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.