|
Post by All Star Batman on Jul 29, 2008 13:46:48 GMT -5
www.wizarduniverse.com/072908tdksequel.html'THE DARK KNIGHT' SEQUEL RUMORS EMERGE Guess who wants to play Catwoman? And guess who wants to make 'The Dark Knight Returns?' By Josh Wigler Posted 7/29/2008 What do you get when you take one of America's most iconic characters, put him on the big screen and he rakes in a $314.2 million box office in 10 days of worldwide release? You get "The Dark Knight," the latest Batman film phenomenon shattering records just like the Caped Crusader does his enemies' jaws. But aside from record-breaking numbers and fast-increasing dollar signs, the success of "The Dark Knight" yields another result—sequel speculation. It's one thing for fans to talk about their ideal casting, but it's something else entirely when an original Batman icon gets in on the action. Julie Newmar, who played Catwoman in the Adam West-starring "Batman" TV series, has voiced her opinion on who she'd like to take up the whip and leather. "Angelina [Jolie] would own the part," Newmar told the Daily News. "My industry friends tell me [she] has made inquiries about the role." So the latter half of Brangelina wants in on the Bat-action? Who can blame her—she's essentially played the role in every movie she's ever made! A-ha! Ah! Ah... forget it. Despite Jolie's interest, the article mentions that "Dark Knight" writers "Jonathan Nolan and David Goyer said in a recent interview that they are, for now, inclined not to bring back Batman's sultry nemesis." So call Jolie a front-runner if it makes you sleep better, but first she'll have to convince the writers and studio bigwigs that the character has a place in the Batman threequel. In other news, there was a little event in California this past weekend—might've heard of it—called San Diego Comic-Con. During the con's 'The Visionaries: Filmmakers' panel, "Watchmen" director Zack Snyder mentioned that he'd like to see Frank Miller's graphic novel "The Dark Knight Returns," centering on an aging Batman returning from retirement, get the big screen treatment. Miller offered a simple reply: "You can do it anytime you want to, Zack." That one little sentence has gotten internet fans ablaze faster than wildfire. Although just a rumor at present, studio moneymen at Warners would be wise to meditate on the hair-brained idea. Chris Nolan is widely expected to return for one more romp with Bruce Wayne, but where does the series go from there? Seeing the returns on "The Dark Knight" and the expected success of "Watchmen" should be irrefutable proof that a "Dark Knight Returns" done right would be box office gold. Couple that with Frank Miller's own blessing and you've got yourself a cinematic miracle in the making.
|
|
|
Post by havedunter74 on Jul 30, 2008 5:08:16 GMT -5
the dark knight returns would make a great film,if not live action maybe as an animated movie(like the new star wars movie) but obviously not aimed at kids. im not sure about the main villain for the 3rd film but lets hope twoface is alive and kicking
|
|
|
Post by /\/\att on Jul 30, 2008 8:10:27 GMT -5
Angelina has been my fan casting choice for Catwoman since I saw her in Hackers back in the mid 90s. That would make me terribly happy.
as for Dark Knight Returns....it'd have to be done just right...
|
|
|
Post by twisted on Jul 30, 2008 13:02:36 GMT -5
I don't think the Dark Knight Returns would work very well. When making a movie based on a comic it can never be implied that everyone going to that movie knows everything about that characters universe. Too many people only know Batman and his friends and enemies through these new movies and nothing else.
We as Batman fans know who Selina Kyle is. We know who Oliver is. But these characters have not been introduced into this incarnation of the Batman world. Too many new fans wouldn't have a clue to their actual significance to Batman or the plot of the story. So extra time would have to be spent just introducing these characters, or you leave the general audience scratching their heads.
So you either make a bad movie where many people have no idea what's going on and why, or you make a 6 hour epic. Not that I, or many other big Batman fans would mind so much, but again the general public ain't sitting around for 6 hours.
|
|
|
Post by /\/\att on Jul 30, 2008 13:05:48 GMT -5
I think that Catwoman is familiar enough to the general public that she could be worked in. I think you can count on another 2.5-3 hour film for Batman 3...and I think you can also count on that being the last one that the Nolan/Bale team does.
I would prefer that WB restarted the property after that with maybe weird off shoots like Dark Knight Returns or perhaps Knightfall. I would enjoy that.
|
|
|
Post by twisted on Jul 30, 2008 14:32:05 GMT -5
I think that Catwoman is familiar enough to the general public that she could be worked in. Understood. The point is in TDKR she's not Catwoman. Easy fix I guess by mearly mentioning that she is/was the Catwoman, but now what image of the Catwoman does the general public have? The Michelle Pfeiffer version or the Halle Berry version or, god forbid, the Julie Newmar version? None of whom did the Catwoman justice. (Though all of them did look great in the costume......MeeeeOooow.) I feel that the recent Batman movies have done great by The Batman, and his friends and enemies, and I'd hate to see the character of the Catwoman done any less. In TDKR she's not much more than a victim, a shell of what she once was. The impression the general public would have of her would be a mix of this victim and of very poor portrails of her from TV and past movies. She deserves a hell of a lot better IMO.
|
|
|
Post by /\/\att on Jul 30, 2008 14:49:52 GMT -5
I think that Catwoman is familiar enough to the general public that she could be worked in. Understood. The point is in TDKR she's not Catwoman. Easy fix I guess by mearly mentioning that she is/was the Catwoman, but now what image of the Catwoman does the general public have? The Michelle Pfeiffer version or the Halle Berry version or, god forbid, the Julie Newmar version? None of whom did the Catwoman justice. (Though all of them did look great in the costume......MeeeeOooow.) I feel that the recent Batman movies have done great by The Batman, and his friends and enemies, and I'd hate to see the character of the Catwoman done any less. In TDKR she's not much more than a victim, a shell of what she once was. The impression the general public would have of her would be a mix of this victim and of very poor portrails of her from TV and past movies. She deserves a hell of a lot better IMO. Ah, I think we're talking about two different things! I was referring to the next Nolan Bat-film, not TDKR. That may be the cause of our confusion! lol. I do feel, though, that TDKR should be followed almost perfectly. The script is already there..as are the storyboards! Just bring it to life with some style.
|
|
|
Post by batman35will on Jul 31, 2008 10:14:40 GMT -5
I have just heard a rumor that they will be making a Batman 3 movie. They said that Angilina Jolie was approched and she seems eager to do the part. (Could you imagin her as Catwoman) woooowe! They have not said if there will be any other villians or not. I would like for the to say that Harvey Dent did not really die and he could return. I thought Aaron Eckhart did a great job. ???
|
|
|
Post by snooch2dnooch on Jul 31, 2008 12:36:10 GMT -5
i think it's all rumors right now. but personally i think angelina jolie would make a terrific catwoman. i definitely think they should include selina kyle, but not add anymore villains after that. you've got two-face, you don't need anymore. i'm feeling very anti-riddler at this point and cannot understand everyone's fascination with the character. he's like a knock-off joker. i think mister freeze (combined with the heart of ice story) is a much more dramatic and sympathetic villain with a much better story.
|
|
|
Post by twisted on Jul 31, 2008 21:50:20 GMT -5
@ snooch2dnooch
That's the second time, or is it the third, that you've said that about the Riddler.
The thing, IMO that has made the current Batman films successful is believability. Yes its fantasy from a comic book, but it's done in a very believable way. It's not some characters that have been altered by scientists splicing up some DNA, or some mutant that's born with the power to shoot power balls out of his mouth. It's not some space born alien saving us from ourselves. We can relate, on some level, to the heroes and the villains in the last two Batman films.
Batman: I man who sees injustice at all levels and wants to do something about it. Change the world by inspiring the good people of Gotham to rise up. Alfred: A mentor who loves Bruce like a son. Willing to help in any way possible. Gordon: The lone cop on the beat who still fights for the public good. Ra's al Ghul : A man driven to see the world turned into a better place. BY ANY MEANS NECCESSARY. His motives we understand and sympathize with, but his methods we can't condone. Two-Face Originally a very good man. But life dealt him some tough cards, and now he is a man split, literally, in two. Joker As Alfred once said, "Some people just want to see the world burn."
Yes it's fantasy with people in masks, and costumes, and paint on their faces, but deep down we as humans have at least heard of people like these in real life. And because of this we can identify with these people if even on only a superficial level. These characters come alive so much more than the usual comic book characters because they're us to a certain extent. Take away the costumes, the make-up, the masks, and that's us, or at least people we've heard of, up there on the silver screen
The only character that was somewhat over the top out of a comic book was Two-Face. And I'm talking about his appearance. But who among us doesn't have many people inside of us? The mad you, the happy you, the loving you, etc. Harvey Dent was taken to the extreme, and his appearance captures that extreme. But we see that Havey has that in him even before he becomes Two-Face, and we identify with him because deep down we all have that within us.
