Superman vs. Batman (2016): How It Should Be Done

At long last, after years of constant delays and indecisiveness, Wonder Woman is finally going to appear in a theatrical motion picture. Even better, the film is shaping up to look pretty damn spectacular and sounds like a lot of fun, and based on the creative team’s previous efforts, I personally cannot wait to see this thing.

I’m speaking, of course… of The LEGO Movie.

Superman vs. Batman (2016): How It Should Be Done

What’s that? You thought I was referring to a different film? Oh, you mean that half-assed directionless Man of Steel sequel that seems to be learning nothing from the mistakes its predecessor made, in addition to being largely made up on the fly based on whatever happens to be big at the box office any given moment? The obvious developing clusterfuck that’s taking its inspiration from all the wrong places and likely will begin filming without even so much as a solid plot outline, never mind a script? (Okay, I wrote this before the recent announcement that the film’s release date has been pushed back until 2016, but most of it still applies…)

The article continues after these advertisements...

Yeah, no. I’ll take The LEGO Movie, thank you very much. For one thing, a bright and colorful action comedy revolving around my favorite childhood toys and made by the guys who brought us Cloudy with a Chance of Meatballs and Clone High sounds significantly better than another dull, drab, poorly-written mess in the vein of Man of Steel. For another, it’s already clear that LEGO Wonder Woman will be superior to anything producer Christopher Nolan and director Zack Snyder and their disinterested writing team could ever dream up. I mean, she even has the invisible jet. Do you think Nolan/Snyder are going to give us an invisible jet? Hell, no!

But enough about LEGO Wonder Woman—you came here for my thoughts on Man of Steel 2/Superman vs. Batman/Trinity/Whatever dull name they come up with that’s not nearly as cool sounding as “World’s Finest.

You’ve probably figured out by now that I’m not terribly excited for this movie. I’m unsure as to why anyone could be, to be honest. It’s a sequel to Man of Steel, for one thing, and besides just being a shit movie in general, Man of Steel’s vision of Superman is not one I’m particularly eager to see more of. It’s from a creative team who apparently heard our complaints that the film was too dark and responded by throwing in Batman and having Harry Lennix quote a line from The Dark Knight Returns as if they misheard us. For another thing, the project doesn’t seem to have a solid foundation for what it’s going to be yet which, given how poorly thought out the last script was, and considering they’ve already set a release date with presumably no script, is not a good sign.

But it’s not like I want this film to fail. I want to be excited for it. The very prospect of a Superman/Batman team-up movie should be the greatest news ever to me. And it’s not like the concept should be hard to do well. All it needs is a good idea.

If Warner Brothers has any clear direction for this project (though I’m pretty sure they don’t), so far the only real hint is the aforementioned Comic-Con announcement, and the use of a quote taken from one of the better known published instances of Superman and Batman as adversaries. So all indications are that the film will be a Superman versus Batman movie, as opposed to a simple team-up.

Now to me, starting off with the concept of Superman and Batman beating each other’s brains out for two hours is just getting off on the wrong foot. It doesn’t really fit the characters, it’s a waste of potential, and it’s just plain not very interesting. I am aware that many feel otherwise, however. There is definitely a market for Dark Age hate-each-others’-guts Superman and Batman, and I recognize that my preferred brand of Silver Age best-friends-forever Superman and Batman isn’t for everyone.

But even if you absolutely must go that route, The Dark Knight Returns is the worst possible story to draw inspiration from. There’s not nearly enough story in the last chapter (the only chapter to feature Superman) to fill a feature film. It’s the weakest part of the book by far: mindless, angsty tripe about an over-equipped, Gary Stu-Batman wailing on a two-dimensional straw-man version of Superman. Not to mention, there’s really nowhere for Woman Woman to fit in.

Superman vs. Batman (2016): How It Should Be Done

To be frank, there aren’t really any good Superman-fighting-Batman stories, despite there being quite a few of them. The problem is the whole concept is just so stupid on its face, even by comic book standards, that no one knows what to do with it. The only way to give Batman even a snowball’s chance in hell in a straight-up fight is for them to equip him with so many extra advantages that he kind of ceases to be Batman and essentially becomes Emo Iron Man. What they usually come up with for a Superman vs. Batman fight isn’t really a fight. It’s more of a “Batman tries desperately to stay alive long enough to break whatever brainwashing made Superman kill-crazy” sort of deal.

