Maybe I will spring for blu-ray for the first two and just see the third in theater. The Henry Ford Museum here in Michigan has a nice big IMAX so maybe I might watch all three there if they do it.
If you asked me a few years ago that I would be anticipating a Batman movie more than a Spider-man movie I would say you were nuts.
His death would be most fitting to end the trilogy, but it'll kill the future of Batman movies. Going with the belief that the last thing the common audience sees will be the first thing related to the next one. If the next reboot was 10 years from now, they might be able to get away with it. The next reboot is to start in 2015. The studio will bank on many people returning to the movie based on Nolan's films. They'll hope the next one can ride the coattails of these movies.
Imagine if each Bond actor died at end of their last 007 movie (the character, not the actual actor.) It would hurt the next actor's first movie.
This whole reboot thing is crazy. Comics change artists and writers all the time and they may change the tone and direction of the book but they don't just erase and start over. That may occur in few examples like line-wide reboots (New52) and abominations (One More Day) but for the most part they don't start over. Are they really going to do another origin story in 2015? That's why not interest in the new Spider-man. I'll rent it but not paying to see half a movie I already saw this soon.
But if the take a radical shift in Batman (more superhero and less dark) then I can see that. But not major origin story. I know there is practical reasons for being all black but I would like for them to get the gray-black costume in there.
Studios want franchises to appeal to their prime audience- the 13-25 year olds. Rebooting a movie after 3-4 years gives them a new audience that they believe never saw anything before. They are partly right. This kind of thinking would work better in an age sans Internet and movies on phones. It is a partially unrealistic goal studios retain. Amz spidey will show it does work. Just not for the generation that "owns" said character at a certain time. Nostalgia doesn't produce revenue until the generation is in their late thirties typically.
Rebooting batman will open doors into the 52niverse they look to be starting with his new superman. New contracts can be made with actors willing to participate in a jla crossover. The taste of this batman series will be cleansed and they will move on.
If they risk holding to this continuity they risk ingesting a flop into the gravy train. Who would want to build on the back of batman and robin?
With bond they hold a very loose continuity that they touch on for fans but means nothing to the story or period. Heck, they have never, as far as I know, even said officially if bond is a person or a title given to multiple people.
This whole reboot thing is crazy. Comics change artists and writers all the time and they may change the tone and direction of the book but they don't just erase and start over. That may occur in few examples like line-wide reboots (New52) and abominations (One More Day) but for the most part they don't start over. Are they really going to do another origin story in 2015? That's why not interest in the new Spider-man. I'll rent it but not paying to see half a movie I already saw this soon.
But if the take a radical shift in Batman (more superhero and less dark) then I can see that. But not major origin story. I know there is practical reasons for being all black but I would like for them to get the gray-black costume in there.
One thing that was neat about Burton's Batman is that it WASN'T an origin story. It had elements in there, but it opened with Bats as an established hero. Batman Begins is my favorite all-time Batman movie, but I agree, I don't need another origin, thanks.
This whole reboot thing is crazy. Comics change artists and writers all the time and they may change the tone and direction of the book but they don't just erase and start over. That may occur in few examples like line-wide reboots (New52) and abominations (One More Day) but for the most part they don't start over. Are they really going to do another origin story in 2015? That's why not interest in the new Spider-man. I'll rent it but not paying to see half a movie I already saw this soon.
But if the take a radical shift in Batman (more superhero and less dark) then I can see that. But not major origin story. I know there is practical reasons for being all black but I would like for them to get the gray-black costume in there.
One thing that was neat about Burton's Batman is that it WASN'T an origin story. It had elements in there, but it opened with Bats as an established hero. Batman Begins is my favorite all-time Batman movie, but I agree, I don't need another origin, thanks.
Agreed! We know, EVERYBODY knows, who Batman is no need for an origin story, almost ever. I would argue that holds true for almost any super hero property.
With bond they hold a very loose continuity that they touch on for fans but means nothing to the story or period. Heck, they have never, as far as I know, even said officially if bond is a person or a title given to multiple people.
