DC Comics Cinematic Universe

[Sam892]

I take it you don't read the comics and and watch cartoons. Several people were Batman other than Bruce Wayne. Jean Paul Valley, Dick Grayson, Terry McGinnis, and even Superman were Batman at one point or another. Battle for the Cowl and Knightfall are fine examples of this as well. Batman was created as an incorruptable symbol that will always be long lasting, and this was established before Nolan even made Batman Begins. Even with the "death" of Batman in TDKR, he will always remain a symbol and everlasting in Gotham as shown in the ending of TDK and TDKR and beginning of TDKR. That was the point. It was more than just a guy putting on a bat costume.

Again, comics.

Again, comics.

And comics.

Blake isn't Batman. He's Robin, and a combo of all 3. Nightwing and Robin wwere able to look after Gotham when Batman was away in the comics and cartoons and even video games.

The difference between the Shumacher movies and the Nolan movies is that B&R completely killed WB and the Batman franchise with fault going to both Warner Bros and Shumacher. Nolan however brought back that franchise and helped WB. If it wasn't for Nolan, we'd wouldn't even have Man of Steel and the thoughts of a JL movie.

-Omi

I do read the comics, but it to me Batman isn't batman without Bruce Wayne. Clearly others feel the same since no matter who becomes Batman (Dick Grayson, Jean Paul Valley, ect) Bruce Wayne is usually Batman again in a year or so. Apart from Terry who is slightly different with the fact the Bruce is in his 80s. In all of those stories ( granted I haven't read the one where Supes becomes batman and excluding Terry) Bruce doesn't willinglygive up being Batman but instead is unable to continue being Batman. When Bruce's back Heals he's Batman again, when Bruce returns after being sent back in time he's batman again. He doesn't willingly hand over the mantel it's taken for him because he's dead, crippled or old. In TDKR batman isn't any of those he just wants a normal life, which isn't the Bruce Wayne I've grown up with or read about. The only time Beuce willingly gives the mantel over us withTerry and even then Bruce still trains Terry, and acts as his Alfred. In a way it's still his Personal fight, but he's using Terry to fight.

If Bats had died at the end of the film I would be fine, but he didn't he willing have up his mission.

[Omicron]

.

If Bats had died at the end of the film I would be fine, but he didn't he willing have up his mission.

No he didn't. He said it very clear that Batman was just a symbol and a mask in Batman Begins and TDK. TDKR is reiterating that with the passing to Blake to keep it going.

And in Batman Beyond, he did willingly give up being Batman. Before Terry even arrived.

And just remembered, even though it wasn't as great, he also gave up being Batman in Batman Forever. And I quote "Batman is no more." :P

-Omi

Edited July 22, 2013 by Omicron

[Sam892]

No he didn't. He said it very clear that Batman was just a symbol and a mask in Batman Begins and TDK. TDKR is reiterating that with the passing to Blake to keep it going.

And in Batman Beyond, he did willingly give up being Batman. Before Terry even arrived.

-Omi

But there was still no real need for Bruce the Mantle on. I get that the Premise of the Trilogy was that Batman can be anyone, but there was no need at the end of the film for Bruce to retire.

The only reasons I can see are the following:

Nolan wanted to end the series

Reiterate that Batman is a symbol

Give Bruce Wayne a happy ending

But I still can't see Bruce after everything he's been through passing the mantle on because he found love again. There was no physical reason for Bruce to retire, he fixed his leg at the beginning and his Back had fixed as well. At his age he could have carried on for a few more years at least. He didn't die, and the only reason he left was because he found love.

Maybe he felt that after Rachel had died he couldn't love someone and be Batman. But that wasn't stated in the TDKR. It was stated in TDK that Bruce was under the impression that when he stopped being Batman he could be with Rachel, but Rachel died.

It just felt forced at the end, as If Nolan said we need to show Batman's a Symbol, but I didn't see a real reason as to why he would pass it on.

Also I feel that I may have not been clear in my original comment. I don't dislike TDKR but its near the bottom of the list of Bat movies in my opinion.

