So who do you think it's going to be? There are a few things we know about the next film that assist speculations.
First of all, two villains have been eliminated from the running straight out. The Riddler was eliminated by Nolan in October and Mr. Freeze was eliminated as a choice over the summer.
Nolan has also said that he prefers to stay away from the more supernatural villains or the ones he thinks "don't work on screen in a realistic fashion." When discussing that last bit, he referred specifically to the Penguin and, in another interview, to Poison Ivy.
He's also said that the Joker won't be coming back (for obvious reasons) and has shown reluctance to reuse the Scarecrow, Ras Al Ghul, or revive Harvey Dent. Along with that, he's given indication that the Joker plot line is concluded, meaning that Harley Quinn is probably not going to happen.
So that's three villains who we know it won't be:
The Joker
Mr. Freeze
The Riddler
And several villains who are unlikely:
Harley Quinn
The Penguin
Poison Ivy
Scarecrow
Two Face
Ras Al Ghul
Ras Al Ghul's daughter
Along with that, we can assume from his distaste of supernatural or gimmicky or unrealistic villains that we won't be seeing the likes of Croc, Clayface, Bane, Man Bat, Maxie Zeus, the Ventriliquest, etc.
Finally, Nolan has stated that this film will be the FINAL film in his Batman series and that he plans to end it in such a way that no one else can take over the series. This leads one to believe that either Batman will die by the end of the movie or quit being the Batman, either out of necessity or because there is no more need for the Bat.
It could, on a lesser scale, simply resolve all the issues surrounding his history as the Batman and his hesitation to continue the role, but personally I don't think Nolan can effectively stop sequels if he takes anything less than a strong definite stance on the ending and why it has to be the ending. Thus, Batman dead or retired. That's my speculation.
The four villains that seem to be high in the running, to me, are as follows.
Hugo Strange
Hugo Strange is an insane psychologist who, in the Batman comics, learns of Batman's identity. He's also hinted to be behind many of Batman's villains, such as being hinted to be the creator of the Scarecrow's fear gas.
Both of these attributes would be attractive to a Nolan film. First of all, he loves masterminds. That's clear from his use of Raz Al Ghul and the Joker in the first two films as super geniuses and is even clear from films such as Inception and Memento, where some character is masterminding a series of events. His films always seem to come back to the plotting of a central character.
As for knowing Batman's identity, we do know that the third film is a direct sequel to the second, which means that Batman is being chased by the police and discovering his identity could well be a major theme. It would be deliciously in keeping with the comics if the man to discover such a thing on screen was the same one who has discovered it on paper.
Hugo Strange is one of Batman's earliest villains and has yet to make a screen debut. He would create a large impact with many fans and has a long history behind him to draw upon in crafting him into a deep character. His motivations are also less gimmicky than many batman villains and are, indeed, difficult to pin down.
Deadshot
The second most likely villain, or even a dual-villain in the film, would be Deadshot... in my opinion.
The appeal of Deadshot is that he's simple. He's an assassin. A damn good assassin, but not much time needs to be spent developing his motivations (which is always attractive in a film that already has so many complex themes to unravel).
Also, the theme of the next film is Batman being hunted. I can't think of a more appropriate villain to achieve this theme than Deadshot.
Hush
Hush is perhaps the most compelling Batman villain ever created. He is, even more than the Joker, the anti-thesis to Batman. He is a Dark Devil, rather than a Dark Knight, who has a personal vendetta against the Batman and hunts him ferociously.
However, I think he is a less likely candidate than Deadshot simply because he has SO MUCH motivation and history with the Batman. To develop that history properly in a single film I think would keep Nolan from exploring much else besides his relationship with Batman. Plus, a similar thing has already occurred with Harvey Dent.
Catwoman
She has to be mentioned because she is such an integral part of the Batman universe. However, like Robin, I think Catwoman comes with too much baggage and too many gimmicks for Nolan to find her as a useful character for his series. Plus, what would he do with her? The Catwoman has never had strong motivations and somehow I just don't see a diamond thief as adding much to the plot of a third Batman film.
