The Dark Knight Rises Joseph Gordon-Levitt as John Blake

Status
Not open for further replies.
Nope not me.

I'm still sticking to my outlandish hope its some sort of incarnation of Robin. Even if its just some sort of amalgamation of Grayson/Drake taking the mantle of Batman for an undisclosed period of time.

I still think what Wayne says in Begin on that plane ride back to Gotham is crucial.

"As a man, I can be destroyed. But as a symbol, I can be something... terrifying"

His little conversation with Ra's as well:

Bruce Wayne: You're vigilantes.
Henri Ducard: No, no, no. A vigilante is just a man lost in the scramble for his own gratification. He can be destroyed, or locked up. But if you make yourself more than just a man, if you devote yourself to an ideal, and if they can't stop you, then you become something else entirely.
Bruce Wayne: Which is?
Henri Ducard: A legend, Mr. Wayne.


His major mistake in this series has been that he thinks he can do this all by himself and that he personally has no limits. Thats a partial truth because Batman truly has no limits but the same doesn't go for Wayne.

The only way he can make this work is by having someone who shares his pain don the mask & cape.

That's a good point...but why would Wayne take a young kid(who admittedly has gone through the same tragedy he has) and train him in order to aid him in his personal crusade? He's seen what being Batman has done to his life and how it's affected him, why would he do that to a kid? I don't think Bruce(this version at least) would want to put any other person through something similar to what he's gone through as Batman, no matter the similarities between their tragic backgrounds. This is why Robin's character has never gone down well with me. At the end of the day, Batman's crusade is personal. Why would he involve a kid in it(by way of training admittedly)?

Anyway, he's already had allies in these movies, Lucius and Gordon specifically. Not to mention Alfred.
 
That's a good point...but why would Wayne take a young kid(who admittedly has gone through the same tragedy he has) and train him in order to aid him in his personal crusade? He's seen what being Batman has done to his life and how it's affected him, why would he do that to a kid? I don't think Bruce(this version at least) would want to put any other person through something similar to what he's gone through as Batman, no matter the similarities between their tragic backgrounds. This is why Robin's character has never gone down well with me. At the end of the day, Batman's crusade is personal. Why would he involve a kid in it(by way of training admittedly)?

Because not all his dogs are barkin'.

Batman isn't perfect. He's partly crazy, and he's also partly selfish. He's also prepared to an obsessive degree. Robin, and the other allies he molds, are his insurance policy that "the war" continues beyond his inevitable death. Is it right? Probably not. But that's what's fascinating about it.
 
Right now... Im going with a Nolan version of Black Mask.

Makes sense to me with Catwoman appearing and the criminal underworld kind of up for grabs after the chaos Joker brought to the city.
 
Anybody else think Variety and EW are both right? That Black Mask will be changed to Alberto from Roman Sionis?
 
What did Oldman say?

When asked about the Villain in the film he said this.
“I think it’s a villain from one of the old, old, from way back from the old comics. It is a Batman villain… It’s not going to be the Joker.”


I dont see JGL playing Strange if hes in it. But who knows. I still say BLack Mask.
 
Last edited:
Black Mask is my guess too mostly because theyve been trying to put him in since Begins. It makes sense to if you think about all the villains weve seen so far. Ras and Scarecrow, then Joker and Two Face everything about them is different and now with Bane and Catwoman its the same pattern of Nolan giving us something different with each movie. Black Mask as a freak mobster is something they havent done yet.
 
When asked about the Villain in the film he said this.



I dont see JGL playing Strange if hes in it. But who knows. I still say BLack Mask.

Ok. That's what Oldman said. Now let's try to remember what other actors have said.


What did Caine say?



I wouldn't listen to to anything any of them says about anything.



:batman: :batman: :batman:
 
Yup the only reliable source now is a WB press release.
 
Anybody else think Variety and EW are both right? That Black Mask will be changed to Alberto from Roman Sionis?

I brought that up yesterday in the News Thread, I was partially joking though. Joking just because I have a feeling they wouldn't go that route, but it is possible. I wouldn't mind.
 
Black Mask is my guess too mostly because theyve been trying to put him in since Begins. It makes sense to if you think about all the villains weve seen so far. Ras and Scarecrow, then Joker and Two Face everything about them is different and now with Bane and Catwoman its the same pattern of Nolan giving us something different with each movie. Black Mask as a freak mobster is something they havent done yet.
Say what? :huh:
 
Black Mask is my guess too mostly because theyve been trying to put him in since Begins.

If you can find a quote regarding this than I'd be inclined to agree with you but I'm pretty sure this whole talk about Nolan wanting Black Mask in past films stems from a plot summary of Dark Knight that didn't pan out to be true. I've been posting on these boards since before Nolan was even announced as director and I don't recall ever seeing Black Mask's name ever being thrown around as anything more than speculation. Comments like this are how false rumors spread.
 
Anybody else think Variety and EW are both right? That Black Mask will be changed to Alberto from Roman Sionis?

Not really. To be honest, I don't quite understand why this has become such a common theory (Nolan making hybrid characters). The only time he's done anything like that was with Ra's/Ducard, and that was for the specific purpose of a twist.
 
Not really. To be honest, I don't quite understand why this has become such a common theory (Nolan making hybrid characters). The only time he's done anything like that was with Ra's/Ducard, and that was for the specific purpose of a twist.


I think you just answered your own question. Now a follow-up question should be... would he want to do something like that again?
 
Because not all his dogs are barkin'.

Batman isn't perfect. He's partly crazy, and he's also partly selfish. He's also prepared to an obsessive degree. Robin, and the other allies he molds, are his insurance policy that "the war" continues beyond his inevitable death. Is it right? Probably not. But that's what's fascinating about it.

I see where you're coming from. I just don't really like that aspect of Batman, even though it's been a constant of the character for so long. That's why I hope this aspect won't be touched upon in Nolan's version, although just in case it is, I guess it depends on the way it's handled.
 
do we even know for sure that JGL will play a villain? did EW confirm that?
 
Given that Nolan hasn't confirmed either's claims i.e he hasn't said JGL will or won't be playing Alberto I can't really say EW is right or that Variety is right. I wouldn't be suprised if they both have it wrong. Considering the casting rumors or TDKR, Superman and Spiderman , to name a few have been all over the place I think we'll only know from an offical confirmation.
 
I think that WB/Nolan & Co. have done an excellent job of keeping everybody off the scent. Only when they are ready will the public know for certain.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Users who are viewing this thread

Staff online

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
202,288
Messages
22,080,560
Members
45,880
Latest member
Heartbeat
Back
Top
monitoring_string = "afb8e5d7348ab9e99f73cba908f10802"