# Batman 3.....   ***POSSIBLE SPOILERS***



## Tuzenbach (Jun 1, 2009)

Does anyone have any info yet?


----------



## Ghostwind (Jun 2, 2009)

I believe they are currently working on a script treatment and that is all that has happened thus far.


----------



## Mistwell (Jun 2, 2009)

The Riddler is the villain.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jun 2, 2009)

Mistwell said:


> The Riddler is the villain.




_Not_ confirmed. Lots of net rumor and speculation, even by some of the actors, but this has _absolutely not_ been confirmed by either the studio or Chris Nolan.


----------



## Tuzenbach (Jun 3, 2009)

Mistwell said:


> The Riddler is the villain.




My sources tell me otherwise........


----------



## Tilenas (Jun 6, 2009)

Tuzenbach said:


> My sources tell me otherwise........




Would you care to share? I mean, you asked for information in the first place...


----------



## Tuzenbach (Jun 12, 2009)

Tilenas said:


> Would you care to share? I mean, you asked for information in the first place...




True. I wanted to see if, perhaps, persons here already knew what I know. How's that 'spoiler' feature achieved?


----------



## Mistwell (Jun 12, 2009)

Mouseferatu said:


> _Not_ confirmed.




I am pretty sure, and it's not from net rumors.



Tuzenbach said:


> My sources tell me otherwise........




Are you sure your source said Riddler was not in the film as a major villian, or did your source perhaps simply say someone else was also in the film as a major villian?


----------



## Traycor (Jun 12, 2009)

Tuzenbach said:


> My sources tell me otherwise........




My sources don't talk to me.


----------



## Tuzenbach (Jun 13, 2009)

Hey, I finally managed to fix my avatar! LoL, it'd been broken for 2.5 years but I was always too busy to fix it. Can you imagine? And all because the previous incarnation of this forum allowed for .BMP files to be used as avatars. LoL, all I had to do to fix it was change the thing from a .BMP to a .JPG .......2.5 years to figure that out? LoL!


_But I digress......._






Mistwell said:


> I am pretty sure, and it's not from net rumors.
> 
> 
> 
> Are you sure your source said Riddler was not in the film as a major villian, or did your source perhaps simply say someone else was also in the film as a major villian?






IIRC, a couple of years back, you were pretty heavily affiliated with the second "Who Wants To Be A Superhero?". I may not have been around for a while, but I've got a memory like a lobster gun!

Anyway, 'tis possible you have information that either contradicts or supports my own info. I'll be posting what I know within the next few days (not sure exactly when, though).

In the meantime, how come this forum got a lot less user-friendly? For example, how come I'm not seeing any options up above for things such as 'bold face', 'italics', 'spoiler tags', 'smilies', 'image insertion', etc.? 

PLEASE don't tell me one must be a "paying" member to be able to use such features!?


----------



## Klaus (Jun 13, 2009)

Tuzenbach said:


> In the meantime, how come this forum got a lot less user-friendly? For example, how come I'm not seeing any options up above for things such as 'bold face', 'italics', 'spoiler tags', 'smilies', 'image insertion', etc.?
> 
> PLEASE don't tell me one must be a "paying" member to be able to use such features!?



To post a spoiler, just add the tags {spoiler}{/spoiler} or {sblock}{/sblock}.

The Quick Reply box has buttons for *Bold*, _Italics_, Underline, Link placement, Picture placement and 







> Quote



 tags. Alternatively, just type {B}{/B}, {I}{/I}, {U}{/U}, {QUOTE}{/QUOTE}...


----------



## Traycor (Jun 14, 2009)

Tuzenbach said:


> I'll be posting what I know within the next few days (not sure exactly when, though).




It teases us!


----------



## WayneLigon (Jun 14, 2009)

At the very least, Eddie Murphy confirmed this week on The Tonight Show that he has no involvement in Batman 3 as The Riddler or anyone else. Thank goodness.


----------



## fba827 (Jun 14, 2009)

Tuzenbach said:


> In the meantime, how come this forum got a lot less user-friendly? For example, how come I'm not seeing any options up above for things such as 'bold face', 'italics', 'spoiler tags', 'smilies', 'image insertion', etc.?
> 
> PLEASE don't tell me one must be a "paying" member to be able to use such features!?




Those features are there in both the 'quick reply' and more in the 'advanced reply' (and if you 'quoted' you automatically go to the advanced reply view).

It's the one or two lines right above the reply text box.

Perhaps a setting in your options or browser isn't set right so you're not seeing it?  Or the coloring is making it hard to see the choices in the black background?

