Batman After Christopher Nolan

Gothamite

Well-Known Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
3,260
Location
Dublin, Ireland
So it's pretty much certain that this will be Nolan's last Batman film and that it will give his run of stories a definitive "ending". How do you guys all want the series to progress in the aftermath of this one?

Do you want it to continue on using the same elements as Nolan's universe or would you like a new approach? Or, would you prefer that they leave the Batman franchise dormant for ten years?

Personally, now that they've done the perfect (so far) series of "Lone, Realistic Batman", I would like to see them tackle the more fantastical elements and give them some sort of relevance and cohesiveness in cinema. I'll post more of my thoughts, later.
 
So it's pretty much certain that this will be Nolan's last Batman film and that it will give his run of stories a definitive "ending". How do you guys all want the series to progress in the aftermath of this one?

Do you want it to continue on using the same elements as Nolan's universe or would you like a new approach? Or, would you prefer that they leave the Batman franchise dormant for ten years?

Personally, now that they've done the perfect (so far) series of "Lone, Realistic Batman", I would like to see them tackle the more fantastical elements and give them some sort of relevance and cohesiveness in cinema. I'll post more of my thoughts, later.

I agree. I'd like to see a significant shift in pace following Nolan's departure. Let another director come in with a new vision and either ignore what came before or at least let them play loose and fast. We don't need a new origin story. Just let a new team come in and hit the ground running.

That said, I think it would be kind of cool to see a similarly influenced director provide one last post-script film to Nolan's series. David Fincher might be a good fit. Give us a filmic spin on the Dark Knight Returns, tying up any loose ends Nolan left dangling. That would give the new team plenty of time to work on the script, casting, and designs for the new films.

;) I wouldn't mind seeing Terry Gilliam doing his spin on Batman.
 
I agree with almost everything said. However, I can't help but feel that a Dark Knight Returns movie would work best as one of those DC Animation projects. While I'm not a huge fan of the ultra-realistic approach that Nolan takes, I do like the serious tone that he has brought to the franchise. If it were up to me, they would keep the serious/dark/gritty/whatever tone of the Nolan films but have more of a comic book influenced aesthetic. So, for instance, Gotham would look more like Gotham and less like Chicago.

I was thinking about this the other day: While the idea of different filmmakers doing different interpretations of the characters might work for comic book fans, do you think that the average casual fan that sees these movies would "get" that these are different interpretations of the characters, and that the story lines are not related? For instance, I know of several people who thought that the Nolan movies were prequels to the first four Batman movies, before I told them otherwise. My fear is that this can become confusing if they do something that would seemingly break the movie continuity, such as have Two-Face in a future movie. Thoughts?
 
I really can't stress enough how much I don't want to see The Dark Knight Returns as a live-action film, at least until they've done an animated version with Kevin Conroy, first. It just seems foolish to try and cast a new actor to play an aging, disgruntled Batman who has to convince us that he's been at this for years and I don't really think Bale would be able to convincingly pull it off for another ten years or so.

I would prefer they continue with a loose sequel, that may or may not have its story's roots in the Nolan films. Given that Nolan's films are shaping up to be the definitive "Bruce Wayne/Batman" trilogy, I would now like WB to try and tackle a "Batman and Robin" trilogy of some kind that focuses on the entirely different dynamic of Batman (who now realises that this mission he has embarked upon isn't going to end anytime soon) taking on a kindred spirit and realising how necessary it is that he has someone to prevent him from going down darker paths.

Robin wouldn't even need to be a child. Just do what they did with Tim Drake or Chris O'Donnell in the movies and have Robin be in his late teens/early twenties. I think this could make for a very interesting and very different trilogy that would justify reshuffling the cast and crew of the franchise.
 
I do not think they should ignore this trilogy at all. If they did another complete reboot you just know people will say how much it sucks compared to the others. BUT I would like to see more scifi/fantasy stuff incorporated into it. An example would be, Hypothetical 4th film brings back either Scarecrow or Joker. But adds someone like Freeze or Ivy. That way in the 5th film we can have just the scifi/fantasy types.
 
