Maybe we’ve just had it too good for too long. The last couple decades have been filled with many (if not all) of our childhood costumed heroes coming to life on the big screen and on television. Heroes who we thought couldn't carrier their own multi-million dollar franchise have stormed the cultural zeitgeist and in their wake, have created legions of new adoring fans and reignited geek flames. Franchises that meant the world to people who grew up in the ‘80s and ‘90s have seen new interpretations and continuations. And while a chunk of this content could be seen as shameless cash-grabs in the name of nostalgia, the fact that at least half of them are as good as they are is nothing short of a miracle.
One of the most constant properties, in terms of generating content, is Batman, a character who has been nothing short of ubiquitous in the pop culture landscape for the better part of a century. He was the face of animation during the ‘90s. He was used to perfect a new style of action adventure video game combat in the Arkham franchise from Rocksteady. (How satisfying are those counter attacks?) And from Tim Burton’s hyper-gothic version of the hero in the 1988 film Batman to the dark, grim take of the Dark Knight in the financially successful (and critically maligned) Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice, The Caped Crusader has been a big screen darling for the better part of thirty of years (except for those Joel Schumacher films in the ‘90s; we try to block those out). And all of this is outside his home realm of comic books, which wouldn’t be the same without his inclusion. In fact, the only form of media Batman hasn’t dominated is live action television... at least, not recently.
RELATED: Ruby Rose Cast As Batwoman in CW’s Arrowverse
The last real live action Batman television show was the campy and endlessly charming series from the '60s starring the late, great Adam West as the titular masked hero. The show was silly, self-aware, and leaned heavily on the more ridiculous aspects of Batman’s Rogues Gallery. Batman defined The Caped Crusader for a generation to the point where even decades later, the show is still aired in syndication and has spawned comic books and new animated productions that play around in the madcap world. But unlike the other DC Comics alum like Superman and Wonder Woman (both of whom would star in shows over the following decades), Batman’s time as the star of a live-action television show never extended beyond the Adam West incarnation.
Sadly, after comments made by The CW President Mark Pedowitz regarding the lack of plans to include Batman in any future Arrowverse release, it seems that this trend will continue. But does it have to? Why is Batman the one character who has been relegated to film when it comes to live-action? Considering that at his core, Batman is a detective, why wouldn’t a network air a procedural show following the crime-solving expertise of Bruce Wayne? So many of Batman’s existing villains and allies already exist in the Arrowverse (including Superman!), so the groundwork is already there.
Page 2: [valnet-url-page page=2 paginated=0 text='%22But%20What%20About%20Gotham%2C%22%20You%20Ask%3F%20Well...']
Yes, Gotham is technically a show about Batman, but it is not a show starring Batman. Despite the fact the series has introduced a version of the character (a “proto-Bat” if you will), the show is really about the people who shape Bruce Wayne into becoming Gotham City’s greatest protector. Gotham is as much a Batman show as Krypton is a Superman show. This might seem like a slightly unfair comparison considering Bruce Wayne is a major character in Gotham while Krypton takes place years before Kal-El is even born, but just because a character is in a show, doesn’t mean belongs to them or it fairly reflects the established world from which the character originates. For example, Long John Silver is in Black Sails, but the show is certainly not a Treasure Island series (like, not even a little bit).
RELATED: Matt Reeves’ Batman Film Isn’t Based On Year One – and That’s a Good Thing
If anything, Gotham seems more like a half measure in developing a true blue Batman live-action show. All the ingredients are there. The proof of concept works. The villains and supporting characters flesh out the world just fine. Even the direction of the show is a (mostly) solid mix of crime drama and operatic craziness. The only thing missing is the man (the BATman) himself.
The Arrowverse is the other side of the same established coin. Members of the Batfamily are already represented and so much of superhero mythology that was connected to Bruce Wayne’s journey is already present. However, having Batman pop up in a random episode of Arrow or Supergirl might feel out of place, and may not have the same impact as Superman making the occasional appearance in the latter show.
Just because an Arrowverse Batman is out doesn’t mean the character as we know him can’t make a modern day small screen appearance. With the upcoming show Titans on the DC Universe streaming service operating outside of the programs running on The CW (at least, as far as we know), Batman could still come to life on the small screen. After all, we would love to see him answer for whatever he did to make Dick Grayson proclaim “F--- Batman!”
Continuing Bruce Wayne’s journey after the events of Gotham isn’t completely out of reason either. A slew of villains will certainly be left standing by the end of the series, and they will most certainly need to be punched, batarang’d, and tossed into Arkham Asylum (it’s a dirty job, but some eccentric billionaire with mommy and daddy issue has to do it). But the dream is to see Batman come to the small screen on his own accord (so to speak), and not necessarily on the heels of an already established television world. Sure, that merge could happen eventually (like with Supergirl and The CW), but it doesn’t need to be forced. After all, when has Batman ever enjoyed being told what to do?