Batman 3 Rumors

[Eric]

Black Mask would perhaps be the ideal route. Him and Wayne have some commonality, not to mention it would be an interesting

spin to have a freak take over the mob. IMO I don't think Red Hood would work without watering him down to being unrecognizable.

 

I agree about Black Mask. I think he's really doable, and I like his character in the comics, so I'd like to see him in the film.

 

And you make a good point about the Red Hood, though Joker was pretty violent in The Dark Knight without having to show a lot. Still, I don't know if that would work with the Red Hood given the kind of violence he's known for.

[DarthHavok]

Black Mask would perhaps be the ideal route. Him and Wayne have some commonality, not to mention it would be an interesting

spin to have a freak take over the mob. IMO I don't think Red Hood would work without watering him down to being unrecognizable.

 

I agree about Black Mask. I think he's really doable, and I like his character in the comics, so I'd like to see him in the film.

 

And you make a good point about the Red Hood, though Joker was pretty violent in The Dark Knight without having to show a lot. Still, I don't know if that would work with the Red Hood given the kind of violence he's known for.

 

 

Ledger's Joker was exactly why I thought of Red Hood. Dissapearing pencil trick anyone? Red Hood could be a great follow up to what the violence and hell the Joker started in TDK. I think he could be done just like the Jokers twisted anarchaic war on Gotham did. Good film making - like what Nolan has given us - can give you unbelievable violence without showing the gore through artistic interpretation. I'm not saying Red Hood has to be done, only that given the tone of how Gotham was left after the Joker, it would seem like a good villian to use. As well as Black Mask taking over an already weakend mob. Who knows who we'll see, but they seem to be as good as any possibility. Perhaps their chances are better given that they have not been used in film before and keep the tone of reality the Nolanverse has given us thus far.

[dhoonib]

Black Mask would perhaps be the ideal route. Him and Wayne have some commonality, not to mention it would be an interesting

spin to have a freak take over the mob. IMO I don't think Red Hood would work without watering him down to being unrecognizable.

 

I agree about Black Mask. I think he's really doable, and I like his character in the comics, so I'd like to see him in the film.

 

And you make a good point about the Red Hood, though Joker was pretty violent in The Dark Knight without having to show a lot. Still, I don't know if that would work with the Red Hood given the kind of violence he's known for.

 

 

Ledger's Joker was exactly why I thought of Red Hood. Dissapearing pencil trick anyone? Red Hood could be a great follow up to what the violence and hell the Joker started in TDK. I think he could be done just like the Jokers twisted anarchaic war on Gotham did. Good film making - like what Nolan has given us - can give you unbelievable violence without showing the gore through artistic interpretation. I'm not saying Red Hood has to be done, only that given the tone of how Gotham was left after the Joker, it would seem like a good villian to use. As well as Black Mask taking over an already weakend mob. Who knows who we'll see, but they seem to be as good as any possibility. Perhaps their chances are better given that they have not been used in film before and keep the tone of reality the Nolanverse has given us thus far.

 

The only problem with going with a character who blows up a building or kills a guy with an object that isn't usually a weapon is that the character will draw comparisons to the Joker. I think no matter what villain is in the third one it will draw comparisons to Ledger so I hope Nolan goes in another direction with it. Someone who isn't over the top. I think the Mask will work but as for Red Hood it would be interesting, kind of a harder character to do, not impossible, especially given Nolan and Goyer's talent but I think given that the Hood has been Joker in the past might end up feeling like a rehash especially if he starts pulling Joker-esque activities.

[ransomz]

I still have a sneaking feeling that they're going to bring Two Face back and that the recent denials are just to throw us off the scent. If they don't bring him back, then Batman is a killer. They have to bring him back!

[DarthHavok]

I still have a sneaking feeling that they're going to bring Two Face back and that the recent denials are just to throw us off the scent. If they don't bring him back, then Batman is a killer. They have to bring him back!

