The Dark Knight Rises - Pre-release Discussion [** NO SPOILERS PLEASE **]

Sad Professor

I think so, yes. Fanboys will go no matter what, but there's no guarantee that mainstream viewers will show up in the same numbers they did last time unless they think they film is going to be great. When people saw TDK's teaser poster and heard the Joker's cackle in the first teaser trailer they got excited in a way that they wouldn't have if the villain had been Hush, or someone they had never heard of before. This sort of thing concerns studios. And as as his title choice indicates, Nolan wants to keep the studio happy.

I'm not saying they couldn't sell the film around one or two lesser known villains, Nolan has the freedom to more or less do what he wants, but TDK featured two of Batman's most iconic foes. I can't imagine Nolan would choose to follow them up with two nobodies. Batman has a lot of great villains in his back catalogue, of course, but there's a reason some of them are more recognisable than others.

ricero

I agree I think they have to have a well enough known film to attract the kids and adults less known to the comics that's why after the riddler being ruled out I'm putting my money on the penguin and blackmask both in it and I'm going to guess it will be a gang war

allanb49

To go back on what i said earlier, Didn't nolan say he wanted to keep away from characters like The Penguin,

I was thinking that he would be the best suited, just have him as a crime boss no weird weapons just a Brendan Gleeson General type character play him like a Godfather who has been manipulating events behind the scenes for the past two movies.

missingtime

Just to echo what Sad Professor said, I feel they do need a big name villain in part three to keep the wider audience interested.

Its clear as day that had Ledger not died, the Joker would have played a huge part.

For me, I'm not hugely familiar with the other villains but apparently though there was a pretty good Red Hood animated movie released recently so perhaps Nolan will look at that as an option.

Reading through this -- http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Batman_Family_enemies -- the obvious leans towards The Penguin.

According to the wikipedia article on Victor Zsasz, it seems he had a bit of a gambling problem, and lost a lot of money to The Penguin which would give Nolan ample material to work with and an easy link between the two characters.

Interesting times ahead

BlitzKrieg

For me, I'm not hugely familiar with the other villains but apparently though there was a pretty good Red Hood animated movie released recently so perhaps Nolan will look at that as an option.

that would be pretty far fetched as it would require going through the entire robin saga

killing off robin and bringing him back as a villian, and thats taking a huge leap from the comic condenscing it down that much as its actually the 2nd robin they kill off and bring back as a villian

Personnally I think people over estimate the need for a big villian for the mainstream audience a smidgin if its correctly compensated for, which it appears they are doing then they can push on without it.

Yes if you are making a batman movie attaching the joker or catwoman to it attracts more attention for people who casually know the series from either its animated or burton incursions and that did indeed help the dark knight.

But these are the same people who obviously saw the dark knight for this reason and making it blatantly clear this is the sequel to that film will bring the majority of them back (with the excpetion of those who didnt like the Dark Knight, and if they didnt like the dark knight then it'll need alot more then a popular villian to bring them back) sticking a big name villain on it is just rethreading markets already covered by the prior film. You are to have more success increasing numbers by grabbing the few that passed over the dark knight to begin with and having a big batman villian is not going to change that. Grabbing a rising star in hollywood might get some better results or pimping out a new technology feat or something. Of those we already have the *all in Imax* pimping (over 3D) and we have the rumours of a cast member from inception jumping over to the franchise.

I know it was dismissed and I doubt it will be done aswell, but they would actually get more butts in seats announcing leonardo dicaprio is in it over announcing the penquin.

I mean how does the character of Catwoman have any more appeal then whats already riding on this film? Its the sequel to one of the biggest films of the decade which they have openly said they are reinforcing with this title (something that says it wont be a big villian to me) they already pulled in the mainsteam audience by the droves and filmgoers have been warmly reminded with inception that Christopher Nolan makes damn good films. Who on earth are we missing that catwoman will appeal that have not already been hooked by the dark knight? In fact there are more big name batman villians who will carry stigma with them rather then more popularity. Both Mr Freeze and Poison Ivy are associated with batman & Robin and Catwoman has the stain of Halle Berry to still wipe off.

