Batman returns once more: Christopher Nolan does it again!!!

[Shallow]

Some new updates from Nolan himself:

Beside opening up about his involvement in "Superman" franchise, Nolan also talks about "Batman 3", hinting that it probably will be the end of the story. "Without getting into specifics, the key thing that makes the third film an great possibility for us is that we want to finish our story. And in viewing it as the finishing of a story rather than infinitely blowing up the balloon and expanding the story... I'm very excited about the end of the film, the conclusion, and what we've done with the characters," he says.

continue the story? the first & second one aren't even relative lol.

he must mean the second going into the third; but i'll be extra tight if that's the last one.

Batman Begins and the Dark Knight are connected though.  First film you essentially have Batman shutting down crime, second film you show the impact of Batman by having the Scarecrow be involved in some petty crime and bam a psycho had to come to shake things up in Gotham.  Third film seems to be that it will continue with batman being seen as a villain.

i'm just saying, people told me they didn't even see Batman Begins & they had no problems following The Dark Knight.

the only thing was Scarecrow at the start of Dark Knight & that was basically irrelevant.

i guess if you want to super anaylze it, they're connected; but i'm sure you'd have to see the end of Dark Knight to follow the third film.

but regardless, i wanted at least five films.

 I hear ya on that.  I don't really want them to stop with three films either, as long as they keep making good films.  I'm okay with Nolan stopping with three if he really doesn't want to do more than that. But whatever he has planned, I hope he doesn't end his films in a way that's too crazy.  I guess what I'm trying to say is I hope he doesn't plan on doing anything super drastic that would kill the franchise, like killing off Batman for instance, or having everyone discover that Bruce Wayne and Batman are the same person.  I'm really looking forward to what Nolan does next with the story.  But whatever it is, I hope he at least leaves it open for another director to continue, should they decide to make more films after his run is over.

I can't imagine Warner or DC letting that happen. Batman doesn't end. There's no end to the Batman story. It just keeps going. Giving a definitive end, especially in the case of a billion dollar movie franchise will make far too many fans think that this is how Batman starts and ends and that's not good for business.

A lot of common fans are idiots. I remember hearing a few people complain about Begins saying "I think it's stupid how Batman's parents die. Everyone knows Joker killed them." It's retarded and so are most of them. While they shouldn't expect much increase, DC should have an agenda to try and turn at least a small portion of fans of the film into fans of the books in some way shape or form, and ending Batman on screen would hurt that, already little, chance.

Personally I'd have DC make at least a few mini-series on the Nolan-universe Batman and follow the tone, style, and story of the films, and I'd have it start right after the end of the third film (if this is indeed Nolan's last one). It won't make many fans of the film bat an eye if they don't read comics, but I guarantee it'll attract of comic fans that don't buy everything Batman. I have never collected a Batman ongoing series, for more than and arc here and there, but if they released a monthly series from the film-universe I'd get every issue if it stayed true and didn't change everything. And I know a lot of other comic fans that don't read Batman books monthly that would do the same.

[basumarpo1610]

Nolan will NEVER put The Penguin in his Batman movie! Mark my words.







I think Nolan said something about not wanting to go into the "supernatural" aspects of the previous Batman-universe(s).

[Bananas]

I think Nolan said something about not wanting to go into the "supernatural" aspects of the previous Batman-universe(s).

I've appreciated that about him so far. Dark Knight could have just as easily been a cop drama if it had different lead characters.

[JohnnyL]

Nolan will NEVER put The Penguin in his Batman movie! Mark my words.







I think Nolan said something about not wanting to go into the "supernatural" aspects of the previous Batman-universe(s).

 If you're talking about using a version of Penguin that is like what was used in Tim Burton's "Batman Returns," then I completely agree with you.  Nolan has said that he will not use anything that leans too far into the realm of fantasy or the supernatural.  So, your reasoning is sound.  But if they took the character back to his comic book origin, he would still be on the table to use, as there was no supernatural element to the Penguin from the comics.

[Shallow]

Nolan will NEVER put The Penguin in his Batman movie! Mark my words.







I think Nolan said something about not wanting to go into the "supernatural" aspects of the previous Batman-universe(s).

 If you're talking about using a version of Penguin that is like what was used in Tim Burton's "Batman Returns," then I completely agree with you.  Nolan has said that he will not use anything that leans too far into the realm of fantasy or the supernatural.  So, your reasoning is sound.  But if they took the character back to his comic book origin, he would still be on the table to use, as there was no supernatural element to the Penguin from the comics.

