Who should take over the Batman franchise? - Page 2

Wright would be a great choice. Another one I'd throw in the ring as a bit of a wild card - Terry Gilliam. He's got the visual flair, and does 'Dark yet fantastical yet heightened yet grounded' like no other. Plus, his career needs a boost pretty badly right now, and a big franchise film would fit the bill nicely (Provided he gets more support than the last time he tried to go all blockbuster, with Brothers Grimm).

The only con I can think of is, hey, it's Terry Gilliam. The bloody thing might not ever actually get made. But if it did... Dammit, I'd take the risk.

Alan Parker. You know it to be true.

Joe Wright and Rian Johnson are the two best picks so far. Wright especially.

Joe Wright.

Yes.

While I have some time, let me lay out why I think Affleck is the front runner.

1. Ben Affleck is a really good director. Gone Baby Gone and The Town got great reviews. Argo has early awards buzz. In addition, not only were Gone Baby Gone and The Town well reviewed, they were gritty crime drama/thrillers which fits in well with with the established aesthetic of the Nolan franchise. WB will certainly prefer an acclaimed director with similar credentials to Nolan if for no other reason than to make it look like it's not a step down for the franchise.

2. WB has backed Affleck's last two films The Town and Argo. While it's not a deal breaker, I believe it would be WB's preference to work with a director who already has a good working relationship with the company. If nothing else, it's probably better for the morale of employees if WB promotes from within to head up one of their prize franchises rather than basically say no one in the company is good enough.

3. Ben Affleck is in his directing prime. Obviously WB isn't going to hand Batman off to some unproven director. I also don't believe they're going to hand off the franchise to an older director that might not have much gas left in the tank. A youngish director that can see Batman through for the next decade is certainly on WB's wish list.

4. Ben Affleck has no other major franchise commitments. If WB is going to hand off one of their prime franchises, they're likely to hand it off to someone with no other major commitments/distractions on his plate.

5. Affleck has legit comic book cred. It's not an essential, but it certainly doesn't hurt.

6. Accidentally or not, WB has already linked Nolan and Affleck by putting the trailer to The Town in front of Inception. Considering Argo is one of WB's biggest releases between The Dark Knight Rises and The Hobbit, a trailer to Argo in front of The Dark Knight Rises seems likely. If Argo is as good as early buzz suggests, Nolan and Affleck might be further linked together through awards season buzz. That would make an easy transition for WB when they are ready to make an announcement. Affleck and Nolan apparently already have something of a relationship with Affleck being offered Superman at one point and turning it down.

Affleck's take would be interesting, but I have a feeling it hew pretty closely to Nolan's version. I just don't see Affleck embracing or really running with the more comic/fantastic elements. And I think the franchise, when the inevitable reboot comes, needs to be markedly different from Nolan's take to continue to generate interest and box office.

Also: you're assuming WB isn't going to give the series a breather for a few years. I think the next Batfilm - a JL movie notwithstanding - is at least five years away. Who knows what Affleck's standing with WB will be then? Also, doesn't he have his hands full with THE STAND? That's likely going to eat 3-4 years of his life, if they break the story in to multiple films as we all suspect they will.

Affleck apparently turned down the chance to direct the new Superman movie. I'd love to see his take on this.

Edit: Didn't see that Evil Twin already mentioned that is his post. That's what I get for skimming!

Whoever they choose, it's not going to be a total departure from the Nolan series. Those of you hoping for Batman who flies spaceships and has a lil' buddy he refers to as "Old chum" aren't going to get it. Affleck seems like a realistic choice to take over. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sebastian OB 

Whoever they choose, it's not going to be a total departure from the Nolan series. Those of you hoping for Batman who flies spaceships and has a lil' buddy he refers to as "Old chum" aren't going to get it. Affleck seems like a realistic choice to take over. 

I'm not hoping for a total departure, but I would like to see something different - this isn't very precise, but something between Burton's take and Nolan's. I think Affleck's take would be pretty close to Nolan's, but unless they're planning on doing what they did with the Burton-Schumacher films, I think it's a good five years before we see another Batfilm, possibly longer. And a lot can change in that time.

