Batgirl (2022)

[DocLathropBrown]

I've been staring at the cowl, and it occurred that the cowl and the scallops are separate pieces. The cowl and the emblem are under the armored scallops. I think Batman can turn his head.

Possible, but perhaps unlikely? People have image-matched this suit with the Watchmen-ish symbol teased for The Flash, and the extra pectoral lines look the same, and Keaton said he still couldn't turn his head in The Flash--although he delivered it with a sense of comedic timing so maybe he was being facetious.

[DocLathropBrown]

I know you're only theorizing, and I'm with you on retcons are 'to be expected' at this point (BatKeats having a Robin in his original costume for starters!), but the whole Joker being alive, and Napier possibly not being the killer of the Wayne's might please vocal detractors of B89 lore, but it may also effectively retcon's Nicholson's Joker completely out of the equation (which would be more or less the point of taking transformative retcons like that), and that's a prospect I'm pretty cold on. I can't imagine I am alone in that either, as Keaton returning as Batman after all these years is a pretty strong card, but also comes across as a play that's a little too reliant on just specifically that attraction. Fans of the Burton films, who are undoubtedly going to be the most excited/nostalgic to see Keaton back as Batman, love those films for more than just who played Batman. It was that world, those characters, the colorful villains, that unique interpretation of the lore that left such an impression. Especially for those of us who were there to experience Bat-Mania in 1989.

Personally, I'm pliable enough to roll with some retcons, but let's keep them at a minimum, and a lot less egregious towards the films Keaton himself is spinning off from in the first place. 

Agreed. While my preference would be for '89 and Returns to be intact except for the new Gordon (although you might even be able to treat it as a recast--I see no reason why J.K. Simmons' Gordon couldn't have taken the exact same actions as Pat Hingle's Gordon in the new timeline), I know there will probably be some tinkering--but I don't think there'd be much. It would sort of defeat the purpose of bringing him back permanently if his two prior movies weren't a go-to place for new people to catch up and see what this new (to them) Batman was all about. I'm sure any tinkering would be on the lighter side because of that necessity, since I don't think Keaton is going to get any new solo projects.

Granted, this is WB. While I don't feel anywhere near as strongly about WB as TLF does, I do freely admit that WB has made plenty of mistakes with DC--principally in that they don't understand what makes DC tick to begin with, hence handing the keys to the wrong people on more than one occasion. But all in all, be it by accident or by design, I have enjoyed every DC film (on some level) since Ayer's Suicide Squad. So that's an upward trend in my book. Of the films since 2016, the only one that was a step down was ZSJL, but even then, it wasn't horrendous--just overlong.

About the only thing I need to see at this point to be completely satisfied with the new DCEU is evidence that Superman will be around in some form. I guess WB is too afraid to try another Superman film, since they don't understand him--even though Chris Evans mimicked Chris Reeve and sold a much harder character in Captain America (it's right there, WB! Just copy Evans!). Hell, if they just let Cavill be himself in the role, people would love him. He's a charmer, that one.

[The Dark Knight]

I've been staring at the cowl, and it occurred that the cowl and the scallops are separate pieces. The cowl and the emblem are under the armored scallops. I think Batman can turn his head.

Possible, but perhaps unlikely? People have image-matched this suit with the Watchmen-ish symbol teased for The Flash, and the extra pectoral lines look the same, and Keaton said he still couldn't turn his head in The Flash--although he delivered it with a sense of comedic timing so maybe he was being facetious.

The way I see it, even if he can turn his head somehow, the new cowl respects what we've seen in the previous two Keaton films. We're not dealing with a thin neck or a raised collar which would be completely foreign to this interpretation. What I am curious to know is what boots he's wearing this time, considering last time they went with Nike.

