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]
Comments
58 responses to “Nolan’s new Batman film gets a title and eliminates a villain possibility”
Well, Nolan is really making crime movies, so you’d want a villain who isn’t too out there. I think it’s going to be Catwoman, who is just an athletic burglar, after all. Well, an a high-class hooker. Two people with secret identities who are both socialites might appeal to Nolan, especially as he’s the guy who made The Prestige.
That’s possible, Hunter. Tom Hardy would be a weird casting choice, but I could dig it.
Not a great title. Maybe there is still a chance a new title will see the light of day before it’s all said and done. We can hope.
I’m hoping for the Penguin.
I think Tom Hardy, who is a physical actor, would be a character who is hired by the city to hunt Batman. That’s where we left off, after all. I’m not really up on the comics mythology, but is there a supervillain who hunts Batman?
Well I guess technically Batman will be the villain for this film. And as for Hardy’s role I’m thinking he’s a task force leader sent after Batman rather than a mob boss/thug.
Hardy would be an awesome David Cain, which could dovetail into a storyline like that, hired gun to take out the bat, etc.
I won’t let myself fall down this rabbit hole today, though…can’t…do it….
That is a surprisingly uninspired title. If he’s now “rising”, what was he doing in the last film, why was it called The Dark Knight if he hadn’t even gotten to the rising part yet.
The Dark Knight Thinking About It.
Plenty of time from now until then to come up with a better name.. I hope they do.
Searching for a female lead? Nolan could make Catwoman look pretty great…
Kris, I read up on David Cain in Wikipedia. That sounds like something Nolan could make work. We’ll see,
I don’t mind the title, though I can see where other people aren’t digging it. It kind of sounds like a genre-specific film, falling into that worn cliche of comic book, action films.
I’m going to assume the film will be great, and thus garner the according Academy scrutiny; as such, a title like TDKR kind of plays into the hands of those not inclined to give awards-support to a film like this. It sounds a bit corny.
It is possible Nolan is just messing with our heads (he did this with “The Intimidation Game” and “Rory’s First Kiss” with the first two Batman films), but I don’t see Nolan pulling a Gap on us: throwing a logo/title out there to see if it fits. Thus, this is probably the title.
Someone posted something on a Batman message board today about, “When did Batman’s name become the Dark Knight?” Imagine the thug in Burton’s Batman (1989) asking, “Who are you?” And Batman saying, “The Dark Knight.” Fair point I suppose.
Kind of disappointed about the Riddler- BUT – Nolan said no Riddler- not Edward Nygma. And it was never going to be “The Riddler” in a bowler hat and mask, so they could still do a character like “The Riddler” just not give him the corny name.
Okay, I’m reaching. Okay, I’m really reaching. Just sayin’.
I prefer Deadshot to Cain but I’d imagine they would both be used in similar ways.
Yeah, I don’t mind the title, but it’s not a great one by any means. Honestly though, I imagine finding a title for the third one would be pretty difficult, and I’m assuming the ‘rises’ part is supposed to mean that Batman is going to be fixing his reputation in Gotham City or something. Who knows.
Anyways, very surprised that the Riddler is not going to be a villain. IMDB’s got it listed as a rumor that Tom Hardy’s character is going to be Detective Harvey Bullock. If that is true, I’m all for it. That would make things very interesting.
When The Dark Knight made more money than god, I can almost assure you that somebody at Warner said…”yeah…call it Dark Knight 2, Dark Knight Returns, Dark Knight Strikes Back, whatever…it just better have that in there”…Chris may have a long leash, but it ain’t long enough to get them away from the business mind-set they have for this franchise.
Personally, I like the title just fine, certainly better than “The Caped Crusader” or “Shadow the Bat”…gag.
Shadow of*
I was thinking about it this morning after the news broke, and the title of The Batman would have worked, at least in my opinion.
I agree “Shadow of the Bat” is less-than-stellar and “The Caped Crusader” brings back cringe-inducing images of Adam West.
What this film needs is Tom Hardy as Catwoman. Deep down you all know that.
“Kind of disappointed about the Riddler- BUT – Nolan said no Riddler- not Edward Nygma. And it was never going to be “The Riddler” in a bowler hat and mask, so they could still do a character like “The Riddler” just not give him the corny name.”
…seriously?
“Shadow of the Bat” would have been awesome if they introduced Dick Grayson. But, well…oh well.
