Film & TV New Villian For Upcoming Batman Movie

ChrisZimbo

New Member
Staff member
#1
Acclaimed actors just keep jumping on the superhero bandwagon. This past month saw Marvel Entertainment announce an incredibly impressive cast for its upcoming "Iron Man" motion picture, with Robert Downey, Jr., Gwyneth Paltrow, Terrence Howard and Jeff Bridges all on board. This follows Christopher Nolan's recent reboot of the "Batman" franchise that brought Christian Bale, Michael Caine, Morgan Freeman, Tom Wilkinson, Ken Watanabe and Gary Oldman to the series. Now, according to The Hollywood Reporter, Aaron Eckhart is joining the cast of the "Batman Begins" sequel, "The Dark Knight," as Gotham City District Attorney Harvey Dent. A pivotal villain in "Batman" lore, Dent goes insane after half his face is disfigured by acid and becomes the crime boss, Two Face. The madman's fateful gimmick is determining whether his enemies will live or die by the flip of a coin. Tommy Lee Jones played an over-the-top version of the character in Joel Schumacher's abysmal 1995 installment "Batman Forever," but he was mostly second fiddle to Jim Carrey's inspired take on the Riddler. As most details of "The Dark Knight" are being kept secret, it's unclear whether Eckhart will just appear as Dent in anticipation of a bigger role in a third new "Batman" movie or whether Two Face is set to be a primary adversary alongside the previously announced Heath Ledger, who will help reinvent the Joker. And what about Cillian Murphy's mad Scarecrow, who survived "Batman Begins"? It was expected he'd have a role in "Knight," but at this point it's pure fan speculation as to whether he's in or out.

Snagging the role is an amazing turnaround for Eckhart that began with last year's Golden Globe-nominated performance in the satirical comedy, "Thank You for Smoking." After making a name for himself in Neil LaBute's "In the Company of Men" and "Your Friends & Neighbors," Eckhart seemed as though he was on the rise with prominent roles such as Julia Roberts' boyfriend in "Erin Brockovich." It took only three pictures ("Suspect Zero," "The Core" and "Paycheck") for the downward spiral to begin and Eckhart to be labeled box office poison. Oh, how luck and good representation can change things.

As for Nolan, the director still has not cast a replacement to play Batman's love interest, Rachel Dawes (originally played by Katie Holmes, who is no longer welcome). Rumors have circulated that Maggie Gyllenhaal and Rachel McAdams are in the running for the part, but Gyllenhaal just seems like a bad fit (the 30-year-old actress sadly looks much older than her real age at times) and McAdams may be singing her way to disco heaven in a major musical which would be shooting at the same time. Needless to say, Nolan and Warner Bros. aren't skimping on A-list talent for their premier Superhero franchise and whoever gets the role should be someone to get excited about.


Aaron Eckhart fucking sucks imo
 

PuffnScruff

Well-Known Member
#2
Eckhart sucked in Suspect Zero but i liked him a lot in Thank You For Smoking so i'll just have to wait and see how he does in the new batman
 
#6
i was really hoping jamie foxx would've got the part...i read in reports that he was being considered for the part....that would've been bad azz...heath ledger as the joker, hmm.....i don't know if anybody can make a more memorable perfomance of the joker..........atleast it's better than that fruity batman series wit adam west...i still have nightmares about pows n' blams....
 

FroDawgg

Well-Known Member
#7
^^^i am a huge batman fan, and you know, for the longest time i despised that show. i thought it was just cheesy and wasn't a real representation of the character. but then recently i watched the movie (66) with the commentary, and realized that these guys have enormous respect for bob kane and the batman mythos, and that they were intentionally having fun with the show. that's what the sixties were about. also, you have to realize that the comic's sales were declining then and without the show, batman might have faded into obscurity.

i could say the same for "batman and robin", b/c without that, we probably would not have had "batman begins", but 1) that movie just plain sucked, and 2) by this time, the character and the legacy were already big enough that one crappy movie (maybe two, if you count batman forever) would bring it down.
 

FroDawgg

Well-Known Member
#8
^^^i am a huge batman fan, and you know, for the longest time i despised that show. i thought it was just cheesy and wasn't a real representation of the character. but then recently i watched the movie (66) with the commentary, and realized that these guys have enormous respect for bob kane and the batman mythos, and that they were intentionally having fun with the show. that's what the sixties were about. also, you have to realize that the comic's sales were declining then and without the show, batman might have faded into obscurity.

i could say the same for "batman and robin", b/c without that, we probably would not have had "batman begins", but 1) that movie just plain sucked, and 2) by this time, the character and the legacy were already big enough that one crappy movie (maybe two, if you count batman forever) would bring it down.
 

Latest posts

Donate

Any donations will be used to help pay for the site costs, and anything donated above will be donated to C-Dub's son on behalf of this community.

Members online

No members online now.
Top