[thecolorsblend]

I know you're only theorizing, and I'm with you on retcons are 'to be expected' at this point (BatKeats having a Robin in his original costume for starters!), but the whole Joker being alive, and Napier possibly not being the killer of the Wayne's might please vocal detractors of B89 lore, but it may also effectively retcon's Nicholson's Joker completely out of the equation (which would be more or less the point of taking transformative retcons like that), and that's a prospect I'm pretty cold on. I can't imagine I am alone in that either, as Keaton returning as Batman after all these years is a pretty strong card, but also comes across as a play that's a little too reliant on just specifically that attraction. Fans of the Burton films, who are undoubtedly going to be the most excited/nostalgic to see Keaton back as Batman, love those films for more than just who played Batman. It was that world, those characters, the colorful villains, that unique interpretation of the lore that left such an impression. Especially for those of us who were there to experience Bat-Mania in 1989.

Very this.

I loved Superman my whole life. But my comic book/superhero fandom was truly born on June 23, 1989. Anything that brings Keaton back to the character will have some mighty high expectations of mine to live up to. As you say, some kind of retconning is probably inevitable. But it should be done sparingly. Erasing the Jack Napier element... well, let's just say that cooler heads DESPERATELY need to prevail on that.

And yet, I'm a hypocrite because just thinking about Keaton reprising the role makes me a little giddy even now and we've had a couple years for the novelty to wear off. So, I guess we'll see.

I've been staring at the cowl, and it occurred that the cowl and the scallops are separate pieces. The cowl and the emblem are under the armored scallops. I think Batman can turn his head.

Same. In the back of my mind, I've been nursing a theory that the scallop could be a partial exoskeleton designed to support Bruce's back (perhaps following some sort of spinal injury between BR and now?) but that's pure conjecture on my part.

[The Joker]

Agreed. While my preference would be for '89 and Returns to be intact except for the new Gordon (although you might even be able to treat it as a recast--I see no reason why J.K. Simmons' Gordon couldn't have taken the exact same actions as Pat Hingle's Gordon in the new timeline), I know there will probably be some tinkering--but I don't think there'd be much. It would sort of defeat the purpose of bringing him back permanently if his two prior movies weren't a go-to place for new people to catch up and see what this new (to them) Batman was all about. I'm sure any tinkering would be on the lighter side because of that necessity, since I don't think Keaton is going to get any new solo projects.

That makes a ton of sense.

I never really thought about it in those terms; that new fans who might be unfamiliar with Keaton's Batman (it has been 30 years since his last film), possibly having a interest in going back to watch the Burton films to see Keats' Batman in not just sequences or as a supporting player, but two entire movies that featured Keaton's Batman in his prime. I was looking at it in a more nostalgic lens, but there's really no arguing your logical stance. Cause that undoubtedly will happen (especially with youngsters and the very casual Batman movie goers), and tinkering around too much with the proper Keaton Batman movies will just result in making the initial viewing experience diminished, and even confusing to some.

With JK Simmons' Gordon, I know this isn't going to happen, but I would just make him Commissioner James Gordon Junior. Ignore the comics version, and have him be as incorruptible and committed to justice as his old man. Being that JK himself is a few years younger thank Keaton, you could even have JK's Gordon make mention to Keaton's Batman of being a mere beat cop during the Penguin kidnapping/murdering the Ice Princess to frame Batman ordeal. Possibly even referring to Hingle's Gordon by saying, "You know, I don't think dad ever truly forgave himself for suspecting you for one second." With Keaton responding with expected pointedness and brevity, "He was a good man."

Just a thought, but that would be one scenario where Hingle's Gordon wouldn't be erased, JK's Gordon Jr. has stepped into his father's role, and is retconned into (at least) being present in the GCPD during the "Batman Returns" events.

I know presently we can't expect a super serious "LOGAN" type situation with Keaton's Batman, but I think having a Batman who's not only just older, but having experienced much loss (not just Alfred, but genuine friends/allies like that of Gordon, Billy Dee's Harvey Dent losing his sanity, Robin leaving at some point ... might be a state of affairs where it's stated like TDKR where Batman and Robin haven't spoken in years. Hell, you can even have him going celibate after Selina, deciding he will never find love, and would be in keeping with how Denny O'Neil envisioned the character, ect), and as a consequence, is in a pretty dark place when we meet him. Possibly even self destructive due to self isolation. Where, over the course of the movie, he undoubtedly has some sort of redemptive arc. We kinda got this with Garfield's Spider-Man in "No Way Home", stating he became bitter after Gwen, and even going so far in telling Holland's Spider-Man, "Don't be like me.", but I think this kinda arc could be explored to it's fullest potential with Keaton's Batman. There's so much that was endured in those 30 years, no doubt some of it was pretty bad, but seeing him rise like a phoenix against the dying of the light would be, quite frankly, dramatically satisfying to see.

