I thought Neeason nailed the part. One of the best portrayals i've seen, it's up there with Stewart.
The Dark Knight Rises
-
-
Neason did a fine job. He played the part well. It was the movie's direction and tone itself that undercut the character and took the iconic-ness right out of him.
That, and David Warner being lodged in my skull as Ra's, the same way Kevin Conroy will always be Batman.
-
Really Flux? It sounds very distinctive to me. I think its superb. He nails a mad eco-terrorist who goal's are to purify the world of evil. He's essentially trying to accomplish the same thing Batman wants to. Only through extremer, crazier, and homicidal means.
Neeson did a good portrayal for Ra's, his just wasn't very memorable. It had some great charms, but I feel he could have been a memorable Ra's if he'd been used more akin to how the comics used him.
-
Ra's really doesn't work if you don't have anything besides "everyone is corrupt, ergo kill everyone to create a utopia".
-
Well that's the essentials of his character. Its just handled with with grace in he comics and animated series than in Begins. He wanted to destroy Gotham, because he viewed it as corrupt behind repair. In the comics he is just a plain madman that wants wipe out 90% of the population, but rivalry relationship with Batman adds a dimension to his character.
In that film he's just a generic assassin that's pissy because he wanted Bats to break his moral code and kill. There's no reference to him being a detective, none of that respectful rivalry with Batman; which made complex and interesting. Then there's no Talia to flesh his personality more. Just boring, dull.There's only one memorable line from him in the film.
When Bruce appears to him in his new costume."Well looks like you took my advice about theatricality quite…. literally".
-
Alright time to give my official stance on this:
I'm severely disappointed.
Now in detail:
While I appreciate and welcome the fact that Nolan wanted to use lesser know villains for his final batman film, I do believe that the choice selection could have been better done.
I'm honestly fine with Black Mask as the primary villain (more on that later), but I do completely abhor Deadshot being included in this film. There's just something about him that seems like a wrong choice. He gives off too much of a BullsEye-Collin Farrell type vibe that downplays his character to something we've already seen before (arrogant leather-wearing assassin who never misses.) Well, at least to me, anyways. If we're going by hired assassins, then I think that substituting him for the villain Firefly would overall make the movie more successful while keeping in touch with originality and fresh villains. That and Firefly is just so much more awesome. Seriously, go read about him.
Secondly, it's absolutely pointless introducing Roland Daggettt this late in the stage. As Robby said, Roland Daggett is the man who is eventually responsible for creating Clayface. it's pointless because what's the point in introducing such a man if Clayface himself will never appear? that's the equivalent of introducing Norman Osborn and setting him up to become, though not actually making him, the Green Goblin in the final Spider-man film. I'd say it would be better to scrap the character of Roland Daggett entirely.
Now as for female villains, Talia al Ghul sounds like a logical choice for the conclusion to Nolan's Batman Series, but I believe that Catwoman would be the best role for this film. Yes, I know that Catwoman has already been brought to the big screen before, but keep in mind that one of the aforementioned villains in this film is Black Mask, and having Catwoman fill the niche of femme fatale would equally serve to bring out the very best in Black Mask as a villain as well. These two have a dark history together that can be played out in this film. So Pay Attention.
In Catwoman Issue #16, Black Mask begins a drug trafficking ring and decides to move his organization into Gotham's East End, drawing the attention of Catwoman, who had sworn to protect that area of the city.
Catwoman interferes in Black Mask's plans, stealing money from him and giving it to the poor, and injuring many of his men. Black Mask decides he wants to remove the problem, and so finds an old friend of Selina Kyle's, Sylvia Sinclair, who is working in the Gotham mobs. She reveals Catwoman's secret identity to him, and he begins a campaign of terror against her. He blows up the new youth center she had endowed with the stolen money, hounds her, and kidnaps her sister and brother-in-law. Black Mask then tortures Catwoman's brother-in-law to death in front of her sister, and then makes the woman eat pieces of her husband's corpse.
Catwoman arrives to find her brother-in-law dead, her sister insane, and her friend Holly Robinson on the verge of being tortured. She attacks Black Mask, and the two of them fight across his penthouse. At the end of the battle, an enraged Catwoman retaliates by shooting him in the head, killing him.
As such, Nolan adapting this storyline to his final film can really work out and bring the best out of everyone's character, including any chemistry between Catwoman and Batman, and Firefly as well.
It's a sad shame Hollywood is too retarded to see this, and this movie will probably fail to expand on any of its characters and fall short of its predecessors in terms of cash revenue.
Color me disappointed and disheartened. I expected better from Nolan. :getlost:
-
Yeah, Mr. 333, I don't think that they will go with a canibalism plot.
Watch Deadshoot be defeated as swiftly as the Scarecrow on Dark Knight.
