My thing is this. He doesn’t need to be “super badass” (however people are choosing to define this) nor does he need to be pathetic nor a stereotypical nerd. I think this is what many fail to realize about his character. I’ve never liked the idea of him being weak nor making empty threats behind closed doors nor failing at everything he works on. That limits so much of his potential.
A weasel, yes. In his first comic, he put people in harms way to create a diversion to escape. He doesn’t care if he hurts women or even babies for that matter. Strange? Absolutely. The Riddler has always displayed bizarre and “questionable” behavior such as getting tattoos in strange places ( not that I necessarily want that) or wearing eccentric accessories or even just doing something absolutely weird.
Psychopaths are highly intelligent, calculated, narcissistic and manipulative. Yet, they are also impulsive and once they feel that they are no longer in control, they become angry and get sloppy in their work. Their egos also get the best of them and that is where their delusions come from.
Another thing is that a Paul Dano is too great of an actor to be type casted as only playing “weak” or “pathetic” characters. He’s very intelligent in real life and that is what I would love to be conveyed through his version of the character.
What I want from the Riddler is simple. I want to see his MO in a serious light. I want riddles in multiple forms and not just questions a third grader can figure out. I want to see him actually outsmart Batman and the GCPD at some point.
Yeah, the thing about trying to make the Riddler pathetic is that it can kind of hurt his credibility as villain. He can still be madman who gets sloppy when things go wrong, and who values his skin over everyone else, and yeah, a “weasel.”
It’s just that it pays to remember that weasels are still carnivorous predators, not scavengers. They’re conniving and deceitful, but like any nasty vermin, backed into a corner, they can bite and claw.
Paul Dini writes my favorite version of the Riddler, even though the bulk of it was during his semi-reformed private eye days; he’s a scumbag, but he’s a scumbag who can grin and bear it under most circumstances when he’s physically outflanked, because he’s planning his way out, and will backtalk and seek to prove his greater intelligence over his adversaries Even in adversity... and oftentimes, *does.*
He’s a guy who has to be faced with a genuinely clever strategy or escape to actually lose his cool - “Riddler’s Reform,” the episode in BTAS Dini Co-wrote, where he seems to almost go straight and sets a trap for Batman he most definitely doesn’t intend to leave any escape in, sees him being a smarmy and smug operator when Batman’s physically confronting him... and only going ballistic and whining when he can’t figure out how Batman escaped.
In contrast, a Riddler I can’t stand would be the one from Jeph Loeb’s work - he always tries to emphasize Riddler as a loser and coward, and even his attempted rebuilding of the character via Hush is ultimately kind of lackluster.
I don’t want a Riddler who gets scared and intimidated by Batman or Falcone, and doesn’t know what the answer to the main mystery is. I want a Riddler who get have his face bloodied after being worked over, yet maintains his position as uncooperative unless they agree to play his game.
Good eye! That is totally Hugo Strange in a hood.