There’s really only one attempt I’ve ever read that managed the trick of being fun, in-character for everyone involved, and mostly believable. That was in Darwyn Cooke’s Justice League: The New Frontier Special #1, a tie-in he wrote to promote the animated movie. It manages this in a number of ways. For one thing, both Superman and Batman go into the fight reluctantly, pushed by outside forces despite already respecting one another, even without having met before. It feels much more in keeping with the spirit of the characters than the idea of them being bitter rivals, which never rang true to me. Secondly, it’s not just a mindless punch-up, and plays to Batman’s strengths in a mostly believable way: Batman relies on stealth, evasion, and sneak attacks, and he manages to get his licks in without Superman seeming slow or incompetent.

Superman vs. Batman (2016): How It Should Be Done

And finally, it has the perfect ending. Wonder Woman, ever the peacemaker, intervenes and points out the obvious, that they should be allies instead of needlessly fighting each other. And just to drive the ludicrousness of the premise home, they resolve the situation by staging a fake fight in which Batman wins.

Superman vs. Batman (2016): How It Should Be Done

If any comic should be the template for a Superman vs. Batman movie, it’s this one. It would have to be fleshed out quite a bit; it’s a very short comic, after all. But the basic idea and spirit of the thing is sound. Having the massive, gritty brawl all the Batman fans want to see in which the Dark Knight annihilates the Man of Steel by pure force of awesome, only to pull the rug out from under them and have the whole thing revealed as a hoax would be just too hilarious for words.

Once again, I know my favoritism towards this story over The Dark Knight Returns is influenced mostly by my Silver Age inclinations. But even if you insist on going darker, the staging of Darwyn Cooke’s fight is far superior to Frank Miller’s. Miller makes Batman into a walking tank just so he can have a straight-up fistfight. Regardless of tone, a fight between Superman and Batman should never be a direct melee duel. It just looks silly, and requires a writer to jump through too many hoops to make it plausible.

The characters simply aren’t compatible like that. Batman isn’t a brawler like Superman, and brute strength isn’t how he solves his problems. He’s a ninja, a guerilla fighter, he’s all about misdirection and sneaking around in the shadows. Use that. Give him lead shielding and ultrasonic tech to sneak around where even Superman can’t see him. Have him use distractions to launch sneak attacks. Let him do things that feel like things Batman would do. Don’t just give in and hand him heavy ordnance and have him punch things.

In fact, if you really want to make the conflict between the two heroes the main crux of the plot, there’s really only one way to play it: make Batman the villain. The thing people always misunderstand when they say Batman is “smarter” than Superman is that he’s really not. Superman’s solar-enhanced brain is the most powerful computer on earth. What Batman is, is more devious than Superman. Sure, he follows a lot of the same codes of conduct Superman does, but he’s more willing to use torture and intimidation, and more likely to pull underhanded, morally-gray tactics. The one thing Batman has that Superman doesn’t is the ability to think like a villain. He’s spent his life studying the criminal mind to the point of becoming a bit unhinged himself. So use that.

Find a reason to put them at odds, then have Batman show up as the new villain in town, the legendary Winged Avenger come to haunt the Metropolis night. Have him leave traps and cryptic clues to taunt the Man of Steel. Maybe he even borrows some fear gas from Scarecrow to confront Superman with his worst fears (laced with Kryptonite, of course). Have him lead Supes on a wild goose chase all over town, building up to their final confrontation: an explosive battle of wits between man and god, between light and shadow.

Or it could be two hours of punching. You know, because that worked out so well last time.

You may also like...

  • Writrzblok

    A good first confrontation of Superman and Batman was in the “World’s Finest” episode of Superman The Animated Series. That could definitely set the tone for the entire movie on how both have methods of achieving the same result (like how they found out each other’s secret identities.) Or what if, say, someone was framing Batman by using methods similar to his, only with deadly results? Because wouldn’t one end up pissing off Bat fanatics by painting Batman as the villain?

    • You probably gathered from this article, but I kinda love pissing off Bat fanatics. But when I said “make him the villain” I didn’t mean “make him do evil things”, at least not necessarily. I just mean have him use traditional supervillain tactics. Have him use every trick he learned from years of fighting the Riddler, the Joker, etc. Elaborate traps, clues, misdirection, that kinda thing. He doesn’t need to kill or hurt anyone, he should just be taunting and manipulating Superman from afar instead of just confronting him directly, at least until the end.