-
Those are iconic because of the Adam West show which was campy, and worked for that era.
The Penquin is mostly hated comic fans anyway, he's merely recognizable. The Dark Knight alone we revitalized the popularity of the Joker and Two-face. It really depends on how memorable these folks are portrayed to be. As much as I like Liam Neeson but his Ra's Al ghul wasn't a memorable portrayal. That and he was very forgettable.
I dunno, I never watched the Adam West show, but before I even got into comics, I already knew the Joker, Catwoman, the Penguin, Riddler, Two-Face, Mr. Freeze and Poison Ivy from the movies. These characters have that "classic villain" feeling for me now, because of that. Even my friends or parents, who never read any Batman comics know their names.
I completely agree with you though regarding Liam Neesons portrayal of Ras Al Ghul. The character not only wasn
t really memorable, he just wasn
t as impressive or fascinating as he should. I even think he got sorta outshined by Cillian Murphys Scarecrow, who, I wish would have gotten a bigger role. I don
t always want to bring up the stupid, old "my friends say that so it has to be generally true" argument, but again, my friends now also know who Scarecrow is and would immediately recognize him in the comics. But if I would mention Ras to them, they just would go "Who?"I always thought Ras Al Ghul as first movie villain was a weird idea, he is a too grand scale type of character for that. He would work so well in a second or third movie, as a bigger threat than Batman has ever faced before, someone that doesn`t just want to kill some people but has really big plans.
On the revealed characters, I think Black Mask is a good idea. He works well in Nolans universe and has the potential to be a memorable villain. Deadshot though, bleh. Wasn
t he already in that animated movie that was supposed to bridge Begins and Dark Knight?? I
m fine with Talia, but who in hell is Roland Dagget? Some mafia guy? What had he to do with Basil Karlo?@RobbyBevard:
So, Raimi is forced to use Venom… does that explain emo Peter, dancing Peter, the terrible characterization of Eddy Brock, the sheer laziness of having a comet happen to fall 2 fee from Peter, or the Sandman subplot ending badly, or the Neo Goblin subplot where he ges amnesia and thenhis Butler tells him everything, or that like, ten minute long Peter tries to ask Mary Jane to marry him sequence?
You nailed everything that was wrong with that movie, thanks . Seriously, the only thing in it that I thought was handled even remotely well was Harrys plot. And even here, yeah, hello, amnesia??
-
While I appreciate and welcome the fact that Nolan wanted to use lesser know villains for his final batman film, I do believe that the choice selection could have been better done.
I'm very skeptical of about the validity of that sites announcements.
Goyer decides the villains they could useI dunno, I never watched the Adam West show, but before I even got into comics, I already knew the Joker, Catwoman, the Penguin, Riddler, Two-Face, Mr. Freeze and Poison Ivy from the movies. These characters have that "classic villain" feeling for me now, because of that. Even my friends or parents, who never read any Batman comics know their names.
That further drives my point home, that this movie might have the potential to make those newbies– unheard of foes; from the comics, more mainstream.
On the revealed characters, I think Black Mask is a good idea. He works well in Nolans universe and has the potential to be a memorable villain. Deadshot though, bleh. Wasn
t he already in that animated movie that was supposed to bridge Begins and Dark Knight?? I
m fine with Talia, but who in hell is Roland Dagget? Some mafia guy? What had he to do with Basil Karlo?Clayface was originally a serial killer. Also that animated movie wasn't canon to the main Nolan universe, its something that's loosely based on the Nolan-verse.
Now as for female villains, Talia al Ghul sounds like a logical choice for the conclusion to Nolan's Batman Series, but I believe that Catwoman would be the best role for this film. Yes, I know that Catwoman has already been brought to the big screen before, but keep in mind that one of the aforementioned villains in this film is Black Mask, and having Catwoman fill the niche of femme fatale would equally serve to bring out the very best in Black Mask as a villain as well. These two have a dark history together that can be played out in this film. So Pay Attention.
Really? I think she is a really bizarre choice, I've said before she could work but now with the this film dealing with the repercussions of the last film. She isn't very villain like and can't carry a film on her own furthermore she needs her father to bring back the dynamic between her and Batman or else she won't work that well. She needs to appear in later films, or they could make her the daughter or relative of Black Mask but that would be terrible. They could bring back Ra's as sort of title of succession with a new person taking over the mantle and making him closer the comics iteration, but that wouldn't feel like Nolan and Ra's hasn't yet to be announced to come back.
Secondly, it's absolutely pointless introducing Roland Daggettt this late in the stage. As Robby said, Roland Daggett is the man who is eventually responsible for creating Clayface. it's pointless because what's the point in introducing such a man if Clayface himself will never appear? that's the equivalent of introducing Norman Osborn and setting him up to become, though not actually making him, the Green Goblin in the final Spider-man film. I'd say it would be better to scrap the character of Roland Daggett entirely.
