web stats

CSBG Archive

So, Bane and Catwoman in the Next Batman Movie?

Anne Hathaway will play Catwoman and Tom Hardy will play Bane.

I am sure that Christopher Nolan will have his own particular twist on these two characters, and both Hathaway and Hardy are strong actors.

But of all the Batman villains to pick from, choosing Bane seems fairly odd.

I guess Nolan is just going to totally revamp him to the point where he’s barely recognizable. And “Venom” WAS a cool storyline from Legends of the Dark Knight, so I can see that being adapted. Otherwise, I don’t know what the idea would be. I guess you just have to trust that Nolan knows what he’s doing, as it worked with the first two films (although Two-Face and Joker are so much cooler than Bane I don’t know if it is a fair comparison).

Then again, I certainly expect to see the following two comics adapted (not really, but it would amuse me if it happened)…

56 Comments

Bane was actually who I though would be a good villain for the third movie since the beginning. I suspect they’ll do away with the super-junkie aspect of his character entirely, leaving us with a villain who is immensely strong and a master strategist against a Batman who is on the run.

I guess you just have to trust that Nolan knows what he’s doing

Why?

as it worked with the first two films

It did? Well I guess if you define working as making a crapload of money, yeah they worked. If you mean working to mean good filmmaking, they failed in that area.

Bane in a Batman movie is ALWAYS a good sign.

Ugh, I hate Catwoman. I doubt that even Nolan can make me like Catwoman.

Bane, however, seems like an excellent candidate for Nolanification

Sigh. I was hoping they’d complete Batman’s story by introducing a proper teenage Robin to round out the mythos and lighten up Batman’s dark world.

Maybe this will also be the Bane/Azreal story where Azreal takes over for an injured Batman or to counter Bane’s strategy

Totally. It’ll also have Anarky, Bat-Mite and the Composite Superman.

Sigh. I was hoping they’d complete Batman’s story by introducing a proper teenage Robin to round out the mythos and lighten up Batman’s dark world.

Nolan already said he’d never have Robin in a movie. Also, I don’t think Nolan has any interest in lightening up Batman, as he seems to have problems with the inherent silliness and fun of the source material and must overcompensate by sucking all the lightness and joy out of it and ramping up the bleakness. Lightening up the movie would force him to admit he’s doing a comic book movie to himself.

Waaaat? Crazy. But then, Ms. Hathaway must be the only actress in Hollywood right now who isn’t pregnant, so I guess that makes sense.

hope talia al ghul is still in there. That’s a weird combo though – Selina Kyle (romantic interest/cat burglar), Bane (strategist/whup-ass guy), Talia al Ghul (romantic interest/international terrorist/tie-in to first film). At this rate Batman’ll stay single! No “rising” for him!

Nolan already said he’d never have Robin in a movie.

And I can understand why, but I think he’s accidentally set Batman becoming a “father” up as the best plotline. Bruce has lost pretty much everything over the course of the first two films, and building up a family would work. I mean, you don’t have to put the kid in tights, but a Dick Grayson plot would make sense.

Waaaat? Crazy.

And of course, I also thought Heath Ledger was an awful choice for the Joker, so I’ll shut up now.

Hah! You probably thought Katie Holmes would be a terrible choice for a romantic interest too, didn’t you?

Damn; no Hugo Strange. (Unless Bane is going to be Reimagined as a Monster Man, I guess…)

I’m pretty sure the Penny Plunderer and the Gorilla Boss of Gotham City are also in it.

Honestly, I don’t know why people bash Katie Holmes so badly. It wasn’t like the role was Shakespeare or anything, she did a perfectly good job with the role, no better or worse than Gyllenhaal. She looked like she was 12, but other than that, her acting was perfectly fine. I think she was better suited to her role than Bale with his spazzed out Cookie Monster voice.

The problem with Katie Holmes, and why she was fired, had to do with her Tom Cruise media circus. She revealed her Tom Cruise relationship during the time when Dark Knight was being promoted (that was when Tom’s Oprah appearance happened and her Letterman appearance) and the whole media circus that ensued from that stole all the thunder away from the Batman Begins promotion. Nolan and the studio were incredibly mad at her for that and felt the movie would have done better if not for the attention she diverted away from it. Thus she became a liability.

