The Dark Knight
Aug. 5th, 2008 11:25 am![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
seriousficTaking this point by point instead of the squeeplosion here (and, hey, spoilers)…
The Joker – I know people have been saying that he has more of a “rise to power” than a character arc, but I think he has a bit of a trajectory. He starts off as just a fucked-up bank robber and ends up as the clown prince of crime. This really is sort of a love story, albeit a one-sided one, between Joker and Batman (that thankfully manages to be more “EWW! HOMICIDAL MANIAC!” than “EWW! GAY PERSON!”). Joker first meets Batman at the party and notices that he has feelings for Rachel, then he’s even further beguiled by the fact Batman lets people die rather than taking off his mask (not your typical boy scout hero). Joker even points out his character development, TWICE, first when he tells Batman that “you complete me” and then when he explicitly says he no longer wants to kill Batman… he just wants to “bat him around” as Black Cat might say.
As signaled by burning his half of the mob’s life savings (which makes the entire Lao subplot a bit of a red herring… wouldn’t a better alternative be to explain that he can now use all that money to buy explosives and bribes enough to plant all the bombs he uses in the third act?), Joker has transcended the petty motivations of a common criminal and is now all about chaos, to the point where he’ll risk his own life to corrupt Harvey Dent --notably, this shows Joker’s literally incredible grasp of the human psyche. He knows that Dent is so fanatical that Two-Face will let him go if the coin goes up right. That’s a far cry from the cowering bank robber in the first scene. In fact, I believe that Joker is initially planning to take his half of the money for killing Batman… it’s after he meets Batman that he realizes material wealth is unsatisfying. He needs to break Batman, even if it results in his own death. Batman’s rebuttal to this, while dramatically necessary, kinda doesn’t work after his pragmatic dismissal of Ra’s in the first movie. “I’ll never kill you, Joker! I’ll just wait until you’re put in circumstances in which you might be killed, then leave you to your fate. I’M BATMAN!”
Of course, I like both, since we know both that Ra’s was too dangerous to let live and we have no reason to believe that Joker won’t stay locked up in Arkham. Now, when it’s Batman 55 and the Joker’s escaped a couple dozen times, then I’ll want to know why Batman doesn’t just “accidentally” let the Joker slip off a rooftop.
In his first meeting with the Mob, the Joker is neurotic and fidgety, even doing the classic stammering bit he did as a failed stand-up comedian in Killing Joke. By the end of the movie, he’s completely confident and overpowering in his interactions with the Chechen. So even though they held off on a lot of his “tricks” (especially Smilex gas), I believe we see the birth of the kind of character who would use things like exploding cigars and hand buzzers to kill people.
Two-Face – Yes, he was rushed. But Two-Face’s power is basically that he’s a guy with a really bad scar (you’d think that would make him less of a threat than your average mook, since Batman could just throw some alcohol on his bad side and BAM, he’s done). His gold status comes from the fact that he used to be a good guy. Comic writers realize that and amp up his good-guy status, to the point where he used to be the Bat-BFF (I myself gave him a military background, but making him more ‘electable’ and more of a credible threat to Bats).
Here, he’s not Bruce’s friend (although Bruce admires him in a very “guy love” kind of way… if you’d told me that JOKER would end up the big Bruce-squeeze in fandom a week ago, I’d’ve laughed in your face) so much as a symbol for hope; thus, his villainous power comes from that symbol being tarnished. So although rushed, he gets to go as Two-Face as the Nolanverse can allow without doing clichéd things like dialing 1-800-HIRE-A-THUG and saying things like “You’re two late, Batman!” as he robs the Second National Bank on Twenty-Two Street.
What’s really interesting is that, for all the criticism of his heel turn as just “No Rachel and no face make Harvey something-something” “Go crazy?” “DON’T MIND IF I DO!”