Clayface could fit in this verse, only through going by the original concept of the character by, making him a serial killer. Then again, the way the story is then now I'm afraid Clayface wouldn't mix well.
In Catwoman Issue #16, Black Mask begins a drug trafficking ring and decides to move his organization into Gotham's East End, drawing the attention of Catwoman, who had sworn to protect that area of the city
Okay. Liking this.
Catwoman interferes in Black Mask's plans, stealing money from him and giving it to the poor, and injuring many of his men. Black Mask decides he wants to remove the problem, and so finds an old friend of Selina Kyle's, Sylvia Sinclair, who is working in the Gotham mobs. She reveals Catwoman's secret identity to him, and he begins a campaign of terror against her. He blows up the new youth center she had endowed with the stolen money, hounds her, and kidnaps her sister and brother-in-law. Black Mask then tortures Catwoman's brother-in-law to death in front of her sister, and then makes the woman eat pieces of her husband's corpse.
Yeah…. A little fuzzy but alright. I'm still listening.
Catwoman arrives to find her brother-in-law dead, her sister insane, and her friend Holly Robinson on the verge of being tortured. She attacks Black Mask, and the two of them fight across his penthouse. At the end of the battle, an enraged Catwoman retaliates by shooting him in the head, killing him.
Now this is a great idea for a Catwoman film. They should hire you to write the script. Not to mention Nolan wants Batman to be only good person in a theatrical costume, this is this is Batman's personal arc. That it would require a little too much establishing of Selina Kyle for film dealing with the awful repercussions of the Dark Knight. That's little too much focusing on that particular character, and not to mention that's this might end up becoming to much like the Burton films became: focusing too much on the villain. Catwoman will pop-up in Bat-film but It won't be in this one that ends the story arc that began with Batman Begins. We have to be patient.
As such, Nolan adapting this storyline to his final film can really work out and bring the best out of everyone's character, including any chemistry between Catwoman and Batman, and Firefly as well.
I admit I take back what I said about Talia working better in this film then Catwoman, she would actually work better in this film then Ra's Al Ghul less Talia. Talia isn't very good by herself, she needs that certain complexity and that's showcase through her being turn by her love for her father and Batman.
It's a sad shame Hollywood is too retarded to see this, and this movie will probably fail to expand on any of its characters and fall short of its predecessors in terms of cash revenue.
This post portion goes to anyone doubting this film because of the villains
Nolan pondered this.Could you see actually yourself not making the third Batman film? NOLAN: Well … let me think how to put this. There are two things to be said. One is the emphasis on story. What’s the story? Is there a story that’s going to keep me emotionally invested for the couple of years that it will take to make another one? That’s the overriding question. On a more superficial level, I have to ask the question: How many good third movies in a franchise can people name? [Laughs.] At the same time, in taking on the second one, we had the challenge of trying to make a great second movie, and there haven’t been too many of those either. It’s all about the story really. If the story is there, everything is possible. I hope that was a suitably slippery answer.
Nolan strikes me as this guy who's a perfectionist. A man who wants to surpass what he did before, and he wouldn't have returned if didn't something special to give to us. Whether you like the Dark Knight or not let me say this; it did top the last villain, and got many good reviews, more then that of the first.
David Goyer is the one who comes up with these stories and actually decides which villains they could use and what villains they shouldn't use.
Many folks doubted Nolan could top Begins especially when Ledger was announced as the Joker, but he did. I believe Nolan could disprove your doubts.There have been third installments in franchises that are revered just as good, if not better then the first two. Have there been many? No. But I do think this film could break that curse like the Toy Story 3 did and end this set of films on the right track, maybe even become just as revered, if not better then the first two. I know the thought of a succeeding villain surpassing the Joker is laughable but it sure isn't a thought outside sanity, and in reality its actually quite possible. Nolan just has to play his cards right and pick the right take and the most unpredictable actor who can bring out this otherworldly performance and Nolan can accomplish that. Black Mask is pretty creepy and chilling and he could become one of cinema's most memorable villains like Heath's Joker has become. Nolan said that that their intention is to make a 'great movie', and Bale said they want to "up" what they did before. This means they are confident they can make a better film.
-
@Mr.333:
Alright time to give my official stance on this:
I'm severely disappointed.
Now in detail:
While I appreciate and welcome the fact that Nolan wanted to use lesser know villains for his final batman film, I do believe that the choice selection could have been better done.
I'm honestly fine with Black Mask as the primary villain (more on that later), but I do completely abhor Deadshot being included in this film. There's just something about him that seems like a wrong choice. He gives off too much of a BullsEye-Collin Farrell type vibe that downplays his character to something we've already seen before (arrogant leather-wearing assassin who never misses.) Well, at least to me, anyways. If we're going by hired assassins, then I think that substituting him for the villain Firefly would overall make the movie more successful while keeping in touch with originality and fresh villains. That and Firefly is just so much more awesome. Seriously, go read about him.