Assuming TDKR does well, we know WB is going to throw piles of money at Nolan to do another. Once it's clear he won't (and I feel pretty certain a fourth Nolan Batman film won't happen for a long time), they'll need to figure out what they want to do. It took them 7 years to do that last time. I see no reason to think they're going to be quicker and smarter about it this go 'round.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelM 

 

Assuming TDKR does well, we know WB is going to throw piles of money at Nolan to do another. Once it's clear he won't (and I feel pretty certain a fourth Nolan Batman film won't happen for a long time), they'll need to figure out what they want to do. It took them 7 years to do that last time. I see no reason to think they're going to be quicker and smarter about it this go 'round.

The reasons are that the superhero craze has shown staying power and audiences have proven more receptive to reboots than they were thought to be 10 years ago.

It's too bad the way comics can do out of continuity stories and change creative teams and direction doesn't translate to film.  It would be simplest thing in the world to say, "Well, that was Nolan's take on the character, here's ___________ with their conception," unburdened by having to adhere to what came before and by having to tag themselves as a reboot, which has the connotation that what came before didn't work.

I don't mind dark and gritty, the comics always were, and for TAS, I think they tried to get as dark and gritty as they could within a 22 minute run time aimed at children.  

How about do something a little different in terms of villains.  Here's my pitch:

Neill Blomkamp 

Fassbender as Wayne/bats

Sharlto Copley as Zsasz to bring some darker and grittier.

Throw in TAS fave clayface, whose original form is played by Elijah Wood.  Have him clayface assume different bystanders or onlookers to the Zsasz events until he finds an opportune moment of media coverage that he starts and then tries to steal the spotlight at the expense of others, getting Bats attention and thus creating a two enemy formula the studios love.   Wood and Copley both being familiar to the Jackson studios would be easy for Blomkamp to leverage.  The only be fight would be Fassbender as his popularity gains.  

Just please please please, no fucking origin retell.  We don't need it.  We have had it with that over done concept of having to hear the same story from someone else, whether supes, spidey or hulk.  It's known, just go with it.

You think him saying "No" prior to release will stop them from doing it after?

They'll try. They'll fail, but they'll try. Hollywood loves a sure thing, and it would be hard for the execs not to see a 4th Nolan Batfilm as a sure thing.

I know he has projects lined up as far as the eye can see, but I think the next incarnation of BATMAN should go to Guillermo Del Toro. Look at Blade II and Hellboy II. He's perfect. Throw in the dark, twisted fantasy elements of Pan's Labyrinth and we have a winner. Just imagine would Del Toro could do with Killer Croc or Scarecrow (Doug Jones as Scarecrow--perfect!). I think the Batman: Arkham City games have the best, spot-on design and feel of what Gotham should be and Guillermo has the chops to deliver that sort of tone and look.

I like the Affleck suggestion, but I HATE the possibility that such a deal might ALSO involve Affleck playing Batman himself. A solid NO to that.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gabe T 

I like the Affleck suggestion, but I HATE the possibility that such a deal might ALSO involve Affleck playing Batman himself. A solid NO to that.

If Affleck were cast, Batman's secret identity would be revealed within minutes due to his tendency toward keeping his mouth agape at all times.

I highly doubt Affleck would cast himself. WB would want to duplicate Nolan's approach of getting someone relatively young - late 20s, around 30 - to play Batman, so that any aging over multiple films won't be egregiously noticeable onscreen.

Lets have an anthology Batman movie where 3 or 4 different directors give different takes on the Batman. That way we could have varied interpretations of the character presented in different ways. It could be the best of all worlds and probably never happen.

Naturally, this would NEVER happen but, in a better world, I wouldn't mind seeing a series of bi-annual Batman films helmed by different directors adapting different GN works in radically differing styles, like the fan film below:

If you can do this for zero budget, imagine someone could do with the relatively modest budget of $50m. I'd call the move "Stretching the legs out on your brand".

