Page 1 of 7

New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 10:22 am UTC
by Zarq
So after months of speculating, Nolan finally announced who Bruce's adversaries are going to be in the next (and possibly last) Batman installment.
And the villains are ...

Spoiler:
Catwoman (played by Anne Hathaway) and Bane (played by Tom Hardy)


Any thoughts, xkcd forum?

(source)

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 11:06 am UTC
by Jesse
Sounds good. Has he announced whether or not he'll carry on making more? Because I'm not sure how you could use these to give a decent finality to the trilogy.

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 11:26 am UTC
by Zarq
From the linked article:

but with Nolan openly admitting that this is the end of his Bat-tale


Maybe Bruce and Selina will marry and have lots of little Bat-children, and Bane will become good and be the new Batman? /notgonnahappen :D

I'm wondering how he will fit Bane in his Nolan-verse. Catwoman is no problem, she's rather realistical, but Bane? Yeah, he could go with a normal bodybuilder, but that's not that villain-worthy I think.

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 12:24 pm UTC
by Pez Dispens3r
Jesse wrote:Sounds good. Has he announced whether or not he'll carry on making more? Because I'm not sure how you could use these to give a decent finality to the trilogy.

I think it's not so much the villains but the screenplay which'll make it a decent last film, and there's plenty of material to work with on those characters to make that happen. Especially considering with the Nolan films it has been the city that is the villain (and simultaneously the victim) as much as anyone in a costume.

Besides, I think more a subtle character (cat burglars aren't particularly evil) and an uncomplicated character (stupidly powerful force of destruction) are an appropriate choice considering you simply can't beat Dark Knight for awesome villains, so it's better not to run that race and go for something less obvious.

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 12:44 pm UTC
by Jesse
I know the article claimed that Nolan had admitted it. I was wondering if anyone knew where that was sourced from? People had been claiming this was the final film at the same time they were claiming that Eddie Murphy was going to be the Riddler. I've no doubt he can create a great ending to this series at all, I have complete faith in Nolan's abilities, I'm more wondering exactly where you can go with it in an "If I was writing this, what would I do?" way.

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 12:54 pm UTC
by Zarq
Though this news had been widely assumed, Christopher Nolan has confirmed in an interview with Entertainment Weekly that The Dark Knight Rises will be his final foray into the Batman universe.


http://www.myhollywoodsource.com/2010/1 ... -included/

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 1:05 pm UTC
by Jesse
Cheers. I'm being proper lazy today.

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 1:33 pm UTC
by ARandomDude
Pez Dispens3r wrote:(stupidly powerful force of destruction)



Bane in the DC comics is quite intelligent, basically like the Bat himself only with lots more muscle.

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 1:58 pm UTC
by Izawwlgood
I thought Bane's use of that juice-y muscle mix made him enraged?

Also, yay for Catwoman choice, I'm... excited. She's something sexy to be sure.

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 2:46 pm UTC
by Pez Dispens3r
ARandomDude wrote:
Pez Dispens3r wrote:(stupidly powerful force of destruction)

Bane in the DC comics is quite intelligent, basically like the Bat himself only with lots more muscle.

Well, I didn't say mindless.

Jesse wrote:I'm more wondering exactly where you can go with it in an "If I was writing this, what would I do?" way.

I'm thinking this is an open question, so:
Spoiler:
Batman is now the villain of Gotham, and its hero is buried. Catwoman is a relatively 'harmless' villain, so if he were to brutally terminate her antics it would further undermine his position with the city. Plus, we know there'll be romantic tension, so he'll want to let her get away despite his principles regarding criminals. That's dramatic tension, right there.

What he'll want to do is come to terms with an 'allowable' amount of criminality in Gotham, punctuated by the highly-intelligent Bane, while also trying to prevent the blatant extortion (gunpoint robbery and such). That is, he can't hold himself so hard to his principles that any criminal deserves a beatdown, because he already compromised on that with Harvey, as he had to compromise on saving everyone with Ra's.

Undoubtedly, the climax of the film would be when he takes Bane out anyway, despite Bane having empathetic motives. Because there really isn't any moral path, just moral calls.

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 5:14 pm UTC
by SecondTalon
Depending on how Bane's written, he's a force of destruction that occasionally references philosophical quotes as he bashes heads in.. or he's Batman, only on 'Roids, minus the 'Roid Rage.

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 5:48 pm UTC
by Jessica
Isn't catwoman supposed to be half villain half anti-hero (or, more accurately, sometimes a villain, sometimes an anti-hero)? Could be she's supposed to be his redemption to bring him back to the forefront of gotham. Could be the romance between Batman and catwoman going against Bruce's moral ethics?

I don't really know batman though.

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 7:31 pm UTC
by EdgarJPublius
Knightfall era Bane is one of my favorite Batman characters, and I've heard good things about the Secret Six incarnation of Bane, hopefully we'll get to see more of that character in this movie.