…that was long…
For all that criticism, it’s explicitly his zeal for justice -- perfectly represented as he explains his scheme to jail half the city’s criminals… he gazes off into the middle distance with Barack Obama utopianism, not hearing Mayor Eyeliner over the sound of how awesome Harvey Dent is -- that’s twisted into his evil vigilantism. Joker is the kind of guy who would easily be found not guilty by reason of insanity, so Harvey lets him go scot-free. He can’t cope with the idea that his philosophy of life is inadequate, that bad things happen to good people, that Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer keep making movies, so he dove-tails into a fanatical obsession with “fairness.” From his perspective, Batman and Gordon saved him because he was Gotham’s white knight (and if there’s a third movie, they really need a climax where Bruce/Batman explains all that to talk Harvey down), so he needs to punish them by becoming a monster.
As much as there’s a clamor for Two-Face as the villain of Batman III (I’m partial to the idea of David Tennant as the Riddler myself), it’d be hard to see where the character can go without turning him into a ridiculous gimmick. In small doses, his coin thing is pretty cool, but for an entire movie it’d have to be both consistent, dramatically interesting, and grow organically out of his portrayal in TDK. Tough order.
Rachel Dawes – Come off it, fanthings, you got Stephanie Brown and Cassandra Cain back, you can handle the occasional female character dying. Yes, even if it’s to further the emotional arc of a (male) main character. That’s why they call them supporting characters. They even have an Oscar specifically for that. The only thing I consider sexist in TDK is that of the two corrupt cops on Harvey’s hit-list, the old white guy gets killed, while the pretty Hispanic girl (who only delivered an innocent woman to a gruesome demise to support her dying mother… I mean, JESUS CHRIST) gets a mere pistol-whipping. Who knew blind chance was so politically correct? If their fates had been reversed, it would’ve made Harvey look like far more of a psycho and give the movie that much more of an edge.
Plus, old white guy dirty cop could’ve been Bullock. Pick up the third movie with him as a private investigator and tie him into Batman’s redemption plot (because you know there has to be one).
In other words, not only did I not have a problem with a woman dying in TDK, but I wanted more women to die. Hello, Fandom Wank, I need you to come over here right now, I have an opinion that jibes with the mainstream…
Back on topic. What’s really interesting is that if you think about it, Rachel’s idea that Bruce Wayne needs to be Batman must’ve come about when she saw him as Batman fighting the Joker (presumably, the first time she saw him both in combat and while knowing that he was Bruce). A shot of Batman enjoying knocking the Joker around and Rachel reacting with horror to the Bat’s brutal fighting style would’ve been great foreshadowing for her eventual decision to leave Bruce and marry Harvey.
The really unfortunate part is that the Bruce/Rachel ship depended on Batman Begins to sell it. This worked in Spider-Man 2, where you wanted Peter and Mary-Jane to get together because you knew from the first Spider-Man that they’d be perfect together. With Bruce/Rachel as the Hong Kong knock-off of that (complete with metafictionally appropriate GweMJ death… thank God there weren’t any Joker babies), all the Bruce/Rachel stuff comes off as just tacky. Especially when Harvey and Rachel have much more chemistry. Maybe Catwoman will finally make for a compelling love interest and a strong female character. Plus, the idea of Batman having to deal with the vigilantes he’s inspired is one that’s brought up in TDK only as world-building and then never dealt with. Because once you get right down to it, as soon as you have vigilantes that are the equal of Batman and don’t place themselves above the law by killing (as you might do by carrying shotguns around), “your armor isn’t as cool as mine and you don’t have a Catmobile” stops being an effective argument.
In case you were wondering, yes, Catwoman would be a far better addition to the franchise than Robin. And not just because of hot women in catsuits and Robin only really being interesting when he gets away from Batman and joins the Teen Titans/Young Justice.