The Riddler fits because we have seen his type before. The criminal who feels the need to outsmart the cops. The criminal who leaves clues that the cops can't figure out. And you know somewhere this criminal is laughing at the cops, because in his mind it is so obvious. We've heard of these types. Bundy, Jack the Ripper, Zodiac, etc.
While I can identify with Mr. Freezes motives to a certain extent, I can't identify with a character who is required to wear a special self-contained refrigeration suit because of some unbelievable accident, and who uses a freeze ray to turn everything to ice. Too comic book and not enough believability for me. We believe the other characters because they are not too far from us, they got that way because of what's in their heads and what has happened to them in the past. Not because of freak accidents, freak birth defects, or freak landings on our planet.
This is not to say he isn't a good comic book character. I love mutants, and aliens, and freak accidents, but in the Bat world Nolan has made.........well they simply don't fit.
|
|
|
Post by snooch2dnooch on Jul 31, 2008 23:54:06 GMT -5
sorry, i don't buy it. i think riddler's clown shoes. and i can't relate to him whatsoever. he's a cheap knock-off villain
|
|
|
Post by twisted on Aug 1, 2008 18:05:24 GMT -5
sorry, i don't buy it. i think riddler's clown shoes. and i can't relate to him whatsoever. he's a cheap knock-off villain Oh. Well seeing as you put it that way, and your arguement is so sound, I don't see why I didn't see that. Of course Mr. Freeze with his freeze ray ice gun thingy is a much more believable character in Nolan's world than some guy trying to match wits with Batman. What the hell was I thinking??
|
|
|
Post by Dark Nightwing on Aug 1, 2008 18:20:19 GMT -5
Mr. Freeze is a relatable character because he is a man trying to save someone he loves.
The Riddler is not a knock off of the Joker. Sure there are a lot of versions that are Joker like. But if you look at some of the more serious versions, you won't see much of similarity. A good version would be the BTAS version. The TB version fits in this category as well, though not everyone likes how different his design is.
The Joker is a genius because he is completely insane. His mind does not work the same way as most people's mind. The Riddler is incredibly intelligent. The Riddler is a test of the intelligence of Batman, where the Joker is more of a test of his morality. The Riddler that is the same as the Joker is where they are both playful tricksters. But the current version of the characters are much different.
|
|
|
Post by Jack the Skull on Aug 2, 2008 9:22:36 GMT -5
[shadow=red,left,300]I agree in away with, Dark Nightwing. The Riddler is a bit of a cheap knock-off of the Joker, but depending what version of the character you look at.
I will be honest here, I am not a John Glover fan, so I did not enjoy BTAS version of the Riddler. But I do acknowledge the fact they made him different from the Joker.
Personally I liked the TB version of the character the best! He was creepy, fun and more importantly unique![/shadow]
|
|
|
Post by All Star Batman on Aug 5, 2008 14:17:57 GMT -5
MORE 'BATMAN 3' CASTING RUMORS Is Captain Jack sailing to Gotham City with Capote in tow? By Josh Wigler Posted 8/04/2008 As fans are sadly aware, the Joker—at least Heath Ledger's interpretation—will not be returning to Gotham City for a third "Batman" film. With that in mind, there's an oversized pair of clown-shoes in Arkham that desperately need filling. But who could possibly top the late Heath Ledger as Batman's latest nemesis? Is it even possible?
Everybody seems to have an opinion about the next Bat rogue, and the National Enquirer is weighing in as well. The tabloid paper reports that Johnny Depp and Philip Seymour Hoffman have been tipped for the roles of the Riddler and the Penguin respectively. "Producers are convinced that the role of the Riddler is perfect for Depp," sources tell the Enquirer. "And what better Penguin is there than Philip Seymour Hoffman?"
Whoa, whoa, whoa! No need to get nasty, National Enquirer. That's an Oscar winner you're talking about, show some respect!
Word about The Riddler is hardly news, as we reported last month. Johnny Depp would be an interesting choice for the villain, but there's some fear that it'll turn out as a simple Joker imitation—especially considering he was considered a contender for the criminal clown years ago. Similarly, rumors circulated about Philip Seymour Hoffman's involvement as The Penguin back when the villain was alleged to have a cameo in "The Dark Knight."