Anyway, if you're having trouble seeing or using those options, you may want to start a new thread in the meta forum with what you do see above the reply text box and the collective brainpower here may be able to figure out the hows and whys.


----------



## Mistwell (Jun 15, 2009)

Tuzenbach said:


> IIRC, a couple of years back, you were pretty heavily affiliated with the second "Who Wants To Be A Superhero?". I may not have been around for a while, but I've got a memory like a lobster gun!




Nice memory.  Yeah my wife was on that show.  

I am also an occasional reporter for comicbookresources.com.



> Anyway, 'tis possible you have information that either contradicts or supports my own info. I'll be posting what I know within the next few days (not sure exactly when, though).




I have two sources on this topic.  I spoke with one of them last night, and he backed off his previous claim that he knew The Riddler was going to be the villain.

My other source, who would know for certain, I have not spoken to in a while, and I don't anticipate speaking with that person for a while yet.  I will see one of this person's family members soon, and that family member might know.  If I find out anything I'll post it. 

But, my prior sense of certainly is now shaken, given my first source's change of opinion.  So...take what I said with a grain of salt.



> In the meantime, how come this forum got a lot less user-friendly? For example, how come I'm not seeing any options up above for things such as 'bold face', 'italics', 'spoiler tags', 'smilies', 'image insertion', etc.?
> 
> PLEASE don't tell me one must be a "paying" member to be able to use such features!?




I don't know.  I see all those options, but I am a contributor.  They are also in black, on a black background, so it's possible you did not see them (you can only see them on my screen if you scroll over them).


----------



## Richards (Jun 15, 2009)

I have a source that confirms beyond a doubt that Bat-Mite will be in the next Batman movie.

Of course, my source sucks.  

Johnathan


----------



## qstor (Jun 16, 2009)

Mistwell said:


> My other source, who would know for certain, I have not spoken to in a while, and I don't anticipate speaking with that person for a while yet.  I will see one of this person's family members soon, and that family member might know.  If I find out anything I'll post it.




Ah..why would people tell all of their family members? Don't these Hollywood types sign non-disclosure agreements?

I'd like to see someone else than the Riddler. Maybe Man Bat?

Mike


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jun 16, 2009)

qstor said:


> Ah..why would people tell all of their family members? Don't these Hollywood types sign non-disclosure agreements?
> 
> I'd like to see someone else than the Riddler. Maybe Man Bat?




I think Man Bat's probably a little too "sci-fi" for the tone of the Nolan Batman series. (Ditto Freeze, and a few of the other more "out there" villains.)


----------



## Klaus (Jun 17, 2009)

Mouseferatu said:


> I think Man Bat's probably a little too "sci-fi" for the tone of the Nolan Batman series. (Ditto Freeze, and a few of the other more "out there" villains.)



The Rodent is right. Of all Batman foes, very few escape the "sci-fi freak" hook that would keep them from appearing in the BB/TDK universe. Possiblities would include:

- The Riddler
- Clayface I (the actor/master of disguise Basil Karlo)
- Harley Quinn
- Catwoman
- Catman
- Bane
- Lady Shiva
- Talia Al'Ghul
- Mad Hatter
- The Penguin
- Black Mask
- Mr. Zsaz
- Killer Croc (he's originally based on a real skin condition)


----------



## Darth Shoju (Jun 17, 2009)

Klaus said:


> The Rodent is right. Of all Batman foes, very few escape the "sci-fi freak" hook that would keep them from appearing in the BB/TDK universe. Possiblities would include:
> 
> - The Riddler
> - Clayface I (the actor/master of disguise Basil Karlo)
> ...




I think they could tone down the sci-fi elements of many of those characters without losing too much of their schtick.

Of course, I would rather that Nolan wasn't so adverse to the superpowers in the first place. It's not like X-Men or Spiderman suffered for having them. Or the original Superman.


----------



## Klaus (Jun 17, 2009)

I highly recommend DC's graphic novel "Joker" by Brian Azzarello and Lee Bermejo. While it was done prior to the release of TDK, it is a near-perfect sequel to it, following the Joker's release from Arkham.


----------



## Merlin's Shadow (Jun 17, 2009)

Darth Shoju said:


> I think they could tone down the sci-fi elements of many of those characters without losing too much of their schtick.
> 
> Of course, I would rather that Nolan wasn't so adverse to the superpowers in the first place. It's not like X-Men or Spiderman suffered for having them. Or the original Superman.