Secondly, it's absolutely pointless introducing Roland Daggettt this late in the stage. As Robby said, Roland Daggett is the man who is eventually responsible for creating Clayface. it's pointless because what's the point in introducing such a man if Clayface himself will never appear? that's the equivalent of introducing Norman Osborn and setting him up to become, though not actually making him, the Green Goblin in the final Spider-man film. I'd say it would be better to scrap the character of Roland Daggett entirely.
Now as for female villains, Talia al Ghul sounds like a logical choice for the conclusion to Nolan's Batman Series, but I believe that Catwoman would be the best role for this film. Yes, I know that Catwoman has already been brought to the big screen before, but keep in mind that one of the aforementioned villains in this film is Black Mask, and having Catwoman fill the niche of femme fatale would equally serve to bring out the very best in Black Mask as a villain as well. These two have a dark history together that can be played out in this film. So Pay Attention.
In Catwoman Issue #16, Black Mask begins a drug trafficking ring and decides to move his organization into Gotham's East End, drawing the attention of Catwoman, who had sworn to protect that area of the city.
Catwoman interferes in Black Mask's plans, stealing money from him and giving it to the poor, and injuring many of his men. Black Mask decides he wants to remove the problem, and so finds an old friend of Selina Kyle's, Sylvia Sinclair, who is working in the Gotham mobs. She reveals Catwoman's secret identity to him, and he begins a campaign of terror against her. He blows up the new youth center she had endowed with the stolen money, hounds her, and kidnaps her sister and brother-in-law. Black Mask then tortures Catwoman's brother-in-law to death in front of her sister, and then makes the woman eat pieces of her husband's corpse.
Catwoman arrives to find her brother-in-law dead, her sister insane, and her friend Holly Robinson on the verge of being tortured. She attacks Black Mask, and the two of them fight across his penthouse. At the end of the battle, an enraged Catwoman retaliates by shooting him in the head, killing him.
As such, Nolan adapting this storyline to his final film can really work out and bring the best out of everyone's character, including any chemistry between Catwoman and Batman, and Firefly as well.
It's a sad shame Hollywood is too retarded to see this, and this movie will probably fail to expand on any of its characters and fall short of its predecessors in terms of cash revenue.
Color me disappointed and disheartened. I expected better from Nolan. :getlost:
This. I also strongly agree with deadshot being a poor choice. Firefly would be MUCH better, hell get deathstroke the terminator in there and you could still do great things. As for a female lead, well i'm not too keen on those anyway so you say what you will about that.
-
I am happy to see Black Mask in this film. Very happy. Like others there's a specific way I see Nolan potraying the character. I imagine Mask as a misanthrope who sort of is a Joker Imposter much like the Bat Imposters from Dark Knight. He hates people and sees their optimism and hope for the future and a mask which they wear and has made it his personal vendetta to wipe them out. He acts much like the Joker only more serious and brooding.
Don't have any qualms with Deadshot showing up. But seriously, people LIKE Firefly? What? I see Firefly more as a gimmick than a character. Also anyone who hooks up with Killer Moth is a failure in my eyes. Not the most rational of hatreds, I know.
-
Really? I think she is a really bizarre choice, I've said before she could work but now with the this film dealing with the repercussions of the last film. She isn't very villain like and can't carry a film on her own furthermore she needs her father to bring back the dynamic between her and Batman or else she won't work that well.
Its always possible Ra's will show up again as a surprise reveal they haven't announced yet.
Spiderman did it with Norman Osborn. Twice.
-
So…has anyone made any peener jokes yet?
-
Errection jokes are like so late 2010.
@RobbyBevard:
Its always possible Ra's will show up again as a surprise reveal they haven't announced yet.
Spiderman did it with Norman Osborn. Twice.
Be a bit meh, since his exit was pretty finite.
But on the other hand, Liam Neeson is awesome. -
@Thousand:
So…has anyone made any peener jokes yet?
The thread tiles was "The Dark Knight Rises snicker" for two months.
Be a bit meh, since his exit was pretty finite.
Thats what Lazarus pits are for.
-
@RobbyBevard:
And the villains are to be…
! Black Mask, Deadshot and Roland Daggett (The guy who made Clayface… but not actually Clayface). Yawn.
I'd be completely unthrilled if at the very bottom of a mountain of text and spoilers it didn't mention that they were also casting for
! Talia.
So, hopefully that character will be the actual big villain and the others just minor cronies.
Oh. And also Vicki Vale apparently. Uhm… okay.
And now lets look at the actual source of of information that site got it from.