  • V

    That would be awesome! There would have to be some “heroic” reason for Batman to be doing that, but that fight, with Batman as the villain, would really be a sight to behold. They could even mess with some of the character’s horror origins! Why aren’t you making this movie instead of the people who actually will?

  • Alexa

    I’d watch that…Because I’m probably sure that that film won’t crush my soul or my brain like Man of Steel did. Seriously when those two things happen simultaneously you can get one of *the* biggest migraines ever. Not fun…
    = (

  • Kevin Rusley

    I’ve got a few ideas of my own. Considering the expensive mess this is starting to resemble, breaking up the production into several installments doesn’t seem all that unreasonable. Either way, the best thing they can do RIGHT NOW is make the WW solo movie:

  • freddy

    I didn’t mind Man of Steel at all, but that’s not an argument I’m terribly interested in rehashing here.
    Instead I’ll just say that I love your suggestions, especially setting Batman up as the villain, at least initially.

  • Gallen_Dugall

    Agree so much. Batman’s not Batman, Superman’s not Superman, Wonder Woman’s not Wonder Woman, and I’m not interested.

  • TheCrazyFish

    Honestly, I didn’t particularly care for the Dark Knight trilogy either. Don’t get me wrong, it was really badass and all, but it was also early proof that Christopher Nolan does not understand DC Comics. At all.

    Nolan tried to use Batman as a metaphor for George W. Bush’s national security and foreign policy, in so doing he took one of the greatest heroes America has ever created, a man who fights crime by night, founds charities by day, and does everything he can to make his environment a better place for everyone in it… and he turned that hero into somebody that people hate. He made audiences everywhere want Batman to die.

    So…no offense, but are you really that shocked that he screwed up Superman too?

    I imagine Nolan is going to turn into the next M. Night Shyamalan. No, really, here’s how:

    1. Made one thing that was good. (Sixth Sense / Dark Knight Trilogy)

    2. Completely misunderstood what made that thing good. (We were honestly surprised / It had awesome characters and badass explosions)

    3. Instead, bases his entire career on making every movie follow the exact same formula until everyone is sick of hearing his name. (Every movie needs a retarded twist ending!!! / Every movie needs to be an adaptation of something lighthearted that is now dark and gritty!!!)

    Totally M. Night Shyamalan.

    • Yeah, totally M. Night Shyamalan. Assuming you ignore LITERALLY EVERYTHING ELSE Nolan has ever done. The Dark Knight trilogy doesn’t account for more than half his filmography and he didn’t even direct Man of Steel. A filmmaker who fast burned out on his own ego and overambition vs a filmmaker who consistently churns out brilliant, thought-provoking thrillers and occasionally phones in a contractually obligated comic book movie to pay for them? Yeah, any connection is tenuous at best from where I stand.

      • Yeah I guess Inception, Insomnia and Memento never happened did they? :P

        • TheCrazyFish

          It seems obvious to us that Shyamalan was doomed to failure now, after Lady In The Water, The Happening, and Last Airbender, yeah. But if someone had told you around the time of Unbreakable “this guy is going to become one of the most hated filmmakers ever” you would have called that guy an idiot.

          But would it have been idiotic? You can look back at a movie like Unbreakable or Sixth Sense and find fundamental flaws in them, like the fact that neither one had a real conclusion, just a big “oh shit!” moment and then the end credits. You can find similar flaws with the films you mentioned. The Dark Knight trilogy got all the characters wrong and turned one of the most iconic and beloved heroes of our generation into an object of scorn. And what’s so thought-provoking about Inception? The fact that its big philosophical question is the exact same one The Matrix asked 11 years ago, and that Total Recall asked 20 years ago? (And incidentally, “nothing is real” is to real philosophy what McDonalds is to fine dining.)

          And it’s kind of a lame argument to say that Man Of Steel was just a fluke and then turn around and say that you believe his next film will be an even bigger disaster than it was.

          Don’t get me wrong. I hope that you’re actually right, that I’m just overreacting, and that Nolan will get off his “everything must be dark and gritty” kick before he runs it into the ground. But I’m not usually wrong about these things. But sometimes I am, and hopefully this will be one of those times. But I doubt it.

          • I think what you’re overlooking is that all of Nolan’s shortcommings so far have come from a lack of interest. He doesn’t WANT to be making superhero movies, so of course they get worse the more they make him do. When he’s working on his own projects, they are always spectacular. Shyamalan just bought into his own hype and made a bunch of pretentious ego projects. Until such time as Nolan produces a bad movie that he actually gave two shits about, I don’t think we should worry.

