Will Todd Philips strike again?

[Gotham citizen]

It seems Todd Philips would love direct a Batman movie set in his Gotham City; https://www.cinemablend.com/news/248...he-joker-world

1qlmai.jpg

[Flash Gordon]

Matt Reeves is a better fit. I want a solid series, at least.

[Frontier]

I'm morbidly curious how Philips would envision Batman after how he handled Joker.

[the illustrious mr. kenway]

Screenrant talked about Bruce becoming the Jester instead of Batman so I could see that happening.

https://screenrant.com/joker-movie-b...jester-theory/

[Vakanai]

I'm morbidly curious how Philips would envision Batman after how he handled Joker.

This, minus the morbidly part. For years now I've wanted the live action films to be more like the DTV lines. Think about it, we have had the main "in continuity" movies starting with Justice League War up to Wonder Woman Bloodline now, but during that time we also got two Adam West movies, three Batman Unlimited movies, a Brave and the Bold crossover with Scooby Doo, Batman Ninja, Gotham in Gaslight, Gods and Monsters, and a crossover with Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, and I've lost count of how many Lego movies. I want that kind of variety in live action films too, and having Todd Phillips and Matt Reeves both making Batman movies is a good step in that direction. If both directors make successful Batman movies that the audience realize are unrelated to each other then maybe that will open the floodgates. Forget a shared universe, we could have a cinematic multiverse!

[SiegePerilous02]

I'm morbidly curious how Philips would envision Batman after how he handled Joker.

It's Batman vs. the Joker, except they're both just really dumb and mentally ill to the point of it being really sad.

[Vakanai]

It's Batman vs. the Joker, except they're both just really dumb and mentally ill to the point of it being really sad.

I'm going on a limb here and guessing you didn't enjoy the Joker movie. It was different, but that was one of the things I liked about it. Still felt very Jokery to me at least, although I get it opinions differ, but it wasn't the same thing I'd seen before in previous movies. And mentally ill isn't that new a take on Joker.

[SiegePerilous02]

I'm going on a limb here and guessing you didn't enjoy the Joker movie. It was different, but that was one of the things I liked about it. Still felt very Jokery to me at least, although I get it opinions differ, but it wasn't the same thing I'd seen before in previous movies. And mentally ill isn't that new a take on Joker.

Oh no, I actually did like it a lot for what it was. I have too many strong opinions on what I think the Joker should be to fully embrace it. But it was a well done movie and I can respect it.

But criminal mastermind this one was not. That was kind of the point for this one, but I'm not sure I would be interested in an ongoing narrative for him. Law of diminishing returns.

[Vakanai]

Oh no, I actually did like it a lot for what it was. I have too many strong opinions on what I think the Joker should be to fully embrace it. But it was a well done movie and I can respect it.

But criminal mastermind this one was not. That was kind of the point for this one, but I'm not sure I would be interested in an ongoing narrative for him. Law of diminishing returns.

Eh, law of diminishing returns is a problem for everything, but as fans of a 75+ year old character it's not something we should be too concerned about.

[SiegePerilous02]

Eh, law of diminishing returns is a problem for everything, but as fans of a 75+ year old character it's not something we should be too concerned about.

I think it's more this particular iteration of the character than the Joker in general, at least for me.
it was a throwback to 70s style cinema, so I have a hard time seeing it being used in big franchise sequels because those types of films don't lent itself to that.

But who knows, they might make it work if they tried.

[Frontier]

We haven't really had a period piece live-action Batman movie so on that merit I think it would be interesting to see how they'd approach things.

[gregpersons]

This, minus the morbidly part. For years now I've wanted the live action films to be more like the DTV lines. Think about it, we have had the main "in continuity" movies starting with Justice League War up to Wonder Woman Bloodline now, but during that time we also got two Adam West movies, three Batman Unlimited movies, a Brave and the Bold crossover with Scooby Doo, Batman Ninja, Gotham in Gaslight, Gods and Monsters, and a crossover with Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles, and I've lost count of how many Lego movies. I want that kind of variety in live action films too, and having Todd Phillips and Matt Reeves both making Batman movies is a good step in that direction. If both directors make successful Batman movies that the audience realize are unrelated to each other then maybe that will open the floodgates. Forget a shared universe, we could have a cinematic multiverse!

100% agree. DC's strength is the Multiverse. Marvel's strength is the one shared universe. I think it is to DC's advantage to push multiple interpretations of their big characters simultaneously.

Anyway I'd be interested in a sequel with a different version of Batman from what Reeves/Pattinson are doing. The main thing I wanted from the Joker film was for Batman to eventually punch him in the face. I think Phillips could do a great job adapting The Killing Joke for a sequel.

[Vakanai]

I think it's more this particular iteration of the character than the Joker in general, at least for me.
it was a throwback to 70s style cinema, so I have a hard time seeing it being used in big franchise sequels because those types of films don't lent itself to that.

But who knows, they might make it work if they tried.

I don't see a problem if they keep the cost low like they did for Joker. They made a billion on a film that was like 50/55 million to make. There is so much room to accommodate diminishing returns it would be silly to worry about it this soon. If WB can tempt Phillips to make a Joker sequel or a Batman movie set in that verse they'd be stupid not too. If the budget remains in the same ballpark as the last it'd still be profitable even if it only took in half the proceeds.

We haven't really had a period piece live-action Batman movie so on that merit I think it would be interesting to see how they'd approach things.

Isn't the Matt Reeves The Batman supposed to be set in the 90s? That's about when the kid from JOKER would be grown up enough to be Batman (Joker was set in the early 80s).