|
Post by SRA on Dec 30, 2005 8:37:35 GMT -5
I was watching Batman Begins {amazing film} and realised that the way it was written was perfect as were the characters - however i remember reading that the plan for these films was realism so what villains can and cant be in them??
I was thinking that - Joker Two Face Penguin Harley Scarface Catwoman Riddler etc can be but can any of these ones appear ?? -
Poison Ivy? Mr Freeze? Bane?
However i then have realised that {like the scarecrow} the origins can be changed - Poison ivy actually not poisoness etc!
What do you think? SRA
|
|
|
Post by Batman Prevails on Dec 30, 2005 10:04:34 GMT -5
Poison Ivy not poisonous? Why's that? Was the Scarecrow not scary? I think all of the villains can appear, I just hope that they screw too much with the villains for the sake of realism. At least the Joker, Penguin, Two Face, Riddler and Catwoman need to maintain their distincive appearences and origins. These characters are too iconic. Changing their looks making Batman ditch his cape so that he can run faster.
|
|
|
Post by Batlaw on Dec 30, 2005 11:24:59 GMT -5
The lack of "fitting" characters/villains for the sequal has been an issue for me as well. I dig Begins and it's "realistic" approach, but wouldve prefered a tad more "fantasy" be included... they may have unfortunately painted themselves into a corner by limiting the franchise so much. To me, its a fine line to toe regarding what is too "real" and what could easily be too "outrageous" Etc. Ive never cared for batman fighting aliens or out and out "monsters", and some of his rogues are a bit over the top, but if done right, could be spectacular on film!? I dont see this new franchise's direction / tone / set up Etc. as being honestly accepting of any characters or villains that are too far removed from humanity or *our reality. Sadly I fear we will never get the chance to see a truly awesome Special FX slugfest between Batman and the likes of Clayface, Bane or Killer Croc!? Even Mr. Freeze may never be realised or fit into the film's sensibilities? Nothing is certain of course, but my point and concern is that for anything as described above to happen, sacrifices would have to be made, and those sacrifices would fracture the integrity of whats been created.
At this point, I'm even concerned about how well the Joker will "fit"? But I dont see why Poisen Ivy couldnt? The only Nec. exclusion from her character would have to be the unatural/un realistic mutant plants, vines and control over them Etc.? 2Face, Penguin, Riddler, Catwoman could all be manipulated enough to work w/o losing too much in translation I think? But the sad thing is, I'm not much of a Riddler or Penguin fan and (for better or worse)they've been done before.
|
|
|
Post by All Star Batman on Dec 30, 2005 13:27:18 GMT -5
I don't see why any villain can't appear in the sequels just because they aren't realistic. Aren't we forgetting about Ra's Al Ghul and the Lazarus Pit? And we do need them to redo Freeze, Ivy, and Bane because of Schumacher's horendous versions of them. And I'd love to see the onscreen versions of Man-Bat and Killer Croc. Let's give the villains at least a chance to appear in the movies. Realism or not.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Nightwing on Dec 30, 2005 14:50:58 GMT -5
I don't think Killer Croc is all that unrealistic, if you go back to the pre-tail days. Maybe have it so that it is not so much a crocodile genetic thing, but just a disorder that turns his skin extremely hard and changes its color. I think that it could be done really well. I don't think that we will see Manbat or Clayface. I don't really want Clayface on the big screen though. The way I see it, we've had two very, very good interpretations of him in animation. Why spoil that?
|
|
|
Post by J-Man on Dec 30, 2005 14:58:34 GMT -5
[shadow=purple,left,300]I doubt we'll see the likes of Clayface or Man-Bat. Killer Croc might make for a good cameo. Mr. Freeze is possible, but who knows? It ultimately depends what works for the screenwriters, director(s) and producers, and the new storyline Christopher Nolan and David Goyer have established.