          • TheCrazyFish

            Good point, but that’s not necessarily a good thing, is it? If he doesn’t want to make comic book movies then he shouldn’t. It’s not like they’ll throw him in jail if he says no.

          • True, but if he says no, he doesn’t get the really big paydays that allow him to make Inception, Interstellar, and all the other movies he wants to make. It’s the nature of the business, sometimes you gotta do stuff you don’t wanna do for the sake of of your passion projects.

          • Muthsarah

            After all of his hits, why can’t he put together enough of his own money (a la Cameron) or at least find investors willing to back a project with his name and brand all over it? I can understand a recently-“discovered” director needing to leap through the studios’ hoops, but he’s done that already; he’s made a name for himself, he’s made his investors a mint, he almost has his own recognizable genre, so why can’t he now make whatever he wants and have people fall over themselves to back the man who made the recent Batman trilogy, AND a massively-profitable passion project of his own, rather than still have to spend half his time making stuff he doesn’t care for?

          • TheCrazyFish

            Honestly, I still say it’s a terrible career move.

            Even if we say the guy’s a genius and his latest movies are just lame because he doesn’t care about comic books, then that just means he’s presently running his career into the ground for no reason.

            I’m not a huge fan, but even I realize that right now he still has enough good will that any movie with his name on it is a guaranteed hit. Even if it sucks people will go see it just because it’s made by the guy who made The Dark Knight Trilogy and Inception. Any producer who would refuse to produce one of his movies is a damn fool.

            But Man Of Steel really made people start to doubt his creative genius, and Superman Vs. Batman is set to lose him even more fans.

            That’s EXACTLY how it started with M. Night. He was showing flaws from the beginning but he was still riding high enough on the success of Sixth Sense and Unbreakable to keep getting projects, but as his movies kept getting worse and worse everyone lost faith in him and he turned his own name into box office poison, to the extent that the only way he can get a movie released now is if he hides his credit. (See: After Earth.)

            Nolan might actually be a genius, but if he keeps making crappy movies that he doesn’t care about it won’t be long before no one sees him as one anymore.

          • doc

            He is making Interstellar.

          • Muthsarah

            I know that. I’m just wondering why he’s ALSO still making these DC films, when (hell, for all I know, it’s just rumor) he doesn’t like doing them. He has enough hits under his belt, and no failures, why does he still have to play ball?

          • doc

            Maybe he just likes the challenge. The man likes to work.

          • CaptainCalvinCat

            He likes to work on something, that he doesn’t care for?

          • CaptainCalvinCat

            I highly doubt that, too – because that is, what seems to be interesting for the most people. Grim, gritty, dark, realistic – when it comes to comic-book-movies or movies about James Bond. Sorry, no. At least not in my book – after all, I liked the more lighthearted Bond-Films and the more “campy” Batman-Movies (yes, even Batman & RObin).

            And concerning to the argument of Joshua, that Nolan does not want to make superhero-movies… well: then he should not direct them.
            When Warner comes to him and says “hey, we want you to direct our next Superhero movie” the obvious answer is: “Sorry, no – not interested. I don’t care for the genre – and honestly: If you’d care you’d hire a director, that frakking cares for the genre.”

            But on the other hand: Nolan wants to make money. ^^

            By the way – I watched inception and I agree, that the philosophical question about reality has been dealt with in Total Recall and in Matrix (and there it was done better). Inception (a.k.a. Algebra – the movie) … yeah, not so much.

          • TheCrazyFish

            Batman & Robin wasn’t a good movie by any stretch of the imagination, but it was entertaining, so there is that one thing in its favor at least.

          • CaptainCalvinCat

            Nah, I liked it. I even can deal with the more stupid things in it, like the Bat-credit-card… no need to erupt in a rage there, Mr. Cricket… erm… Critic.

    • Alexa

      Yeah while I also didn’t care for Nolan’s take on Batman, I still like the guy. I liked Inception a lot and I think he’s way too smart to take the Shayamlan road. But I will agree that he didn’t really get the character and his interpretation was not my cup of tea at all, but I have to admit his Batman interpretation was ten times better than Snyder’s Superman. You would of thought that a guy who said he actually likes superheroes, unlike Nolan, would have made a decent Superman film, but no…Not really…*shrugs*

    • WTFisgoingon

      Allow me to retort:
      1. Following, Memento, Insomnia, Batman Begins, The Prestige, The Dark Knight, Inception, The Dark Knight Rises
      2. That’s up to interpretation. How many times has Batman been rebooted/reimagined/retooled on TV, in the movies, and especially in the comics?
      3. The Prestige is exactly like Inception and Memento. The Dark Knight equals Insomnia. Think about those statements.

