The Dark Knight Well....this is intresting? (Joker news)

[Rynan]

Damn, forgot.

 

[Mr. Socko]

What did you think it was?

Well Jett is right just about all of the time, isn't he?

 

[Dark Knight]

Big Joker Scoop?
Author: Jett
Wednesday, April 26, 2006 - 5:44 AM CENTRAL TIME: Jett here. The following comes in from a LONGTIME source who has provided BOF with much dead on info regarding BATMAN in the past. Some news has been revealed/broken here at BOF (like Ken Watanabe and Katie Holme's casting in BEGINS); some has been kept secret to keep this source anonymous. This is a rather lengthy report, but it clears up a lot of stuff and reveals the Joker info I alluded to cryptically last week. (One note regarding news from BOF: If you copy and paste this on message boards -- cool; But PLEASE include a link back to BOF. Thank you.) Anyway, here goes...

I first slipped you information many years ago that centred on the possible casting of Jude Law as Bruce Wayne/Batman. This was long before Christopher Nolan’s involvement with the franchise. Law’s name was also thrown about re: Petersen’s BATMAN VS. SUPERMAN project. Now it seems we have come full circle. Your site has mentioned Law as a candidate for Harvey Dent. This is incorrect. Law is being [considered for The Joker]. He is a WB suggestion (one of a select few). WB do not have a “wish list,” but WB has narrowed down a couple of names for Nolan etc. to consider later this year.

As far as I know, Paul Bettany is not on this list. His name holds some appeal with a section of the Batman fan base, but the idea is not exactly setting WB’s world on fire. Too many creepy villain roles; been there, done that. He was never really in this race, as your site intimated recently – well done

Lachy Hulme is on this list. He is not the “frontrunner” as many have suggested; he is the “dark horse.” WB is concerned about his lack of profile in the US, but they are keeping a very close eye on him. Hulme’s lack of profile could be remedied with two projects, MACBETH and an Australian comedy called BOYTOWN. The buzz for both films is very strong. Cillian Murphy landed his casting call for BATMAN BEGINS off the career boost 28 DAYS LATER gave him; likewise, Hulme only needs for one of these films to click. FYI: Hulme HAS met with the producers. He is the only actor not contracted for sequels to have done so.

I can confirm that The Joker role is a small and mysterious one in the sequel. It will be nothing like the Jack Nicholson-style showcase that the previous Joker provided.

Reps for Sam Rockwell were pursuing the role in the hope that this Joker would be on par with the 1989 Joker, but soon discovered otherwise. Hugh Jackman also expressed interest in The Joker. Upon learning the size of the role he explored the Harvey Dent option instead. Due to Jackman’s association with Marvel, however, you can probably count him out of either role in the BATMAN BEGINS sequel. Probably.

Hugo Weaving is also on the WB Casting list; Johnny Depp is not. Guy Pearce has never been discussed for any role in the sequel; neither has Robin Williams.

The other issue perplexing WB is Katie Holmes. I can’t confirm whether she will be in the sequel or not. This is not due to whether she was weak in BATMAN BEGINS; the consensus at WB is that Holmes delivered a fine performance. The issue is, what to do with her character? That is a problem for Jonah and Chris to resolve.

Nice! There shouldn't be a dilemma for Jonah and Chris and WB when it comes to the character of Rachel Dawes. KILL HER OFF....and have the Joker do it! It's easy.....the character of Rachel in the Batman universe is of no substance or consequence. She is a very minor and insignificant character who was made up for BEGINS. The way to make her character significant when it comes to development and learning experiences of a young Batman is have the Joker kill her. Thats it....plain and simple....no if's and's or butts about it.....

I'm glad Robin Williams (too old for Joker) and Hugh Jackman (to many Marvel films..ie X-Men and upcoming solo Wolverine film) are not going to be involved in this film and I don't want Rockwell in this film either. Interesting to hear that Pearce has never been considered in any capacity...nor has Depp. I'm glad Weaving is being considered as a Joker or perhaps Dent candidate...he is a heckuva an actor and he has such an awesome voice! He was great in V for Vendetta!
I could see Law as a Joker candidate....but i'm just curious to see what other "names" have been "suggested" by WB to Nolan. I find it also intriguing that we didn't hear anything about other names that have been thrown about for Dent. Gyllenhaal or Schrieber?? Perhaps those are THE two that are really being considered since they weren't mentioned? Interesting....good stuff from the Jett Man!

 

[Babs Gordon]

small role could mean a lot of things. i would argue that scarecrow's role was rather small in the last film (meaning screentime) and i would be ok with less than that for the second film.

 

[Two-Face]

Well Jett is right just about all of the time, isn't he?

Not all the time.

 

[Babs Gordon]

i just feel that if bats, dent and gordon are on the trail of the joker through the whole movie the feeling of "when's he gonna show" will really grip audiences. i'd love that.

 

[DV8]

small role could mean a lot of things. i would argue that scarecrow's role was rather small in the last film (meaning screentime) and i would be ok with less than that for the second film.

I need way more Joker than that . . . not necessarily 'screen time' . . . cuz one of the greatest movie villains of all time . . . John Doe in S7VEN, had a minimal amount of screen time, but was present throughout the film as the major threat . . .

but we don't have all the Batman origin build up in this one, so that leaves room for enough/more Joker . . .

 

[The-Night]

i just feel that if bats, dent and gordon are on the trail of the joker through the whole movie the feeling of "when's he gonna show" will really grip audiences. i'd love that.

Ditto

 

[Mr. Socko]

small role could mean a lot of things. i would argue that scarecrow's role was rather small in the last film (meaning screentime) and i would be ok with less than that for the second film.

That was fine for Crane, but not The Joker.