But, it's part of the gritty, (semi) realistic tone Nolan is going for. Anything much in the way of powers would shatter that. X-Men, Spiderman, and Superman can get away with it because superpowers are part and parcel of their identities. Not so with Batman and doubly not so for the Nolan vision of Batman.

Personally I think that Bane would make a great villain in a Nolan Batman flick. Someone who wants to destroy Batman and rule Gotham and uses self-enhancing drugs to get there seems like it would be a perfect fit.


----------



## Klaus (Jun 17, 2009)

Merlin's Shadow said:


> But, it's part of the gritty, (semi) realistic tone Nolan is going for. Anything much in the way of powers would shatter that. X-Men, Spiderman, and Superman can get away with it because superpowers are part and parcel of their identities. Not so with Batman and doubly not so for the Nolan vision of Batman.
> 
> Personally I think that Bane would make a great villain in a Nolan Batman flick. Someone who wants to destroy Batman and rule Gotham and uses self-enhancing drugs to get there seems like it would be a perfect fit.



Specially since we've seen Scarecrow's "super" drugs in earlier movies, so a drug that increases the adrenaline of a user (no "hulking out", though) wouldn't be out of place.


----------



## Runestar (Jun 17, 2009)

Thus leading to Batman's back being broken, and an appearance by Shiva and Azrael?


----------



## Klaus (Jun 17, 2009)

Runestar said:


> Thus leading to Batman's back being broken, and an appearance by Shiva and Azrael?



Not really Azrael, but I could see an injured Bruce mentoring an "understudy" that takes up a different costume when he gets better (and then you'll have a Robin/Nightwing).


----------



## RangerWickett (Jun 17, 2009)

The route I would go is to take advantage of Batman's "girlfriend" being dead by introducing Catwoman as a hostile love interest who is trying to steal something dangerous. And then Talia appears on the scene, mysteriously offering to help Batman stop the cat burglar before Bad Thing X happens.

But it ends up being a ploy, with Catwoman taking the fall and Talia getting away with the dangerous item, which she takes to . . . Liam Neeson! I mean, her father, Ra's al Ghul.


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jun 17, 2009)

Klaus said:


> Not really Azrael, but I could see an injured Bruce mentoring an "understudy" that takes up a different costume when he gets better (and then you'll have a Robin/Nightwing).




Guh! No! No Robin! No Nightwing! No sidekicks in Nolan's Bat-verse! Ever! 



RangerWickett said:


> The route I would go is to take advantage of Batman's "girlfriend" being dead by introducing Catwoman as a hostile love interest who is trying to steal something dangerous. And then Talia appears on the scene, mysteriously offering to help Batman stop the cat burglar before Bad Thing X happens.




I can't begin to tell you how much I hate the idea of Catwoman ever appearing in this series, either. (Though I'd sooner accept that than Robin.) I want my Batman villains _evil_, and I've long despised the whole "Batman/Catwoman hostile love interest" thing. Hate, hate, hate.

Also, hate.


----------



## Tuzenbach (Jun 17, 2009)

fba827 said:


> Those features are there in both the 'quick reply' and more in the 'advanced reply' (and if you 'quoted' you automatically go to the advanced reply view).
> 
> It's the one or two lines right above the reply text box.
> 
> ...






			
				Klaus said:
			
		

> To post a spoiler, just add the tags {spoiler}{/spoiler} or {sblock}{/sblock}.
> 
> The Quick Reply box has buttons for *Bold*, _Italics_, Underline, Link placement, Picture placement and  Quote:
> <table border="0" cellpadding="6" cellspacing="0" width="100%"> <tbody><tr> <td style="border: 1px inset ;" class="alt2">                              Quote                      </td> </tr> </tbody></table>
> tags. Alternatively, just type {B}{/B}, {I}{/I}, {U}{/U}, {QUOTE}{/QUOTE}...                    __________________





Hey, thanks guys! 

I eventually figured it out. It was in the "My Account" section under _"edit options"_..................




​I guess that, at some point, Enworld went through a series of upgrades & knocked a lot of less regular participants back down to the "basic" text setting. But, as you can see, I've managed to switch to something a little less spoiler-inducing! 

But I just have one question........WHAT IN THE HELL IS _*"MULTI - QUOTE"?!?!*_ 






I'll try to post my Batman info a little later today or tomorrow.......


----------



## stonegod (Jun 17, 2009)

Mouseferatu said:


> Also, hate.



But tell us how you really feel... 

I'm also against sidekicks and the Cat for this interpretation. While there are ways to do them good, there are so many more ways to do them wrong.