I wont deny the ultimate hat trick is big name + big character = score. Thats what worked with dark knight, but of the two with this film, big name is more important so Nolan is not going to be under any studio pressure to put specific characters in his film, he'll be under more to cast someone popular. So in the way of characters Nolan does indeed have much more freedom to go with who works best with the story, be it talia or blackmask or whoever.

grames_bond

Today on Radio Nova (so take with some salt) that the villian will be clayface!

senordingdong

Also, according to Wikipedia, Tom Hardy, of Star Trek Nemesis fame, has been cast in an unspecified role.

sprinkles

I'm not so sure the film needs a big name bad guy. With the exception of the Joker, the only reason the penguin and two face are known to everyone is the Batman tv series and the Original films. Most people don't read the comics so have had to rely on what they see on screen. On top of that Batman Begins didn't have a big name bad guy for those that don't read comics. I couldn't imagine too many people heard of Ra's Al'ghul or scarecrow before seeing BB/

Personally I'd love the idea of the penguin as an ordinary ruthless crime boss who has been running the show behind the joker. However if it's someone more obscure I don't really care, nor do I think anyone not familiar with the comics would be either. This film will be huge regardless of who they have as a villian.

Mr Freeze

zimovain wrote: »

Gordon cheats in one of the graphic novels if memory serves.

I think it was in Batman: The Long Halloween or its sequel.

Both excellent reads, and along with Year One heavily influence Nolans Batman Universe.

Anyways, can't really see them using Clayface as a villain!!!!

folan

Batman needs a big villan. it being batman isnt going to be enough for me.

Penguin prefered, in a proper crime boss mode. Taking over the city after batman has taken out whatever mob bosses there were left.

fluke

It's a 3rd Batman movie directed by Christopher Nolan, following The Dark Knight, it ain't gonna be a hard sell. The idea that people need villains based on their casual knowledge of the Batman universe is a bit hard to swallow. Once the story is (hopefully) decent word of mouth will spread anyway.

Hell, some people went to see Inception because it was directed by Nolan.

If anything Batman Begins was a harder sell, given that the films that directly preceded it were woeful, and that it was to be a reboot with lesser known bad guys.

The last one felt like an event movie. Marketed right this one will too.

Nervous Wreck

BlitzKrieg wrote: »

that would be pretty far fetched as it would require going through the entire robin saga

killing off robin and bringing him back as a villian, and thats taking a huge leap from the comic condenscing it down that much as its actually the 2nd robin they kill off and bring back as a villian

Not to nitpick but Red Hood and that story aren't mutually exclusive. That's just a new thing (as far as I know anyway). Originally, in some versions of the Red Hood storyline,

Red Hood was The Joker and this was long before even Dick Grayson (IIRC anyway).

Open to correction on that cos it's been a while. Anyway, point being, Red Hood won't emerge.

BlitzKrieg

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

Not to nitpick but Red Hood and that story aren't mutually exclusive. That's just a new thing (as far as I know anyway). Originally, in some versions of the Red Hood storyline,

Red Hood was The Joker and this was long before even Dick Grayson (IIRC anyway).

Open to correction on that cos it's been a while. Anyway, point being, Red Hood won't emerge.

I was responding to a post that specified the recent red hood animated movie as a source for inspiration. Not the actual character.

But you are correct, red hood was

mr J's possible alias before becoming the joker. though I think it is hinted at strongely in the laughing joke I think that the red hood is just a criminal term for patsy

I

Overheal

I really could give a **** who the villain will be in this. After what they did with the Joker, I think they're capable of anything, and whatever they end up doing will be huge success.

I think however they will rule out any of the "superpowered" villains, like Freeze or Ivy. The direction Nolan has taken thus far is a firmer basis in reality. Hell, he could even surprise us all and create a completely new villain.

senordingdong

Overheal wrote: »

I think however they will rule out any of the "superpowered" villains, like Freeze or Ivy. The direction Nolan has taken thus far is a firmer basis in reality. Hell, he could even surprise us all and create a completely new villain.

Well that's the part that I find od.

In BB he went with lesser known villians, and it was a huge success, and imo, a much better film.
For the sequel, which would have been succesful regardless, he went for the obvious, well known villian.

Personally I would have expected it the other way around.

Duggy747

senordingdong wrote: »

Well that's the part that I find od.

In BB he went with lesser known villians, and it was a huge success, and imo, a much better film.
For the sequel, which would have been succesful regardless, he went for the obvious, well known villian.

Personally I would have expected it the other way around.

True but then it would have been to much of a remake like Burton's Batman. I actually didn't like Batman Begins, I liked how they started from scratch with the story but I thought the film was too confused in what it was supposed to be. They got the idea honed down in Dark Knight as they're both are visually completely different films (Gotham City looking too packed with it's slums and railway system in BB to resembling more like Chicago in The Dark Knight).

Anyways, you can't have a Batman saga without The Joker since he is the main villian out of them all. The Joker is the polar opposite of Batman..........just a pity we won't ever see him again.