My ranking is:

The dark Knight

Batman Begins

1989 Batman

Batman returns

The Dark Knight Rises

Batman Forever

Batman and Robin

Overall the movie is ok but I just think its the weakest of the Nolan trilogy. I could see watching that film that Nolan didn't want to do another Batman film afterwards.

[Omicron]

The only reasons I can see are the following:

Nolan wanted to end the series

That's a no brainer. Nolan didn't even want to make Dark Knight but did so anyways because we wanted a sequel and he wanted a story. And then when we called for a trilogy, Nolan again said no because he wants a story to work and he doesn't like making a series of films. The TDK trilogy is the only time we actually see Nolan make a series. He made a story that has an ending.

As the meme goes, you either die a trilogy or you live long enough to see yourself become Batman & Robin.

But I still can't see Bruce after everything he's been through passing the mantle on because he found love again.

It wasn't just love. It was life. He was moving on without something holding him back, and it was Batman. Alfred made mention of that.

There was no physical reason for Bruce to retire, he fixed his leg at the beginning and his Back had fixed as well.

He didn't fix his leg at all actually. He had a temporary brace, which I'm pretty sure Bane had removed to add on to his torture in the prison. His back also could not be completely mended, considering it was broken pretty long by the time he was transported to the prison and during his stay (which could have been weeks to months before being fixed since there is a time lapse). And the couple times he fell from climbing with the rope tugging really hard on his back after being "fixed" is not good on the back.

But hey I'm not cracking down on your opinion. Comic fans love comics and movies for various reasons. :P

-Omi

Edited July 22, 2013 by Omicron

[Sam892]

That's a no brainer. Nolan didn't even want to make Dark Knight but did so anyways because we wanted a sequel and he wanted a story. And then when we called for a trilogy, Nolan again said no because he wants a story to work and he doesn't like making a series of films. The TDK trilogy is the only time we actually see Nolan make a series. He made a story that has an ending.

As the meme goes, you either die a trilogy or you live long enough to see yourself become Batman & Robin.

It was just love. It was life. He was moving on without something holding him back, and it was Batman. Alfred made mention of that.

He didn't fix his leg at all actually. He had a temporary brace, which I'm pretty sure Bane had removed to add on to his torture in the prison. His back also could not be completely mended, considering it was broken pretty long by the time he was transported to the prison and during his stay (which could have been weeks to months before being fixed since there is a time lapse). And the couple times he fell from climbing with the rope tugging really hard on his back after being "fixed" is not good on the back.

But hey I'm not cracking down on your opinion. Comic fans love comics and movies for various reasons. :P

-Omi

Ye ok I can see you points, I didn't realise that he was still physically damaged by the end of the film. Overall the films good, but not one of my favourites.

I'm hoping DC decide to take a chance and make an Aquaman film. He's pretty underrated and he could easily be the DC equivalent of Thor. There's only one way to change the perception that he's useless and that's to make a film where he isn't. He's pretty badass in the new 52.

[Spider-Man]

I would be curious to see how they would do an Aquaman film. I'm sure there would be a whole lot of CGI involved, but I would still like to see a Black Manta fight scene as long as it wasn't like the end fight scene of MoS...

[Omicron]

but I would still like to see a Black Manta fight scene as long as it wasn't like the end fight scene of MoS...

Black Manta would throw Aquaman out of the water as he crash lands onto a barge with Wayne Enterprises shipping crates.

Since apparently that will be the running gag. :P

-Omi

[Spider-Man]

Black Manta would throw Aquaman out of the water as he crash lands onto a barge with Wayne Enterprises shipping crates.

Since apparently that will be the running gag. :P

-Omi

And then go enjoy a fine meal at his local I-Hop

[Im a brickmaster.]

And then go enjoy a fine meal at his local I-Hop

I know Im missing something here, hang on, don't tell me....... Anyhow TDKR was an Awsome movie! Nolan is a good story teller. Although HISHE makes some good points too.....

[The_Chosen_1]

^ It was a tongue-in-cheek reference to some of the ridiculously blatant product placements in Man of Steel.

Edited July 24, 2013 by The_Chosen_1

[Omicron]

^ It was a tongue-in-cheek reference to some of the ridiculously blatant product placements in Man of Steel.

