Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Metal Slime]

Considering all the shit that Joker did to Gotham , I just realized they could explain his absence from there on that he got sentenced to death and sent to maximum security.

Oh, wait. Comic book universe. Can't have it make sense. 

[Arc]

The quote is from the August issue of GQ:

Nolan had said during the promotion of Batman Begins that he had no interest in Robin. If I had to surmise, I'd say Bale is repellent to the Gee Golly Shucks angle that Grayson had been saddled with over the decades, and Nolan isn't keen on introducing a teenager into a world of criminals. It didn't look so irresponsible on screen in Batman Forever since O'Donnell was 25, but by that point Robin isn't even Robin anymore.

If they play up the Father/Son angle and mirror the Ducard training sequences, then it can work. Still, I'm calling this possibility dead in the water for the next entry.

[Brentai]

* Neat little subversion of The Killing Joke, when you think about it - where this Joker realizes that there is at least one person in the world who won't turn homocidal no matter how bad it gets.

Did you read a version of The Killing Joke that ends with Gordon going on a murderous rampage?

Except in that one Joker never really gets the point, as far as I can tell.

[Thad]

Considering all the shit that Joker did to Gotham , I just realized they could explain his absence from there on that he got sentenced to death and sent to maximum security.

I don't think any explanation is needed.  He's locked up in Arkham and hasn't managed to escape yet.

If they really wanted to, they could pull a Grant Morrison and say he just "reinvented" himself and recast.  I think that would be a profoundly bad idea and is not going to happen.

Slightly more likely -- and we're going to have to see what happens with Spider-Man regarding precedent -- is that Batman will continue with a different cast after the third movie.  And at that point, if you're recasting Batman, recasting the Joker isn't really a problem either.

Except in that one Joker never really gets the point, as far as I can tell.

Well, Batman said it to him outright.  But it's been awhile and I don't recall what, if anything, his reaction was.

[Brentai]

Slightly more likely -- and we're going to have to see what happens with Spider-Man regarding precedent -- is that Batman will continue with a different cast after the third movie.  And at that point, if you're recasting Batman, recasting the Joker isn't really a problem either.

I think the plan all along was to do three movies, then pass the ball along to the next cast and director.  Wheelbarrows full of cash might fuck that one up, but honestly I think even the studios are starting to catch on that milking a franchise is actually possible as long as you never let the same guy make more than three movies (hear that, Lucas?)  Bond, I think, is the best example, both of how the rule works when heeded and completely fucks you if you ignore it.

Except in that one Joker never really gets the point, as far as I can tell.

Well, Batman said it to him outright.  But it's been awhile and I don't recall what, if anything, his reaction was.

Checking.

Apparently he acknowledges that Batman's probably right, but that he's too far gone himself to be able to listen to anything like reason.

...

Puts Ledger-Joker's "I'm not actually that crazy" rant into a bit of focus, really.

[Kazz]

And at that point, if you're recasting Batman, recasting the Joker isn't really a problem either, because nobody is going to go see your shitty movie.

[Thad]

milking a franchise is actually possible as long as you never let the same guy make more than three movies (hear that, Lucas?)

Depends what you mean by "make".  If you mean "direct", then Lucas shouldn't have been allowed to make more than one.

[Brentai]

Direct, write, cast, star in, or basically any part of the process.  Like Bale should not be Batman any more than three times.  Ford and Lucas shouldn't be making a fourth Indy movie.  Hayter is hopefully not writing any more X-Men (and retroactively sucked as Old Snake).  Stallone should not be... doing every single thing that he is doing.

This has some unfortunate implications (Ian McKellan/Clellen has tapped out his role as both Magneto and Gandalf, Q should have retired sometime back in the 60s, and Stan Lee needs to stop reprising his role as Stan Lee) but it's usually better than the alternative.

[Detonator]

The problem is that Hollywood could have adhered to those rules as strictly as possible and we still would have had to suffer through Spider-Man 3.

[Brentai]

There are so many worse things than Spider-Man 3.

Like Spider-Man 4.

[Thad]

The problem is that Hollywood could have adhered to those rules as strictly as possible and we still would have had to suffer through Spider-Man 3.

And Batman and Robin.

...Keeping the same Alfred through all four movies doesn't really count.

[Romosome]

Riddler, Catwoman, and Bane are the best bets.  Most folk with significant superpowers are unlikely.  Bane's only "powers" are that he does lots of drugs and is really really strong.  He's also solidly grounded in Batman's later years, though; as much as Nolan likes Millar's notes now and then, I've heard he wants to stick to pre-Silver Age Batman.

And due to that, Bane is doubly unlikely, because you'd need Knightfall to do him (or what would be the point?) and Robin isn't even likely, much less already poised to take over for an hour.


If we want to get creative with redoing villains, and they wanted to do more with Joker in the next movie, you could pull an interesting replacement.  It wouldn't be nearly as charming as the character's ever been, but a strung-out, smeared-makeup successor could be done as Harley.

A really scary Harley that we haven't really seen before.