      These two directors have nothing in common.

  • Muthsarah

    Aaaaaaaand it’s being announced that Jesse Eisenberg will be Lex Luthor. Apparently, the casting is being done entirely with a giant wheel.

    I’m so sorry, Joshua. You should probably just let this movie go.

    • Guest

      What are you talking about? That’s great news! Mark Zuckerberg as Lex Luthor? I totally want to see that!

    • What’re you talking about? That’s great news! Mark Zuckerberg as Lex Luthor? I totally want to see that!

      • The_Stig

        Because when I think Lex Luthor, I think Michael Cera with a Jewfro. He’s a fine actor but he’s as menacing as a newborn kitten. What’s next, Matthew McConaughey as Darkseid?

        “That’s what I like about them New Genesis girls. I get older and they stay the same age. Yes they dooooo. Alriiiiiight”

        It’s like Nolan is trying to piss me off personally.

        • tedzey71

          First of all… racist? (jewfro comment, but that’s a tangent).

          Second… Eisenberg’s the anti-Michael Cera. Michael Cera couldn’t act his way out of a cardboard box. And before anybody give me a Scott Pilgrim strawman argument, I’m shooting it down because he couldn’t even do that right! Eisenberg’s proven himself to be a competent actor… Cera hasn’t.

          Third… and this one’s subjective. Eisenberg’s played a menacing billionaire in a little movie called “The Social Network.” If anything it sheds light on how today’s billionaires and entrepreneurs haven’t even hit 30 yet and are masters with computer tech. If anything, it make this version both relatable and true to the spirit of the character.

          • TheCrazyFish

            Nevermind, whatever.

          • The_Stig

            No, Eisenberg played an entitled, plagiarizing douchebag billionaire in The Social Network. There was nothing menacing about his performance.

            As I said. Eisenberg is a fine actor, but as Lex Luthor? Ninja, please.

  • Thomas Stockel

    Well said, Josh.

  • yeahputtie

    Man o Steel is still better than the latest JL movie based on the New 52. Superman was not Superman. And WW was a complete moron.

    • Alexa

      I would say they’re both equally bad in their own special misguided and annoying way.

  • doc

    A lot of people aren’t going to like this but I don’t care. Fuck the fans. They don’t know what they want. All the bitching and griping and they are still going to be there opening night having bought their advance tickets on Fandango and then 2 and a half hours later bitching again that they wasted their money on that pile of garbage blah blah blah. At least wait for a damn trailer to start making judgements.

    • TheCrazyFish

      Yep, that’s the movie studios’ philosophy in a nutshell. And it’s bull.

      Where your argument falls apart is in this single silly idea: you’re treating this group, “the fans”, as if it were a single, cohesive group. But it’s not. It’s billions of people, all of whom have different opinions and most of whom have never and will never speak to each other.

      I think the perfect example of this is Michael Bay. The internet is full of people bitching about how much the Transformers movies suck, so when he releases a new Transformers movie and lots of people go see it you foolishly assume that it’s because we’ve “given him a second chance” or because we “don’t know what we want.”

      But you’re wrong. Most of those who said “Transformers was crap, I won’t watch Transformers 2” actually DIDN’T watch Transformers 2, but there’s an equally large segment of the movie-going public out there who not only don’t mind, but actually LIKE the movies. They are the ones who gave Transformers 2 an audience. They are also the ones who will give 2014’s Transformers: Age of Extinction an audience.

      Michael Bay knows that, and that’s why he panders to those fans, and ignores the rest of us.

      It’s the same for every other hated filmmaker that inexplicably keeps getting work. Just look at The Asylum. When I watched Asylum’s versions of Hansel & Gretel, Jack The Giant Killer, and Sherlock Holmes it wasn’t because I’m stupid or don’t know what I want. I watched them because I know I can always count on The Asylum to give me ridiculous bullshit that is never boring no matter how stupid it is, and that is always prime fodder for mocking to my friends and on my blog. You could say that in a twisted way I’m a fan of theirs, and they make their movies so cheaply that they can afford to keep making more no matter how few fans they actually have.

