Announcement

**Nostromo** · June 17, 2005, 01:33

We'll never know for sure. But I bet he's happy because he's finally found a woman who's fun in bed. Nicole Kidman? I'm sceptical. Penelope Cruz? She's beautiful, but God does she sound boring. And, yes, he made a fool of himself.

**GePap** · June 17, 2005, 01:34

Anyways...

Gary Oldman was a great choice as Gordon. When I first saw him onscreen, I was surprised they had gotten him, but I think he does an excellent job.

Michael Cain as Alfred was also an inspired choice. And Liam Nielsen was also very good. In all, the acting was either decent (Holmes) or right on the money.

I would love to see thebad guys already used being featured in future Batman movies of this type, but specially two fgace, because I agree that what was done to Two face in Batman Forever was a huge travesty, even if Jim Carrey was a fine Joker. The less said about Ahnold's Freeze, the better.

**Nostromo** · June 17, 2005, 01:36

Originally posted by GePap
Anyways...

Gary Oldman was a great choice as Gordon. When I first saw him onscreen, I was surprised they had gotten him, but I think he does an excellent job.

Michael Cain as Alfred was also an inspired choice. And Liam Nielsen was also very good. In all, the acting was either decent (Holmes) or right on the money.

I would love to see thebad guys already used being featured in future Batman movies of this type, but specially two fgace, because I agree that what was done to Two face in Batman Forever was a huge travesty, even if Jim Carrey was a fine Joker. The less said about Ahnold's Freeze, the better.

Carrey was the riddler. It seems the next villain will be the Joker.

**GePap** · June 17, 2005, 01:38

Woops...I mean Riddler.

But this ia a prequel, so the reason they show the Joker was because he is the main villain in the First Batman.

In the age of CGI, Clayface would be a nice villian to use, or the crock.

**Nostromo** · June 17, 2005, 01:41

I don't know I never read a comic in my life. The Joker was a late addition?

**GePap** · June 17, 2005, 01:43

No, he was there relatively early, hence becoming the signature badguy (thought he was meant as a single edition badguy).

That said, Batman has been around since the 40's, so there is much to work with. If the producers want to continue not using bad guys used before, Clayface and the Croc are both good.

I never in my life have read Batman Comics. MOst of my Batman knowlegde comes from the excellent 90's cartoon.

**Imran Siddiqui** · June 17, 2005, 01:45

I think it'd be lame to reuse supervillians though... even if they messed it up.

The only ones that may be able to be resurrected are those that were the minor supervillian in a previous movie (like Poison Ivy or The Riddler).

**Boris Godunov** · June 17, 2005, 01:46

But AFAIK there's no connection between the previous Batman movies and this one--it's a totally fresh start.

**Imran Siddiqui** · June 17, 2005, 01:48

I think that's pretty lame as well. Apparently they are talking 'sequal' already. Oy... because sequalitius won't go the same way as the original movies?

**MrFun** · June 17, 2005, 01:49

Could that be why it's called Batman BEGINS?

**Nostromo** · June 17, 2005, 01:50

Irc, both Burton and Nolan were inspired by the Frank Miller comics.

**Imran Siddiqui** · June 17, 2005, 01:51

Apparently for the 'sequal', the Joker and Two-Face are supposedly the villians.

And Mark Hamill is in talks to become the Joker (he does the voice for the cartoon).

**GePap** · June 17, 2005, 01:57

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui
I think it'd be lame to reuse supervillians though... even if they messed it up.

The only ones that may be able to be resurrected are those that were the minor supervillian in a previous movie (like Poison Ivy or The Riddler).

The Riddler was the MAIN bad guy of the third film, not minor. It was Two Face that was minor.

Movies three and four were god awful, and people better damn well do good with those characters.

The first two were OK, but Burton (and whomever directed #2) simply did not have the right "darkness" for Batman. Which is why the cartoon was such a better version of the character.

**Imran Siddiqui** · June 17, 2005, 01:59

The Riddler was the MAIN bad guy of the third film, not minor. It was Two Face that was minor.

Ah, you're right! I guess I mixed it up in my mind because it seemed when Riddler and Two-Face got together, Two-Face was in charge. Ok, Two-Face can be used again. Sad that the Riddler is forever ruined.

Burton (and whomever directed #2)

Burton directed both "Batman" and "Batman Returns". The Joker and the Penguin were done well in those movies as well. Then the villian quality dropped off with only Carrey's Riddler being anywhere near decent.

**MrFun** · June 17, 2005, 02:01

Originally posted by Imran Siddiqui

The Riddler was the MAIN bad guy of the third film, not minor. It was Two Face that was minor.

Ah, you're right! I guess I mixed it up in my mind because it seemed when Riddler and Two-Face got together, Two-Face was in charge. Ok, Two-Face can be used again. Sad that the Riddler is forever ruined.

That and the movie was about how the Riddler came into being -- not how Two-Face came into being.

Announcement

Batman begins: post your reviews and comments here (no spoilers)

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment

Comment