Let's cast the Batman Beyond movie

You guys are missing the point. Removing Old Bruce as a character from the Batman Beyond movie would be like making a Spongebob movie and cutting out Mr. Krabs.

As far as I'm aware, they're looking to adapt the TV show, which like I said is what everyone thinks of when they hear Batman Beyond, and Damian Wayne doesn't appear at all in the TV show. However, it's a good idea for a movie later in the series.

edited 28th Jul '13 8:26:39 AM by somerandomdude

Damien Wayne didn't exist at the time of the show's creation.

Zero: Why do you want him in there so badly? He wasn't in Beyond, the average filmgoer and/or Beyond fan won't know who he is, he hasn't been with us for even a decade (no, I am not counting Son of the Demon), and strictly speaking, he is not well-loved. Let it go.

Now... you think they should keep the Jokerz' looks, or modify them a bit?

Well, realistically speaking the fact of the matter is that if they were going to make a Batman Beyond movie now as apposed to a decade ago, they most likely wouldn't draw entirely from the comics than from an adaptation of an adaptation of an adaptation, and would actually bring some comics influence into it. Otherwise, I don't really see them bothering.

Running the Asylum can only get you so far before it turns into "ignoring everything but bringing back exactly what I liked as a kid, exactly as I liked it," which got Joe Quesada into trouble a while back. It's the same reason I wouldn't want a movie about the Teen Titans to be specifically about the 2000's show, since doing so would ignore a crapload of things in favor of that one show that people liked a decade ago.

If we ever do get a Batman Beyond movie, it doesn't really matter to me whether it's Bruce or Damien or even Dick Grayson somehow, but Damien should at least be considered a legitimate choice.

edited 28th Jul '13 9:51:46 AM by KnownUnknown

But the Batman Beyond comics supplied virtually nothing new to the public overall perception of the sub-franchise. To the hardcore fandom, sure.

edited 28th Jul '13 9:51:39 AM by NapoleonDeCheese

So? Public perception is a really bad standard for comic book movies - heck, public perception is a bad standard for adaptations in general (it's why we'll never get an Oz movie that isn't based on the classic film, for instance).

After the nasty aftereffects things like Superfriends caused throughout the public, making it hard to use certain characters in certain ways, I figure superhero movie writers should avoid using "the public doesn't really know about X / only knows about this in this specific way" to judge whether or not something's worth using.

I didn't really read the Beyond comics either, but the ideas used in them are pretty interesting and worth at least considering.

edited 28th Jul '13 9:54:56 AM by KnownUnknown

I still doubt they would use Damien Wayne. I know studios don't always do things exactly how the original was, but Bruce Wayne is a very important part of the show. They could have Damien as a side character, but they probably won't cut out the main draw of the series. Without having Bruce Wayne, to the general public it's just "some guy who teams up with another guy to be Batman". It'd be like if, say, a Teen Titans movie got rid of Robin and used Aqualad or something. There's a difference between using the source material and using obscure characters just because you can.

edited 28th Jul '13 1:44:25 PM by wuggles

They could do the animated movie and have Damien be the one to get possessed.

^^ Well, we did note the use of Damian would require previous movies to establish. But then, so would a Batman Beyond movie in the first place.

I figure if they do a Batman Beyond movie it'd probably be in their animated movies line.

edited 28th Jul '13 4:16:39 PM by KnownUnknown

The first movie would probably focus on Terry and Blight's origin stories, and they were explained well in the series. I never watched Batman The Animated Series and I still loved Batman Beyond. But like I said, Damian Wayne would be a perfectly fine character to introduce in a later movie, or hell even in the same movie.

The issue I took with it was that people were suggesting replacing Bruce with Damian outright.

What I meant is that a Batman Beyond movie would require a Batman movie (maybe even more than one) to launch off from, similar to how Batman Beyond required Batman The Animated Series, The New Batman Adventures and to a lesser extent Superman The Animated Series to establish continuity.

edited 29th Jul '13 2:15:10 PM by KnownUnknown

Not really. Virtually all the villains are completely new. All the viewers need to understand is that:

• Bruce Wayne is old and bitter and no longer Batman
• This is set in the FUTURE!

Especially since the Nolan movies, even people who've never read a comic in their lives know that Batman's identity is normally Bruce Wayne. Having Terry meet "Bruce Wayne" would be instantly meaningful to the vast majority of the viewerbase.

Damian wouldn't just be some guy though. He would have been Batman. As it stands, if Bruce Wayne were to retire now (as opposed to ten years ago), Dick Grayson would step up to be Batman and when he steps down (because Dick cant die) Damian would then be Batman. If its old!Bruce, then I'd feel that they would omitting what should be an important element. Bruce isn't without successors. Why would there be a gap between him and Terry?

Exaclty, its the future. Not just in the series. Its the future in the real world, too. things have changed that should be accounted for.

