People can handle the idea of a guy from another planet coming to Earth and having mind-blowingly incredible power since that's the premise of the film. What they cannot handle is establishing this supremely powerful individual and following it with the ridiculous inconsistency and plot hole that would accompany a storyline where a human being with no super powers whatsoever went toe to toe with him, even with all the gadgets at his disposal.
The Joker and Bane are great villains for a Batman film, but just wouldn't work in a Superman film, for what are hopefully obvious reasons.
I'm sorry but that's just being ridiculous. It's part of the storyline in the comics and I don't recall people crying about this notion. But if they put it in movie form they're going to have a hard time with it? I guess I just don't get that notion.
Sorry, but just because something works in comic books does not mean it will work on the big screen. A movie is going to be held to higher standards and is going to have to appeal to a wider audience than the comic fanboys.
Just because he's British doesn't mean people will throw a fit. I mean, Bale was British and people loved him as Batman!
In all seriousness though, Idris Elba is awesome, but I think there's been more speculation on whether he'd accept the role for John Stewart (Green Lantern) later on.
They could handle Hawkeye and the Black Widow in the Avengers.