According to The Hollywood Reporter, Warner Brothers is considering making another Batman movie. The two possibilities:
An adaptation of Frank Miller’s limited series Batman: Year One. This series showed Bruce Wayne after graduating college and his return to Gotham City to fight crime. It detailed how he decided to become Batman and also showed, in parallel, the life of Commissioner Gordon as a young police officer.
A live-action adaptation of the animated Batman Beyond, the series now showing on the WB Network. This series is set forty or so years in the future. Bruce Wayne is retired and reclusive, living alone in Wayne Manor. Apparently, the only other person from the old days still alive is Police Commissioner Barbara Gordon. Batman is actually young Terry McGuinness. Wayne monitors his exploits from the Batcave, functioning as Alfred did for him.
Some thoughts:
Both possibilities mean that they’re going to re-cast Batman again with a younger man. Who would you like to see play a young Batman? I nominate Ben Affleck.
In the Batman Beyond version, I’d like to see the elderly Bruce Wayne played by James Coburn, an actor whom you could believe could’ve been Batman once upon a time. And Ben Affleck could be Terry McGuinness.
To really guarantee success, Warner Brothers should make sure that director Joel Schumacher and writer Akiva Goldsman have absolutely nothing to do with the movie. Schumacher directed the last two films, and Goldsman wrote the last one. I say, “Good-bye. Don’t let the door hit you on the way out.”
It’s also obvious that WB is trying to go in a new direction. Doing Year One would allow them to start afresh with the contemporary Batman, while doing BB has it’s obvious advantages with the flying Batmobile and the opportunities for visual effects.
The only live-action Batman worth a tinker’s damn was portrayed by Adam West. How many times did you hear Chris O’Donnell say “Holy ANYTHING AT ALL?” I concede that I have no idea whether he did use the expressions, as I have been boycotting the films on principle (and I expect WB to cave any day now), but I suspect that it is unlikely.
That said, here is my cast:
Bruce Wayne/Batman: Tom Hanks
Dick Grayson/Robin: Jonathan Taylor Thomas
Alfred: Nigel Hawthorne
Aunt Harriet: Bea Arthur
Commissioner Gordon: Patrick Stewart
Chief O’Hara John Goodman
Barbara Gordon/Batgirl: Callista Flockhart
Special Guest Villains: TBA
Please keep in mind that this is from the same man who believes that what the Dodgers need in order to return themselves to their natural position of dominance, is to get that slacker Sandy Koufax back on the mound (how much rest can one arm use?).
In Batman Forever, when B&R attacked the stronghold of Two-Face and The Riddler, they made it onto the steel platform and Robin said, “Holy metal, Batman!”
Batman said, “What?”
“The metal is full of holes.”
Or something like that. Anyway, that joke was so lame it needed two crutches. There may have been other “Holy Robin” lines in the last film, but most of that movie has blessedly left my consciousness. I guess I’m one of those Batfans who preferred the serious nature of the comics produced in the 70’s, 80’s and 90’s over the campiness of the TV series. Mind you, I liked the TV series, but I was only ten years old at the time. OTOH, the late Bob Kane, the creator of Batman, liked the series, so what do I know?
Aunt Harriet and Chief O’Hara were characters created specifically for the 1960’s TV series and movie produced by 20th Century-Fox and therefore may not be available for a WB-produced movie. Aunt Harriet appeared briefly in the comic books, but after she did so on TV.
What Warner Bros. needs to do is incorporate the excellent story-telling from the Batman animated series into the movies and not worry about “all star” casting. Let the costumes do the acting to make new stars.
I’d like to see Batman: Year One. I prefer the dark, serious Batman to the funny, chock-full-of-gadgets one. Batman Beyond is dark, but what can I say, I’m emotionally attached to Bruce Wayne. I haven’t watched enough of BB to tell if Terry’s had some sort of horrific emotional trauma to make him fight crime, and what’s Batman without trauma?
However, I greatly fear that their version of Year One would suck. “The people don’t want character depth! They want explosions and cool cars!” I’d love to see The Dark Knight Returns by Miller as a movie, but I’m afraid that it would get screwed up too.
“Happiness is nonetheless true happiness because it must come to an end, nor do thought and love lose their value because they are not everlasting.”
In Batman Beyond, Terry’s father was killed in the first episode by Derek Powers (a billionaire who merged his corporation with Wayne Enterprises) who himself was transformed into a radioactive being called Blight.
And I think the writer of the new movie should be Kevin Altieri, who co-directed and co-created the original Batman: The Animated Series.
I can argue with that assertion, gaudere (about what people want in movies). There seems to me to be a significant population out there that does want character depth of a sort. Otherwise drama films wouldnt come about (no profit, right?). American Beauty is probably doing okay in the BO, can anyone check that out?
ANOTHER batman? The batmen seem to have gotten pretty shitty (heehee, rhyme) recently. They really should revamp them if they want them good.
My comment was referring to what WB thought people wanted from Batman, not what people do want. Clearly, some (most?) people want more than explosions and gadgets from Batman, otherwise we wouldn’t be complaining about it.
In my book, it’s The Dark Knight or nothing. When are they ever going to bring that story to the screen?
