The Dark Knight Rises How about an original villain?

[protoctista]

Is it essential for the villains featured in the sequel to be comic book classic characters? Obviously we all want to see our favourite villains get the Nolan treatment, but wouldn't it be cool to have a character that we aren't familiar with, and therefore have no preconceptions about how they should be played, and have no idea about what will happen.

I think that the Nolan batman universe has established enough of its own mythology and interpretation to be able to do this respectfully, and considering the talents involved in the first two films I can trust that they'd come up with something good.

Comic-book films have always acted as translations of the characters and mythology from one medium to another, but why not allow this new medium (film) to actually act as an integral part of the mythology?


Any thoughts?

 

[Reginald]

Is it essential for the villains featured in the sequel to be comic book classic characters? Obviously we all want to see our favourite villains get the Nolan treatment, but wouldn't it be cool to have a character that we aren't familiar with, and therefore have no preconceptions about how they should be played, and have no idea about what will happen.

I think that the Nolan batman universe has established enough of its own mythology and interpretation to be able to do this respectfully, and considering the talents involved in the first two films I can trust that they'd come up with something good.

Comic-book films have always acted as translations of the characters and mythology from one medium to another, but why not allow this new medium (film) to actually act as an integral part of the mythology?


Any thoughts?

Yea I was thinking about this a couple days ago, the only way it could happen if it was a minor villain who didn't have a huge role. No way could Nolan give the lead villain role away to someone not already known in the Batman universe

 

[Bathead]

No. I'd much rather see an old favorite character brought to life.

 

[Crook]

Batman has the most versatile and popular villains in comic book lore, and you wanna disregard them for someone new?

 

[protoctista]

It's not a question of disregarding them. At all.

And yeah, it could only happen for a minor role.

But are you saying that batman's catalogue of villains are now absolute? It would be OK for a comic series to introduce a new character, but not a film?

 

[Reginald]

It's not a question of disregarding them. At all.

And yeah, it could only happen for a minor role.

But are you saying that batman's catalogue of villains are now absolute? It would be OK for a comic series to introduce a new character, but not a film?

Yea I think that is true, but if anyone could do it, it'd be Nolan

 

[Crook]

It's not a question of disregarding them. At all.

And yeah, it could only happen for a minor role.

But are you saying that batman's catalogue of villains are now absolute? It would be OK for a comic series to introduce a new character, but not a film?

No, but when there are still several villains who have yet to be done justice on-screen, they deserve priority.

This isn't like the comics where everyone has several opportunities to shine in a story arc. Film takes much longer to make and has less time to satisfy all characters.

 

[Nathan]

I'll respectfully say no. I watch comic book movies because I want to see some of my favorite characters brought to life.

 

[hatebox]

If it's a good, well thought-out villain whose relationship brings out another interesting aspect of Batman, then sure. Why the hell not?

 

[Nathan]

Because an established comic villain can just do the same.

 

[Byron Long]

I'm really digging Nolan's take on the villains so far. I think that's much more interesting than coming up with a novel villain.
​

 

[Commodore Schmidlapp]

I'll respectfully say no. I watch comic book movies because I want to see some of my favorite characters brought to life.

This quote says it exactly, Nathan

 

[Jochimus]

I can think of three reasons to stick with comics-based villains as opposed to "making up" new ones: Ross Webster, Selena, and Nuclear Man. IMHO the line between "original character" and "cheap knockoff" is too thin to risk; better to make a serious attempt at bringing one of the 'old standards' to the screen.

 

[hatebox]

Because an established comic villain can just do the same.

Well, the presumption is that a newly created villain only exists simply because he/she brings some new dynamic the other established ones don't. I'm not advocating anything either way, but to close oneself off to it completely would be just plain silly.

 

[protoctista]

No, but when there are still several villains who have yet to be done justice on-screen, they deserve priority.

I'm not belittling that mentality, but it goes back to what I said earlier; comic book films have always acted as translations to the material on the page, rather than a facultative part of the mythology itself.
Priority? Batman films shouldn't simply be a production line of depreciatingly well-known/popular characters transmogrified to flesh.

Why do they need to be done justice on-screen? They've already been done justice countless times in the comics - it's not like they've been abused by their previous incarnations on screen or by not being given a cinematic debut.

 

[Commodore Schmidlapp]

I can think of three reasons to stick with comics-based villains as opposed to "making up" new ones: Ross Webster, Selena, and Nuclear Man. IMHO the line between "original character" and "cheap knockoff" is too thin to risk; better to make a serious attempt at bringing one of the 'old standards' to the screen.

That one particularly makes my head hurt.

 

[protoctista]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Jochimus
I can think of three reasons to stick with comics-based villains as opposed to "making up" new ones: Ross Webster, Selena, and Nuclear Man. IMHO the line between "original character" and "cheap knockoff" is too thin to risk; better to make a serious attempt at bringing one of the 'old standards' to the screen.

That one particularly makes my head hurt.

It's made my fists hurt on regular an occasion.

 

[Crook]

I'm not belittling that mentality, but it goes back to what I said earlier; comic book films have always acted as translations to the material on the page, rather than a facultative part of the mythology itself.

Disagreed. The films have brought just as much importance to the overall mythos as the comics or cartoons have. These films aren't recreations of comic book stories, nor imitations. They've all (good or bad) brought new interpretations to these characters, and almost all of them are original stories.

Priority? Batman films shouldn't simply be a production line of depreciatingly well-known/popular characters transmogrified to flesh.

Who's to dictate what these films should be? Since we're on the subject, what SHOULD it be?

Why do they need to be done justice on-screen? They've already been done justice countless times in the comics - it's not like they've been abused by their previous incarnations on screen or by not being given a cinematic debut.

To reflect this back at you, why does Batman or his world need to be done justice on-screen? Or any other comic book character for that matter?

 

[Ronny Shade]

too many good villains already.

 

[Paradyme]

Stick with the comic villains.

 

[The Guard]

With few exceptions, any original villain is just going to be derivative of an existing villain.

 

[Laderlappen]

I'd like to see another Lau or Gambol. Its really hard to make a story with only already existing characters. Even the comics introduce new characters so...

 

[Anjow1060]

Let's get the pre-established villains RIGHT before we start getting all "original".

Although I agree, somewhere down the line it would be cool to see someone new that the fan boys have no idea about. I never played the game, but I remember a lot of people saying that Sin Tzu was always a good villain.

- Jow

 

[Anjow1060]

Let's get the pre-established villains RIGHT before we start getting all "original".

Although I agree, somewhere down the line it would be cool to see someone new that the fan boys have no idea about. I never played the game, but I remember a lot of people saying that Sin Tzu was always a good villain.

- Jow

 

[griffolyon12]

I personally would rather like to see an already created villain get a shot in BB3, but that is not to say that I wouldn't be opposed to Nolan and co. creating their own villain. I mean after all, they're writing superhero stories the same as a comic book writer, and if a comic book writer has the right to create a new villain, why not a filmmaker making a superhero film?

Bottom-line, Nolan and co. have already delivered the two greatest Batman films of all-time, so I say whichever they choose is fine by me, because they have already proven to me that they fully understand this universe and its characters.