• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Tom Hardy joins Batman 3

Status
Not open for further replies.
NYR

NYR

Member
If there is one thing Nolan has proven in the last two Batman movies it's that he does NOT go the supernatural or odd - he keeps things drenched in a relatively normal, real life environment.
 
E

ezekial45

Banned
Ignis Fatuus said:
Bullshit.

Aside from the fact that he was already (poorly) used in the animated tie-ins, he'd be fucking stupid in the Nolanverse.
Click to expand...

He claimed earlier he saw details of the script, or heard some stuff from insiders, about Killer Croc being in it.

It's not completely impossible for Nolan's Batman. Just give him a serious skin disease, body builder, etc. I think it could be done.

If people honestly think can make it into Batman 3, than Killer Croc should be possible too.
 
B

Blader

Member
NYR said:
If there is one thing Nolan has proven in the last two Batman movies it's that he does NOT go the supernatural or odd - he keeps things drenched in a relatively normal, real life environment.
Click to expand...

That doesn't stop from taking something supernatural or odd (like Ra's al Ghul) and making it grounded.
 
I

Ignis Fatuus

Banned
ezekial45 said:
He claimed earlier he saw details of the script, or heard some stuff from insiders, about Killer Croc being in it.

It's not completely impossible for Nolan's Batman. Just give him a serious skin disease, body builder, etc. I think it could be done.

If people honestly think can make it into Batman 3, than Killer Croc should be possible too.
Click to expand...
Well, again, Croc was done already in Gotham Knight.
 
D

Dan

No longer boycotting the Wolfenstein franchise
Mark Millar says something about Batman, makes sure to plug his own project in same tweet. Whether any of this has basis in truth or not, Millar is obnoxious.
 
G

GhostRidah

Member
ezekial45 said:
He claimed earlier he saw details of the script, or heard some stuff from insiders, about Killer Croc being in it.

It's not completely impossible for Nolan's Batman. Just give him a serious skin disease, body builder, etc. I think it could be done.

If people honestly think can make it into Batman 3, than Killer Croc should be possible too.
Click to expand...
Yea I can sort of believe croc being in a Nolan film, sort of how that Mortal Kombat trailer that was released and the way they did Reptile in it.
 
D

Dan

No longer boycotting the Wolfenstein franchise
Second of all, who the fuck is Millar to go around potentially revealing secrets of Batman 3?
 
P

Penguin

Member
Dan said:
Mark Millar says something about Batman, makes sure to plug his own project in same tweet. Whether any of this has basis in truth or not, Millar is obnoxious.
Click to expand...

I was gonna point that out, it seems like a plug for his new comic.

Honestly, the thing will get Retweeted to hell, and people will see Superior 1 is out. That is all. :lol
 
F

Furret

Banned
NYR said:
If there is one thing Nolan has proven in the last two Batman movies it's that he does NOT go the supernatural or odd - he keeps things drenched in a relatively normal, real life environment.
Click to expand...

I love it when people say these sort of things about a film in which a billionaire dresses up as a bat to fight crime.
 
P

Prentice

Neo Member
As-Clarkie-in-Layer-Cake-tom-hardy-10827433-600-298.jpg


Fuck yes.
 
D

Dan

No longer boycotting the Wolfenstein franchise
Furret said:
I love it when people say these sort of things about a film in which a billionaire dresses up as a bat to fight crime.
Click to expand...
I love it when people say these sorts of things...

It's a matter of suspension of disbelief. There's the first step of believing in the premise that a billionaire fights crime dressed as a bat. If you can't suspend disbelief for the premise, nothing that follows matters. It's all ruined anyhow. But if you get people to engage with that premise, there's a lot you can ask of viewers within that framework, but it's by no means unlimited. There's plenty that will break the suspension of disbelief, like say, Clayface or Ra's Al Ghul emerging from a Lazarus Pit. That's asking viewers to believe in a whole different set of rules, and that can be a real tough sell. I think it's the height of stupidity to pretend supernatural/superpowered villains would make a lick of sense in Nolan's Batman universe.
 
F

Furret

Banned
Dan said:
I love it when people say these sorts of things...

It's a matter of suspension of disbelief. There's the first step of believing in the premise that a billionaire fights crime dressed as a bat. If you can't suspend disbelief for the premise, nothing that follows matters. It's all ruined anyhow. But if you get people to engage with that premise, there's a lot you can ask of viewers within that framework, but it's by no means unlimited. There's plenty that will break the suspension of disbelief, like say, Clayface or Ra's Al Ghul emerging from a Lazarus Pit. That's asking viewers to believe in a whole different set of rules, and that can be a real tough sell. I think it's the height of stupidity to pretend supernatural/superpowered villains would make a lick of sense in Nolan's Batman universe.
Click to expand...

I think it's the heigh of stupidity to pretend any of it makes a lick of sense, but why should it? It's a superhero film.

Having to castrate the Batman mythos just to placate joyless twenty-somethings desperate to pretend that any of it is in the least bit plausible is profoundly depressing.
 
P

Pctx

Banned
Just to break up the Neoism train that's rolling in this thread..... :lol ....

This is great news for the film. With Nolan going back to the roots of the origins story and characters needing to have even more presence on the screen, this is a big win for the Batman trilogy and for fans.
 
S

SpeedingUptoStop

will totally Facebook friend you! *giggle* *LOL*
Furret said:
I think it's the heigh of stupidity to pretend any of it makes a lick of sense, but why should it? It's a superhero film.