Fanboys, who are always so personally vested in the performance of comic book movies with the mainstream because they feel on some level the failure of a comic book movie is somehow a judgment on them, were quick to pile on Katie Holmes as well and convinced themselves after her firing that she did some horrible, horrible acting job that derailed the whole movie somehow and kept it from being the highest grossing movie ever. It’s so untrue. She did a perfectly competent job.

I actually like Katie Holmes just fine, but I’m all for much-needed venting too.

And of course, I also thought Heath Ledger was an awful choice for the Joker, so I’ll shut up now.

I will give Nolan this much credit, he totally sidestepped the issue of whether or not Ledger was a good choice for the Joker by instead having him play a different but very awesome character that he WAS suited to play, then just calling THAT character the Joker. So he may just do the same with Hathaway or Hardy. Let them play the best type of villain they can play, write that villain as well as you can, then just call them Catwoman and Bane.

I actually like Katie Holmes just fine, but I’m all for much-needed venting too.

Uh, how are we supposed to know that you were suddenly being sincere when all your other comments, including the one after, are sarcastic or jokey?

I’d like to know where this idea came from that for a movie based on DC or Marvel superheroes to work, it has to have at least two villains in it. Movies aren’t that long. If you don’t have the imagination to do a decent story with one supervillain, you may want to consider another line of work.

Makes a lot of sense, I’d say. Wasn’t Bane originally scared of bats in his earliest appearances and that was the reason for his coming to Gotham ie: to beat Batman and to face his fear? Strip him back to that and a) it echoes Bruce in Batman Begins and b) it’s a very easy understand motivation, so that’d work. And let’s be honest, they’ve come up with a version of Bane that Tom Hardy can play. That alone is a very good thing. As for Anne Hathaway playing Selina Kyle – she’s a good actress, the right age and is certainly the correct right physical type. She’ll be good.

Bane also was Talia and Ra’s’ “bodyguard” or Batman replacement for awhile.

I expect that will be the role we will see here. Bane as another disciple of Ra’s comes to Gotham with Talia to crush the Bat.

Selena will be onboard so that Batman does not have to punch a woman lol

Oh, I thought she was wrong for the role (because as you say, she looked 12), but it didn’t particularly bother me. It’s just a long way from bashing, just some gentle teasing because I know there was a big stink about that. But I understand you’re actually responding to a cumulative aggregation of fanboy rage, which is an easy thing to get annoyed with.

For what it’s worth, I actually liked Batman Begins more than Dark Knight, although I know I’m in the minority there, and Katie and Maggie didn’t have much to do with that one way or another.

Bane is a great character whose introduction wasn’t the greatest…I imagine there will be a connection to Scarecrow, who no doubt is responsible for Venom hitting the streets of Gotham.

I’m so pumped for Bane in DKR.

Sorry, I just figured the pun had to be made. I am stoked as long as it’s cool master strategist Bane though, which, let’s be honest it is going to be. This isn’t gonna be a massive steriod idiot Bane, it will be a cunning, hunter Bane. Like he should always be.

Between Bane and Ra’s, this franchise has adapted my two favorite villains. So gracias Senor Nolan.

More on topic, it doesn’t sound like we know if Catwoman will even appear in the movie as such. Hathaway could wind up to be the Billy Dee Williams of the current Batman franchise.

More on topic, it doesn’t sound like we know if Catwoman will even appear in the movie as such. Hathaway could wind up to be the Billy Dee Williams of the current Batman franchise.

It’s possible, but that would seem to be such a waste of fan expectations don’t you think? Especially since this is Nolan’s last Bat movie and he won’t get a chance to follow up on in it later.

I suspect Bane will be used as a sort of Anti-Batman– he’s stronger and smarter! I suppose, in the public eye, he is more interesting and even more recognizable than Killer Moth or The Wrath or whatnot.

I was really hoping for Robin, even though Nolan said he wasn’t going to have him in the films. But I thought since he is considering this his final film that he may have changed his mind. I thought before he said Catwoman was one of the characters that would be difficult to translate, which hinted that she wouldn’t be in it.
I’m hoping Bane is more like an Anti-Batman. I was hoping for Deahtstroke, DeadShot, The Wraith or Hush in that role rather than Bane, but there have been a crapload of “Anti-Batmen” in the comics so it would be nice to see one of them.
I still think not including Robin is a mistake, and hopefully there’s a chance he will be in the film. He’s the balance that Batman needs, and after all the White knight/replacement stuff with Harvey Dent in Dark Knight it seemed natural that he could have found that role in Robin (whichever one it would be Dick Grayson, Tim Drake, ext.)