Batman – Well, if there’s a choice being having Batman being a compelling character because his villain’s weak or Batman being less showy because the villains are SO FRIKKIN’ STRONG, I’m gonna have to go with the strong villains. The Batsuit really looks weird in full light, so I’m a little bewildered by the decision to set the entire confrontation with the Joker in a brightly-lit room. Plus, his “guttural” voice hasn’t gotten any better (when I’m a millionaire, I’m going to pay Kevin Conroy to dub over the Batman parts. Yes, it’s stupid and fannish, but you’d watch it, admit it). And there’s the weird decision to make their first talky confrontation into Joker’s big speechifying, so Batman never really gets a chance to rebut Joker’s arguments until the ferries. Even then, it’s mostly “you diseased maniac, you’ll never get away with this.” As much story sense as it makes to put the Killing Joke’s corruption onto Harvey Dent, having the Joker actually win on that exchange completely invalidates the whole point of the story. Batman’s victory in TDK is much more Pyrrhic than anything else.
Criticism – Did they really need to have Batman and Rachel have A Moment while Joker was doing God knows what to a party full of Bruce’s friends?
Totally fannish peev, but shouldn’t Batman use his Batarangs once? There was so much grapple-gun action in this that they could’ve given him Spider-Man’s webshooters.
Gordon’s “death” and return were for the motherfucking win, but “I had to protect my family”? Seriously? How did Gordon faking his death protect his family? If there’d been a threat against them, even just a thirty-second scene of Gordon getting a phone call asking “How’s the family, Sarge?”, that sequence wouldn’t have been so nakedly drama for the sake of drama.
So, basically, for the third movie I want Catwoman to steal stuff and look hot while the Tenth Doctor does a Frank Gorshin impression. Although if history is any kind of teacher, Batman 3 will suck balls, with a lengthy scene where Bruce break-dances, followed by James Marsden exploding, maybe some Richard Pryor and a scene where Jim Carrey dry-humps a cane that looks like a question mark. Goddamnit, threequels...
The Joker – I know people have been saying that he has more of a “rise to power” than a character arc, but I think he has a bit of a trajectory. He starts off as just a fucked-up bank robber and ends up as the clown prince of crime. This really is sort of a love story, albeit a one-sided one, between Joker and Batman (that thankfully manages to be more “EWW! HOMICIDAL MANIAC!” than “EWW! GAY PERSON!”). Joker first meets Batman at the party and notices that he has feelings for Rachel, then he’s even further beguiled by the fact Batman lets people die rather than taking off his mask (not your typical boy scout hero). Joker even points out his character development, TWICE, first when he tells Batman that “you complete me” and then when he explicitly says he no longer wants to kill Batman… he just wants to “bat him around” as Black Cat might say.
As signaled by burning his half of the mob’s life savings (which makes the entire Lao subplot a bit of a red herring… wouldn’t a better alternative be to explain that he can now use all that money to buy explosives and bribes enough to plant all the bombs he uses in the third act?), Joker has transcended the petty motivations of a common criminal and is now all about chaos, to the point where he’ll risk his own life to corrupt Harvey Dent --notably, this shows Joker’s literally incredible grasp of the human psyche. He knows that Dent is so fanatical that Two-Face will let him go if the coin goes up right. That’s a far cry from the cowering bank robber in the first scene. In fact, I believe that Joker is initially planning to take his half of the money for killing Batman… it’s after he meets Batman that he realizes material wealth is unsatisfying. He needs to break Batman, even if it results in his own death. Batman’s rebuttal to this, while dramatically necessary, kinda doesn’t work after his pragmatic dismissal of Ra’s in the first movie. “I’ll never kill you, Joker! I’ll just wait until you’re put in circumstances in which you might be killed, then leave you to your fate. I’M BATMAN!”
Of course, I like both, since we know both that Ra’s was too dangerous to let live and we have no reason to believe that Joker won’t stay locked up in Arkham. Now, when it’s Batman 55 and the Joker’s escaped a couple dozen times, then I’ll want to know why Batman doesn’t just “accidentally” let the Joker slip off a rooftop.
In his first meeting with the Mob, the Joker is neurotic and fidgety, even doing the classic stammering bit he did as a failed stand-up comedian in Killing Joke. By the end of the movie, he’s completely confident and overpowering in his interactions with the Chechen. So even though they held off on a lot of his “tricks” (especially Smilex gas), I believe we see the birth of the kind of character who would use things like exploding cigars and hand buzzers to kill people.
