Anne Hathaway as Selina Kyle/Catwoman XXXIII

[Alex Logan]

Originally Posted by Van Petrol

She was solid, no doubt about it, but she didn't get to that level, imo.

Originally Posted by The Joker

Seconded. Loved her to bits, but she didn't reach the acting levels Heath did as Joker.

Sure she did, just in a different way.

[BatLobsterRises]

Joker is always going to be a flashier role than Catwoman. I think both did tremendous and both feel like they're part of the same universe, so that's what counts for me.

Heath probably gave the most transformative performance ever seen in a CBM though, so I do tend to put him on his own plane there.

[Van Petrol]

Originally Posted by The Joker

Seconded. Loved her to bits, but she didn't reach the acting levels Heath did as Joker.

Agreed. As has been said numerous times, she was still fantastic though.

[Van Petrol]

Originally Posted by BatLobsterRises

Joker is always going to be a flashier role than Catwoman. I think both did tremendous and both feel like they're part of the same universe, so that's what counts for me.

Heath probably gave the most transformative performance ever seen in a CBM though.

I agree with this somewhat. As for the part I've bolded, I'd also throw in Neeson as Ra's, Eckhart as Dent/Two-Face, Crane as Scarecrow and Hardy as Bane, as all did tremendous jobs in their roles and deserve to be put alongside Heath's Joker and Anne's Selina/Catwoman. If only Talia was written more interestingly and with more weight then I feel Marion would have hit it out of the park and also been lined up alongside the other great villain portrayals of this trilogy.

[Van Petrol]

Originally Posted by Alex Logan

Sure she did, just in a different way.

Opinions differ I guess. Though if you're putting Anne's Selina up there with Heath's Joker, then Hardy's Bane deserves to up there too, imo.

[The Joker]

Originally Posted by Alex Logan

Sure she did, just in a different way.

I don't see it. None of her scenes displayed the level of acting that Heath gave in say the interrogation room scene for instance. Anne was good, just not as good as Heath.

[BatLobsterRises]

Yeah, I mean I think the entire lineup of villains for this series has been great. I do think Marion "fits in" with them, as in- I found her believable as the daughter of Liam's Ra's, even if she didn't get as much development as the others. But overall it's an amazing on-film rogues gallery.

My top two are Ledger and Hardy. Neeson, Hathaway and Eckhart are all right up there though not too far behind.

[Van Petrol]

I agree.

[Excelsior.]

Ledger stands heads and shoulders above the rest in this franchise. Not just a "little" bit better. Worlds better.

[geetard]

[The Batman]

Originally Posted by The Joker

I don't see it. None of her scenes displayed the level of acting that Heath gave in say the interrogation room scene for instance. Anne was good, just not as good as Heath.

This. The idea that Anne was as good as Heath is...kinda weird. Just seems like a fanboy thing. The only dude who comes close to Heath's performance is Tom Hardy....and even he couldn't beat Heath.

[Van Petrol]

Originally Posted by The Batman

This. The idea that Anne was as good as Heath is...kinda weird. Just seems like a fanboy thing. The only dude who comes close to Heath's performance is Tom Hardy....and even he couldn't beat Heath.

This.

[AnneFan]

Originally Posted by Van Petrol

Opinions differ I guess.

Yes.

[shauner111]

When it comes to transforming, Heath wins. Hardy comes second.

Back to Selina..

Anne & Nolans Catwoman is exactly how i wanted her to be. The focus was on Selina Kyle, the morally grey character. Everything i love about the character was there. Visually? I had no complaints even though i would love to see the cowl/goggles/whip next time. It WAS Catwoman.

Michelle & Burtons Catwoman was super weird. It could be my fav thing from Batman Returns but it's not Catwoman, or should i say..it's not Selina Kyle to me. They could have easily called her another name like they did with Halle Berry's Catwoman and it would have fit better. Visually she looked like Catwoman 100 percent and Michelle was awesome but it's just as different of a character as Halle's.

Pfeiffer's performance will always outshine Anne's because the writing called for a lot of outlandish ideas and a more wild performance that jumps up at you more. Anne transformed too but not like Ledger or Hardy, and it wont get noticed as much as Nicholsons or Pfeiffers roles because it wasnt meant to be 100 % charismatic all the time. But it doesnt matter because she nailed the real Catwoman. Therefore as a Batman fan it's more memorable to me.

Performance wise people might take Michelle over Anne because it's more wild. The crazy characters will always get noticed more than the solid character. But it's just as hard playing the quiet part sometimes. Eckhart and Bale are underrated in TDK for example. Of course im not saying Anne didn't show charisma because she definately did.

And character wise, i think it's gonna be hard to top Hathaways Selina. Her look may be liked more in the future once they give her the cowl, but i think Selina Kyle was done extremely well in TDKR.