It'd pretty much not be Harley at all, and just be a name-drop that lets them safely bring back Joker (as a girl), but it'd work better than the Penguin or whoever the hell is left at this point.

[Thad]

Riddler, Catwoman, and Bane are the best bets.  Most folk with significant superpowers are unlikely.  Bane's only "powers" are that he does lots of drugs and is really really strong.  He's also solidly grounded in Batman's later years, though; as much as Nolan likes Millar's notes now and then, I've heard he wants to stick to pre-Silver Age Batman.

Ra's al-Ghul is a character from the 1970's, and is thoroughly grounded in the supernatural.  The former didn't matter, and the latter wasn't used in the movie.

(And I assume you mean Miller-with-an-E.)

And due to that, Bane is doubly unlikely, because you'd need Knightfall to do him (or what would be the point?) and Robin isn't even likely, much less already poised to take over for an hour.

Robin's Golden Age, but yeah, it'd be tough to do his origin AND poise him to take over.

I think Bane's doable without full-on Knightfall.  Batman can have a debilitating injury that's something short of a broken back.

If we want to get creative with redoing villains, and they wanted to do more with Joker in the next movie, you could pull an interesting replacement.  It wouldn't be nearly as charming as the character's ever been, but a strung-out, smeared-makeup successor could be done as Harley.

A really scary Harley that we haven't really seen before.

It'd pretty much not be Harley at all, and just be a name-drop that lets them safely bring back Joker (as a girl), but it'd work better than the Penguin or whoever the hell is left at this point.

But that sounds an awful lot like doing the same thing again.

Goyer teased MTV recently that he knows what the theme for the third movie's going to be, and he and Nolan have been batting a villain back and forth.

The theme of the first movie was fear, and the theme of the second was escalation.  If I had to take a stab at it, I'd say the most likely theme for the third is redemption.

And if I had to take a stab at a Batman villain who represents redemption, it's Catwoman.

[Catloaf]

It'd pretty much not be Harley at all, and just be a name-drop that lets them safely bring back Joker (as a girl), but it'd work better than the Penguin or whoever the hell is left at this point.

What?  I like the penguin.  He could still be done well.

Also, while I like the idea of Harley, I don't think she works without her Puddin'.  And Joker could still be there with full-on chemical-bleached face for an excuse for why he looks different.  Poison Ivy also fits well into the "No real powers" department, and would nicely complement an appearance of Harley.

I'm putting my money on Bane.  But hoping for Clayface.  I honestly just can't see Mr.Freeze with memory of Schwarzenegger's bad ice puns burned into my mind.

[Brentai]

The theme of the first movie was fear, and the theme of the second was escalation.  If I had to take a stab at it, I'd say the most likely theme for the third is redemption.

And if I had to take a stab at a Batman villain who represents redemption, it's Catwoman.

I didn't get the "escalation" theme from TDK, but that's Word of God so I'll just shrug and accept it.

I've got a few ideas for the third "theme" but none of them are very solid; Catwoman probably does fit a theme better than most, whatever it happens to be.  It also fits with the series as I see it, as well: the first movie proved that Batman can't be frightened off the path, the second movie proves that Batman can't be driven off the path, and the third movie could prove that Batman can't be seduced off the path.  To that end the "bigger" villain should be someone who can actually seriously tempt Bruce Wayne into some sort of unholy alliance - Ra's is classically the guy who's come closest to that, but the vibe I'm getting is that nobody wants to see the Lazarus Pit.

If you're going with "redemption" then Mr. Freeze would actually fit pretty well, but I'm just going to come out and say I hate Mr. Freeze no matter who's making bad ice puns through him.  At best he's an extremely well-written version of a really stupid idea, sort of like most episodes of Firefly.

[Arc]

Poison Ivy also fits well into the "No real powers" department

I'm putting my money on Bane.

I am perfectly willing to place money down. Let's do this. Let's take this community to places unknown, unseen, and unwanted.

[Catloaf]

Poison Ivy also fits well into the "No real powers" department

Well, at first anyway.  Wasn't she at first (in story, not design)just good with plants and made poisons out of them?  Yes, later there's the walking death plants and all that crap, but for all intensive purposes, she's just a mad botanist.

[Rosencrantz]

but for all intensive purposes

 

[Norondor]

but for all intensive purposes

[Doom]

but for all intensive purposes

 

Regarding Redemption + Ra's: Talia, I think her name is. AND Cat Woman. Give the third movie two female leads that aren't terrible to wildly overcompensate!

I didn't get the "escalation" theme from TDK, but that's Word of God so I'll just shrug and accept it.

Harvey: Thanks to Bats, we've gone from hoping for Gotham's safety to arresting 500+ criminals. At once.

Joker: Hi folks. I'm bored, so I want to see how many of you will turn into homicidal loonies in the next hour.

Joker: Hi again. Still bored. Let's play Prisoner's Dilemma!

For what it's worth, I'm quite vehemently against any return of the Joker for round three. Considering the horrifying tone of his antics in TDK, you're really going to throw the general public into the tired old "Never Kill A Criminal" debate that plagues prolonged exposure to Batman.