Bane would be interesting choice. Hasn't been explored as much outside the comics.


----------



## Klaus (Jun 17, 2009)

Mouseferatu said:


> Guh! No! No Robin! No Nightwing! No sidekicks in Nolan's Bat-verse! Ever!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Sidekick, in the usuall sense? I don't see it coming. But after seeing untrained citizens donning capes and trying to be Batmen, I'd see Bruce training someone to pick up when he can't. God knows there were dozens of moments in TDK when Batman would benefit of having a clone somewhere else to help him.

You're a writer, Rodent! Make it work!


----------



## Mouseferatu (Jun 17, 2009)

Klaus said:


> Sidekick, in the usuall sense? I don't see it coming. But after seeing untrained citizens donning capes and trying to be Batmen, I'd see Bruce training someone to pick up when he can't. God knows there were dozens of moments in TDK when Batman would benefit of having a clone somewhere else to help him.
> 
> You're a writer, Rodent! Make it work!




I don't _want_ to make it work. 

Sure, there are ways to make the concept fit, but I dislike the _concept_ itself, at its very core. Batman is--and, IMO, should always be--a loner. He has _allies_, like Gordon and Alfred, but he should never have a _partner_.


----------



## Klaus (Jun 17, 2009)

Mouseferatu said:


> I don't _want_ to make it work.
> 
> Sure, there are ways to make the concept fit, but I dislike the _concept_ itself, at its very core. Batman is--and, IMO, should always be--a loner. He has _allies_, like Gordon and Alfred, but he should never have a _partner_.



If you show Batman as being the only "hero" in the world, then sure (and Nolan has hinted that his Batman wouldn't work in a JLA universe). But Bruce Wayne got his surrogate father (Alfred), brother (Gordon) and crazy-uncle-with-toys (Lucius). Let's see him become the mentor and get a surrogate son and daughter (Robin and Batgirl). I think there are ways to make that work in the current movie universe.

But mind you, you have to avoid all semblance of campy left from the TV series and the previous movies.


----------



## Darth Shoju (Jun 18, 2009)

Merlin's Shadow said:


> But, it's part of the gritty, (semi) realistic tone Nolan is going for. Anything much in the way of powers would shatter that. X-Men, Spiderman, and Superman can get away with it because superpowers are part and parcel of their identities. Not so with Batman and doubly not so for the Nolan vision of Batman.
> 
> Personally I think that Bane would make a great villain in a Nolan Batman flick. Someone who wants to destroy Batman and rule Gotham and uses self-enhancing drugs to get there seems like it would be a perfect fit.




I understand *why* he's taken that stance, I just don't really like it. Batman is a comic book character in a comic book universe. If Nolan thinks that is so lame, why didn't he just make a gritty detective movie or something? Perhaps it's because that wouldn't have made him exceptionally rich?

For the record, Nolan's Batman movies are my favorite Batman movies by far. I just don't think sidekicks or superpowers are the albatrosses he seems to think they are.


----------



## Darth Shoju (Jun 18, 2009)

Mouseferatu said:


> Guh! No! No Robin! No Nightwing! No sidekicks in Nolan's Bat-verse! Ever!
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Frankly I find those characters more interesting than Bruce Wayne a lot of the time. Some writers can't seem to get past the murder of Bruce's parents and end up milking the angst until I feel like screaming "Just get over it already!". My favourite Bat stories are the ones where they deal with him as the World's Greatest Detective, not the World's First Emo Superhero.


----------



## Darth Shoju (Jun 18, 2009)

To clarify, I do think it would be difficult to properly work a sidekick into the Nolan Batman movies. While I like the opportunity for character development provided by Bruce having an orphan as his ward, I've never been comfortable with Batman taking a *child* out to fight dangerous psychopaths and super-villains. It's really a concept that works better in a TV series or comic, where the sidekick can grow into the role as a superhero (as an adult).

I just don't like the "No Robin character ever!" idea. I'm certainly not pounding the tables demanding they put him into the Nolanverse movies, but it would be possible to have Bruce take on a young Dick Grayson as his ward. They wouldn't have to have him be Robin, just use the "orphan adopts an orphan" idea, then hint that Dick would someday take up crimefighting.

That's my take on it anyway.


----------



## fba827 (Jun 18, 2009)

Tuzenbach said:


> But I just have one question........WHAT IN THE HELL IS _*"MULTI - QUOTE"?!?!*_




multiquote = a little flag you set, so in a thread, set the multiquote button on all the posts you want to quote.  then when you hit the quote button it will do a "quote block" for every post that you flagged with multiquote.

