When it comes to WHAT MUST BE the essential nature and conflict in the upcoming Batman/Superman movie, take Jon’s words as if they had come from my throat, with my voice. I mean no disrespect to Nolan, mind, but Jon’s point is well-taken:
In Miller’s world, Superman and Batman embody two polar views of the human condition. Superman believes in the perfectibility of man and the eventual triumph of the City of God over the City of Man. Batman does not. In fact, he views even the City of Man as a tenuous achievement, and one which must be constantly defended against the depredations of human nature. He believes in the Enlightenment, but not in its inevitability. And because of this, he believes that an übermensch such as Superman is at least as much a threat to civilization as he is its savior.
This is satisfying in a way that using the Nolan Batman could not be. Christopher Nolan’s Batman exists in a very different universe that Zack Snyder’s Man of Steel. A movie that sought to bring them together would struggle for coherence, because Nolan’s Batman would ultimately welcome a Superman. But a Superman-Batman movie must have tension between the two characters if it’s going to have anything interesting to say.
Although I will add this: Nolan’s Batman likewise labors under the burden of being, at the end, alone. There can only be one Dark Knight in Nolan’s universe at a time. Heck, the entire plot of The Dark Knight Rises would be nonsensical in the DCU. But Miller’s Batman can live, easily enough, in a wider super-heroic milieu.
Moe Lane
, 