The Dark Knight New Villians - in the Nolan style

[Keyser Sushi]

Never thought I'd say this, but I hnoestly think that's something that should be left in the cartoons. At least the whole "subjects dress up as fairy-tale characters" part. I MUCH prefer the pedophile-like behavior he had shown. It makes the obsession with Alice that much darker and twisted.

Not to mention it makes Hatter more... realistic.

The thing about him as a character is that it's so possible to interpret him that way. His obsession with Alice, the Wonderland business... it's an attachment to a childhood story, implying that he himself lacks a significant amount of emotional maturity. Which makes him a prime candidate for a serial rapist, child molestor, killer, or all of the above.

Also, it's creepy as hell.

 

[Crooklyn]

Yup.

Sad thing is, I don't think we'll see him on the big-screen anytime soon. Something tells me Nolan won't go for that type of thing. Maybe if David Fincher comes along...

 

[BobJM]

Here are some of my ideas for villains in Nolan's movie-verse.

JOKER: A failed, psychotic comedian with a sick sense of humor and theatrics. Lives in an abandoned theater (perhaps the one where Bruce's parents died?) and uses makeup to create his clown-like face.

CATWOMAN: A rich, animal rights activist born in Gotham's East End. Witnessing her mother's suicide and her father's death, she cared for her younger sister for the majority of her life. After being trained by Ted Grant and after seeing Batman in action, she became Catwoman. (Anti-hero, so to speak)

PENGUIN: Gotham's most powerful crime lord since Falcone's death. Short and overweight, Oswald Cobblepot is always dressed in a business suit and has his infamous eye glass. (Currently in competition with Rupert Thorne).

RIDDLER: Arkham Asylum inmate with a knowledge of each villain locked up there. Instead of a green suit, he sports a single green tattoo of a question mark on the back of his neck. Constantly agitates authority by speaking in riddles and questions.

POISION IVY: Member of an enviromental terrorist group (or so the FBI calls it) and leads attacks on big name companies that abuse the enviroment with experiments and pollution. Considers herself to be Mother Nature and has a thing for a certain skin tight outfit.

BANE: South American athlete turned hitman, Bane utilizes his natural strength and energy boosts thanks to experimental steroids that releases a venom-like substance that increases his strength exponentially.

TWO FACE: Former lawyer with a new, extreme out look on justice. Half of his face scarred from a liquid acid hurled at him from the man he was prosecuting.

 

[Crooklyn]

Here are some of my ideas for villains in Nolan's movie-verse.

JOKER: A failed, psychotic comedian with a sick sense of humor and theatrics. Lives in an abandoned theater (perhaps the one where Bruce's parents died?) and uses makeup to create his clown-like face.

CATWOMAN: A rich, animal rights activist born in Gotham's East End. Witnessing her mother's suicide and her father's death, she cared for her younger sister for the majority of her life. After being trained by Ted Grant and after seeing Batman in action, she became Catwoman. (Anti-hero, so to speak)

PENGUIN: Gotham's most powerful crime lord since Falcone's death. Short and overweight, Oswald Cobblepot is always dressed in a business suit and has his infamous eye glass. (Currently in competition with Rupert Thorne).

RIDDLER: Arkham Asylum inmate with a knowledge of each villain locked up there. Instead of a green suit, he sports a single green tattoo of a question mark on the back of his neck. Constantly agitates authority by speaking in riddles and questions.

POISION IVY: Member of an enviromental terrorist group (or so the FBI calls it) and leads attacks on big name companies that abuse the enviroment with experiments and pollution. Considers herself to be Mother Nature and has a thing for a certain skin tight outfit.

BANE: South American athlete turned hitman, Bane utilizes his natural strength and energy boosts thanks to experimental steroids that releases a venom-like substance that increases his strength exponentially.

TWO FACE: Former lawyer with a new, extreme out look on justice. Half of his face scarred from a liquid acid hurled at him from the man he was prosecuting.