As an example, in this post that i'm responding to, you have a quote block for both myself and Klaus.  If you used multiquote, you would click on multiquote in my post (and any additional ones you wanted a quote block for) and then clicked the quote button for Klaus and you'd end up with a quote block for each of us (similar to the way you manually did it this time).


----------



## fba827 (Jun 18, 2009)

Mouseferatu said:


> Batman is--and, IMO, should always be--a loner. He has _allies_, like Gordon and Alfred, but he should never have a _partner_.




Agreed, at least for this movie franchise setting, a sidekick wouldn't work well.  He definitely needs to be the loner with allies to provide support, not someone running around with him.

Also, another argument against a sidekick for this movie setting, so far (at least it appears) that this setting it trying to maintain continuity from one movie to the next; the second had many references back to the first.

For a sidekick, once you put it in, it would require a recurring role.  And once you tell the crux of the secondary story character, it is often dificult to make an exciting continuing story for them because they can't steal the spotlight away from the title character (they are just secondary characters after all).  Thus, they often become damsels in distress so that they have a reason to be there, or they become the angsty talk-backer or 'that guy' with all the jokes, or some other exaggerated personality just to keep them somewhat interesting, or they just become personality-less figures on the screen that just follow the main guy around.

Note I said "difficult" to do, I didn't say "impossible."  but at the moment I can't think of any 'secondary recurring character' that didn't fall in to such a trap - the previous movie robin because the wisecracker, MJ Watson and Aunt May always seemed to be the damsels in distress, Harry Osborne is always the angsty guy full of hate, several of the xmen in the later movies really just became onscreen figures with little personality or character development, etc etc.


all my opinion anyway.


----------



## Remathilis (Jun 18, 2009)

Agree on Robin/Nightwing, but disagree on Catwoman. She could be done right, but I fear that Halle Barry movie (that didn't get made) ruined her potential selling point.

What about the Penguin?


----------



## Mustrum_Ridcully (Jun 18, 2009)

Maybe one should forget the "sidekick" part to Robin and make him a second Vigilante? Maybe he can give Batman a tip and vice versa. He could have a more specific goal - hunt down who killed his family, probably - and might turn up something useful for Batman, or Batman might aid him.

I like the Catwoman as romantic interest story.  But that doesn't have to happen.

I definitely want to see more of the "Detective" side of Batman. So someone like Riddler seems a good choice.

I don't know about the Penguin. Maybe a mafia don or corrupt businessman? Batman might need to figure out the Penguins contacts and/or dirty past.


----------



## Traycor (Jun 18, 2009)

Mistwell said:


> I have two sources on this topic.  I spoke with one of them last night, and he backed off his previous claim that he knew The Riddler was going to be the villain.




You source backing off makes sense in light of this new story:
BATMAN-ON-FILM.COM - Chris Nolan and BATMAN 3: FAR from a done deal? (June 16, 2009)


----------



## Tuzenbach (Jun 18, 2009)

Klaus said:


> The Rodent is right. Of all Batman foes, very few escape the "sci-fi freak" hook that would keep them from appearing in the BB/TDK universe. Possiblities would include:
> 
> - The Riddler
> - Clayface I (the actor/master of disguise Basil Karlo)
> ...





What!? Damn, you've figured it out.........


----------



## Tuzenbach (Jun 18, 2009)

​ I've tried not to assign spoiler tags to information that is either public knowledge or speculatory in nature. There will, however, be speculation mixed with facts. 


What I'm going to present is _*evidence*_ culled from research via sources I am not at liberty to name. It is important to remember, however, that _*evidence *_should never be confused with _*proof*_.......





*EXHIBIT A:* _When will Batman 3 be released?_



The short answer is that nobody knows for certain........._or do they?_



​ 
The above was taken from a _months_-old article. Then again, this next bit is only 3 _days_ old:

BATMAN-ON-FILM.COM - Chris Nolan and BATMAN 3: FAR from a done deal? (June 16, 2009)​


Which one is true? Which one is false? Oftentimes, especially in the motion picture industry, studio executives will go to great lengths with extensive campaigns of disinformation designed to keep release details a secret from the public. This is done for various reasons, including political, legal, and financial.

When gathering data from various informational (or even _"psuedo-informational"_) Internet sites, one gets the sense that, perhaps, if Warner Brothers _did_ try to get Batman 3 "as fast as they can get it", then the movie might actually be in pre-production at present. 

The following rough outline is constructed from various Internet sources. Where there's a series of question marks ("?????"), the dates in question are either approximate estimations, logical guesses, or complete speculation....... 




​ 

Batman Begins - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Dark_Knight_(film)

Batman (film series) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia​ 





*EXHIBIT B:* _Was there an "official" decision reached regarding Batman 3? If so, when could this decision have been made apparent?


_Take a look at these two articles........



​ 



​   Do you see the _*DATE*_ from the respective articles? That's the most important thing here, not the actual articles, but the *date* of *December 8th, 2008*. In retrospect, I probably should not have included most of the image, but hindsight is 20/20, right? 

Anyway, several media outlets were told _"something".......
_ 





*EXHIBIT C:* _Why is December 8th, 2008 such an important date?_

The theory is this: *IF* Warner Brothers gave the go-ahead for Batman 3 (and this assumes that Nolan was on board), it probably was done so on or around the date of (Monday) December 8th, 2008. Thus, the previous weekend would have included the deal-sealing, contract signing, etc.

...............................


_*But how is the above conclusion being drawn with so little evidence?*_ 


.................................

​OK, here's where it gets weird.........

[sblock]There's this obscure, start-up film production company called the "Camelot Entertainment Group". As they're a public company, their stock can be bought and sold by investors. More to the point, because they can be traded, there is a Google Finance page devoted to them with an accompanying message board. On said board, investors and traders will oftentimes chime in with random thoughts, advice, information, and sometimes something else........

Here's a screen grab and link from Camelot's message board on Google 
Finance.




​
Do you see _*WHEN *_this was posted? That's right, this cryptic riddle was posted on *December 8th, 2008*.

But who cares? Isn't _"information"_ like that merely designed to pique the curiosity of potential investors? 



Spoiler



Actually, absolutely nothing like this message appears anywhere else amongst the thousands of comments made regarding Camelot. In fact, research strongly suggests an orchestrated smear campaign is being conducted against Camelot. Why? Could it, perchance, be for the same reasons random persons disguise themselves as ghosts & monsters on _"Scooby Doo"?_ *WHAT TREASURES ARE PEOPLE TRYING TO HIDE???*



And _*so wha**t*_ if it was posted on December 8th, 2008? I mean, so what, right? This "Camelot Entertainment Group" _(that most people don't even realize exists)_ doesn't have anything whatsoever to do with either D.C. Comics, Christopher Nolan, or Warner Brothers. 

_*There is NOTHING to connect Camelot with Batman 3 *_

_* ...........or is there...........?*_​ 
[/sblock]






*EXHIBIT D:* _Is there evidence suggesting Batman 3's main villain?_ 


[sblock]














​ 






​ 
_*PLOT RUMOUR:*_ My sources indicate Batman 3 revolves around the theme of *redemption*. Moreover, the character of "The Black Mask" was chosen for multi-purposes:*1)* It introduces a brand new Batman villain to the big screen.

*2)* Nolan's got a deep, psychological concept to accompany the Black Mask's character development. In other words, Nolan's going to try to make this new villain more interesting/terrifying than the Joker. 

*3)* The title of the film might, in fact, be_ "Batman: The Black Mask"_, or even just _"The Black Mask"_ (as opposed to _"The Caped Crusader"_). Why? It would be a running theme. *BOTH the protagonist and the antagonist wear BLACK MASKS*. The thing is, one of them is a good guy and the other's a bad guy. Apparently, the citizens of Gotham are having a hard time telling each of them apart, due to the violent nature of either._(Personal speculation)_ I think Nolan's going for something akin to that little speech Mel Gibson's character had in "Mad Max", where he's talking about the bronze badge being the only thing separating him from the bad guys, only Nolan's turning the concept into Batman's identity crisis.

*......................................*​​*But all this is just speculation, right? I mean, where the hell is it confirmed that this "Black Mask" guy is supposed to be the villain in Batman 3......!? And why would you even bother discussing that nothing, start-up production company, "Camelot"?

.................................................