-Nicolas Winding Refn

-Guillermo Del Toro

-Duncan Jones

-David Fincher

Cuarón is a great pick, so is Bigelow.

I want Doug Liman.  What put him in director jail in the first place?

Also, someone is thinking David Twohy, I just know it.

ETA: What happened to Andrew Davis?  The Fugitive is almost a Batman movie already, and I swear it's cinematography of Chicago inspired bits of TDK.

Quote:

Originally Posted by MrBananaGrabber 

Also, someone is thinking David Twohy, I just know it.

His name is Justin Waddell, and we don't speak ill of him in the Franchise forums.

Of all the names listed, I still think Bigelow is the best of the plausibles.  She can do action, has just enough of a pedigree to entrust with such a huge property but not enough clout to demand billions on the back end or full creative control, and her style is grounded enough to not be too far afield of Nolan's aesthetic* but also more action-oriented, which would be a bonus.

Who would be the worst choice you could actually see happening (I think we all agree that a Lars Von Trier Batfilm would be a fascinating stew of insanity, but we're more likely to see Octomom in the White House next year)?  My last place choice is probably Frank Miller. 

*Here's the fine line, because while they obviously don't want to fix too much of what wasn't broken with the Bale films, you need to have a take that is noticeably different from Nolan's to warrant rebooting.  This essentially disqualifies people like Fincher, Aronofsky, or Refn.   

Bigelow would be good, Cronenberg would be interesting, but my choice is Ryuhei Kitamura. He can shoot action, handles mood very well and has great visual eye. It'll never happen, they'll probably give it to JJ Abrams...

Ugh.  Miller.  I don't want him, or Rodriguez anywhere near a Batman movie.

Here's one I'd be money on happening: Shawn Levy.

Jody Hill

Give me Observe and Report where our mall cop has tons of cash and resources. Lets see Batman played out as Moore's Rorshach.

Lighter version: Joe Dante (he was considered for Batman originally).

Darker version: David Fincher.

I'm not interested in trying to go "Lighter" or "darker" which I really think is too binary of a decision with these movies.

I think instead embracing the pulp aspects of the character come the next go-round wouldn't be a bad idea. And that means I'd suggest somebody new, with a fresh vision, Joe Cornish being one of the best names possibly branded about.

The guys behind the animated series feels like the best fit to be honest.   They've spent the most time of any creative team in the Batman universe and know the character and what makes him tick better than anyone else.   Also, take a look at what the Pixar alumni have been able to do with live action (MI:4 and John Carter) and it feels like the best bet.   As for the Wachowskis, I've always thought they were born to do a Superman movie.   One could say the Neo vs. Mr. Smith fight in Matrix 3 was their audition reel and it was an impressive one.  

Also I know this probably sounds pathetic.

But I'd like to have a Batman movie that I can watch with my nephew without it either being stupid, or hedging close to an R-rating.

So that's another vote for Bruce Timm then?

Really, it isn't the Batman: TAS that I keep thinking when beating the Timm drum, it's the incredibly impressive & smart JLU series. We should be so lucky to get a live action DC movie as good as anything from those couple seasons of JLU.

I'd love to see what Bruce Timm could do as a producer.  The DC animated properties have been much more consistent, flaws and all, than DC's live-action output.

Batman: Gotham Knight, which Timm produced, is a pretty neat anthology attempt.  It's worth a watch if you haven't yet seen it.

Eh. I found GOTHAM KNIGHT to very much be a one-and-done thing. Shorts varied from pretty cool to pretty boring.

Quote:

Originally Posted by The Rain Dog 
I know he's considered a bit workman-like by some, but I reckon Alex Proyas could do something interesting with the Bat if he was in Crow/Dark City-mode.

 

Are the Wachowskis still with WB? If so, I think they'd be my choice personally.

You read my damn mind, RD in regards to Proyas.

I'd want the W Bros for SUPES (and Jon Hamm as Kal).

