Edward Nigma, we think, might be a looney too far for Christopher Nolan's next Batman outing...
On April 30, Warner Brothers announced that an official release date for Batman 3 (working title) has been set at July 20, 2012. For eager Batman fans, this pretty much begins a two-year countdown until Christopher Nolan’s remarkable world of Gotham revisits the big screen. As the Caped Crusader’s franchise is arguably the most successful comic book set to film in recent years, there has been the requisite flurry of fanboy arguments over who would be a great villain for Christian Bale’s third and final act as Batman. One villain that has been strongly lobbied for as a possible opponent is Edward Nigma, better known as the Riddler, the evil and shrewd Silver Age genius.
Now just to be clear – I love the Riddler. I love the character. The ‘evil genius’ villain tends to be overdone in literature and cinema, but when it’s done right, it’s brilliant. The Riddler is done right. It’s no fluke that he’s universally agreed to be among the top four or five Batman villains ever among the hundreds of baddies that the Bat has tangled with over the decades. However, as great as the Riddler may be, here are eight reasons why Christopher Nolan would be smart in choosing otherwise for his Batman 3 antagonist.
1. It’s Already Been Done…and Badly
In an apparent attempt to bring Batman back to its goofy Adam West roots, Joel Schumacher pit the Riddler against Batman in 1995’s abysmal Batman Forever (only outdone in awfulness by Schumacher’s next directing “effort” - Batman and Robin). Eschewing Mr. E. Nigma’s traditional brilliance and obsession to be the man to outwit Batman, Jim Carrey instead decided to play him as the long-lost Fourth Stooge. Sure, he was the only film villain to find and destroy the Batcave, but between spending all his time mugging for the camera and trying to fill all of Gotham with neon green question marks, the Riddler may have been ruined on the big screen in the process.
2. After The Dark Knight, A follow-up Riddler Movie Will Just Feel Like a ‘Joker-Lite’ Version
Anyone who considers themselves a fan of the latest Batman incarnation can generally agree that whoever follows Heath Ledger’s incredible turn as the Joker will have immensely huge shoes to fill. So would it be a good idea to pit Batman against an enemy who, to casual fans, will appear to be exactly like the Clown Prince of Crime? Both are apparent maniacal lunatics and delight in using mind games to get under Batman’s skin as opposed to beating him senseless. For those who haven’t followed the comics, the two are far too interchangeable. Casting the Riddler will have millions of moviegoers who don’t know his history asking “so, is this guy the Joker’s son or something?” What’s worse is that while the Joker is genuinely psychopathic, the Riddler is perhaps only at the level of an obsessive-compulsive egotist. One of the worst sins a popular franchise can commit is to appear to be treading water, or (an even larger sin) to regress in tension and scope. As much love as I have for the Riddler, featuring him now would unlikely be anything else but a step backwards.
"Casting the Riddler will have millions of moviegoers who don’t know his history asking “so, is this guy the Joker’s son or something?”"
3. Batman Needs A Villain Who Is a Physical Threat: The Riddler Isn’t That Guy
In Batman Begins, Ra’s Al Ghul pummeled Bruce Wayne quite a bit…until Wayne was fully trained. By the end of the film, Batman was far superior in both strength and training and made short work of his former mentor. Then there is the puny Scarecrow, who hasn’t a prayer in hand-to-hand combat against the Caped Crusader. In The Dark Knight, the Joker relied on goons and trickery to keep Batman off balance. The Nolan Batman has simply yet to encounter an enemy who has the capability to pound him into submission. There have been mental challenges aplenty, but little physical threat. And the Riddler would certainly have no chance to put Batman down for the count. In such an extensive rogues’ gallery as Batman has in the comic books, it would be odd for Batman 3 to contain yet another villain without the physical strength to stand toe-to-toe with Wayne. Not to sound sexist, but the fact that Nigma was once easily beaten in physical combat by Poison Ivy in the comics is all you need to know about his fighting prowess.
4. With Rachel Dawes dead, a Female Villain Would be a Better Choice
Perhaps the most tragic side effect of the Joker’s reign of terror in The Dark Knight was the death of Bruce Wayne’s lifelong sweetheart, Rachel Dawes. Now heartbroken and more alone than ever, the Bat could be particularly susceptible to mixed feelings for a female villain. Fans who foresee this turn of events have been vocal in their support of Catwoman making a return to the franchise. Carrying on a love/hate relationship for decades in the comic series, Batman and Catwoman have frequently alternated between near-death battles and romantic rendezvous. Such an opponent could be perfect for Batman at this stage of his “career”, at the end of his emotional rope and torn between growing feelings for the new woman in his life and his duty to rid Gotham City of crime.