Realistically, and most certainly, they'll probably want to keep away from that same over-the-top silliness of the Schumacher/ Burton films.[/shadow]
|
|
|
Post by the_killing_joke on Dec 30, 2005 20:50:31 GMT -5
I can see Two-Face,The Riddler, The Joker and even the Penguin being made into realistic characters. I can also imagine that Harley Quinn, Catwoman, Black Mask and The Mad Hatter the same way. They are the characters that do not worry me too much. If they appear, I have faith in the film-makers to capture the essence of the comic characters whilst maintaining a plausible realism. Killer Croc could work if they remember he is a primarily a man and not go to extremes with his mutation. I like the idea of his skin being hardened and scaly and discoloured making him look greenish yellow. His teeth could be splintered and his nose misshapen through years of fighting. It could all add up to give a plausible account for his Killer Croc identity and not look too over the top. The horrifying nature of the character could be brought out in the acting not excessive unrealistic make-up. Killer Croc could have that whole tragic-villain thing going for him too. I think it would work great. (Get Ron Perlman to play him - I think I spelt that right??) Poison Ivy could work too. Surely they could wheel on some nano technology explanation for the controllable plant life? Why could she not have some pseudo-medical explanation of her toxic condition that makes her a deadly contagion to any that come into close contact with her?? It is unrealistic I know but if done right could one's disbelief not be suspended? Sadly for Ivy, Schumacher really did taint people's feelings for the character or at least those of the casual viewing public. Sadly for Mr Freeze, I am convinced that the effect of the aforementioned Mr. Schumacher has really buried any chance this character will be used again in a film and the same could sadly be said for Bane. (Who could they find that big and that good an actor to play him anyway?) As for Man-Bat and Clayface, why not? A well told take on Dr Jekyll and Mr Hyde and a villain that can shape shift are not terrible ideas for Batman movies as long as they are treated with respect and care for the source material. I love all of the films to be honest I am sure that I will like the future ones too. These are only my personal feelings on the subject so no offense meant to anyone who strongly disagrees!
|
|
|
Post by Dark Nightwing on Dec 30, 2005 21:52:39 GMT -5
How about we see Firefly? He could be worked in rather well. I wonder where he would get the jetpack. He is realistic enough that he could be pulled off easily.
|
|
|
Post by BatmAngelus on Dec 31, 2005 0:23:11 GMT -5
This isn't directed at anyone, but I've always wanted to rant about the ridiculously strict definition of realism in the Batman films, so here we go:
Realism shouldn't restrict this series from bringing in certain characters or visually maiming them. So far, Nolan and Goyer have down pretty well (although there is a rumor that Nolan didn't want Scarecrow in a burlap mask but Goyer persuaded him). There definitely needs to be an element of fantasy in a world of realism (Yes to microwave emitters and underground cities. No to Batman and Robin fighting off space monsters and going back in time to meet famous people). Batman Begins definitely had a fine mix of this.
But I think some fans (not here!) have taken the realism idea too far. I've heard an idea for putting Catwoman in just a catburglar outfit, but without a catmask, a whip, or claws. So much for CATwoman, huh? I've heard an idea for getting rid of Joker Venom and instead having Joker carve smiles into people's faces. Sorry, I don't want to see The Carver from Nip/Tuck appear in the Begins sequel. I've read opposition toward certain comic book elements, such as the Batwing, as well as important comic book characters, such as Robin and even Superman, simply based on the matter of realism. These would be huge relationships and character development opportunities from the comic books...going straight down the drain. I can understand opposition to Batman teaming up with Superman, but Robin? Heck, even Catwoman?
Instead of thinking, "How cool would ____ be on film?", they've been thinking "What can we take away from ______ so that he/she can be done in the real world?"
I'd honestly rather see something like Tim Burton's Penguin than those ideas above because it had the guts to add something interesting to the character and didn't make him boring. It gave him a tragic yet creepy past, a psychological connection to Batman, a slight sympathetic implication that he could become a good person if he wanted to, and ultimately changed his M.O. from a thief to a homicidal monster who wanted to mercilessly kill children. This, to me, shows creative, albeit controversial, vision.
A serial killer Joker who doesn't use his trademark Joker Venom, but instead carves smiles into their faces? Who needs that? It adds an unnecessary gruesome R-rated quality to an already violent character. It turns Joker from a three-dimensional unique supervillain to a cliched slasher film character. It's ultimately unfaithful to the comics, so much so that I fail to understand why so many fans, who have supported comic book faithfulness, can support it . This, to me, is anti-vision, if such a word exists. It takes away much more from the character and adds very little.