Nervous Wreck

senordingdong wrote: »

Well that's the part that I find od.

In BB he went with lesser known villians, and it was a huge success, and imo, a much better film.
For the sequel, which would have been succesful regardless, he went for the obvious, well known villian.

Personally I would have expected it the other way around.

I think Nolan was far too clever than to waste Batman's main adversary on a film where Bruce Wayne is only figuring out how he wants to approach his vigilante persona. Batman definitely needed to find his feet before being able to go up against the Joker, especially Nolan's Joker. Batman Begins was amazing but was definitely made to be the first act of an overall story and the first act is always the set-up.

Duggy747 wrote: »

Anyways, you can't have a Batman saga without The Joker since he is the main villian out of them all. The Joker is the polar opposite of Batman..........just a pity we won't ever see him again.

Tbh, I'd rather never see Joker again than see someone try to live up to Ledger's performance and fail. We've seen what Nolan can do with the Joker; I reckon he can do a great job with any other villain.

FortuneChip

Nail on the head, Batman Begins was about Bruce Wayne deciding he needed to become Batman, the Joker would have taken away from the Origin story. Don't show your hand to early seemed to be the idea. It's been said thousands of times, it's a pity the Joker won't be returning to Nolan's Gotham.

But Nolan hasn't let me down yet!

Duggy747

Nervous Wreck wrote: »

Tbh, I'd rather never see Joker again than see someone try to live up to Ledger's performance and fail. We've seen what Nolan can do with the Joker; I reckon he can do a great job with any other villain.

Agreed, and when I refer to The Joker I mean Ledger's Joker. I didn't want anyone else to replace him as it would've taken away far too much from the film.

Shauny2010

George Clooneys going to be the new joker

Nervous Wreck

Shauny2010 wrote: »

George Clooneys going to be the new joker

Even joking like that should lead to a 6 week ban.

Overheal

Duggy747 wrote: »

They got the idea honed down in Dark Knight as they're both are visually completely different films (Gotham City looking too packed with it's slums and railway system in BB to resembling more like Chicago in The Dark Knight).

They used R'as because it tied in to the origin story in an interesting way. As others have said, a super-strong character, like ledger/Joker, would have overshadowed Bale and Batman. Liam Nielson just has that Obi-Wan effect going for him, a good recognizable actor thats not too overbearing. He would have also made a good pick for a Mr. Freeze (under another director) when I think of it.

As for the part I quoted here Nolan actually said the big reason for cleaning up the look of gotham was because so much of Dark Knight is spent blowing the place up. But I do like the change. I like how joker knocked batman off his bike in front of a Kinkos.

The saddest part is i dont know how they can possibly live up to the Joker plot. "I just want my phonecall"

jim-jam

Overheal wrote: »

Liam Nielson just has that Obi-Wan effect going for him, a good recognizable actor thats not too overbearing.

I think Liam Neeson was a better choice though

Sad Professor

EXCLUSIVE: Chris Nolan is lining up actresses he'll meet for two female lead roles in The Dark Knight Rises, the third installment of the Batfranchise which Warner Bros has dated release on July 20, 2012. I'm told one of the roles is a love interest for Christian Bale's Bruce Wayne, and the other is a villain. The actresses are: Rachel Weisz, Naomi Watts, Blake Lively, Natalie Portman, Anne Hathaway and Keira Knightley. Nolan is keeping the roles under wraps, just the way that he did when he drafted his Inception star Tom Hardy to come aboard to likely play a villain. Deadline broke that story October 13. I'm still not sure what the role is and I believe Hardy took the job without knowing or reading a script that's still being tweaked.

http://www.deadline.com/2010/11/chris-nolan-lines-up-actresses-for-batfilm/

BopNiblets

I vote for Naomi Watts (maybe Weisz but she was too similar to the previous girls), the rest are too Hollywood-ey

Handsome Bob

I wouldn't be too enthusiastic about any of those actresses, but if I was forced to pick, I'd go with Portman and Hathaway,

I'd say it's bull though. Blake Lively? Do WB really want someone playing various characters within the DC universe?

ricero

Kiera knightly please god no

Duggy747

Until Nolan states it or multiple reliable sources confirm it I'm not willing to believe much info on this movie at this point.

ricero wrote: »

Kiera knightly please god no

It will actually ruin the tone of the movie if that ironing board with a face is cast in it. She won't though, as Nolan's film usually consist of people with talent beyond pouting.

DrumSteve

anne hathaway would be a good choice.

opinion guy

Ok sorry.

Batman 3 ??? More like Batman 6 or 7 no ?