For the majority of your suggestions, it's pretty good. But I see no reason for such a drastic change in your Joker and Riddler.

 

[Keyser Sushi]

Here are some of my ideas for villains in Nolan's movie-verse.

JOKER: A failed, psychotic comedian with a sick sense of humor and theatrics. Lives in an abandoned theater (perhaps the one where Bruce's parents died?) and uses makeup to create his clown-like face.

RIDDLER: Arkham Asylum inmate with a knowledge of each villain locked up there. Instead of a green suit, he sports a single green tattoo of a question mark on the back of his neck. Constantly agitates authority by speaking in riddles and questions.

And this right here is EXACTLY the problem with this thread.

You all keep talking about Nolan's "realism" approach.

Let me ask you a question: Based on what we saw in Batman Begins, how much did Nolan alter the characters to make them "more realistic"?

1.) Scarecrow - a guy who uses mind-altering gas to confuse and incapacitate people.

Changes? Instead of a professor, Nolan made him a shrink from Arkham. He was never seen in full costume but at the end of the movie it was obvious that he was headed that direction.

2.) Ra's al Ghul - head of a large clan of ninja assassins who do his bidding; he believes that human civilization is destroying the earth and in order to save the planet he would kill most of the people. He does, of course, have secret knowledge of Lazarus pits to infinitely prolong himself.

Changes? His organization went from "League of Assassins" to "League of Shadows," and he spent some time pretending to be someone else for most of the movie. He made no mention of saving the planet but he clearly is wary of human civilization, and would still kill most of the people on the earth. No mention was made of Lazarus pits, but his immortality was hinted at.

So, you ask, what is my point? I'll tell you my point. The changes to these characters had nothing to do with REALISM. They had to do with the story that Nolan was telling. Merely this and nothing more, as Poe would say.

So don't go thinking that Nolan has to make all his villains somehow "realistic." I don't think he's about that at all. I think Heath Ledger's Joker is going to be quite comic accurate and I think you are all going to be surprised.

 

[Nepenthes]

I want to see the villains done the way they're supposed to be done, not altered to fit Nolan's sensibilities. If he can't work with them as they are in the comics or TAS, he shouldn't be making a comic book film.

I guess you didn't really enjoy Batman Begins then. Or are you saying the villains in BB were not altered in any way at all? The basic characters were the same, I know, but their finer portrayals were very different...

And this right here is EXACTLY the problem with this thread.

You all keep talking about Nolan's "realism" approach.

Let me ask you a question: Based on what we saw in Batman Begins, how much did Nolan alter the characters to make them "more realistic"?

1.) Scarecrow - a guy who uses mind-altering gas to confuse and incapacitate people.

Changes? Instead of a professor, Nolan made him a shrink from Arkham. He was never seen in full costume but at the end of the movie it was obvious that he was headed that direction.

2.) Ra's al Ghul - head of a large clan of ninja assassins who do his bidding; he believes that human civilization is destroying the earth and in order to save the planet he would kill most of the people. He does, of course, have secret knowledge of Lazarus pits to infinitely prolong himself.

Changes? His organization went from "League of Assassins" to "League of Shadows," and he spent some time pretending to be someone else for most of the movie. He made no mention of saving the planet but he clearly is wary of human civilization, and would still kill most of the people on the earth. No mention was made of Lazarus pits, but his immortality was hinted at.

So, you ask, what is my point? I'll tell you my point. The changes to these characters had nothing to do with REALISM. They had to do with the story that Nolan was telling. Merely this and nothing more, as Poe would say.

So don't go thinking that Nolan has to make all his villains somehow "realistic." I don't think he's about that at all. I think Heath Ledger's Joker is going to be quite comic accurate and I think you are all going to be surprised.

Sorry Keyser but you are certainly kidding yourself by saying that these villains are no more realistic than in the comics. Again as I said in my first post, 'realism' may not be the word we can all agree on, maybe 'serious' is better.

