I am not convinced by the casting of Anne Hathaway as Catwoman. Catwoman should be sultry, sexy, mischevious. Anne Hathaway is wholesome, cute, coy.

Count his lack of an Oscar nomination as another in the long list of reasons why the Academy Awards are garbage. Seriously. Hardy owned.

I have no doubts he'll take whatever he's given and make it great but I still think it's an odd choice for the villain. But this is where Nolan and Company will step up and make me walking away wishing I'd never had doubts.

She wasn't too wholesome in Havoc. That said, I'm also not convinced that she can pull off the role.

Yeah she's not someone I had in mind for the role either, I was hoping for someone more like Cameron Diaz or call me crazy, Lindsay Lohan.

Very well, I will call you crazy you crazy man you. Truth be told I'd quicker see Lohan than Cameron Diaz in the role. I never get why she's popular.

I think I'm the only one who's convinced Anne Hathaway's a good choice. Can she play sultry, sexy, mischievous? Of course she can, she's a friggin' actress. On a more serious level, Anne's been trying hard to expand her range lately. She proved sexy in Love and Other Drugs (all while being sick with the Parkinson's), so that's one. Sultry and mischievous she hasn't quite tapped into yet. I have a feeling it won't be much of a stretch for her.

I actually like both choices. She is a good actress which is what I want, not like tabloid material like the aforementioned Lohan or Diaz. Besides, I think we will be seeing more of Selena Kyle here than Catwoman and she can pull that off. As far as Hardy goes, I think his success so far speaks for itself.

I never said she was a bad choice, just not my ideal choice, she did do a great job in Havoc, but I just can't quite picture her as Catwoman for some reason.

I think the problem with Cat Woman is that there's always this temptation to interpret her dress and behaviour as essentially fetishistic rather than threatening in the real crime sense.

Frankly, I hope Nolan throws away most of the existing Batman lore about these characters and starts again. The central dynamic has to be a credible threat to the city that brings out our knight in its defence. Then we can get into the whole morality schtick of how to justify Batman as a vigilante. How far is he allowed to go before he is just as dangerous as the criminals he confronts. Indeed, perhaps he is always more dangerous because the villains are locked away in Arkham Asylum while he is free to walk the streets in his alter ego.

Throw away the lore? There is no point to Catwoman without it.

...or because they were/are the 4 most well-known Batman baddies.

Anyway, before we go any further, I found this image on JoBlo, and I think it applies here, too:

Or that prior to that, the last time Batman appeared onscreen was in his 1940s serial adventures, and the general public didn't know any Bat-villains at all. Except, perhaps, The Joker.

The Riddler is a small-time crook who leaves lame riddles as a calling card. The Penguin is a gangster version of Frasier Crane. Face it--these two are big-time Bat-villains by sheer editorial fiat.

Depends entirely on your take on the Riddler. In my Batman sequel, he's basically a 60s radical terrorist in the mold of Bill Ayers (only a better bomb maker), with a frontman hero (Bane) offering an alternative to Batman.

Any number of possible Bat-villains (may I suggest Firefly?) would be a far better fit for that scenario. Reimagining characters is one thing, but I don't see the point in using a character that must be altered beyond recognition in order to work.

For a master class in effectively rewriting characters to be dramatically effective while still retaining their essential characteristics, the 90s animated series is the best there is. Ironically, Batman & Robin tried to ape the reimagined Mr. Freeze, but he ended up more ludicrous than his original version ever was.

Hell, the animated series even managed to take a shit villain like the Clock King and do something reasonably interesting with him.

The key for me is the psychological games aspect of the Riddler--that defines him, and it associates him with intellect. I imagined him toying with people he's about to kill by asking them odd riddles...then blowing up their car.

I find myself not being enamoured by the Catwoman as a charactor in the batman franchise.
How and ever, Nolan has been brilliant for the last 2 batman films and Anne Hathaway is a good enough actress to bring what ever Nolan has in mind to the screen to a high enough standard..
Tom hardy is going to be brilliant as Bain. I am really looking forward to seeing how this charactor is developed by Nolan. If Hardy plays the charactor anything like "Bronson" then it will be the equal of Ledger's Joker.

I guess my one minor quibble with this series is that Nolan always seems to cast actresses who look considerably younger than Christian Bale (Katie Holmes, Maggie Gyllenhaal, and now presumably Anne Hathaway... given Catwoman/Selina Kyle's history with Bruce Wayne/Batman) as the love interests. At least in the first Batman series Michael Keaton, Kim Basinger, Michelle Pfeiffer, Val Kilmer, Nicole Kidman, George Clooney, Uma Thurman, and Elle Macpherson all looked generally the same age.

I can forgive Nolan for a bit of latent cradle-robbery if he can turn out another good film in this series. Besides, we've already gotten to see Anne Hathaway nekkid (courtesy of the film Havoc), so it's not exactly like she's got the innocence factor going for her anymore.

Well... I would agree with you on Katie Holmes and Ann Hathaway. However, I think Maggie Gyllenhaal looks as old, if not older, than Bale.
-Jeremy

katie Holmes Born 1978
Anne hathaway Born 1982
maggie G Born 1977

Christian Bale Born 1974

katie and Maggie would be around the same age as Bale. Note: I am 5 years older than my wife.
hathaway is only 8 years younger that bale, not an awful lot really.