I actually did think Bane would be quite a good choice for a villain for Nolan. He will of course require some tweaking – venom can easily be shown as some kind of super steroid, possibly even derrived from the same flower that the fear gas from the first film established. Have a pre-venom Bane be offered it in exchange for taking down Batman, and he becomes a character who for the frst time is physically a match for Batman as well as mentally. If you wanted to mirror the original storyline you could even have a Arkham breakout to cameo a ton of other villains.

I know I’m in the minority but I thought Black Mask would be the natural villain for this movie. After creating a massive hole in Gotham’s organized crime structure, a supervillain mob boss seemed like it would work better than a strategist like Bane, and we haven’t seen Mask in any movie yet either. If I wanted a character like Bane my choices would have been David Cain and Lady Shiva, both work better with Nolan’s style and are new additions. They wouldn’t have the wide appeal that Bane does though.

Fanboys, who are always so personally vested in the performance of comic book movies with the mainstream because they feel on some level the failure of a comic book movie is somehow a judgment on them, were quick to pile on Katie Holmes as well and convinced themselves after her firing that she did some horrible, horrible acting job that derailed the whole movie somehow and kept it from being the highest grossing movie ever. It’s so untrue. She did a perfectly competent job.

By the way, this last paragraph above was talking about the fans online who were extra-vitriolic and frothing about Katie Holmes and took it too far. Rereading it I realize it looks like I’m accusing buttler of being that way and I don’t want to give that impression. Even though the post started off as a response to him, I wasn’t referring to him in that last paragraph.

Tom Fitzpatrick

January 19, 2011 at 4:06 pm

As long as Bane is not a repeat performance from Batman and Robin.
That was embarassing to watch.

Let’s all trust in Nolan.
Amen.
;-)

I trust Nolan at this point. His visuals may not be as inventive as Burton’s, but his story-telling choices have been great.

You have to assume that Tom Hardy as Bane will be a radically different character than the guy in the comics. Something about his back-story appealed to Nolan, who probably just developed his own character around it. This is essentially what happened with Ras al Ghul in the first film and it turned out fine.

Catwoman is a trickier proposition. She comes with almost as much cultural baggage as the Joker, but is probably less supple. Non-comics people feel like they know her deal. She steals stuff and flirts with Batman.

I’ll be honest, Anne Hathaway is not someone that I would have chosen. She is very good actress and is certainly attractive enough. She just does not come off as having that Selina Kyle quality.

I thought the completely needless and pointless bastardization of Henri Ducard and Ra’s was the second worst part of Batman Begins, behind the terrible fight cinematography.

On the other hand, I feel that they nailed Scarecrow, the Joker, and Harvey Dent (not so much Two-Face).

Bane could easily ascend to huge mainstream popularity if he is used effectively in this film.

Hopefully, we will get to see the twisted Captain America/Edmond Dantes hybrid that Bane should always be.
Just look at how Chuck Dixon and Gail Simone handle him. He is such a fantastic character, and I really hope this helps to push The Secret Six in to greater sales.

Bane is a character who, like Spawn, Hellboy, and Deadpool has a strong resonance outside of the hardcore comic book audience. Just the idea that he “broke the Bat” makes him a character who is instantly recognizable to even the most casual of super hero fan.

Am I the only comic fan not to give a flying flip about comic-based movies?

Catwoman is a trickier proposition. She comes with almost as much cultural baggage as the Joker, but is probably less supple. Non-comics people feel like they know her deal. She steals stuff and flirts with Batman.

That covers a lot more territory than most people realize….

Cat burglar?

Con woman?

High society, gentlewoman thief?

Lots of approaches, I think….

Only slightly off-topic…how did the redemption of Bane storyline wind up? Last I saw of him before my break from reading comics, he was out in the Himalayas somewhere. Everything done with him in that storyline seemed a smart extension of the character.