Very this.

I loved Superman my whole life. But my comic book/superhero fandom was truly born on June 23, 1989. Anything that brings Keaton back to the character will have some mighty high expectations of mine to live up to. As you say, some kind of retconning is probably inevitable. But it should be done sparingly. Erasing the Jack Napier element... well, let's just say that cooler heads DESPERATELY need to prevail on that.

And yet, I'm a hypocrite because just thinking about Keaton reprising the role makes me a little giddy even now and we've had a couple years for the novelty to wear off. So, I guess we'll see.

That was the "No Way Home" effect for me. Not a perfect movie by any stretch of the imagination, but damn was it a treat to see Maguire, Garfield, Molina, Dafoe, THC, and the rest return in one big movie. Course, I'm more of a fan service > subvert expectations kinda guy, so I'm biased.

[The Laughing Fish]

retcons are 'to be expected' at this point (BatKeats having a Robin in his original costume for starters!), but the whole Joker being alive, and Napier possibly not being the killer of the Wayne's might please vocal detractors of B89 lore, but it may also effectively retcon's Nicholson's Joker completely out of the equation (which would be more or less the point of taking transformative retcons like that), and that's a prospect I'm pretty cold on. I can't imagine I am alone in that either, as Keaton returning as Batman after all these years is a pretty strong card, but also comes across as a play that's a little too reliant on just specifically that attraction. Fans of the Burton films, who are undoubtedly going to be the most excited/nostalgic to see Keaton back as Batman, love those films for more than just who played Batman. It was that world, those characters, the colorful villains, that unique interpretation of the lore that left such an impression. Especially for those of us who were there to experience Bat-Mania in 1989.

Personally, I'm pliable enough to roll with some retcons, but let's keep them at a minimum, and a lot less egregious towards the films Keaton himself is spinning off from in the first place.

Great comment. You've eloquently expressed my concerns so much better than I ever could. You raised a really good point about how these dramatic changes might embolden the Burtonverse's biggest detractors. That's something I didn't even think about before. It would suck if that were to happen after the discourse surrounding B89 and BR improved a lot over the last several years. I can't imagine how any supposed Burton Batman fan would like that. If the fears of Keaton's Batman potentially becoming the latest casualty in Hollywood's clumsy woke politics wasn't concerning enough, this is another thing to worry about.

I'd very surprised if they keep the whole Jack Napier stuff in tact. As I've said many times by now, putting Simmons and Keaton in the same universe together is significant, so who can guarantee they won't retcon the whole Joker backstory? We all know there's no chance for Nicholson to ever come back due to old age, and he has retired for over a decade anyway. Even if they don't have any plans to reintroduce the Joker, I can see these writers thinking it's a good idea to change the history for the sake of comic accuracy.

However, since Warners is in a very transitional period right now, I fully expect some, shall we say, reorganization to happen post-Discovery merger, and not just with the current DC Films brass, but also in film plans/releases as well. If prior mergers of this scale is any indication.

Yeah, something tells me the status quo isn't going to be the same.

While I doubt anything will change much for Batgirl, I won't be surprised if it gets moved to next year.

[Silver Nemesis]

I wonder if the new costume was influenced, at least in part, by the Earth One batsuit. Note the extra seams on the torso, and in particular the lines on the pectoral area which correspond with those on the Earth One costume. Also note the similar way the cape and cowl connect with the chest emblem, which is different from the earlier Keaton batsuits, and the fact the utility belt is black despite the chest oval being yellow.

This would make sense, since the earlier Keaton costumes were essentially all-black variations of the Neal Adams suit, while the Earth One costume is basically a fusion of the Adams batsuit with the Batman Inc version (which was in turn influenced by the Burton movie batsuits).