5. The Riddler is Anti-Establishment, Not Anti-Outlaw
As shown in the closing moments of The Dark Knight, Batman will likely begin his time in Batman 3 as an outlaw and outcast. The Batcave is ruined, Wayne Manor destroyed. He has framed himself for the murder of Harvey Dent to preserve Dent’s reputation. In short, his life as both Wayne and Batman will be a mess. So what reason would a villain like the Riddler have to make an appearance and pile on the misery? To put it bluntly, he wouldn’t. His obsession is to outwit Batman and ruin him. An already-ruined Caped Crusader isn’t a challenge for the Riddler. In the opening reels of Batman 3, Wayne’s alter ego will be a man on the run, wanted for murder. In such a scenario, it is difficult to imagine the Riddler turning up to take him down a notch. Batman has already been disowned by the law and order elements of Gotham. He no longer has a reputation for Nygma to ruin. The inclusion of the Riddler at this point would be a puzzling choice (pardon the pun).
6: Gotham’s Gangsters Need More Screen Time and More Respect
The last thing the gangsters in Gotham City need, while being portrayed as holding Gotham City in an iron grip, is another villain to make complete fools out of them. In Batman Begins, crime boss Carmine Falcone is turned into a quivering, straitjacketed lunatic by Jonathan Crane’s Fear toxin. In The Dark Knight, the Joker barges in on a “secret” mob meeting with little resistance and later singlehandedly dispatches mob leaders left and right when they refuse his help to stop Batman. Sal Maroni, the mob leader implied to be currently controlling Gotham, is presumably killed by Two-Face, who simply shoots Maroni’s driver while his car is in motion, causing the vehicle to crash. These are the guys who keep Gotham’s lawmen up at night? Nolan’s third Batman venture might do well to raise Gotham City’s mobsters up to the level of danger that would be presumed in a mob-dominated metropolis. Adding another evil genius to the mix would only serve to relegate the crime bosses to the fringe of the story when they should be at the very forefront.
7. If the Nolan Films Are So Gritty and Realistic, Why Write In Another Gimmick Villain?
Writing the Riddler into Batman 3 would make a supposed realistic and edgy film series a perfect 4-for-4 in somewhat-unrealistic antagonists. Ra’s Al Ghul is a nutty anti-capitalist and anti-industrialist who is part of an ages-old secret society that wipes entire civilizations of the map when they don’t like how they’re progressing (in the comics, it’s even crazier – he’s immortal!). The Scarecrow is basically “the guy in the creepy mask with the insanity gas”. The Joker is a sociopath who takes the guise of an evil clown and, on several occasions, proclaims the positive merits of total anarchy. Yes, these are comic book movies, but for all the talk about Christopher Nolan’s “more realistic” view of the Batman universe, these three guys are characters who are seemingly popular because they are so unlike any actual living people. As fantastic as the first two films are, their villains stand out as gimmick characters, especially when compared to Bale’s flawed and human hero.
"In the end, the Riddler’s quirky brain teasers would not only be just another gimmick, it might be the corniest one yet."
8. Who Would Play Him?
To be sure, Heath Ledger’s brilliant portrayal of the Joker was a bit of a shock to many moviegoers who didn’t realize his depth and ability as an actor. To find another actor to play the Riddler as effectively would require Christopher Nolan to once again find the needle in a haystack, something that simply may be too much to ask. Robin Williams, Mark Hamill, Adrien Brody, Johnny Depp, and David Tennant (recently of Dr. Who fame) have been a few of the names circulated to be in contention if the Riddler is chosen for Batman 3. All are talented actors to be sure, but the difficulty in playing a villain so similar to the Joker and not ending up being accused of “copying” Ledger’s performance in The Dark Knight would be an unnecessary headache for both cast and crew. Every maniacal laugh, crazed look, or hissed line of dialogue by the Riddler’s portrayer would be both consciously and subconsciously compared to Heath’s take on the Joker. With the ghost of Ledger hanging over the production, the bar would be set unfairly and impossibly high if a villain similar to the Joker is chosen. Passing on the Riddler would make such comparisons a non-issue.
