jonthejoker (Guest) on 01/19/2011 6:59 pm

I'll be the first to cast the doubt anchor. It may be the worst, which may be a true statement because the others were so great. Batman may be paralyzed and lead to a horrible Robin

Captain Seamus on 01/19/2011 7:14 pm

I'm excited. Tom Hardy was incredible in Bronson, and that character is very much like the early Bane(highly recommend that movie by the way). I was hoping he'd play Hugo Strange, but Bane has been getting the shaft since the late '90s. It'll be good to see a calculating, ruthless criminal mastermind rather than the dumb brute we've been stuck with for so long. If done right he can provide an intellectual threat on par with The Riddler and a physical one that none of Batman's other villains can match.

blood_panther on 01/19/2011 7:22 pm

to be fair they actually havent said catwoman will be in the next movie, just Selina Kyle. they could very well do what they tried to do in the first movie with harvey dent, and explore the background of selina.

ColdFusion (Guest) on 01/19/2011 8:26 pm

Anne Hathaway is hotter than hot.. I creamed my mental pants just hearing she'd be Catwoman.. though, to be fair, everyone who's ever played Catwoman has been hot (even Halle Berry. We're talking about hotness, not writing).

As someone who mostly watched TV and didn't read comics, I grew up with Bane as a thug and a metaphor about the dangers of steroid use, so I feel ignorant whenever people talk about him as this major plot guy, but I'd like to see him fleshed out even if he'd NEVER been that way before.

Nick on 01/19/2011 8:31 pm

While there is a very high chance that the movie will be amazing like the last two, I don't really like the pairing of Bane and Catwoman. I don't they clash well at all.

Aries on 01/19/2011 9:16 pm

Anne Hathaway...oh yes. My pants have risen!!!

Bing (Guest) on 01/19/2011 9:44 pm

That's probably the creepiest thing you've ever written.

Starscream on 01/19/2011 10:42 pm

I have no problem with Bane because I think Nolan can write depth into his character that we haven't seen since the Knight Fall arch. Plus I think Bane works fairly well into Nolan's "Nothing Fantastical" approach to his Batman world.

I've got no qualms about Catwoman being in the film at all but its Hathaway I have issues with. I've seen her in her "I'm not a princess, I'm a bad girl" roles and I can't say I've ever been convinced. Even if Catwoman in this is going to be more Anti-hero I can't say that Hathaway has the ability to do it justice.

captain516 on 01/20/2011 12:04 am

Im more than okay with Anne Hathaway

Pentegarn on 01/20/2011 6:51 am

I expect Anne Hathaway will do just fine as Catwoman.

Beats Halle Berry anyway

Sinister (Guest) on 01/20/2011 2:21 pm

No movie writer has yet touched on Scarface/the ventriloquist. Of the villains in Bat-man's city scape, none are more realistic- In the sense that there really are schizophrenic cases where an evil (or more daring) personality is projected on someone or something else. If you've ever seen a ventriloquist perform, it can be a little creepy the way they can get audience members interacting with what they know to be a puppet. I've seen them laugh, flirt, even get mad at it, while the ventriloquist stands there in amused silence. Not that I own a ventriloquist's dummy, or anything. Or talk to one/with one. I'm going to quit typing now...

HowardC on 01/20/2011 11:06 pm

I'll go ahead and say it... ....... Meh....

The re-imagined batman franchise is the most over-rated piece of crap ever to be over-rated. Teh franchise thus-far has these thigns wrong with it in no particular order.

1. Gotham city is now downtown LA. Sorry kids, but the main character of any batman story isn't batman, bruce wayne, or some crazy costumed villian, it's gotham city. When gotham city isn't portrayed as a dark, 1940's mirror of new york then the movie (and in this case the franchise) has failed before the first scene.

2. Batman doesn't talk like a 12 year old kid pretending to be batman. Sorry that fake, over the top gravely voice ruins it for me. In real life any villian who heard a guy talking like that would be defeated not by a batarang, but by doubling over from laughter.

3. Female leads in a batman story have to be either visually striking or striking in their acting ability. Thus far this hasn't happened in the two films.

4. Less is more. The original Tim Burton film holds up fairly well, the sequels, not so much. Why? Well in the first film we have one villian, in the sequels we always have two or more. This leads to a disjointed story (not enough time to do the backstory), watered down drama, and at least one villian that comes out looking as a glorified side-kick. I find it hard to believe that the new franchise gets so much praise when they made the same mistake right from flim one. Scarecrow and Two-Face, ironically the more interesting characters, get little to no screen time.

5. Don't monkey with the characters damnit!! Just like Posion Ivy didn't need to be some kind of mutant plant hybrid and the Penguin didn't need to be a deformed freak that lives in the sewers, the Joker didn't need to be a very un-funny psychopath with a giant scare across his face. Ledger made for an interesting and compelling villian... it's too bad that the villian he was playing wasn't the joker. I think it's similar to Devito's portrayal of the Penguin... very good... just not the character they are supposed to be.

