Anne Hathaway Cast As Selina Kyle, Tom Hardy Cast As Bane In TDKR

Apologist Puncher wrote:This statement kind of perplexes me:

"You look at Heath’s performance as the Joker, there was a lot of madness there but there was also a grace and he had a code there. There’s a lot of belief and codes of behavior in Gotham and my character has one, too."

Did she even see 'The Dark Knight'? Wasn't the whole POINT of the Joker that he had NO "code"? No "rules"?

Yeah, because Ledger's Joker was, in his own words, an anarchist, whether said literally or figuratively. As a matter of fact, his entire take on the Joker was anarchy. Like he told Harvey Dent, he's a 'dog chasing cars'. He might have even been dead in his game with the gun if Two-Face's toss of the coin had landed on the wrong side. But one thing I find interesting from TDK is that when Dent was in the car with the Italian guy before shooting the driver, he stated that the Joker was a 'mad dog' or some such but that he (Dent) wanted to know who let him loose? Remember that? So what is that in reference to? Was he hired by the League of Shadows like the hulking 190-lb. Bane? Is that Nolan's answer for everything?!

non_amos wrote:Yeah, because Ledger's Joker was, in his own words, an anarchist, whether said literally or figuratively. As a matter of fact, his entire take on the Joker was anarchy. Like he told Harvey Dent, he's a 'dog chasing cars'. He might have even been dead in his game with the gun if Two-Face's toss of the coin had landed on the wrong side. But one thing I find interesting from TDK is that when Dent was in the car with the Italian guy before shooting the driver, he stated that the Joker was a 'mad dog' or some such but that he (Dent) wanted to know who let him loose? Remember that? So what is that in reference to? Was he hired by the League of Shadows like the hulking 190-lb. Bane? Is that Nolan's answer for everything?!

It's sort of a no-win situation, isn't it? "I want whoever let him off the leash." If that's supposed to be a reference to someone or something to do with TDK, well, it's never really made clear, now is it? If it's supposed to be a League of Shadows thing... well, it is as you say.

The anarchy thing bugs me. There's a difference between chaos (which is what the Joker seems to represent) and anarchy (which is the word constantly thrown about). Anarchy is basically government cut down as small as friggin possible so as to provide the maximum protection for the rights of the individual. So perhaps on a city block by city block basis, you might have a "government" that looks after the interests of those who inhabit that city block. There IS a society in place there, it's just that the rule of law is on a very very small scale. That's the theory anyway.

Chaos is no government or rule of law whatsoever. People can do whatever the fuck they want as long as they're strong enough to do it.

Yeah, you could argue that anarchy is unworkable and either directly or indirectly leads to chaos but anarchy and chaos are fundamentally different concepts.

Anyway, it just pisses me off when pseudo-intellectuals (of which I must now consider Nolan after the jackoff masterpiece that is TDK) throw the two terms about as if they're interchangeable when they're not.

Speaking of motivations, I thought about mentioning this in one of the other threads but since motivations were brought up..........

We know in real life Heath Ledger died. However, as tragic as that was, the Nolan Bat-films are supposed to be telling an ongoing story. Sooooooo..........since Nolan is fast-forwarding 8 years, where's duh Joker supposed to have been all this time?! And I don't want Nolan to answer like 'totally disregarded in respect to Heath'. No, I hate he died & all but you're telling a story here, no?! So Batman hides like a scared puppy for 8 years while the Joker just fades into oblivion?! I know, I know, Nolan didn't wanna recast & so he abandoned his idea for using the Joker in duh sequel. But still. Just saying, but I'd like to know what his explanation for the Joker's absence will be? For 8 years?! And remember, he didn't kill off the character like Tim Burton did so where's he been? In Arkham Asylum? I could buy that to a point but you'd also think the Joker would bust out in a fraction of that time?

You probably get what I'm trying to say. For the sake of the story, just what happened to the Joker?!

Did Nolan ever confirm that the Joker was supposed to come back? I know fans have speculated on it but I can't remember if he's ever said anything besides "he WON'T come back now that Ledger's passed." Anywho...