But we're split - right down the middle..
8 Reasons why the Riddler SHOULD be the villain in Batman 3
|
|
|
|
![For ever...and ever...and ever... [The Shining, 1980]](/images/stories/misc/promos/distanthorror.jpg "For ever...and ever...and ever... [The Shining, 1980]")
:
 FOLLOW SHADOWLOCKED ON TWITTER |
 FOLLOW SHADOWLOCKED ON FACEBOOK |
You don't need to register to post comments, but if you don't, you will have to wait for your comments to be approved.
Comments
I did consider that when constructing my list. If Nolan had the guts to go with the Riddler's current comic storyline, that would have the potential to be a great movie. But that's the problem with using a character's current storyline - only those readers who are currently reading it would really "get" it. The Riddler's more well-known persona is as a criminal genius, not a P.I.
I think the Warner Brothers execs would be afraid that non-hardcore fans would see a "different" Riddler on the screen than the one they know and be unhappy with the result. And that could result in a drop in box office receipts, the one thing that execs fear the most.
Whatever villain will appear in the new movie I'm sure it will feel fresh and original whether they have been done before or not.
Not the Bane from Batman & Robin (what a waste) or from the animated series.
The Bane from the comic book. The Bane who releases all the Arkham inmates and in the end snaps Batman's spine.
And there's your lead-in for Batman 4.
1. It’s Already Been Done…and Badly
I agree this was one of the worst movies in a comic book series. But, in no way destroys the riddler character for hardcore fans.
2. After The Dark Knight, A follow-up Riddler Movie Will Just Feel Like a ‘Joker-Lite’ Version
I could see how this is viable concern for most fans. Ledger did a great job with the joker and people, in some ways, would like to see more joker in the next film. But, the Riddler is different then the joker in how he handles batman. Joker is chaos with plan. The Riddler, on the other hand, is much more methodic and calculating. Cleaver traps and riddles could be twisted to an almost "saw" like experience to deliver the intensity the audience requires. It is easy for us to imagine heath ledger in a green suite with black question marks and say why again? This one will be on the actor chosen to really dig deep and pull something spectacular out for a new view of a great villain.
3. Batman Needs A Villain Who Is a Physical Threat: The Riddler Isn’t That Guy
WRONG! The best thing about batman is he is a detective first! The fighting is just one of his tools in his utility belt. Punching, kicking, throwing, and shooting has been done over and over and over again by Hollywood. Now I wouldn't mind seeing some fight sequences in which the battle flows more like a borne identity tussle, minus the shaky camera. But not the whole movie. If you need a physical movie with Batman, rent Batman and Robin...and shut up.
4. With Rachel Dawes dead, a Female Villain Would be a Better Choice
This portion of the article really gets to me...Rachel Dawes, more specifically Maggie Gyllenhaal, was the worst part of the second movie. She is a horrible actress and did nothing to create a connection with the audience. She tried to hard to be a big character and just came off as annoying and cheesy. I'm so glad she is gone.
5. The Riddler is Anti-Establishment, Not Anti-Outlaw
Ok, well I see you were able to google the riddler before writing this article in order to get your material. But, the truth is these characters have now boundaries. Especially in the hands of Christopher Nolan. These characters can be anything if done correctly. The truth is, we do not know how the director will form the mentality of Batman in the third film. In my opinion, Batman finally took on and accepted the role he was meant to play at the end of the Dark Knight. His challenge should be trying to integrate this new role in his personal life with outside forces, Riddler and society, making it difficult.
6: Gotham’s Gangsters Need More Screen Time and More Respect
The mob presence is only that...a presence. It's like saying the main characters in the next movie should be all the crazy clown cronies that joker left behind. The only way the could be viable threat and worthwhile venture for Batman is if they had a face to represent them. Actually two-face to represent them. I am sure he was not killed from a two story fall in the Dark Knight. I would definitely be cool with a mild cameo still role in the next film.
7. If the Nolan Films Are So Gritty and Realistic, Why Write In Another Gimmick Villain?
If character in Batman is a gimmick villain lady! That's why its a comic book! People don't want to see an evil joe the plumber! They want horribly disfigured, psychotic, chaos willing evil geniuses. Every Batman character has a gimmick.