"For Your Eyes Only" opens with Bond visiting his late wife's grave, which I suppose could at least link Moore to Lazenby and Connery. I think "The Spy Who Loved Me" mentions her as well. Aside from that, though, it's kept vague. I remember as a kid seeing those before the Lazenby film, and not having any idea what they were talking about.
I've read that the original script of "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" featured Bond undergoing plastic surgery, which would have at least explained why it took Blofeld so long to recognize Bond, when they just met in the previous film.
With bond they hold a very loose continuity that they touch on for fans but means nothing to the story or period. Heck, they have never, as far as I know, even said officially if bond is a person or a title given to multiple people.
"For Your Eyes Only" opens with Bond visiting his late wife's grave, which I suppose could at least link Moore to Lazenby and Connery. I think "The Spy Who Loved Me" mentions her as well. Aside from that, though, it's kept vague. I remember as a kid seeing those before the Lazenby film, and not having any idea what they were talking about.
His marriage is also mentioned in the beginning of License to Kill.
With bond they hold a very loose continuity that they touch on for fans but means nothing to the story or period. Heck, they have never, as far as I know, even said officially if bond is a person or a title given to multiple people.
"For Your Eyes Only" opens with Bond visiting his late wife's grave, which I suppose could at least link Moore to Lazenby and Connery. I think "The Spy Who Loved Me" mentions her as well. Aside from that, though, it's kept vague. I remember as a kid seeing those before the Lazenby film, and not having any idea what they were talking about.
His marriage is also mentioned in the beginning of License to Kill.
That's why I said loose continuity. There are little things. But they are meaningless overall.
Let me tell you, I don't think I've wanted to see ANY movie more than I want to see this one. It doesn't feel like a movie...it truly feels like the third act of an epic. July 19th cannot come soon enough (Dark Knight-a-thon!)
I'm actually pretty pleased about this. Nolan is talented as hell but i think a Justice League movie would require a different sensability than The Dark Knight.
Truthfully, I wouldn't mind if he provided a storyline & produced, with direction, but not write or direct the movie. It'd be too different a movie. This Batman is awesome to picture in the real world, but wouldn't work well with superpowered characters.
Just saw a humorous TV spot for DKR. It had a scene that showed Nolan is going for a realistic feel. Athletes suffer severe injuries playing sports, so...
I just read that it's tracking slightly behind Avengers for the opening weekend. I still don't think it beats Avengers because that had 3D prices which this doesn't but I think we may have our second film to open at 200 million in as many months
Comments
If you asked me a few years ago that I would be anticipating a Batman movie more than a Spider-man movie I would say you were nuts.
M
Imagine if each Bond actor died at end of their last 007 movie (the character, not the actual actor.) It would hurt the next actor's first movie.
M
But if the take a radical shift in Batman (more superhero and less dark) then I can see that. But not major origin story. I know there is practical reasons for being all black but I would like for them to get the gray-black costume in there.
Amz spidey will show it does work. Just not for the generation that "owns" said character at a certain time. Nostalgia doesn't produce revenue until the generation is in their late thirties typically.
Rebooting batman will open doors into the 52niverse they look to be starting with his new superman. New contracts can be made with actors willing to participate in a jla crossover.
The taste of this batman series will be cleansed and they will move on.
If they risk holding to this continuity they risk ingesting a flop into the gravy train. Who would want to build on the back of batman and robin?
With bond they hold a very loose continuity that they touch on for fans but means nothing to the story or period. Heck, they have never, as far as I know, even said officially if bond is a person or a title given to multiple people.
I've read that the original script of "On Her Majesty's Secret Service" featured Bond undergoing plastic surgery, which would have at least explained why it took Blofeld so long to recognize Bond, when they just met in the previous film.
Love the musical score in this especially when the WB and DC logos kick in.
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/Wolvie09/news/?a=63173
M
news.yahoo.com/nolan-says-no-justice-league-superhero-film-090302403.html
M
M