SDCC: DC Announces Superman/Batman Movie for 2015

[hedrap]

I think I mentioned here that the SDCC announcement seemed rushed. There are soo many variables, and without Tull and Robinov, Snyder/Goyer/Nolan are not going to have clear path.

That comment proves it. Combined with his "we'll deal with the events of MOS in the sequel", Snyder wants to do DK Returns, in the sense that it's a straight-up fight based around how Batman percieves Superman to be a threat. That ties in to how he and Goyer have discussed Luthor, which puts Wayne in league with Luthor, until the big reveal in the third act...

...and I guarantee that's what has WB hedging.

They are not in the mood to invest 200 million in a movie where Batman is an anti-hero, Superman is Godzilla, and Luthor's dislike of Superman is reasonable!

So Snyder calls Miller in to help him navigate a way through. Which has a chance when you look at Holy Terror. Miller can really approach Superman/Batman from a totally new point compared to thirty years ago.

And if Snyder walks, which I still see as possible, this whole things is going to unravel quickly because no one will trust the new WB team. And that means Ratner could still end up as director, since he's now tied to the WB's new hedge fund investors.

I would've just called Paul Dini and saved the grief.

[huedell]

-#1 seems reasonable, but the problem here (for the audience) is that, as soon as the top character gets unpopular and TRULY overexposed they can just reboot. So.... folks get sick of Batman, reboot him as a wacky character, tie it into the '66 TV ideal, watch the oldsters thunp their chests over how "DC FINALLY gets it!" Make another 20 years of movies....

Who are the "oldsters"? And just what exactly defines "finally getting it"?

I'd venture to say that hedrap hitting upon upon Dini is the only "getting it" that any notable amt. of "oldsters" is gonna tolerate. Batman '66? Not a chance. Closer to Burton... who helped to closely inspire the direction of Timm/Dini's Batman anyways.

If the cinematic DCU heads in THAT (Timm/Diniesque) direction... I imagine you'd be pleasing the most people pound for pound. Get rid of Nolan before he totally squeezes whatever life is left in the Batman character in movie-land (and the Superman character reboot he helped launch) before it's too late.

[madmarva]

Nevermind

[Hector]

If they want Miller's Dark Knight flick, it should be a stand alone flick, not incorporated into Znyder's Man of Steel sequel, that would truly be a disservice to Superman fans, Period.

Miller's interpretation of Superman is just plain awful, a government puppet, totally opposite of Snyder's heroic Superman.

You think Superman fans who supported Man of Steel wanna see Supes get pummeled to a bloody pulp by a senior citizen Batman?

Please, I myself wouldn't go see that pro Batman-biased Miller storyline in the Superman Snyder sequel, it just doesn't click one bit.

Wanna see Miller's storyline on the silver screen?

Then make a stand alone Miller Dark Knight flick, and leave Man of Steel alone.

[hedrap]

I don't think he'll be the Miller puppet-Supes, Hector.

The impression I've gotten was Supes MOS "I'll help on my terms" line to the general, and then coupled with how his help constitutes leveling a city, will antagonize Wayne/Batman as the Nolan/Goyer version of Batman is literally willing to kill himself to save Gotham.

By inverting the two traits associated with the other guy, it flips Miller's Returns to where Batman and his connections to Gordon make him the lawman and Supes as the alien, is the outsider.

You can't really do it the other way without making it a Batman movie with Superman. And this was billed as a sequel to MOS. Unless that's the disagreement Snyder was alluding to...

[huedell]

I think people *may* be over-analyzing the one Dark Knight Superman quote... that quote could apply a billion different ways to a new movie context ... and, regardless of it's wide range of possibilities, it belongs to one of the most lauded superhero stories of all-time, so it's no wonder they are throwing around that quote and Miller's name at this point... it's great hype with zero obligation... perfect promotion for a movie a long while off.

[TomStrong]

I agree with Hector about the Miller situation, it really makes Supes look like a doofus. I was hoping for an original script where they could team up and work together to save the world. (Hey I know it's cheesy). To me Superman was always the example of what a super hero should be, maybe the cynicism of the modern world doesn't like that anymore but I still do. Stories like Kingdom Come reminded me just how awesome he is not just some dumb Boy Scout. I appreciate the sharpness of Batman's mind and enjoy Detective stories immensely.

[Hector]

Well said, my friend... ^^^^^^^

[Earth 2 Chris]

For all the good DKR did Batman in solidifying his "cool" factor...it really dented Superman's rep. It, more than anything before or since, equated Superman with a distrusted establishment. It also proved that Miller didn't really do his homework, dialing Batman back to his earliest vigilante roots, but making Superman the polar opposite of Siegel and Shuster's original social crusader.

I don't think we'll get a straight up adaptation of DKR, but I can't help but think any plans Snyder and Goyer had for a MOS sequel are being severely compromised by WB suits out to make Avengers level money. And every body who knows ANYTHING about modern comics knows about Frank Miller...and that's about all they know. So since he famously matched these two characters, and has a Hollywood rep (although someone is forgetting The Spirit, apparently) they send Snyder to him.

Hopefully, Miller's influence is only felt in the inevitable battle we are going to see.