8. Who Would Play Him?
Finally a good point in your article. What I don't understand...or I guess what you may not understand is the Riddler is not a crazy laughing paint on your face psycho like the joker. He is very calm and calculated. His riddles are designed to test your wits and stress your emotions. What I'm guessing your problem is the only knowledge you have of the Riddler is what you have read on the internet and Jim Carreys awful preformance in Batman Forever. You see that stupid version of a goofy Riddler and think.."How is that going to work?" We'll ma'am it wouldn't work if that's the way you were to go with the character. In fact, that's why it didn't work in that film. There are a few animated cartoon version of the Riddler that do a decent job. Batman the animated series for example. That's why this cartoon won so many awards. Also the new Batman: Arkham Asylum provides a voice cameo from the Riddler that may steer in the right direction. As for who will play...Not sure but they better take the role seriously.
Now the last problem I have was not one of your eight points but a quote, "Casting the Riddler will have millions of moviegoers who don’t know his history asking “so, is this guy the Joker’s son or something?”"
Shame on you! Shame on you!!! This is the worst quote of all time and the exact reason why movies like catwomen, Batman and Robin, and Spiderman 3 become such crap. The new Christopher Nolan take on this important story became such successes because the did not care about "millions of moviegoers who don’t know his history". Hollywood tries to make movies for teeny-boppers and old people who don't know anything about the story in order to reach a larger audience. Next thing you know, Arnold Schwarzenegger is Mr. Freeze, and everywhere you turn there is a stupid one-liner. I'm glad if millions of movie goers don't understand what is happening in a well designed movie for a true fan. If the director did setup the movie to cater to the masses, these "fans" would still walk a way and forget in a week. But, true fans would never forget and the stale taste in their mouth can only be washed out with sweet success of a true devotionalist director...
p.s. I know "devotionalist" is not a word!
"'Batman Needs A Villain Who Is a Physical Threat: The Riddler Isn’t That Guy.' WRONG! The best thing about batman is he is a detective first!"
-- I agree that the Batman in the comics is a detective first. After all, his first appearance was in Detective Comics #27, but as far as the Nolan Gothamverse, he hasn't exactly done a whole lot of detective work per se. Lots of scenes where he plugs info into a computer and waits for it to give him an answer, but not much walking the beat and rustling up witnesses. I was just pondering how nice it would be to see him up against somebody who could take him down with muscle and not just with elaborate comic-booky traps.
"Rachel Dawes, more specifically Maggie Gyllenhaal, was the worst part of the second movie. She is a horrible actress and did nothing to create a connection with the audience."
-- I agree that the Rachel character wasn't portrayed very well, by either actress. I didn't say otherwise; I was just talking about where Bruce Wayne's head would be, as a character. The girl he loves is dead, so it would make sense to introduce a semi-evil women to mess with his head, like Catwoman or Talia Al Ghul.
"The mob presence is only that...a presence. It's like saying the main characters in the next movie should be all the crazy clown cronies that joker left behind."
-- I don't necessarily want a mob character to be the next main villain. I just find it a little amusing that everyone in Gotham is supposedly frozen in fear of the mob element and yet every villain that has come along so far has easily been able to toy with the supposedly-powerful mob network.
"Shame on you! Shame on you!!! This is the worst quote of all time and the exact reason why movies like catwomen, Batman and Robin, and Spiderman 3 become such crap. The new Christopher Nolan take on this important story became such successes because the did not care about "millions of moviegoers who don’t know his history". Hollywood tries to make movies for teeny-boppers and old people who don't know anything about the story in order to reach a larger audience. Next thing you know, Arnold Schwarzenegger is Mr. Freeze, and everywhere you turn there is a stupid one-liner."
-- I couldn't agree with you more, actually. Those three movies you listed are all terrible for the exact reasons you outlined - writers and directors that don't understand the source material and just make the whole film a slapstick disaster. I was merely saying what a Riddler film might be perceived as by the moviegoers that aren't aware of the Riddler's backstory. As far as I'm concerned, The Dark Knight was my favorite movie of 2008 and Heath Ledger as the Joker was probably the greatest comic book villain ever put to film. I am just concerned, as any fan is when he sees a comic book film actually done really well, that there isn't a big letdown later in the series. And there's a good chance that Nolan will pick the Riddler and do it right. That wouldn't surprise me at all.