If he's just an arms dealer who likes tuxedo jackets and garnered the name penguin because of that and his stocky build that'd be fine. If he uses his umbrellas to fly then that would be stupid.

[JohnnyL]

Nolan will NEVER put The Penguin in his Batman movie! Mark my words.







I think Nolan said something about not wanting to go into the "supernatural" aspects of the previous Batman-universe(s).

 If you're talking about using a version of Penguin that is like what was used in Tim Burton's "Batman Returns," then I completely agree with you.  Nolan has said that he will not use anything that leans too far into the realm of fantasy or the supernatural.  So, your reasoning is sound.  But if they took the character back to his comic book origin, he would still be on the table to use, as there was no supernatural element to the Penguin from the comics.

If he's just an arms dealer who likes tuxedo jackets and garnered the name penguin because of that and his stocky build that'd be fine. If he uses his umbrellas to fly then that would be stupid.

 Yeah.  I don't think they'd give him flying umbrellas or anything.  They might give him a gun-umbrella or something.  But I think if they used Penguin, he would be toned wayyy down from what Burton did.

[Shallow]

Nolan will NEVER put The Penguin in his Batman movie! Mark my words.







I think Nolan said something about not wanting to go into the "supernatural" aspects of the previous Batman-universe(s).

 If you're talking about using a version of Penguin that is like what was used in Tim Burton's "Batman Returns," then I completely agree with you.  Nolan has said that he will not use anything that leans too far into the realm of fantasy or the supernatural.  So, your reasoning is sound.  But if they took the character back to his comic book origin, he would still be on the table to use, as there was no supernatural element to the Penguin from the comics.

If he's just an arms dealer who likes tuxedo jackets and garnered the name penguin because of that and his stocky build that'd be fine. If he uses his umbrellas to fly then that would be stupid.

 Yeah.  I don't think they'd give him flying umbrellas or anything.  They might give him a gun-umbrella or something.  But I think if they used Penguin, he would be toned wayyy down from what Burton did.

It would work if he's some out of town huge arms dealer and such who sees an opening in Gotham city. With every cop trying to hunt down Batman there's plenty of room for The Penguin to make money of the streets. Or how could just be qa new player on the streets that comes up in the absence of the old order which was all but taken out in the last film. The comic origin of being a bullied kid and getting the name Penguin because of his looks but hating the name works fine for a Nolan film. He comes up on the streets of Gotham and opens in nightclub, using it to strengthen his place in the Gotham underworld, and even plays informant to Batman in order for Bats to allow it to stay open. It's not rocket science.

[Blasphemy]

Batman Begins and Dark Knight were connected, but the connection isn't huge, it's enough to show they are sequels, but in the end it's not essential to the over-all movie. can't wait though.

[Shallow]

Batman Begins and Dark Knight were connected, but the connection isn't huge, it's enough to show they are sequels, but in the end it's not essential to the over-all movie. can't wait though.

Why do people try and downplay the connection? It's the same director, same writer, same actors playing the same characters, the same universe, and parts of both stories overlap. It's a sequel no matter how you look at it.

It's no less connected than Batman and Batman Returns or T1 and T2, and in T2 case it's almost more enjoyable if you've not seen T1 because of the similar plot.

Most sequels in Hollywood are stand alone films with the first film not being an absolute essential. Films like Lord of the Rings are the exception.

How many Hollywood sequels are really the same story drawn out over two films?

[Javier]

Part of the reason what makes The Dark Knight great is the fact that it continues the overall arc in story and character from Batman Begins.  Now it seems to be even more evident that people liked The Dark Knight for it's candy coated surfaced.  Don't get me wrong, it's not in depth as The Wire, but geez there is still some depth to it at least. 

[Chamillitary Click]

Batman Begins and Dark Knight were connected, but the connection isn't huge, it's enough to show they are sequels, but in the end it's not essential to the over-all movie. can't wait though.

Why do people try and downplay the connection? It's the same director, same writer, same actors playing the same characters, the same universe, and parts of both stories overlap. It's a sequel no matter how you look at it.

It's no less connected than Batman and Batman Returns or T1 and T2, and in T2 case it's almost more enjoyable if you've not seen T1 because of the similar plot.

Most sequels in Hollywood are stand alone films with the first film not being an absolute essential. Films like Lord of the Rings are the exception.

How many Hollywood sequels are really the same story drawn out over two films?

nobody is denying that they are sequels, but the connection is just put there by people who choose to see the movie for more than just entertainment.

for example, me & 98% of the rest of the world see the movie for a thrilling, enjoyable film; not the connection between the Batman character from first movie to second.

it's not made for anylitcal purposes, but to kill the box office & it surely did.

