Shared publicly  - 
 
New article about the future of Batman movies, from me today at Forbes...
4
1
norkhairi misdi's profile photoAdrian Martin's profile photo
 
I like this article, Mark!  People need to let go of Nolan's Batman; I know it's going to be hard to do because of their pure genius.  With the state of studios needing to suck in money every chance they get, I'm sure we won't get the chance to allow Nolan's films to sit in the cultural consciousness for more than a couple of years before we have another director's take thrust down our throats.  They should let Nolan's Batman trilogy, as a standalone film set, sit for a good 5-10 years before going back to this franchise.  I also don't think they should use any of Nolan's cast in a new film--it'll only confuse and piss people off.  Use "Justice League" to reestablish Bruce Wayne; he could easily be given the "reboot" approach through quick-burst flashbacks (NOT using Nolan footage) to bring new fans up to speed.  It could work.  I had no problem seeing Maggie Gyllenhaal as Rachel Dawes--she was better than Katie Holmes anyway.  If they don't do things such as the aforementioned, we'll see this pattern continue: Director reboots, makes good (or bad) film(s), people can't let go, reboot needed to pacify.  Look at Spiderman...was "The Amazing Spiderman" really necessary this quickly?  It's not to say the film was bad, but was it truly needed at this quick of a point?  It's almost like all of Sam Raimi's work is being forgotten...  It's obvious that back in 2005 ("Batman Begins") there was no thought of a "Justice League" or else Warner Bros would've impressed it upon Christopher Nolan to leave plot cues in each film for it.  Because of this lack of pressure, Nolan was able to make a believable series that has become one of the most critically acclaimed trilogies ever.
Add a comment...