 

 

Perhaps. He was supposed to be dead but now that Ledger is out for another turn as the Joker it's possible they may decide to go with Harvery Two-Face. They left it open to interperetation at the end of TDK... I personally like the idea of a Two-Face flick as I didn't think there was enough of him in TDK...A danger when utilizing too many villian in a movie a la Spiderman 3.

[Wheeljack35]

Or in Batman and Robin where you had Poison Ivy,Bane and Mr Freeze

[DarthHavok]

Or in Batman and Robin where you had Poison Ivy,Bane and Mr Freeze

 

 

But Spiderman 3 was still entertaining and watchable regardless of it's character developement. Schumacher's....Words fail me to describe the trash he produced.... film, which I use loosley, was a lesson in poor everything. The bootleg Fantastic four was better than that.

[DarthHavok]

Or in Batman and Robin where you had Poison Ivy,Bane and Mr Freeze

 

 

But Spiderman 3 was still entertaining and watchable regardless of it's character developement. Schumacher's....Words fail me to describe the trash he produced.... film, which I use loosley, was a lesson in poor everything. The bootleg Fantastic four was better than that.

 

 

 

However I agree with you entirely.

[Wheeljack35]

True Spiderman 3 was a whole lot better

[Eric]

As a Batman movie, Batman and Robin was pretty terrible. But as a campy throwback to the TV show, I don't find it to be that bad of a flick.

 

Spider-Man 3 was aiming at a continuation of the franchise and a more realistic tone, setting the movie up for an even bigger fall, and in my mind it fell hard. The first two films were outstanding, setting the bar for superhero movies up to that point intime. And the third was awful because it was still trying to reach that bar and didn't even come close.

 

I'll rewatch Batman and Robin from time to time (it helps I take it for what it is). I don't really care to watch Spider-Man 3 again.

 

To get back on topic, doing the Red Hood in Batman 3 without ever having had a Robin or Jason Todd would make it less satisfying for me. They could make anyone under the hood, but I like the story of it being Jason Todd.

[DarthHavok]

As a Batman movie, Batman and Robin was pretty terrible. But as a campy throwback to the TV show, I don't find it to be that bad of a flick.

 

Spider-Man 3 was aiming at a continuation of the franchise and a more realistic tone, setting the movie up for an even bigger fall, and in my mind it fell hard. The first two films were outstanding, setting the bar for superhero movies up to that point intime. And the third was awful because it was still trying to reach that bar and didn't even come close.

 

I'll rewatch Batman and Robin from time to time (it helps I take it for what it is). I don't really care to watch Spider-Man 3 again.

 

To get back on topic, doing the Red Hood in Batman 3 without ever having had a Robin or Jason Todd would make it less satisfying for me. They could make anyone under the hood, but I like the story of it being Jason Todd.

 

 

Taking Batman and Robin as a throwback to the campy 60's show, then yes, I can see that. But that campy 60's show died after two seasons. Camp just doesn't work and Batman in any incarnation just isn't a comedy. "My parents died so I'm doing the Bat-tusi" just doesn't seem to mesh. I can see Spiderman using camp, in part, due to the jovial nature of the character. To be honest, Spiderman 3 certainly was the least appealing of the series, but it certainly didn't bury the franchise requiring a complete reboot after years of dormacy as a result of not only poor box office and reviews but major fan backlash. Batman is my absolute Favorite hero and Batman and Robin, in my opinion, hurt the character.

 

But I digress...

 

Red Hood was both Jason Todd and Joker, But Ra's al Ghul was not Henri Ducard but an Arabic man who was 600yrs old and needed lazarous pits to survive. Point is, they can make a character appealing even though they change him so long as the story around him is well thought out and depicted. I can buy Red Hood as a villian who isn't either Joker or Rodd. He could be a protege` of Joker...or what ever.

 

I'd still go with Black Mask first though.

[DarthHavok]

As a Batman movie, Batman and Robin was pretty terrible. But as a campy throwback to the TV show, I don't find it to be that bad of a flick.

