Batman to be rebooted after The Dark Knight Rises

Chris Nolan will remain producer

batman

Chris Nolan wasn’t kidding when he said that The Dark Knight Rises would be his last Batman film.

Warner Bros have revealed that after Nolan closes up shop on his Batman trilogy, they will be rebooting the character completely ahead of their proposed Justice League movie.

“We have the third Batman, but then we’ll have to reinvent Batman…” says WB president Jeff Robinov. “Chris Nolan and [producing partner and wife] Emma Thomas will be producing it, so it will be a conversation with them about what the next phase is.”

Whether that means the WB will jump straight into a new Batman film, or re-launch him with the Justice League movie, remains to be seen.

But to reboot Batman on-screen for the third time in 30 years is surely going to result in serious audience fatigue – especially if they insist on retelling Bruce Wayne’s origins story all over again.

Reboot? Or rubbish? Disappointed that this is Nolan's last film, and that a reboot is on the horizon? Or think the character needs freshening up? Talk to us...

Comments

    • writerdave87

      Mar 30th 2011, 10:11

      Dear god not another origins story. Please. We don't need it.

      Alert a moderator

    • KingofSpain

      Mar 30th 2011, 10:20

      Blimey, and we all thought the Spiderman reboot was contrived! Surely they can only reboot the character within a JL movie and not give him a separate film??? I mean, Warner Bros wants to release JL in 2013, and TDKR is out in 2012 so there isn't even time to do a new movie before JL. I'm sure conversations with Nolan will consist of figuring out how to tie JL into Nolan's Batman and not viceversa. I.e. how much of Nolan's version can we use within JL? For all we know, the end of TDKR might leave Batman open to a JL role. As long as he doesn't die in Nolan's final movie then I guess anything goes.

      Alert a moderator

    • Hadouken76

      Mar 30th 2011, 10:30

      MAkes sense i guess. Nolans Bat-Universe wouldn't feel right with a flying alien and a guy with a 'magic' ring. Anyway, who says it says it has to be an origins story? Burtons' Batman films managed to do fine with little or no backstory.

      Alert a moderator

    • ChrisWootton

      Mar 30th 2011, 11:06

      Fair point.. I'm with the whole audience fatigue thing though.. but i think that's mainly just to do with superhero films

      Alert a moderator

    • Krooshlash

      Mar 30th 2011, 11:10

      this story, along with the reboots of spiderman, hulk and superman epiotmises what studios are all about. overkill of the highest order. but why would they give a s**t? the movies will undoubtedly make shedloads of cash

      Alert a moderator

    • fuzzcaminski

      Mar 30th 2011, 11:17

      You have to consider how confusing this would be to the general public, one year after the Dark Knight Rises and BOOM another Batman film, with a different tone, similar story and quite possibly different actors in the roles, how many people would assume it was some sort of cheap rip off or cash in. It just smacks of desperation and money grabbing at the hands of WB

      Alert a moderator

    • RaveyDaveyGravy

      Mar 30th 2011, 12:55

      kill him off I say, then go on and make something different, come back to this in 20 years

      Alert a moderator

    • nacho316

      Mar 30th 2011, 13:10

      Madness, no need for a complete re-boot why not just cast someone else as old pointy lugs and just get on with it!

      Alert a moderator

    • Hadouken76

      Mar 30th 2011, 13:32

      Reboots are only neccessary if their predecessors were eye-gougling bad..(like Die another day, Batman and Robin, Superman 4, Daredevil, Ghost Rider). Films like Spiderman 3 were a bit off but there was room for improvement, (Sandman for well done for instance and would of loved to see Dylan Baker finally become The Lizard), it was only ruined by the Fanboys insistance on including Venom in the mix.... thats right, fanboys ruined Spidey 3!

      Alert a moderator

    • Hadouken76

      Mar 30th 2011, 13:35

      That should of read 'Sandman was well done, for instance'....why do i always see errors AFTER I''ve submitted a comment? Sheesh.