Thanks again for the constructive criticism. :)
is perhaps the best choice for the next film... next to a version of the Red Hood. As long as Jim Carrey/Frank Gorshin antics were banned, the Riddler would lead Batman around town chasing false leads. Bringing him as a consultant for the GCPD is simply brilliant. Say he comes in to catch Batman, realizes how corrupt Gotham is and exploits it, pulling crimes, pinning those on Batman, all while taunting Batman.. sounds good.
#2. Not really. Batman will start the next film hunted by the entirety of Gotham for the murder of Harvey Dent, the city utterly frightened by the Joker, Arkham inmates running around in costumes and masks committing crimes for fun, and civilians dressing as Batman to go vigilante. The Riddler was always Batman's most intelligent and cunning foe... it would not be hard for this film to escalate to heights above the Joker's crime spree.
#3. The only believable physical threat would be Bane and the only version of Bane that was decent was Knightfall (excluding the Azrael storyline). Plus, I disagree on principle. There's no resolution to a strongman villain besides working-out more of bringing a bigger gun to the party. Batman has always been about the mental game... willpower and intelligence beats the villains, not brute strength. A "physical" villain would suck for this reason alone.
#4. Hollywood will insist on a crappy, "hot" actress who doesn't understand the role, instead a decent, mildly attractive one who does. Even if they don't, Catwoman isn't strong enough to carry her own story and would breach your reason #2.
#5 No, he isn't. The Riddler isn't anti-establishment. The Riddler is anti-social. He believes he's more intelligent than everyone and the world can't compete with him. He's too smart and the rest of the world is pathetic. That's always been his philosophy and anyone who knows the Riddler character knows this well. Go watch "If You're So Smart, Why Aren't You Rich?" from the animated series and call me in the morning.
#6. Not really. The groundwork for the gangsters has not only already been laid, but it's been shown to be the reason why Gotham is in shambles. The point of the Batman is that he escalates the situation... You're never quite sure if the situation in Gotham would be better or worse without him. Almost his entire rogues gallery consists of villains he "created" himself simply by existing. The gangsters have become the least of Gotham's problems, although they still remain in some capacity or another.
#7. "Gimmick characters?" Alright. Not only are your INCREDIBLY over-simplified depictions of the Batman's villains inaccurate, they're downright misleading. Ra's Al Ghul was not a "nutty anti-capitalist and anti-industrialist who is part of an ages-old secret society that wipes entire civilizations of the map when they don’t like how they’re progressing"... he was a cold and calculating assassin who understands the human condition and had a polarized viewed of justice and morality. They didn't wipe civilizations off the map because they didn't like the way they were "progressing"... They did it to send a message to the world. Take the most decadent, corrupt place on the planet at the right time and destroy it to send a message that "evil cannot prosper and here's why." It had nothing to do with civilizations taking too many left turns. The Joker isn't "wearing the guise of an evil clown"... he's laughing at a joke only he understands, because people have grown comfortable in their inane, boring little lives. He pushes anarchy because he, as Alfred puts it, "likes to watch the world burn." And the Scarecrow isn't just a guy with insanity gas. He's a deeply disturbed doctor who enjoys experimenting on people to sate his God Complex and is obsessed with the fears of others. The gas is merely a tool by which he extracts that fear. He actually delights in tormenting and torturing people... not because he's zany and wears a creepy makes, but because he actually enjoys watching people reduced to feeble, terrified simpletons.
The Riddler would be perfect. The Joker succeeded in turning the city against itself by preying on the impulses of Gotham and tearing down their paragons. The Riddler would build on that to hold the city in his iron grip while laughing from atop the rubble by shredding the protections of the people, using those systems against the people of Gotham, and elevating himself to positions of power. Nothing "gimmicky" about it... just using human nature to control the populace.
#8. I actually think David Tennant would be perfect.
+1
Not only has she never been done but they could write
it in the script that she would be avenging the jokers death.
Also, Shannyn Sossamon for Catwoman. I put no time table on this, but want it.
Also also, never Harlequinn. No one can do her justice.
Also, I liked the idea of a female villan as Wayne will be in a vulnerable state in this movie after his childhood sweethearts death. A version of Poison Ivy or another villan could be brought in as sub-villan along with the riddler as each previous Nolan film has had two villans.
RSS feed for comments to this post.