 

Spider-Man 3 was aiming at a continuation of the franchise and a more realistic tone, setting the movie up for an even bigger fall, and in my mind it fell hard. The first two films were outstanding, setting the bar for superhero movies up to that point intime. And the third was awful because it was still trying to reach that bar and didn't even come close.

 

I'll rewatch Batman and Robin from time to time (it helps I take it for what it is). I don't really care to watch Spider-Man 3 again.

 

To get back on topic, doing the Red Hood in Batman 3 without ever having had a Robin or Jason Todd would make it less satisfying for me. They could make anyone under the hood, but I like the story of it being Jason Todd.

 

 

Taking Batman and Robin as a throwback to the campy 60's show, then yes, I can see that. But that campy 60's show died after two seasons. Camp just doesn't work and Batman in any incarnation just isn't a comedy. "My parents died so I'm doing the Bat-tusi" just doesn't seem to mesh. I can see Spiderman using camp, in part, due to the jovial nature of the character. To be honest, Spiderman 3 certainly was the least appealing of the series, but it certainly didn't bury the franchise requiring a complete reboot after years of dormacy as a result of not only poor box office and reviews but major fan backlash. Batman is my absolute Favorite hero and Batman and Robin, in my opinion, hurt the character.

 

But I digress...

 

Red Hood was both Jason Todd and Joker, But Ra's al Ghul was not Henri Ducard but an Arabic man who was 600yrs old and needed lazarous pits to survive. Point is, they can make a character appealing even though they change him so long as the story around him is well thought out and depicted. I can buy Red Hood as a villian who isn't either Joker or Rodd. He could be a protege` of Joker...or what ever.

 

I'd still go with Black Mask first though.

 

I meant Todd. As for the protege of the Joker...He has his crew of miscreants from Arkham... Certainly there is someone there he could have groomed or had such an impression on that they took up his cause.

 

It has been said by myself and others in this posting that the idea would be to get away from that kind of story/villian though. Joker has been done so lets not go with yet another villian who kills recklessly.

[Eric]

Taking Batman and Robin as a throwback to the campy 60's show, then yes, I can see that. But that campy 60's show died after two seasons. Camp just doesn't work and Batman in any incarnation just isn't a comedy. "My parents died so I'm doing the Bat-tusi" just doesn't seem to mesh. I can see Spiderman using camp, in part, due to the jovial nature of the character. To be honest, Spiderman 3 certainly was the least appealing of the series, but it certainly didn't bury the franchise requiring a complete reboot after years of dormacy as a result of not only poor box office and reviews but major fan backlash. Batman is my absolute Favorite hero and Batman and Robin, in my opinion, hurt the character.

 

But I digress...

 

Red Hood was both Jason Todd and Joker, But Ra's al Ghul was not Henri Ducard but an Arabic man who was 600yrs old and needed lazarous pits to survive. Point is, they can make a character appealing even though they change him so long as the story around him is well thought out and depicted. I can buy Red Hood as a villian who isn't either Joker or Rodd. He could be a protege` of Joker...or what ever.

 

I'd still go with Black Mask first though.

 

I don't really disagree with anything you said in your first paragraph. There's no doubt that Batman and Robin hurt the franchise. Actually, it damn-near killed it. In hindsight, I'm glad it did, because that gave us the chance to get Nolan's Batman films. Who knows where we'd be if Schumacher had replicated Batman Forever for Batman and Robin instead of going so extreme with it. And as I said, as a Batman film, Batman and Robin was terrible. But a lot of people knew Batman only from the TV show, and I think Joel Schumacher was one of them, so he wanted to update it for the '90s. That's why I don't think it hurt the character because some people already had that campy, "Holy whatever, Batman!" way of thinking about our beloved Dark Knight.

