In what I would have to consider some pretty big, yet under the radar news, Michael Caine sat down with Sheila Roberts to discuss a whole bunch of thing that go bump in the Gotham night. It was a fairly standard interview, but there were what I consider some hidden gems for sure.
First of all I had no idea, but it’s rumored that Christopher Nolan’s third installment in his Batman series would be in theaters summer 2010. In case you missed that I said that she reported there are rumors that the new Nolan flick will hit in 2010. If you still haven’t caught what I’m getting at. That’s next summer. I would file that in the increasingly large file folder marked “Crazy shit someone said on the web that will never come true”. But that’s just me, and since I’m not the one Michael Caine calls when he wants to talk biz, I could be dead wrong.
The other interesting piece here is that Caine is pretty clear, that in his opinion, the villain for the third flick will be the Riddler. I sort of have mixed emotions about that. To me Frank Gorshin defined The Riddler. If you read the comic, Riddler just isn’t that strong a character. It was Gorshin’s portrayal of the character that put him in the batfan’s spotlight. Nolan has done a great job of creating characters who, while not based on any specific run of the comic, are true to the overall Batman cannon. I think that if he wants to stay true to that formula Riddler is the wrong choice. Bane, Poison Ivy, Harley Quinn, even Penguin I think could deliver a villain who is much more true to what this franchise has been about this far.
I’ve also heard that Johnny Depp is considering the role and will use The Riddler from The Batman animated series as his model for how the character should be played. That sounds great. I’d rather see him put on his Jack Sparrow costume and play a new bad guy called The Angry Pirate (Check out that link if you’ve never heard of The Angry Pirate, trust me you’ll be glad you did) At any rate it’s sort of an interesting interview if you like hearing old British guys drop the F-Bomb (and I for one do)
Gorshin defined the riddler? That’s just asanine. If there’s ever a non-comic translation of the character that “defined” him its from Batman the Animated Series, not the campy live action show, and not that batmanesque cartoon called “The Batman”. Nolan’s vision is to have villians whose MO can be rooted in the real world. Bane would have to have a cheesy story to explain his massive strength (see Batman and Robin), likewise for poison ivy. There was no mention of HQ in The Dark Knight so its difficult to explain her without using the joker, and I wouldn’t count the Penguin out of the story. He might be sued in a non-villianous capacity, but perhaps instead as a political foe in the wealthy/influential society. Riddler seems absolutely perfect because there are criminals whose MO is somewhat like the Riddler’s (e.g. Zodiac Killer) and there were a few potential clues/easter eggs as to the Riddler’s presence. Nolan made a fantastic choice if this news is true.
Dude you should check out that campy live action show again because you must have caught a bad episode. Gorshin was a man amongst boys in that series. I agree with you that the show itself sucked. But give Frank Gorshin’s performance another chance. He stole that show.
You bring up some great options for what could be done with The Riddler, but as a fan of the book they just never manifested themselves in the comic. I don’t deny that the possibilities for the character are limitless, but if they just won’t be true to the comic.
As it relates to Bane, I dunno, is Bane’s super steroid cocktail any more over the top than Johnathan Crane’s fear inducing nerve toxin? I don’t think it’s too over the top for Nolan’s universe.
Totally with you Chickenbone. Riddler in the comics – banal. Frank Gorshin – legend.
I always thought it was like Gorshin really wanted to play the joker – so he essentially did!
I too would have thought a Nolan Penguin would be the way to go – I left a link above to my musings on the whole thing from a while back, with loads of ideas in the comments too, over on BifSniff.
Considering there are plants and even toads that secrete toxins that cause incredible hallucinations, man-made fear inducing toxins don’t seem that much of a stretch. Contrast with super steroids that are supposed to give you the size of 3-5 men and vitals skyrocketing all over the place….Might just be me, but I find Bane a bit farfetched. Any normal person’s heart would explode if they went through that.
I have to agree in part, Gorshin was awesome, though his portrayal would be considered too campy. He’d probably have that sinister aspect….However, he is the perfect choice considering all those Easter eggs mentioned, and the very fact that Batman’s identity is the riddle on everyone’s mind, especially after he is accused with Harvey Dent’s death. Who other than the Riddler would you associate with unraveling such a mystery bit by bit throughout the course of the movie?
I’m not too familiar with the DC Universe (Sorry!) but couldn’t Black Mask be the villain in the next movie? He could start a gang war right?
I don’t get why so many people think the Riddler is banal in the comics. He has a ton of potential and tapping into that potential is what Nolan’s movies have been all about so far. Comics like Hush have proven that the Riddler has the intellectual prowess to go up against many of Gotham’s toughest villains and heroes. Besides, many of Batman’s villains (and Batman himself) have updated their equipment to become more fearsome foes. You can’t tell me that the Riddler being a brilliant computer hacker would go against his role in the comics or make him out of character- he was created in 1948, it’s not just OK to update him it’s necessary! I think the only reason some guys complain about him is that he’s not a very violent villain…death count doesn’t necessarily equal a cool villain. It’d be easy to have him and another, more violent villain without becoming Spiderman 3ish. Nolan’s proven he can do it and as long as he doesn’t go more than two it could work fine.
batman is a good series whatever peoplesay
I can’t imagine another villian more appropriate for a thrid film. However, I don’t think that a Jim Carrey approach to the Riddler would be right, but a more subtle, deadlier approach. I never really cared for Gorshin’s campy style, even though it fit with the overall campiness of the 60’s Batman TV show. Nolan’s Batman has to have villians we can imagine meeting on the streets of reality, not in a circus. So that’s going to leave out a lot Batman villians in Nolan’s version.