Majik1387 said:
Actually no. She can work in Nolan's films with minor toning down of her character and getting rid of the jester suit. And she would still get justice for her character.
Not really a lot. You can give her the same screentime as Scarecrow had and still be able to give her character justice.
I can't see any version of Quinn being nearly as interesting or relevent as Scarecrow's character in BB. In some ways, Scarecrow was 'in name only' in BB, but plot-wise, it made sense and he was able to be an invaluable cog in the larger machine. I don't see that for Quinn...unless they completely redo her character into something that really isn't Harley Quinn.
I think you're putting way too much stock into the Quinn character, but to each their own. There's so much more important stuff that could be fit into these movies than Harley Quinn, or even Robin for that matter. The worth of a Harley Quinn character would not equate the screentime required for her, compared to developments of the Gordon character and his relationship with Batman, for example. It's not so much having anything against harley Quinn as a character....I just think that the inclusion of her character would hurt the films more than help it, when there are so many other things that could help the films more within their limited allotted time. If this was a new TV series, maybe, but not in the next two films.
Maybe....just maybe...she could play the clinical psychologist character for most of the film, covering up in some way for the Joker as a result of her morbid fascination with him....which Joker takes advantage of, manipulating her all along. But then only have her become the Harley character for a short time towards the end in some twisted fashion...which would ultimately prove fatal, so we can get her out of the way. But I woudn't want to see her romping around as Harley for any substantial length.
Majik1387 said:
I disagree; Psycho-vixens are great characters the majority of the time, especially Bat-vixens. They don't only get fans because they're drawn hot, they get fans also because of their origins and characters. Again, I don't want the new Batman films to turn into sausage fest and despite what people think, adding female characters doesn't force them to be a love interest and it doesn't mean they will take away from the plot.
So that's what you see happening..a sausage fest? My aversion to the Harley character was based solely on the character, not the gender. I would have an equal opinion of a male character (psycho-hunk, if you will) that I felt was as cartoonish and unessential as Harley. Boy or girl, we're talking about a one-dimensional semi-character here that would take too much effort to modify than would be worth it. If you disagree with that opinion fine...but don't play the f'in sexist angle here, that's not what this is about at all. If a part of your argument for Harley is that the films could use a 'woman's touch', then it's myopic and superficial. I have no problem with a female character and did not allude to such an issue...if that's what you thought I was referring to, then I would respect your taking issue with such an ignorant outlook, rather than countering it with another argument based on gender. That's not what I meant. Jesus! How about I change 'psycho-vixen' to 'a non-essential, violent supporting villianous character who just happens to be female, not that there's anything wrong with that'.....let's call it that.
Sorry...didn't mean to come off as angry, but I have no problem with female characters. Just extranneous ones. If you like Harley, then fine.
Aaaaaaanyway.....if she were younger, Patricia Arquette.
t:
