Report: Superman/Batman Movie Planned

Become a member of the CGSociety

Connect, Share, and Learn with our Large Growing CG Art Community. It's Free!

REPLY TO THREAD
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  08 August 2013
Originally Posted by cookepuss: At worst, which is where I feel it belongs, it was a steaming pile. Bane was terribly written, poorly acted, & just badly translated for the big screen. Catwoman just sat there. Her plot just lay there like week old lasagna. The whole 2nd act sagged and dragged everything down. The final villain related plot twist felt tacked on. Batman's characterization was terrible. Making him a whiny recluse was an insult to fans. The fight choreography? Watch how some moves never hit, but the actors react anyway. Awful. Some movies get better on repeat viewings. TDKR? Not so much.

The Nolanverse always bugged me anyway. In an attempt to create a sense of reality and ground the movie, he boxed it in.


I agree with you about the last Nolan movie. It just wasn't any good. Second one was okay, the first one I probably liked better but what's her face...Katie Holmes...was horrible.
Even that whole love situation between them was horrible.
With Batman yelling at her while she's in the Battank mobile. Dude, you're Batman...and you're yelling at her to stay calm?! Why was she just accepting everything? I don't know.

My main point was going off of your comments about the movies not really showing Batman for who he was. Bruce Wayne is a man of extreme talents. The dude pushed himself to be the best and more verse martial artist. He learned tons of skills that are useful to solving crimes among other various things.
The latest games are the only things besides that comics that really show what Batman is all about.

Originally Posted by JoeyP88: The Batman persona is an act, a tool effectively used to strike fear into the heart of a class of people whom fear very little, and more importantly lack any fear for the justice system and what it might do to them if they commit a crime. But take an irrational symbol of a creature that was once used as inspiration for the vampire , learn how to disappear into the shadows and appear at will like ghost, and now you have tool that even the most street hardened criminal will learn to fear.

No, Batman is not crazy, nor is he unhinged, but he would sure like for all criminals he comes in contact with to think he is.


Here's something that I remember reading, Bruce Wayne is Batman's secret identity, not the other way around. Bruce considers himself, at his core, Batman. Not the billionaire playboy.
If the Mad Hatter was to ask Batman what his real name is, Batman would always say, "Batman."
Bruce Wayne, for how smart he is, does not hold any educational degrees. He PLAYS the part of Bruce Wayne...he is Batman.

So in this case, I don't see Ben Affleck being able to play the character. Just give it to someone else and save some money on a lesser known actor.

Last edited by rhinton : 08 August 2013 at 12:38 AM.
 
  08 August 2013
I find it werd that people will discount Affleck as an actor without seeing the slightest hint of a performance from him. How do people know he cant do this type of character if he's never needed to before in his career?
I actually think if you watch Argo that he had a pretty convincing performance when he had the moral dilemma of going forward or going back (i wont say more than that coz i dont want to risk spoilers in an unrelated film thread, but if you've seen it, you know what i mean..). I'll give him a chance before discounting him out of hand as so many did for Heath Ledger. People said you couldn't beat Jack Nicholson as Joker, and I think he actually proved that wrong despite people writing him off before he'd even started the role.

I'm FAR more worried about how they actually make a decent film out of Batman and Superman together... Even on their own, it's not easy (particularly Superman), but together i think it could end up a total mess... Again, i'll wait to see something to decide, but i'm way more skeptical about the film premise that I am about any of the leading actors!
__________________
__________

Nick Marshall
Head of Environments / Generalists
Double Negative :: Vancouver
www.dneg.com
 
  08 August 2013
OMG.
Here too?
Is there no place in the internet safe from the Batfleck imbroglio? ^_^
__________________
My Deviations
 
  08 August 2013
Originally Posted by nickmarshallvfx: I find it werd that people will discount Affleck as an actor without seeing the slightest hint of a performance from him. How do people know he cant do this type of character if he's never needed to before in his career?
I actually think if you watch Argo that he had a pretty convincing performance when he had the moral dilemma of going forward or going back (i wont say more than that coz i dont want to risk spoilers in an unrelated film thread, but if you've seen it, you know what i mean..). I'll give him a chance before discounting him out of hand as so many did for Heath Ledger. People said you couldn't beat Jack Nicholson as Joker, and I think he actually proved that wrong despite people writing him off before he'd even started the role.

I'm FAR more worried about how they actually make a decent film out of Batman and Superman together... Even on their own, it's not easy (particularly Superman), but together i think it could end up a total mess... Again, i'll wait to see something to decide, but i'm way more skeptical about the film premise that I am about any of the leading actors!


'Argo' was a good film, but it wasn't great solely on Affleck's acting. The guy literally plays the same boring person in every film I've seen.
My problem with him getting this role is I feel it's a game for him and his buddies. "Sweet, thanks for giving me the role. I didn't read through a script, but you know I'll be good because I'm a writer and director. I did 'Argo' after all."
It's a joke.
Just get someone that costs less than this guy, it's that simple. Spend the money on the VFX works because you're going to need a lot of it to put this movie together.
Read any of the Batman Superman comics to know this, or even watch the animated 'The Dark Knight Returns' DC movie.

I also think the problem with fans is they've invested a huge amount of time and money into this character. Personally I've got books upon books of Batman stuff and it's a little ridiculous in someone's eyes but Batman is a great character.
A friend of mine actually named his new born son Bruce Wayne. I'm totally not making this up.

So it just comes down to hearing these hardcore fans out, if they don't, this movie will not be successful.
 
  08 August 2013
Originally Posted by rhinton:
Here's something that I remember reading, Bruce Wayne is Batman's secret identity, not the other way around. Bruce considers himself, at his core, Batman. Not the billionaire playboy.
If the Mad Hatter was to ask Batman what his real name is, Batman would always say, "Batman."
Bruce Wayne, for how smart he is, does not hold any educational degrees. He PLAYS the part of Bruce Wayne...he is Batman.

So in this case, I don't see Ben Affleck being able to play the character. Just give it to someone else and save some money on a lesser known actor.


Thats seems like reasonable explanation, but it ignores who Batman is and why. It wasn't Batman who witnessed his parents gunned down by Joe Chill. It was young Bruce Wayne. Batman wasn't even conceived till Bruce was an adult. Years after he had begun training himself for the task. He sees himself as avenging his parents, and preventing others from having to experience the same tragedy as himself. Everything about who and what he is begins as Bruce Wayne, not Batman. Batman is the persona, the uniform, but Bruce Wayne IS the man.

As for the Mad Hatter or any member of the rogues gallery, Batman would never reveal his true identity anyway. So I think that is weak argument.

I do think that the movies have done a thorough job at selling the idea that Bruce is just a frivolous playboy. It further diminished his accomplishments by limiting his involvement in the creation of his tools (batcar, batplane, etc) and limiting his role in the family business. So I can see why people have this idea about Batman. But in canon it is very different. Bruce Wayne is a self made man and Bruce Wayne created Batman and his tools, not the other way around.

As for Affleck, the dude LOOKS like Bruce Wayne. More than any actor since Adam West. And if Keating can play Batman, I see no issue here.

But more than that, I trust the current team making these decisions, at least from the vantage of canon and respect of the character. Look, most people go to the movies to be entertained. Super hero movies are unique in that its more than entertainment, it's also an effort to bring to life a portrait of a pop culture artform which many of us have consumed or are least familiar. The work done on Man of Steel proves to me that canon and respect of the character matter to this team.

Having read , and still own, several thousand DC comics from the 70's and 80's, and seeing what they did with MoS, I see where this is going and I'm really excited about it. Considering what they did in MoS, I'll even go as far as to PREDICT that the next movie will portray a far more human side to Bruce Wayne than you've ever seen.
 
  08 August 2013
Originally Posted by JoeyP88: Thats seems like reasonable explanation, but it ignores who Batman is and why. It wasn't Batman who witnessed his parents gunned down by Joe Chill. It was young Bruce Wayne. Batman wasn't even conceived till Bruce was an adult. Years after he had begun training himself for the task. He sees himself as avenging his parents, and preventing others from having to experience the same tragedy as himself. Everything about who and what he is begins as Bruce Wayne, not Batman. Batman is the persona, the uniform, but Bruce Wayne IS the man.


No, even in the Christoper Nolan movies they got this right. Katie Holmes/Rachel Dawes states, "[Rachel touches Bruce's face] No, no, *this*... is your mask. Your real face is the one that criminals now fear. The man I loved - the man who vanished - he never came back at all. But maybe he's still out there, somewhere. Maybe some day, when Gotham no longer needs Batman, I'll see him again."

Bruce Wayne is the secret, not the other way around. The comics all expand on this as well, plus the book is called 'Batman' after all...not Bruce Wayne.

Originally Posted by JoeyP88: As for the Mad Hatter or any member of the rogues gallery, Batman would never reveal his true identity anyway. So I think that is weak argument.


The Mad Hatter uses mind-control devices and is a master hypnotist, that argument is not weak what-so-ever.

He revealed his identity to:

Vicki Vale
Talia al Ghul
about 9,000 other girlfriends that are killed or murdered
Silver St. Cloud
Sasha Bordeaux
Selina Kyle aka Catwoman
Princess Diana aka Wonder Woman
Clark Kent aka Superman
Wally West aka Flash
most of the other Super Heroes/Justice League
Hugo Strange (maybe not revealed, but he knows)
Alfred (knows because of...yeah...)
Ra's al Ghul
Lucius Fox (sometimes)
Dick Grayson (Robin)
Jason Todd (Robin)
Tim Drake (Robin)
Carrie Kelly (Robin)
Stephanie Brown (Robin, then Batgirl) (not sure if she completely knows though)
Damian Wayne (Robin)
Thomas Elliot
The Riddler (he deduced it)
The Joker (before he died)
Deadman
James Gordon
Barbara Gordon (Batgirl)

...probably a bunch of others...

Originally Posted by JoeyP88: As for Affleck, the dude LOOKS like Bruce Wayne. More than any actor since Adam West. And if Keating can play Batman, I see no issue here.


At least not to me he doesn't.

Looks like a Photoshoped Ben Affleck on Bat Mask


Originally Posted by JoeyP88: But more than that, I trust the current team making these decisions, at least from the vantage of canon and respect of the character. Look, most people go to the movies to be entertained. Super hero movies are unique in that its more than entertainment, it's also an effort to bring to life a portrait of a pop culture artform which many of us have consumed or are least familiar. The work done on Man of Steel proves to me that canon and respect of the character matter to this team.


Possibly.

Originally Posted by JoeyP88: Having read , and still own, several thousand DC comics from the 70's and 80's, and seeing what they did with MoS, I see where this is going and I'm really excited about it. Considering what they did in MoS, I'll even go as far as to PREDICT that the next movie will portray a far more human side to Bruce Wayne than you've ever seen.


I believe the majority of people don't care about Bruce Wayne, they care about Batman.
Personally, I don't want to see a "human side" to Bruce Wayne...that would be the most boring movie ever.
Actually maybe not, because he spends all his time as THE BATMAN!
 
  08 August 2013
Once you get past the basics *,I feel as though "Bruce Wayne is the Secret Identity of Batman" has been a staple component of the next level of the basics, the basics of what is Batman. It is a higher level concept that defines a fictional character, and it seems to be sticking.


* the basics being Bruce Wayne, Rich, Dead Parents, Crime Bad, Scary Bat stuff, Fight Crime.
 
  08 August 2013
The more I think about it the more I like it. Ben has that laid back douchebag thing going and can easily play the part of Bruce Wayne, but who cares. It is the "he can't be Batman" that gives us a taste of what people in Gotham feel about Bruce Wayne, and I for one find that interesting and will be part of the reason why I will pay to see this movie.

"Ben/Bruce as Batman? No way!"

It's genius!
 
  08 August 2013
I'd actually like a Batman vs Robin Hood type of unexpected thing.
__________________
"Any intelligent fool can make things bigger, more complex & more violent..." Einstein
 
  08 August 2013
i couldn't disagree more with almost everything you said here...

Originally Posted by rhinton: 'Argo' was a good film, but it wasn't great solely on Affleck's acting. The guy literally plays the same boring person in every film I've seen.
My problem with him getting this role is I feel it's a game for him and his buddies. "Sweet, thanks for giving me the role. I didn't read through a script, but you know I'll be good because I'm a writer and director. I did 'Argo' after all."
It's a joke.