Having to castrate the Batman mythos just to placate joyless twenty-somethings desperate to pretend that any of it is in the least bit plausible is profoundly depressing.
Click to expand...

A billionaire being of the mind to dress up as a bat to fight crime is a suspension of disbelief in regards to the mental capabilities of the main character. Something that exists only in the character's mind and his traits.

someone jumping into a lazarus pit or molding his face is a suspension of disbelief in the reality the character exists in (which, up til now, is not a reality that goes out of it's way to disobey the rules similar to our own).

There is a difference.
 
.la1n

.la1n

Member
Nolan has handled the characters fairly well so far so I'm willing to give him the benefit on the doubt despite the fact that I do believe you can use a more comic-type villian and still have a fantastic movie (Tim Burton, screw the haters.)

Hardy is great in all he has done so give him something he can really stretch his acting muscle on. We know he can play someone mentally disturbed so the riddler isn't out of the question. He has slimmed down for roles before, he can do it again.
 
D

Discotheque

Banned
.la1n said:
Nolan has handled the characters fairly well so far so I'm willing to give him the benefit on the doubt despite the fact that I do believe you can use a more comic-type villian and still have a fantastic movie (Tim Burton, screw the haters.)
Click to expand...

I also think Tim Burton's films were entertaining, but people really undersell Ledger's joker. He's not just a psychotic, I think he had some funny scenes in TDK. Such as when he's trying to take Batman's mask off after the big chase.

There's also some terribly unintentional humor sprinkled throughout the Nolan films too. A lot of Batman Begins contains this, and it's also kind of evident in TDK when it takes itself a bit too seriously i.e. Batman's Officer McGruff "People are capable of GOOD" speech to the Joker with that horrible voice.
 
Monocle

Monocle

Member
Furret said:
I think it's the heigh of stupidity to pretend any of it makes a lick of sense, but why should it? It's a superhero film.

Having to castrate the Batman mythos just to placate joyless twenty-somethings desperate to pretend that any of it is in the least bit plausible is profoundly depressing.
Click to expand...
You're acting willfully ignorant. Nolan's Batman is self-evidently grounded in reality, slightly heightened though it may be. Every aspect of its design, from the Batmobile, to Batman's suit, to Two Face's and the Joker's injuries, was deliberately made to be as realistic as possible by Nolan & co.

Not a hint of the supernatural has ever appeared in Nolan's universe, and currently there is no reason to expect it will feature in the third film. It's a good thing, too. Once the rules of a fictional world are established, arbitrary foreign elements that contradict those rules cheat the audience by undermining the logical foundation of the story, and by extension, everything that relies on it.
 
R

Raging Spaniard

If they are Dutch, upright and breathing they are more racist than your favorite player
Schattenjagger said:
Should just go in the batman 3 hype thread
Click to expand...

Not really, you should keep up with the forum rules.

New relevant info = new thread.
 
F

Furret

Banned
Monocle said:
You're acting willfully ignorant. Nolan's Batman is self-evidently grounded in reality, slightly heightened though it may be. Every aspect of its design, from the Batmobile, to Batman's suit, to Two Face's and the Joker's injuries, was deliberately made to be as realistic as possible by Nolan & co.

Not a hint of the supernatural has ever appeared in Nolan's universe, and currently there is no reason to expect it will feature in the third film. It's a good thing, too. Once the rules of a fictional world are established, arbitrary foreign elements that contradict those rules cheat the audience by undermining the logical foundation of the story, and by extension, everything that relies on it.
Click to expand...

And that's why I find the Nolan films to be silly, po-faced and often fairly dull.

The characters in the film are psychologically impossible, the ones left out are physically impossible.

It doesn't matter which is which (some are both) they're both... impossible.

Frankly I'd rather have both and have a fully entertaining film

Better that than pander to the sort of unimaginative nerd that thinks a man dressed (badly) as a bat talking the way Bale does to the police is "grounded in reality", but you can't have Catwoman in the film because she wouldn't fit.
 
S

Solo

Member
I said in the Inception thread that one of JGL or Hardy was guaranteed to show up in Batman 3, just given the way Nolan re-uses actors. Having said that, I do believe it was truly "one or the other". Now that Hardy is in, I don't expect JGL to be in.

And LOL at anyone thinking Leo will be in it.
 
S

Solo

Member
Discotheque said:
JGL doesn't belong. And Murphy/Watanabe are sadly out of the equation.
Click to expand...

Watanabe is obviously out of the question, but Murphy? Id be shocked if Scarecrow didn't cameo in it.
 
R

Rindain

Banned
Ellen Page possibly? Nolan needs a new female character for B3. And just about anyone would be better than Katie Holmes or Maggie G.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Tom Hardy and Charlize Theron to unite in Mad Max sequel
37
3K
mitch1971 replied
SONY wins bidding war for ’28 Years Later’ . Boyle directing. Garland writing. Cillian Murphy on as EP - no word on if he'll star yet.
14
1K
Dirk Benedict replied
The Matt Reeves DC Universe Grows: Colin Farrell Penguin Spin-Off Series From The Batman Coming to HBO Max
17
1K
Werewolf Jones replied
Filming Is Underway on 'The Batman'
13
994
Cravis replied
Kids' WB! - The Longest Running Saturday Morning network
8
3K
TaySan replied
Top Bottom