The Phillip Seymour Hoffman rumor is pretty old -- he was rumored to be cast as the Penguin in a cameo role for this movie until the "second villain" part went to Aaron Eckhart for Harvey Dent/Two-Face.Originally Posted by NJReds
The rumor had Hoffman playing the Penguin as a British arms dealer who sets up shop in Gotham. Eventually, Nolan torpedoed the idea, saying that he couldn't get the character right.
Cincinnati Reds: Farm System Champions 2022
Fantastic film. I won't go as far as to say best ever, but certainly the best Batman film and, IMO, the best comic book movie. I really enjoyed it and plan to see it again (when the crowds thin out just a bit!).
Agree. And awesome on IMAX. Wow!
Nearly sensory overload.
Depp would be awesome as the Riddler.
Grape works as a soda. Sort of as a gum. I wonder why it doesn't work as a pie. Grape pie? There's no grape pie. - Larry David
I agree with that article that a movie overpopulated villains is too cluttered and busy, and makes for a bad movie (i.e. Spiderman 3).
The suggestion of Paul Giamatti in the role of the Penguin was interesting.
There are plenty of amazing dark alleys for this series to go down and I see no reason why it should revisit places it's been before.
Last edited by GAC; 08-02-2008 at 09:51 AM.
"In my day you had musicians who experimented with drugs. Now it's druggies experimenting with music" - Alfred G Clark (circa 1972)
I hope the over inflated success of Dark Knight doesn't go to the producers' heads and have an adverse effect on the amount of creative control Christopher Nolan has over the third film. I'm afraid they'll think with their ideas the film will do "even better!"
We've already seen that Nolan knows how to use multiple villains without resorting to a campy "alliance" plot device. Dark Knight had the mob, Joker and Two face, and they all had multi-level relationships to each other. For example the mob hated Joker but dealt with him because they were pressured and forced to. In the other Batman movies villains get together because that's what villains do. As long as Nolan has full creative control, and I'm assuming he won't return unless he does, the third movie should be handled very well. Spiderman 3 was bad because it's director fell in love with the fancy fun of the movies and things turned out cheesy and flat. Nolan is a much more serious filmmaker.
Which is why I have virtually no worries about the next movie. Nolan is an excellent filmmaker who understands that characters and story drive a film more than logos, explosions and history.
He's nailed every major casting decision thus far and he's produced two incredibly well-written and well-directed films. While X-Men and Spiderman might be responsible for bringing comic book movies back to the forefront, Nolan will be remembered as the director who "took them legit" in terms of using a comic background to create a serious and well-regarded drama.
I have complete faith in Nolan to make an incredible 3rd Batman movie.
Cincinnati Reds: Farm System Champions 2022
I beg to differ. The main character in "The Following" prominently displayed the Batman logo. And Nolan has put together a family team of producer (his wife) and writer (his brother) that will reap the financial rewards of the infantile fascination that so many people have for cold war comic book "heroes". Nolan understands logos and franchises exceptionally well and he's exploiting your (and probably your children eventually) superficial nostalgia to perfection.
If I can add to this great post, not only is Nolan exploiting your children but he is also sleeping with your wife. Yes, it's true. When she tells you she is going to the basement to "check the water heater" she is actually going down there to sleep with Christopher Nolan. Also using his knowledge of logos and franchises he has managed to convince your children that he is their real dad and poses as the father of the house when you are away at work.
Sucker!
Jeepers ..... who do you think Nolan is...the preacher from "Children of the Corn"? Talk about McCarthy type paranoia.
I'm still trying to figure out how a character introduced in 1939 is deemed to be a "cold war comic book hero".
Super hero books did see an up-swing during the time frame of the Cold War, but the catalyst was a McCarthy-like lynching of a then-dominant EC Comics by other industry insiders who used the new "Comics Code Authority" label to lock EC out of its bread-and-butter horror titles. The entire industry basically wanted EC gone and they got their wish by internally cencoring them out of business. And it wasn't hard to do after paranoia mounted against the comic book industry from a couple of well-respected hacks, culminating in Dr. (and I use that term loosely) Frederic Wertham's publication of "Seduction of the Innocent". Washington, always looking for a scapegoat and particularly during that time period, held congressional hearings in 1954 that focused on comic book industry's crime and horror genre- where EC certainly was the gold standard.
That event was public enough to grab a front-page story in the New York Times and the path of the comic book content was changed forever.
While other heroes came before, remainded after, and were borne of the Cold War, the two primary events leading to the popularity of super hero books were the opportunistic strangling of EC and the post-WWII "baby boomer" birth rate spike which produced a ton of young people who were more than willing to grab cheap super hero reads off the local dime store rack.
And the irony in this thread is that the same silliness Betterread is espousing (the exploitation of the minds of America's youth) is one of the primary influences we saw a growth of super hero books in the first place after the huge hole in industry caused by the removal of EC. And it's aimed at a character who is nostalgic to folks who are 80 or 8 years old. That's what "timeless" gets you.
Seems that someone doesn't know their history.
"The problem with strikeouts isn't that they hurt your team, it's that they hurt your feelings..." --Rob Neyer
"The single most important thing for a hitter is to get a good pitch to hit. A good hitter can hit a pitch that’s over the plate three times better than a great hitter with a ball in a tough spot.”
--Ted Williams
Bad day at work, or are you always this pleasant?
How do we know he's not Mel Torme?
Also, I've been trying to track down a copy of "The Following" and no one seems to carry it.
Yes, that's it. As opposed to working with his family because I don't know.... he's comfortable with them, trust them, enjoy their company, the three of them have set out to scheme the American public for monetary gain over a pre-WWII, Cold War comic book "hero."
And to truly exploit nostalgia, wouldn't it have made more sense to recreate the Burton films or even the campy West series of the 60's?
Also, in regards to exploitation, wouldn't a more mainstream and well-known character to the general public been better used in the first of his franchise as opposed to the Scarecrow?
Well it came in #1 for the 3rd straight week and will pass the $400M mark on Monday or Tuesday making it the fastest to that mark in less than half the time it took Shrek 2 (current record holder) to get there.
Posting Permissions
|
Board Moderators may, at their discretion and judgment, delete and/or edit any messages that violate any of the following guidelines: 1. Explicit references to alleged illegal or unlawful acts. 2. Graphic sexual descriptions. 3. Racial or ethnic slurs. 4. Use of edgy language (including masked profanity). 5. Direct personal attacks, flames, fights, trolling, baiting, name-calling, general nuisance, excessive player criticism or anything along those lines. 6. Posting spam. 7. Each person may have only one user account. It is fine to be critical here - that's what this board is for. But let's not beat a subject or a player to death, please. |
Reply With Quote