In all fairness, IHop and Sears are literally the only things out there in Kansas to destroy. :P

-Omi

[Faefrost]

^ It was a tongue-in-cheek reference to some of the ridiculously blatant product placements in Man of Steel.

On a related side note, am I the only one that has ever wondered about the number of companies that fall over themselves pouring product placement money into movies, in order to show their businesses and name brands being blown up, destroyed, leveled, attacked by serial killers, or subjected to song and dance numbers by disturbingly creepy aliens?

I mean really, what was the decision path that led Sears and IHop to give WB money? I'm guessing "a safe place to shop" was not the intended message?

[Omicron]

I mean really, what was the decision path that led Sears and IHop to give WB money?

I think it could partly be that they are becoming a dying breed and could use something to boost. I know Sears hasn't been doing very well in the past couple years.

-Omi

[The_Chosen_1]

Yep, it's all about generating brand awareness. At the end of the day, if an audience walks out of a theater remembering that IHOP showed up in the film, it'll be much more effective than certain other methods of advertising. Soliciting sponsorship has also become a critical method for large-budget films to supplement their budgets.

[BrickG]

I actually like Batman Beyond more than normal Batman :P. It's got old retired Batman PLUS a new one that ain't half bad.

As for the product placement. It wasn't as bad as Star Trek 2009's car scene. And I didn't actually notice. I have no problem with product placement that is realistic (like ihop being in a town :P) as long as it's not IN YOUR FACE obvious which I don't feel it was in Man of Steel (otherwise I'd have noticed).

[Vindicare]

But I still can't see Bruce after everything he's been through passing the mantle on because HE FOUND LOVE again. There was NO PHYSICAL REASON for Bruce to retire, he fixed his leg at the beginning and his Back had fixed as well. At his age he could have carried on for a few more years at least. He didn't die, and the only reason he left was because he found love.

*capped parts are because I'm on an iPad and can't remember how to bold text*

You do remember Catwoman in that black leather, right? Right?!

[Sam892]

*capped parts are because I'm on an iPad and can't remember how to bold text*

You do remember Catwoman in that black leather, right? Right?!

Haha ye I certainly remember that.

[Darth Lurtz]

Ben Affleck is the new Batman:

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/08/23/ben-affleck-to-play-batman-in-man-of-steel-sequel?abthid=5216c10931f11b410400000f

[Leo604]

Ben Affleck is the new Batman:

http://www.ign.com/articles/2013/08/23/ben-affleck-to-play-batman-in-man-of-steel-sequel?abthid=5216c10931f11b410400000f

I'm honestly not sure how I feel about it, but the only Affleck movies I've seen him in are Armageddon, Pearl Harbor, and The Town so I dunno what his other movies are like: Argo, for instance.

[The Penguin]

Interesting.

I can't say that I've seen many films with Affleck, but he seems to be a good actor to play Bats. He has mature, yet attractive looks and he seems to be quite fit.

Good day, ladies and gentlemen! )

[Mr Man]

Ben Affleck is the new Batman:

http://www.ign.com/a...1f11b410400000f

Well he was dull in Daredevil, but I'll wait and see, I'm still not convinced about the premise of the B vs S film in the first place.

[RaincloudDustbin]

Ugh. Affect should be banned from playing superheroes. He was good in Argo though.

[strangely]

I'm actually okay with this casting despite how awful Daredevil was. I don't think he's quite right for Batman, but I imagine he'll be a good Bruce Wayne. Plus after Val Kilmer and George Clooney I honestly feel like nobody could be worse than them.

I'm really hoping they make Batman's suit closer to the comics. I'm tired of this all black armor thing Batman's been sporting since 89. How hard is it to have a good mix between gray and black. I'm also hoping we get something close in plot to World's Finest from the animated series (So Joker and Lex Luther as villains, with sidekicks Harley Quinn and Mercy Graves).

[Ceroknight]

I don't know much about Afleck to judge how well he will be as Batman, but I'm sure the cast was made for a reason!

[FinalFeature]

Grant Gustin has been casted as Flash on season 2 of Arrow!