I think his role will be the cop hired to track down Batman.... ends up becoming obsessed with the case, and finds out some evidence that the whole thing is a cover up.. something similar to that.

Lynn wrote:This scenario is interesting, but TDK proved that Bruce can't lead a normal life just because of this split in his identity. As long as he remains a masked vigilante, he can't find peace for himself, either as Batman or as Bruce. Now, if he stopped working "outside the law" and became a public figure, like Dent or even his own father, Thomas Wayne, things could be different.

A normal life is subjective I think. Your life, my life, and anyone's life.......I believe Wayne will have to accept that being Batman is part of his everyday routine. At least with someone like Selina/Catwoman, he doesn't have to hide who he is. He can be happy as either Wayne or Batman.

Batcat wrote:I think what she meant

I'm a man.

I just prefer Fran over Francis.

Fran wrote:

Batcat wrote:I think what she meant

I'm a man.

I just prefer Fran over Francis.

Oooops sorry I feel so ashamed now I always thought you were a woman I don't know why, just like me you don't have the little symbol I'm really sorry again!

And I love your POV

I don't think the Ra's flashbacks will have to do with Bane or Talia. I think they have something to do with the history of Gotham and the Wayne Family. I think they'll be brief sequences also.

I think Talia will not be in the film and I think JGL and Marion are playing John Blake and Miranda Tate, just as Nolan said. I remember when Anthony Michael Hall and Sarah Jayne Dunn were supposedly playing Riddler and Harley. People thought Michael Engel was an alias for Edward Nigma, including myself sadly.

Begins was a different story because:

A) Ras Al Ghul was a villain in the film and listed as such
B) Henri Ducard while an alias was an actual trainer and mentor to Batman in the comics. So it worked to pay homage to that character and comic continuity
3) TWO villains from what is considered Batman's main rogues gallery. That has been the pattern. I don't accuse Nolan of being repetitive but I think they possibly kept this as a rule of thumb. Ras/Scarecrow, Joker/Two Face, Catwoman/Bane
D) Lastly, the Ras Al Ghul thing made sense! There is no reason for Talia to do this also unless someone else is walking around calling themselves Talia Al Ghul. It wasn't about hiding the name it was simply about misdirection as to who was in charge. This way if someone targeted the head of the group, i.e. Ras, they would be targeting the wrong person. But makes no sense for Talia unless there is a Talia walking around which would have been announced by now I'm sure.

Argue whether Catwoman or Talia is a villain all you want. If you look at any catalogued Batman material (DC/Batman encyclopedia, etc) over the last few decades they are listed as part of Batmans Rogue gallery. They are considered villains. Talia is a major name in list Batman villains and there is no room for her in this film.

Law_of_4 wrote:no but i am saying it doesn't take 4 months to recover from a pregnancy.

It can take more than 4 months to recover, depends on the type of pregnancy they've had. I know a number of people though who have taken up a year (even more) to recover..

But anyway back to this topic, I personally don't see the character of Miranda being just Miranda and I also don't see her role being as big as Selina.

Because Nolan has been making changes to the script, it's not entirely impossible that originally he had the two female leads but changed one of them as the script progressed (even past February when Cotillard's signing first popped up).

abcd786 wrote:To be honest, I feel JGL > Hardy as an actor.

Watching Mysterious Skin I can safely say that. I feel only a handful of actors can portray that role to the perfection JGL did.

I have this feeling Mr Blake will get his ass kicked by Bane or Batman. I really wanted JGL to play a villain.

I hope its something along the Ducard/Ras al Ghul type.

I love both actors but I'm going to have to disagree, there is something about Hardy that makes him so much better than JGL. Hardy is just so much more effortless, he completely transforms into his character while JGL gives much more subtle performances. Both very different style, both are very good but Hardy is just better.

As for Mysterious Skin, I don't understand why everyone has a raging boner for him in that movie, he was good not great.

abcd786 wrote:

eclecticians wrote: Really? I have to disagree. He seems very "held back" that can be mistaken for being frigid kind of I guess. And also, he really needs to develop his voice (in all his roles, I've found he talks like a teen that tries to have a deep voice, but has to fake it. I know, been there myself hahaha). He's not a bad actor, but I personally think he's overhyped.

IMHO, Hardy is the better, more naturally charismatic and talented actor.

You're entitled to your opinion. From watching Manic, The Lookout, Mysterious Skin and Brick etc. I find JGLs subtle nuances far more effective and natural then Hardy's acting. Both are great, Hardy has more sophistication in his acting - however I feel JGL can play a larger variety of roles more convincingly.

I think he has played a large range of roles but I don't think they've all been "convincing". Hardy may play the same type but at least he's effective in most of his roles.

Don't you people get bored infinitely speculating ? Honestly I read in this thread some of the stupidest things ever... :modesty:

Law_of_4 wrote:Also, four actors out of the cast have won Oscars.

That will be pretty awesome to see in the trailer.

They'll probably only have christian bale's one in there.

abcd786 wrote:

talli wrote:

basically. In every role I have found him scared to make an exciting choice...as if he is afraid that he will look too big or too unnatural. So he resorts to being too naturalistic and too restrained emotionally. Unexpressive face, unexpressive voice. He needs to become a braver actor, take chances and make exciting scene choices.



i have literally, never seen one scene in which he did something I did not expect him to do.

Unexpressive is a harsh in terms of his acting. You also seem to be implying that a more expressive performance is a superior one. Some of the best characters written(which includes his role as Neil in Mysterious Skin) are reserved in their emotion. Think of Michael Corleone - when he found out who the traitor was in GF2 - not very expressive yet with his body language you understood everything. JGL has no inhibitions as an actor, he is willing to put himself in compromising and vulnerable for the sake of the character. I recommend you watch Manic, The Lookout, Brick, Mysterious Skin and you'll see what a talent he is.

I agree unexpressive is a bit harsh, he is no doubt talented but you're just overhyping him at this point. Look I love jgl but I ave no idea why people always mention Manic, The Lookout and Brick because even though he's playing different characters the performances in those movies are te same.