I won't return.

Ibid. I mean, do what you want. It's a free country. But this isn't what I would want.

Same here. DocLathropBrown was one of the first people to join this site. He's been here longer than I have and has contributed to several site features over the years. I was glad to see him start posting again and I'd be sorry to see him leave now. I hope he'll stick around.

My guess is the film opens with a prologue.

Gotham City circa the year 1998-2000.

Gordon has a manhunt going for an serial arsonist calling himself the Firefly, who attempts to murder the Gordon family in retaliation. Mrs. Gordon is killed, maybe Firefly goons attempt to finish Babs and Jim, but BATMAN.

If the rumours concerning the Nightwing movie are true, then I think they might use the prologue/flashback to introduce a teenage Dick Grayson before presenting the adult version later in the film. Whether he'll suit up or not is anyone's guess, but I wouldn't rule out the possibility of him putting in an appearance.

When I first saw those set pictures of the mural depicting Batman and Robin I had this idea that they might use it for a scene transition between the past and present – so we might have a two-shot of Batman and Robin standing next to each other, then dissolve to a matching reverse dolly shot of the mural accompanied by a caption saying "25 years later" as the camera pulls back to reveal present day Gotham. I don't suppose that'll actually happen. But it would be cool to see a comic accurate teenage Robin appear alongside Keaton, even if it's only for a brief flashback.

I like the idea the damage comes from a heavy duty villain, but Keaton barely survives the ordeal and uses the remote control Batmobile to escape back to the cave ala TDK Returns. Which could also provide a counterpoint to B89's Decent into Mystery.

Only this Batman won't have Alfred to patch him up, which would make such a defeat harder to bounce back from. I wonder if the film will address how the Burtonverse Alfred died. Old age, MacGregor's Syndrome, or did one of the villains kill him?

I might be wrong. But it looks like the torso has an armored top half while the lower half is tailored to allow for greater flexibility in the stomach, lower back and so forth. It's hard to be sure from the quality of these spy pics tho.

I think you're right. I've seen plenty of stunt double pictures from B89 and BR where the trousers look wrinkled, but the upper body section was usually firm. In these pics though the abdominal area looks creased, which suggests a more flexible material has been used. Meanwhile the upper pectoral area looks sturdier and sculpted, which as TDK points out is most likely intended to make Keaton's slender physique look more muscular.

Manoeuvrability would be one reason for using a more flexible material (hopefully this means we can expect some impressive fight scenes), but I'd imagine Keaton's age is also a factor. The costume needs to be light enough that a man of his advancing years can wear it without too much discomfort. It's no secret that the costumes in the Burton/Schumacher era were very heavy and uncomfortable. Apparently they became lighter and more flexible during Schumacher's reign, but were still fairly onerous to wear. This new costume needs to improve on those earlier designs. We don't want Keaton quitting after Batgirl just because he couldn't face wearing the suit again.

Though saying that, I wouldn't be surprised if he just appears in his Bruce Wayne civilian togs from now on before getting a new costume in the Justice League film, and that new costume could well be a mo-cap mech suit. In which case this new batsuit might only be used in The Flash and Batgirl. But we'll see.

I haven't been the biggest fan of the B89 comic series, but I'm also hoping to see the Batcycle, or some other expanded universe addition to make an appearance. I wouldn't rule it out, especially when toys are to be sold.

Much as I'm looking forward to seeing the Burton Batmobile return, I would love to see Keaton's Batman break out the Batcycle. We've already seen him drive versions of the Bat-plane and the Bat-boat, but never the Batcycle. The dieselpunk design from the Batman '89 comic is consistent with the aesthetic of those earlier vehicles and would look great in live action.

I've seen tongue-in-cheek speculation that Keaton might have his own version of the Batsub in Aquaman 2. I think it's more likely he'll just appear on dry land in his Bruce Wayne guise. But the Batcycle is a very real possibility. Batfleck's certainly riding one in The Flash, and it looks great.