The Daily Blam reports that according to sources within Warner Bros., Deadshot and the Black Mask will be villains in Christopher Nolan's The Dark Knight Rises.
However the Daily Blam is not as accurate or reliable as Batman on film
Plus the Daily Blam article is titled "'Two villains supposedly revealed for Dark Knight Rises'', the fact that that they used 'supposedly_'_ means it isn't definite. In contrast the article you posted had a definite title revealPlus the article in Daily Blam was updated after this announcement.
Upon further review, it appears this information originated in this week's issue of Production Weekly. Though still a rumor until confirmed by the studio, according to a source the Dark Knight will face off several popular comic characters in director Chris Nolan's final Batman film starring Christian Bale.
http://www.dailyblam.com/news/2011/01/13/revealed-as-the-villains-in-the-dark-knight-rises
Yeah..Robby . I don't think that's accurate.Firstly this is still treated as a rumor on may other sites and as far I now Batman on film only acknowledged Talia.
Batman-on-film is the most reliable source for Bat-film news as they have direct links to folks who actually play a part in the films. They haven't confirmed that either Black Mask or Dead-shot will be in that film. They were the first to disprove Tom Hardy playing Hugo Strange.
Not to mention this nonsense with Black Mask and Dagget sounds quite similar to this recently released leaked script. It also had Deadshot and Black Mask, with Strange and Riddler fused together. with a very similar similar plot to the article you posted described. It also had Daggget who is a Timm-verse creation that exist outside the comics.
http://uk.movies.ign.com/articles/114/1143277p1.html
Proven fake by Batman on film. Later confirmed by Ign to be fake.
UPDATED, JAN. 11: Batman-on-Film claims there has been no script leak, and that Tom Hardy's recent decision to shave his head doesn't indicate anything about who he's playing in The Dark Knight Rises as he's making another movie, The Wettest County in the World, first.
Not to mention the whole "Black Mask/ Dagget" thing sounds an awful lot like another fake leak for The Dark Knight where Mask was allied with the ousted CEO from Begins.
So folks who don't like either Deadshot or Black Mask can rest at ease. looks like we are back to square one again and we don't know a thing about the who the new villains are . All we know about the next villans is that it will feature new villains never before portrayed on live-action film
**“You know the thing is with [[/B]**BATMAN BEGINS], people would say ‘Who are you going to use? The Penguin, The Joker, The Riddler, etc.’ These are the well known characters – known principally from the TV show -- and guess what, we used Ra’s Al Ghul and The Scarecrow. Now they weren’t characters from the other films or the TV show but these were big characters from the comics. And there are a lot of big characters in the comics that haven’t been used -- comic book readers know who they are though.”_** - David Goyer
Nolan ruled out Riddler, Joker, Penquin….but not Catwoman.
So maybe they could use her...though I'm still skeptical.Its always possible Ra's will show up again as a surprise reveal they haven't announced yet.
Spiderman did it with Norman Osborn. Twice.
I agree and since I just debunked your source and now there are no villains confirmed at this point . I'd say its even more within the realm of possibility
Thats what Lazarus pits are for.
Uh… remember take Nolan was aiming for. I've said before They could bring him back as the guy who succeeds him the Liam Neeson Ra's and make the title of Ra's Al Ghul a title that can be succeeded by another guy more closer to the comics. But I just don't see Nolan doing that. Actually there is one hint in Begins and that they pronounce "Ra's al Ghul' Raz'-Al-Ghul, this is different from the comics and and other media which commonly pronounce it as Ray'sh Al-Ghul. Maybe they can give the next guy the chance to play a version more akin to the comics iteration and pronounce him by that. Its possible.**_
-
Sorry double post not that I've debunked the both Black Mask and Dead shot being in this film. I have more hopes Hugo Strange will appear.
He'd be perfect.
-
Bill I like how you bold things.
-
Eh, sorry Robby if I'd embarrassed you. Guys but seriously this why is one of reasons Hugo would be great for this.
He's just fits the puzzle very well.
-
Eh, sorry Robby if I'd embarrassed you. Guys but seriously this why Hugo would be great for this.
He's just fits the puzzle very well.
Oh my God is that Christopher Lee.
-
I think that is. But I think that's the guy that voiced him the original animated series.
Ray Buktenica -
This post is deleted!
-
Seriously are you getting hung up over the pronounciation of a 3 letter name that was originally written in a comic book?
I mean really.
-
Not really…. What the are even talking about? I don't care if Ra's name was changed. I just mentioned the next guy could be called akin to his comics pronunciation. It doesn't really matter. to me. I'm not of the those comic-geeks that frown over one change.
Don't know where you got impression
-
But that means you do care.
[edited]
-
Nope it doesn't. I really don't mind at all, it was just speculating if they could call him that. Whether they don't or not is fine by me .
Edit: I moved that post to the my post debunking Robby's source. Because I thought it would be I didn't want to double post.