*​ [/sblock]




*EXHIBIT E:* _Assuming time constraints are an issue, is it possible one or several smaller production companies will be partnering with Warner Brothers?_

[sblock]




​ 


<link rel="File-List" href="file:///C:%5CDOCUME%7E1%5CASSAUL%7E1%5CLOCALS%7E1%5CTemp%5Cmsohtml1%5C01%5Cclip_filelist.xml"><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>  <w:WordDocument>   <w:View>Normal</w:View>   <w:Zoom>0</w:Zoom>   <w:Compatibility>    <w:BreakWrappedTables/>    <w:SnapToGridInCell/>    <w:WrapTextWithPunct/>    <w:UseAsianBreakRules/>   </w:Compatibility>   <w:BrowserLevel>MicrosoftInternetExplorer4</w:BrowserLevel>  </w:WordDocument> </xml><![endif]--><style> <!--  /* Style Definitions */  p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal     {mso-style-parent:"";     margin:0in;     margin-bottom:.0001pt;     mso-pagination:widow-orphan;     font-size:12.0pt;     font-family:"Times New Roman";     mso-fareast-font-family:"Times New Roman";} @page Section1     {size:8.5in 11.0in;     margin:1.0in 1.25in 1.0in 1.25in;     mso-header-margin:.5in;     mso-footer-margin:.5in;     mso-paper-source:0;} div.Section1     {page:Section1;} --> </style><!--[if gte mso 10]> <style>  /* Style Definitions */  table.MsoNormalTable     {mso-style-name:"Table Normal";     mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0;     mso-tstyle-colband-size:0;     mso-style-noshow:yes;     mso-style-parent:"";     mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt;     mso-para-margin:0in;     mso-para-margin-bottom:.0001pt;     mso-pagination:widow-orphan;     font-size:10.0pt;     font-family:"Times New Roman";} </style> <![endif]-->  

​[/sblock]​ 
  <o></o>



*REMEMBER:* _........Don't shoot the messenger!_


----------



## Traycor (Jun 18, 2009)

Tuzenbach said:


> Keep watching this space.......




At this rate they'll make the official annoucement before you do


----------



## Traycor (Jun 19, 2009)

Mouseferatu said:


> Guh! No! No Robin! No Nightwing! No sidekicks in Nolan's Bat-verse! Ever!




Actually Mr. Rodent, it sounds like you would be one of the biggest fans of a movie with Robin in it...

Do the storyline where Joker ties Robin to a tree and beats him to death with a crowbar. Good stuff.


----------



## Klaus (Jun 19, 2009)

Traycor said:


> Actually Mr. Rodent, it sounds like you would be one of the biggest fans of a movie with Robin in it...
> 
> Do the storyline where Joker ties Robin to a tree and beats him to death with a crowbar. Good stuff.



Actually...

[ComicBookGuy] ... Joker sneaked up on Robin while in Africa, where he was selling nuclear warheads to warlords. Robin was distracted, looking for his real mother (who was tied inside a warehouse), and the joker went Jon DiMaggio on him, but didn't kill him. He did leave a bomb that blew Robin and his mom to smithereens.


----------



## WayneLigon (Jun 19, 2009)

The latest Bat-rumor is that Nolan is 'so devestated' by the death of Heath Ledger that he probably won't do another Batman film. Whether this is true or not probably depends on how much money Warner's is willing to fill his trough with, so it's neither here nor there. The idea of a Nolan-less Batman movie, though, might not be a bad idea. Bale is pretty much joined to Nolan at the hip, so if Nolan goes, he goes; this might be good or it might be bad. 

I like Bale well enough but he and Nolan despise the idea of a Robin and to me, the second film sets up time and time again that Batman Needs Help, as in, another pair of hands. If you'd had a partner, you;d have been able to be in two places at once and you wouldn't have a dead childhood friend and a new crazy enemy now would you? There are many ways to make it work, work right, and work within the version of Batman Nolan has set up here.

I'd let the franchise cool off for a time, anyway. I think Nolan might be immune to third-movie-disaster-itis but at this time, I think anything you do is going to fall short of public - and more importantly, studio, - expectations.


----------



## Klaus (Jun 19, 2009)

From the looks of it, and given TDK's billion dollar income, Warner Bros. won't be rushing a third movie just to have a third movie. Seems like they're giving Nolan all the time he needs to decide wether or not he'll direct a third Bat-movie.

As for partner, a Robin/Nightwing that uses motorcycle gear instead of a true "costume" would be easy enough to bring to life. I've seen several motorcycle outfits that already look close enough to Nightwing's costume. That ought to distance a "partner" from the "mini-me" stigma of comic book sidekicks.

Examples:

[sblock]






















[/sblock]

If you want to, you can mix the Robins a bit: Dick Grayson (let's peg him at 16) still performs at a circus as an acrobat, but also in a globe of death-style act. And taking a page from the Jason Todd origin, Dick could steal the Batpod to go after Tony Zucco, who ordered the hit on his parents.


----------



## Tuzenbach (Jun 19, 2009)

OK, I'm in the process of posting the data. Just one question........