Ben Affleck or Tom Hanks as BATMAN? shudder ick!
In my opinion, NONE of the Batman movies have been very good. That’s not so much because of miscasting (george Clooney was no worse in the role than Keaton or Kilmer) as because NONE of the movies had plots that made a lick of sense. Still, stupid plots (or non-plots) didn’t hurt the first three Batman movies at the box office…
I happen to think the silly, goofy, campy Adam West approach to Batman is the best one, simply because the ridiculousness of the whole concept becomes obvious when you see it played straight. I mean, if YOU wanted to become a crimefighting vigilante, would YOU dress up in tights and a cape??? Of COURSE not! IF you were going to do it at all, you’d follow the path of Charles Bronson in “Death Wish” (that is, you’d get some guns, and lie in wait for criminals).
Or, to turn the question around, if you were a mugger, and you saw a guy in tights and a cape coming at you, would you cower and surrender? No… I suspect you’d either die laughing, or just shoot the stupid freak, and walk away shaking your head!
Sorry to disagree with you Astorian, but Batman can be done quite well in a serious mode. Read some of the Englehardt/Marshall Batmans from the late 1970s. Englehardt portrayed Bats as just a few cuts above a psychopaths; the result was some brillaint issues about a deeply flawed hero.
The recent comic series based on the animated show was not as dark, but did give Batman enough of the proper grim attitude.
When done effectively, the Batman is one of the few superhero comics worth a damn.
A good Batman movie is one of those things that I don’t expect to live long enough to see. The reason being that everyone wants to James-Bond him. “Where does he get the marvelous toys?”
For this reason, I would like to see a Batman: Year One approach. Whats more, I would like to see it set in the early 80s and I don’t want to see any technology greater than what would be considered possible in that time frame. What I want is a detective story.
Now then. I liked Michael Keaton in the role. Kilmer was too quirky, and Clooney was to optimistic. Keaton, however, did a good job at portraying a troubled man. (And lets face it, Batman just doesn’t work as a character with out the scars on his psyche.) If they can’t get Keaton back, I say hire an unknown, someone who has never had top billing.
I do have to admit though, I like bringing name stars for the villains. They seem to have a lot of fun doing something so over-the-top. Keep Alfred, but send Robin and Batgirl to college. Batman works best as a solo act. And fer cryin’ out loud, give Commissioner Gordon something interesting to do! He is always portrayed as a dedicated and intelligent character in the comics, use him better in the movies.
Speaking of which, A Batman/Gordon team movie would be wonderful. Let’s see some film-noir style police work.
I would like to see them get Kevin Smith to write the screenplay. I suspect that he is the only major player in the industry who knows and cares enough about the characters to do them justice.
o:These are my demands! If they are not met within the next year. I will rip one mint condition issue of “Detective Comics” a day. Am I understood!? :o
Sealemon88, there was an episode of the Animated Series where some kids were arguing about what Batman was really like. Each kid’s version was animated in a different style. One kid’s “campy” version was animated in the style of the 50’s comic books. Gary Owens was the voice of Batman. Another kid saw Batman a different way and her version was modeled after Frank Miller’s The Dark Knight. The kid looked the female Robin from that series. I don’t remember the name of that episode, but I’m sure WB will repeat it eventually. It was a good episode, IMHO.
BTW, it looks like they’ve stopped making new episodes of Batman and Superman. Batman Beyond is all there is for now. I like BB, but still…
And for those who argue that you could never have a Batman in real life… You take things way too seriously. No one ever said there could be a Batman in real life; no one over the age of twelve, anyway. There couldn’t ever be a real Tarzan or James Bond or Sherlock Holmes or Superman, and that’s their appeal. Some of us wish there could be such people and the stories allow us to vicariously live out the impossibility.
One thing’s for sure: If superheroes were real, it would certainly make the evening news more exciting.
I do not take costumed superheroes seriously at all- I DO think, however, the whole idea of a guy dressing up in tights and a cape to fight crime is rather ridiculous. I read comic books for years, when I was a kid, and enjoyed them, but even THEN, I knew at some level how goofy the whole idea was. But in the context of a comic book, I was prepared to suspend disbelief, and go with the fantasy. I loved Superman and Captain America comics as a kid, and who knows? If I picked up an old Captain America comic, I might still get a kick out of it. And there’s nothing wrong with that- just as long as I know how silly the concept of Captain AMerica is (a guy in red white and blue spandex defeating the wehrmacht with his bare hands and a shield? Come on!)
Now, IF a movie studio decide to make a Captain America movie, I hope they’d be smart enough to make it silly and lighthearted. Making a “realistic” Captain America would be silly. I mean, would ANYBODY want to see a Captain America movie that tried to be “realistic” about World War 2? Picture “Saving Private Ryan,” and then picture a clown in red white and blue tights kicking Nazi butt at Omaha Beach, while all around him, AMerican G.I.s are getting decapitated and disemboweled.
Sounds ridiculous at best, sick at worst, right? Well, trying to do a “realistic” Batman is only slightly sillier. It MAY work brilliantly in comic books like the “Dark Knight” series. But when you see it in live action, the silliness of the concept is way too clear.