I know you're only theorizing, and I'm with you on retcons are 'to be expected' at this point (BatKeats having a Robin in his original costume for starters!), but the whole Joker being alive, and Napier possibly not being the killer of the Wayne's might please vocal detractors of B89 lore, but it may also effectively retcon's Nicholson's Joker completely out of the equation (which would be more or less the point of taking transformative retcons like that), and that's a prospect I'm pretty cold on.

We can take consolation in the knowledge that any retcons they do make should only apply to the new DCEU canon, not the Burtonverse canon. The Burton films will always exist untainted in their own universe (that universe will probably end in The Flash anyway, thus sealing it off from future tampering), just like Superman III, IV and Supergirl will always exist in spite of the divergent Singerverse timeline. If the new films disappoint, then we can ignore them and fall back on the Schumacher movies as the true continuation of that timeline.

Apropos of the Napier situation, I haven't seen any leaks about the studio's plans for the Joker yet, other than the rumours of them developing a sequel to the 2019 Phoenix film. If I was to speculate how the Joker might be handled in future DCEU films, here are a few possibilities.

1)   Have Napier's Joker replace Leto while honouring the events of the 1989 film. In other words, Jack is the Joker of this timeline but Batman wasted him over thirty years ago. They could mention him, but always in the past tense. A while back you and I brainstormed a pretty good idea for how the Napier Joker could be revived in a Batman Beyond movie using a new actor and deepfake technology. If they take this route, then the door remains open for a live action Return of the Joker movie once the current slate of films is finished.

2)   Have Leto continue as the Joker of the DCEU. This might entail erasing the Napier Joker entirely, or else somehow having the two Jokers co-exist. One way of doing this would be to reveal that Leto's Joker is a copycat, similar to the Curtis Base Joker from Batman V1 #450-451 or Jarvis Poker the British Joker, or else adapting Geoff Johns' three Joker's concept from the more recent comics. These approaches would still leave the door open for Napier's version to return in a Batman Beyond film.

3)   Merge the Nicholson and Leto Joker's into an amalgamation. This would obviously involve retcons, such as having the Joker survive the cathedral showdown in the 1989 film and making it so that he didn't kill Bruce's parents. The age difference between Keaton and Leto would also be a problem. I imagine this solution would be the one most likely to upset fans. But once again it would only affect the DCEU Joker, not the Burtonverse version.

4)   Ignore the Joker altogether. With the possible exception of the Gotham City Sirens movie, I doubt the Joker's going to factor into any of these upcoming films anyway. They could just avoid giving a concrete answer as to which Joker it is and let the fans decide.

I'd say the first and fourth strategies would work best. Maybe a combination of the two. Just don't mention the Joker, beyond passing references to events of the past, and then leave the door open for a Return of the Joker movie at a later time. If another Phoenix movie gets made, that should give fans their Joker fix. Or WB might introduce a new Joker in the Reeves universe. I don't particularly want to see Keaton's Batman go up against the Joker again, unless it's in a Batman Beyond film, so I'd be happy with them just leaving this particular issue vague for the time being.

I'm sure any tinkering would be on the lighter side because of that necessity, since I don't think Keaton is going to get any new solo projects.

I don't think he will either. If the leaks I've seen are true, then he'll have a co-lead role in The Flash and Justice League, a modest supporting role in Batgirl, and probably just a cameo in everything else. Unless they go ahead and make Batman Beyond further down the line, in which case he'll be the co-lead alongside whoever plays Terry.

[The Joker]

We can take consolation in the knowledge that any retcons they do make should only apply to the new DCEU canon, not the Burtonverse canon. The Burton films will always exist untainted in their own universe (that universe will probably end in The Flash anyway, thus sealing it off from future tampering), just like Superman III, IV and Supergirl will always exist in spite of the divergent Singerverse timeline. If the new films disappoint, then we can ignore them and fall back on the Schumacher movies as the true continuation of that timeline.

