It's time for Batman to return to television

It's time for Batman to return to television

With The Dark Knight set for yet another big screen outing in 2016, I feel that, after a 46 year absence, it's high time he made a resurgence on the small screen.

Editorial Opinion
By batfan08 - Dec 20, 2014 07:12 PM EST
Filed Under: Batman
Source: The Wrap
This year was a historic one for Batman fans like myself. Not only was it the 75th Anniversary of the character, and the 25th Anniversary of the classic Tim Burton film, but, for the first time ever, after 46 years, the classic Batman TV series was released on Blu-Ray and DVD. Let that sink in, for a moment: it's been almost half a century since Batman last graced our television screens in live-action.

As a lifelong DC Comics fan, I'm ecstatic about WB's plans for a DC Cinematic Universe. I was in the camp that thoroughly enjoyed Man of Steel, and I'm excited to see where they pick up the pieces from here. The thought that, by 2018, we could, potentially, be going to see a Justice League film is a mind blowing notion for myself and others, and the best part is that we're, essentially, getting two DC Universes!

You read that right! Not only do we have a Justice League featuring Barry Allen, Clark Kent, Bruce Wayne, and others, but it seems as though the Arrow and Flash TV series are poised to bring in even more of the DC Universe. I mean, that's what it seems like, Barry Allen's already on TV and we're seeing him in the upcoming film slate, so, that must mean that we're just moments away from seeing the small screen counterparts of DC's "Holy Trinity," [Batman, Superman, and Wonder Woman] as it were, right?

Well, according to Arrow and The Flash executive producer Andrew Kreisberg, that may not be the case. "You won't be hearing 'Gotham' or 'Metropolis' on our show anytime soon," he stated in a recent interview. That's it? After Harley Quinn, after Ra's Al Ghul; after "Wayne Tech/Queen Inc. Merger Complete," we won't get to see all those little teases go anywhere? Well, why the hell'd you include them, then? I'm sorry, but it's this "pick and choose" mentality that WB has with their properties that pisses me off to no end.

Arrow star Stephen Amell recently voiced his disapproval of Warner Bros.' casting of a new Flash for their film universe, hot off the heels of Grant Gustin's debut as the Scarlett Speedster, saying:

“I thought that it was shitty that all of this stuff got announced the morning of the spectacular ratings of the second episodes of ‘The Flash’ came in. I thought that the way that Warner Bros. announced the slate of DC movies could have been handled better, and I think that someone like Grant Gustin, who has just launched an iconic character like the Flash, to record breaking numbers. I think that he should have been given a wider berth than two episodes before another actor was announced to play his character."
 


There seems to be a real disparity in how Warner Bros. treats their Television division, in contrast to how their motion picture division seemingly has carte blanche over all DC properties, and I have to say that, as a DC fan, and a Batman fan, that is incredibly agitating.


I hate the fact that, every time I turn on the television, and tune into a DC Comics based program, I have to see them tip toeing around the existence of these characters. I am no longer content in seeing Batman's rogues gallery retrofitted to Arrow, nor am I content in the endless barrage of prequels. Smallville, Gotham, Krypton? Where do we go from here, WB? A "Dallas"-esque soap opera about the lives of wealthy socialites Thomas and Martha Wayne that eventually culminates in a "Who shot J.R." moment in Crime Alley?

The thing that agitates me the most, though, is just how much you think you're doing us all a favor by placing these characters on a pedestal. "Well, look how much better these characters are! They're so special to us that we've reserved the right to use them exclusively for our motion pictures." I'm excited to see Ben Affleck's portrayal of The Dark Knight, and I'm excited to see Justice League on the silver screen, but, with films, you have limitations that simply aren't present on television.

When Christopher Nolan's "The Dark Knight" Trilogy was released, one of the common complaints I saw was that Batman wasn't much of a detective. While he did partook in some deductive reasoning, there was an overreliance on technology in how he solved crimes. I'm of the belief that this was of no fault to Nolan. With a runtime that clocked in at nearly two and a half hours (possibly over; I'm unsure, off the top of my head), "The Dark Knight" was  packed full of content, already. A larger focus on the "world's greatest detective" facet of Batman's character would only serve to further detract from the film's pacing.
We live in a golden age of Television, where Cable networks like HBO, FX, and AMC have redefined how we perceive dramas on the small screen, and shows like Breaking Bad, Mad Men, and The Walking Dead have sparked a revolution in how even prime time networks approach dramatic content. Look no further than NBC's sleeper hit "Hannibal" to see how they are pushing the boundaries of what's allowed, in the service of great storytelling. 