And you know what? Who cares if no one knows Damian. He should at least be considered. He could play the grizzled old ex-Batman just as easily as anything else. Familiarity doesn't matter for crap, otherwise Marvel Studios (not the same, I know) never would have touched properties like Ant Man (who people only know for the wife-beating thing) or the Guardians of the Universe (who people don't know at all).

edited 29th Jul '13 7:12:29 PM by Zeromaeus

I'm not ruling out the possibility of Damian being introduced in addition to Bruce. It's him replacing Bruce that I have an issue with. That'd be like, I dunno, making a Harry Potter movie and replacing Hermione with Susan Bones the whole time. Nothing against Susan Bones, but Hermione is part of the core cast of the series.

As for why there would be a 20-year gap between Bruce and Terry, well, that gap a major part of the show as well, especially in the earlier episodes.

The whole father/son dynamic would be interesting to play up, actually. And if I get my way with the cast, Harrison Ford would be on the OTHER side of the awkward father-son relationship.

edited 29th Jul '13 7:22:02 PM by somerandomdude

Not really. It'd be like making a Harry Potter spin-off series and having the Potter acting as a mentor be his son instead of Harry. Only not really, because his son wouldn't have taken his father's role while Damian would have.

It'd be like making a Marvel movie set in the future of the Ultimate Marvel universe and having Miles be Spiderman instead of Peter.

edited 29th Jul '13 7:33:19 PM by Zeromaeus

Who cares? HAAAAAAAHAHAHAHAHAAAAHAHAHAHAH!

Everyone. Even the suits. The initial reaction to hearing the name "Damian Wayne" will, by and large, be "Huh?" Bruce Wayne is universally known as Bruce Wayne. Comparatively, only about 5 to 10 percent of the possible viewership would know who Damien Wayne is, let alone be okay with him being the retired Batman.

There is no good reason to put him in there as the retired Batman. As another hero, perhaps, but not THE former Batman.

^^^^^ Just like how the new DC Cinematic Universe will have to introduce a whole new Batman (and is going to) even though they've just made a whole set of Batman movies because the character has to be reintroduced as relevant to its universe, a Batman Beyond movie would need to introduce a respective Batman to make the fact that it's the future of the future an actually matter.

If not, there's not really any point to not reskinning the whole thing as something new, since the fact that it's Batman related becomes effectively irrelevant - or at least there's little point to it.

Though maybe if it's in their animated set - the animated movies tend to be more able to jump into the action and just tell the story. Then again, they're also a bit more niche.

edited 29th Jul '13 7:38:40 PM by KnownUnknown

I also disagree that it has to be Bruce Wayne to establish that connection. If you establish that Damian was Batman AND say he's Bruce Wayne's son, it would have similar significance AND emphasize the whole FUTURE angle.

You could, after taking great pains and efforts, but from the perspective of an executive gambling millions on a project, why should they risk going with that over proven profitable commodity Bruce Wayne, just to satisfy someone's lonely fanboy wishing for Old Damian Wayne?

And thus nothing is made but what people already know.

There's a delicate line to walk on with those things. Some new things are just potentially audience-alienating, but their time might come someday, just not yet. We don't even have any live action Jason Todd or Tim Drake yet, and they are much easier to set up than Damian. It's not a matter of saying 'oh, if we don't take any and all bold new ideas, we aren't making anything new period'. That's a false dichotomy.

edited 29th Jul '13 7:49:29 PM by NapoleonDeCheese

In that case, why take a risk and make Batman Beyond at all when a new Batman movie would serve the same purpose and would be even more of a sure thing?

edited 29th Jul '13 7:49:30 PM by Zeromaeus

We are getting a new modern day Batman movie, just one co-starring Superman.

What is so hard to understand about this? Take out all the rhetoric about popular culture and who's known and whatnot, and you still have the pressing issue that Bruce Wayne is a core character of Batman Beyond.

You can't have Harry Potter without Ron or Hermione. You can't have Percy Jackson without Annabeth or Grover. You can't have Spongebob Squarepants without Patrick. You can't have Lord Of The Rings without Aragorn. You can't have Avatar The Last Airbender without Katara. And you can't have Batman Beyond without Bruce Wayne.

^^^^ As silly as it sounds (I can't even believe I'm saying it), but Damien might actually be the easiest of the Robins to set up directly, because he's the only Robin whose origin is connected directly with Bruce. Dick requires a Haley's subplot, and both Jason and Tim require that the previous Robins be introduced - since it's a big part of either's either introduction or character arc.

That's the reason we'll probably never see Tim in a live action movie (as terrible as that is) - he's a time-release character, who is at his most effective when introduced after a lot of stuff has already happened, as he's specifically made to address a later Batman whose been through some things.

But the only imperative thing needed to introduce Damien is his connection with Ra's and Talia, and the contrast between his more brutal outlook and his father's ideals - which Batman can do on his own. And he needs to be stable in order to do that, so it's not entirely necessary for Jason or even the other two Robins to be plot significant (in a similar way that Tim doesn't need to appear in Under The Hood).

On the off-chance that this really does happen this way, I can totally see this being a minor series in the animated dvd movies - Batman and Son, then Batman Beyond. But meh, that's just one way to do it.

edited 29th Jul '13 7:59:04 PM by KnownUnknown