I'm concerned though that the two 'villains' are both semi-redeemed in comics canon, becoming more anti-heroes than villains, that could mean that we're going to get a lot simpler version of one or the other (which would probably mean Bane) or a soppy ending where everyone is redeemed and Gotham lives happily ever after.
On the other hand, I have enough faith in Nolan that whatever happens, it will be a great movie.

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 8:33 pm UTC
by the_bandersnatch
I know this is going to be an incredibly unpopular opinion... but... I hope it's better than the first two. Especially in terms of the editing and the po-faced "beginners guide to philosophy" crap.


And Christian Bale's growly Batman voice.

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Thu Jan 20, 2011 11:59 pm UTC
by Jesse
How are you even supposed to respond to someone saying the editing in the Batman films is bad? It's just.. What was it about it that you didn't like?

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 2:27 am UTC
by the_bandersnatch
To coherently form my thoughts into reasonable and worthwhile arguments, I'd have to watch the films again, and I really can't be bothered.

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 2:54 am UTC
by Jesse
I don't even need a reasonable or worthwhile argument. I'm just not sure how that sentence makes sense. I mean, at worst the editing was fully competent. It conveyed the information it was supposed to without being confusing or anythign like that.

EDIT: To clarify, I'm not attacking you. It's a genuine curiousity.

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 12:10 pm UTC
by Pez Dispens3r
I didn't like the editing in some of the fight scenes of Begins: seemed a little choppy and flustered (I saw a behind-the-scenes where they mentioned they had tried to do it that way, but I think they shouldn't have). Maybe that's what bothered bandersnatch?

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 2:54 pm UTC
by the_bandersnatch
Well, there is that. Definitely off-putting choppy editing on the fight scenes, but that seems to be an film industry problem in general these days, so I can't single out the Batman films for that. But overall I thought both films - especially the first - were over-long and poorly paced, which I put down to the editing. They should have been tighter films, and could have been with a little more left on the cutting room floor, but as it was I really felt them dragging. And it's not the length per se: the Lord of the Rings films were crazily long, but (and here's the key) they didn't feel like it. (Though in interests of fairness, I should point out they also had the badly shot close ups in battle scenes).

And to quote from an article I read online about The Dark Knight:

"It continuously refers to the concept of morality but never talks about the subject in a way that is intelligent or challenging."

That was a big one for me, and the audience reaction of "wow, these films were so adult and intelligent!" No, they weren't, they were simplistic superhero movies, not that there's anything wrong with that, just don't paint it as something it's not.

And lastly, they try to present themselves as more realistic takes on the superhero genre, set in a much darker and more realistic Gotham, but then there's countless moments that bring me straight out of my suspension of disbelief, so that viewing the film is like driving over speedbumps it's so jarring.

I'd like to quality: I didn't hate these films, and loved Heath Ledger's performance in The Dark Knight, I just feel they could have been so much better, had the potential to be so much better, and in the hands of the people making the films, should have been so much better.

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 4:12 pm UTC
by Izawwlgood
I just want to chime in an say that I agree that the fight editing was horrendous, I understand the reasoning behind it. Batman fights via misdirection and trickery, from the shadows and then he vanishes. Opponents are supposed to be terrified of him, and the cuts were meant to convey that. I think it could have been done better, because we the audience are still supposed to see what's going on, and particularly, how everything he does is still very possible by human standards.

However, Ledgers performance in that film was astonishing, and I can think of virtually nothing to improve the way he was used.

As for the new villains, really, Tom Hardy and not Nathan Jones? The dudes 6 ***11*** and weighs like 350 lbs. I've seen smaller cars. That scene in Troy made me want to punch someone and rip their face off with my teeth; Jones is the man for Bane.

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 4:14 pm UTC
by jakovasaur
Post deleted

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 6:34 pm UTC
by Jessica
the_bandersnatch wrote:And it's not the length per se: the Lord of the Rings films were crazily long, but (and here's the key) they didn't feel like it. (Though in interests of fairness, I should point out they also had the badly shot close ups in battle
Sorry, but really? The LotR movies felt like a marathon even after one movie. At least for me. They were SO LONG. But, that's me.

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 6:50 pm UTC
by Zarq
Jessica wrote:
the_bandersnatch wrote:And it's not the length per se: the Lord of the Rings films were crazily long, but (and here's the key) they didn't feel like it. (Though in interests of fairness, I should point out they also had the badly shot close ups in battle
Sorry, but really? The LotR movies felt like a marathon even after one movie. At least for me. They were SO LONG. But, that's me.


I agree for the first one. That one just kept going. The other two weren't as bad, but Batman was definitely better (length-wise).

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 7:20 pm UTC
by the_bandersnatch
Jessica wrote:Sorry, but really?


Yes, really. But let's not let this thread become LOTR vs Batman (though Batman vs Sauron is a graphic novel just waiting to happen), I guess it's down to personal preference. But for me, the Batman films dragged, the LOTRs didn't.

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 8:53 pm UTC
by ArgonV
Return of the King certainly felt dragged. The battle's over, dude's been crowned and then there's another 30-45 minutes of film

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 8:58 pm UTC
by SecondTalon
ArgonV wrote:Return of the King certainly felt dragged. The battle's over, dude's been crowned and then there's another 30-45 minutes of film
the_bandersnatch wrote:Yes, really. But let's not let this thread become LOTR vs Batman (though Batman vs Sauron is a graphic novel just waiting to happen), I guess it's down to personal preference.

