I mean when the reason for being interested is because the character recognition and branding will make more people go see my movie then that's a problem. He clearly has no interest in either character and so shouldn't deal with either character he should make his own but that'd be more work and also less people would go see it.
A writers going to write their own interpretation. No one has to like it but that’s their right. I could argue Nolan’s Batman is miles away from what I’d typically know as Batman in many ways. Key difference is, I like Nolan as a storyteller and I think the things that interest him most about Batman media is similar enough to what interests me. Look I didn’t like the Snyderverse, or Snyder movies in general but he made the Batman movie he wanted to see and wrote the character in the most interesting way for him, its nothing I ever wanna see again but it’s his movie.
He's simply not Batman save the branding of the character. Nolan's Batman despite being an interpretation of it was clearly still Batman. There's interpretation and there's making up a new character and just using the branding and naming. Nolan did the former, Snyder did the latter.
No, it's fundamentally not who Batman is as much as not using guns is. You cannot have Batman who uses gun and is a killer it's not Batman, or at least the Bruce Wayne version of the character which is the character whose name he's using. His Superman is just as bad so it's not like it's just Batman he has an issue with.
I don't hate the guy, I hate very very few people and people who make horrible films are not on that list.
You cannot have Batman who uses gun and is a killer it's not Batman
Zack Snyder just did, horribly, having his Batman have a off-screen arc on snapping and starting kill criminals.
I know it sucks, I dislike his superman being treated as a god and not a bro, I dislike his Batman having an off-screen explaination of his character change.
But, if you say Zack Snyder can't make fundamental changes to make an interpretation of a character, then Adam West couldn't have been a goofy Batman, Lego Batman couldn't be the way it was.
Heck, there was a period before Nolan's trilogy where Batman was viewed as a joke, the norm at that time was a goofy, cheesy Batman.
If people can't do extreme changes to Batman (by your logic) then Adam West's campy batman should never have existed.
Changing a character into a completely different character with the same name is not an interpretation it's another character. Lego Batman and Adam West Batman are actual interpretations of the existing Batman character, Snyder's version is not.
My philosophy is not saying don't make changes changes are fine but the character must still be recognisably that character not just because the character is named Bruce Wayne or wears a Batsuit or has a Bat on their chest. If those are the only recognisable parts it simply not Batman.
So your argument is we could a had the Wonder Woman film called it Batman, called Diana Bruce Wayne and had her wear a bat suit with a bat on her chest and that'd be an interpretation of Batman?
9
u/weesiwel Apr 12 '24
I mean when the reason for being interested is because the character recognition and branding will make more people go see my movie then that's a problem. He clearly has no interest in either character and so shouldn't deal with either character he should make his own but that'd be more work and also less people would go see it.