Tom Hardy will be Richard “Dick” Grayson a.k.a. Robin haha
@ Kris:
Seriously. I mean, if the Harvey-Dent-is-not-dead crowd can’t have a little fun, why can’t I? : )
I’m glad the villain isn’t The Riddler, because even though I like the character, I think it would be a little too similar to The Joker. I wonder how long we are going to have to wait until the villain is unveiled.
No 3D. No Riddler. No Penguin. No Freeze. In IMAX. Completely happy.
With Hardy, he’s either going to play Black Mask or Hush. But, he could also be Harvey Bullock…in charge with hunting down Batman, which would be really, really interesting if you’re a fan of the animated series.
Also, don’t rule out Hugo Strange…depending on the interpretation of that character.
Well even though I really would have liked to seen Nolan’s interpretation on The Riddler, this just makes me curious as to where they are going to go. They managed to bring Scarecrow and Ra’s Al Ghul effectively on screen. Still think you could bring Blask Mask, Deadshot, and Penguin in a smaller role to the screen.
Talia al Ghul for the female lead?
“The Darker Knight” would have been a better title.
The last female lead died, so it´s only logical there will be another one. It won´t matter she´s a villain or not.
I don’t think so. Women have always been an afterthought in all of Nolan’s previous films.
His films, including the Batman films, are uniquely sexless. I’m pretty sure Nolan’s Batman wouldn’t mind at all if he does not have a lady love in this film though the audience may expect one coz that’s how it usually is in comic-hero movies.
Hunter…Bane (mercenary) and Deadshot (hired assassin) are two villians that have “hunted” Batman in the comics. I’m gonna go out on a limb and say Bane (Hardy) and Catwoman (?) will be the new villians.
I’m not a fan of that title either.
Why not simply call it BATMAN 3D?
Because it won’t be in 3D?
I just don’t see Catwoman being in it. That seems like a character Nolan wants to stay far away from. Especially since she’s been portrayed multiple times in movies and T.V. Also because of the Halle Berry movie; i’m sure Nolan understands the consequences of that. And simply the notion of including a character who dresses up as a cat. Makes no sense.
” And simply the notion of including a character who dresses up as a cat. Makes no sense. ”
How about a character dressing up as a bat. How much sense does that make in comparison.
Doesn’t roll of the tongue well, now does it?
The Batman Saga: Rising
The title should have been GOTHAM CITY. An epic, grand title – and it would have underlined the fact that this franchise is too big to be concerned of having the word “Batman” in the title. Now it just makes it weird to expand on the title of the second film in the series when the second one didn’t expand on the first one.
They changed the title completely before. Do it again!
Until an official word is out, I will keep dreaming that they’ll cast Maggie Gyllenhaal as Catwoman.
Having Rachel resurrect from the dead with a new twisted personality (remember, they never found her body) makes more sense than you’d think. It would be the ultimate love story that could only end in tragedy – again…
Apparently a porn studio has already announced (what it took just 3 hours?) a porn spin-off with the title The Dark Knight Rises. Go figure! :P
Can’t we just cast Marion Cotillard as Catwoman and get this over with? Jesus..
The Gotham Knight
Is it like he is rising in the acceptance of the Gotham Citizens. No longer hunted by the police. No longer the Dark Knight who “killed those people” but a light they can look up to like Superman? I only wonder because this is to be the last one…
They should just call it BATMAN.
What kind of a title is that? Can’t they think of a more creative title?
I also don’t think Catwoman will be in it… I prefer a new villain. Someone whom we haven’t seen or didn’t have much story in the past Batman movies…
Hardy I guess is a good pick, depending on his role, I don’t know, maybe it’s just me but why do I have a feeling this Batman will suck?
Nolan already did his version of The Riddler. His name was Coleman Reese
“Having Rachel resurrect from the dead with a new twisted personality (remember, they never found her body) makes more sense than you’d think.”
Actually it doesn’t. By definition. But I like the enthusiasm.
If he had some real hubris he could call it “Long Day’s Journey Into Knight”. One can dream ;)
Hunt the Dark Knight.
A bit Frank Miller, but that would be my choice.
No penguin! because danny devito did very well as that already! I would like to see batgirl and mad hatter! Poison ivy and catwoman also! He’d be smart to top ledgers joker performance with a stunning female villian performance!
man, Fanboys are hard to please.
Surely they will come to their senses and re-title it. That is completely un-imaginitive