If he plays the same sort of characters in a lot of his films, maybe he is trying to branch out as he enters the next stage of his career. Often actors get unfairly typcast into certain roles and find it tough to break out, even though they have a lot more range in them if a director gave them a chance. Heath Ledger proved that in one Batman movie, why not someone else?
The rest there is pure speculation, this role may mean a lot to him, and there is no evidence at all that he was only given this role because he's proving to be quite a skilled director.

Originally Posted by rhinton: Just get someone that costs less than this guy, it's that simple. Spend the money on the VFX works because you're going to need a lot of it to put this movie together.
Read any of the Batman Superman comics to know this, or even watch the animated 'The Dark Knight Returns' DC movie.


How much did Affleck cost? He may have been a real bargain, and like it or not, having recognisable leads has shown over time that it can make a huge difference to audience perception of a movie and thus the money it takes at the box office. Even if he is expensive it might be one of the best investments.
As for the vfx, The Dark Knight trilogy surely showed that vfx shot count doesn't make a good movie. Compare the vfx shot count in Dark Knight Rises vs. Man of Steel. Both were in production at the same time, I would assume that Man of Steel has a much larger vfx shot count, but is a weaker movie in the end. Put the money into the SCRIPT! No vfx can save a bad script! A good script can have slightly wonky vfx and you can get past it and still have a great movie.

Originally Posted by rhinton: I also think the problem with fans is they've invested a huge amount of time and money into this character. Personally I've got books upon books of Batman stuff and it's a little ridiculous in someone's eyes but Batman is a great character.
A friend of mine actually named his new born son Bruce Wayne. I'm totally not making this up.

So it just comes down to hearing these hardcore fans out, if they don't, this movie will not be successful.


Again, i think you have to accept that the vast majority of people who see the Batman movies are NOT hardcore Batman fans. If the want a successful movie, they have to find a way to make the movie appealing to a wider audience than just the comic book fans. Of course sometimes that causes the ideas in the comics to get a bit watered down which is a shame, but if anything, the people you can assume will see the movie regarless of how good it is are the hardcore fans of Batman (unless they really do upset them very badly). The bigger challenge is to get in the other movie goers who are not fans of Batman.
John Carter made this mistake - in the end all the fans of the ERB stories saw the movie and liked it, but nobody else did. Flop. Of course this was a much bigger issue than just being too faithful to the source material that had already been plundered 100times, but you get my point...
__________________
__________

Nick Marshall
Head of Environments / Generalists
Double Negative :: Vancouver
www.dneg.com
 
  08 August 2013
Originally Posted by nickmarshallvfx: If he plays the same sort of characters in a lot of his films, maybe he is trying to branch out as he enters the next stage of his career. Often actors get unfairly typcast into certain roles and find it tough to break out, even though they have a lot more range in them if a director gave them a chance. Heath Ledger proved that in one Batman movie, why not someone else?
The rest there is pure speculation, this role may mean a lot to him, and there is no evidence at all that he was only given this role because he's proving to be quite a skilled director.


I don't think Batman is the role to take to showcase your acting chops. No one ever did that. They ended up being an iconic character that has already been created for them, acting the character isn't improving their acting skills. It might get you fame, that's about it.

Originally Posted by nickmarshallvfx: As for the vfx, The Dark Knight trilogy surely showed that vfx shot count doesn't make a good movie. Compare the vfx shot count in Dark Knight Rises vs. Man of Steel. Both were in production at the same time, I would assume that Man of Steel has a much larger vfx shot count, but is a weaker movie in the end. Put the money into the SCRIPT! No vfx can save a bad script! A good script can have slightly wonky vfx and you can get past it and still have a great movie.


Well, my point still stands with that, spend the money on something else that will make the film great. I've seen better Cosplayers perform Batman better than Christian Bale and Michael Keaton. Get a no name.
Chris Hemsworth came out of left field and did an excellent job with Thor.