6. Batman drives a sports car, not a hummer. Seriously he's in the city, how does that even make any sense?

7. Alfred is a proper english gentlemen, not some cockneyed gutter trash. Nuff said.

So thus far we've had two mediocre films and the third is going to kill the franchise. How do I know? One word... Bane. Bane is a cheap, comic-book selling gimmick. He doesn't have any real depth. It's the equivelent of putting Galactus in the FF sequel... where the hell are you going to go after that?

I've yet to see a really good batman film, but burton's are quite superior simply because he gets that gotham is a character and it's the MAIN character. But if the younger generations thrive on "re-imagined" b.s. then so be it.

Pandajuice on 01/21/2011 1:28 pm

I like the choice of Hathaway, especially when you see what other actresses Nolan was looking at (Natalie Portman anyone? Blech); I think he chose the best one. She'll be ridiculously hot in the costume and is a good actress that can pull off the dark stylings of the series.

I've never been a big fan of Bane, but trust Nolan to make him a great and believable character just like he did with The Joker.

I'm a little disappointed that Harleyquinn won't be making an appearance in the film however. :(

MarioRPG on 01/21/2011 4:53 pm

@Sinister: I got a grab bag of comics at some event this year and there was a Scarface one in there... I had no idea about him up until then. He definitely could protrayed well in film.

Also, I can't see Hathaway as being a villain, but I do like her.

ColdFusion (Guest) on 01/21/2011 7:33 pm

God, opinions are hilarious. I strongly agree with about 30 percent of what Howard said and vehemently disagree with the rest, and I think Anne Hathaway and Natalie Portman are equally hot, and for all the same reasons.

All Hail Duke on 01/22/2011 12:40 am

still think Bane's an odd choice, but Nolan has done good work with his takes on the rogues

and fully expect his Selina/Catwoman to be better than Burton's Magical Zombiewoman

RADIX (Guest) on 01/22/2011 11:02 am

Catwoman and Bane, eh? Didn't expect that combination.

It might've been interesting if, say, they'd try to portray Mr. Freeze and Poison Ivy in a less campy light, but bringing back those two (at least in that combination) would've been a death wish.

albinorino24 on 01/23/2011 10:38 am

I dont know about anyone else but I was hoping for Talia Al-Ghul to be the villain. I feel it would have brought the trilogy full circle.

Chris (Guest) on 01/23/2011 11:16 am

I was hoping for Patton Oswalt as Calendar Man, I'll settle for this though.

DTRY (Guest) on 01/23/2011 1:17 pm

One more support for the Ventriloquist. I always love the "quiet, mild-mannered guy who is deeply a psychopath inside" type of villains. And his criminal career isn't bad either. I remember reading the comic which he appeared for the first time, and Batman, high on drugs, almost KILLED him out of spite.

A villain who almost cause Batman to break his "no-kill" code deserves some respect. Too bad he was killed off and replaced by a chick. Eugh.

mstiras (Guest) on 01/24/2011 3:27 am

I totally see Nolan doing a breaking the batman story line with this combination. Movie opens with Bane running amok in gotham. Batman shows up to try and fight him and Bane breaks his back just like the comic book. Then we follow the arc of the comic pretty much from there only replace the shitty new Batman from the comics with Catwoman. Catwoman, being an anti-hero goes too far and after recovery time Bruce comes back as Batman to stop her. Thus showing all of Gotham that he is in fact a true hero. I totally called a breaking the batman story line after the 2nd movie. It was the only way I could think of for Nolan to deal with the whole, everyone now hates batman plot he'd created. I can't wait to see this movie and I can honestly say I expect it to be every bit as good as the first 2.

Eek (Guest) on 01/24/2011 8:24 pm

Not to be a downer, but I think we all trusted Sam Raimi with Spider-Man 3. Superhero movies seem to all go bad once they become a trilogy.

Nick on 01/24/2011 10:48 pm

Sam Raimi only wanted to put one major villain in his third movie. Too bad Sony and the fans wanted Venom. Blame yourselves.

That Other Guy on 01/25/2011 1:47 pm

Bane was in Batman and Robin? I don't remember that, but I don't want to watch it again to check; on acconut of the "Joel Schumacher is history's greatest monster" thing.

All Hail Duke on 01/25/2011 4:34 pm

true, schumacher will forever (pun not intended) have tainted film with those that shall not be named but he'll always have The Lost Boys, Falling Down the fact he made a movie with Mr. T in it to fall back on

Phone Booth was pretty decent as well

Friz (Guest) on 01/26/2011 1:04 am

I was tweeting away on twitter trying to find something to cure my boredom - and WHAM - somebody I follow tweeted this post. Now, I am not quite as bored. Thanks for posting good material.

toolz88 on 01/27/2011 10:16 pm

It can't be any worse than Batman:Forever and Batman & Robin.

KennyTheInsane on 01/29/2011 12:26 pm

We all know Hathaway isn't the most voluptuous actress on the market, but I'll be damned if she doesn't have my vote.

