The Dark Knight

[dubq 0]

Thats the key to Nolan's Batman movies, he picks indie actors, but they also have had major movies too. So even though these actors are very good and are known for independent work, they also have had some mainstream movies too. Even though Goyer says that Penguin or Catwoman won't be in the next film, do you honestly think Warner Bros. is going to agree? Considering The Dark Knight has done record breaking business, with villains from past films, I don't believe Goyer at all. I mean it would be weird to see the Joker and Two-Face, then all of a sudden go to Black Mask. I would like to see the Ventriloquist in a movie though, since he's so damn creepy. I don't think it matters what villains are in the next movie though, since I think Nolan will make a killer movie anyway.

 

To be fair, WB can't be that closed minded to more obscure villains. Most casual moviegoers hadn't even heard of the Scarecrow let alone Ra's al Ghul from what I understood.

[Youth N Asia 0]

I've never been able to take The Penguin seriously as a bad guy

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

I look at it the other way. I think WB would be open to whatever Nolan wants to do for the next one. His vision of the franchise just made them eleventy-billion dollars. I think he's got the stroke to do what he wants after TDK. Especially since they're gonna want him back pretty badly one would imagine.

 

[ZGangsta 0]

I look at it the other way. I think WB would be open to whatever Nolan wants to do for the next one. His vision of the franchise just made them eleventy-billion dollars. I think he's got the stroke to do what he wants after TDK. Especially since they're gonna want him back pretty badly one would imagine.

Yeah but Sam Raimi made Sony a shitload of money on the first 2 Spiderman movies and they still stuck their noses in his work on the 3rd one.

 

However, I think Nolan is in a better position since

a) TDK is on track to make way more money than any of the Spiderman movies.

b) I think Raimi had signed on for the 2nd and 3rd whereas Nolan could still walk if the studio didn't give him his way.

[Brett Favre 0]

Raimi is a dumbass though. How can he not have Venom in any of the movies? Nolan just had the big money maker in Joker. After that, no one is creaming their pants for Penguin or Catwoman. They ain't that big.

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

I look at it the other way. I think WB would be open to whatever Nolan wants to do for the next one. His vision of the franchise just made them eleventy-billion dollars. I think he's got the stroke to do what he wants after TDK. Especially since they're gonna want him back pretty badly one would imagine.

Yeah but Sam Raimi made Sony a shitload of money on the first 2 Spiderman movies and they still stuck their noses in his work on the 3rd one.

 

 

 

This is true. Hopefully the steaming pile of shit that was Spiderman 3 will convince WB to stay hands off.

[Anakin Flair 0]

Thats the key to Nolan's Batman movies, he picks indie actors, but they also have had major movies too. So even though these actors are very good and are known for independent work, they also have had some mainstream movies too. Even though Goyer says that Penguin or Catwoman won't be in the next film, do you honestly think Warner Bros. is going to agree? Considering The Dark Knight has done record breaking business, with villains from past films, I don't believe Goyer at all. I mean it would be weird to see the Joker and Two-Face, then all of a sudden go to Black Mask. I would like to see the Ventriloquist in a movie though, since he's so damn creepy. I don't think it matters what villains are in the next movie though, since I think Nolan will make a killer movie anyway.

 

To be fair, WB can't be that closed minded to more obscure villains. Most casual moviegoers hadn't even heard of the Scarecrow let alone Ra's al Ghul from what I understood.

 

I had a passing knowledge of Scarecrow, but as a casual fan of Batman I had never even heard of Ra's al Ghul. But Nolan made the characters so compelling my lack of knowledge didn't matter. The same could be said if Nolan decideds to use lesser-known villians in the future.

 

As for the Spider-Man 3 deal- I think the major problem was that Rami didn't like Venom at all and didn't want to use him, but the Studio wanted him in the movie. I doubt that Rami was crying any tears over how baddly Venom was handled, or that he was kileld off immediately.

 

And the movei may have been a piece of shit, but it was a piee of shit that made a lot of money. That's what the studio ultimately cares about.

 

[The Ghost of bps21 0]

But Nolan will care. I don't think he'll do a third one unless he gets his way. He's got a nice run of movies in his career going for him.

[DarKnight 0]

 

And the movei may have been a piece of shit, but it was a piee of shit that made a lot of money. That's what the studio ultimately cares about.

 

It didn't make that much money. It did the least gross out of all 3, and deserved it. It really was shit. And I wouldn't say Scarecrow and Ra's Al Ghul were unknowns at all to the mainstream, since those 2 were featured a lot on the animated series. Scarecrow was featured in some of my favorite episodes. Ra's Al Ghul's episodes I run hot and cold on, since his episodes are very weird, and seems more like a villain for James Bond or Indiana Jones. He's not one of my favorites, but I don't hate him or anything.

[Nightwing 0]

Raimi is a dumbass though. How can he not have Venom in any of the movies? Nolan just had the big money maker in Joker. After that, no one is creaming their pants for Penguin or Catwoman. They ain't that big.