| Most recent blog posts from Jonathan Stark... | |
| Feedback | |
 |
joseph_valencia - November 19, 2010 (07:36 AM) Nolan never said that no one would be able to pick up where he left off. He said something more along the lines of "this is the end of the story started in Batman Begins." So, I wouldn't count on Batman dying or quitting or anything. |
 |
EmP - November 19, 2010 (09:33 AM) I'd like to see the Red Hood plot brought in, but it's way too complex. Bane done well would be a good film concept, but Hush would have to be limited to the point of being a parody of himself to fit into a 90min or so movie. Hush: We were never friends! Wayne: Do I know you? Hush: LETS PLAY CHESS IN AN ANGSTY WAY!! I WIN!! THINK LIKE MEEEEEE! Wayne: ??? |
 |
zippdementia - November 19, 2010 (11:21 AM) Exactly my point about Hush. Joe, yeah, you're right. He's never come out and said that the film will be the end of the franchise, but he's often in the past said how much he dislikes franchises and never wanted to be a part of one without complete control. So I believe that he may set up a situation where it would be ridiculous to continue the series without him. Speculation, of course. |
 |
Suskie - November 19, 2010 (12:51 PM) Now that the Riddler's been ruled out, I think we can rule out Hush as well. Your big omission, though, Zipp? Black Mask. Everything about him is right up Nolan's alley. You also forgot to mention that Tom Hardy has been cast in a major role, most likely a villain, and I can easily see him playing the part. Still, I'd say Hugo Strange is the best bet. EmP: Which rendition of Red Hood are you referring to? I know he has multiple backstories, but the only one I'm familiar with is the one where he's the Joker, before he turns into the Joker. Edit: Wait, never mind, you said Todd. Yeah, the only place I've read about Red Hood is The Killing Joke. |
|
zippdementia - November 19, 2010 (01:28 PM) I thought about the Black Mask, but I think he's got two major problems. One, his back story is fairly complex, leading to a similar problem as Hush. Secondly, he is portrayed as a fairly supernatural being in the comic, at least physically (what with the whole black skull for a head) and Nolan doesn't traditionally enjoy those kind of characters. Two Face is an argument against this, but I think two face represents something so PRIMAL in the human arena that he is too good to toss out. Plus, it's FAIRLY believable to have a man with severe burn trauma (though I think they messed up bad on his design... have you seen the original makeup? Incredible. They removed it to go for a PG-13 rating). I don't actually think the Black Mask is that good a character for a film. He's doesn't embody any easily identifiable characteristics that make him work for the Superhero genre. He'd be a better character for a WhoDunnit? film, as he's got that complicated history and set of motivations. You couldn't succesfully develop him in a 90-180 minute film and still focus on what needs to be focused on in a Superhero movie... the battle of the Superhero against being misunderstood. |
|
Suskie - November 19, 2010 (02:02 PM) Black Mask isn't supernatural at all. The skull is just a mask (hence, Black Mask) that he carves from the wood of his father's coffin, which to me sounds like something Nolan would like. You're right that he probably couldn't carry a Batman film on his own, but neither of Nolan's last two Batman movies have settled for only one villain, and it's not hard for me to imagine Black Mask acting as Rises' version of Falcone from the first film. |
|
zippdementia - November 19, 2010 (02:30 PM) But wait a minute... that mask is literally BURNED into Black Mask's skull. |
|
EmP - November 19, 2010 (03:03 PM) There's two of them! The one whose mask got weilded on eventually took it off. Then was killed. By Catwoman. In the most undramatic fashion ever. Neither Black Mask is really magical. One got hard on ritualitsic scarring and voodoo that never worked, and the other is power-hungry criminal mastermind with two guns and an odd ability to be a slightly worse hand-to-hand fighter than whoever decides to be Batman that week. Like 75% of all the other villians. |
 |
honestgamer - November 19, 2010 (03:09 PM) I need to go back through and read some Batman comics. I recognize less than half of the villains you're all talking about. What was Nolan's reason for not going with The Riddler, anyway? He seems like he would've been pretty good for a movie. Maybe he's just been done too often on film? |
|
zippdementia - November 19, 2010 (04:03 PM) Unfortunately, Nolan didn't say why. I suspect it's because he is a little gimmicky. I can't see Nolan okaying a script with the lines "Riddle me this." |
 |
zigfried - November 19, 2010 (05:53 PM) Mr Freeze Come on, seriously, no one cares about these other guys (and no one really cared about Raz Al-Ghul either -- talk about token villains). But if Nolan really wants to make waves, he'll Kojima us all and make the next Batman movie about Azrael. //Zig |
|
joseph_valencia - November 19, 2010 (08:40 PM) it's not hard for me to imagine Black Mask acting as Rises' version of Falcone from the first film. I think that role will end up going to Rupert Thorne. After getting cut from the 1989 Batman, the guy deserves to make his first cinematic appearance. |
 |
Leroux - November 19, 2010 (08:50 PM) Zig nailed it. I vote for Vin Diesel as Mr. Freeze, although I'd be okay with The Rock or John Malkovich. |
