Mad Hatter in future batman movie

[jka12002]

ive been wanting to see this guy in a batman movie for a long time, i think that Steve Carell would make a good Mad Hatter in my opnion, idk, what do you think?

[a-spidey]

wouldn't be a bad idea,
but i hope they make him then a scary character and not an ridiculous looking idiot.

[Sean Whitmore]

ive been wanting to see this guy in a batman movie for a long time, i think that Steve Carell would make a good Mad Hatter in my opnion, idk, what do you think?

If Steve Carell was the villain in a Batman movie?

I think I'd think: "Damn, I wish Nolan was still directing this series."


SEAN

[BrikHed21]

If Steve Carell was the villain in a Batman movie?

I think I'd think: "Damn, I wish Nolan was still directing this series."


SEAN

I agree 100% - I love the guy's work, but he just does not make sense for Batman.

[havokeff]

I suppose a pedophile would make a good villain in a Batman movie, but I'm not sure the general public is quite ready for it.

[rwe1138]

I could see Mad Hatter work, but the character would have to be altered to fit the style of Nolan's films. As for Steve Carell, he's a bit too tall. William H. Macy would be my choice.

[jka12002]

what about this guy as the Mad Hatter:

http://z.about.com/d/crime/1/0/E/7/glovers.jpg

he's crazy enough to play mad hatter

[havokeff]

I guess, if I had to pick someone... perhaps Paul Giamatti would be pretty good. He was smart and fairly nutty in Shoot 'Em Up. And actually, the more I think about it, the more I like the idea. I still think that you would need to take the pedophile edge off the character for the big screen for the general public.

[Damiean Dark]

Why bother? Hatter has always been a sub par villain and in Nolans universe he would be reduced to a shell of what makes him remotely interestiing.

[Alan2099]

Nolan doesn't seem to care for the fancier sillier aspects of the Batman mythos, so he'd defintley be the wrong person to handle something like this. You need a director with more flair and style.

Now as for the Hatter himself, there's really no reason to play him up as a pedophile at all. One of the best versions of Mad Hatter comes from the animated series, where his obsession was directed towards a blonde co-worker named Alice.

Really, I can't think of anyone to actually play the role right. You need a nice balance of pathetic, subtly dangerous, and merrily crazy.

If this was done years ago, I would have suggested Gene Wilder, who's shown he could handle a similiar role perfectly with Willy Wonka, or with Tom Petty, who's music Video Don't come around her no more, showed us one of the creepiest Mad Hatters ever. Nowadays, I'm at a loss for a decent actor for the role.

[Earl of the RCs]

Why the heck would you have to take the pedophile aspect out of the character for a movie? I mean I udnerstand why they went with `stalker/kipnapper of an adult alice' rather than kids in the cartoon but for a movie thats presumable PG13 whats the difference? As long as they dont actually show sexual abuse occuring, but just kinda imply it. I mean we're not supposed to like the guy. He's a super-villian. And its definetly an element to the character that removes all chance of just seaming goofy on film.

[Sean Whitmore]

...Mad Hatter's a pedophile?

Guy's never been a favorite villain of mine, so I don't keep up with all his appearances, but when did this happen?

Was it a Gotham Central thing?


SEAN

[Earl of the RCs]

Na, a Robin thing.

[Sean Whitmore]

Na, a Robin thing.

Holy Jesus!

I really don't wanna know, do I?


SEAN

[Alan2099]

Why the heck would you have to take the pedophile aspect out of the character for a movie?
Well, I never liked that particular aspect myself. I find it to be an unnecessary attempt at trying to darken a character that didn't need darkening.

I mean I udnerstand why they went with `stalker/kipnapper of an adult alice' rather than kids in the cartoon but for a movie thats presumable PG13 whats the difference? As long as they dont actually show sexual abuse occuring, but just kinda imply it. I mean we're not supposed to like the guy. He's a super-villian.
Adding a child molester element to the character almost guarantees that the audience will have absolutley no sympathy or respect for him. As a stalker or even a kidnapper, he still has a cetain level of pathetic charm wherer you might not be able to forgive the guy, but you can somewhat sympathize with him. It adds extra tragedy to who he is, as he becomes a man lost in his own fantasy world.

And its definetly an element to the character that removes all chance of just seaming goofy on film.
And what's wrogn with goofy? The thing I absoltuet hated about batman Begins is how serious they tried to take everything and how they atrempted to reduce the fantasy and escapists aspects of the character to their very bare minimum. While that may have given us a more that had more drama in it, the drama clashed hard with the fact that the movie focuses on a guy that dresses up in a bat costume to fight crime. It also deaded the feel to the movie. There was very little energy or life to what it showed.