 

Returning to the Red Hood, he could easily be someone else, and it would work. At this point, if Chris Nolan said he was going to put Bat-Mite in his film and David Spade was playing him, I'd be stoked because I know Nolan would pull it off in stunning fashion. But my personal favor goes with a Jason Todd Red Hood because I think that's a very compelling aspect of the character.

[DarthHavok]

In hindsight, I'm glad it did, because that gave us the chance to get Nolan's Batman films.

 

Well written.

 

Returning to the Red Hood, he could easily be someone else, and it would work. At this point, if Chris Nolan said he was going to put Bat-Mite in his film and David Spade was playing him, I'd be stoked because I know Nolan would pull it off in stunning fashion. But my personal favor goes with a Jason Todd Red Hood because I think that's a very compelling aspect of the character.

 

 

I totally agree. I only meant that it could be done. I love Batman's rogues, but I would like to see some of the lesser known villians, who are easily some of the best - Zsasz - get some screen time.

[azrael23]

Red Hood was both Jason Todd and Joker, But Ra's al Ghul was not Henri Ducard but an Arabic man who was 600yrs old and needed lazarous pits to survive. Point is, they can make a character appealing even though they change him so long as the story around him is well thought out and depicted. I can buy Red Hood as a villian who isn't either Joker or Rodd. He could be a protege` of Joker...or what ever.

 

Ra's was just using an alias, he wasn't the actual Henri Ducard, and concerning the Lazarus Pit and being

600 years old, Nolan left it completely ambiguous which was a great idea. Overall if the Red Hood isn't either Todd

or Joker then there is really no point in watering him down to be something different. And since Red Hood (Todd) is a former

protege of Batman the feud between them makes that character more interesting, what would be so interesting about

some protege of Joker? Not to mention anyone like Hush or Red Hood hasn't really been around long, I believe that

any Rogue Nolan interprets should have a slightly longer history with Batman.

 

It has been said by myself and others in this posting that the idea would be to get away from that kind of story/villian though. Joker has been done so lets not go with yet another villian who kills recklessly.

 

Which means we should have a villain that can challenge Batman on an intellectual level, have the story be alot more personal, like Begins.

[dhoonib]

Red Hood was both Jason Todd and Joker, But Ra's al Ghul was not Henri Ducard but an Arabic man who was 600yrs old and needed lazarous pits to survive. Point is, they can make a character appealing even though they change him so long as the story around him is well thought out and depicted. I can buy Red Hood as a villian who isn't either Joker or Rodd. He could be a protege` of Joker...or what ever.

 

Ra's was just using an alias, he wasn't the actual Henri Ducard, and concerning the Lazarus Pit and being

600 years old, Nolan left it completely ambiguous which was a great idea. Overall if the Red Hood isn't either Todd

or Joker then there is really no point in watering him down to be something different. And since Red Hood (Todd) is a former

protege of Batman the feud between them makes that character more interesting, what would be so interesting about

some protege of Joker? Not to mention anyone like Hush or Red Hood hasn't really been around long, I believe that

any Rogue Nolan interprets should have a slightly longer history with Batman.

 

It has been said by myself and others in this posting that the idea would be to get away from that kind of story/villian though. Joker has been done so lets not go with yet another villian who kills recklessly.

 

Which means we should have a villain that can challenge Batman on an intellectual level, have the story be alot more personal, like Begins.

 

I Agree about the Red Hood, it was Joker and Todd in the past but we know it can't be Joker, Todd was never introduced so its not him and unless its Gordon, Alfred or Two-Face back from the dead it really doesn't hold a whole lot of mystery. I don't think we need someone who was a part of the Joker, a student of the Joker and anything associated with the Joker other than a mention in the next movie if they must. I think a character who makes Batman think, show off his detective skills and tries to catch up and get a head of would be a better villain.

[DarthHavok]

[quote

protege of Batman the feud between them makes that character more interesting, what would be so interesting about

some protege of Joker? Not to mention anyone like Hush or Red Hood hasn't really been around long, I believe that

any Rogue Nolan interprets should have a slightly longer history with Batman.

