Potenially awful news

[Guest SP-1]

Weren't there two seperate Bats movies in the works?

 

A scarecrow movie and a year one movie. Aronofsky was set to direct Year One I believe. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

That would be correct.

 

Though both projects have been going so slow that I haven't seen very much news at all. Year One may be dead by now.

[Guest TheZsaszHorsemen]

Weren't there two seperate Bats movies in the works?

 

A scarecrow movie and a year one movie. Aronofsky was set to direct Year One I believe. Someone please correct me if I'm wrong.

That would be correct.

 

Though both projects have been going so slow that I haven't seen very much news at all. Year One may be dead by now.

Year One is dead. The attachment of Nolan and Goyer is recent, so I'd say "Batman 5" is slowly exiting Development Hell.

[Guest TheZsaszHorsemen]

I thought Peters was only connect to Superman movie (which will never get made as long he's onboard; if it does it'll probably suck). Did he somehow get stroke back into the Batman franchise?

 

I've seen some people on other forums bring up the whole Keaton outcry in the '80s, but at least Keaton had talent.

Peters was involved in the 1989 Batman movie. It was his only remotely successful venture into Comic Book film and he's still using it as an excuse. He made 3 KEY decisions.

 

1. Jon Peters decided that all the one-sheet posters for the film should be JUST the Bat-Symbol against a black background. It was inspired.

 

2. Peters decided that Batman should have a love interest. STUPID.

 

3. Peters was the only guy who agreed with Burton that Keaton could do Batman. Looking back it was a BRILLIANT choice.

 

 

Since then he's been a huge fuck-up, but I can't fault two of those choices.

[Guest newblood03]

Michael Keaton was the perfect Batman and should be Batman if he wasnt too old

[Guest Agent of Oblivion]

Another Darren Aronofsky movie fizzling before it could begin? SHOCK AND AWE.

 

I swear, this guy HAS to make another movie. Pi and Requiem aren't enough. besides, good shit comes in threes.

[Guest TonyJaymzV1]

I could see Kutcher in Year One, as a young, just learning Batman.

 

Guy Pierce would be perfect as Batman, but I agree w/ Nolan about getting an unknown. In The Hulk, I never once said "Oh thats that HUGE celeb..as a scientist?", I truly belived Bana was Banner. BTW Ange Lee is a great director...just saying.

 

I think all movies should have storys that come directly from the comics. I'm all for creative direction, but take the main storylines from the comics. I still say a batman movie should be made like the Knightfall storyline. It could be a damn good trilogy: Movie 1 has the basic layout planned, with Bane letting out the inmates at Arkam out, which eats away at Batman until finally they have the final abttle, where Bane wins? Movie 2 would be have the emergence of Robin and Nightwing as major players, and have the new metalic Batman showup, have the big battle with Bane, and beats him. We are led to belive that a new force of good is in town, and that now Bruce Wayne can leave the Batgame, and finally live a life as his own, without the responisblity of the city on his shoulders. Then, in moive 3, we see that the new Batman has issues, and is violating the Bat Creedo: He kills. Robin and Nightwing try, but theres only one man who bring down the psychotic Bat: The Original Batman. We find Bruce leaving his now relaxed life, get back in the game, final battle, and Batman wins. He knows now that he can't ever leave the city, his city, on the shoulders of others. It's his curse/blessing to bear.

 

Now, I know that theres flaws and whatnot, but as a basic outline of three good movies, I think its pretty good. The movie execs need to stop the "Villain enters, Villain messes with good guy, Good guy kills villain" sketch. Batman doesn't kill. He wouldn't even kill the bad batman. You could even make the bad batman a tragic hero, have him find himself, and tada, you have a new superhero movie on your hand, guranteed to make money because it already has a history in people's heads.

 

But I digress.

[Guest El Satanico]

Another Darren Aronofsky movie fizzling before it could begin? SHOCK AND AWE.

 

I swear, this guy HAS to make another movie. Pi and Requiem aren't enough. besides, good shit comes in threes.

A haunted submarine movie he WROTE called Below is on DVD. It only received a Limited release, but It has an interesting plot, so I'm planning on checking it out.

[Guest Smell the ratings!!!]

I'd just like to see a movie where the bad guy wins. Last one I can remember is that Star Wars where Luck Cocknocker get's his hand cut off.

[Guest Lethargic]

1. Aronofsky/Miller and WB could never come to agreement on the Year One script after several drafts. The official word on it is "stalled". It could still be made down the line after Nolan's movie but with them eyeing such a young actor for the role it would seem un-necassary to do two young Batman movies. But they are still attached to Year One, the movie has not been cancelled or shelved and there ARE plans to turn in another draft later on. But if the script Nolan and Goyer turn in turns out to be a origin/restart, Year One would then probably really be killed.

