Nolan’s new Batman film gets a title and eliminates a villain possibility

Posted by · 9:38 am · October 27th, 2010

Christopher Nolan is hard at work on his third foray into the world of the Caped Crusader.  Recently Tom Hardy was cast in an unspecified role.  The latest word is that he’s busy trying to nail down the female lead in the film (we don’t know who the character is yet).  And today, two more nuggets.

First, the film has a title, as reported by Geoff Boucher at the LA Times’ Hero Complex blog: “The Dark Knight Rises.” I am…not digging it.  At all.  It’s so dry.  It feels pedestrian, incidental, something.  But what’s in a title, right?  “Batman Begins” was kinda lame for a title, I thought.  But then “The Dark Knight” worked off of the potent thematic mojo going on in the script.  This is just the usual “He’s baaaaack” kind of thing.  Meh.

Next up, Nolan revealed to Boucher that the villain in the film is NOT the Riddler.  Most have just assumed Hardy was cast in that role, but now it looks like the character isn’t even in the film.  And part of me is really happy about that.  I’d have loved to see Nolan’s take on the Riddler, don’t get me wrong.  But I think the series desperately needs to go its own way character-wise in this third installment, so I’ll be very excited to see who’s who.

Boucher’s blog post was more of a preview for a larger piece still to come, but here’s a nugget:

Nolan plays things close to the vest — he’s one of the few filmmakers of his generation who actually does wear a vest — and he chuckled when I tried to get a few more details out of him. “Oh, you know me, I don’t talk.” He began our conversation by comparing it with a visit to the dentist’s office. Well, if so, he’s a patient who never opens wide. I asked if he could imagine a time when Warner Bros. would let a filmmaker shoot a Batman script where the villain isn’t one of the signature creations from the comic books. “Ah, Geoff Boucher, master of the leading question,” he said with a chuckle.

Also eliminated as a possibility, Boucher says, was Mr. Freeze, so the guessing game continues. But it won’t be concerning “Batman 3” or “‘The Dark Knight’ sequel.” From now on, call it “The Dark Knight Rises.”

[Photo: Los Angeles Times]

→ 58 Comments Tags: , | Filed in: Daily

58 responses so far

  • 1 10-27-2010 at 10:14 pm

    KBJr. said...

    The title should just simply be “Gotham”…given the way the last film ended, it would seem that its sequel will focus on the actual city, its citizens, and the media…I think that title would not only be apropos to the tenor of the series, but also kind of epic. The reported title is just God awful.

    As far as the villain is concerned, as a non-comic book reader, I discovered Batman as a kid watching the old cartoon. I won’t say I’m adverse to Nolan featuring a villain who isn’t the most well known, but I would kind of prefer him to stick with big guys. That’s just me. “Batman Begins” was kind of a bummer for me because I had no clue who Liam Neeson was playing! “The Dark Knight” was made by The Joker. I for one was excited by a re-interpretation of “The Riddler” (even though I’m still a huge fan of Jim Carrey’s).

    I’d recommend Nolan stick with the well-known villains. It could mean a lot of Box Office.

  • 2 10-27-2010 at 11:21 pm

    A.J said...

    The Dark Knight Rising fails as a title. Epic fail. Why not just use The Dark Knight Returns? Or Gotham City? Or just Gotham?

  • 3 10-28-2010 at 1:16 am

    Jonathan Spuij said...

    Anyone ever stop and concider the movie might be far less about Gotham than is believed? Perhaps it will focus again much more on Wayne and the villain(s) with the city nothing more than a mere backdrop.

  • 4 10-28-2010 at 3:16 am

    Derek 8-Track said...

    Gotham’s Knight

  • 5 10-28-2010 at 3:41 am

    Rashad said...

    AJ, The Dark Knight Returns is its own iconic title. This won’t be an adaptation, no need to spit on Miller’s work and one of the best books in the medium

  • 6 10-28-2010 at 3:41 am

    Square Eyes said...

    I actually like just the plain and simple title of “The Batman”.
    It would fit in well with how the titles have been going.

  • 7 10-28-2010 at 5:07 am

    Kyle said...

    One other thing, I really REALLY hope the next film doesn’t have as stupid a plot point as….

    *SPOILERS* (just so I’m not a d*ck)

    ….Gordon fakes his death. I mean, seriously was there ever a more pointless or unrealistic angle they could have taken for a film praised for its gritty realism…and I say that as somebody that loves the film. Was fake-Harvey Bullock in on it? or did he take his stupid pills that day?

  • 8 10-28-2010 at 12:23 pm

    Marshall1 said...

    I am a bit disappointed that they will not have Mr. Freeze as the villain. I remembered that in the cartoon version of Batman (the great one, don’t remember the name), Mr. Freeze is a frail character that is driven to crime (I think his wife’s dead as well). Using this background story, he could make this a more emotional one (I know it’s more a Sam Riami kind of story). Also, it would correct the mistake of Arnold and Batman 4 *shudders*