-
Sorry double post not that I've debunked the both Black Mask and Dead shot being in this film. I have more hopes Hugo Strange will appear.
http://images.wikia.com/batman/images/4/42/Hugo_Strange_1.jpg
He'd be perfect.
Why the hell are there two Batmans running in the opposite direction? That makes no sense, if it were a reflection of one Batman they'd both be running in the same direction.
-
Nope it doesn't. I really don't mind at all, it was just speculating if they could call him that. Whether they don't or not is fine by me .
You wouldn't even bring it up if the fact that they changed the pronounciation of a 3 letter word didn't irk you incredibly. So contrived. Bring him back just so they can 'correct' his name. I mean it's such a minor change, who the hell cares?
Raz, Rash. The movie's destroyed!
-
You wouldn't even bring it up if the fact that they changed the pronounciation of a 3 letter word didn't irk you
Listen I didn't really care at all. That's not what I meant
So contrived. Bring him back just so they can 'correct' his name.
The only reason I bring that up because I think they did bring him back, they might give us a closer adaption of Ra's from the comics that's all, so perhaps a name pronunciation closer to comics might make that apparent. This is a different one. I want him done justice worthy of the character he's based on. Again you read my post wrong. Me and Robby also want him back to put Talia to her full potential, no offense; but that's a pretty dumb accusation.
Raz, Rash. The movie's destroyed!
Wrong again.
This is me being the hardcore comic-book dweeb that your making me out to be."WHAT? THEY CHANGED HIS NAME LIAM NEESON SUKCS iWANT HIS NAME RIGHT"
A name ruining a movie? Wow. I've never said something that crazy. .Real me: Maybe they could distinguish this Ra's from the other one, if they are hewing closer to the comics, by giving a name closer to the comics.
You: Oh grow up its just a fucking name.If I really was having a gripe because of the name wasn't pronounced the same as the comics, then I would have mentioned that in my critique on Nolan's take of the character
Here.Well that's the essentials of his character. Its just handled with more grace in the comics and animated series than in Begins. He wanted to destroy Gotham, because he viewed it as corrupt behind repair. In the comics he was just a plain madman that wants wipe out 90% of the population, but rivalry relationship with Batman adds a dimension to his character.
In that film he's just a generic assassin that's pissy because he wanted Bats to break his moral code and kill. There's him not him calling detective, none of that respectful rivalry with Batman; which made him complex and interesting. Then there's no Talia to flesh his personality more. Just boring, dull.Is there a single spot you see that I'm bitching about his name Flux? None. I' could care less if they made a comic closer iteration of the character on film and they still had him caled Raz'. I would still be entertained, and wouldn't care about the name change, I just suggested they should have him be distinguished if they get another guy to take his place as the leader of league of assassins by a new name.If I really was having a gripe because of the name wasn't pronounced the same as the comics, then I would have mentioned that in my critique on Nolan's take of the character that I quoted for you. For some reason you misunderstood and even mistakenly assumed that I was this nit-picky dunce that couldn't handle a character slight name changes to villains, then you made weird accusations that I that didn't like Nolan take Ra's because of its different way it choose to pronounce the character's name. This was your mistake. I mean your talking to the guy who was content with the changed name pronunciations in the 'Last Airbender'( which I think the bender part means something gay in your country) for fucks sakes.
Why the hell are there two Batmans running in the opposite direction? That makes no sense, if it were a reflection of one Batman they'd both be running in the same direction.
Its supposed to representative of his twisted psyche.
He wants to be Batman. He is obsessed with that man. -
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/images/users/uploads/8073/tdkrposter.jpg
Cool fan-made poster.
Also how does anyone feel about these alternative titles I've come up with?
Is it better?
The Batman: Haunted Knight
The Batman: Gotham's Rebirth.
The Cape Crusader:Gotham Night
Batman:The Silent Protector.
Batman Reborn
The Batman Returns.
The Gotham Knight Strikes again.
The Batman: Beyond. -
My essential point - Why on earth would they suddenly change not only continuity by changing him to make him 'more closer to the original character' - Where are you getting this idea? It's a stupid idea that they would never consider.
For some reason you misunderstood then you made weird accusations that I that didn't like Nolan take Ra's because of its different way it choose to pronounce the character's name. This was your mistake.
I don't think so;
Uh… remember take Nolan was aiming for. I've said before They could bring him back as the guy who succeeds him the Liam Neeson Ra's and make the title of Ra's Al Ghul a title that can be succeeded by another guy more closer to the comics. But I just don't see Nolan doing that. Actually there is one hint in Begins and that they pronounce "Ra's al Ghul' Raz'-Al-Ghul, this is different from the comics and and other media which commonly pronounce it as Ray'sh Al-Ghul. Maybe they can give the next guy the chance to play a version more akin to the comics iteration and pronounce him by that. Its possible.