The realism is in how their psychological motives propel the story. Nor can you understate the importance in the lack of costumes. That the doctor uses a mask only in experiments, one that is designed to provoke reactions in patients rather than appeal to the audicne...is more realsitic than a guy in a straw hat rantiong and raving like they do in the comics (and in previous movies).

As for Nolan not being 'about realism'...well tell that to the Nomex suit, the memory cloth, the Tumbler, the 10,000 spare parts, as well as a Gotham city far more corrupt than we've ever seen before. I could go on. The movie goes to considerable lengths to ground Batman in a higher degree of realism.

As for the Joker...well we already know what material Nolan will be basing his Joker on. So of course a Joker that is similar to his first appearances and the Killing Joke WILL be comic accurate....but it will not neccersarrily be representitive of how Joker has been generally portrayed throughout his entire comic history. Spin it any way you want but a Joker with laughing fish, robot dolls, a jokermobile and a purple suit will not fly in these movies.

 

[Nepenthes]

POISON IVY - Okay I guess we can't have any plant control or green ghost nonsense, and keeping in mind we've already had the poison flower thing in BB. Although you could always go...."Here's the science chick who helped Scarecrow with the flowers...oh $hit, she's poisoning rich guys all around the city, watch out Bruce Wayne!" Make Ivy a rich society type turned seductive serial killer, with a vengeance against the old, white male power-players who are 'ruining this world' with their greed and their lies. Politicians, pimps, oil barons, CEO's, a real man-eater. Eco-terrorism is only part of her deal, on it's own it wouldn't carry her.


SCARFACE - To continue escalation Scarface would be good in number 3 because it would show just how trippy the underworld has become, where the crazies have replaced 'normal' mafia dons around the city even before Two-Face arrives. You cant go into his story too much (it'd be cheesy and irrelevant) just show that he's the boss of one the competing gangs and the audience will be like 'WTF? Batman you need to kick that guy's ass...' Simple, weird, effective and entertaining.


FREEZE -A cryogenic scientist wishes to cure his wife, so he places her in an illegal freeze and reports her missing (and that's a pretty big stretch right there in itself). But he's yet to perfect the process in bringing her back so he must experiment on more frozen people. He approaches to The Penguin or some other boss, and offers to dispose of any underworld casualities as long as they are delivered alive to his lab. Batman is tracking some missing thugs, which leads him to discover Freezes little cold room, where is partially frozen and almost loses some limbs. When Freeze eventaully falls in his vat and he is unthawed at Arkham they discover his cells will deteriorate in room temps, so Bruce Wayne builds a frozen cell in where he can continue working on a way to thaw his wife. End of story.

I love these manips, by Pimpernel over at the The Planet. There's one for all the major villains if you've never seen them before.

 

[Darknightnomis]

How about Nolan going for broke an show ALL of them in a movie adaptation of Arkham Asylum.

 

[Miranda Fox]

And this right here is EXACTLY the problem with this thread.

You all keep talking about Nolan's "realism" approach.

Let me ask you a question: Based on what we saw in Batman Begins, how much did Nolan alter the characters to make them "more realistic"?

1.) Scarecrow - a guy who uses mind-altering gas to confuse and incapacitate people.

Changes? Instead of a professor, Nolan made him a shrink from Arkham. He was never seen in full costume but at the end of the movie it was obvious that he was headed that direction.

2.) Ra's al Ghul - head of a large clan of ninja assassins who do his bidding; he believes that human civilization is destroying the earth and in order to save the planet he would kill most of the people. He does, of course, have secret knowledge of Lazarus pits to infinitely prolong himself.

Changes? His organization went from "League of Assassins" to "League of Shadows," and he spent some time pretending to be someone else for most of the movie. He made no mention of saving the planet but he clearly is wary of human civilization, and would still kill most of the people on the earth. No mention was made of Lazarus pits, but his immortality was hinted at.