[rickfox]

a piece of "news"

Anne Hathaway, Tom Hanks and Halle Berry get lead Oscar pushes for 'Dark Knight Rises' and 'Cloud Atlas'

http://www.hitfix.com/in-contention/...nd-cloud-atlas

[Dark Raven]

Originally Posted by rickfox

a piece of "news"

Anne Hathaway, Tom Hanks and Halle Berry get lead Oscar pushes for 'Dark Knight Rises' and 'Cloud Atlas'

http://www.hitfix.com/in-contention/...nd-cloud-atlas

Well that's a surprise. I'm all for Anne being nominated for Selina Kyle, but I'm not sure if that should be at the expense of Les Mis where she really has an oscar-worthy piece of work. Are they only going to nominate her for one? I definitely hope she is still nominated for Les Mis, because she's more likely to win there than for TDKR, just because it's that type of film that would win.

[Kansiov]

Originally Posted by The Batman

This. The idea that Anne was as good as Heath is...kinda weird. Just seems like a fanboy thing. The only dude who comes close to Heath's performance is Tom Hardy....and even he couldn't beat Heath.

Tom Hardy never came close to Heath's level, not even by a mile. Dozens of actors could have did what he did and do it much better. Did he have more scenes to work with than Anne? Sure he did, he was the main antagonist (for the most part) and was in more of the action sequences– but on a performance level, Bale and Hathaway were heads and shoulders above him (and pretty much everyone else in TDKR).

You could argue that Hathaway and Heath had more interesting characters to work with which is true, but they would have been nothing if not for their masterful performances– Catwoman could've been another sexbot and the Joker could've just been another generic villain. Instead they've put an incredible amount of hard work and research into their respective roles while Tom Hardy didn't do any of that and it's extremely telling in their performances (and their reviews).

[Caped Crusader]

Anne was excellent as Selina/Catwoman. Heath level though? Not even close. But I will go as far as saying that she played the role better than anyone who came before her.

[Dark Raven]

Well I don't know that we can really talk about "Heath level" of performance from Anne. The role wasn't as anarchic or even over the top as the Joker so it didn't call for that type of performance. If Anne played it like that or even like how Michelle Pfieffer played it, we would all be complaining that she wasn't playing the Selina Kyle from the comics but still going for this psycho character who isn't quite mentally stable.

So I think Anne played it the way she needed to play it, and performed extremely well in the role. If Heath hadn't played the Joker but a more subdued or understated character like John Blake, for example, would we still be talking about a "Heath level" of performance even from him? That's an unnecessary pedestal that even he might not have been able to reach in other situations.

[Monicabbm]

Hardy had a difficult role here. He was all the time with a mask, needing to have to work with the body and eyes.
Not every actor can do that.
He gave a great performance in this movie. Not on the level of Ledger, but still very good.

[shauner111]

Originally Posted by Kansiov

Tom Hardy never came close to Heath's level, not even by a mile. Dozens of actors could have did what he did and do it much better. Did he have more scenes to work with than Anne? Sure he did, he was the main antagonist (for the most part) and was in more of the action sequences– but on a performance level, Bale and Hathaway were heads and shoulders above him (and pretty much everyone else in TDKR).

You could argue that Hathaway and Heath had more interesting characters to work with which is true, but they would have been nothing if not for their masterful performances– Catwoman could've been another sexbot and the Joker could've just been another generic villain. Instead they've put an incredible amount of hard work and research into their respective roles while Tom Hardy didn't do any of that and it's extremely telling in their performances (and their reviews).

That first part is a joke. Tom's accent and brute strength as well as his eye/body movements were all Tom, and i cant think of any other actor who could have touched that. Without that we probably would have had a built actor who plays the character very straight and boring.

Tom was asked by Nolan to not dig into the source material so he stayed away. They took a few things but it was a different Bane, so he didnt need to get into it. Anne's Catwoman was the Catwoman of the last 70 years. A Catwoman who has never been on film before. So it's different with her, she read the source material.

[BatLobsterRises]

I think it's just important to keep in mind that when you're comparing the villain performances in this franchise, you're comparing the actual characters almost as much as you are the acting.

For instance, Christian Bale, Tom Hardy and Gary Oldman all probably have the chops to play an amazing Joker. But each cast member is given a different job to do. And again, that's not to downplay Ledger's performance...that was some insane, once in a life time, lightning in a bottle kind of stuff and I don't know if anybody in the cast could've outdone that. I give Nolan a ton of credit for casting him when the entire world went, "WHAT?!!!"

I however, disagree that Joker could've ever been a "generic" villain. The filmmakers would have to fail pretty hard to turn The Joker into that. Bane, on the other hand could've fallen into that trap, but I think what Hardy did with his voice and eyes made it irresistible to watch. There's a reason people love doing Bane impressions. Not just because it's funny, but because it's fun.

[shauner111]

Exactly, and Joker just calls for an all-out performance at all times. Bruce Wayne calls for a lot of emotions that are kept quiet and hidden.

Bane doesn't call for charisma. But Hardy added that in there, and it's something that not a lot of people can do. Or would do to such a brute character.

[Excelsior.]

How does Bane not call for charisma? How do you lead a group of zealots and make wordly announcements on national television without charisma?

[Fudgie]

Originally Posted by Excelsior.

Ledger stands heads and shoulders above the rest in this franchise. Not just a "little" bit better. Worlds better.

Truth. Hathaway didn't come close to it.