I was under the impression from somewhere, probably some link at SHH or some such, but I think the intention was for Ledger to reprise his role in the 3rd film. His untimely demise prevented that. Apparently Nolan was so grief-stricken that he didn't even know if he would even make a 3rd film. I guess he had a story idea with the Joker continued on but when Ledger died, that was it. Some fans offered the idea of recasting but Nolan would obviously hear none of that. Keep in mind some of what I read may have been speculation or hearsay, I don't know. But eventually someone else will have to recast the Joker. But what I'm getting at though is that for the sake of this continuity, what did Nolan do with the Joker? Did Hardly Bane devour him as a 'lite' snack or what? Remember Nolan, you're telling a story here. For the sake of the story, what happened to the Joker for 8 years?

I too recall hearing he had plans for the joker to show up again in the 3rd film. But with ledger death and what have you that plans probably changed. I believe if ledger has lived the film probably wouldnt have this 8 yr gap and probably would have just been 6months-1yr period of time. As for being locked up i dont see why that isnt much of a stretch of things. As for what has happened to the character now. They could always throw out some lines saying batman and joker had a few more runins over the yrs and been in and out of jail.

non_amos wrote:But one thing I find interesting from TDK is that when Dent was in the car with the Italian guy before shooting the driver, he stated that the Joker was a 'mad dog' or some such but that he (Dent) wanted to know who let him loose? Remember that? So what is that in reference to? Was he hired by the League of Shadows like the hulking 190-lb. Bane? Is that Nolan's answer for everything?!

Actually, I took it as they ALL did. Joker asked for half of EVERYTHING they had, and at the end, with the Chinese guy on top of it, he burned his half.

So if they ALL "let him off his leash", would YOU take credit for it if you were Maroni?

Apologist Puncher wrote:

non_amos wrote:But one thing I find interesting from TDK is that when Dent was in the car with the Italian guy before shooting the driver, he stated that the Joker was a 'mad dog' or some such but that he (Dent) wanted to know who let him loose? Remember that? So what is that in reference to? Was he hired by the League of Shadows like the hulking 190-lb. Bane? Is that Nolan's answer for everything?!

Actually, I took it as they ALL did. Joker asked for half of EVERYTHING they had, and at the end, with the Chinese guy on top of it, he burned his half.

So if they ALL "let him off his leash", would YOU take credit for it if you were Maroni?

Not quite sure I agree with that. Here's why. Remember when the Joker first revealed himself to all the mob figures in that kitchen or wherever? They were in there talking to the Chinese dude on the TV who was telling them that he had made their money secure & all of that. Then pseudo-Joker comes in with his attempt at 'humor'. You know, the squeaky giggling sounds he tried to make to pass himself off as the Joker. Anyway, he tries to strike that bargain with them. The black guy threatens Joker with a contract on his life. Anyway, the impression I got was that they were all kind of surprised at his appearance. Later on he kills the black guy. So I guess what I'm saying is, if they let him off the leash, why did it not seem to come off that way? And giving him half of their loot? That doesn't sound like something that they would've agreed to either. Pseudo-Joker burning it was even more asinine!

I guess with the knowledge that Hardly Bane is employed by the League, as well as knowing that Scarecrow worked for them in Begins, well, I guess that's what causes me to wonder that about pseudo-Joker.

Apologist Puncher wrote:Joker asked for half of EVERYTHING they had, and at the end, with the Chinese guy on top of it, he burned his half.

non_amos wrote:Pseudo-Joker burning it was even more asinine!

Not to derail your this thing even more but this is one aspect of the movie I've had problems with for quite a while now. In some of the most of famous Joker stories, he's consistently out for money. A Death In The Family, The Laughing Fish and the first story in Batman #1 all spring to mind. Hell, I'd go so far as money was his primary motive in those stories. And even in The Killing Joke, the Joker wouldn't burn the shit up just to "introduce a little [chaos]."

Anyway...

non_amos wrote:Not quite sure I agree with that. Here's why. Remember when the Joker first revealed himself to all the mob figures in that kitchen or wherever? They were in there talking to the Chinese dude on the TV who was telling them that he had made their money secure & all of that. Then pseudo-Joker comes in with his attempt at 'humor'. You know, the squeaky giggling sounds he tried to make to pass himself off as the Joker. Anyway, he tries to strike that bargain with them. The black guy threatens Joker with a contract on his life. Anyway, the impression I got was that they were all kind of surprised at his appearance. Later on he kills the black guy. So I guess what I'm saying is, if they let him off the leash, why did it not seem to come off that way?

