The Dark Knight Rises

[The Mask of Norro]

Yeah, IMDB and multiple other sites have confirmed this.

I've mixed feelings. Very, very many mixed feelings. Glad Hathaway is in it, upset that she'd be cast as Catwoman of all people, and then thrilled that we finally get to see Bane's redemption on the big screen considering how horribly he was butchered last time. Maybe Hathaway can redeem Catwoman too, I don't know, but at this point I have to admit that I'm very confused as to where this next movie will wind up going. They had a lot of options and these two being who they went with for villains is rather out of left-field to say the least.

[GoGo Yubari]

Catwoman bores me. She's fine when she's written as like an outright ally, boring when she's written as an adversary, and the former takes a lot of work.

And Bane? Just... god. I'm sure Nolan will make this work but bleh. Casting Tom Hardy is... uh. It definitely assures a take that's closer to the original. I guess. I'm pumped for the "cast actors of the actual race of the character" types getting pissed over this, though.

[zero]

For anyone complaining right now about the seemingly odd choice of Anne Hathaway as Catwoman, I will simply say:

Heath Ledger.

[Horus]

Both the casting of Anne and Tom are alright, since Nolan seems to have a way with bringing out the best in people, so I'd be surprised if this turned out to be a train wreck or anything close to that. As far as Bane and Catwoman go, meh.. lets face it, as for as the 'male villians' go, a character like The Riddler, who had been rumored for this movie for awhile now, would have some HUGE shoes to fill, since depending on whos writing the character, both he and Joker can sometimes be easy to intertwine character motivation wise (just ask Jim Carrey, who clearly watched Jack's take on a Batman villian and tried his best to recreate that), so Bane is a nice change of pace.

[GoGo Yubari]

(just ask Jim Carrey, who clearly watched Jack's take on a Batman villian and tried his best to recreate that)

He was doing a take on Frank Gorshin's '60s take on Riddler, not Jack Nicholson's Joker.

Also I have no problem with Anne Hathaway as Catwoman, I just don't care for Catwoman herself.

[Maxx]

For anyone complaining right now about the seemingly odd choice of Anne Hathaway as Catwoman, I will simply say:

Heath Ledger.

I think he'd be a terrible choice for the role.

[livid]

For anyone complaining right now about the seemingly odd choice of Anne Hathaway as Catwoman, I will simply say:

Heath Ledger.

I think he'd be a terrible choice for the role.

Yeah, he'd be a little stiff.

Anyways, I don't really mind the casting (both Hardy and Hathaway are good) or the choice of villains. I mean, I trust Nolan so whatever he wants to do is cool with me. And let's be honest, Catwoman is one of the universally known villains in the Batman universe and it would've been hard to sell the general public (re: not the internet) on somebody less known.

[TKz]

Interested to see Nolans take on Bane. As for Catwoman... yeah, I just don't really see it. As much as I'd like to see Hathaway don the costume, I get the feeling it'll be less like the Catwoman from comics and probably more of just a nickname of some kind for her as a thief.

[GoGo Yubari]

Catwoman is one of the universally known villains in the Batman universe and it would've been hard to sell the general public (re: not the internet) on somebody less known.

You mean like Ra's al Ghul? (Though I really wasn't a big fan of the Batman Begins take on the character, especially the fact that they failed to pronounce his fucking name correctly.)

[livid]

Catwoman is one of the universally known villains in the Batman universe and it would've been hard to sell the general public (re: not the internet) on somebody less known.

You mean like Ra's al Ghul? (Though I really wasn't a big fan of the Batman Begins take on the character, especially the fact that they failed to pronounce his fucking name correctly.)

That's different because Batman Begins is more about Bruce Wayne overcoming his personal "villains" and becoming Batman than it is about just going up against a tough villain. I think it would've been too hard to try and sell a lesser known villain as an actual threat to Batman (now that he is Batman) than it would be to use an iconic one like Catwoman. I have confidence that Nolan would've been able to do it but I wouldn't be surprised if the studio just wanted him to do a bigger name.

Regardless, like I said, this is Nolan we're talking about here and I have all the confidence in the world that he can put together another outstanding movie, so I really couldn't care less who the villains are.

[TKz]

I kind of agree with Livid on this one, the first Batman film was sold on the merits of 'It's Batman'. The second one was pretty much entirely thanks to The Joker. After that one, people are going to want to see what the next villain is. People would watch it anyway, but it's going to be an easier sell with someone like Catwoman who people will know, as opposed to Talia Al Gul or Hugo Strange who will merit little more than a 'who?' from most people.

It will sell anyway obviously on the strength of The Dark Knight, but Catwoman will add a little bit more interest for the casual fan which will probably ultimately help sales that little bit more and probably keep Warner Bros feeling safer about the film.

[King.]

This make me wonder if the "leaked" info I found like a month ago had any merit. It mentioned Catwoman, Talia, and Bane. Basically said Bruce Wayne falls for Selina Kyle. Not knowing she's Catwoman, and her not knowing he's Batman. Talia comes in, stalks down Batman. Wants to fuck him. Catwoman gets jealous. Bruce finds out Selina is Catwoman. Catwoman, scorned, teams with Bane. That was the general idea really.

[GhostMachine]

I like Anne Hathaway, but I just don't think she's a good choice to play Catwoman. I actually think she'd be a better choice for Poison Ivy or even Rachel Dawes if they hadn't killed her off in TDK. Tom Hardy is a pretty decent choice for Bane, though.

[Meacon Keaton]

Nolan knows what he is doing. Let the man work his magic.

[brenchill]

I was really looking forward to the Hugo Strange story being played out by Nolan. But that's looking unlikely right now. I just don't see how they can portray Bane without a tonne of CGI (which I know Nolan prefers to not use). I just hope this doesn't go the route of Venom in Spider-Man 3.

[King.]

I could see Bane being portrayed as on some sort of drug that gives him adrenaline. Hardy is already a built guy, and if he trains like Bale always does, he could get even bigger. Simply play Bane realistic, as a guy who you can kick, punch, probably even stab and shoot, and unless it's a hit in the brain or heart, he's gonna keep coming at you unless he bleeds out. Constant roid rage type stuff. Look at The Joker. He didn't fall in a vat of acid to look like he did. He had scars, and wore clown make up. The Scarecrow wore a mask and used drugs to appear monster like. Al Ghul wasn't immortal, the name was. All based in reality.

[TKz]

Why not just play the Venom off as being something that just makes you stronger as opposed to growing massive muscles or something? Surely the most important part of the Bane character is his smarts, not his strengths. All he needs to do is be as buff as Bale is in TDK and I'd buy him as being able to break Batmans back. Though I have no idea how they could play that off in the film without doing either another film or skipping ahead a few months midway through.

[brenchill]

But the whole point of Bane was that he had super human size and strength but he was also amazingly smart. I don't think you should mess around with any of his traits. But that's just me. Either do it properly or not at all.

[9 to 5]

Should have just signed Scott Steiner to be Bane and be done with it.

[Jimmy]

I didn't think Ledger was going to work as The Joker until I saw the trailer. I have full faith in Nolan. I'm really interested to see if they'll tackle the back break in some form or not.