Two-Face – Yes, he was rushed. But Two-Face’s power is basically that he’s a guy with a really bad scar (you’d think that would make him less of a threat than your average mook, since Batman could just throw some alcohol on his bad side and BAM, he’s done). His gold status comes from the fact that he used to be a good guy. Comic writers realize that and amp up his good-guy status, to the point where he used to be the Bat-BFF (I myself gave him a military background, but making him more ‘electable’ and more of a credible threat to Bats).
Here, he’s not Bruce’s friend (although Bruce admires him in a very “guy love” kind of way… if you’d told me that JOKER would end up the big Bruce-squeeze in fandom a week ago, I’d’ve laughed in your face) so much as a symbol for hope; thus, his villainous power comes from that symbol being tarnished. So although rushed, he gets to go as Two-Face as the Nolanverse can allow without doing clichéd things like dialing 1-800-HIRE-A-THUG and saying things like “You’re two late, Batman!” as he robs the Second National Bank on Twenty-Two Street.
What’s really interesting is that, for all the criticism of his heel turn as just “No Rachel and no face make Harvey something-something” “Go crazy?” “DON’T MIND IF I DO!”
…that was long…
For all that criticism, it’s explicitly his zeal for justice -- perfectly represented as he explains his scheme to jail half the city’s criminals… he gazes off into the middle distance with Barack Obama utopianism, not hearing Mayor Eyeliner over the sound of how awesome Harvey Dent is -- that’s twisted into his evil vigilantism. Joker is the kind of guy who would easily be found not guilty by reason of insanity, so Harvey lets him go scot-free. He can’t cope with the idea that his philosophy of life is inadequate, that bad things happen to good people, that Jason Friedberg and Aaron Seltzer keep making movies, so he dove-tails into a fanatical obsession with “fairness.” From his perspective, Batman and Gordon saved him because he was Gotham’s white knight (and if there’s a third movie, they really need a climax where Bruce/Batman explains all that to talk Harvey down), so he needs to punish them by becoming a monster.
As much as there’s a clamor for Two-Face as the villain of Batman III (I’m partial to the idea of David Tennant as the Riddler myself), it’d be hard to see where the character can go without turning him into a ridiculous gimmick. In small doses, his coin thing is pretty cool, but for an entire movie it’d have to be both consistent, dramatically interesting, and grow organically out of his portrayal in TDK. Tough order.
Rachel Dawes – Come off it, fanthings, you got Stephanie Brown and Cassandra Cain back, you can handle the occasional female character dying. Yes, even if it’s to further the emotional arc of a (male) main character. That’s why they call them supporting characters. They even have an Oscar specifically for that. The only thing I consider sexist in TDK is that of the two corrupt cops on Harvey’s hit-list, the old white guy gets killed, while the pretty Hispanic girl (who only delivered an innocent woman to a gruesome demise to support her dying mother… I mean, JESUS CHRIST) gets a mere pistol-whipping. Who knew blind chance was so politically correct? If their fates had been reversed, it would’ve made Harvey look like far more of a psycho and give the movie that much more of an edge.
Plus, old white guy dirty cop could’ve been Bullock. Pick up the third movie with him as a private investigator and tie him into Batman’s redemption plot (because you know there has to be one).
In other words, not only did I not have a problem with a woman dying in TDK, but I wanted more women to die. Hello, Fandom Wank, I need you to come over here right now, I have an opinion that jibes with the mainstream…
Back on topic. What’s really interesting is that if you think about it, Rachel’s idea that Bruce Wayne needs to be Batman must’ve come about when she saw him as Batman fighting the Joker (presumably, the first time she saw him both in combat and while knowing that he was Bruce). A shot of Batman enjoying knocking the Joker around and Rachel reacting with horror to the Bat’s brutal fighting style would’ve been great foreshadowing for her eventual decision to leave Bruce and marry Harvey.