So, you ask, what is my point? I'll tell you my point. The changes to these characters had nothing to do with REALISM. They had to do with the story that Nolan was telling. Merely this and nothing more, as Poe would say.

So don't go thinking that Nolan has to make all his villains somehow "realistic." I don't think he's about that at all. I think Heath Ledger's Joker is going to be quite comic accurate and I think you are all going to be surprised.

Exactly! I'm not sure where everyone is getting the idea that Nolan would fundamentally change characters for the sake of realism. I actually found that Penguin comment rather reassuring because I'd much rather he just did not use a character than change it to the point where it's not that character anymore. Why Penguin didn't fit is something only he knows but it could just be he didn't fit the story.

Nolan's approach, in my opinion, is more about asking how the costumes are practical - what is their purpose? Batman's has many. The Scarecrow's mask protected him from his own fear gas as well as frightening people. The infamous 'escalation' conversation points towards people becoming more drawn to masks and personas and you can easily give them a purpose without changing anything about the character at all.

Consider this - what about the Joker being a chemist for Janus Cosmetics who blows the whistle on the shady goings-on there - anonymously tipping off the police. A corrupt cop tells Roman Sionis who did this and Roman has him killed. The hitmen attempts to the dispose of the body in a vat of chemical waste. Obviously, he doesn't die and emerges with his 'clown face.' The rest is history.

There. It's still Joker but with a different backstory. Nothing unrealistic about it - Janus Cosmetics made facepaints so it's not unbelivable the chemicals used could burn someone's face that way.

I actually came across an excellent interview with Jonah where he talked about how he and Chris have gone through the comics numerous times and how it was easier to work with the 60 years of history they have for all these characters. If they were to just rewrite characters into something/somebody else they'd be discarding it and...I've yet to see evidence either of them are that stupid.

 

[Ronny Shade]

Ronny --

It's nice to agree with you again.

We can be friends again if you watch "The Killer"

 

[Ronny Shade]

You've NEVER SEEN SE7EN!!!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

we used to HAVE something, Ronny! We used to BE something!! LIES!! LIES!! all LIES!!!!

*kicks ronny in nuts*


go rent that shyt tonight

I wasn't aware that movie was such a big deal. I'll see it eventually. I have to shoot a movie by the end of the month, so I might not get to it until december.

 

[Boom]

and uses makeup to create his clown-like face.

NO.

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO.

NO.

 

[Ronny Shade]

NO.

NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO NO.

NO.

 

[Keyser Sushi]

Sorry Keyser but you are certainly kidding yourself by saying that these villains are no more realistic than in the comics. Again as I said in my first post, 'realism' may not be the word we can all agree on, maybe 'serious' is better.

Serious probably is a more accurate word. I never said the villains were no more realistic in the movie than they were in the comics. It's just that the changes he made were not as catastrophic as most of the fan suggestions seem to be. He made minor changes that served his story (and, honestly, the filmic medium) without sacrificing what was special about the characters. He stayed very true to the core of the characters even as he changed a lot of the finer points.

The realism is in how their psychological motives propel the story.

Precisely.

Nor can you understate the importance in the lack of costumes. That the doctor uses a mask only in experiments, one that is designed to provoke reactions in patients rather than appeal to the audicne...is more realsitic than a guy in a straw hat rantiong and raving like they do in the comics (and in previous movies).

Exactly. And now that Scarecrow has been subjected to his own toxin and his mnid has, apparently, snapped, if they choose to feature him in a full-on scarecrow suit and frothing at the mouth, there's a good explanation for it.

As for Nolan not being 'about realism'...well tell that to the Nomex suit, the memory cloth, the Tumbler, the 10,000 spare parts, as well as a Gotham city far more corrupt than we've ever seen before. I could go on. The movie goes to considerable lengths to ground Batman in a higher degree of realism.

Absolutely he does. I never said that Nolan wasn't about realism. I just said that the changes he made to the villains were STORY-DRIVEN, not random measures to erase the identity of beloved Batman foes.