Given the source, it's hard to consider these rumors at all reliable. That still doesn't stop the mind from speculating on the possibilities. Stay tuned for more news on possible casting rumors in the weeks to come!
|
|
|
Post by jasontodd2 on Aug 5, 2008 17:14:41 GMT -5
If they do bring The Joker back for the third film I was thinking that depending on the role he will play in the film, it may just play out to what actor should be playing him. If he is only going to be in it for about 15 minutes or something like that I say go and get somebody like Crispin Glover, I think he would nail it. But if The Joker is going to play a huge part in the third film then perhaps they really should look at Johnny Depp taking up the role.
I am not opposed to other villians being in the film, if they decided not to have The Riddler or Joker I would love to see guys like Deadshot, Firefly, or even The RatCatcher (in a small part)
I think that Catwoman is a must for the third film, now I am not a huge fan of Angelina Jolie, she looks the part but is a horrible actress, but I think its about time a woman plays a key role in the Nolan Batman films, because the first two films don't feature strong females in a large capacity. Kate Beckinsale would make a fantastic Catwoman
And I hope they bring in Bullock and Montoya.
I guess this is the fun part of being a Batman fan right now all the possibilities and speculation of villians and storyline for the third film, I am excited
|
|
|
Post by snooch2dnooch on Aug 5, 2008 18:02:18 GMT -5
i still say daniel day lewis for the joker. and i think angelina jolie is a credible actress who also nails the look at sense of coldness and disconnect to play selina kyle / catwoman. it's all in her eyes. while i like kate beckinsale, she's just too nice.
|
|
|
Post by All Star Batman on Aug 6, 2008 13:33:09 GMT -5
If they do bring The Joker back for the third film I was thinking that depending on the role he will play in the film, it may just play out to what actor should be playing him. If he is only going to be in it for about 15 minutes or something like that I say go and get somebody like Crispin Glover, I think he would nail it.
Funny, when we first found out Joker would be in the next Batman years ago, I picked Glover to play him.
|
|
|
Post by crazyhatter on Aug 6, 2008 21:24:56 GMT -5
If they do bring The Joker back for the third film I was thinking that depending on the role he will play in the film, it may just play out to what actor should be playing him. If he is only going to be in it for about 15 minutes or something like that I say go and get somebody like Crispin Glover, I think he would nail it.
Funny, when we first found out Joker would be in the next Batman years ago, I picked Glover to play him. I think a lot of people wanted Glover for the Joker, including myself. Thank God Nolan discovered Heath for the role to out smart us all with the casting.
|
|
|
Post by All Star Batman on Aug 8, 2008 1:27:33 GMT -5
Op/Ed: Is a 'Dark Knight Return' in Batman's Film Future? By Michael Doran posted: 07 August 2008 11:10 am ETBuzz up! del.icio.us
So as The Dark Knight steamrolls to $500 million dollars in domestic box office receipts, breaking all manners of all-time records along the way, the only real remaining "storyline" for the film is how close can it get to all-time box office champ Titanic, currently the only movie in history sailing the $600 million dollar seas.
There are the Oscar questions, of course - will Heath Ledger receive a posthumous nomination for his turn as the Joker, and can the film perhaps secure Best Picture and/or Best Director nominations? But we won't have any answers to those until early next year.
Comic book message boards abhor a vacuum, however, and these days in absence of anything that compelling to dissect about The Dark Knight, the focus of uber-fan energies is turning to the inevitable (the-sun-rises-in-the-morning sort of inevitable) next film in Warner Bros'. franchise.
Rumors and speculation focusing on possible villains and the actors who might play them are the fan forum fodder du jour, with names like Johnny Depp (The Riddler), Angelina Jolie (Catwoman), Philip Seymour Hoffman (The Penguin), and even Aaron Eckhart (as a Two-Face who apparently would enjoy a remarkable recovery) emerging from the pack.
And then there was that now infamous little exchange during last month's Comic-Con International: San Diego. Watchmen/300 director Zack Snyder reportedly mentioned that he'd like to see writer Frank Miller's seminal Batman graphic novel "The Dark Knight Returns" adapted into a big screen feature, with Miller later responding to Snyder's comment, "You can do it anytime you want to, Zack."
And Internet fandom was off and running...
As any self-respecting comic book reader knows, Miller's "The Dark Knight Returns" – first published in 1986 in a watershed moment for comics publishing – is a work whose influences are already pervasive in Christopher Nolan's Batman Begins and The Dark Knight. Set in a not-too-distant future, the story – which helped give birth to (or at least popularize) the "grim and gritty" movement in comic books – finds a middle-aged Bruce Wayne emerge from a ten-year retirement as "the Batman" to battle his old nemeses Two-Face, the Joker – and even Superman.
So while a big-screen adaptation of one of the industry's holy grails is already near the tops of any fanboy's greatest "Hopes" and "Fears" lists, speculation is now turning towards whether something that few thought would ever happen could actually become reality sooner, rather than later.
Today we're going to discuss the merits of the "sooner" camp...
The very "sooner" camp, in fact.
Now adapting "The Dark Knight Returns" for the screen would be a bold and audacious move for any director and the studio, as well as a road fraught with some treacherous obstacles. For one, the story's entire third act featuring a Superman under the thumb of the Federal government would almost certainly have to be abandoned, if for no other reason (and there are quite a few) that Nolan's vision for the first two films is far too "grounded" to suddenly introduce a super-strong, flying man who can survive a nuclear explosion (as he does in the story).
So whether it's an unlikely "faithful" adaptation, or the more-likely "loosely" adapted version, placed together in context, the clues are there that some manner of adaptation of "The Dark Knight Returns" is precisely the direction Nolan is going in for a third film.
Let's run through the clues one-by-one. And we'll be talking about The Dark Knight in very story-specific detail, so you three people left on Earth who have yet to see the movie, consider yourself "spoiler" warned.
What's In a Name?
OK, OK, this is the flimsiest of circumstantial evidence but sometimes the most obvious clues are the most telling.
What do you call a sequel to a film (which curiously broke the naming precedent of the five "Batman" films before it) called "The Dark Knight"? A film in which in its closing moments, the protagonist runs off into the night, literally chased by dogs, his future as the protector of Gotham City in doubt?
Why, if you want it to actually star the Dark Knight, you call it "The Dark Knight Returns" of course.
And if you're going to go through the trouble of calling it "The Dark Knight Returns", well then...
In a Word – "Escalation"
One doesn't have to speculate whether Nolan and his co-writers David S. Goyer and brother Jonathan Nolan understand the concept of "escalation" – they introduced it into the series themselves in the closing moments of Batman Begins. In fact, they wrapped the entire existence of Heath Ledger's the Joker around it.
The Dark Knight was clearly an "escalation" over Batman Begins in both theme and tone. The landscape was broader, the stakes higher, and the tragedies greater. Operatic in tone and grandiose in scale, Nolan has left himself one direction to take this story, and that's to its necessary end.
No matter how high-rent the actor (and the franchise can now afford very high rent), no other villain or villains are going to feel appropriately menacing – or satisfying – after the nihilistic embodiment of chaos Ledger and Nolan created.
The Joker killed Bruce Wayne's great love and destroyed the one person Batman thought could make him obsolete. He nearly seduced the very soul of Gotham City itself.
How in the world do you top that? How do you make the audience feel the stakes raise and not have the next installment feel like a breather?
By actually finishing that story, that's how. Which brings us to...
The Three Act Structure
There is little doubt Christopher Nolan understands what a three-act structure is, and every reason to believe he understands any storyteller is pushing their luck with any more than three (good luck Sam Raimi). Yes, a compelling argument can be made that Warner Bros. isn't going to put this cash cow out to pasture, and will want a new Batman movie every few years, but they can still have that, which we'll address later.
We'll also take Nolan at this word that he hasn't signed on for a next installment yet (and God bless him and the upcoming due reward he'll receive if he hasn't), but given his talents as a storyteller, it would be shocking if he a) was telling a story he didn't already know the ending to, breaking the cardinal rule of storytelling; and b) left the franchise without finishing the story by his own hand.
Nolan famously completed Batman Begins without "knowing" whether he'd do a second installment. That didn't stop him from laying the seeds for The Dark Knight in that first film's closing moments.