Originally Posted by nickmarshallvfx: Again, i think you have to accept that the vast majority of people who see the Batman movies are NOT hardcore Batman fans. If the want a successful movie, they have to find a way to make the movie appealing to a wider audience than just the comic book fans. Of course sometimes that causes the ideas in the comics to get a bit watered down which is a shame, but if anything, the people you can assume will see the movie regarless of how good it is are the hardcore fans of Batman (unless they really do upset them very badly). The bigger challenge is to get in the other movie goers who are not fans of Batman.


I think you need to visit more comic conventions because the here around the Tampa Comic Con, people are none to happy.

Originally Posted by nickmarshallvfx: John Carter made this mistake - in the end all the fans of the ERB stories saw the movie and liked it, but nobody else did. Flop. Of course this was a much bigger issue than just being too faithful to the source material that had already been plundered 100times, but you get my point...


What's John Carter? lol...seriously...
You mean that story from 1917 that they tried to resurrect from the grave? When you talk about fans, I'd say the majority of movie goers you're talking about didn't even know what John Carter was. Batman is more relevant to today more than ever and the fan base is extremely many more than any fan base for John Carter. That was your problem.
 
  08 August 2013
Originally Posted by JoeyP88: Sorry, I don't buy that. Bruce Wayne and Batman are both perfectly sane.
<snip>
The Batman persona is an act

First, it's the Bruce Wayne personality that's the act, not Batman. The whole spoiled rich boy slash billionaire playboy thing is a put on. Batman is THE persona. It's his extended Bat family and Alfred who push him into the light. Left alone, he'd probably brood and obsess all day long.

Second, Batman is by no means sane. The "family" keeps him grounded and in touch, but Batman is, well, bat-shit crazy. Pretty hard to ignore that.

1. The most obvious is, instead of seeking psychiatric help in dealing with his PTSD, he instead chooses to dress up as a bat and beat people up. In the real world? Yeah. That's enough to lock him up with the crazies. Still, this being comics, let's overlook that for a moment.

2. Batman isn't any less insane than the guys he hunts. People think that he has a code of ethics. In fact, Batman HAS killed bad guys many times before. He's hung them from his plane, stabbed them through the heart, crushed them under tons of debris, etc and so forth. He's been doing this stuff for almost 74 years now. (Yes. Batman HAS used guns in the past, contrary to popular belief.)

3. Batman suffers from intense paranoia. He claims the he's just being prepared for the worst, but he's even got a plan to kill each and every one of his "friends". Would you be deemed sane if you went into work or school with a detailed hit list?

4. Batman puts minors, little boys, in harm's way as his "sidekick". On top of being an issue of child endangerment, it's also a bit twisted. Imagine being a shrink analyzing this. Bruce couldn't save his parents when he was a little boy. How does he deal with it? He dresses up little boys and gives them weapons to fight criminals. He's getting them to play the role that, perhaps, HE wanted to play as a child. Pretty sick. Worse yet, he doesn't care who the kid is. He even put his own son Damian in danger. What did the kid get for it? Oh yeah. He got KILLED. Somebody take away that "#1 DAD" mug from him.

5. Batman is better than the bad guys. He's nothing like them. He's.... uh... Why is he having sex with them? I guess his principles only apply to the male bad guys. At what point does a sane guy think that it's okay to sleep with the criminally insane? If you're judged by the company you keep then something's not quite right with Batman.

6. Batman's got severe trust issues. His whole "family" could be at risk and he wouldn't tell them, preferring to trust only himself to handle it.

I can keep on going. Alone, each one of these things might not be a huge deal. Together, Batman is just this side of loony. Cops kinda look the other way because he's taking on bad guys who are crazier than him, but Batman is really not too far off from being the Punisher. This is really why Mark Millar's Big Daddy (from Kick-Ass) seems like such an obvious, but acceptable Batman rip-off. Millar was on the nose. Batman is really that sad and psychotic.

However, keeping with the "company you keep" idea, Batman's far more tolerated because he stands for photos next to guys like Superman. Batman may not be Joker-level insane, but he's definitely not normal. He's taken PTSD to the next level and started acting out in some violent and self-deluded ways.