Here's my version of Bats:

BATMAN: SHADOW OF THE BAT

DIRECTOR: Alex Proyas

BATMAN/BRUCE: Jason Patric

Commish Gordon: Bryan Cranston

Bullock: Robert Costanzo

MANBAT/KIRK LANGSTROM: Jeff Goldblum

KILLER CROC: Nathan Jones

ALFRED: John Cleese

Let's get crazy with the mad science. If Spidey can do it...

Quote:

Originally Posted by MichaelM 

Eh. I found GOTHAM KNIGHT to very much be a one-and-done thing. Shorts varied from pretty cool to pretty boring.

Sound concept. Piss poor execution.

Can Proyas really handle action?

I know I sound dopey with this, but I'd like to see a guy who can make Batman cool when he's fighting.

The action in The Crow & the "Holy shit!" climax of Dark City suggest that Proyas' proper handling of action is not a concern.

Proyas has been the obvious choice to take the Bat-reins since 1994. Hell, even Ebert said in his review of Dark City that Proyas should direct a Batman film.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Art Decade 

The action in The Crow & the "Holy shit!" climax of Dark City suggest that Proyas' proper handling of action is not a concern.

 

Proyas has been the obvious choice to take the Bat-reins since 1994. Hell, even Ebert said in his review of Dark City that Proyas should direct a Batman film.

And he'd sure as shit take it back to its pulpy gothic roots. And have a quality soundscape and prod design. Hell, get Jennifer Connelly (Proyas collaborator) in there too. As Selena K.

Course, if they went with my monster suggestions, GDT would be a fine choice as well, considering my sentence above.^

Eh I was never that sold on the action scenes in either film.

Quote:

Originally Posted by DARKMITE8 

And he'd sure as shit take it back to its pulpy gothic roots. And have a quality soundscape and prod design. Hell, get Jennifer Connelly (Proyas collaborator) in there too. As Selena K.

If we're talking Proyas regulars:

Ernie Hudson as Lucius Fox!

Richard O'Brien as anybody!

Michael Wincott as someone!

David Patrick Kelly as another guy!

The movie should only be about Michael Wincott eatting sandwiches now.

Michael Wincott seems to be slowly turning into Stephen Rea by way of Mickey Rourke. Getting old sucks so hard.

Sorry, not sold on Proyas.  If this was 1999 maybe.  I love the crow, and for years that was the ultimate comic book movie.  I love Dark City, but Proyas has been on a one way ticket leaving interesting behind and doing nothing going forward.   Garage days - did anyone even see it (I did,but barely remember anything in the shadow of the far superior Almost Famous)? I Robot - good.  Knowing - Downright bad.  And if we were to get Proyas, would he bail on the franchise, just as he did when they went to move onto City of Angels?  I want to at least be able to stand behind the next director for 2- 3 movies at minimum.  

I do think Fincher would be great.  How about Verbinski?  He has handled dark before and obviously knows how to set atmosphere.  My first suggestion would be Blomkamp, as he seems to be an ultimate fanboy looking to give tribute to what he does (the halo shorts, and I don't care anything about halo).  Del Toro would make me blow my load, as I think he would be perfect, but don't know if this is his kind of thing.  I think Del Toro would be very similar in mood to Nolan, but with a mystical/magical/superworldly aspect.  Cauron also would be a batman fan's dream.  

I also think getting Timm involved however they could would be awesome (producer, and/or director/co-director).  I think he would be better doing a subservient capacity, even though we have seen great stuff from the Pixar guys, it would be a risk.  I personally think WB needs to give Timm a shitload of money and tell him to run their DC comics adaptions, and gear them towards a JLA/U the same as Marvel did with The Avengers.  This would be the smartest thing DC/WB ever did in regards to their film franchises. 

Quote:

Originally Posted by Art Decade 

 

Michael Wincott seems to be slowly turning into Stephen Rea by way of Mickey Rourke. Getting old sucks so hard.

But still, the voice!

Edit: That's it! Michael Wincott! Overdubs! Solves the Bat-voice problem! So excited can't articulate! Tram-ampoline!

No. Not in this or any other universe.