Now, if Nolan did Mad Hatter, yeah, he'd probably play the child molester aspect, he probably play down the goofy aspect, and he'd probably try to play the whole thing dead serious. Then again, Nolan sucks. :p

[CBikle]

Na, a Robin thing.

That just sounds very, very awful.

[CBikle]

Why the heck would you have to take the pedophile aspect out of the character for a movie? I mean I udnerstand why they went with `stalker/kipnapper of an adult alice' rather than kids in the cartoon but for a movie thats presumable PG13 whats the difference? As long as they dont actually show sexual abuse occuring, but just kinda imply it..

Unless it's done in a very subtle manner, it'd kill the franchise.

And I don't think WB would allow it anyways (with good reason)- You don't want a pedophile element anywhere near a Batman film, even one made mostly for adults.

I don't consider myself prudish or overly sensitive, but there are some things you really want to steer away from in a superhero movie (except something like Watchmen).

[IamtheRock3]

I always saw Hatter as a very dark charcter

Nolan downplay the mind control aspect...but always found Alice in Wonderland a dark book

And a somewhat kindapper obessess who occasinly murder folks, obsessed with it a creepy kids book is pretty dark

[Sean Whitmore]

And I don't think WB would allow it anyways (with good reason)- You don't want a pedophile element anywhere near a Batman film, even one made mostly for adults.

Yep. There's no simpler math. As long as movie Batman is appearing on birthday napkins and spiral notebooks, movie Mad Hatter ain't gonna be a pedophile.


SEAN

[Miss J.]

Maybe they could just play up the obsessed with hats and Alice in Wonderland part and let the audience make up their own minds what Hatter does with his multiple young blonde Alices.

Not that I'm a fan of the Mad Hatter, myself. I always felt he was a second rate villain even though he appeared the same time Riddler did in the comics way back when, so it's not like he's a relatively new character. Why do I feel that way about him, though? Does everyone just sort of write him that way?

[Alan2099]

Not that I'm a fan of the Mad Hatter, myself. I always felt he was a second rate villain even though he appeared the same time Riddler did in the comics way back when, so it's not like he's a relatively new character. Why do I feel that way about him, though? Does everyone just sort of write him that way?
I think it's because he's been used a lot more sparingly in various media, has had no real major storyline, and has had quite a few vastly different looks.

[Sean Whitmore]

Not that I'm a fan of the Mad Hatter, myself. I always felt he was a second rate villain even though he appeared the same time Riddler did in the comics way back when, so it's not like he's a relatively new character. Why do I feel that way about him, though? Does everyone just sort of write him that way?

I'm right there with you. His first problem is his gimmick is way too specific. Jokes and fear and the number 2 can be played in a variety of ways, but not so much a Lewis Caroll obsession. After a while you have to ask yourself how many Alice in Wonderland-themed amusement parks one city can have.

Secondly, no two writers handle the guy the same way. In the Silver Age he was just a crook, in the cartoon he was a halfway sympathetic schlub pushed too far, under Jeph Loeb he's a nursery-rhyme spouting zombie, and according to Gail Simone he puts hats on food before he eats it. This is actually true for MOST of Batman’s villains, but again, they have their much stronger gimmicks to fall back on.


SEAN

[Miss J.]

I'm right there with you. His first problem is his gimmick is way too specific. Jokes and fear and the number 2 can be played in a variety of ways, but not so much a Lewis Caroll obsession.

True. His gimmick is pretty particular. Makes you wonder who in the creative department thought that one up.

After a while you have to ask yourself how many Alice in Wonderland-themed amusement parks one city can have.

And you have to wonder, if his MO is so obvious, why hasn't Batman staked those places out with cameras or something?

[Sean Whitmore]

True. His gimmick is pretty particular. Makes you wonder who in the creative department thought that one up.

As a one-off villain, I can see it. I'm curious about who looked at him and thought, "Let's bring that guy back!"


SEAN

[the goddamn batman]

under Jeph Loeb he's a nursery-rhyme spouting zombie

Wait... isn't that Scarecrow?

[Sean Whitmore]

Wait... isn't that Scarecrow?

You're right, Scarecrow did the nursery rhymes.

Hatter was constantly quoting Carroll, I believe? At least, I don't remember him having any real dialogue.


SEAN

[the goddamn batman]

As I glance through Haunted Knight, I don't see anything but Alice in Wonderland lines coming from his mouth.

[CBikle]

As a one-off villain, I can see it. I'm curious about who looked at him and thought, "Let's bring that guy back!"


I think it was the Batman TV show that brought him back.