Childhood Fantasies? Hi, it's been awhile. It's time we sat down together.

E (Guest) on 02/02/2011 6:54 pm

I'm like the only person that didn't like The Dark Knight. It was boring I couldn't even finish it. Christian Bale's Batman was irritating. MY NAME IS BATMAN AND I SAY EVERYTHING THROUGH MY TEETH. Why did no one say "That's terrible, knock it off!"??

All Hail Duke on 02/02/2011 11:49 pm

his batgrowl was altered in post i believe

The_Maddog (Guest) on 02/13/2011 4:12 pm

This responce is aired directly at HowardC. Wow, it's hard to find people who spew stupid like you do but it's allways a pleasure when I do.

I'm not even sure where to start but I'll try to rise to the challenge.

1) Batman isnt the main character..it's Gotham City? Thats news to me. I'm pretty sure I'm reading or watching a story about a man fighting crime who dresses as a bat. So thats idiot statement number 1 delt with.

2) Yeah whatever...and whilst they are doubled over Batman can punch them all that harder. I'm not going to pass judgement on Bales interpretation but "The voice" is often reffered to in the comics (all but left to the readers imagination). At least Nolan and Bale gave it a go.

3) Both a sexist and idiotic comment. Look good or at least act good? Maggie Gyllenhaal fits both those requirements and did a fine job in the last movie. I acctually cared about her character and what happened. I can even begin to fathom what you want there.

4) The "original" Tim Burton movie...??? What? The original movie was 1966 with Adam west though we could go back to the mini serials made in 1943. The "Original" Batman was and is the first comic book printed in 1939. But lets focus on Burtons version. Now I like the movie..but there is little or no development on Bruce Wayne..you just wait for Keaton to put the suit on. On top of that Batman kills how many people in that movie? Batman dosent kill....

5) Read my last point...You complain when the villans are adjusted but love it when the main character is converted into the very thing he's supposed to despise. Movie wise...they'll allways mess with the characters. Nolan just wanted to it "realisic" and Heath had me convinced I was watching the Joker.

6) Wow...you know squat about what Batman does or dosent drive. There have been more Batmobiles than you can shake a stick at. Some are sports cars, some are not...yet you sing praises about Burtons movie and that Batmobile was no sportscar either.

7) Calling Micheal Caine gutter trash should earn you a kick in the nuts..it really should. I dont know who Alfred is in your mind. Caine wouldnt have been my choice but by hell...it works for me!

8) Two mediocre films? Could you be any dumber. Not only did Nolan save the franchise he very nearly broke box office records.

So do us all a favour pal..stop watching.

Slash Man (Guest) on 07/31/2011 12:13 am

Opinions are opinions, folks. Let's not get them mixed up with facts. To address the main topic, I never really liked Bane, but I think he'll make a good villain, as Batman has rarely faced such a physical threat (let alone mental). Hathaway seems like the typical A-list choice, but I give Nolan faith. Ledger wasn't that bad.

Now, Batman does kill, but it's only in Nolan's universe that he has a "no kill" rule. That in itself is a little unrealistic, but it's interesting nevertheless.

My only other problems with it are the Batmobile and the voice (obviously). At least Michael Keaton was more subtle about it. I still favor Burton's films, but Nolan's were at least entertaining and had depth. The Joker was interesting, but I couldn't get the Joker vibe like I did with Jack. Plus, I think what Howard was getting at was how Burton's gothic scenery met the tone of the comics.

Still, I can't wait for this to come out.

Batfan27 (Guest) on 08/15/2011 3:11 pm

I am SUPER excited about the new chris nolan batman flick, but i do have some problems with some of it:

1. i hate that stupid voice bale does as batman. hes supposed to be human and vulnerable, not dead and with clipped vocal chords!

2. THE VILLAINS. Why bane and catwoman? i mean i like bane but hate catwoman, and those two paired up equals an awful combo. I wouldve enjoyed seeing heath ledger as joker again, the same way they did scarecrow at the beginning of the dark knight, but thats not chris nolans fault. what is his fault is using the worst villain pair in history in the finale of a great trilogy. what i would have done is have man-bat and clayface in the movie, with don cheadle as clayface and james franco as man-bat. i really like this combo because i like the whole monster theme for the third movie and because man-bat is batman's polar opposite and i think it would be a great way to wrap up the trilogy.

3. i think they could have done a much better job with casting catwoman. i think tom hardy as bane is perfect, but i hate anne hathaway as catwoman. i dont like catwoman at all as a character in any movie, but i do think michelle pfeiffer did a great job as catwoman in the 80s. i also liked halle berry as catwoman in the 2000s. what they should have done is either kept halle berry, or used scarlett johanssen as catwoman, as she did a great job as a similar character, the black widow, in iron man 2.

well thats what i have to say about the movie, but dont get me wrong, i am super-excited about how this is gonna turn out.

Mercy (Guest) on 10/04/2011 6:58 am

Hathaway has not been represented as a villain which to me sounds good.