      Alert a moderator

    • GarthMarenghi

      Mar 30th 2011, 14:16

      I agree with Hadouken76 - fanboys are to blame for the reboot of Spider-Man. The film had big problems, but Raimi seemed to have learned from the experience and was putting his foot down over Spidey 4, not letting the studio interfere this time. It seemed perfectly plausible that they could rebuild and move on, but thanks to the backlash they just threw away a perfectly good franchise. It's this mindset of the path of least resistence; if things get a bit difficult, give up and start all over again. Like most of you, I'm sick of origin stories. Not that long ago a hero could arrive fully-formed and no one would bat an eyelid about it. We didn't find out anything much about Bond's past until 40 years into the series. This pandering to a vocal niche who think a filmmaker straying too far from the 'canon' is an excuse to start all over again is a worrying trend. That said, there's no reason why with Batman this couldn't be a good thing. Treat it the way they used to treat Bond - self-contained adventures with a sort of implied vague history that the audience just accepts. And after four or five movies, re-cast the role. They could just adapt key graphic novels, with a different director each time. But ideally they should let it rest for a bit. I can't be the only one hoping someone in Hollywood says 'okay, no more superhero films for five years, let's have a break!' I'd rather have a big-budget, serious Batman TV series than more films, I think.

      Alert a moderator

    • kilroy0097

      Mar 30th 2011, 15:29

      It's pretty obvious what they are doing here. They can't possibly let "The Avengers" movies have all the spot light so they need to come up with a tired copy cat of a story "The Justice League". It's not like they didn't do this exact thing between DC Comics and Marvel Comics all the time. One just copied the other's idea and tweaked it to fit their own universe and then the other returned the favor. Same thing but different media. No doubt they will attempt to introduce the Justice League in some way with Batman and don't discount another Superman movie also and then of course their is the talk about the upcoming Wonder Woman TV series and maybe movie later on. Expect what they did with Marvel and the Avengers but done worse because frankly I'm not impressed with DC in general. Batman is their work horse. They slaughtered Superman as a cornerstone. Wonder Woman is going to be iffy. Already did Flash as a TV series. Green Lantern doesn't look too bad just yet as a movie. Aquaman is a boring character in today's world and will probably be looked at as a Greenpeace activist with super powers and then Martian Manhunter. Anyone outside of comic readers even know who he is? There is a long road ahead of the DC franchise and unfortunately it doesn't look good unless someone comes along with a damn good vision and can piece it all together. It's all very tedious.

      Alert a moderator

    • Frankie88

      Mar 30th 2011, 15:57

      This whole clusterf**k comes from WB/DC deciding to follow Marvels formula of introducing superheroes with origins stories beforehand so that an ensemble movie won't become a convoluted mess, right? Why not do it with different approach? Screw continuity and just do it - this comic books. Simply re-casting Batman sends enough of a message.

      Alert a moderator

    • Ali1748

      Mar 30th 2011, 17:35

      Again saw this coming a mile away, studios only care about making money. Good luck to the poor sap who has to take over from Nolan.

      Alert a moderator

    • GarthMarenghi

      Mar 30th 2011, 19:44

      Well, if they hire someone of equal or higher stature to Nolan - David Fincher or Michael Mann for example - then they aren't likely to be intimidated.

      Alert a moderator

    • Ali1748

      Mar 31st 2011, 3:15

      I very much doubt the studio would aim for such prestigious directors, Nolan was an indie director when he was selected to reboot the franchise.

      Alert a moderator

    • TheEnigma

      Mar 31st 2011, 4:28

      GarthMarenghi put it best folks... "Treat it the way they used to treat Bond - self-contained adventures with a sort of implied vague history that the audience just accepts. And after four or five movies, re-cast the role" Well said man...! (Applause)

      Alert a moderator

    • 3459ERICS

      Apr 1st 2011, 13:00

      im all for a reboot if done correctly, i love burtons and nolans batman, but i want to see some of more super powered villians, lets do mr freeze or poison ivy correctly or killer croc or clayface. do it in the tone of arkham asylum ps3 game then it can go a bit far fetched in the villians but dark and realistic in characters development. another idea is explore the joker relashionship with harley quinn when he's sectioned in arkham a must is to keep fantastic actors in the roles.

      Alert a moderator

    • BaleAndNolanFan

      Apr 1st 2011, 17:10

      This is ridiculous! This Batman series is brilliant, why would you need to redo it?