[Sean Whitmore]

I think it was the Batman TV show that brought him back.

I wouldn't be surprised. That actually sound very likely, now that you mention it.


SEAN

[Toreador]

Haven't read much of him in the past few years but in some old comics I read about him he didn't have originally the 'Alice In Wonderland' obsession. He was a basic criminal with a hat gimmick ala Two-Face or Kiteman. His crimes were either hat-based (robbing a political rally because the candidate was 'throwing his hat into the ring') or using hat weapons to commit the crime.

It wasn't I think until BTAS or Robin Year 1 (he was kidnapping young girls to brainwash them and sell them overseas, so no pedo action against Robin) that the Carroll aspect was attached to him.

[Sabrinaset]

This is just a guess, but wasn't Hatter as a pedophile brought up first in Batman: Arkham by Morrison?

[Damiean Dark]

Martin Short was born to play Hatter but he is getting on ib years.

[Captain Jim]

I have never cared for this guy as a villain and can't imagine a worse choice for the movie franchise.

[The Master Meglomaniac]

Then again, Nolan sucks. :p

The vast majority of movie critics and the general public audience disagree.

What works in one medium wouldn't always work in another.

[Damiean Dark]

I respect Nolan as a filmaker but his vision of Batman is pretty bad IMO it has no soul to it its simply a formulaic action movie cleverly hyped as a deep psycological drama. the actors assembled are some of hollywoods best but they seem to all be on autopilot, the fight scenes are appallinly bad, the tumbler isnt a batmobile just a lazy way of avoiding creating a car specialy for the movie, Gotham has no distinctive look like films like Batman 1989 or the crow just a series of shots of chicago

this isnt to say its a bad film it just falls well short of my expectations.

[Earl of the RCs]

I respect Nolan as a filmaker but his vision of Batman is pretty bad IMO it has no soul to it its simply a formulaic action movie cleverly hyped as a deep psycological drama. the actors assembled are some of hollywoods best but they seem to all be on autopilot, the fight scenes are appallinly bad, the tumbler isnt a batmobile just a lazy way of avoiding creating a car specialy for the movie, Gotham has no distinctive look like films like Batman 1989 or the crow just a series of shots of chicago

this isnt to say its a bad film it just falls well short of my expectations.

See, thats how opinions work, aint it? Some of the stuff you didn't like is exactly what I liked the most! I thought the fight scenes finally made sense; they generally depicted the way Id always imagined Batman would fight (disapearing in and out of the shadows, rather than the stilted termanator style `fighting' of Batman 89 ), and the one-on-one fight scenes with Ra's felt really real too. Then again, Ive watched a fair bit of tournament fighting and the grittier hong kong movies (cause, like, Im a nerd heheh). And using an exisitng prototype car rather than inventing a new one seamed like the logical thing for Batman to do. Like the worlds fair bit in the Animated Series. And I liked the fact that Gotham looked more like a real city. And its not a pychological drama; its subtle comedy/drama/action film. Easily the most humour filled Batman movie made as well as the most violent and nasty; which is the combination that makes it feel the most believable- since life's like that- while totally leaving the fantasy elements intact.

Oops, on topic.... I love Alice In Wonderland and the ture hisotry origin of the phrase `Mad as a Hatter' (mercury poison through inhaleation from the steaming- for pressing- of treated felt into hats), so Ive got a soft spot for the character as an interesting pitch for a psycho. And even though the rumours of Lewis Carrols own tendancy to pedophilia have been pretty much put to rest, a little bit of mud always sticks, so the whole history thing adds an element to the way stories play out.

[Alan2099]

The vast majority of movie critics and the general public audience disagree.

What works in one medium wouldn't always work in another.

Wouldn't be the first time the majority was wrong. ;)

[CBikle]

I respect Nolan as a filmaker but his vision of Batman is pretty bad IMO it has no soul to it its simply a formulaic action movie cleverly hyped as a deep psycological drama. the actors assembled are some of hollywoods best but they seem to all be on autopilot, the fight scenes are appallinly bad, the tumbler isnt a batmobile just a lazy way of avoiding creating a car specialy for the movie, Gotham has no distinctive look like films like Batman 1989 or the crow just a series of shots of chicago

this isnt to say its a bad film it just falls well short of my expectations.

Nolan was trying to make as realistic a Batman movie as possible and I think he did an excellent job doing so.

The very notion of making a very realistic superhero movie with a 70 year old licensed property is anything but formulaic.

[The Master Meglomaniac]

Wouldn't be the first time the majority was wrong. ;)

yeah, I think movie critics know more about what makes good movies, more than you do at least.