 

 

Longer history how? This is Batman's beginning so every villian he runs into is essentially "new" with no history. Jason Todd won't happen because you need Robin first. Dick Grayson then Todd...We're getting ahead of ourselves. What's interesting about a protege of Joker? I don't know, maybe an incredibly popular villian known as Harley Quinn. That being said, I think there is possibility in a Joker protege. And to be clear, I offered that possibility as a way around using both Joker and Todd as the identity of Hood. And with all the Arkham inmates he used as his crew in TDK, I don't think it's a stretch.

[azrael23]

Longer history how? This is Batman's beginning so every villian he runs into is essentially "new" with no history. Jason Todd won't happen because you need Robin first. Dick Grayson then Todd...We're getting ahead of ourselves.

 

You're referring to the timeline of the film, I'm referring to Batman's overall comic history. Villains that have been around for alot longer than more recently created villains. I'm aware which Robin came first and were Todd factors in, trust me, I'm keeping pace. Me mentioning that fact rules Red Hood completely out of the equation as a potential villain because if Red Hood isn't Joker or Todd its essentially

pointless making him anyone else and since Nolan won't be introducing any Robin that eliminates an unaltered Red Hood.

 

What's interesting about a protege of Joker? I don't know, maybe an incredibly popular villian known as Harley Quinn.

That being said, I think there is possibility in a Joker protege. And to be clear, I offered that possibility as a way around using both Joker and Todd as the identity of Hood. And with all the Arkham inmates he used as his crew in TDK, I don't think it's a stretch.

 

But thats not what you originally stated, you were making reference to Red Hood, not Harley Quinn and personally I don't think she's a villain with enough

presence to carry a film. If Nolan does do a 3rd film he's more than likely isn't going to use anyone connected to the Joker in no way, shape or form. A villain

with a more interesting story to tell, which is why I think Black Mask is much more up his alley and a better possibility than anyone else.

[nonameshmo30]

We need a cross over move batman teams up with blade to fight a demon hord that penguin unleashes.

 

what it could work #US1#

[Dragonrider1227]

Does anyone else think that if done right, the Ventriloquist with the Gangster puppet could turn out really cool in this reality?

[azrael23]

Does anyone else think that if done right, the Ventriloquist with the Gangster puppet could turn out really cool in this reality?

 

He would be rather unique to do and he's actually plausible Make him some unseen entity were people

think its this powerful new crime boss in Gotham which no one has ever seen and then it turns out to be

a freakin puppet at the end, it would be hilarious.

[dhoonib]

http://www.slashfilm.com/2008/10/07/every-...mor-ever-is-bs/

 

So there you go, Goyer said there is no Riddler, Catwoman with Jolie or Cher, no Penguin or Clayface. But the really bad news is that unlike what some news sites said this weekend Nolan has not come back on board. So I guess we are stuck in limbo.

[GPM in ICT]

I have a lot of idea's about what they could or shoud do with the next movie and I think that a lot of fandom is thinking to much about what villian should be next and not what type of story should be next. Right now in the Batman Movie Universe you have a Batman that is wanted by the police. and who the general public distrust. I think you have to fix this first. I also think you have two choices for the next movie. Either go with more of a detective story where we really see Bats use his brain to hunt down someone (maybe like Zsasz or Hugo Strange) Or have a anti hero (or villian who starts out as something of a hero and just becomes the outright villian by the end of the movie) come to Gotham to "Bring in the Batman". Then they could show us the difference between the two or have the "villian" become more and more obsessed with Batman over the course of the movie.

[TheWildBunch]

I think that Black Mask would make a good personal villain while Hush would be the main villain....but instead of Hush being who ever he was under the bandages, have it be Harvey....then everything is explained that Two Face killed those people not Batman and maybe they have the Riddler in there somewhere as Edward Naston or Nygma, have him get caught by batman in the middle maybe because Hush set him up or something...i would go see this movie