By concentrating on villains who aren't completely one-dimensional? The first two movies were great and didn't need Venom at all. Spider-Man survived over twenty years without Venom; trying to force him in to placate fanboys was stupid, especially since most of his appeal comes from being an anti-hero rather than a Spider-Man villain. The symbiote, for the most part, worked fine in the story. But they should have kept the villains to Harry and Sandman.

[Red Baron 0]

Besides after all the build-up in the first two movies between Harry and Spiderman went to shit and they were working together at the end.

[Red Baron 0]

What about Poison Ivy as a villian?

[milliondollarchamp 0]

I think Marion Cotillard would make a great Catwoman. She's definitely my top choice mainly because only within the past couple of weeks have I discovered what an amazing actress she really is. Plus, I've heard that she's supposedly reigning in that accent of hers for Public Enemies, and that she also has at least one scene with Bale, so I'm very interested to see how that turns out (not that I wasn't seeing that movie anyway. I mean, Michael Mann, Johnny Depp, and Christian Bale? Come on!). It would be great if she could have two different accents as Selina and Catwoman. That would help with the suspension of disbelief with Bruce not recognizing her.

[DarKnight 0]

By concentrating on villains who aren't completely one-dimensional? The first two movies were great and didn't need Venom at all. Spider-Man survived over twenty years without Venom; trying to force him in to placate fanboys was stupid, especially since most of his appeal comes from being an anti-hero rather than a Spider-Man villain. The symbiote, for the most part, worked fine in the story. But they should have kept the villains to Harry and Sandman.

 

Why do people say Venom is one-dimensional? He is a very complex character who has his own beliefs and actions. It would have made for fascinating movies. Just because Raimi hates the character though, he decides to make a joke out of him on screen, and piss off fans in the process. I don't know how anyone can think Sandman is a good villain. I think he is by far one of the worst comic book villains. Just so lame. Thats another reason why Spider-Man 3 sucked the fat one.

[Brett Favre 0]

Raimi is a dumbass though. How can he not have Venom in any of the movies? Nolan just had the big money maker in Joker. After that, no one is creaming their pants for Penguin or Catwoman. They ain't that big.

By concentrating on villains who aren't completely one-dimensional? The first two movies were great and didn't need Venom at all. Spider-Man survived over twenty years without Venom; trying to force him in to placate fanboys was stupid, especially since most of his appeal comes from being an anti-hero rather than a Spider-Man villain. The symbiote, for the most part, worked fine in the story. But they should have kept the villains to Harry and Sandman.

 

I'm sorry but anyone looking forward to a Spider-Man franchise would love to have seen Venom on the big screen.

 

Because Sandman is so cool.

[Guest Vitamin X]

And the movei may have been a piece of shit, but it was a piee of shit that made a lot of money. That's what the studio ultimately cares about.

 

It didn't make that much money. It did the least gross out of all 3, and deserved it. It really was shit. And I wouldn't say Scarecrow and Ra's Al Ghul were unknowns at all to the mainstream, since those 2 were featured a lot on the animated series. Scarecrow was featured in some of my favorite episodes. Ra's Al Ghul's episodes I run hot and cold on, since his episodes are very weird, and seems more like a villain for James Bond or Indiana Jones. He's not one of my favorites, but I don't hate him or anything.

 

I, and most likely a gigantic portion of the general public who have helped push Dark Knight to its legendary box office numbers, have never seen nor cared for the animated series, so yes, they most likely were unknowns, especially to most people over 25, for example.

[ChrisMWaters 0]

Though it's not saying much...

 

Scarecrow was also a member of the Legion of Doom in the SuperFriends series "The Challenge of the Super Friends"

 

So those who watched that series, being older fans or younger ones who watched re-runs of that series, would know about Scarecrow as well.

[Brett Favre 0]

Some people don't even know Two-Face. Like one of the people I went with. GTFO.

 

I think they should go all out with a bunch of villains. Joker opened the door for all the freaks in the city, so maybe you can have the Riddler being a detective for the cops, Black Mask running the mob, Penguin selling guns, Mad Hatter abducting teenage girls, Bane hired by Black Mask to kill Batman, and Hush being a serial killer or something. They don't need major screentime, just give most of them small parts like Scarecrow in TDK and Mr. Zsasz in BB. He doesn't have to defeat all of them, but by the end of the movie just let everyone know that these types of villains will always be around.

[bob_barron 0]

I, and most likely a gigantic portion of the general public who have helped push Dark Knight to its legendary box office numbers, have never seen nor cared for the animated series, so yes, they most likely were unknowns, especially to most people over 25, for example.

 

That's a lot of commas.

 

Nolan's not even signed on for a third movie, so I think he can do what he wants re: villains

[dubq 0]

And the movei may have been a piece of shit, but it was a piee of shit that made a lot of money. That's what the studio ultimately cares about.

 

It didn't make that much money. It did the least gross out of all 3, and deserved it. It really was shit. And I wouldn't say Scarecrow and Ra's Al Ghul were unknowns at all to the mainstream, since those 2 were featured a lot on the animated series. Scarecrow was featured in some of my favorite episodes. Ra's Al Ghul's episodes I run hot and cold on, since his episodes are very weird, and seems more like a villain for James Bond or Indiana Jones. He's not one of my favorites, but I don't hate him or anything.