That's why I think that any actor to take on the role needs to understand that Batman's a guy constantly struggling to be sane in an insane world. Batman's true mask is Bruce Wayne. Bruce is Batman's (extreme) attempt at sanity and is used to hide the fact that Batman is much more comfortable in a world populated by crazy killers. Batman can relate far better to lunatics than he can regular folks, which is also why he tends to find "nice" suspect. That's kinda... off.
__________________
DISCLAIMER: The views presented herein do not necessarily represent those of my brain.

Last edited by cookepuss : 08 August 2013 at 03:32 PM.
 
  08 August 2013
Originally Posted by rhinton: No, even in the Christoper Nolan movies they got this right. Katie Holmes/Rachel Dawes states, "[Rachel touches Bruce's face] No, no, *this*... is your mask. Your real face is the one that criminals now fear. The man I loved - the man who vanished - he never came back at all. But maybe he's still out there, somewhere. Maybe some day, when Gotham no longer needs Batman, I'll see him again."


The movies are not canon. They are a portrait of what precedes it, an artistic interpretation of a different artform. I enjoy the interpretation, but I don't see it as part of the character's canon.

Originally Posted by rhinton: Bruce Wayne is the secret, not the other way around. The comics all expand on this as well, plus the book is called 'Batman' after all...not Bruce Wayne.


Is Bruce Wayne his secret identity? No. Batman has no "secret identity". It's his true identity. Batman is unique. The one truly unique superhero among them. Unlike, Superman, Flash, Wonder Woman, Hawkman, Aquaman, etc. He finds commonality with only a handful, Green Arrow being the first that comes to mind. Why? Because he has no super powers. Flash will always Flash, a victim of an electrochemical reaction that forever changed his physiology. Wonder Woman will always be an Amazon princess. Superman will always be from Krypton.

Bruce Wayne is different. He is a mortal human who chooses to be Batman. Not the other way around. He has no superpowers. Bruce Wayne can walk away from Batman anytime he chooses, the moment he finds closure or just gets tired of it. But Bruce Wayne chooses not to walk away from it. It's Bruce Wayne's choice to be Batman, not Batman's choice to be Bruce Wayne.

Bruce Wayne is his true identity. Superman, Hawkman, etc need SECRET identities to give them a real life. Bruce Wayne already has a real life. Instead he chooses to enter a world where he must work harder than any human mortal to become something equal with those who posess super powers when they are just being themselves. That's is Bruce Wayne's decision, not Batman's. Batman is Bruce Wayne's secret identity.


Originally Posted by rhinton: The Mad Hatter uses mind-control devices and is a master hypnotist, that argument is not weak what-so-ever..


So your premise is that Mad Hatter would be manipulating the situation, not that he would be asking him to voluntarily give up the information. And that further his ego defines him as Batman first, not as Bruce Wayne first. That's different than what I interpreted. Still, I disagree. Bruce Wayne is not the inconsequential alter-ego that modern pop-culture has tried to make of him.


Originally Posted by rhinton: He revealed his identity to:

Vicki Vale
Talia al Ghul
about 9,000 other girlfriends that are killed or murdered
Silver St. Cloud
Sasha Bordeaux
Selina Kyle aka Catwoman
Princess Diana aka Wonder Woman
Clark Kent aka Superman
Wally West aka Flash
most of the other Super Heroes/Justice League
Hugo Strange (maybe not revealed, but he knows)
Alfred (knows because of...yeah...)
Ra's al Ghul
Lucius Fox (sometimes)
Dick Grayson (Robin)
Jason Todd (Robin)
Tim Drake (Robin)
Carrie Kelly (Robin)
Stephanie Brown (Robin, then Batgirl) (not sure if she completely knows though)
Damian Wayne (Robin)
Thomas Elliot
The Riddler (he deduced it)
The Joker (before he died)
Deadman
James Gordon
Barbara Gordon (Batgirl)

...probably a bunch of others...