 |
True - November 19, 2010 (09:43 PM) Bane... Without question, simply because someone needs to make it right and Nolan is the only one who can. Um... did I spell Bane right? |
 |
JoeTheDestroyer - November 19, 2010 (11:48 PM) Calendar Man! Kidding, kidding... Even though he's kinda gimmicky, I've always wanted to see Mad Hatter. There are definitely some actors out there who could probably nail Mad Hatter, and I don't mean Johnny Depp. I do agree that either Deadshot or Hugo Strange would be the likeliest candidates. I thought I had heard somewhere that Nolan was shooting for a villain that has yet to have been used. There's also another rumor going around that the Batman movie after this one will be a film adaptation of Batman Year One, and that it would be a new continuum. You know how rumors go, though. |
|
joseph_valencia - November 20, 2010 (09:04 AM) Crazy Quilt! "Batman Begins" was pretty much a contemporary "Batman: Year One." |
|
joseph_valencia - November 20, 2010 (10:06 AM) http://www.batman-on-film.com/THE-DARK-KNIGHT-RISES_rumor_is-hugo-strange-in-TDKR_11-20-10.html Informed speculation says the story may be inspired by/based on "Prey." This is the most credible theory about the villain/plot that I've seen. 1) It takes place in an early-ish timeframe in the Batman mythology, fitting the "formative" theme in this trilogy. 2) It involves a police force being assembled to hunt down Batman, which is a logical continuation of the ending to TDK. 3) It's a grounded "crime drama" kind of story. 4) It sounds nothing like "Batman Begins" and "The Dark Knight." If I were a betting man, I'd put my money behind this theory. |
|
zippdementia - November 20, 2010 (11:26 AM) I'm in total agreement with Joe about how things will pan out. That said, this "anonymous" rumor came to me that "Kacie Thomas and Vera Farmiga have both auditioned for the role of Julie Madison. And as we know Madison, besides being engaged to Bruce Wayne, was a target of the disgruntled B-actor Basil Karlo... who would eventually become the villain Clayface (Detective Comics #40, 1940)" I'm not sure if I buy the audition rumour, though there is some evidence that Julie Madison is a character name in the new film. I still can't see Clayface being the villain. |
 |
darketernal - November 21, 2010 (04:58 AM) The thing is, there are a lot of villains that Nolan could use, hell, he could surprise us all and go with a really minor villain(let's be frank, half of the people who watched Batman Begins never heard of the villain before, since he's not universally famous). As for the villain, I have to wonder why he doesn't want to go with Riddler. Riddler would be awesome for his view of the Batman universe, but again, it's his call to make. Killer Croc "could" work in his universe, being a horribly disfigured character who gets called the way he does and who's crazy strong or something(a MMA fighter, or something.. Zsazs is your typical psychopath killer, he could pull that one as well. Still, both of those are not really strong enough in my opinion to serve as the main antagonists, but could serve as annoyances or henchmen of the real deal. Hugo Strange is interesting, but I swear, that guy died more times in the Batman universe then Jean Grey did in the X-men, he's constantly dead, then he's some kind of a haunting ghost, then he's Batman's impersonator and so on and so on. Who knows, maybe Nolan will go all the way to the start of the Silver age and pull a hilarious villain like the man with ten eyes or Crazy Quilt(Yes, there is a villain with that name apparently). |
|
joseph_valencia - November 21, 2010 (05:15 AM) Zsas was in "Batman Begins" as a very small cameo. |
|
Suskie - November 21, 2010 (11:21 AM) Yes, and he was also Crane's defendant in trial early in the movie. |
|
zippdementia - November 21, 2010 (12:03 PM) Nolan has also said Zzasz won't be coming back :( You have to consider the issue from a writer's standpoint. For Batman Rising to work, for any Superhero movie to work, it has to recreate sympathy with the hero. That's why superhero sequels often fail; because the writer neglects to re-establish the hero on a level that we can understand. X-men is the best example of this failing. The heroes were so powerful and so wrapped up in fighting supervillains that we never really empathized with them. But the Dark Knight definitely recreated that element, by focusing on Bruce Wayne's reluctance to continue fighting, his desire to find love, and his fear that he would become that which he was fighting. These are powerful human fears that draw us in to the character and Two Face and the Joker were perfect catalysts for those fears. Nolan and his brother are not bad writers; they know these rules and will stick to them. I don't know what theme is going to play through Batman Rising (though I would guess redemption will play a strong role) but whatever that theme is, it's got to be supported by a villain that can continually drive Batman to confront it. Furthermore, the motivations for the villain can only be developed as long as they meet this theme. Again, the Dark Knight as example... the character of Harvey Dent reveals his motivations within the first five minutes of meeting him and then proceeds to walk the same path as Batman, but he illustrates what happens when you cross the line. He becomes