The point I'm trying to make is that, if you haven't already guessed, after 46 years, it's time for the caped crusader to return to the small screen in a big way. 1992's seminal "Batman: The Animated Series" proved to us just how perfect a fit the dark knight is for the long-form, serialized format, in, what many believe to be the definitive portrayal of Batman in any media.

There is so much depth to Batman, as a character, with one of the richest rogue's galleries in all of comics, the various dimensions of who Bruce Wayne is and why he does what he does, and the potential for great storytelling that those dynamics entail. To pidgeon hole the character to one two and a half hour film every two to three years, based on some misinformed notion that you're preserving his importance, is to barely scratch the surface of who Batman is, and, in doing so, you're creatively stifling the character outside of the confines of the print medium.

With that being said, please, Warner Bros., I urge you to let go of the reins a little bit. Allow creators to play in the vast sandbox that is Gotham City (AFTER the arrival of Batman), and trust in your audience to support the character no matter what medium he's presented in. We go see Batman films because we love Batman, and I don't see how his presence on television would serve to change that. This same rule applies to Superman, and Wonder Woman, as well. There is plenty of room for multiple interpretations.

My apologies for any format errors, as this is my first editorial, and I'm still learning the ins and outs of how this should all work.

BANE And DEATHSTROKE Live-Action Movie In Development At DC Studios
Related:

BANE And DEATHSTROKE Live-Action Movie In Development At DC Studios

Hayden Christensen Responds To BATMAN Rumors And Explains Why Darth Vader Would Beat Thanos
Recommended For You:

Hayden Christensen Responds To BATMAN Rumors And Explains Why Darth Vader Would Beat Thanos

DISCLAIMER: As a user generated site and platform, ComicBookMovie.com is protected under the DMCA (Digital Millenium Copyright Act) and "Safe Harbor" provisions.

This post was submitted by a user who has agreed to our Terms of Service and Community Guidelines. ComicBookMovie.com will disable users who knowingly commit plagiarism, piracy, trademark or copyright infringement. Please CONTACT US for expeditious removal of copyrighted/trademarked content. CLICK HERE to learn more about our copyright and trademark policies.

Note that ComicBookMovie.com, and/or the user who contributed this post, may earn commissions or revenue through clicks or purchases made through any third-party links contained within the content above.

Tars
Tars - 12/20/2014, 8:55 PM
Glad I could read this article *sarcasm*
RextheKing
RextheKing - 12/20/2014, 9:08 PM
I'm suppose to wear glasses but I don't; get me a bigger font, and I'll actually be able to attempt to read it.
gamecreatorjj
gamecreatorjj - 12/20/2014, 9:08 PM
is this an article for ants?
Darkknight2149
Darkknight2149 - 12/20/2014, 9:21 PM
The font is too small to read but, from reading the title, there are two words you should know: Gotham. Fox.

And right before Gotham started airing, Beware The Batman had just ended it's one season run on Toonami. Batman never left TV to begin with.
Darkknight2149
Darkknight2149 - 12/20/2014, 9:29 PM
Also, 46 years? You realise Batman TAS, The Batman, various Batman animated shows from the late 60s to 80s, Gotham, Birds Of Prey, Batman Beyound, Batman The Brave And Bold, and Beware The Batman have all aired since the 1960s show. And if you mean live action, there's Birds Of Prey and Gotham.