All of this transpired BEFORE Batman helped get 80% of them arrested by bringing the Chinese guy in. Once this happened, they felt they had no choice but to let the Joker loose on him.

Watch it again, and I think you'll see it this time.

And giving him half of their loot? That doesn't sound like something that they would've agreed to either. Pseudo-Joker burning it was even more asinine!

But see, they did. Joker even told the Russian guy it was his half, and he'll do with it what he wanted.

I guess with the knowledge that Hardly Bane is employed by the League, as well as knowing that Scarecrow worked for them in Begins, well, I guess that's what causes me to wonder that about pseudo-Joker.

I don't think Nolan thinks that far ahead.

Or else he would have foreseen that a 5'7 "Bane" was an assinine decision to make.

Moved to the "Bane" thread, where it belongs.....

Apologist Puncher wrote:

All of this transpired BEFORE Batman helped get 80% of them arrested by bringing the Chinese guy in. Once this happened, they felt they had no choice but to let the Joker loose on him.

Watch it again, and I think you'll see it this time.

I may just do that in the coming months. I have this tendency to watch previous films in a film series leading up to the latest sequel. I watched Begins again right before TDK to get 'up to speed' & I also watched the 1989 film the night before! Why did I do that? So that I could have Jack's interpretation fresh in my mind in order to better compare it to Heath's. Now that I finally have a Blu-Ray player, maybe I can get those films on Blu-Ray & do the same deal. If not, then just what I already have. I did get a good deal on the 20th anniversary edition of the 1989 film on Blu-Ray though. Best Buy had it for $10.99, 20 bucks off! But I will have to watch TDK again more carefully.

non_amos wrote:But I will have to watch TDK again more carefully.

That's a good way to lose a few brain cells, my friend.

Some batman/bane/catwoman toys pictures:
http://idlehands1.blogspot.com/2012/01/toy-fair-2012-dc-direct-rises.html

Nice to know she's going to wear a mask rather than those stupid goggles. Who the hell are you trying to be, Bono?

You know, I think Anne Hathaway is a knock-out, and wanted her for Lois Lane. Bit ain't no way she has a booty like THIS:

Apologist Puncher wrote:You know, I think Anne Hathaway is a knock-out, and wanted her for Lois Lane. Bit ain't no way she has a booty like THIS:[/img]

If there was any actress I could believe it of, it'd be her.

I tell ya man! These action figures are gonna be a total sell-out ain't they? Just like Nolan 'sold-out' the mythos.

No kidding? "Which bland, darkly-colored, leather clad, generic hunk of plastic do YOU want, kids?!?!"

It's funny, even among the core Batman fans I know (of whom a considerable number are avowed Nolan-lovers), NOT ONE is unequivocally sold on TDKRises. Generally, their remarks are variations of "it looks cool BUT...", followed by a legitimate grievance that any of us would likely agree with. And this is the group that defends BB and TDK on all fronts at all times without exception before they'd seen a frame of either! If ANYBODY should be enthused about this movie, you'd think it'd be them, right? But it's not happening.

I'm not saying the movie will tank it at the box office. Who can know? I'm just saying the movie's core audience isn't onboard. So who else isn't hip to Nolan's sludge this time out?

And meditate on this one for a while. THE AVENGERS also have action figures coming out in support of its' film but from what I've seen so far, they're bright and colorful and invoke excitement for the film! And consider too that Avengers has the jump on TDKR by what, a full month and a half? Now kiddies, which ones do you want to buy?!

Good luck with that one Nolan.

toys are toys to me, it really counts on what company is making them. So get very close to correct portions of actors and others are not. Then same goes with how posable the toys are too.

You know I don't think it'll be much of a hassle if they had Anne Hathaway wore both the goggles and the cat ears all at once!

Some more tdkr toy pics:
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/debbiedowner/news/?a=54590





Also a prototype batman figure:
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/fansites/JoshWildingNewsAndReviews/news/?a=54585

Hey dude, when you're right, you're right.