[Mr. Croup]

What about David Tennet? Make him a fan of the Joker, but he decides to use the character from Alice in Wonderland, instead of a pack of cards.

[marvelfan06]

I don't think they could afford to give Mad Hatter a much bigger part than Scarecrow had in the first movie. He may make a decent pawn that the main villain needs to manufacture some type of machine, but putting him in as the main character would probably only fit if it were the sequel to Batman and Robin.

[Sean Whitmore]

Different question, but related:

If the Hatter were introduced into the movies, what do you all think about the mind-control technology?

Too much for Nolan's world? Or not very different from military water-vaporizing death rays?


SEAN

[mattx110]

Different question, but related:

If the Hatter were introduced into the movies, what do you all think about the mind-control technology?

Too much for Nolan's world? Or not very different from military water-vaporizing death rays?


SEAN
Maybe a combo of hypnotism, scarecrowish chemicals, hallucinagens, and planted microphones.

Having an easy mind-control device might be a bit to scifi.

[Sean Whitmore]

Maybe a combo of hypnotism, scarecrowish chemicals, hallucinagens, and planted microphones.

Having an easy mind-control device might be a bit to scifi.

I like the hypnotism idea.

Just like you can get a guy to cluck like a chicken when he hears a bell, the Hatter can get people to obey his will when they wear a hat.


SEAN

[Alan2099]

I also like the idea of Mad Hatter playing the role of some twisted Pied Piper that's viewed society as too sick so he's taking all the children away to play in his "Magical Wonderland"

[DonC]

Different question, but related:

If the Hatter were introduced into the movies, what do you all think about the mind-control technology?

Too much for Nolan's world? Or not very different from military water-vaporizing death rays?


SEAN


I would say too much. The Mad Hatter seems more like a Tim Burton villain to me. Matt's idea of making it a combination of things is pretty cool, though.

[Earl of the RCs]

Well given that the water vaporising microwave emiters, y'know, actually exist (although they dont work the same way they did in the movie. They were actually designed as a long range weapon and send a focused beam in a specific direction, not a random spread of microwaves- since that would kill everyone in the immediate vicinity including the people using it) and mind control devices dont exist (as far as we know ;) ) Id say there's a definate difference!

Memory cloth exists in real life too by the way.

[metalhead_dave743]

Well given that the water vaporising microwave emiters, y'know, actually exist (although they dont work the same way they did in the movie. They were actually designed as a long range weapon and send a focused beam in a specific direction, not a random spread of microwaves- since that would kill everyone in the immediate vicinity including the people using it)


Well to be fair, in the movie Earl's lackey said that the machine DOES use focused microwaves to vaporize the enemy water supply and Ras did activate it when he was over the water pipes. One could assume the microwaves were just being pointed down. But I'm getting off topic.

As for Hatter, you turn him into a stakler obsessed with a pretty blonde like he was in the first episode of Batman TAS and it would work easily for a movie. The hypnotism suggestion is a pretty good substitution for mind controll. Although I don't think he's grand enough to be a main villain for a Batman movie, maybe he could be a first act subplot of somebody who's taken "Alice" hostage and Batman has to find him.

[Nics23]

I always like The Mad Hatter in the cartoons and even in a few comics. I think the pedo thing does need to be avoided. I dont watch Batman for that kind thing. It is kind my escape from the real world and that would just make it too real life and for no good reason. Want toi have it hinted at thats fine. Out right saying it or whatever. Not a fan of that.

The mind control thing could be done very well if the right person gets a hold of it but I think the hypnotism would work better. And he cant be a main villian. He would have to be a lacky or a sub villain. The good Question would be who would he be a lacky for?

[Bat-Reader]

I don't think there will be any more Batman movies in the future after the up coming JLA movie.Couse it will ruin Batman.

[Rattlehead]

I also like the idea of Mad Hatter playing the role of some twisted Pied Piper that's viewed society as too sick so he's taking all the children away to play in his "Magical Wonderland"

You want to turn the Mad Hatter into Michael Jackson???????:confused:

[HaroldAllnut]

I guess, if I had to pick someone... perhaps Paul Giamatti would be pretty good. I still think that you would need to take the pedophile edge off the character for the big screen for the general public.

The pedophile edge wasn't always inherent to the character; Grant Morrison introduced that element to darken the character enough for inclusion in Arkham Asylum.

I think that David Bamber should play the Mad Hatter. If anyone saw him in the BBC's version of Pride and Prejudice, I think they would be inclined to agree.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/drama/content/images/2007/03/19/mr_collins_396_396x222.jpg

Phillip Seymour Hoffman would do an excellent job as well.