However, if you really mean it's time for them to do another live action Batman show actually centred on Bruce Wayne in action as Batman instead of just a show surrounding the Batman Universe, that's understandable. It's hard to understand what you mean because the article text is too small to read.
batfan08
batfan08 - 12/20/2014, 9:46 PM
@Tars @RextheKing @gamecreatorjj @darkknight2149 I appreciate the fact that you guys checked it out, and I'm really sorry about the "technical difficulties," but I've ironed them out, so, if you're still interested, it should be much more readable, now!
RextheKing
RextheKing - 12/20/2014, 9:57 PM
I agree with your logic, but at the moment I am fine without a Batman live action tv series. Like you said though, I do feel like he and other DC properties should not be withheld from television for the sake of the cinematic universe.
batfan08
batfan08 - 12/20/2014, 10:02 PM
@RextheKing That's my biggest issue. I don't necessarily believe that there has to be a Batman television series, but I believe that creators should be given the option. If Kreisberg, Guggenheim, and Berlanti want to have a TV Bruce Wayne show up on Arrow, they should be afforded the same courtesy that Snyder is, when it comes to having his own DCCU Flash.
Darkknight2149
Darkknight2149 - 12/20/2014, 11:20 PM
@batfan08
Ah, much better. Yeah, I see your point. I'm fine with no Batman (as in, Batman in costume in live action) show right now but I do think they need to bring him in eventually. Also, I believe there are way too many Batman villains in Arrow and hope they start using more Green Arrow characters and make Arrow seem less like Batman and more like...Green Arrow.
SKOne
SKOne - 12/21/2014, 3:50 AM
If Gotham lasts at least six seasons or more, the series finale at the very least will have Batman in it for a decent amount of time (Warner Bros won't ever make the Smallville mistake again). But I also kind of believe that DC has so many other B and C list characters that I'd like to see, that I don't really need a TV Batman right now. I also kind of feel like you need to give Arrow and the Flash a lot longer runs and develop them more before you think about bringing in Batman and Superman.
batfan08
batfan08 - 12/21/2014, 7:08 AM
@SKOne Personally, I'd love to see a Boardwalk Empire style time jump on Gotham around Season 4 or 5. You could follow the Year One template. Maybe at the end of season 3, Gordon gets forced out of the department, somehow, and decides to transfer to Chicago. Cut to 7 years later, when his forced exile is over, and Gordon returns to find his old pal Bruce Wayne back from an exile of his own, and a mysterious vigilante roaming the streets. I hope, at the very least, we get one season of Batman on the show. Even if it is the final season, I just want to see the difference in a Gotham with a caped crusader; particularly that one, since it's already such an interesting universe.

My hope is that DC are just playing it safe until Batfleck, and that, once his Batman is established, they'll loosen up their grip a little bit. As far as Arrow and Flash go, I absolutely agree with you, but the way Kreisberg's comments read, it's almost like they're not allowed to use the characters. You don't even need to give them their own shows, necessarily, but you could use DC's Trinity as a secret weapon to boost ratings. I'm deadset on a Batman show because I feel that, with his semi-grounded universe (even if you did a Clayface or Croc episode here or there, it probably wouldn't require a huge budget), he'd be the best fit, but for those effects heavy characters like GL and Superman, could you imagine if they had a guest spot once a year on one of the two (or three, or more, depending on how far they decide to expand it) shows? Hell, you could even have a four-part Justice League mini-series, annually, where DC and WB collectively blow their budgetary load.
KingRainbow
KingRainbow - 12/21/2014, 8:29 AM
There was Beware the Batman (2013 till 2014) and Batman the Brave and the Bold, both on Cartoon Network. What did you mean Batman needs another series? He still has one :/
batfan08
batfan08 - 12/21/2014, 8:59 AM
@KingRainbow I clarify in the article that I'm referring to live-action. The last physical Batman we had was Adam West from 1966-68.
batfan08
batfan08 - 12/21/2014, 10:43 AM
@Doopie Oh god, yes. We need more superhero period pieces. I could just imagine that silhouette; those giant devil horns, and his two .45s. Someone needs to hire Jon Hamm and make that happen!
batfan08
batfan08 - 12/21/2014, 12:03 PM
@GliderMan What's an op-ed without an "op?"
batfan08
batfan08 - 12/21/2014, 4:30 PM
@GliderMan I'm afraid you're right, and, as much as I want this, I don't think anything beats how much I want these films to be good. While I said I'm a Man of Steel fan, it wasn't without its flaws. If rumors are true, it appears that some of those may be addressed, but never the less, Batman V Superman seems to be one of the riskiest productions I've ever seen, in regards to just how much they're trying to put into one film, and I'm just hoping beyond all hope that the risk pays off and this upcoming slate of films is awesome.

Like I said, though, it's not so much that a Batman show has to happen, but the way everything reads, it seems like DC has gone and seemingly restricted him and the rest of the A-listers from use, and I don't like that, nor do I think it's necessary. If these guys from WB TV never want to do anything with Batman, and we never see anything, I'm cool with that, but I think that, at the very least, they should be allowed the option.
MileHighRonin
MileHighRonin - 12/22/2014, 11:32 AM
Hell yeah! Give us Gotham Knight! I think a tv series would change the game, yes we have some really good comic book hero based shows. However a well known character like Batman is different than introducing the mass public to Arrow or Iron Fist.
HulkOnion
HulkOnion - 12/25/2014, 4:54 AM
The font is not at all small...
Yeezus
View Recorder