So, T., which version of Joker do you think is the definitive one? The one Nolan should have adapted to the big screen instead of creating a ‘different’ character? The ‘Killing Joke’ version of the Joker? Grant Morrison’s Joker? Batman:TAS Joker? Denny O’neil’s Joker? Tim Burton’s Joker? Frank Miller’s Joker?

Because all of these versions are vastly different from one another. I don’t think there is a ‘definitive’ Joker.

It’s all about the Cesar Romero Joker.

So, T., which version of Joker do you think is the definitive one? The one Nolan should have adapted to the big screen instead of creating a ‘different’ character? The ‘Killing Joke’ version of the Joker? Grant Morrison’s Joker? Batman:TAS Joker? Denny O’neil’s Joker? Tim Burton’s Joker? Frank Miller’s Joker?

Because all of these versions are vastly different from one another. I don’t think there is a ‘definitive’ Joker.

For me there is no definitive Joker. But there are a few traits common to every Joker, a bare minimum of traits that are required to call a character Joker.

Kind of like with Batman: he can be campy, dark, psychotic, well-adjusted, or fight aliens, but no matter which version you have at the very minimum he’s got to have bat ears, a cape and know how to fight to be called Batman. For example once a guy is depicted as regularly fighting crime in a pink tuxedo and top hat with big gold chains, it’s pretty safe to say it’s not Batman.

Likewise with the Joker, no matter which Joker you like, none of the ones you listed look like dirty, filthy, lurching stooped over twenty-something homeless long-haired refugees from Ichi the Killer or a snuff film. Like I said, the character Hedger did play was an awesome and creepy one. It just wasn’t the Joker.

God forbid, T, that someone create a new version of a character like the Joker.

You didn’t like Nolan’s Joker…because of his appearance?

In all seriousness though, I understand. You said you think the character is awesome, but he doesn’t match your vision of the Joker. I can respect that, and I’ll stop being so pedantic.

Did you ever see the Batman cartoon that came right after Batman: The Animated Series; the one that was just called “The Batman”? The version of the Joker they used on that show was basically a barefoot wild man with green dreadlocks in the shape of a jester’s cap.

“Dirty, filthy, lurching stooped over twenty-something homeless long-haired refugee from Ichi the Killer or a snuff film” is actually a pretty good description of that guy. Granted, I don’t remember anyone thinking that version of the Joker was really an improvement over the classic depiction of the character, but my point is the Ledger Joker wasn’t a total departure from every previous depiction of the Joker.

Saying the Joker can’t look like a dirty homelss guy is kind of like pointing out that Nick Fury isn’t black (except without people accusing you of being racist) or that the X-Men don’t all wear black leather. Is that the way they’re usually portrayed? No. Is it a way they have been portrated? Yes. Is it possible to portray them that way in a good movie/comic/TV Show? Sure, why not?

I imagine a Bane character being a successful strong arm guerrilla who has succeeded in freeing/controlling his island nation, and deciding he wants to take on bigger fish, and targeting Batman, pretty much the entire fall of Batman storyline could work, no reason to use super villains, but wear out batman with a non-stop crime spree and confront him when he’s at his weakest and “break” him. (do not touch the Azrael bat storyline, because it just highlights the absurdity of Batman’s position on life and death for villains–not promoting actively killing them, but the comic books insistence on trying to save them regardless of what they did, one thing the movie version has right is that Batman should have no problem letting villains die by their own hands)

as to the Katie Holmes issue, she was a lot less annoying than gyllenhall(who was pretty much useless)

I’ll second T’s comments about Ledger and the Joker, It’s what it was, I also think Heath’s performance is massively overrated, but oh well.

You didn’t like Nolan’s Joker…because of his appearance?

Both comics and movies are visual mediums. There’s a reason artists are paid so much and costume designs can make or break a superhero book or movie. Ask Joel Schumacher or the creators of the 90s Avengers cartoon. ;)

Seriously though, it wasn’t just the appearance. He didn’t quite act like the Joker either. I mean he killed people and taunted Batman, but here was my big problem: To me what makes Batman and the Joker dynamic work very well is that Batman is the introverted, crouching, skulking, dark, demonic, sick looking character with the grim expression. And he’s the force for GOOD. The Joker is the gregarious, brightly colored, pastel clown in the dapper suit with the smile and the clean-cut appearance. And he’s as evil and depraved as can be. When you make BOTH of them as dingy, dark, demonic and sick looking as can be, that awesome contrast is lost and it’s just looks like two sick-looking, psychotic, twisted people fighting.