Is it wrong of me to miss the days when Superman and Batman met on a cruise ship and learned each other identities? And their only real gripe with each other was competing for a date with Lois?

Chris

[TomStrong]

Is the super beat down really what the "kids" want? Maybe I'm just old enough now to be out of touch (36).im really asking. No sarcasm sign here at all.

[rchatlin]

my thoughts:

Keep Supes and Bats as near "equals" and on good terms for the first 2 acts.

Then the big Bad guy - Brainiac, Darksied, etc - gets Supers under his control.

Then they battle - and naturally, Bats loses. Badly.

Of course, Batman being Batman, has been keeping tabs on other super powered do- gooders -
all helping others but still in the shadows.

He pulls them together to help stop Superman...

in the Justice LEague movie.


r
o
b

[huedell]

For all the good DKR did Batman in solidifying his "cool" factor...it really dented Superman's rep. It, more than anything before or since, equated Superman with a distrusted establishment. It also proved that Miller didn't really do his homework, dialing Batman back to his earliest vigilante roots, but making Superman the polar opposite of Siegel and Shuster's original social crusader.

Sometimes a character is morphed for a greater good as far as character relationships in a new story. Batman is the ultimate loner and a creature of the shadows and we can't really stray from that. With Supes, we have a bit more elbow room on how he works with other heroes... and how he works with the U.S. government.

When you're playing Superman offa Bats, I think it makes sense to morph Supes a bit more towards the "Captain America" type as far as allegiance with the country and it's political leaders. It may not go hand in hand with the Superman character's origins, but it's easily believable to a wide audience because Supes is almost as relatable to American iconism as apple pie and baseball. You couldn't get away with that as well with any other characters.... so why not play that up a bit.

And I think that's what they will do... play it up *a bit*. Then Bats will set Supes straight. It won't be anything as deep and dark (and pathetic) as Superman and Batman's actual tussle in MIller's original tome.... just something born out of it and shoehorned into the movie so they can say they consulted with the guy who wrote that "real cool comic from a few decades ago".

[Hector]

my thoughts:

Keep Supes and Bats as near "equals" and on good terms for the first 2 acts.

Then the big Bad guy - Brainiac, Darksied, etc - gets Supers under his control.

Then they battle - and naturally, Bats loses. Badly.

Of course, Batman being Batman, has been keeping tabs on other super powered do- gooders -
all helping others but still in the shadows.

He pulls them together to help stop Superman...

in the Justice LEague movie.


r
o
b

That's better than Miller's Dark Knight storyline for sure.

Kinda like when the Fantastic Four or the Avengers gang up on the Hulk.

[ctc]

>It, more than anything before or since, equated Superman with a distrusted establishment

Yeah, but it came around during one of them "housecleanings" we've been overdue for. When the entertainment industry starts the new paradigm and in doing so wipes away the old one. Superman WAS seen as a giant boy scout, and the late 80's were a time of growing discontent with the status quo.... hence the change. (Remember that since the 50's he embodied Truth, Justice and THE AMERICAN WAY!!! and in the mid 80's a lot of Americans were feelin' kinda suspicious about the government.) The big problem NOW is that they can't let go of ANY of these versions, and keep trying to play both as they branch into other media. It's been horrid for the comics over the last decade, with the back and forth/redo/re-edit/repeat jazz.... but now it looks like the films are getting into the act too. ("He's a bad dad.... he's a great son.... he makes tough choices.... he's gritty and wears his undies on the INSIDE now...." Pick a lane dammit!)

>Is it wrong of me to miss the days when Superman and Batman met on a cruise ship and learned each other identities? And their only real gripe with each other was competing for a date with Lois?

Maybe, 'cos some of those stories were pretty creepy if you stopped and thought about them. I WOULD juxtapose that feeling with how you felt back in the day when you first read DKR. 'Cos....

>Is the super beat down really what the "kids" want?

....it sold like hotcakes back in the day, and kids really aren't any different now than they were then. There's a weird thrill from watching two icons fight it out, especially when you don't know who to root for. Just like DKR. Younger folks got more hormones goin' on, their brains still process dopamine.... big, shocking things painted in bold colours and broad strokes like that feel "right" to them. Just like it did for us.

It's the oldsters like us that want to dial it back. Which I've begun to think is really unfair to the kids. We have to step back at some point and let them find their own things. Otherwise we're just gonna keep seeing the same damned reboots, tired stories and unsurprising "surprise" twists we've been getting for the last thirty years.

>Batman '66? Not a chance

I dunno. Look how many people loved and lament "Brave and the Bold."

>You think Superman fans who supported Man of Steel wanna see Supes get pummeled to a bloody pulp by a senior citizen Batman?

You DO realize that technically Superman won that fight, and the only reason Bats' plan worked is 'cos Superman LET it?

....nobody cries for Ollie though....

Don C.

[hedrap]

The overlooked factor in all of this is gaming.

Right now, Injustice and Arkham City are the two most popular DC brands. The tie-ins for both are monster sellers.

That's going to hold a lot of weight over story and design.

So you can guarantee at least one blowout fight between the big two and a very good chance that Gotham will be some version of Arkham Origins.