The Dark Knight
 

http://movies.yahoo.com/shop?d=hp&cf=prev&id=1809271890

Looks like it will be 2 years before we see the next one. :(

The big question right now is, who would play the Joker?

I want Crispin Glover; but who cares what I want...

Superman Returns/2006, Wonder Woman/2007, Batman 2/2008, Superman 4(?)/2009... Justice League/2014..?

DC wants their icons released a fair amount of time around each other. They think it's a better idea to released focused movies than Marvel's sloppy set-up. Marvel released alot of stuff in the last 6 years, but only a few were actually good. I like DC's plan but it's a bummer to wait so long for certain properties. How about two movies a year?

The time of the releases has little to do with the quality. If they released the Hulk Ten years from a movie either past or future, it would still have sucked as much ass.

Yeah, Crispin Glover would prolly be best for Joker.

I thought I heard the name Mark Hamil bounced around about playing the role of the Joker.

Well, he voiced him in the cartoon.

I could see it...

Mark has played both cartoon and live-action variations of the the Flash badguy, Trickster. It'd be an interesting job although I don't think Hamil's take on Mr. J would work in live action.

When I think of Glover doing Joker, I also think of Batman's new tone in films. Crispin would fit right in to the quasi-realistic world of Batman. Assuming they base it off "The Killing Joke", which they better.

Given there is going to be so much more dc movies I can see marvel releasing more x-men movies to combat it

I rather they dig in their deep pool of characters and combat quality with quantity. DC will have the movies but Marvel still has better licensing tactics (better games, TV projects, advertising). In this light, DC is Nintendo to Marvel's Sony. Quality vs. Quantity, and results already appear similar.

Mark Hamil was just a rumor and actully he isn't even among consideration. Would love to see him in it though.

LOL.

Jack Nickelson was awesome as The Joker. So was Cesar Romero. They gotta go really deep and find somebody else before they remake movies with the same villians. Didn't the television series with Adam West have guys like Egg Man and King Tut. Or go a different direction with The Animated Series and do Red Claw or Kiyodai?

I do miss Kiyodai. But I doubt they'll do a film with lesser rogues.

As retarded as he normally is, Kalyx's right. They're gonna do all his greatest hits. You need people like Two Face, the Joker, etc.

It's all about the big names on the big screen.

Yeah. Besides I...

Hey fuck you, man!

Sorry, but the blatant Nintendo fanboyism shit was pretty retarded.

I'm not a fanboy. Wii all know that...

Hey fuck you, man!

I have honestly never heard of Crispin Glover.

Who is he and where would I have seen him?

Crispin Glover:

http://www.jahsonic.com/Villain.jpg

A shot of him in Willard will send the point home.

Oh that guy. Yeah I just did'nt know his name.

Not my best work, but you get the gist.

Man, terrible job on the eyes. Didn't zoom in nearly close enough. Lousy edge finder.

rofl

I actually read that they may not even have the joker in the next batman.

Seems kinda weird after the ending of the last one, but thats what I read

Russell Crowe from Virtuosity woulda been pretty good I reckon. But now after films like Gladiator and A Beautiful Mind I see him as being too serious.

So wait, he'll be a good joker because he's already worn a pinstripe suit?

It was never a guarantee. Just because they mentioned him doesn't make him the next villain.

Last I read it was going to be Joker #2 and Two-Face #3

In which case I again vote for Guy Pearce for Two-Face

I think Jason Mewes should be the Joker. :shifty:

snoochie poochies

After all this time, we meet, BAtman. And I will have the last laugh!

BONNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNG!

One word: CLAYFACE.

That is all...... even though it's technically two words mashed together.

Clayface would be an AWESOME villian to go with. But you gotta find someone pretty but strong to fit the role.

And you need some good CGI.

Also, Bane needs to be in one of these movies, so as to erase the travesty that was Batman and Robin Bane.

Think they'll use Halle Berry's Catwoman or introduce a new one altogether?

If their goal is to take the newly revived series and make it suck, they'll throw in the Berry version.

From the list that was on the website Hugo Weaving and Jude Law would both be awesome in it.


And how could can you compate dc to marvel in terms of move making.

Yeah sure Batman begins was fucking awesome but you cant compare dc who have only made 3 movies (I think and not including the old batman movies) to Marvel who has made a shitload (again the recent ones starting with Blade).

And x-man 2 and spiderman where almost as good as Batman Begins



And lol I was just looking thought the message boards and some kid said that he thought that ryan reynolds or Ashton Kutcher would be good as the new joker

More importantly, Catwoman was nowhere near "Batman Begins." That pile of shit is a tossup for worst commercially released Superhero movie in recent history. The only other movie THAT bad was Hulk.

And, lest we forget, they DID make that Batman series before Begins. The one that was so shitty (At the end), it nearly ended DC's chances of making movies.

Hence the whole "DC is like Nintendo" shit being so retarded.

Quantity aside, DC's already made their share of shit.

I was motioning more toward the revitalized comic-movie ressurgance in the late 90's onward (which Marvel's Blade lead on). Since then, respectable movies based on comics came about, picking up where Superman and Batman left off. Between that timespan... Spawn?

Both DC and Marvel began to take their movie properties very seriously with different plans. Avi Arad took a proactive role in making sure movies didn't bastardize Marvel's characters. We got Spider-Man 2, but we also got Daredevil. Then Elektra. Still, I got alot of stuff to hunt for my Marvel collection (based on films stemming from the more focused direction). DC also began to take their stuff seriously, but the plan was developed based on observing Marvel's ways. "We can release 3 films a year, or one major property a year." That philosophy is close to Nintendo's Quality vs. Quantity belief, which I always agreed with. Marvel's approach reminded me of Playstation's stigma, a mountain of titles to choose from (something they often used as advertisement) although very few were worth playing. The same pros apply as well, atleast there's a lot to work with.

Another similarity with DC Films and Nintendo is that you have to wait a while before you get good stuff.

So while you see my comparison's as fanboyism toward the Big N, I really don't have any issues showing both sides of the coin. Their are pros and cons to both distribution philosophies and I'am aware of them.