The really unfortunate part is that the Bruce/Rachel ship depended on Batman Begins to sell it. This worked in Spider-Man 2, where you wanted Peter and Mary-Jane to get together because you knew from the first Spider-Man that they’d be perfect together. With Bruce/Rachel as the Hong Kong knock-off of that (complete with metafictionally appropriate GweMJ death… thank God there weren’t any Joker babies), all the Bruce/Rachel stuff comes off as just tacky. Especially when Harvey and Rachel have much more chemistry. Maybe Catwoman will finally make for a compelling love interest and a strong female character. Plus, the idea of Batman having to deal with the vigilantes he’s inspired is one that’s brought up in TDK only as world-building and then never dealt with. Because once you get right down to it, as soon as you have vigilantes that are the equal of Batman and don’t place themselves above the law by killing (as you might do by carrying shotguns around), “your armor isn’t as cool as mine and you don’t have a Catmobile” stops being an effective argument.
In case you were wondering, yes, Catwoman would be a far better addition to the franchise than Robin. And not just because of hot women in catsuits and Robin only really being interesting when he gets away from Batman and joins the Teen Titans/Young Justice.
Batman – Well, if there’s a choice being having Batman being a compelling character because his villain’s weak or Batman being less showy because the villains are SO FRIKKIN’ STRONG, I’m gonna have to go with the strong villains. The Batsuit really looks weird in full light, so I’m a little bewildered by the decision to set the entire confrontation with the Joker in a brightly-lit room. Plus, his “guttural” voice hasn’t gotten any better (when I’m a millionaire, I’m going to pay Kevin Conroy to dub over the Batman parts. Yes, it’s stupid and fannish, but you’d watch it, admit it). And there’s the weird decision to make their first talky confrontation into Joker’s big speechifying, so Batman never really gets a chance to rebut Joker’s arguments until the ferries. Even then, it’s mostly “you diseased maniac, you’ll never get away with this.” As much story sense as it makes to put the Killing Joke’s corruption onto Harvey Dent, having the Joker actually win on that exchange completely invalidates the whole point of the story. Batman’s victory in TDK is much more Pyrrhic than anything else.
Criticism – Did they really need to have Batman and Rachel have A Moment while Joker was doing God knows what to a party full of Bruce’s friends?
Totally fannish peev, but shouldn’t Batman use his Batarangs once? There was so much grapple-gun action in this that they could’ve given him Spider-Man’s webshooters.
Gordon’s “death” and return were for the motherfucking win, but “I had to protect my family”? Seriously? How did Gordon faking his death protect his family? If there’d been a threat against them, even just a thirty-second scene of Gordon getting a phone call asking “How’s the family, Sarge?”, that sequence wouldn’t have been so nakedly drama for the sake of drama.
So, basically, for the third movie I want Catwoman to steal stuff and look hot while the Tenth Doctor does a Frank Gorshin impression. Although if history is any kind of teacher, Batman 3 will suck balls, with a lengthy scene where Bruce break-dances, followed by James Marsden exploding, maybe some Richard Pryor and a scene where Jim Carrey dry-humps a cane that looks like a question mark. Goddamnit, threequels...
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
A social commentary on the last paragraph
Date: 2008-08-05 05:27 pm (UTC)Re: A social commentary on the last paragraph
Date: 2008-08-05 05:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2008-08-06 09:07 am (UTC)The only niggle I have is that, well Christian Bale's Batman is awesome. I can totally buy him as this amazing crime fighter who makes criminals wet their pants etc but he doesn't really come across as that bright. I guess that's what he needs Morgan Freeman for.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-11 05:45 pm (UTC)My little sister is the same way. "She needed to wear a bra... not that she had anything to hold up!" Me, I think she looked kinda pimp in her Lao-interrogating ACE ATTORNEY! outfit.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-06 01:49 pm (UTC)Which really does not bode well for a good follow-up to TDK, damn it. Can Nolan buck the trend? I fricking well hope so, but I'm not finding myself with a lot of hope...
no subject
Date: 2008-08-06 06:04 pm (UTC)Look, Joker was obviously going to work his way down to Gordon eventually. This just saved him having to make a Sadistic Choice-OH WAIT.
