Chris Nolan once again fails to cast Summer Glau in a part she'd be perfect for (Catwoman)

Ok, so I think Anne Hathaway will be good, as will Hardy. I trust that Nolan can turn a fairly pedestrian villain (Bane) into someone far more interesting. Handling Catwoman should be tough though.

Yeah... but now you get to cast her as Catwoman in your reboot of Batman! I'm really excited for you!

I don't think I'd ever use Catwoman, were I to make a Batman movie. I have a terrific idea for the Riddler, one that would also use Bane. I'd probably throw in Harley Quinn for the Glau role. Joseph Gordon-Levitt as The Riddler and Mickey Rourke as Bane.

Selina Kyle will make things very interesting.

Mickey Rourke as Batman in the as-yet-nonexistent adaptation of The Dark Knight Returns.

I like the casting of Thomas Hardy, though I'd imagine that Bane is likely not going to be portrayed in in the film quite like his comic book incarnation unless Hardy gains another 100 pounds of muscle. Anne Hathaway is a casting choice that I'm a little skeptical about, but I was also skeptical about the decision to cast Heath Ledger as the Joker, and that turned out quite well.

I put stock into Nolan's ability to find the right cast members to fit his vision of the film. That said, I'm really hoping that the pressure from the studio doesn't compromise his ability to craft a good film as I fear it will.

Yeah, the absence of either The Penguin and/or The Riddler is a little disappointing since they're probably the #2 & 3 villains in Batman lore... though I'm not surprised about the absence of the former given Nolan's stated dislike for the character (though I think he could've found a way to make him work in this version), and the latter was probably viewed as too vaguely similar to The Joker.

The only reason anybody views The Penguin and The Riddler as any better than third-stringers is because they were popular in the 1960s show--and, to a lesser extent, the 90s movies.

I’ve never had any interest in reading the series where Bane was introduced, but I like the idea of the character. A guy who grows up in a world of crime and poverty, who fights his way up the food chain through wits and violence, eventually making it his mission to prove that he’s better than Batman. That and the idea of causing so much havoc around Gotham that it wears Batman down to breaking point, giving him the chance to swoop in and destroy Batman at his weakest, just sounded like it could have been a fun story.

I’m sure it was handled in a hilariously 90s way in the comics, but I think Nolan could do something interesting with it. If you strip away all the stupid and ridiculous parts of the character, I think there’s something worthwhile underneath.

Bane's on Wikipedia. Anyone that wants to read up and take a guess at how Nolan is going to approach the character can jump right in!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bane_%28co ... ite_note-0

I think this is Nolan's central thesis on every Bat-character. The trick is, will there be anything useful left once all the stupid and ridiculous stuff is gone?

The 90s animated show had a similar attitude, but without the restrictive insistence upon "realism"--whatever that means in a universe where orphaned rich kids thrash criminals in the night in black rubber suits instead of going into therapy.

Some good stuff therein. Especially the powers & abilities section:



That's certainly a lot different than the way the character was presented in Batman & Robin. There's even the possibility that he may not be a villain for the film's entirety.

He could have a Two-Face arc, except perhaps more pronounced--a vigilante who goes off the deep end. But then who would be the primary villain? Catwoman??? Or some other character whom we don't yet know?

I think Bane could work if they play up the intelligence angle. Have him both physically and mentally superior to Batman. This is an aspect that hasn't really been explored.

The Joker was essentially an anarchist, who was was physically no match for Batman and relied mostly on the fact that he was a wildcard, that no one else was as crazy as he was and people turned to him out of desperation. He was let down by his faith in chaos and misjugement of Batman's (and everyone else's) corruptability.

Ra's al Ghul was mentally disciplined, but ruled by his ideology. His plans had little personal gain, and thus he put his cause over self-preservation.

Two-Face was driven by rage, by his confusion with what he saw was as an unfair world. His plans were illogical and his rationalising poor. Thus he was able to be easily defeated by Batman.

If Bane could be able to smart enough to predict Batman's actions and motivations, and also have the physical strength to take him on, it would provide an interesting conflict. He is also primarily self motivated, and thus isn't a slave to his ideals. Batman however has one thing that he must protect - his identity. It was only hinted at in the previous films as to what means he would go to in order to protect his secret identity. So far he's never had to make any really tough decisions. How far would he go, to silence a potentially innocent person who knows too much? That was one story thread that wasn't explored enough in The Dark Knight. And if Bane has the intellect to figure it out, it could make for a very interesting series of events.

This all looks wonderful in summation, but this is very much editorial word-of-god stuff. Bane is smart not because he does exceptionally smart things, but because other characters talk about how smart he is. Bane is dangerous not because he earns the aura of danger, but because situations are contrived to show off how dangerous he is--usually by neutering the Batman, who himself is typically contrived to be nearly omniscient and improbably durable.

As Bane originally appeared in the Knightfall storyline, his M.O. was essentially to unleash a cavalcade of villains upon Gotham City, meanwhile waxing philosophical about "breaking" Batman in the presence of his obligatory coterie of criminal henchmen. While this is marginally interesting, it doesn't raise him above the level of the sales-boosting gimmick that DC was going for.

I'm betting that the filmmakers have a decent angle on him. If not for that, the choice of Bane would inspire zero confidence in me.

Surely they would've had to have been popular before that to have been featured as heavily as The Joker and Catwoman. Those have been the 'core four' Batman villains for as long as I've been aware of the Caped Crusader.

Those four are the precise lineup of villains from the film adaptation of the '60s show. Make of that what you will.

There are plenty of noteworthy Bat-villains aside from The Joker and Catwoman. Hugo Strange, The Ventriloquist, Clayface (all three of them!), and The Mad Hatter are all staples of the Batman rogue's gallery, and have been involved in some very good stories. The Riddler and the Penguin are certainly popular, but they are comparatively small-time crooks.

In fact, part of Bane's plot in the Knightfall storyline was to pump the Riddler full of the strength-inducing Venom, just to see what might happen if an unlikely Bat-villain were transformed into a formidable opponent.

Good post and I especially like the question you pose towards the end. They'll probably never top the Joker, but Batman's identity could make for a compelling storyline.

Thanks. It's an idea that got me thinking recently, especially with all the news coverage over the Wikileaks controversy. A number of extreme conservatives have been calling for Assange's execution, even though they're unable to easily determine what laws he's broken. They just don't want important secrets revealed to the public.

My initial thoughts (for some reason) went to Batman. The Dark Knight drew many similarities to conservative ideals, and got me thinking - to what lengths would Batman go to, to stop information regarding his identity from reaching the public? Would he sacrifice his ethical code for the greater good of his actions? Could he use his political and financial influence as Bruce Wayne to effectively 'gag' someone he saw as a threat? What if they weren't breaking any laws, and were only pursuing the issue in the name of public interest? Would they then be forced to seek less legal means to have their voice heard? And thus could Batman essentially 'create' a criminal?

Of course, it's all silly fan-fiction, but interesting to ponder. Especially since The Dark Knight raised the questions of whether it was worth sacrificing individual freedom and privacy for the safety of the majority...

Well he did punch out the Joker.

Tom Hardy was a force of nature in Bronson. If he can bring half of what he brought to that film to DKR, Bane will be a great character, no matter how he was written in the books.