      • CaptainCalvinCat

        [quote = the Crazy Fish]

        But you’re wrong. Most of those who said “Transformers was crap, I
        won’t watch Transformers 2” actually DIDN’T watch Transformers 2, but
        there’s an equally large segment of the movie-going public out there who
        not only don’t mind, but actually LIKE the movies. They are the ones
        who gave Transformers 2 an audience. They are also the ones who will
        give 2014’s Transformers: Age of Extinction an audience. [/quote]

        Allow me to introduce myself: Calvin Nathan Cat – I am one of those you’re talking about. Not only did I watch Transformers 1 and thought “hey, that is a kinda decent movie”, but I watched Transformers 2 and 3, because I liked them. Yeah – I geniunely liked the “Story of adolescence” in Part 1. Part II was not bad either – the thing about Sam and Mikaela? Why not – why not tell that story in the movie?

      • doc

        What’s your point? What I’m saying is “fans” will see a movie they know or at least think they know they are not going to like just so they can talk about about how much it sucked later. If you don’t like a product don’t support it. That’s what my rant was about. You jumped on your soap box about Michael Bay and The Asylum. Michael Bay might suck as a director but I would love to see a Spielberg movie with a reigned in Bay directing the action scenes. and yes, The Asylum makes terrible movies, but listen to the Friends in your Head podcast about 2010: Moby Dick and you’ll have a new appreciation for some of the shit people have to do for a paycheck.

        • TheCrazyFish

          But that’s not what it was about, is it?

          Listen, is it true that there are people who will watch a movie they know they’ll hate just so they can tell everyone how much it sucked? Maybe, but they would be a very SMALL percentage of people. As I said, if you look at a movie like Transformers 2, most of the people who went to see that movie were there because they actually wanted to see the movie because they enjoyed it, like Calvin Cat said below. Others were there out of curiosity, because they thought it might be good.

          The number who were there for literally no other reason than so they could tell everyone how they wasted their money is pretty close to zero. How do I know that? Simple: if one of your friends walked up to you right now and said, “Hey, dude, I just went out and wasted two precious hours of my life which I’ll never get back doing something I knew I would hate just so I could talk to you now and tell you that I hated it!” …what would your response be?


          And frankly, when you talk about “the shit people have to do for a paycheck”… ugh, where do I even begin with this? I’m supposed to feel bad for a guy who spends all day making movies? That poor baby. At least he has a stable job, unlike me. Shit, man. We live in a universe of infinite possibilities. If you hate your job you can look for a new one, or start your own, or go live in the woods and hunt for your food, or sleep under an overpass and beg for booze money, or just DIE. There’s absolutely nothing in this universe that you or anyone else “has to” do. If anyone ever tells you otherwise, ignore them – they’re trying to control you.

  • mofs

    I guess with all the Nolan hate that nobody has noticed that Nolan won’t be producing the new film. I agree that Batman vs Superman is looking like it could be a car crash, although the casting has been pretty spot on so far.

    • TheCrazyFish

      I dunno. Maybe it’s just me, but I have a bit of difficulty picturing Ben Affleck as Batman.

  • Lilgreenman

    I’ve always thought that movies should draw a lot more inspiration from “New Frontier” – specifically, a standalone Justice League movie (modeled on the pilot of the TV show) with the Martian Manhunter as an everyman who’s recruited into the League for his intel on the White Martian enemies.

    Anyone agree?

  • I didn’t hate “Man of Steel”… As a matter of fact, I might suggest that it was a decent start to a new franchise. I think it made a few mistakes (Especially the ending) that probably ought to have went away during the development process. But really, it didn’t make any more mistakes than “Superman II” made in that respect.

    Now the sequel… Hmmm…. I can see tossing Batman into it. That kinda makes some sense if DC wants to build a shared cinematic universe. But stop at Batman for that movie.

    I want to see Wonder Woman on the big screen as much as the next person, but adding her into the next movie along with Batman risks diluting her presence. Have her show up in the next Batman movie and then integrate them in a Justice League movie (But please let me have a Flash movie first… please?).

  • If they really want to have fun with the characters, I would think that they could start by taking a look at the Bruce Timm animated crossover between Batman and Superman… It made basic sense as an intro of the two characters, gave each one something to do and had fun with it. And it didn’t really feel the need to just do the cliche thing of having them automatically fight…