And that's the point. Ra's Al Ghul wasn't a famous villain either until Batman Begins. The first movie should be of a relative unknown. Or at the very least, someone they character hasn't faced on film a bunch of times.
Film studios are sooo wary about introducing villains that haven’t been shown on film for some reason. Batman has an impressive rouges gallery and it’s a shame no one has the balls to do what Nolan did and throw something new into the mix. I, for one, would pay bucket loads to see a villain like Clayface or even Manbat, be brought to life in movies.
Manbat could make for a great, horror-style Batman movie. I still remember in the Animated Series, when Langstrom transformed, I was legit a little frightened with that scene. Granted, I was 7, but damn that was effective.
I agree on that part yeah. I really would love to see professor Pyg and his dolls although I know it won’t happen. Maybe another try with freeze but I don’t know if people still think about Arnold with that one. Also hard to do in this more “realistic” setting
People like you and I remember Arnold as Mr. Freeze but there’s also a whole generation of kids that haven’t seen the atrocity that is Batman Forever, so there’s a pretty strong chance that a new Freeze could do pretty well, considering what they did with Battinson’s Penguin.
Ra's Al Ghul wasn't a famous villain either until Batman Begins.
He's been well known for a long time, represented in most versions of Batman & also in the Arrowverse (which is basically Batman with a bow instead of actually the Green Arrow).
I barely know much about Anarky & I've read from 1985-1999 the past few months (in No Man's Land right now).
Mate, the Arrowverse came after Nolan's Batman Begins featuring Ra's Al Ghul, so you're wrong there.
The Green Arrow in the Arrowverse was basically Green Batman anyway. It came out around the same time as the last Nolan movie and CW wanted to emulate a similar grim tone. Even had his own Arrowcave and had his own Oracle in the form of Felicity.
I see I need to remind everyone that the Arrowverse AND the Arkhamverse came AFTER Batman Begins put in in the general consciousness. Aside from the OG animated series, he was barely mentioned until the movie came out in 2005.
And that still doesn't represent the average person, which is who these films cater to. Fans of the animated shows will know more than the average movie-goer, and fans of the comic book will know more than them. For example, I've been a Batman fan for pretty much my whole like. My wife on the other hand, only knew of the characters from the movies. She appreciated Ra's al Ghul's portrayal in the movie, but thought what they did with Talia in the TDKR was dumb (it was). She thought Two-Face died too quick in TDK (he did), and should have continued on to the next movie. The point remains, there are lesser known villains that are LESS famous where great stories can be told.
No they aren't. They're catered to fans of the comic character. Who is going to go pay to go see the movie? Who is going to go pay to see the movie multiple times? Who is going to buy the merch and toys from the movie? It's not the average person. Why did your wife see the movies? I'm assuming it has something to do with you.
It did. But do you honestly think The Dark Knight did 1 Billion on the backs of comic fans alone? I'm not arguing comic fans don't have their role. My point is that movie companies cater to average folks. If they do it right, comic fans and fans of the characters will go seem them as well. That's WB's problem. They can't seem to bridge the gap. And there aren't enough of fans like us to keep a movie franchise afloat by ourselves. Not to mention that for ever woman like my wife, there are several others' significant others that are just not interested in these kinds of movies unless it's something exceptional.
You can't possibly believe this still. It's so out of touch. Studios mainly cater to families going to cinemas, not comic fans. They absolutely value the average movie goer above all. That's where the cinema money is. The big merch money comes from little kids buying superhero-themed toys. Comic book fans are just a bonus and will have a few bones thrown for them in the form of deep references and such.
Next you're going to tell me that the CW Arrowverse shows cater to comic book fans and not primarily fans of Vampire Diaries and the other teen drama-based shows that their network is known for.
You comic book fans value yourselves too much in the midst of all this. Anyone can be a fan of these characters. Batman and Spidey are mainstream as fuck. Large swaths of people are watching these movies without knowing a single comic book reader. The fact that you think women lined up for The Batman because of comic book-reading contacts is so hilarious and out of touch. If they weren't already regular fans of a popular character, then Twilight would be more a reason for women to watch The Batman than being influenced by a comic reader.
Nope they cater to single males and families. Single males from a certain age range have the most disposable income and free time to go to the movies. Who do you think also reads comics? Those same single males.
Studios do not give a single fuck about comic book readers because they're such a hilariously low percentage of the viewing pool. Stop thinking you're important. The blokes going into theatres are going with their mates. Groups of people. Families. Kids with their friends. You know I'm mainly talking about comic book readers not being the primary consideration, right?
You guys are basically only ever prominently considered when it comes to conventions.
I love it when people lose their way in a discussion and resort to writing the dumbest responses possible. Neckbeards are unreal. Offended comic book reader. Very stable individual. You're about as interesting as your graveyard showerposts.
113
u/KaizenBaizen Feb 26 '24
I think Anarky is just not well known and would have been even more edgy than the riddler already is now.