Batman looks like he could be murderous and demonic but he’s the ultimate force for unwavering moral good. And that cognitive dissonance makes him extra cool. Joker looks like he could possibly be a fun clown, but he’s actually murderous and demonic, and that cognitive dissonance makes him extra creepy. But when he looks like a psycho serial killer, as murderous and demonic on the outside as he is on the inside, it’s just unimaginative and trite, and it’s that aspect of it that makes me say he’s not really the Joker. Because in just about any era of the comics from the campiest to the darkest, the Joker does not look as blatantly murderous and filthy in his exterior as his soul is on the interior.

I’d just like to say T has made a number of great points in this thread, but the best is that Bale’s Batman sounds like a spazzed out Cookie Monster. Up until now I found it difficult to describe exactly why I didn’t like his portrayal of Batman, but that pretty much nails it.

Except, T, that Batman wasn’t that way during much of the 50s and 60s, and neither was the Joker, so there was no dichotomy there. Hell, the 60s Adam West series had a fairly bright, goofy Batman against a… wait for it… fairly bright and goofy Joker. There’s no contrast at all.

You could make the same criticism about the Dark Knight Returns that you did about Nolan’s movie. He doesn’t appear like a “fun clown” at all.

These villains are being used to test the physical limits of Bruce. Obviously BEGINS was the birth of Batman, where he battled Ras and Scarecrow on his journey to master skill and fear. Joker tested his mind. Bane and Catwoman are directly correlated to challenging Batman in a purely physical sense.

T, Nolan did a heist movie about invading dreams that he conceptualized when he was in middle school. I don’t think he has very many qualms about adapting a comic book.

Nolan has a very grounded style, that’s evident in his insistence in using real effects in lieu of CGI. He has a sixth sense for creating convincing and realistic worlds. This is why he’s well suited for creating Batman movies. Batman is considered one of the most feasible superheroes and people consider him the most realistic because he lacks powers and takes the maximum advantage of the tools at his disposal.

The whole idea that campy, cheesy or flashy Batman can be just as good as a dark and realistic one has already been debunked by the existence of the exuberant Batman & Robin and Batman Forever. Those movies had cheesy and fun storylines but lacked any depth and quality. They were shitty movies.

And about BB and TDK “failing as a movie” you are very much in the minority.

And the contrast for Batman and Joker has a lot of range.

Batman is known precise, thoughtful and surgical, while Joker instinctively fucks shit up and succumbs to his nature.

i think bane is logical for the story progression – joker and twoface pushed batman to his mental limits in dark knight now bane will push him to the breaking point physically

nolan is literally deconstructing the character to investigate what makes him work

T.
January 19, 2011 at 11:30 am

I guess you just have to trust that Nolan knows what he’s doing

Why?

as it worked with the first two films

It did? Well I guess if you define working as making a crapload of money, yeah they worked. If you mean working to mean good filmmaking, they failed in that area.

T. Are you a fucking idiot? Failed to make good films? Guess that’s why the films are ranked 112th and the 10th best films of all time! Jesus, the right to an opinion should be taken away by fucking morons.

T. Are you a fucking idiot? Failed to make good films? Guess that’s why the films are ranked 112th and the 10th best films of all time! Jesus, the right to an opinion should be taken away by fucking morons.

Dude, I TOTALLY agree! The fact the films are ranked 112th and 10th of all time IS proof that the right to an opinion should be taken away from morons! Glad someone sees my points. Thanks, brother! ;)

Banes a great choice of character for dkr they could end up with bane snapping bat mans back in the very end, and then the city of gothem rising up against the villains of gothem city

as for selina Kyle idk how Chris Nolan will make that work but Anne Hathaway is a good actor and Chris Nolan worked wonders with Heath ledger as the joker so idk……..

[...] So, Bane and Catwoman in the Next Batman Movie? (goodcomics.comicbookresources.com) [...]

Leave a Comment

 

Categories

Review Copies

Comics Should Be Good accepts review copies. Anything sent to us will (for better or for worse) end up reviewed on the blog. See where to send the review copies.

Browse the Archives