 

2. Nolan's movie is NOT the Frightening and nobody has any idea if the villain will be the Scarecrow or not yet. I don't know why fanboys keep this stupid Frightening script alive. That script was NEVER REAL. It was a fan script that got popular on the internet and got pushed by years of rumors, jokes and lies and it ended up becoming the "real" script for Batman 5. It is NOT the script and never was. People even took that script, took off the real writer's names and replaced them with some "name" writers and sent it to places like AICN and the like who fell for it for about 5 seconds until finding out the truth. It DID get attention at the studio due to the crazy response to it but it was never seriously considered and it is NOT what Nolan is making because why would a studio use a fan script that has been online for 5 years and read by every single fan already? The new movie is a totally original story written by Nolan himself with the screenplay by David Goyer. The plot to this treatment has not been leaked anywhere yet though it does seem to be a restart and not a sequel, but it has NOTHING.....NOTHING to do with the Frightening. Could it be a Scarecrow story? Maybe. But NOT the Frightening and I'm sick of hearing about it.

 

3. I'll believe Ashton has the role when the studio or Nolan says it. This Ashton story broke about 3 weeks ago on CHUD.com, hell, I even had it in MY news column on TSM back then, I don't know why the rest of the net took nearly a month to finally catch up with it. The thing is, just this past Monday, Pearce himself said that he was talking to Nolan about the role. So it makes me wonder, if Ashton really has this role so locked up, why would Nolan and Peace still be in talks only 5 days ago when Ashton tried to say he had it locked up weeks ago? I also go by the rule of "If E Online reports it, it's best to ignore it."

[Guest NaturalBornThriller4:20]

Hey, I like Ashton Kutcher. Sue me.

 

All of a sudden he's:

 

- Signed on to 500 Movies

 

- Hanging with P. Diddy ( Parties, Award Shows, etc )

 

- Banging Demi Moore

 

- Banging Demi Moore

 

- Banging Demi Moore

[Guest El Satanico]

1.) fuck P Diddy

2.) Demi isn't that big of a deal anymore. She's a single middle aged woman, so I'm sure any young decent looking "famous" guy would have a shot with her.

 

3.) Liking Ashton is one thing, but supporting Ashton as Batman is a completely different thing. So please don't add them together.

[Guest Lil Naitch]

Ashton has the build to play Scarecrow.  Whether he can play a serious role is yet to be determined, though.

Isn't Scarecrow pretty easy to cast? Get a Skinny guy who can take bumps...

Spike Dudley?

[Guest redbaron51]

Michael Keaton was the perfect Batman and should be Batman if he wasnt too old

yes, Bring back Michael Keaton

[Guest El Satanico]

The reason Keaton's the best movie Batman isn't because he was so great, but because of the others being so horrible. When being compared to Val and Clooney it's not very hard to be the best movie Batman.

 

 

Bruce Campbell should be Batman. The man was made to play a superhero...just look at his jaw line.

[Guest TheZsaszHorsemen]

The reason Keaton's the best movie Batman isn't because he was so great, but because of the others being so horrible. When being compared to Val and Clooney it's not very hard to be the best movie Batman.

 

 

Bruce Campbell should be Batman. The man was made to play a superhero...just look at his jaw line.

Yes, because Bruce Campbell could bring the pathos for Batman.

 

 

Batman is more angst then anything else. Campbell is HORRIBLE for the role.

[Guest El Psycho Diablo]

AGH.

 

Bruce Campbell crops up again..I swear, the internet has the biggest hard-on for the guy I've ever seen. If they ever -did- put him starring in something other than a bad B movie, I think people's heads would explode.

[Guest El Satanico]

Yes...I'd be happy with Bruce Campbell cast in any role regardless of the movie or character.

 

Any role you can name I would've rather seen Bruce Campbell cast in it. So ha ha haaa

[Guest JMA]

If this movie follows the continuity of the first four films I will not be going to see it. There hasn't to this date been a good live-action Batman movie.

[LaParkaYourCar 0]

The reason Keaton's the best movie Batman isn't because he was so great, but because of the others being so horrible. When being compared to Val and Clooney it's not very hard to be the best movie Batman.

 

 

Bruce Campbell should be Batman. The man was made to play a superhero...just look at his jaw line.

I disagree. I heard a lot of praise for Keaton's Batman before he was even replaced with someone else. It wasn't in retrospect or even in contrast.

 

Keaton did a good job.

[Guest El Satanico]

I didn't say that he's the best Batman in retrospect. Just that it's easy to be the best Batman when you're the only good Batman to date.

 

It's not like Keaton gave an amazing performance that completely blew everybody away and salted the earth around the character of Batman making it impossible for others to play him.

[Guest El Satanico]

I didn't say that he's the best Batman in retrospect. Just that it's easy to be the best Batman when you're the only good Batman to date.

