Some people just don't know how to give up. While there's been a lot of talk about who is going to dawn the cawl in "Superman Vs. Batman", it's been rumored that Chaitin Bale has been offered up to 60 million dollars to reprise his role as the Caped Crusader. Up till now, Bale has remained pretty adamant that he will not be returning to play Batman, but at some point, if they keep throwing bigger amounts of money at him, he's going to cave.
It's undeniable that Christopher Nolan's interpretation of the "Dark Knight" has been one of the most successful comic-book adaptations ever. (Even if the final movie in his trilogy didn't hit the notes as well as its predecessor.) And I think much of that had to do with the fact that each of the movies were good-to-great films in their own right, not just because of the logo the main character wears on his chest. Christopher Nolan just knows how to make a good film.
One of the biggest complaints circulating the tubes about bringing Nolan's Batman into the JLA universe is Bale's Batman was in more of a "real world" setting than something as far out as Superman would exist in. But, I think the fanciful world Nolan created with Wanes far out tech, and the realism Zack Snyder injected into Daily City, makes the two an easier blend than most people think.
But, Batman Begins was released eight years ago. Isn't it time to let someone else step into the roll, and take the franchise into a new direction? For me, this is one of those nerd-questions that I can debate with myself on, and still come out perfectly torn. If I had to chose, I'd say Bale is the safer of the options: we've already established his back story, we accept Bale in the role, and it keeps an already established Bruce Wane story moving forward. And with the plan to do an older, more seasoned and possibly more jaded Dark Knight, not only do I think it won't "undo" the ending of The Dark Knight Rises, I think it could come across as a logical extension of the character.
On the other hand, TDK trilogy had a complete arc for the character. It also ended on a somewhat divisive finally, compared by some to Spiderman 3. And a fresh take might be nice, if not a little soon. It certainly will open up for this current generation of JLA characters to give Batman its own origin, which, considering the property, if they do decide to go with a reboot over a continuation, we will get a re-telling of the beginning years. And that brings up the discussion of putting the Bats most famous villain back on screen, the Joker. Be it too soon or not, if done right, it would be a pretty spectacular thing to see.
I could go on and on debating back an forth. If we have to see Batman rebooted, I'd like to have some space between them, but that's not the reality of the industry right now, and I'm kind of cool with that, too. It's fun to see what different artists envision for the character. But then again, Nolan is involved with this series, too, and it might feel like a retooling of the exact same picture, not just the broad strokes of the bare bones to the Batman mythos. And there I go again...
Cody Hobbs
Showing posts with label Batman. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Batman. Show all posts
Friday, August 16, 2013
Friday, August 9, 2013
Will the Marvel bubble ever pop?
In a recent interview with Wired Magazine, Marvel movie overlord Kevin Feige casually tossed out the idea that there are movies planned up to 2021. So of course, the internet has done its usual internet thing and completely crapped its pants. We have a pretty solid idea what the next couple of years will be filled with: "Thor: The Dark World" comes to us this November, and the Cap is stepping out next year in "Winter Soldier". And let's not forget the 2015 tent-pol mash up, "Avengers 2".
And all of these are movies that I'm excited to see. But with Marvel releasing two films a year like clockwork, I have to wonder, will this incarnation of the Marvel universe ever get old? I think that's a tough question to answer. People who are complaining about the "over saturation" of comic-book movies are getting a bigger spot light, but does that really mean that they accurately represent the movie-going public? As I've mentioned before, "Avengers", and more recently, "Iron Man 3" pulled people in droves, and early buzz for the next installment of the "Avengers", slated to be released two years from now, are giving no indication of anything slowing down.
On the other hand, "Iron Man 3" did get some softer reviews than its two predecessors, and "The Wolverine" may not become this summers next steaming box-office turd, but it didn't bring in the "buy your own private island" return that I'm sure its financial backers had hoped for. Maybe people really are just becoming worn out on this generations iteration of Marvel heroes, or comic-book movies in general.
While I definitely think this current trend of movies will pass, or at least go through some massive change-ups in the future, I think some of the Nostradamus-ing going on right now is forgetting to take the individual movies into consideration, in favor of being the one say that they were the ones who predicted the big crash. Shane Black, taking over the helm of Iron Man, made a different Iron Man movie than his predicessor Jon Favreau, and some of what he tried just didn't work out -- it wasn't that I was too tired of comic-book movies to enjoy it, it just wasn't as good of a movie.
I think the future of Marvel film universe is going to depend on its ability to keep making quality movies; ones that speak to its current generation of audience. When the studios stop allowing their films to grow and progress naturally with the times will mark the bursting of the current Marvel bubble we're currently caught in. The re-booting of the Spiderman franchise, and the new direction the X-men movies have taken with "First Class" and the upcoming "Days of Future Past" are good examples of how to keep things fresh.
And over at DC, allowing Nolan to focus on making good movies that just happen to include the caped crusader was the perfect formula. I think looking at trends can only tell us so much, and is more useful in telling us where we've been than where we're defiantly going. As for me, I'm more interested in seeing good movies, in whatever shape they may take.
Cody Hobbs
And all of these are movies that I'm excited to see. But with Marvel releasing two films a year like clockwork, I have to wonder, will this incarnation of the Marvel universe ever get old? I think that's a tough question to answer. People who are complaining about the "over saturation" of comic-book movies are getting a bigger spot light, but does that really mean that they accurately represent the movie-going public? As I've mentioned before, "Avengers", and more recently, "Iron Man 3" pulled people in droves, and early buzz for the next installment of the "Avengers", slated to be released two years from now, are giving no indication of anything slowing down.
On the other hand, "Iron Man 3" did get some softer reviews than its two predecessors, and "The Wolverine" may not become this summers next steaming box-office turd, but it didn't bring in the "buy your own private island" return that I'm sure its financial backers had hoped for. Maybe people really are just becoming worn out on this generations iteration of Marvel heroes, or comic-book movies in general.
While I definitely think this current trend of movies will pass, or at least go through some massive change-ups in the future, I think some of the Nostradamus-ing going on right now is forgetting to take the individual movies into consideration, in favor of being the one say that they were the ones who predicted the big crash. Shane Black, taking over the helm of Iron Man, made a different Iron Man movie than his predicessor Jon Favreau, and some of what he tried just didn't work out -- it wasn't that I was too tired of comic-book movies to enjoy it, it just wasn't as good of a movie.
I think the future of Marvel film universe is going to depend on its ability to keep making quality movies; ones that speak to its current generation of audience. When the studios stop allowing their films to grow and progress naturally with the times will mark the bursting of the current Marvel bubble we're currently caught in. The re-booting of the Spiderman franchise, and the new direction the X-men movies have taken with "First Class" and the upcoming "Days of Future Past" are good examples of how to keep things fresh.
And over at DC, allowing Nolan to focus on making good movies that just happen to include the caped crusader was the perfect formula. I think looking at trends can only tell us so much, and is more useful in telling us where we've been than where we're defiantly going. As for me, I'm more interested in seeing good movies, in whatever shape they may take.
Cody Hobbs
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)