So I said rogues gallery, not friends family and super hero buddies. Remove anyone from your list that's not a rogue and that leaves:

Talia al Ghul
Selina Kyle aka Catwoman
Hugo Strange (maybe not revealed, but he knows)
Ra's al Ghul
The Riddler (he deduced it)
The Joker (before he died)

Further I was arguing that Batman would never voluntarily share that information to a rogue. Remove those from your list who figured it out on their own( that includes Ra's), and you have:

Selina Kyle aka Catwoman
The Joker (before he died)

He married Catwoman on Earth-2. Since consummating a marriage would be difficult with the mask on, and no court on Earth would force her to testify against him, we can eliminate her, or their child for that matter. That leaves:

The Joker (before he died)

And telling the Joker on his deathbed would be a bit like sharing the Bush's baked bean recipe to their family dog. So I think the point stands.






Originally Posted by rhinton: At least not to me he doesn't.

Looks like a Photoshoped Ben Affleck on Bat Mask



I did not say he looked like Batman, I said he looked like Bruce Wayne.

http://www.people.com/people/ben_affleck/




Originally Posted by rhinton: I believe the majority of people don't care about Bruce Wayne, they care about Batman.
Personally, I don't want to see a "human side" to Bruce Wayne...that would be the most boring movie ever.
Actually maybe not, because he spends all his time as THE BATMAN!


Sadly, I think there may truth to thisstatement, but Hollywood and more recently some expedient decisions on the part of DC have fueled that misperception. If you read from canon from the 40's to the 80's, you don't get that picture.

Incidentally, the reason why Ra's a Ghul never exposed Bruce Wayne after he figured it out was his great respect for Wayne's deductive abilities. That was respect for Wayne, since Wayne and his family would have been hurt by the revelation.

But the problem is, the human side to Bruce Wayne is what drives him to be Batman. His compassion for those who have suffered the same tragedy as he. His reaction to those who commit injustices. His driving need to bring justice and balance where he can. The willingness to sacrifice a normal life amidst the rich and famous to embark on a risky, painful, and grueling crusade to bring justice for others. And it's all his choice.

That's Bruce Wayne.

That's an interesting story.

PS. I thought Batman Begins got really close to this, closer than any film or television adaptation before or since.
 
  08 August 2013
Originally Posted by cookepuss: First, it's the Bruce Wayne personality that's the act, not Batman. The whole spoiled rich boy slash billionaire playboy thing is a put on. Batman is THE persona. It's his extended Bat family and Alfred who push him into the light. Left alone, he'd probably brood and obsess all day long.


Persona means facade or act. That's what I said. Batman is the act.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/persona

And I disagree, Bruce Wayne was never pushed by anyone else to be Batman.

Originally Posted by cookepuss: Second, Batman is by no means sane. The "family" keeps him grounded and in touch, but Batman is, well, bat-shit crazy. Pretty hard to ignore that.

1. The most obvious is, instead of seeking psychiatric help in dealing with his PTSD, he instead chooses to dress up as a bat and beat people up. In the real world? Yeah. That's enough to lock him up with the crazies. Still, this being comics, let's overlook that for a moment.


Being crazy, and appearing to do something which most people would consider irrational but heroic, are two entirely different things.

Originally Posted by cookepuss: 2. Batman isn't any less insane than the guys he hunts. People think that he has a code of ethics. In fact, Batman HAS killed bad guys many times before. He's hung them from his plane, stabbed them through the heart, crushed them under tons of debris, etc and so forth. He's been doing this stuff for almost 74 years now. (Yes. Batman HAS used guns in the past, contrary to popular belief.)


Yes, I'm aware of all these things. But what was the context of each. Was there pre-meditation? Was the act malicious or an act of self defense. Police do the same things every day in the line of duty.


Originally Posted by cookepuss: 3. Batman suffers from intense paranoia. He claims the he's just being prepared for the worst, but he's even got a plan to kill each and every one of his "friends". Would you be deemed sane if you went into work or school with a detailed hit list?


Can't say that I'm aware of this, I'm guessing this is part of the Dark Knight narrative? Still what's context?