Traycor said:


> BATMAN-ON-FILM.COM - Chris Nolan and BATMAN 3: FAR from a done deal? (June 16, 2009)





^^^
Do you see how the name of the story was posted, but not the actual html reference? How's this achieved?

I wouldn't ask except for the fact that a few of the references I have contain VERY extensive html codes & the whole thing would be much more conducive if I could post either an abbreviated title (or graphic) and then have those things magically link to the pertinent data. 

LoL, I probably should have learned how to do this YEARS ago!


----------



## RangerWickett (Jun 19, 2009)

So what, Arkham Asylum, where Bats goes in and there are tons of baddies?


----------



## RangerWickett (Jun 19, 2009)

Tuzenbach said:


> Do you see how the name of the story was posted, but not the actual html reference? How's this achieved?




{url=http://www.etc.com}Title{/url}

Replace the curly brackets { with hard ones [ (and replace etc. with your url).


----------



## Tuzenbach (Jun 19, 2009)

RangerWickett said:


> {url=http://www.etc.com}Title{/url}
> 
> Replace the curly brackets { with hard ones [ (and replace etc. with your url).





What? That's it? Jeez, and all this time, too. That's probably easier than clicking together ruby slippers.......

Thanks, Wickett!


----------



## Tuzenbach (Jun 19, 2009)

RangerWickett said:


> {url=http://www.etc.com}Title{/url}
> 
> Replace the curly brackets { with hard ones [ (and replace etc. with your url).





What if I wanted to link a URL to an image I've got stored at photobucket?


----------



## Klaus (Jun 19, 2009)

Tuzenbach said:


> What if I wanted to link a URL to an image I've got stored at photobucket?



{url=http://etc.com}{img}image URL{/img}{/url}


----------



## Traycor (Jun 19, 2009)

Tuzenbach said:


> What if I wanted to link a URL to an image I've got stored at photobucket?




You're putting a lot of work into this... I expect proper spelling and good use of colors. Make sure that grammer is correct too-- don't want to ruin the effect.


----------



## Tuzenbach (Jun 19, 2009)

Klaus said:


> {url=http://etc.com}{img}image URL{/img}{/url}




Thanks!



Hey everybody, I apologize for my speed, but I'm learning stuff as I go.

Is it possible to put spoilers around an image that's linked to a URL? 

I'm trying, but am having no luck.


----------



## Klaus (Jun 19, 2009)

Tuzenbach said:


> Thanks!
> 
> 
> 
> ...



{sblock} {url=http...} {img}image http...{/img} {/url} {/sblock}

Like so:

[sblock]



[/sblock]


----------



## Traycor (Jun 19, 2009)

Tuzenbach said:


> Hey everybody, I apologize for my speed, but I'm learning stuff as I go.




I was just teasing you earlier. Learning sblocks and url links can be kinda strange when you are first learning it. Especially when you think you are doing it right and it just doesn't seem to work.

I'm sure you'll get it in no time!


----------



## RangerWickett (Jun 19, 2009)

Is there a way to do that, with roll-over text for the image, and a pop-up that infects malware onto your computer?


----------



## Tuzenbach (Jun 19, 2009)

Hey, thanks for everybody's help. I CANNOT BELIEVE THAT TOOK ME OVER FOUR HOURS!!!

LoL!

If that's not worth a bunch of experience points, I don't know what is!


----------



## Traycor (Jun 20, 2009)

Wow! That's some pretty elaborate digging you were doing back there.


----------



## WayneLigon (Jun 21, 2009)

Exhibit E is right out.
Pantera Films
'The Black Mask' is a cheapie horror film.

The only comics-related thing Camelot seems to be working on is 'Will Triumph Fights Alone'


----------



## Tuzenbach (Jun 21, 2009)

WayneLigon said:


> Exhibit E is right out.[sblock]
> Pantera Films
> 'The Black Mask' is a cheapie horror film.[/sblock]
> 
> The only comics-related thing Camelot seems to be working on is 'Will Triumph Fights Alone'





Perhaps, perhaps not.

Several months ago, my source actually emailed both the 



Spoiler



"Pantera Films"


 people and the "Will Triumph" people. Neither party would either confirm or deny affiliation with Camelot. I think a lot of it has to do with nondisclosure agreements. Then again, one never _really_ knows ......_or do they?_ 


_Dictel?_ 

_The Intimidation Game?_ 

_Rory's First Kiss? 
_


----------



## Tuzenbach (Jun 21, 2009)

Come to think of it, could there be something hiding in plain site?


----------

