Comments on: Two Batman sequels together?

By: hepcatjew

hepcatjew — Sun, 30 Oct 2005 11:23:26 +0000

i think shooting the next 2 films together is a good idea as long as they tell two separate stories (i.e. allow some time pass in between the plot lines of films 2 and 3 – not necessarily alot of time, but there should be a central thematic shift from film 2 – 3). What I liked most about BEGINS vs. the previous films was its realism & focus on character development (no surprises here I’m sure) – I’d like to see this continued in the franchise. Based on rumors flying around about where Nolan wants to take this story and how he’s going to tell it, I think not shooting these two projects together will decrease the likelihood of a 3rd film being made, and I think you need 2 more films to tell a satisfying BATMAN story that doesn’t leave you feeling like the last few Shumacher films. Dig this take on things – (www.batman-on-film.com/opinion_tapley_beginssequel.html) Need two movies to do it justice and set up this franchise for the long term! Oh, and as to not bringing back the Joker b/c he died in the Keaton pic?! – Um, okay… while we’re at it, let’s bring Arnie BACK simply because he DIDN’T die, yeah, let’s do that…

By: crackerjack

crackerjack — Wed, 07 Sep 2005 21:43:07 +0000

I can see why the producers would want to film two consecutive sequels. I am not sure when it first happened, maybe Lord of the Rings was the first, though they werent really sequels as much as one large movie. They had always planned that. So maybe the Matrix sequels were first. One reason the producers like doing this is it limits the pay for actors. If they don’t get the actors in a contract to do two or three sequels then the star like Bale could demand more. I don’t know if its good or not, I hope the sequels are as entertaining as the first. I wholeheartedly agree with those that ripped into the people bringing up the Joker’s death in the 1989 Batman. Of course it’s a different imagining of the same story. The Joker is not dead in the new Batman series yet…

By: mat b.

mat b. — Wed, 07 Sep 2005 20:47:14 +0000

what BB was doing in the end if sum of u couldnt see was setting up the movie Batman the joker had to be turned into the joker but he still left his calling card (the joker out of a deck of cards).

now what should happen in the new movie is the return of Scarcrow or a better villan like killer croc or play out the death of robin and the departure of batgirl.

By: lizardfreak12

lizardfreak12 — Sat, 06 Aug 2005 02:34:56 +0000

Bill B. please think before you type. Honestly you have no taste in Batman let alone any common sense. And Halle Berry played the worst Catwoman ever, and that whole Catwoman movie was not in relation to Batman. It was an adaptation of a comic book without Batman, just Catwoman. You don’t know shit.

By: Bill B.

Bill B. — Sat, 06 Aug 2005 01:54:55 +0000

This is what I’d like to see in BATMAN BEGINS 2 :

I hope Kevin Smith is brought in to write the script. I’d like to see Billy Bob Thornton as The Joker, Jessica Simpson as Harley Quinn, Ashton Kutcher as Harvey Dent, and I’d love to see Halle Berry reprise her role as Patience Phillips/Catwoman for the required love intrest.

By: lizardfreak12

lizardfreak12 — Tue, 12 Jul 2005 21:12:51 +0000

I wonder if the Joker was working for Falcone and shot the “nobody” that killed Bruce’s parents? And after Falcone fell out of power from the Batman, maybe the Joker became the powerful one. Something will happen where the Joker will become mutated from a chemical plant some way from one of his operations.

By: Episode666

Episode666 — Tue, 12 Jul 2005 06:40:27 +0000

I would hope that they would bring in Joker, if only as a background character. It’s also obvious that they’re ignoring the older Batman movies by having Bruce’s parents not be killed by Joker. I like the way the series (assuming they’re making more) is going and hope it stays as dark as it is. As for Joker, nobody can top Nicholson’s performance…wonder who they’re gonna get.

By: Richard Brunton

Richard Brunton — Mon, 11 Jul 2005 20:10:55 +0000

Good point Herby, Wayne’s parents are killed by a nobody, not the pre-Joker Joker.

By: Herby

Herby — Mon, 11 Jul 2005 09:25:59 +0000

I can’t believe there are people griping over the Joker being the next villain because he was killed off in the first film. The producers and Director has stated enough times they are ignoring the last four films and starting fresh. That should have been apparent when they brought in the character of Joe Chill to kill Bruce Wayne’s parents. The Burton film had a young Napier (Joker) killing his parents.

This is an alternate universe, one that is far closer to the comic.

By: SuperGrover

SuperGrover — Mon, 11 Jul 2005 03:30:38 +0000

Whatever it was that I understood, or misunderstood for that matter, about the original post here gives you no grounds, lizardfreak, to belittle me into unconsciousness — as you so hoped would be possible. But the fact that a day after your original post, you were STILL thinking about what I wrote means that you and I could actually have an intelligent debate about any movie out there. For that I give you points, and I invite your wit any time.

On the matters of attacking the fellow members of Sesame Street, lay off. Grover is a character himself, unrelated to that of Big Bird — who’s gay — and the Grouch, who lives his pessamistic life out of a garbage can, and who’s closest friend is that of an mute inchworm. Or shall I attack you on the grounds of choosing your nickname from having a passion for lizards?

I respect your opinion, lizardfreak, but shots below the belt are beneath you and I.