Pajiba

Your friends sound like beyotches, Joanna. Ladylips, heee heeee!

Now I know WB is a little better in terms of creative liberties, and considering The Dark Knight made about a billion dollars at the box office they might let Nolan do whatever he wants for the next movie, but there's gonna have to be some kind of comic booky-type villain for the next one, isn't there?

Just looking at the facts, its a financial loss in terms of any merchandising or appeal if they don't have something at least in the same wheelhouse of the Joker in terms of a bad guy -- he was the number one reason why that movie was so big, no question. So even though they could never come remotely close to the hype surrounding the Joker as the villain -- be it cause of Ledger's death or performance -- those studio execs aren't going to deny that chance at potentially recreating that kind of income again (I mean we always hear about the toy sales).

From that financial viewpoint, there's no way they can simply skip over a super-type villain (especially with the characters Batman has, I mean everyone knows a handful of them) for a barely-known detective character, right?

Don't get me wrong, I want whatever makes the story strongest, but money's always the endgame here, and I'm pretty sure the studio probably had a chat with Nolan about who the villain was going to be even before he started fleshing out the script.

(and yes I will nerd-out when it comes to the Batman movies, thank you very much)

but there's gonna have to be some kind of comic booky-type villain for the next one, isn't there?

Respectfully disagree.

Consider the lack of success WB has had with superhero movies outside of the Nolanverse. You've got the panned Superman Returns, whose cost went further than simple gross when you consider they were attempting to restart the franchise, Jonah Hex, Catwoman and Watchmen.

In allowing Nolan the freedom to craft the first two movies, coupled with the impact of the Ledger tragedy, any attempt to influence the script or the story arc will be met with total disdain from the team that created the first two movies.

Neeeeext, you have to remember that the first movie featured Ra's Al Ghul and Scarecrow. It did pretty well. And you can't ignore that the second movie would not have been anywhere near as successful if the first one wasn't good.

This isn't schlock like Green Lantern or the Fantastic Four. If you're clamoring for some kind of "super-type villain", you've missed a large part of what's been created here. Cort is also just one piece of the bigger puzzle, which in the comics is orchestrated by Hugo Strange. What the not-so-goodly doctor represents is someone who's able to go to up against Batman on an equal plane of intelligence, while attempting to use both Cort and the cops as the physical might to back his play.

Money is the endgame, but without Nolan, there's no Bale, there's no movie, and there certainly isn't any money. But don't start throwing up your arms just yet, this is a long and secretive process.

We've had some female casting rumors without anything concrete as to whom they may be playing. If this is going to come full circle in as epic a storyline as Nolan feels capable, I wouldn't be surprised if Talia and the League of Shadows makes the big play here.

Oh! And I do agree that Talia and the League should make some kind of appearance...

@D-Day, I'm certainly not clamoring for a super-type villain, simply just trying to think in terms of the whole studio/money side of this thing -- I in fact would love if the movie was closer to your idea, more of a Batman vs. Gotham City situation, especially if they continue directly with him as a fugitive after taking the blame for the murders at the end of The Dark Knight. It would continue with the more philosophical direction these movies have been following, possibly expanding on the whole "what line will you cross to ensure safety" debate that was raised with the sonar doohickey in the last film, something that I loved.

But unlike Superman and Green Lantern, the Batman movies' main draw isn't the hero -- it always seem to be the villains. (and yes, not with Batman Begins, but I think there was enough excitement that a new Batman movie was coming out that is wasn't needed.) I mean Hell, what has practically every post about the movie on this site itself been about since the last one was released? Who the next villain will be. That's what everyone is always talking about. I absolutely agree that that shouldn't be the case, but that seems to be the way of the world, and for the studio to miss recognizing, let alone capitalizing on that? I don't think its gonna happen. Just imagine that they were able to keep the villain a secret until the first trailer came out, and the villain is Hugo Strange? I would love it, you would love it, but the majority of the world would be scratching their heads, and that might not necessarily translate into money signs.

I truly hope that the studio is going to let Nolan do whatever he wants, and, like you alluded to, they may simply trust the man given the massive success he's had on such a big property already, but I won't believe it till I see it. But hey, maybe we'll get a Catwoman as the villain and it'll still be great -- there's always that possibility, and nothing's been shown yet that that shouldn't be the case.

/lookingagifthorseinthemouth

catwoman?

Are you sure they're not just projecting lesbians?

Just to be clear, the action figure argument is weak because it's the sort of argument a studio suit would make. Neither aidan nor I were advocating that route, but I can see his point.

We shouldn't forget about the Black Mask, either. There's a vacuum in organized crime after TDK, as well. And with the police all-but forced to focus on Batman, someone's gotta fill it. Personally, I'd like to see Nolan's take on Penguin filling that role. Hardy as Penguin? Now that's casting against type. Hwauck hwauck hwauck!

RED. HOOD. RED. HOOD.