what Batman is afraid of himself becoming. It's a powerful treatment. This is why Hugo Strange immediately suggests himself as a character for Rising. As a psychologist, he could be placed in a situation where he understands Batman better than Bruce Wayne understands himself. And if there is one thing that Nolan's Wayne is looking for, it is understanding. A villain like Croc or the Penguin would ultimately be just another bad guy for Batman to fight. It's difficult to imagine the characters working with the police to catch Batman or pushing the theme of redemption (or any theme that might correlate to the third film) further along. Worst of all, for Nolan, these are characters that CANNOT be separated from their physical gimmicks. Sure, they COULD make Croc just some heavy weight wrestler who took Croc as his name, but would Batman fans really be satisfied with this? No, because the whole point to Croc is his transformation from a human into an animal. While that could actually work as a theme for the movie, I just can't see Nolan as interested in developing a pseudo-science to explain how this would happen to a man. Similarly, I can't see him using Man-Bat. Of course, he COULD always surprise us and reveal the villain is Bat-Mite. |
|
Suskie - November 21, 2010 (12:44 PM) Can I throw another idea into this pile? Wrath. |
|
darketernal - November 21, 2010 (01:01 PM) No, the reason X-men sucked is because the writers and producers are a bunch of douche bags that rather sucked Snikt Bub's dick then played out a viable story. They killed characters that are like the staple of the X-men mythos by giving them one minute of screen time, the screenplay in itself was awful, and Halle Berry was a tiny dictator who threw a rage tantrum whenever her face was not on the screen. As for the Batman, all viable points, but one thing still remains, and that at it's core it is still a superhero film. There is absolutely no difference between Batman and Superman aside for their morals and their approach to things(and even that was practically identical back in the gold-silver age). People who love Batman seem to forget that Bats is a super hero. That he still comes from the age of wearing tights, using Bat shark reppelents and punching galaxy threats in the face. Nolan made it more "realistic", sure, and he's a master director who did a great job. However, even Nolan understood the need for "flair" and dramatics, giving crazy ninja fights in the first Batman and Joker as a whole in the second one which made for some great action scenes. Hugo Strange is an interesting villain, no doubt, but I can see him more on the level of Scarecrow in the first one, as a "mind", that would torture Batman. You still need a bruiser or someone that will make the movie flashy, and by default more approachable by the greater public, thus creating more revenue. Bane could be a pretty damn intimidating one. I could see him and Strange as a great duo. By the way, I don't like when a villain shares the spotlight with someone else, which was basically the main thing I disliked about TDK because Harvey Dent was Two Face for ten minutes, and that was pulled really, really badly since Two Face is an awesome villain, but certainly not one for Joker to share the spotlight with, but in this scenario, it could work. Hell, Bane could be a good guy(which I think in comics currently, he is) who's brainwashed or something by Strange to do the crap he does. |
|
EmP - November 21, 2010 (01:14 PM) Bane's been a good guy for a while. I believe he's also currently dead. But when has that ever stopped anyone in comicworld? |
|
Suskie - November 21, 2010 (02:14 PM) X2 was a good movie. The others, not so much. Edit: Also, I liked Two-Face's incorporation into TDK, but yeah, that does introduce the problem of using up the two best Batman villains in a single movie. Rises has a lot to live up to. |
|
zippdementia - November 21, 2010 (02:31 PM) X-2 worked because it focused on the relationships between the characters so we actually had a chance to connect with them. Still not a great film in my opinion. I would love to see Bane brought in, especially as he was royally f-ed over in "Batman and Robin." I still think the villain pairing that makes the most sense is Strange and Deadshot, though. |
|
zigfried - November 21, 2010 (02:52 PM) X-2 was only good because Peter Wingfield was in it. //Zig |
|
zippdementia - November 21, 2010 (06:35 PM) Yeah, good example. It also works for Cowboy Bebop and Firefly. The best episodes, according to popular opinion and ratings, were those that dealt with the character's back stories. On a larger scale, I also think this contributed greatly to the success of Lost. You can argue about whether or not the show was good, but those flashbacks were incredibly effective at maintaining character empathy. |
|
Suskie - November 21, 2010 (06:45 PM) Whoa. I saw "Firefly" and thought you were talking about the Batman villain. Like you were suggesting him for the next movie. *shudder* ... ... ... Actually... |
|
© 1998-2024 HonestGamers
None of the material contained within this site may be reproduced in any conceivable fashion without permission from the author(s) of said material. This site is not sponsored or endorsed by Nintendo, Sega, Sony, Microsoft, or any other such party. Opinions expressed on this site do not necessarily represent the opinion of site staff or sponsors. |