DonnachaOne

If they could pull something like this off every year, I'm sure it would be great to see the Nolans tackle the Riddler, or Mr. Freeze, or whoever else. I'm sure their take on the familiar villains would be original and interesting.

But, the reality is that these films take years to put together, and Christopher Nolan is very involved and focused. He isn't off producing sixteen possible films and TV series, like many other filmmakers. He generally does one job and heads right into the next.

With that mindset, I can see how he is trying to keep it realistic. He has other stories he wants to tell and doesn't want to just give them to someone else to do. I can understand how, after working on Batman films on-and-off for nearly ten years, he'd want to move on to a different phase. Christian Bale, too; things are different since he took on the role. He has an Oscar now, and he's no longer defined by his child roles or Patrick Bateman, so it stands to reason that he'd want to flex his creative muscles without having to worry about being back in Bat-shape in time for another six-month shoot.

I hope The Dark Knight Rises is good, and presents a satisfying end to the story the Nolans want to tell. Given their collaborative history and my personal satisfaction in their work, I feel it's almost a certainty. Would I say no to a fourth? Not at all. But, I'd worry if the artists involved would have their heart in it anymore, and if the work might suffer.

So for me, omitting well-known villains from the world they've created for me does not present wasted or missed opportunities. I'm happy that the Nolans and Bale had the opportunity at all, and they've made some cracking entertainment with what they chose to use. Batman is an incredibly versatile character, and I'll be happy to check out what the next filmmaker does with him.

kgrogers1979

I am hoping for a DC cinematic universe like what Marvel is doing that culminates in the Justice League.

Solid Snake

as long as they set it up right. Makes ya wonder if Snyder's Supes or GL would be included into that.

Since they're NOT continuing w/ Nolan's Batman to work into a JL movie. I'd hope that the newer Batman just starts off doing his thing. Making you feel that this character has his history and it is what it is, aka no more origin. Letting the director and the production itself not isolate itself from getting a bit wilder. Granted..that takes interesting writing and direction.

E Unit

Hokeyboy

Love!

kgrogers1979

The Man of Steel movie would be a great way to start it. They could set up Batman as already being established in a post-credit sequence where he comes to Metropolis to investigate Superman and they have their first encounter.

Heck, Hal should go investigate as well since its his job as an intergalactic police officer to investigate possible alien threats.

argh923

Has this been confirmed??

georgec

Man, don't take this the wrong way, but you are dense and lack some basic reasoning skills.

He fakes his death so that Gotham thinks Batman sacrificed himself to protect the city. Batman's reputation is redeemed, and the city unites over this final act.

Anybody could figure that out.

Solid Snake

*looking at the argument* Are you guys arguing how it may end? Alright...

RocShemp

Well Snyder did have the Nolan/Goyer treatment of The Man of Steel rewritten. Hopefully he ditched Nolan's insistance that Superman be the only superhero in the world. Then we can have the possibility of a JL movie.

No. It's confirmed to take place 8 years later. Minor detail, I know, but you did ask if there was confirmation.

kgrogers1979

http://www.empireonline.com/news/story.asp?NID=32527

Nolan says in that link, "our story picks up quite a bit later, eight years after The Dark Knight. So he's an older Bruce Wayne; he's not in a great state."

So I was off by two years, but yeah its an older Bruce.




I shouldn't take it the wrong way even though you have made insulting comments in every one of your replies.

Are you talking about Batman's reputation at the end of TDK? Its eight years later. You don't think he would have already been redeemed in that length of time? I very seriously doubt the police and/or FBI would have kept letting him operate in Gotham that long if he hadn't redeemed himself. We might get a flashback sequence showing how it happened, but I bet Batman is well within the good graces of Gotham at the beginning of Rises.

bluetoast

That pic looks like it's from a video game, but it's a nice action pose.

kgrogers1979

It ends with

argh923

Wow...I had no idea it was so far after TDK. Interesting. Are Michael Caine/Morgan Freeman confirmed to return?

Solid Snake

Yes. They have returned...to film...last year.

RocShemp

A true fan wouldn't have made that mistake.

I disagree. I think Batman will have been working without police aid (aside from Gordon) during that span of 8 years. His saving the city from the likes of Bane and the League of Shadows would be his "rise". If anything, given some comments from Nolan and company about how this film echoes the first, I'm expecting an extended period of time where we barely see Batman in action (since he'd likely be trying to stay incognito).

Nick Martin

Tell me about it. He takes that shit far too seriously and it's just insulting to everyone.

Hokeyboy

It's getting ugly in here. I can't imagine comics fans on the Internet ever getting this hot and bothered.

Nick Martin

The thing is, if people could leave their elitist attitudes about these things out of discussions, it wouldn't get ugly.

Besides, they fixed Bane's voice so we can't even bitch about that!

RocShemp

Seriously? I hadn't heard and assumed people were still bitching about that.

Paul_SD

I could have sworn I read comments (possibly from Nolan) that Batman is supposed to have essentially packed it in post Dent's death. He took the blame for it and then hung up the cowl -until the events in this film compel him to re-emerge.

I felt (and still feel) the whole "I have to take the blame for Harvey's actions so the people can still look to him as a source of inspiration" was just a bit insipid- but to have that actually mean anything, it would seem to me that the new film would have to show that things played out in just that way- that the people were inspired and motivated to get more of handle on corruption/law and order/etc and thus were able to get along without a Batman around to do the heavy lifting.

If Batman were still plying his trade the last 8 years, then that sacrifice he made would have meant nothing- worse it would have meant that he was stupid enough to make his job that much harder- for no real good reason.

kgrogers1979

The only problem with that is Nolan is trying to make his Batverse so realistic and a vigilante operating without police cooperation just doesn't work there. The FBI would have definitely arrested him in that eight year span if he was not in their good graces.


You should have seen the shitstorm that DC's relaunch caused last year.


It's already been confirmed that Bruce built the sometime during that eight year span, which will finally be in Rises, and so he must have still been active as Batman.

Paul_SD

Didn't want to rehash this- but this is the big problem for me with Nolans films and his wanting to have his cake (putting these characters into a realistic, recognizable environment) and eating it too (not having to address the ultimate hierarchy of law enforcement- i.e. state and federal divisions which would surely have been interested in a vigilante that drives tanks through the city, but also flouts international laws, destroys public and private property, detonates ordnance within city limits with indifference, no accountability, and no legal permission AND who appears to have assassinated a high profile member of the criminal justice community)
Not to mention they would have also have had the resources to easily profile this character, identify and incarcerate him, and generally make Wayne's life a living hell as a result.
And any truly nefarious bad guy would have been well connected enough to have been pulling the strings to make that happen.

You open up a huge can of worms when you try to make this stuff 'realistic' and down to earth. Fortunately Nolan's movies have had a lot of fans who see them as brilliant and flawless and apparently don't expend too much effort actually thinking about the implications of the events they are watching.

kefrank

I've always found the claims of "realism" in Nolan's Batman movies by both critics and fans to be absurd. They're slightly more grounded and less stylized than your average comic book movie, but they clearly take place in a heightened reality that requires significant suspension of disbelief.

Sure, maybe Nolan-fanboys are all unthinking dolts who stay blinded to the myriad flaws in his films. Or maybe you're an over-analytical killjoy whose inability to suspend disbelief makes you find flaws where there aren't any. Or maybe the real answer is somewhere in the middle.

stingermck

To me the Nolan films are not grounded in reality. They are just taken more seriously than previous attempts.