IMO, any villain can be done in the sequel as long as the protrayal is altered enough to fit into the story's context, yet is still respectfully faithful to the comics. If Chris Nolan and David Goyer come up with a dark and deep version of Egghead and have Ben Kingsley signed up to play him, bring it on! These guys have already taken unpopular ideas (i.e. Joe Chill killing Bruce Wayne's parents, multiple villains teaming up) and executed them extremely well in a popular movie. Scarecrow and Ra's, while different from their comic book counterparts, were still true to the core of their characters. And it worked. I expect the same treatment for the villains in the sequels.
|
|
|
Post by Dark Nightwing on Dec 31, 2005 0:30:35 GMT -5
Bring on dark Egghead! P.S. Good choice .
|
|
|
Post by jasontodd2 on Dec 31, 2005 0:30:39 GMT -5
And I'd love to see the onscreen versions of Man-Bat and Killer Croc. Let's give the villains at least a chance to appear in the movies. Realism or not. Those are two villians I would LOVE to see onscreen, I would put the two of them in a Horror/Sci Fi X-Files type of Batman theme to the movie, and even though it is a stretch have an appearence from Swamp Thing.
But to keep with the "real" theme you could have Killer Croc as he was back in the early days as a side show freak wrestler with a skin disease, and Man Bat could be a phsyco with a Vampire fetish, but going that way might not be what we all want to see, but it would be more realistic this way
|
|
|
Post by Dark Nightwing on Dec 31, 2005 0:44:50 GMT -5
I am a little leary of having Manbat . If they can do it well, then great! There is a lot of places where they can go wrong with him.
|
|
|
Post by J-Man on Dec 31, 2005 12:29:46 GMT -5
[shadow=purple,left,300]I don't think Man-Bat's a character whose fit for the big screen. It would be cool to see, but no way would he be able to carry a movie on his own.
As for what BatmAngelus said, I absolutely agree. There's a line that can be crossed with keeping things 'real' in the Batman universe. When talking about Catwoman, for instance, and certain people wanting to take away her cat-like costume and accessories, I think this is important to understand: How realistic can Batman's universe be when the central character is dressed up in a kevlar bat-suit, drives a giant tank through a major city, and swings from building to building using a device referred to as a 'bat grapple'?
I don't mind the 'realistic' approach to the series as long as it doesn't go too far. I don't think it will, because David Goyer and Chris Nolan are both familiar with the character and his surroundings. Most of the characters are real enough that they'd appeal to Nolan's universe without any changes (like Catwoman, Joker, Two-Face, etc).[/shadow]
|
|
|
Post by Batman Prevails on Jan 3, 2006 5:34:01 GMT -5
Personally I love Clayface but I really don't want him in a live action movie, simply because I can't CGI's extravaganzas. Star Wars, Hulk or Spider-Man 2 were too painful to watch. I'm really glad that Nolan is not a huge fan of CGIs.
|
|
|
Post by SRA on Jan 3, 2006 12:55:48 GMT -5
Hey all - what i ment to intend was that Begins had alot of verisimilitude which worked extremly well, however my favourite villain{ess] is Poison Ivy but i always prefered her BTAS performance over anything else so what i ment by not poisoness is that she is immune to poisons -
Well you cant really make Batman or any other superhero's realistic to a degree as they are indeed fiction however as we all know that if it does become too comic it may go like the previous bat flicks/shows!
However i do remember something on the web that this series was going for the realistic approach and take the whole comic book thing away - also some thing with the joker not looking as white etc. was an issue as probally are the other villains!!
But dont get me wrong i do love that film, but i do like the others as well!!
SRA
|
|
|
Post by the_killing_joke on Jan 7, 2006 13:13:46 GMT -5
How about we see Firefly? He could be worked in rather well. I wonder where he would get the jetpack. He is realistic enough that he could be pulled off easily. I recently saw the Firefly figure from "The Batman" and thought that Seth Green would make a cool Firefly. I am not sure if he could be a main villain but certainly a great henchman/arsonist/enforcer type.
|
|
|
Post by J-Man on Jan 8, 2006 21:04:36 GMT -5
[shadow=purple,left,300]Please continue all discusion HERE[/shadow]
|
|