As for the Joker...well we already know what material Nolan will be basing his Joker on. So of course a Joker that is similar to his first appearances and the Killing Joke WILL be comic accurate....but it will not neccersarrily be representitive of how Joker has been generally portrayed throughout his entire comic history. Spin it any way you want but a Joker with laughing fish, robot dolls, a jokermobile and a purple suit will not fly in these movies.

Actually that's debatable to some degree. While I have no desire to see a Jokermobile or anything like that, I do think that the gassing of the Narrows, combined with the talk that Gordon and Batman had on the roof at the end of Begins left the door wide open for the wierdos to march in and moon us all.

I thought Miranda Fox had some rather good points in her post on this page:

Nolan's approach, in my opinion, is more about asking how the costumes are practical - what is their purpose? Batman's has many. The Scarecrow's mask protected him from his own fear gas as well as frightening people. The infamous 'escalation' conversation points towards people becoming more drawn to masks and personas and you can easily give them a purpose without changing anything about the character at all.

That, to me, is the point of the realism in Begins. It's a BEGINNING. Nolan felt that it was necessary to do some setup instead of just diving into a city full of loons in green spandex. That he needed to show Gotham first as a real city, limping brokenly though life, and then use a massive terror plot to blow the doors of the joint and in doing so, create the Gotham that we all know and love to read about.

It's about *grounding* Batman's world in reality, not hosing it up in the name of realism.

 

[Keyser Sushi]

We can be friends again if you watch "The Killer"

You mean we're not friends now?

 

[num1batfan]

defntly agree with you here. defintly. the reason batman part 5 was so cool was because it was RELISTIC (altho it could have been more). and thats wat people want these days. batman part 1 and 2 mite have worked with the joker (a guy wearing clown makeup? gimme a break) and the penguin (totaly unbelevable) because in the 80s everyune was a liberal hippy and on drugz. but now w ith 9/11 and the war an iraq people want relism. so here are my ideas for how the villens (bad guys as i call em) shuld be in the next movies:

mr freeze: loose the suit, loose the ice gun. maybe have him jus t b from canada (its really cold up there) and have him come to gotham to try to becum mayor in order to destroy the american way of life.

mad hatter: no one has seen alice in 1nderland anymore. they shuld totally change this guy. change his name to th e madd hatta (always wearing a backwards baseball cap) an have him be a gangsta rapper who gets gotham involved in a huge gang w ar.

poison ivy: may b like a ultra liberal activist who wants bruse wayne to stop "pollution" so batman has to stop her.

thats it 4 now. ill think of more later.

 

[Ronny Shade]

Serious probably is a more accurate word. I never said the villains were no more realistic in the movie than they were in the comics. It's just that the changes he made were not as catastrophic as most of the fan suggestions seem to be. He made minor changes that served his story (and, honestly, the filmic medium) without sacrificing what was special about the characters. He stayed very true to the core of the characters even as he changed a lot of the finer points.

immortality is pretty ****ing special, don't you think, Keyser?

 

[Ronny Shade]

You mean we're not friends now?

Kidding. But you really should watch it. Really.

If you still hate John Woo after you see The Killer, I'll accept it.

 

[Ronny Shade]

defntly agree with you here. defintly. the reason batman part 5 was so cool was because it was RELISTIC (altho it could have been more). and thats wat people want these days. batman part 1 and 2 mite have worked with the joker (a guy wearing clown makeup? gimme a break) and the penguin (totaly unbelevable) because in the 80s everyune was a liberal hippy and on drugz. but now w ith 9/11 and the war an iraq people want relism. so here are my ideas for how the villens (bad guys as i call em) shuld be in the next movies:

mr freeze: loose the suit, loose the ice gun. maybe have him jus t b from canada (its really cold up there) and have him come to gotham to try to becum mayor in order to destroy the american way of life.

mad hatter: no one has seen alice in 1nderland anymore. they shuld totally change this guy. change his name to th e madd hatta (always wearing a backwards baseball cap) an have him be a gangsta rapper who gets gotham involved in a huge gang w ar.

poison ivy: may b like a ultra liberal activist who wants bruse wayne to stop "pollution" so batman has to stop her.

thats it 4 now. ill think of more later.