This seems a bit desperate for ways to bring him back.
-
My essential point - Why on earth would they suddenly change not only continuity by changing him to make him 'more closer to the original character' - Where are you getting this idea? It's a stupid idea that they would never consider.
Its not stupid if its handled correctly. They could make him like an uncle or something, and that the original Ra's left his daughter with him. So Talia would value him more as a father figure then uncle as he raised her to be loyal. Talia, like I said before is a really bizarre choice and since they haven't no villains confirmed, with the exception of her I would assume they might get her 'father.'
I don't think so;
This seems a bit desperate for ways to bring him back.
Uh… remember take Nolan was aiming for. I've said before They could bring him back as the guy who succeeds him the Liam Neeson Ra's and make the title of Ra's Al Ghul a title that can be succeeded by another guy more closer to the comics. But I just don't see Nolan doing that. Actually there is one hint in Begins and that they pronounce "Ra's al Ghul' Raz'-Al-Ghul, this is different from the comics and and other media which commonly pronounce it as Ray'sh Al-Ghul. Maybe they can give the next guy the chance to play a version more akin to the comics iteration and pronounce him by that. Its possible.
That's me, just me pointing that out. I think Goyer and Nolan maybe intentionally may have pronounced his name like that because they have wanted to make a more original character different from the comics. Then when they bring that character-with a adaption closer to the comics iteration. I mentioned that as a possibility of a different name pronunciation to distinguish him from that. How else can you 'bring' him back. Use the Lazarus Pits like Robby said, that doesn't even exist in the Nolan-verse? Without Ra's there really isn't any reason for Talia to be in this film that finishes the story, and takes after the tragic outcome of the Dark Knight–Batman now the villain and reviled by most in the city. With Gordon having to hunt him down to preserve the city's sanity, all Talia will serve in this film is that she will become a revenge obsessed nut. Which would feel tacked on IMO. Then again they might try a comforting role but the confirmed info says there will be two leading females: one as a villain and one as a love interest for the troubled Bruce Wayne.
And she might fill in that role.
-
I think Goyer and Nolan maybe intentionally may have pronounced his name like that because they have wanted to make a more original character different from the comics.
You're joking, right?
It's the same exact name. Meaning it's the same character. Just pronounced differently.
-
I know that but then again that Ra's was also a fusion of the Henri Ducard and the comic character. But whatever, they probably won't do that. It was just a suggestion.
But I don't how else they will bring the character back.
Edit: I sorta agree that the pronunciation thing doesn't matter I don't really care, just throwing it out there.
-
Darren Aronofsky might be turning his 'Year One' script to a comic.
Aronsky, before Nolan came on board; was to be involved in a Batman film called "Batman Year One'' which would have been an adaption of Frank Millers graphic Novel reinventing Batman's beginnings. The Nolan-verse borrows heavily from this comic. Alfred was gonna be this black mechanic, and is called "little Alfred" Selina/Cat-woman would have been this black prostitute and Batman/Bruce would have fled his parents murder scene to be this middle class car mechanic. A version of the script was leaked on Batman on film:http://www.batman-on-film.com/opinion_jett_yearonereview.html
Which was written by Miller I believe( who was also involved). Its been described as a very gritty film with a lot of violence. This adaption never made it to fruition due to the fact it was said to very violent–too violent to market to kids. It was scraped and they did a reboot all together which lead to the Nolan films you see now.
This is what Batman on film had to say about the script
In my opinion, YEAR ONE is in reality a dark, gritty, and violent (it surely would have earned an “R” rating) vigilante story. Aronofsky was quoted as saying it was a “gritty urban crime with an underground guerrilla flavor.” He’s right. You could very easily renamed many of the “Batman” characters, such as Gordon and Bruce, had the Wayne character choose another sort of disguise, and you would have had a pretty good here. But it just wasn’t “Batman” to me.
The #1 reason why it fails for me is that I didn’t care much for this Bruce Wayne. There are many scenes that he is virtually unlikable. His voice over dialogue - his letters to his dead father - are particularly cheesy. But going back to Bruce being unlikable, it is because his intentions - his “mission” - and his actions are all about self-gratification. He’s not donning the Bat-suit to save Gotham, he’s putting it on to beat the living hell out of criminals to make himself feel better. What kind of hero is that?
What does this have to do with Batman on film? He's hinted he might pitch this as a Batman reboot
When asked if he is planning to revisit his "Batman" script, Aronofsky replied: "It hasn't really been announced, but we're doing a comic book of a script that's really hard to make and we're going to do a comic version first and see what happens after Nolan's is done_._"
http://www.worstpreviews.com/headline.php?id=20353&count=0
This a feasibility of what's to happen if Nolan is done, quite frankly I don't like it one bit.. Taxi Driver like narration, severe changes to the character to make him that unknowable.