That's a valid way of looking at the current situation. As you mentioned, the divergent interpretations of Keaton's Batman and lore is something that may very well become something of an issue depending on just how well the current plan for Keaton's DCEU Batman is received. Unfortunately, the nostalgic card with Keaton's Batman returning after such a long hiatus will have been fully played with "The Flash", and I believe the reception of that film (along with the reception/plan for Keaton's variant DCEU rendition) is going to be, more or less, 'the' decider on how Discovery/Warners decides to handle Keaton going forward. Since I just don't really believe "Batgirl" on HBO Max is going to be what saves or theoretically kills this iteration of Keats' Batman if "The Flash" is negatively panned, and if it's not, then I don't see Discovery deciding upon changing course. Interesting times indeed.

1)   Have Napier's Joker replace Leto while honouring the events of the 1989 film. In other words, Jack is the Joker of this timeline but Batman wasted him over thirty years ago. They could mention him, but always in the past tense. A while back you and I brainstormed a pretty good idea for how the Napier Joker could be revived in a Batman Beyond movie using a new actor and deepfake technology. If they take this route, then the door remains open for a live action Return of the Joker movie once the current slate of films is finished.

Admittedly, I am pretty married to the idea of a supernaturally revived Nicholson Joker (new actor/stand in, soundalike, deepfake, some smoke and mirrors like how Blumhouse revived Donald Pleasence's Doctor Loomis in "Halloween Kills", ect) returning from the dead in a Batman Beyond movie.

However, right now, given just how messy the situation with DCEU continuity is, and the apparent state of flux that's going on behind the scenes with the Discovery merger, and what the fall out of the DCEU might be following that, I don't rule out the possibility (especially since I don't foresee "Flashpoint" being the FIX current Warner brass as hoping for, anymore than "Flashpoint/New52 was the FIX DC Comics was hoping for) that we'll see Keaton's Batman appearing in different timelines/Earth's. Yes, this would be akin to Fox's X-Men cinematic universe, where continuity was played rather fast and loose, but perhaps WB will, if this theory pans out, make more of a point in the future on stating different earth's are very much in play. This would be a more discernible way to reconcile glaring continuity clashes if/when course changes are implemented, and possibly leaves the door open for a actual return to the Burtonverse with Batman Beyond in the future.

The incorporation of various earth/timelines in the DCEU, thus compartmentalizing various versions of characters/lore (Keaton/Affleck Batman existing simultaneously with Pattison's Earth-2 Batman, Nicholson/Phoenix/Leto with Joker, ect) would lend itself to many unique approaches and interpretations for filmmakers. Not to mention, possibly building towards a bona fide cinematic "Crisis" down the road, but that's playing the long game.

Just don't mention the Joker, beyond passing references to events of the past, and then leave the door open for a Return of the Joker movie at a later time. If another Phoenix movie gets made, that should give fans their Joker fix. Or WB might introduce a new Joker in the Reeves universe. I don't particularly want to see Keaton's Batman go up against the Joker again, unless it's in a Batman Beyond film, so I'd be happy with them just leaving this particular issue vague for the time being.

Couldn't really agree more. With the Reeves Batman universe, I really have no desire to see the Joker appearing in that interpretation (I think it would pretty spectacular if it's NOT Joker, but Harvey Dent who is built up in future sequels/tv shows, to where the eventual clash between Pattison's Batman and Two-Face has a very dramatic effect). Presently, I don't believe we truly know what the future holds for the Snyderverse until following the Discovery merger, so that leaves open the possibility of more of Leto's Joker returning in some fashion. Then there's Joaquin Phoenix's Joker in the Phillips earth. So, personally, that's honestly enough Joker. I really have no desire to see the character get completely over saturated like in the current comics, where he's basically used monthly from what I hear. Which is ridiculous, but that's the decaying state of that industry now. So go figure.

[Gotham Knight]

Apparently the Gotham Globe Newspaper is featuring Lex "Luther" and has a blurb about Cobblepot making a comeback. It may tease that the Penguin is alive. Could be nothing. A lot of these set dressing props are never seen.

[DocLathropBrown]

I have a feeling the misspelling of Lex's name is down to UK spelling. Some prop guy is thinking of the religious figure, haha

I think if these details were going to be getting true screen time, that spelling would get corrected.