[Shallow]

Batman Begins and Dark Knight were connected, but the connection isn't huge, it's enough to show they are sequels, but in the end it's not essential to the over-all movie. can't wait though.

Why do people try and downplay the connection? It's the same director, same writer, same actors playing the same characters, the same universe, and parts of both stories overlap. It's a sequel no matter how you look at it.

It's no less connected than Batman and Batman Returns or T1 and T2, and in T2 case it's almost more enjoyable if you've not seen T1 because of the similar plot.

Most sequels in Hollywood are stand alone films with the first film not being an absolute essential. Films like Lord of the Rings are the exception.

How many Hollywood sequels are really the same story drawn out over two films?

nobody is denying that they are sequels, but the connection is just put there by people who choose to see the movie for more than just entertainment.

for example, me & 98% of the rest of the world see the movie for a thrilling, enjoyable film; not the connection between the Batman character from first movie to second.

it's not made for anylitcal purposes, but to kill the box office & it surely did.

And you and 98% of the world are right, but you would also be right about 98% of all sequels. What are these magical sequels that are unwatchable unless seeing the first film first?

[Chamillitary Click]

Batman Begins and Dark Knight were connected, but the connection isn't huge, it's enough to show they are sequels, but in the end it's not essential to the over-all movie. can't wait though.

Why do people try and downplay the connection? It's the same director, same writer, same actors playing the same characters, the same universe, and parts of both stories overlap. It's a sequel no matter how you look at it.

It's no less connected than Batman and Batman Returns or T1 and T2, and in T2 case it's almost more enjoyable if you've not seen T1 because of the similar plot.

Most sequels in Hollywood are stand alone films with the first film not being an absolute essential. Films like Lord of the Rings are the exception.

How many Hollywood sequels are really the same story drawn out over two films?

nobody is denying that they are sequels, but the connection is just put there by people who choose to see the movie for more than just entertainment.

for example, me & 98% of the rest of the world see the movie for a thrilling, enjoyable film; not the connection between the Batman character from first movie to second.

it's not made for anylitcal purposes, but to kill the box office & it surely did.

And you and 98% of the world are right, but you would also be right about 98% of all sequels. What are these magical sequels that are unwatchable unless seeing the first film first?

i don't know, i didn't say a sequel had to be in direct relation with the first film.

BUT, Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, The Godfather, Spiderman(?), Lethal Weapon(?), Transporter, Die Hard(?), i can't even think of other sequel movies..

[Shallow]

Batman Begins and Dark Knight were connected, but the connection isn't huge, it's enough to show they are sequels, but in the end it's not essential to the over-all movie. can't wait though.

Why do people try and downplay the connection? It's the same director, same writer, same actors playing the same characters, the same universe, and parts of both stories overlap. It's a sequel no matter how you look at it.

It's no less connected than Batman and Batman Returns or T1 and T2, and in T2 case it's almost more enjoyable if you've not seen T1 because of the similar plot.

Most sequels in Hollywood are stand alone films with the first film not being an absolute essential. Films like Lord of the Rings are the exception.

How many Hollywood sequels are really the same story drawn out over two films?

nobody is denying that they are sequels, but the connection is just put there by people who choose to see the movie for more than just entertainment.

for example, me & 98% of the rest of the world see the movie for a thrilling, enjoyable film; not the connection between the Batman character from first movie to second.

it's not made for anylitcal purposes, but to kill the box office & it surely did.

And you and 98% of the world are right, but you would also be right about 98% of all sequels. What are these magical sequels that are unwatchable unless seeing the first film first?

i don't know, i didn't say a sequel had to be in direct relation with the first film.

BUT, Lord of the Rings, Star Wars, The Godfather, Spiderman(?), Lethal Weapon(?), Transporter, Die Hard(?), i can't even think of other sequel movies..

Lord of the Rings is the only one where you can't watch it with out seeing the first one. I can easily watch Spiderman 2, GF 2, Empire Strikes Back, Transporter, or any of the Die Hards with out seeing the first in the series. Empire is the closest of the bunch, but you're telling me you can't watch Lethal Weapon 2 with out seeing the first, but you can watch Dark Knight with out seeing Begins? Because if so, it would make a lot of sense regarding your Tom Brady arguments. 

[Chamillitary Click]

^i put "?" next to the ones i wasn't really sure about.

i couldn't even tell you what happened in Lethal Weapon 2; i haven't seen those in years.

just saying there are sequels where you need to see the first one, Dark Knight just isn't one of them.