My take..
Date: 2008-08-09 05:06 am (UTC)What I find wierdest about this movie entry is that it seems to me that Batman falls short several times over in this movie. I am use to seeing him having everything covered, no matter how bad things get.
If anything Batman Begins not only focuses on his need for revenge, but his need to be the best at what he does. He is constantly pushing his own limits.
From almost the very start, we see he has a new costume, but it isn't totally up to snuff. And is it me, or did his kung-fu seem really stiff and repetitive. He seemed so much more comfortable and smoother in the first film.
I realize that the corruption of Harvey Dent was a bit fast, but I'm willing to give them a break on that, considering that the movie is already two and a half hours long. I have a feeling there will be more on that in the deleted scenes on the special edition DVD, and we'll be wondering why they kept some scenes and cut those more important scenes.
The death of Two-Face bothers me for two reasons, one..he never dies in the comic, and two it goes back to Batman not being on his game. It just seems to me that if the Batman can knock the Joker off a building and catch him, he'd be able to do the same for a friend..Harvey. Also, I agree.. In just about every first meeting in the comics I could swear Batman defeats him with a batarang to the coin. With all the weapons in his arsenal, and all his martial arts skills, the whole charging and knocking Dent off the building thing just seemed greatly out of character.
For actual DC comics fans, did the cell phone device smack of shades of Brother Eye?
Who I'd like to see next? I'd love to see the Great Kahli or Brock Lesner as Killer Croc.
Angelina Jolie seems like a natural choice for Catwoman, but at the same time, too obvious.. Maybe someone different.. I'll have to see them in action, but maybe some of the ladies that are gonna be in Deathrace. I looked some of them up on IMDB.com out of curiosity.. They are all hot,they are all hardbodies, and they are all actual stuntwomen...
If I knew this series had enough legs to make it to 5 movies, I'd save Robin for the fourth. I think David Tennant would be an interesting choice for the Riddler. He's not my favorite Doctor, but I can see him doing the Riddler justice.
I still want Patrick Stewart as Mr. Cold.
Austin Pendleton would be a perfect Mad Hatter.
Eric Roberts (sporting his Star 80 mustache) as Floyd Lawton, aka Deadshot.
Ron Perkins can be a good Ventriloquist.
Re: My take..
Date: 2008-08-11 05:33 pm (UTC)I think that's to highlight how completely overwhelmed he is by the Joker's insanity.
The death of Two-Face bothers me for two reasons, one..he never dies in the comic, and two it goes back to Batman not being on his game. It just seems to me that if the Batman can knock the Joker off a building and catch him, he'd be able to do the same for a friend..Harvey.
Well, keep in mind that Batman's battled his way through both clowns and SWAT, been mauled by dogs, beaten on by the Joker, been shot, and that's in addition to being in a
motorcycleBat-pod accident just days prior (not to mention all the other injuries he sustained over the course of the film, like getting dropped out of his penthouse). By that point, his main priority was saving James Jr. and he didn't have time for anything fancy.For actual DC comics fans, did the cell phone device smack of shades of Brother Eye?
As one fan put it, somewhere Barbara Gordon's nipples are getting hard and she has no idea why.
Eric Roberts (sporting his Star 80 mustache) as Floyd Lawton, aka Deadshot.
But Eric Roberts was already in this movie. And Floyd isn't a really intimidating name for a villain...
no subject
Date: 2008-08-11 07:44 am (UTC)Also, although I understand why, I hate the idea of Batman being thought of as a killer in order to preserve Harvey. Totally in keeping with the plot, so I'll get over it, but completely anti-Batman's code of honor. Where do they go from here? His whole power in Gotham depends upon the police surreptitiously supporting his vigilantism without actually holding up pennants that say "Go, Batman, Go!" and forming a cheering section. Murder crosses an ethical line that I think would have lessened Batman's ability to get away with what he does, do the extent that he does.