 

[DV8]

i just feel that if bats, dent and gordon are on the trail of the joker through the whole movie the feeling of "when's he gonna show" will really grip audiences. i'd love that.

that is a cool idea . . . but I think they could show him a few good times, and just make it creepy as fuack when he's there . . . like you don't know what he's gonna do . . .

 

[DV8]

That was fine for Crane, but not The Joker.

Xactly

 

[Babs Gordon]

i really think if they exhaust the joker in the second movie the third will be a let down. if nolan and nolan preoccupy us with other interesting portrayals of rogues gallery villains and a really good story, i don't think we'll be disappointed. i really would rather they save the joker for the grand finale.

 

[Rynan]

Nice! There shouldn't be a dilemma for Jonah and Chris and WB when it comes to the character of Rachel Dawes. KILL HER OFF....and have the Joker do it! It's easy.....the character of Rachel in the Batman universe is of no substance or consequence. She is a very minor and insignificant character who was made up for BEGINS. The way to make her character significant when it comes to development and learning experiences of a young Batman is have the Joker kill her. Thats it....plain and simple....no if's and's or butts about it.....

I see this my mind's eye:

Kill her dammit! ****in kill her dead dammit! The Joker ****in needs to ****in kill her ****in dead! With fire and a ****ing crowbar, dammit! Why the hell doesn't Nolan ****in listen to me, dammit! Mother ****er! She should be a dead *****! Dammit! *******s!

 

[Babs Gordon]

so my point was that let joker have all kinds of attention in the second movie... but keep him a wraith. we don't need to see him for him to be part of the plot. by role i really meant actual screen time.

but really we should save the screen time for #3.

 

[Babs Gordon]

I see this my mind's eye:

Kill her dammit! ****in kill her dead dammit! The Joker ****in needs to ****in kill her ****in dead! With fire and a ****ing crowbar, dammit! Why the hell doesn't Nolan ****in listen to me, dammit! Mother ****er! She should be a dead *****! Dammit! *******s!

lol the only problem that i can see with that is that-- sure, in the comics she doesn't even exist. but most of the people who will see begins will never have picked up a batman comic, sad to say. they'll be going "what the hell happened to that chick" because her role was more significant than most of us would like to admit, at least with regard to the amount of attention she was given as a character. to kill her off just like that would be careless storytelling. i'm not saying she can't die, but at least give it a little more attention then "oh yeah... she died" somewhere in between.

 

[Two-Face]

so my point was that let joker have all kinds of attention in the second movie... but keep him a wraith. we don't need to see him for him to be part of the plot. by role i really meant actual screen time.

but really we should save the screen time for #3.

Yes but how will Two-Face fit in Batman 3?

 

[Mr. Socko]

i really think if they exhaust the joker in the second movie the third will be a let down. if nolan and nolan preoccupy us with other interesting portrayals of rogues gallery villains and a really good story, i don't think we'll be disappointed. i really would rather they save the joker for the grand finale.

It's all but confirmed that Joker'll be in Batman 2. Rumor suggest Two Face is being saved for the finale, but maybe Joker can return too.

 

[Mr. Socko]

Yes but how will Two-Face fit in in Batman 3?

Same way more then one villian fit in Batman Begins.

 

[DV8]

so my point was that let joker have all kinds of attention in the second movie... but keep him a wraith. we don't need to see him for him to be part of the plot. by role i really meant actual screen time.

but really we should save the screen time for #3.

you know, you're totally starting to win me over. Goddam, you broke it down! . . . we're all so excited to see Joker that too much Joker in 2 will be like premature e-joker-lation

Plus, they can incorporate more villains that haven't been introduced in previous batflicks . . . i.e. crane and Ra's . . . . and still have the Joker brooding and planning . . . his master plan could BE to turn Harvey over at the end, in a huge media spectacle . . . then escape somehow . . .

 

[Babs Gordon]

are you suggesting, two face, that there can be only one villain in the last one? sure the three batman films prior to begins butchered the whole "multiple" villains concept, but in truth, batman is fighting the worst of his villains all the time sometimes simultaneously. there's no reason they couldn't both be involved in #3. in fact that would be magnificent if written well.

as far as the joker being in two... sure they've said the joker will be in 2. ok. what does that mean? that he'll be the star? the major villain? i'm sure he'll be the villain of most interest simple because of the character's fame. but will he be the principle villain as far as screentime? i don't think we can predict that yet.

 

[Rynan]

lol the only problem that i can see with that is that-- sure, in the comics she doesn't even exist. but most of the people who will see begins will never have picked up a batman comic, sad to say. they'll be going "what the hell happened to that chick" because her role was more significant than most of us would like to admit, at least with regard to the amount of attention she was given as a character. to kill her off just like that would be careless storytelling. i'm not saying she can't die, but at least give it a little more attention then "oh yeah... she died" somewhere in between.

Actually, I was making fun of how many times I heard the "Kill Racheal" slogan. It's quite annoying.

 

[Two-Face]

Same way more then one villian fit in Batman Begins.

I don't want Dr Crane screentime for Two-Face as Ra's was only main villian.

 

[El Payaso]

Well Jett is right just about all of the time, isn't he?

Not at all.

 

[DV8]

It's all but confirmed that Joker'll be in Batman 2. Rumor suggest Two Face is being saved for the finale, but maybe Joker can return too.

But in the 3rd, you can have Two-Face after the Joker; Joker after Two-Face; Batman against both of them, and vice versa! A Mexican standoff of sorts throughout the whole thing . . .

it would be the ultimate contradiction to all the lame 'team-ups' of the past schufuacker bat-flicks that mimicked the 60's TV show . . .

 

[Mr. Socko]

I don't want Dr Crane screentime for Two-Face as Ra's was only main villian.

Same here but this isn't gonna stop Nolan from doing whatever he wants to.