Originally Posted by cookepuss: 4. Batman puts minors, little boys, in harm's way as his "sidekick". On top of being an issue of child endangerment, it's also a bit twisted. Imagine being a shrink analyzing this. Bruce couldn't save his parents when he was a little boy. How does he deal with it? He dresses up little boys and gives them weapons to fight criminals. He's getting them to play the role that, perhaps, HE wanted to play as a child. Pretty sick. Worse yet, he doesn't care who the kid is. He even put his own son Damian in danger. What did the kid get for it? Oh yeah. He got KILLED. Somebody take away that "#1 DAD" mug from him. [


5. Batman is better than the bad guys. He's nothing like them. He's.... uh... Why is he having sex with them? I guess his principles only apply to the male bad guys. At what point does a sane guy think that it's okay to sleep with the criminally insane? If you're judged by the company you keep then something's not quite right with Batman.


So with Catwoman, in the Earth-2 narrative at least, they did not tie the knot till after she rebuked her criminal past. But Catwoman was always a character in conflict.

As for Talia, their son Damian, and all that, its part of the Ra's a Ghul narrative which is extraordinary complex and bizarre. But it's consistent with the historical account. She was conflicted like Catwoman and there was chemistry there. I don't think anyone has every argued that Bruce Wayne, or Batman, ever had a Mr. Monk complex. He does dirty work, work others are afraid to do. But he's capable of compartmentalizing. Won't argue with that.

Originally Posted by cookepuss: 6. Batman's got severe trust issues. His whole "family" could be at risk and he wouldn't tell them, preferring to trust only himself to handle it.

I can keep on going. Alone, each one of these things might not be a huge deal. Together, Batman is just this side of loony. Cops kinda look the other way because he's taking on bad guys who are crazier than him, but Batman is really not too far off from being the Punisher. This is really why Mark Millar's Big Daddy (from Kick-Ass) seems like such an obvious, but acceptable Batman rip-off. Millar was on the nose. Batman is really that sad and psychotic.

However, keeping with the "company you keep" idea, Batman's far more tolerated because he stands for photos next to guys like Superman. Batman may not be Joker-level insane, but he's definitely not normal. He's taken PTSD to the next level and started acting out in some violent and self-deluded ways.


Not normal is not synonymous with psychotic. He's definitely not living a normal life. By choice. But he's perfectly sane. As sane as any genius or IQ above 200. I do think however that the Dark Knight narrative has pushed an emotional instability as part of the character that was not part of the character prior to the 90's. But this is an alternate narrative which I always felt was pushed to provide a level sensationalism that did not exist prior to that time. One that I personally chose not to purchase. And by 1985, with 50 years behind the character at that time, the basis for the character is clearly established, regardless the sensationalist narratives.

Originally Posted by cookepuss: That's why I think that any actor to take on the role needs to understand that Batman's a guy constantly struggling to be sane in an insane world. Batman's true mask is Bruce Wayne. Bruce is Batman's (extreme) attempt at sanity and is used to hide the fact that Batman is much more comfortable in a world populated by crazy killers. Batman can relate far better to lunatics than he can regular folks, which is also why he tends to find "nice" suspect. That's kinda... off.


Struggling to be sane is not psychotic, unhinged, or insane. It just means your having a difficult time holding on to it. That's not insanity. But it is "at risk". And I would certainly agree that Batman is a completely sane but "at risk" personality.

But I am intrigued that people view Batman as having preceded Bruce Wayne. That somehow Bruce is an invention to hide Batman's true anguish. I see it the other way around. Bruce is perfectly comfortable in the lives of the rich and famous. But he has anguish and torment which he must keep silent within that world. Bruce is not a mask, but Batman is the megaphone with which Bruce gets to express himself. And it's an expression which is otherwise unacceptable or misunderstood in the social class he descends from. Vigilante justice that is. Bruce is not Batman's refuge, Batman is Bruce's refuge where he gets to speak his true mind anonymously. Batman is the mask literally and figuratively.
 
  08 August 2013
In case you havent seen this (Superman and Batman: Super Cafe):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1QzIQW8CEKA
 
reply share thread



Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
CGSociety
Society of Digital Artists
www.cgsociety.org

Powered by vBulletin
Copyright 2000 - 2006,
Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Minimize Ads
Forum Jump
Miscellaneous

All times are GMT. The time now is 05:17 PM.


Powered by vBulletin
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.