Also, I was thrilled to see the "old white guy dirty cop", especially because he was paired with "sexy latina cop." I'm thinking: "Bullock and Montoya? SWEET!" Grrrr... totally let that opportunity smack them in the ass. Especially because (so I've recently heard, but maybe everyone else has already?) that Harely Quinn was supposed to be in the hospital scenes with the Joker as his doctor!
It's all nit-picky stuff, considering that I was generally thrilled with the movie, in ways I NEVER was with the first attempt at a series. Even in the odds are against a continuation of hits, I'm hoping for a miracle on the scale of Indiana Jones/Star Wars (discounting I-III), LoTR, and (most of all) James Bond proportions. There are SO many places they can go with this without resorting to the cheap and unrealistic theatricality of the other series (Jim Carrey? Seriously? I like the guy, but so very, very wrong...) THERE Two-Face was almost worse that Riddler, and don't even get me started with Mr. Freeze. And Catwoman. Oh, gods - Catwoman.
Nolan discounted Penguin as a 'realistic' villain, but I actually think he has the potential to be more realistic than most of the others. After all, if they can make the friggin' SCARECROW work, why not Cobblepot as he's portrayed Pre-, During, and After No Man's Land? Totally do-able!
As for Robin... I don't know HOW to make that one work in an explainable way. I mean, in this day and age, take an eight-year-old orphan, adopt him, and then put him in brightly colored tights and teach him martial arts? There's no WAY that's not coming back to bite someone in the ass. Especially using Dick Grayson, who - although awesome - is so very, very... energetic? Slapstick? Dare I say, flamboyant even? I'm perfectly fine with leaving him be, at least until someone can sell it on the level they did with Scarecrow - that impressed the hell out of me. Joker rocked my world on so many levels (even without the Smilex, which is so creepy, I would have loved to see it somehow), but I was already thrilled with the lack of cartoonism captured by the Crane character, that I knew they could make Joker work.
And so, before I end this rant, I have one last thing to say to the possibility of seeing Catwoman, as both a romantic interest and a compelling female character/villain/anti-hero:
Catwoman = Eliza Dusku...
Big Win.
no subject
Date: 2008-08-11 05:42 pm (UTC)But there'd be no real comeuppance for the Joker (even if you left out his escape) and no real evolution of Batman's character. It'd just stop instead of end.
Nolan discounted Penguin as a 'realistic' villain, but I actually think he has the potential to be more realistic than most of the others. After all, if they can make the friggin' SCARECROW work, why not Cobblepot as he's portrayed Pre-, During, and After No Man's Land? Totally do-able!
I think it's just that if you strip away the bird fetish, the make-up, the trick umbrellas, and all that... what you end up with is a rather generic, if realistic, crime lord. It feels as wrong as having Penguin be a "British arms dealer" as was rumored. Now, if you want to have that character and call him Rupert Thorne (a highly influential politican in Gotham who is also a crime boss), then that'd be cool, but making that guy Penguin would be a letdown.
As for Robin... I don't know HOW to make that one work in an explainable way. I mean, in this day and age, take an eight-year-old orphan, adopt him, and then put him in brightly colored tights and teach him martial arts? There's no WAY that's not coming back to bite someone in the ass.
The most obvious way is to make him a teenager, but even then it's a little weird. You have to make him young enough that he can have a father-son relationship with Batman, while keeping him old enough that it isn't creepy. And honestly, I don't see any great, legitimate demand for Robin to make the Nolanverse "complete." Most of it seems, to me, to be fen with a girl-on for Dick Grayson/Tim Drake/Jason Todd.
Catwoman = Eliza Dusku...
Eliza Dushku always seems really youthful to me, as opposed to Christian Bale being very much an adult, so I think pairing them together would make him come off as a creepy old man. Now Angelina Jolie, on the other hand... she is way obvious in that "Crispin Glover as the Joker" sort of way, but so long as she puts on some weight so she doesn't have those creepy mummy limbs, Catwoman could be the role she was born to play (depending on Nolan's interpretation of Selina, of course).
Now, Felicia Hardy on the other hand... Eliza Dushku, buy white hair dye. NOW.