By leaving the Joker (literally) hanging at the end of The Dark Knight, Nolan left open-ended a story that begs to be finished. Even Tim Burton knew he had to kill Jack Nicholson at the "end". Nolan himself killed Ra's at the end of Batman Begins and he even tied-up a loose end regarding the Scarecrow in The Dark Knight. These are both clear signals Nolan knows the story has to have an end and has some idea for that end already in mind.
Nolan further foreshadows the future in The Dark Knight's climatic moments as well. remember when the Joker tells Batman the two of them can "do this for years"? Filmmakers of Nolan's talent don't throw away lines like that, especially in a moment like that. That was the director signaling to the audience that he understands one of "The Dark Knight Returns'" main themes - that the Joker's very existence is primarily to be Batman's nemesis and their fates were inevitably intertwined, as well as a signal that their final showdown will in fact come years down the road.
Which brings us back to the three-act structure: Act One (Batman Begins) was the first Batman story. Act Two (The Dark Knight) was a classic tragic turning point.
So what does this demand Act Three be?
Well, not only the final battle of Batman and the Joker, but also the last Batman story, of course.
The Joker/Ledger Factor
By leaving the fate of the Joker open in The Dark Knight knowing the performance he had gotten from Ledger, Nolan also knew he was casting a shadow over the next film and any future installments until the character's story is finished – whomever happens to be behind the camera when it is.
While perhaps a marketing department's worst nightmare and admittedly macabre, Nolan could have made a different pragmatic decision in post-production and made the Joker's fate more "final". By leaving the character alive, Nolan knowingly left the next director the choice of either having to somehow make villains like the Penguin, the Riddler, or Catwoman more of a menace than they've ever been in the comic books, or using the Joker again.
And even if the former approach could be achieved, are moviegoers really going to be satisfied with the idea the Joker is simply sitting in prison somewhere, particularly given his jailbreak in The Dark Knight? The next film would be anti-climatic before it ever began.
It would make sense, however, that if Batman goes further underground (as suggested in The Dark Knight's ending), that the Joker would simply not even try to escape, his reason for being removed, a major element of "The Dark Knight Returns".
So that leaves this pragmatic question – given the circumstances, how do you finish the Batman/Joker story? Well, it would still be difficult, but by telling a story set 10, 15, 20 (?) years in the future, Nolan would buy himself some much-needed leeway to recast the Joker as an older man.
It would still be an unenviable task for both the director and whatever actor accepted that challenge, but it just might provide some measure of wiggle room.
So here's the recapped case for the next film being an adaptation (on some level) of "The Dark Knight Returns".
1.) The Dark Knight's title and ending makes the next film being called "The Dark Knight Returns" logical. 2.) The next film needs to further "escalate" the series, and be even bigger and bolder than The Dark Knight. 3.) Nolan seems to be crafting a three-act structure, and left the Joker's fate open to be a major element of a final act. 4.) The “Dark Knight Returns” future setting gives Nolan some "room" to help recast the Joker.
And the Case Against?
As mentioned, in the context of the world Nolan has created in the first two movies, some parts of "The Dark Knight Returns" are un-filmable. Superman's role in the story and the whole third act are impossible to make work. To refine this theory, we're effectively talking about liberally adapting the main elements of the first two acts of Frank Miller's story.
A 14 year-old girl running around in a Robin costume doesn't make much sense in the Nolan Bat-verse either, although given the 'Batman imitators' element the director introduced in The Dark Knight, a young disciple who could serve a similar role as Carrie does in TDKR wouldn’t be too hard to imagine.
Then there is the question of finality. The Dark Knight is on its way to becoming the second-highest grossing film of all time. Why, oh why, would Warner Bros. produce a film that could potentially be perceived by audiences as the last story in the franchise?
Well, here’s the thing - that's happened once already, unintentionally. Joel Schumacher's Batman & Robin almost killed the big-screen Batman.
The success of Batman Begins and The Dark Knight prove moviegoers are a forgiving lot, and (like comic book fans) understand the nature of a self-contained story arc. While in-story internal logic requires "continuity", doesn't Nolan's relaunch of the franchise indicate fans will accept new creative visions that aren't necessarily related to previous ones? That fans want a good story; not necessarily a next one?
Perhaps the wisest thing Warner Bros could do is let talented filmmakers like Nolan tell their own stories in the classic, satisfying three-act structure, instead of just trying to keep films rolling out in serial fashion to higher costs, even higher expectations, and eventual lesser returns. To let new filmmakers relaunch and reinvent the adaptable franchise again (and again, and again) on his or her own terms.