Zach Synder has stated the next superhero he wants to tackle is Batman and he wants to do an Dark Knight Returns adaption
http://www.slashfilm.com/zack-snyder-interested-in-the-dark-knight-returns-movie/
and he's the top candidate to to succeed Nolan after he's finished. Hell Nolan even picked him to work on the Superman reboot coming, so now I 'm worried. I'm of the opinion that The Dark Knight Returns, like 'Watchmen' works better as a comic then a film and its best left untouched, or else it would become awkward on film translation. Look at what he did with 'Watchmen' and how unnecessarily close it was to the comic. I'm worried about the direction of Bat-film after Nolan leaves the directing mantle. For now both Snyder and Arons are the two plausible directors to succeed Nolan in directing Batman film
-
As long as whoever it is gives us a completely fresh take and it has a good cast I'll be happy.
-
Really guys…from The Batman? No, I want dapper Riddler, like from the original animated series. Here's a render I found:
http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y140/Neurolanis/More%20yet/Batman/Riddler.jpg
And a comic-cover. It would work if the green were toned down to like a hunter green.
http://images2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20080215000211/Batman/images/thumb/d/d6/Riddler.jpg/290px-Riddler.jpgI agree with this buddy!
The movie was really incredibly and great job done by joker..
-
Selena Kyle and Bane are the villains. Warner Bros. announcing Anne Hathaway will play Kyle and Tom Hardy will play Bane. (via Twitter)
-
I love Anne Hathaway but Catwoman?
Hardy is SO Bane though. Bane will be a brilliant villain.
-
Bane ais a villan
Bane
Bane.
Why that gimmicky villain? The villan should be Hugo Strange not those two.
Nolan is making a mistake here, Bane is later years Batman villan not na early years one. Catwoman she can't hold film by herself she will surely be the antihero so Talia is now going to fill the role of healing Bruce Wayne.
No Hugo Strange?
-
Bane is awesome.
-
Bane is a good villain but this goes against what Goyer said about them wanting use villains that have not been portrayed he's contradicted himself with these choices. Firstly Catwoman was already portrayed by Michelle Prefffer in Batman Returns, and Bane was portrayed by Micheal Reid in "Batman and Robin.'' Looks like Catwoman fans get the laugh after all. Goddamn. Oh well I guess they do deserve a good interpretation of the character after a certain 2004 film raped and mangled her . Put really Hugo Strange was the best route to go, oh well. Bane better be portrayed as the skiled tactician he is in the comics, or this may be the worst villain choice for this type of film. These villains succeed Heath's Joker how will they pull this one off? Catwoman….Really and Bane.
-
Bane does make a lot of sense. 'Knightfall', anyone?
-
I love Anne Hathaway but Catwoman?
Hardy is SO Bane though. Bane will be a brilliant villain.
Darn right:
KKC-FKGMeCYTom Hardy could fit Bane. Easily.
-
Hugo Strange makes even more sense, that and I doubt Nolan is going to cripple Batman severely. Bane is a villain that's intelligence matches his body and he's been portrayed in other media as being this bumbling nimrod who;s no where near as intelligent as his comics counterpart.
I gotta say Hardy does make a good Bane though. But yeah How will he surpass the Joker?
Catwoman like I said when debunked Robby's source, might work but she needs to be in an era where Gotham has gotten worse, crime is on all mighty high may have moved out, poverty has increased. I find it funny that that the villain details that Robby posted were more easier
to swallow then the real announcements. -
I doubt Nolan would want to tread the whole 'Corrupt Villain Doctor testing his wacky stuff on innocents' thing since he already had Cillian Murphy do that in Begins. It'd be repetitive. He wants a completely different type of Villain than before. To be memorable in his own right.
-
I love Anne Hathoway, but…eh. We'll see.
And I like Bane. Perhaps they'll do him some justice.
-
Selena Kyle and Bane are the villains. Warner Bros. announcing Anne Hathaway will play Kyle and Tom Hardy will play Bane. (via Twitter)
Ugggghhh…..
Bane is boring. And Catwoman would only work with certain other villains that are not Bane who is boring.
Goddammit, why couldn't Nolan have done The Mad Hatter.
-
@Mr.333:
Goddammit, why couldn't Nolan have done The Mad Hatter.
This. Or I'd actually have liked to see a Killer Croc.
Maybe even a BETTER Poison Ivy. I could see Anne as Ivy.
-
This. Or I'd actually have liked to see a Killer Croc.
Maybe even a BETTER Poison Ivy. I could see Anne as Ivy.
Oh, Poison Ivy could have worked SO much better than Catwoman. It's such a shame, it's not even funny.
The Ventriloquist could have worked as well.
Bane is just…..too flat of a character.