Last edited:
I don't want to see any villains that we've seen before in the movies. They've had two different series to show Catwoman, The Penguin, The Riddler, Freeze, Ivy, Scarecrow, Ra's, and two different versions of The Joker and Two-Face. Batman has one of the greatest and most extensive rogues galleries in all of comics. They have plenty of great villains to choose from. I mean, if it's really necessary, then I guess you could bring some of those villains into the post-Nolan movies, but leave Joker and Two-Face out for a while.
 
Funny I was just thinking about this today. If they're not going to do a shared universe (I would love to have the dark knight version of batman there it will help ground the film in reality and just be damn cool to see that Batman go up against super powered villains) then I would like them to wait several years then do a set of movies closer to the comics, not campy or less dark just closer. It would be great to see Nightwing, Tim Drake, and Oracle on the big screen. Maybe do something different than an origin film. Let some creative people do something cool, new, and original.
 
If the Nolan films serve as a base set of films on which other directors can base their Batman stories, does this mean that Two-Face, one of Batman's top two or three villains, should no longer be seen on film? This is the big problem I have with TDK...now to have Two-Face in a future movie, they'd either have to break continuity or do a reboot.
 
They need to acknowledge the Nolan films with a fourth. I see them taking on the story of Robin after the third. Maybe Batman realizes that he may not inspire another Harvey Dent so needs to start influencing people to take up his mantle in the hopes that his legacy will continue. I think that could easily done and kept in the same tone as the movies prior to it. Hate to say it but Nolan has kind of pigeon-holed this franchise with the realism... Eventually, there is going to have to be the Mr. Freeze or Ivy stories if they want to continue making Bat films.
 
I never said a "complete reboot". I don't want to see Batman's origin onscreen for the fifth time in less than 25 years. Now that we have an established Batman with established motivations, create a different Gotham, with different inhabitants and a new story that justifies a series of films rather than just "Batman-vs-X" which is what the Spider-Man films basically became, in spite of the awkward attempts made to make them seem like romantic dramas/comedies.

And they should definitely branch out and have other villains than the ones we've seen before.
 
Last edited:
Let great directors do standalone Batman films set in the universe.
 
I don't think handing another director nolan's style would work. These films have a very clear and limited narrative, to hand it off would result in instant comparison and the story would never live up to the heighten stakes of Nolan's film. You should let someone do their own thing than try and copy something that way people can view it as something different and see it for what it is. Also I would love to have a nolan style series like on HBO or something. I think you can introduce any Batman villains with new twist and edge, they couldn't work in a movie but can work beautifully on the small screen.
 
Wouldn't you have the same problem with the tv series?
Well not really, because it's a tv show you can have much smaller plots. Nolann's films focus on huge city wide crisis. You can't then pull back in the next movie to something small. So tv has that ability to tell a simpler story thus widening the range someone has to work with. Plus I don't think it should be in continuity with the nolan films, but keep the style, props, costume design, etc. And I think the change of media helps the audience dissociate from nolan's films and accept any changes.
Hmm....Gotham Central, perhaps?

That could work too. I think TV has huge untapped potential for comic book characters
 
Last edited:
I'd rather see Daredevil on TV (think FX show)

In my personal opinion I'd rather they focused on other characters. Superman needs to be refined, Wonder Woman, Flash and other characters still need to be done. I so want a Starman movie with JGL as Jack Knight.
 
I'd rather see Daredevil on TV (think FX show)

In my personal opinion I'd rather they focused on other characters. Superman needs to be refined, Wonder Woman, Flash and other characters still need to be done. I so want a Starman movie with JGL as Jack Knight.

Which is why a show may be best, they can still give the audience their Batman fix and make money off of it while exploring other movie options
 

Latest posts

Back
Top