      Alert a moderator

    • tomahawk

      Apr 2nd 2011, 9:55

      I don't see why there is a need to re-boot, can't he (Batman) just be in the Justice League movie seeing as there will be three movies by that time? Even if Batman is not portrayed by Christian Bale the audience are not that stupid and already know his origin....even non-fans know Batman's and Superman's origin. If the JL movie is not in the same universe as Nolan's Batman, or Snyder's then Superman movie, there is still no need to reinvent the characters. Batman and Superman appear in the DC animated Justice League movies without an origin story while the lesser characters get theirs. The movie could be about already established heroes like Batman & Superman (even Green Lantern by then) recruiting the lesser heroes who haven't had an origin story, basically the heroes that wouldn't get bums on seats if they had their own movie like Aquaman, Hawkman, Martian Manhunter...etc etc!

      Alert a moderator

    • therealeverton

      Apr 2nd 2011, 19:01

      It's interesting to read what people are saying but there's a fair amount of misconception going on. Firstly does anyone really count Burton's Batman as a reboot? Then there's Schumacher's Batman movies, the went lighter but they weren't reboots anymore than Star Trek IV was a reboot because of the lighter, more comedic nature of that movie. Now then, more of this "Too many super hero movies" nonsense. Even if, IF, you can lump them into one grouping; which I get but given that they can be a wildly different as Mystery Men (more or less a super hero even if only fighting for lurve), Kick a*s and Spider-Man; To Hellboy, Blade and Wolverine. There are NOT that many of these movies made at all. People are just too used to the days when there were none, or just one or two. There's far more romcoms, (just counting the bad ones!), more action films, more drama etc (all of which super hero movies can cross over into as well) than super heroes. Over 130 films will be out this year, meaning less than 5% of the movies out will be super hero films, yet somehow this is too many? We had to wait years for technology to be good enough that our heroes could look good on the big screen; also Marvel making their master plan 13 film (cut back a little) strategy, to get the characters they hadn't rented out in desperation to various studios, leading to The Avengers and the release of movies with characters the wider populace had never heard of before. List the American Super hero movies of the 2nd wave (Post Blade, which is acknowledged by Hollwood as the film that kicked off the serious return of Super hero, and comic book, movies post Judge Dredd & Batman & Robin seeming to signal the end of them; or at least the big budget ones.Think how many romcoms or horror movies there have been in those 13 years and you honestly think the Super hero "genre" comes anywhere near that number? 2 Batman films, 3 Blade, 2 Hellboy, 4 X-Men, 1 Wolverine, 2 Iron Man, 2 Hulk, 1 Captain America, 1 Thor, 1Green Lantern, Kick a*s (British, but hey), 2 Fantastic Four, 1 Daredevil, 1 Elektra, 1 Incredibles, 3 Spider-Man, 1 V for Vendetta, 1 Watchmen, 1 Unbreakable, 1 Catwoman, 2 Punisher, 1 Green Hornet, 1 Jonah Hex, 1 League of extraordinary Gentlemen, 1 TMNT: You could also include Sky High, Zoom and My Super Ex girlfriend, further evidence that Super hero movies can cross many genres. If you take all of these, even ones as Spurious as Super hero movie you get 48 movies in 13 years! Just 48, that's all. An Average of less than 4 a year, borne out by the 5 due this year (really not counting the $2m budgeted Super) and 5 next year. I'm not able to see how that is somehow too many. By this summer we'll have had at LEAST 3 romcoms based on the concept of friends with Benefits, one actually called Friends With Benefitts and that's assuming I haven't missed one, and yet 5 Super hero themed movies is so annoying; so difficult for people to not watch if they hate them so much. There' only been over 1,700 other movies for you to choose from over the past 13 years of super hero "dominance".

      Alert a moderator

    • starwars4life

      Apr 3rd 2011, 21:25

      Did nobody see the date this was published?! Crikey! Hey look guys - it says gullible on the ceiling xD

      Alert a moderator

    • writerdave87

      Apr 4th 2011, 1:50

      Published on March 30th...

      Alert a moderator

    • Khalain

      Apr 9th 2011, 11:33

      I guess because its already been done before i don't think they'd do the origin story again, they will probably say in the new movie he's already been around for a while and is aware of some if not all of the other hero's to more seamlessly move into the justice league movie.

      Alert a moderator

Most Popular