You're my favorite.

 

[Keyser Sushi]

How about Nolan going for broke an show ALL of them in a movie adaptation of Arkham Asylum.

THREE REASONS WHY THIS IS NOT GONNA HAPPEN:

1.) The story has nothing to do with Nolan's trilogy, so, not gonna happen.

2.) Not the kind of Batman story most of us actually want, so, not gonna happen.

3.) Probably be better suited to David Fincher than Christopher Nolan, so, not gonna happen.

Did I leave any out?

 

[raybia]

defntly agree with you here. defintly. the reason batman part 5 was so cool was because it was RELISTIC (altho it could have been more). and thats wat people want these days. batman part 1 and 2 mite have worked with the joker (a guy wearing clown makeup? gimme a break) and the penguin (totaly unbelevable) because in the 80s everyune was a liberal hippy and on drugz. but now w ith 9/11 and the war an iraq people want relism. so here are my ideas for how the villens (bad guys as i call em) shuld be in the next movies:

mr freeze: loose the suit, loose the ice gun. maybe have him jus t b from canada (its really cold up there) and have him come to gotham to try to becum mayor in order to destroy the american way of life.

mad hatter: no one has seen alice in 1nderland anymore. they shuld totally change this guy. change his name to th e madd hatta (always wearing a backwards baseball cap) an have him be a gangsta rapper who gets gotham involved in a huge gang w ar.

poison ivy: may b like a ultra liberal activist who wants bruse wayne to stop "pollution" so batman has to stop her.

thats it 4 now. ill think of more later.

Kudos on just being bold and brave enough to suggest these radical ideas.

 

[Keyser Sushi]

immortality is pretty ****ing special, don't you think, Keyser?

Of course... and I was waiting for someone to say that.

The thing is, there was nothing in the movie that says Ra's wasn't immortal. It was hinted at but always with a back door out of the discussion. Kind of amusing. In my view Ra's could always come back. Maybe he won't, but he could. There's no reason to think otherwise.

 

[raybia]

defntly agree with you here. defintly. the reason batman part 5 was so cool was because it was RELISTIC (altho it could have been more). and thats wat people want these days. batman part 1 and 2 mite have worked with the joker (a guy wearing clown makeup? gimme a break) and the penguin (totaly unbelevable) because in the 80s everyune was a liberal hippy and on drugz. but now w ith 9/11 and the war an iraq people want relism. so here are my ideas for how the villens (bad guys as i call em) shuld be in the next movies:

mr freeze: loose the suit, loose the ice gun. maybe have him jus t b from canada (its really cold up there) and have him come to gotham to try to becum mayor in order to destroy the american way of life.

mad hatter: no one has seen alice in 1nderland anymore. they shuld totally change this guy. change his name to th e madd hatta (always wearing a backwards baseball cap) an have him be a gangsta rapper who gets gotham involved in a huge gang w ar.

poison ivy: may b like a ultra liberal activist who wants bruse wayne to stop "pollution" so batman has to stop her.

thats it 4 now. ill think of more later.

edit

 

[Keyser Sushi]

Kidding. But you really should watch it. Really.

Good. And I'll try to rent it sometime when I have the chance.

If you still hate John Woo after you see The Killer, I'll accept it.

I don't hate John Woo.

I'm not particularly a fan of M:I2 (but you've known this for a long time) and I do think he would be a terrible choice for a Batman director, but I don't hate him or his work. It is sort of its own genre, though, and people trying to imitate him have created a lot of poopy movies. But that's true of a lot of directors.

 

[Keyser Sushi]

Kudos on just being bold and brave enough to suggest these radical ideas.

num-nums is always good for a laugh.