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 9:21 pm UTC
by Jesse
Izawwlgood wrote:As for the new villains, really, Tom Hardy and not Nathan Jones? The dudes 6 ***11*** and weighs like 350 lbs. I've seen smaller cars. That scene in Troy made me want to punch someone and rip their face off with my teeth; Jones is the man for Bane.


First off: Nathan Jones is a guy I hate, so I'm glad they didn't pick him.

Secondly, Tom Hardy is THE MAN. Did you see him in Bronson? Have you seen him in Warrior? Spot on. And I refuse to doubt Nolan's casting because I doubted Bale and he was perfect then I doubted Ledger and he was perfect.

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 9:26 pm UTC
by charliepanayi
Izawwlgood wrote:
As for the new villains, really, Tom Hardy and not Nathan Jones? The dudes 6 ***11*** and weighs like 350 lbs. I've seen smaller cars. That scene in Troy made me want to punch someone and rip their face off with my teeth; Jones is the man for Bane.


Presumably because Tom Hardy is an actor.

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 9:29 pm UTC
by Jesse
To be fair, Nathan Jones is an actor, just not a very good one. Also never struck me as seeming intelligent enough to be Bane.

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 9:40 pm UTC
by Izawwlgood
Why the Jones hate?

I admit I could be wrong about this, but I don't recall Bane being intelligent. I recall him being big, and angry, and certainly brighter than the Hulk, but not exactly a someone you could have a particularly astounding conversation with.

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 9:44 pm UTC
by charliepanayi
Izawwlgood wrote:Why the Jones hate?

I admit I could be wrong about this, but I don't recall Bane being intelligent. I recall him being big, and angry, and certainly brighter than the Hulk, but not exactly a someone you could have a particularly astounding conversation with.


He is very intelligent in the comics, certainly in the Knightfall arc anyway.

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2011 10:01 pm UTC
by broken_escalator
I overheard that catwoman would be a new villain today, and I had to wonder if they were recasting Halle Berry.

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2011 1:21 am UTC
by Jesse
Izawwlgood wrote:Why the Jones hate?

I admit I could be wrong about this, but I don't recall Bane being intelligent. I recall him being big, and angry, and certainly brighter than the Hulk, but not exactly a someone you could have a particularly astounding conversation with.


I hate Nathan Jones for personal reasons related to his treatment of certain of my friends. Also, the Bane you're thinking of is otherwise known as 'Bad-writer Bane', or Batman&Robin Bane.

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2011 3:24 am UTC
by ArgonV
SecondTalon wrote:
ArgonV wrote:Return of the King certainly felt dragged. The battle's over, dude's been crowned and then there's another 30-45 minutes of film
the_bandersnatch wrote:Yes, really. But let's not let this thread become LOTR vs Batman (though Batman vs Sauron is a graphic novel just waiting to happen), I guess it's down to personal preference.


Ok, I'll shut up about it then...

My knowledge of Batman pretty much boils down to cartoons, former movies and games and having played Arkham Asylum: Bane was the pumped up steroid guy, right? I always thought Scarecrow was the best villain (yes, better than the joker). Too bad they used him in the first movie...

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2011 3:26 am UTC
by Pez Dispens3r
ArgonV wrote:I always thought Scarecrow was the best villain (yes, better than the joker). Too bad they used him in the first movie...

Why? They used him in the first movie, and a little in Dark Knight, and they made him completely awesome. What more do you want?

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2011 6:41 am UTC
by PeterCai
Pez Dispens3r wrote:
ArgonV wrote:I always thought Scarecrow was the best villain (yes, better than the joker). Too bad they used him in the first movie...

Why? They used him in the first movie, and a little in Dark Knight, and they made him completely awesome. What more do you want?


I am sorry, but the first one sucks. Scarecrow felt like a typical villan, and the movie felt like a typical super hero movie, there's nothing memorable about any of it.

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2011 7:05 am UTC
by Pez Dispens3r
PeterCai wrote:I am sorry, but the first one sucks. Scarecrow felt like a typical villan, and the movie felt like a typical super hero movie, there's nothing memorable about any of it.

He wasn't typical. For one thing, he was Cillian Murphy. But that asides, he had a freaky fucking sack to wear and he got to do his neuro-toxins schtick in a way that made sense with the rest of the movie. He was a sensible inclusion in a film that delivered comic-book material in a mature and credible fashion. Hate it if you want but it wasn't Daredevil.

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2011 9:21 am UTC
by Zohar
Electra was so much better than Daredevil. And that's REALLY saying something.

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2011 12:04 pm UTC
by Jesse
Daredevil Director's Cut is actually a decent film.

Re: New Bat-Villains announced.

Posted: Sat Jan 22, 2011 12:44 pm UTC
by Zohar
I want to ask "really" but there's a more pressing question - why would you even bother checking it out?