We just can't shake this feeling that this is exactly what they're going to do.Yeah, or here's an idea: DON'T MAKE A DKR MOVIE SET IN NOLAN'S UNIVERSE. Just make the film adaptation on it's own. The Justice League movie will probably be set in a different universe too.
|
|
|
Post by havedunter74 on Aug 8, 2008 4:19:02 GMT -5
i still think if they are going to do a"the dark knight returns" movie it should be an animated film in a anime style but obviously not aimed at young children.
|
|
|
Post by All Star Batman on Aug 8, 2008 12:20:32 GMT -5
i still think if they are going to do a"the dark knight returns" movie it should be an animated film in a anime style but obviously not aimed at young children. Good thing we got the DCU DTV line. Hopefully DKR becomes a feature (along with The Long Halloween).
|
|
|
Post by snooch2dnooch on Aug 8, 2008 12:37:14 GMT -5
i want to see THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS live action starring Bruce Willis as the eldery bat and Robert Rodriguez directing (think about sin city - this is the guy for the project. too bad dumbass frank miller handed it over to the over-rated untalented zak snyder)
|
|
|
Post by Jack the Skull on Aug 8, 2008 13:55:22 GMT -5
[shadow=red,left,300]Personally, I don't think they should adapt it DKR at all!
1) Yes they could do it separately the "Nolan Universe", but if it does bad, then that could spell trouble the "Nolan Universe!
2) The Graphic Novel is just to perfect and it could get lost in the translation!
3) Don't think would be a good response to another Robin!
4) They should just let Nolan continue with his version of Batman, it seems to be striking a chord with audiences! We don't need another Burton-Schumacher incident on our hands![/shadow]
|
|
SuperPa
Legions of Gotham Police Officer
Posts: 198
|
Post by SuperPa on Aug 8, 2008 14:43:28 GMT -5
TDKR's would be way to much for the big screen and it couldn't work in The Nolan verse since that Batman kills,and there's a Robin and the big one,There's a Superman.And the thing with that is you can't just leave out Superman he played a massive part in the book he killed Batman.And there's like a hundred other reasons that it could never work in the Nolan verse or any other.
Next Batman film should be about Batman and Hush since Hush attacks Batman personally and up till now its been Batman fighting for Gotham so this would be new since Hush know's Batman's Identity and just wants to ruin him.
|
|
|
Post by crazyhatter on Aug 10, 2008 7:53:13 GMT -5
Please, no Hush...
|
|
|
Post by jasontodd2 on Aug 10, 2008 18:40:19 GMT -5
Next Batman film should be about Batman and Hush since Hush attacks Batman personally and up till now its been Batman fighting for Gotham so this would be new since Hush know's Batman's Identity and just wants to ruin him. Sounds a bit like Batman Begins storywise with Ras Ah Ghul knowing who Batman is, and destroys Wayne Manor The two share a connection in the film and I think it might be a little too soon to do another storyline like that for the third film.
|
|
clownprince1
Legions of Gotham Police Officer
Why so Serious?
Posts: 114
|
Post by clownprince1 on Aug 10, 2008 21:41:09 GMT -5
Nolan needs to finish off his series and then they need to wait 10 yrs and then bring Batman back in DKR type story---
|
|
|
Post by jasontodd2 on Aug 17, 2008 18:57:05 GMT -5
i want to see THE DARK KNIGHT RETURNS live action starring Bruce Willis as the eldery bat and Robert Rodriguez directing (think about sin city - this is the guy for the project. too bad dumbass frank miller handed it over to the over-rated untalented zak snyder) I agree with you on the style of a Sin City or perhaps even a 300 type setting, but I respectfully disagree on your choice of Bruce Willis playing the elder Batman. I don't really see Bruce Willis as a good Batman, current or in the future, something about him doesn't make him right.
My choice for Bruce Wayne and Batman for a Dark Knight Returns film would be....... Christopher Noth. Think about it, he has played a hard nosed Detective in the law and order series for years, and has the playboy bachelor type angle from playing Mr. Big in Sex & The City. He is in his mid 50's (53) stands over 6'0 feet, and really just has that look, plus he is a great actor.
|
|
|
Post by Batlaw on Aug 17, 2008 19:27:07 GMT -5
I always thought Ed Harris could pull off a great live action older Bruce Wayne.
|
|