 

Ah, but note that I said to the casual moviegoing public. Not Batman nerds like us.

[Dr. Zoidberg 0]

The more I think about, the more I like the idea of Catwoman being the next villain. They wouldn't really even have to play it as, "Bruce doesn't know Catwoman is Selina," they could just make it so she's a hooker that Mr. Reese gets with, he gets drunk and spills the beans about who Batman is, and she decides to play into that. She forces Bruce to "date" her and make her a socialite or she'll tell the world, then when he breaks it off or something, she goes even crazier and starts dressing up in leather, killing dudes by clawing at their faces or some shit, and when Bats comes to stop her, she says "Turn me in, I'll turn you in," or something like that. Climactic battle ensues.

 

 

I dunno. I know that's not that good of an idea, but it would be a good start, I guess. Who knows. Fuck it. Shut up.

 

 

And I second Marion Cotillard.

[Guest Vitamin X]

I, and most likely a gigantic portion of the general public who have helped push Dark Knight to its legendary box office numbers, have never seen nor cared for the animated series, so yes, they most likely were unknowns, especially to most people over 25, for example.

 

That's a lot of commas.

Well it's a hell of a run-on sentence, so yeah.

[DarKnight 0]

I, and most likely a gigantic portion of the general public who have helped push Dark Knight to its legendary box office numbers, have never seen nor cared for the animated series, so yes, they most likely were unknowns, especially to most people over 25, for example.

 

Well, I'm just saying that these characters were there on television for people to watch. I can see why no one's ever heard of Black Mask, since he wasn't featured on the animated series, and the Ventriloquist was only in 2 episodes, so yeah, I can see why no one's heard of them.

[ChrisMWaters 0]

I, and most likely a gigantic portion of the general public who have helped push Dark Knight to its legendary box office numbers, have never seen nor cared for the animated series, so yes, they most likely were unknowns, especially to most people over 25, for example.

 

Well, I'm just saying that these characters were there on television for people to watch. I can see why no one's ever heard of Black Mask, since he wasn't featured on the animated series, and the Ventriloquist was only in 2 episodes, so yeah, I can see why no one's heard of them.

3 if you count the style change that came about when "Superman: The Animated Series" debuted.

[DarKnight 0]

3 if you count the style change that came about when "Superman: The Animated Series" debuted.

 

Blah, I didn't like the New Batman Adventures at all, but Superman: The Animatd Series seemed pretty cool from what I saw of it. I only remember this one episode where Superman fought Metallo, and Metallo tried to drown him in lava. That was real bad ass!

[Anakin Flair 0]

I, and most likely a gigantic portion of the general public who have helped push Dark Knight to its legendary box office numbers, have never seen nor cared for the animated series, so yes, they most likely were unknowns, especially to most people over 25, for example.

 

Well, I'm just saying that these characters were there on television for people to watch. I can see why no one's ever heard of Black Mask, since he wasn't featured on the animated series, and the Ventriloquist was only in 2 episodes, so yeah, I can see why no one's heard of them.

 

The only thing I know of Black Mask is that he was the one who tortured Stephanie Brown, IE Robin IV. Isn't he supposed to have some backstory with Bruce?

[dubq 0]

3 if you count the style change that came about when "Superman: The Animated Series" debuted.

 

Blah, I didn't like the New Batman Adventures at all, but Superman: The Animatd Series seemed pretty cool from what I saw of it. I only remember this one episode where Superman fought Metallo, and Metallo tried to drown him in lava. That was real bad ass!

 

o_O

 

How could you not like the New Batman Adventures??? Some of the best episodes in the DCAU were in that series. IMO, of course.

[Ravenbomb 0]

I liked the animation style of the other animated Batman series more.

[dubq 0]

I found the revised style to be much more fluid and less choppy at times. That said, they're both technically the same series..

 

My favourite redesign for that series has to be for the Scarecrow..

 

Original:

 

Redesign:

 

Excellent!

[dubq 0]

Didn't know about this. Apparently now that The Batman (animated) is over, there's another animated series starting up for the Dark Knight. Batman: The Brave & The Bold starts this November.

 

http://www.worldsfinestonline.com/news.php...news&id=213

 

July 25, 2008 by James Harvey

 

Cartoon Network has set a new November 2008 premiere date for Batman: The Brave and The Bold.

 

The World's Finest has learned that Cartoon Network has set a new premiere date for Batman: The Brave and The Bold. The new Batman animated series is now set to premiere Friday, November 14th, 2008. After being originally announced for a Fall 2008 premiere, the network pushed the series back to March 2009. Now, the series is moving forward to November 2008. The series will feature Batman teaming up with Blue Beetle, Black Canary, The Flash, Metamorpho, Green Arrow, Plastic Man, and many others.

 

Stay tuned for further updates.

 

Preview video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zpXSPJZr65s

 

Interesting animation style. Reminds me a bit of Venture Brothers.