 

It's not like Keaton gave an amazing performance that completely blew everybody away and salted the earth around the character of Batman making it impossible for others to play him.

[LaParkaYourCar 0]

I know. He didn't do that awesome, but it sounded like you were saying he only looked good compared to the others.

 

But I see what your saying now.

[Guest IDrinkRatsMilk]

I'll tell you who'd be a good Batman... Stephen Dorff. Lift some weights maybe, but he's got an alright look for it and can act well enough.

[Guest El Satanico]

I know. He didn't do that awesome, but it sounded like you were saying he only looked good compared to the others.

 

But I see what your saying now.

Yeah there's no doubt that Keaton is the best Batman to date. So I'd never try denying that.

[Guest JMA]

Kevin Conroy > Keaton, Kilmer, Clooney

Mask of the Phantasm > All the live-action movies

 

They need to drop continuity and start anew.

[LivingLegendGaryColeman 0]

I really want to see Guy Pierce be Batman. It just seems right. He's been solid in everything I've seen with him, he is a name, but not a big enough name to overshadow the project. He generates a little interest in the fact people will say "Who is Batman?" and rather than "Some no-name schmuck" (not saying I agree, speaking general public here), they may say "Guy Pierce, the guy from <insert favorite Guy Pierce movie here>". That way it's got a slight name, but not a name that would overshadow it. I am not completely against Ashton Kuchner getting it, as I think it would be interesting and I like to see actor's trying a range, but I think that would downplay the bat movie with "Batman is the guy who lost his car" or "gets stoned with the foreign guy and the other hippies" or some other reference to something like "Just Married". Now, if this takes a while, Ashton gives some serious stuff and proves himself as being credible besides a stoner, I'm all for it, the name value, if proven in the genre, can get money. As of now, Guy Pierce sounds best. Not "huge" name value, but just enough to get a few, credible and fitting for the part.

[Guest Lethargic]

I'd still much rather see Pearce play the Joker than Batman.

[Guest Kid Kablam]

Ashton Kutcher...Good for Sitcoms and Hidden Camera shows and Hollywood Social Functions...

 

BAD BAD BAD for Batman...

 

Just get some Big Strong Guy who can act...And I dont mean Vin Diesel...

 

You dont need a "NAME" to play Batman...

 

Look at McGwire and Spiderman...

Toby maguire was a name though He had garnered a reputation in "Cider House Rules" and "Wonder Boys" and I'm pretty sure his name had leaked to even the cretins.

[Guest Kid Kablam]

1. Aronofsky/Miller and WB could never come to agreement on the Year One script after several drafts. The official word on it is "stalled". It could still be made down the line after Nolan's movie but with them eyeing such a young actor for the role it would seem un-necassary to do two young Batman movies. But they are still attached to Year One, the movie has not been cancelled or shelved and there ARE plans to turn in another draft later on. But if the script Nolan and Goyer turn in turns out to be a origin/restart, Year One would then probably really be killed.

 

2. Nolan's movie is NOT the Frightening and nobody has any idea if the villain will be the Scarecrow or not yet. I don't know why fanboys keep this stupid Frightening script alive. That script was NEVER REAL. It was a fan script that got popular on the internet and got pushed by years of rumors, jokes and lies and it ended up becoming the "real" script for Batman 5. It is NOT the script and never was. People even took that script, took off the real writer's names and replaced them with some "name" writers and sent it to places like AICN and the like who fell for it for about 5 seconds until finding out the truth. It DID get attention at the studio due to the crazy response to it but it was never seriously considered and it is NOT what Nolan is making because why would a studio use a fan script that has been online for 5 years and read by every single fan already? The new movie is a totally original story written by Nolan himself with the screenplay by David Goyer. The plot to this treatment has not been leaked anywhere yet though it does seem to be a restart and not a sequel, but it has NOTHING.....NOTHING to do with the Frightening. Could it be a Scarecrow story? Maybe. But NOT the Frightening and I'm sick of hearing about it.

 

3. I'll believe Ashton has the role when the studio or Nolan says it. This Ashton story broke about 3 weeks ago on CHUD.com, hell, I even had it in MY news column on TSM back then, I don't know why the rest of the net took nearly a month to finally catch up with it. The thing is, just this past Monday, Pearce himself said that he was talking to Nolan about the role. So it makes me wonder, if Ashton really has this role so locked up, why would Nolan and Peace still be in talks only 5 days ago when Ashton tried to say he had it locked up weeks ago? I also go by the rule of "If E Online reports it, it's best to ignore it."

Didn't george clooney write a treatment for a Batman movie that involved the Scarecrow?

[Guest Smell the ratings!!!]

This is probably just me, but I would go for William Dafoe as Joker.